Eric Ries explains the 5 why's in three minutes

http://blogs.hbr.org/video/2012/02/the-5-whys.html

by rmason • 14 years ago

81 28 14 years ago

blogs.hbr.org

mikeryan• 14 years ago

Honestly, I like Eric but this is kind of a strange video. The core of what "5 whys" is is root cause analysis. He doesn't really explain this and then goes on to, if I'm understanding him correctly, say that every time you hit the same root cause, spend a small amount of time on the fix? Or address each of the "why's" individually?

There's also something of an assumption that the root cause always ends up as a human problem and not a technical one which is only sometimes the case.

This ends up turning a very powerful process and tool into being a very convoluted MBA speak on process and team dynamics.

mwsherman• 14 years ago

I suspect what he means is that the “root cause” is not a single, binary thing that is simply “fixed or not fixed”.

In the training example, it’s quite possible that the first hour of training will cover 80% of the problem, with subsequent hours offering diminishing returns. The point is to discover it while avoiding waste.

He’s acknowledging that “root cause” is a club that can be used for bureaucracy; handled wrongly it looks a lot like premature optimization or CYA. What he’s describing is what I consider empiricism.

ryan_f• 14 years ago

The first half of the video served as a good example of how the 5 Whys can lead to the root cause. That doesn't mean the other Whys should not be looked at as they were an issue at some level.

The second half was a little more confusing with proportion of time in solving the problem. I understood the solution but now how it directly related to using the 5 whys analysis.

anthonyb• 14 years ago

I think the idea was to spend a little bit of time/effort on each of the causes responsible for your issue. Over time, causes which need more fixing will crop up again and again and on average you'll spend the right amount of time on each one, without over-investing in any of them.

That's my interpretation, anyway: Imagine that you have 20 different issues related to training, but that you have the same conversation about training 20 times :)

hartror3• 14 years ago

It is a okay introduction to the concept but there is far better introductions on how it should be gone about. [1]

[1] http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/07/how-to-conduct-...

rhizome• 14 years ago

I basically agree with you, but I think something positive about this video is its admonishment not to settle for one thing wrong. There are other factors and precursors that can be identified and fixed as well. Turn a root cause analysis into a root causeS analysis.

5wrong5wrong2• 14 years ago

1.)Why is Eric Ries wrong? Because he uses the 5 whys of root cause analysis When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. 2.)Why is root cause wrong? Because it is uses one of three logic frameworks. 3.)Why is one logic framework of deduction wrong? In simple JAPANESE manufacturing environments, deduction works. In complex, chaotic environments need induction, abduction, deduction and combinations of all three. 4.)Why are simple 'explanations' wrong? Flawed safety process or entire 'safety culture' to blame? Rise of the British empire or fall of the Roman empire? 5.)Why is the 'blame the process' wrong? Mutual feedback loops between team, person, process and technology. Technology includes software which is probabilistic. Because it is 'the system of medical care' 6.)Why is the 'system of medical care' wrong? Assumes you become healthy by taking pills. The more pills, the better. The more root cause anomalies the better. 7.)Why is 'finding faults' wrong? http://thinkexist.com/quotation/we_can-t_solve_problems_by_u... http://litemind.com/problem-definition/ Because “We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” 5timewrong at workgold dot 33mail dot com Tony's paradox on what happens when something has benn 'screwed': replace quote of "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" with When all you have is a screwdriver, everything looks like a screw, but you can't tell if you are TIGHTENING the screws (on yourself) and making the problem worse or loosening the screws.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3564378 of course, perhaps in most cases Eric is right and successful. Please don't shoot the messenger.

PPS. start the flame war! rise and fall of the JAPAN manufacturing empire. SONY will eventually go bankrupt. too many nitpicking fault finders and little creativity in the big corp HQ in earthquake prone Tokyo. All the factories clustered in Thailand (how convenient for Japanese male execs to go!) which is flooded.

PS. How do I solve problems? I use the FIVE WHO. I take the strangest assortment I can find. Throw them together in a 'party' and then induce/abduce the answer. Since 'birds of a feather' flock together, the 'corporate dodo bird' is doomed to extinction (to mix metaphors).

moe4• 14 years ago

This video exemplifies for me the 5 wrongs with business school yuppies:

  * Smart looking guy in a fancy suit

  * Confidently talks about stuff he doesn't have a clue about

  * Applies over-simplified abstractions completely detached from reality

  * Draws wrong and ill-conceived consequences from said abstraction

  * Never realizes it's really the guys in the trenches
    who keep his bacon afloat by politely ignoring his pointless
    ramblings and just quietly cleaning his mess after him.

But yes, next time our "server crashes" I'll apply the "5 why's" for team motivation. A good laugh never hurts, especially when you make it a proportional investment.

hartror3• 14 years ago

A point by point response to your points:

1. What is wrong with a suit?

2. He cofounded IMVU and had a number of failures before that, he has plenty of time in the trenches to back up his assertions.

