• Empirical Root Cause Analysis for Human Error

    From Michael Ejercito@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 23 09:31:25 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, talk.politics.misc, soc.culture.usa

    https://www.qualitydigest.com/inside/management-article/empirical-root-cause-analysis-human-error-012224.html


    Empirical Root Cause Analysis for Human Error
    Because people often can’t remember what they forgot
    PUBLISHED: MONDAY, JANUARY 22, 2024 - 12:03

    COMMENT
    RSS
    SEND ARTICLE
    (MUST LOGIN)
    PRINT
    AUTHOR ARCHIVE

    Aroot cause analysis (RCA) should be empirical; however, this can be
    difficult when dealing with human error. A typical human failure is a
    missed operation, such as when a process step isn’t carried out. This
    could mean a part wasn’t installed, a bolt wasn’t tightened, or a server didn’t deliver a food item that had been ordered.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    The simplest answer in such a situation is “the employee forgot.”
    Perhaps, but there’s often more to the situation than simple
    forgetting—and forgetting isn’t so easy to evaluate empirically. We
    can’t ask somebody who assembles hundreds of parts a day, “Did you
    forget to tighten a bolt four months ago?” We have only the evidence, in
    the form of an untightened bolt, and the untestable hypothesis,
    “employee forgot.” Fixating on the untestable hypothesis does little to identify the cause of the problem so that adequate corrective actions
    can be implemented. This is the point in supplier quality where the
    supplier often submits an 8D report listing both the root cause,
    “employee forgot,” and the corrective action, “employee retrained.” Such
    actions do little to prevent a reoccurrence of the failure.

    Instead, it’s better to look at the entire system that led to the
    failure. W. Edwards Deming tells us that 85% of all problems are due to
    the system and solvable by management only, and 15% of problems are due
    to employees. Somebody may have forgotten, but how was it possible for
    one act of forgetting to cause the problem? Is there any way to reduce
    the chance of somebody forgetting in the future?

    Investigating to identify the weak points in the process is the first
    step. Here, a flowchart of the process may be helpful. This flowchart shouldn’t be created in a meeting room based on knowledge of the
    process; the process should be followed and mapped to see how it truly operates. The objective is to identify improvement areas that can
    prevent the failure from happening again as well as to prevent the
    failure from escaping if it does occur. This second point is especially important when the only line of defense against an occurrence is hoping
    nobody forgets.

    Every organization has different processes, so the actual actions to
    take will vary. Figure 1 shows a generic Ishikawa diagram for a missed operation, with various items to consider when dealing with such a problem.


    Figure 1: Ishikawa diagram for a missed operation

    People
    A person may have made a mistake, but there could be contributing
    factors that need to be addressed by the organization’s management.
    Could fatigue have contributed to the failure? If so, there may not be sufficient break time, or breaks may be long enough but too infrequent.
    This is especially important if the operation requires intensive
    concentration for long periods of time.

    Is the person even capable of correctly performing the operation? More
    mistakes could happen if an inexperienced person was never shown how to
    perform the operation, or a person was placed in the job without any
    training in how to perform the task. If one person was untrained, then
    there may be many more. So formal employee training and training
    tracking should be instituted.

    Method
    Ensure that procedures or work instructions are up to date and available
    at the place of work. Also, make sure they are written in a way the
    operator can understand. Technical instructions written at a graduate
    school level might not be understandable to a production operator. Be
    sure to determine whether the operator is capable of reading the
    language used for the work instructions. If not, update the instructions
    to be more graphic or translate them into the appropriate language.

    Are part counters available? If so, were they turned on? If not, perhaps
    a part counter should be installed. Is there a check to ensure that
    there are no unused parts left after the operation is completed? This is
    an indication that there is a part from the last order still around. One
    simple solution is to ensure that only parts used for the current order
    are on the work surface.

    Machine
    Is there a poka-yoke system in place to ensure the machine automatically
    stops when a process step is missed? Poka-yoke can remove the need to
    depend on people not forgetting. Was a poka-yoke in place but turned off
    or removed? One organization received customer complaints due to mixed
    parts. The subsupplier that produced the parts kept reporting that there
    was nothing more they could do because a divider was in place, and
    production employees still mixed up parts. The root cause was clear
    after a visit to the subsupplier’s production floor: All dividers had
    been removed. During previous complaints, the supplier had not thought
    to actually check to ensure that the dividers were still being used. The problem was blamed on employees, but a simple solution was available.

    An operation may be stopped in the middle for an operator to collect the correct tool. Stopping an operation in the middle and a simple “don’t
    stop till finished” procedure would be insufficient if the operation
    can’t continue until the required tool is available. In such a
    situation, all required tools and equipment should be made available in
    the work area.

    Environment
    Lighting for people isn’t a typical item on an Ishikawa diagram, but it should still be considered. It would be difficult to correctly complete
    many detailed operations with insufficient lighting, so this is an item
    that should be checked.

    Are there loud sounds in the work area? Some people might not be able to concentrate with the constant thump of a machine, so noise mitigation
    efforts or hearing protection may be needed to help employees
    concentrate in a loud work area.

    Are co-workers interrupting the operator? A machine operator who needs
    to frequently stop to assist others might not restart an operation at
    the correct step. If interruptions are unavoidable, it may be necessary
    to implement a policy requiring the current operation to be completed
    before stopping to respond to the interruption.

    The temperature in the work area should also be considered. Heating or
    cooling may be necessary; it can be difficult to perform tasks requiring
    fine motor skills in a very cold environment, or it could be difficult
    to maintain concentration in an overly hot room.

    Employees might also forget to install a part if they are working in a cluttered work area. Parts from various work orders may get mixed up,
    making it difficult to notice if there is an extra part left over after
    an operation. Implementing 5S may be helpful. The work area should be
    sorted to remove unneeded items, straightened to ensure things are
    stored in an orderly manner, scrubbed to clean the work area, and
    standardized. Self-discipline should be used together with the
    assistance of a regular cleaning schedule to make sure the work area
    stays clean and orderly.

    Measurement
    Is there sufficient time to complete the operation? Assembly personnel
    might be expected to move quickly, but is the takt time for the
    operation too short for the operation to be correctly completed?

    Material
    Was the part delivered to the work area? The employee might have missed
    the operation because the part was never there in the first place. In
    such a situation, there’s the failure of “part not delivered” in
    addition to somebody forgetting. Here, the failures should be
    investigated to ensure that proper corrective action is implemented.

    People make mistakes, but...
    People do make mistakes. But often the process or organization
    contributes to the mistake happening. Reminding an employee to “stop forgetting” isn’t a sufficient corrective action. The organization must investigate the underlying factors that helped to contribute to the
    failure; otherwise, another employee can be expected to make the same
    mistake. Wherever possible, poka-yoke should also be implemented to
    ensure that failures can’t happen. Such actions are far more effective
    that telling people to remember to stop forgetting.

    Originally presented at the IAQ Quality Forum in Bled, Slovenia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)