Afrikaans
Akan
Albanian
Amharic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bemba
Bengali
Bihari
Breton
Bulgarian
Cambodian
Catalan
Cebuano
Cherokee
Chichewa
Chinese (Simplified)
Chinese (Traditional)
Corsican
Croatian
Czech
Esperanto
Estonian
Ewe
Faroese
Filipino
Frisian
Ga
Galician
Georgian
German
Guarani
Gujarati
Haitian Creole
Hausa
Hawaiian
Hmong
Icelandic
Igbo
Indonesian
Interlingua
Irish
Javanese
Kannada
Kazakh
Kinyarwanda
Kirundi
Kongo
Korean
Krio (Sierra Leone)
Kurdish
Kurdish (Soranรฎ)
Kyrgyz
Laothian
Latin
Latvian
Lingala
Lithuanian
Lozi
Luganda
Luo
Luxembourgish
Macedonian
Malagasy
Malay
Maltese
Maori
Marathi
Mauritian Creole
Moldavian
Mongolian
Myanmar (Burmese)
Montenegrin
Nepali
Nigerian Pidgin
Northern Sotho
Norwegian
Norwegian (Nynorsk)
Occitan
Oriya
Oromo
Pashto
Punjabi
Quechua
Romansh
Runyakitara
Russian
Samoan
Scots Gaelic
Serbo-Croatian
Sesotho
Setswana
Seychellois Creole
Shona
Sindhi
Sinhalese
Slovak
Slovenian
Somali
Sundanese
Swahili
Tajik
Tamil
Tatar
Telugu
Thai
Tigrinya
Tonga
Tshiluba
Tumbuka
Turkmen
Twi
Uighur
Ukrainian
Uzbek
Vietnamese
Welsh
Wolof
Xhosa
Yiddish
Yoruba
Zulu
- Hi.
I'm William Lidwell, and this is
Universal Principles of Design.
In this movie a root cause for want of a nail.
For want of a nail a shoe was lost.
For want of the shoe, a horse was lost.
For want of the horse, a knight was lost.
For want of the knight, a battle was lost.
For want of the battle, a kingdom was lost, and all
for want of a nail.
This proverb, which dates back to at least
the 14th Century, exemplifies the foremost
challenge of design, that is, developing
a deep understanding of problems.
The temptation, in fact the human tendency,
is to presume that problems have single,
proximal causes, the cause immediately
preceding the problem.
The kingdom was lost because the battle
was lost, and that's it.
That is how news is typically reported,
how history is typically written, and how
courses are typically taught, but this
is rarely the case in reality.
The kingdom was lost due to a paucity of nails.
That is the deeper truth in the proverb,
the root cause.
But, of course, even this is over simple.
Was there a shortage of iron that led to
the shortage of nails?
Perhaps the shortage was due to bad
inventory management, or perhaps,
an incompetent apprentice.
All of these factors and more could have
played a part in the loss of the kingdom.
So, the challenge is to understand the causal
chain that led to the observed problem,
identify the key links in that chain and how
they relate to one another, and then target
those areas where we have the most leverage
to make a significant impact.
The goal of this lecture is to give you a tool to
figure out how to ask the right question, to
understand problems deeply.
That tool is called Root Cause Analysis.
Root Cause Analysis is a way of understanding
problems in terms of their causes, with the
goal of finding the first event that caused
everything else.
The notion is that everything after the root cause
is a symptom or an aftereffect, and treating
symptoms won't cure the disease.
So, what is a root cause?
A root cause is defined as the key initiating
cause in a sequence of events that leads to
a problem event.
Most problems, especially difficult problems,
have multiple causes, and their proximal causes
are rarely their root causes.
Now, there are a bunch of different ways to do
root cause analysis.
We're going to focus on a technique called
"The Five Whys," that is, asking why an event
occurred, five causes deep, plus or minus.
This technique was developed in the 1930's by
Sakichi Toyoda, the acclaimed inventor and founder
of Toyota Industries Corporation, which would
later become Toyota Motor Corporation.
The Five Whys remains a key part of problem solving
training for Toyota employees to this day,
not to mention designers, engineers and managers
throughout the world.
An example of how it works.
Why did the welder burn herself?
She wasn't wearing protective clothing.
Why wasn't she wearing protective clothing?
It was hot in the room.
Why was it so hot?
The air conditioner was broken.
The root cause of the accident was a
broken air conditioner.
This is not to say that you don't address other
problems in a causal chain.
For example, perhaps the welder needed better
safety training.
But, you focus on the root cause, fixing
the broken air conditioner.
One more example.
During a visit to one of Amazon's Fulfillment Centers
in 2004, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos learned
about an accident in which a worker injured his finger.
He reportedly walked to the whiteboard and started
asking the group questions in the manner of Five Whys.
Why did the worker damage his thumb?
The team replied, "because his thumb got caught
in the conveyor."
Why did his thumb get caught in the conveyor?
The team said, "because he was chasing his bag,
which was on a running conveyor."
Why did he chase his bag?
The team said, "because he had placed his bag
on the conveyor, which then started unexpectedly."
Why was his bag on the conveyor?
The team replied, "because he was using the conveyor
as a table."
Ah ha.
Bezos and team concluded that the root cause
of the accident was really the lack of a surface
on which associates could lay their belongings.
The solution was to add tables to the work stations,
which is what they did.
So, whether you use your understanding of
root causes and the Five Whys technique to
identify and solve the right problem, or to
more deeply understand problems and identify
the causal links where you have the most leverage,
remember the kingdom was lost for want of a nail.
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get subtitles in any language from opensubtitles.com, and translate them here.