3. A short 3 minute video is hardly the place to go into depth perhaps a blog post? [1].

4. Huh? Saying it doesn't make it so, perhaps some explanation.

5. See #2

[1] http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/07/how-to-conduct-...

ps I didn't down vote you.

moe4• 14 years ago

1. Nothing, but I had 5 bullets to fill and he thankfully served the stereotype.

2. Anyway, skipping the bullets now.

What bothers me about this "presentation" is that it's the prototype pointless "biz-speak" ramble that many of us have to deal with every day.

He packs a nugget of truth ("when shit happens, ask why!") into a truckload of superfluous verbal padding and tries to sell it as some sort of great revelation, all the while completely ignoring the reality of the situation™.

Over here in the real world root-cause analysis falls under common sense for every engineer worth their salt. We are naturally inclined to fix problems at the source, simply because we don't like fixing stuff in the middle of the night, because we hate fixing the same thing repeatedly, and because we like paychecks.

However, his video lacks the tiniest bit of acknowledgement of reality, where the answer to the third 'why' usually amounts to something like "because the boss decided to outsource this" or "because the deadlines make no sense" or "because 3 people are doing the work of 8 here" or "because the product manager is incompetent" or "because they wouldn't listen when we told them 5 times this would happen".

Yes, these are people-problems, too. But you rarely see those addressed, presumably because these shiny polished biz-school fortune cookies tend to conveniently ignore how the fish, more often than not, stinks from the head.

I could go on for a while on his rosy misconceptions about "proportional investment at every stage of the problem" (duh! can it be that simple!) and "training", but this is getting too long already and I'm going to be voted to -8 and beyond either way.

kevingadd3• 14 years ago

I sat next to Eric Ries for months and worked with him personally. He knows about everything he talks about in that video and it's completely accurate. And the process worked.

Don't be a dick.

billpatrianakos2• 14 years ago

I agree completely, thought I was the only one who saw it much like you. Eric Ries deserves credit. He knows his stuff, he worked his way up, he has a lot of great advice we can learn from but lets not just let him ride on his past successes here. This cannot be his best work. Unfortunately this does end up sounding like it came from some stereotypical higher-up that's totally detached from reality. The 5 why's? How about we save the cute names for it and call it what it is: wrapping up common sense in a cute name and selling it as innovative.

Besides that I don't like how he oversimplifies the root cause of these problems he's talking about. He's pretty much saying that all problems in your company can be traced to people. It's a person that is always the problem according to this video. That's not so. The problem can be people or it can be ridiculous processes like going through "the 5 why's" or it can be anything else in the world including a random act of god. Hopefully Ries bounces back with something better. Hopefully he hasn't peaked like the business school version of a pop star who's 15 minutes are up.

kevingadd3• 14 years ago

If it's common sense why do so many companies fail at identifying and addressing root causes? If making it a process with a name that's rigidly followed isn't the solution, what is?

It's not a complicated process that requires certification. It's simple enough to be described completely in three minutes.

I'd also love to see an example of a problem you've encountered that is actually pure technology, since virtually all modern technology is created and maintained by humans. I've run into lots of crazy hardware and software problems, but pretty much all of them had a human involved here or there that could help make things better.

oasisbob2• 14 years ago

He's pretty much saying that all problems in your company can be traced to people.

I shared the same concern, but having heard Ries speak in the past, I think his use of "people" here is a bit misleading.

A commenter on the video made the good point that it's probably more accurate to refer to "process problems" than "people problems". I think this video may have been flavored by his audience, looking down from an upper-management perspective.

"People problems" implies that you need to keep people from messing up. "Process problems" includes more institutional problems: culture, training, scheduling, prioritization, &c.

ipince• 14 years ago

Can someone add "[video]" to the title?

figure8• 14 years ago

There are many people who want to have power and control, but don't have the skills or experience to do anything concrete and exceptional. There is an entire management advice industry around finding tools and psychological tricks which allow those people to appear high-minded, visionary, and strategic. Eric Ries may not be one of these people, but his 5-why's lecture presents one of those tools. Anyone managing a team of ditch diggers needs some hard-to-criticize collection of platitudes which can be uttered to avoid either joining the diggers and/or being identified as completely useless.

5wrong5wrong2• 14 years ago

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3564378 of course, perhaps in most cases Eric is right and successful. Please don't shoot the messenger.

ramblerman• 14 years ago

you start your argument with

"When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail"

and end with

So here is my hammer....

drstrangevibes• 14 years ago

meh

twainer• 14 years ago

Does Harvard Business School have a kindergarten class now?

Eric Ries explains the 5 why's in three minutes

Related Stories