
Eric Ries explains the 5 why's in three minutes - rmason
http://blogs.hbr.org/video/2012/02/the-5-whys.html
======
moe
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.

~~~
billpatrianakos
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.

~~~
kevingadd
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.

~~~
moe
_If it's common sense why do so many companies fail at identifying and
addressing root causes?_

One failure that I see very frequently is that the analysis reliably stops at
the invisible line between the trenches and the management.

I.e. the people-problems are very well identified by everyone in the room, but
nobody feels like calling out the guy who sits on the other end of the table
in your next "performance review". It just doesn't seem like a good idea.

This is something that I'd like to see people like Eric talk about.

Because either I live in my own personal bubble here or _that_ is a much more
common problem than people not knowing how to trace back a technical issue to
people and processes.

In fact, every engineer I know could sing you a song about it. But again,
perhaps I really just happen to live in a particular bubble far away from
Harvard...

~~~
kevingadd
That's a really fair point, but it's also not a problem unique to any
particular technique or process. There is literally _nothing you can do_ via
process to protect yourself from bad or actively harmful management. Your only
choice is to try and drive them out of the company, or leave.

Maybe the problem is that 5Ys worked great and seemed like a nice process
improvement because we had healthy management. I think the reality is - the
unhealthy managers who could really benefit from Eric telling them how to be
better managers? They're never going to go anywhere near HN or the Harvard
Business Review.

~~~
davidw
"Things basically work in our company because we have good people from the top
on down" doesn't make for catchy business books though.

------
mikeryan
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.

~~~
ryan_f
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
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 :)

------
figure8
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.

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

------
twainer
Does Harvard Business School have a kindergarten class now?

------
drstrangevibes
meh

------
5wrong5wrong
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://thinkexist.com/quotation/we_can-
t_solve_problems_by_using_the_same_kind_of/15633.html)
<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).

~~~
ramblerman
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....

