Apollo Root Cause Analysis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article or section has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page.
  • It reads like a personal reflection or essay. Tagged since May 2008.
  • Its introduction provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. Tagged since May 2008.
  • Very few or no other articles link to this one. Please help introduce links in articles on related topics. Tagged since May 2008.
  • It may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.Tagged since May 2008.

At the core of ARCA is a new way of thinking about causation. As noted in the discussion on Causality the philosophical analysis of causality or causation has proved exceedingly difficult. A 2007 publication in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy regarding Causal Processes provides the history of this difficulty. These difficulties are primarily caused by linear and categorical thinking along with the inability of our language to express the reality of cause and effect.[1] ARCA overcomes these difficulties by providing a principium or set of fundamental truths on which a simple process is built. The principium is called the Cause and Effect Principle and is discussed below.

Contents

[edit] Realitycharting

Like Cause Mapping, ARCA creates a visual representation of the causal relationships associated with a defined problem. This unique causal chart is called a Realitychart and is created using "post-It" notes or an intuitive software program called RealityCharting©.[2] RealityCharting is an iterative process that first identifies what is known and then provides simple rules and processes to help identify what we need to know to find effective solutions to a defined problem/event. ARCA requires that the problem first be defined and then creates a chart consisting of evidence-based causes and their often complex causal relationships.

ARCA is one of many root cause analysis methods, sometimes referred to as Root Cause Failure Analysis [3], but It differs from all other root cause analysis methods in that it is based on a cause and effect principium. Dean L. Gano, after many years of studying why conventional methods and tools did not prevent problem recurrence, created the Apollo Root Cause Analysis (ARCA) method in 1987. [4]

[edit] Cause and Effect Principle[5]

There are four elements of the cause and effect principle.

[edit] 1. Cause and Effect are the same thing

They differ only by how they are perceived in time. Like the sides of a coin we cannot separate cause and effect. Whenever we ask why of an effect, such as injury, the answer is “because” and a cause is stated. When we ask why again, what was just now a cause becomes an effect because we must ask why of an effect. Knowing this helps us understand one reason why people can look at the same situation and see different problems. They actually perceive different time segments of the same event. By treating each person’s perspective like a different piece of a jigsaw puzzle, ARCA prevents the usual arguing and creates a common reality where everyone’s causes are placed on the chart pending evidence to support them. This builds buy-in and confidence in the final analysis.

[edit] 2. Causes and Effects are Part of an Infinite Continuum of Causes

Each time we ask why, the only limitation to the answer is our own ignorance. Continually asking why can take us back to the beginning of time, but ARCA keeps the analysis inside the system of interest. Knowing that there is an infinite set of causes helps us understand that no matter where we start, we are always in the middle of a bigger set, so there is no right or wrong place to start.

[edit] 3. Each Effect Has at Least Two Causes in the Form of Actions and Conditions

ARCA states that each effect has at least two causes one of them a trigger or action the others are conditions which are necessary to make the action the trigger. Each of these causes then has at least two causes etc. etc.. This would lead to an infinite number off causes were it not for the fact that many causes are not known (or perhaps unknowable) and this keeps the cause tree reasonably slim. While this is not always obvious, like the condition of gravity needed to cause a fall, it is always true. For example, see Figure 1:

Figure 1: Realitychart
Figure 1: Realitychart

An open fire is caused by the conditions of oily rags, oxygen, existence of a match and the action of striking a match. This element of the cause and effect principle is what sets ARCA apart from conventional thinking and hence solves the riddle of causality. Unlike prior notions of causality that set conditions aside as a separate element from cause and effect, ARCA incorporates them as a needed parallel cause in every causal set.

Another aspect of this element is that it further amplifies the second element regarding the infinite set of causes. As we ask why and get two or more causes, ask why again and get more causes for each of the previous causes/effects, it is easy to see how reality can become very complicated very fast. In practice it doesn't go that far because we are too ignorant to know all the answers. Also, since our language will not allow us to communicate this complexity, a graphical representation, such as a Realitychart, is needed to provide a visual dialog. As the understanding of causal relationships continues to grow, the reality of the event incorporates feedback loops that circle back to already defined causal sets thus adding more complexity.

[edit] 4. An Effect Exists Only if its Causes Exist at the Same Point in Time and Space

This should be obvious, but using the fire example in Figure 1, if the listed causes did not exist at the same point in time and space, the fire would not exist. Every effect we observe in the physical world is caused by momentary action causes coming together with existing conditional causes in the same relative space, where “coming together” does not necessarily mean physically but connecting is some way. This teaches us to validate all causal relationships by making sure this element of the cause and effect principle is present in every causal set.

[edit] Creating a Realitychart[6]

Creating a Realitychart is a simple five-step process. See Figure 1 for a simple causal set.

  1. For the identified problem, ask "why."
  2. Look for causes in actions and conditions.
  3. Connect all causes with "Caused By"
  4. Support all causes with evidence.
  5. End each cause path with a "?" (meaning we have reached our point of ignorance) or a reason for stopping.

[edit] Effective Problem Solving[7]

Effective problem solving is a five-step process.

  1. Define the problem by writing down the What, When, Where, and Significance.
  2. Create a Realitychart.
  3. Identify effective solutions; they must be connected to a cause on the chart, prevent recurrence, be within our control and meet our goals and objectives.
  4. Implement the best solutions.
  5. Follow-up to ensure our solutions were effective.

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

[edit] References

  1. ^ History of Causal Thinking
  2. ^ RealityCharting® Root Cause Analysis Software
  3. ^ Gano, Dean L. “Root Cause Failure Analysis” Pumps & Systems, 2000-November, p16
  4. ^ Gano, Dean L. "Root Cause and How To Find It" Nuclear News,1987-August, p39
  5. ^ Tooth, David “Houston, We Have A Problem” Training Journal, 2000-July, p25
  6. ^ Gano, Dean L. “Apollo Root Cause Analysis – A New Way of Thinking” Apollonian Publications, LLC, Third Edition, copyright 2007 ISBN 978-1-883677-11-4
  7. ^ Gano, Dean L. “Total Failure Management” Quality Digest, 1994-November, p56