TECHNIQUE 53 Cause Effect Diagram

Use a Cause Effect Diagram (Technique 53) to document all the important causal relationships in the system. Then prioritize these relationships using a Cause Effect Matrix (Technique 54). These then become the initial focus of an attempt to trim the system using a trimming worksheet. 

Use a Cause Effect Diagram (Technique 53) to determine the root cause for each potential error. This is a critical step in mistake proofing that is often missed because too many people confuse errors with defects. For example, motion sensor failure is a defect motion sensor zone set incorrectly is an error. You can only truly solve a problem at the error level, so make sure you understand the difference. 

Scenario In the DVD-by-mail example from the Cause Effect Diagram (Technique 53), we looked for the root causes (inputs) contributing to customer dissatisfaction. We can also use a Cause Effect Matrix to discover... 

You can gather this information from your Process Map or Value Stream Map (Technique 46), or even a Cause Effect Diagram (Technique 53). 

With an optimized innovation ready for the market, it s time to improve and transition the project to its owners for ongoing operation. Use the Process Behavior Charts and Control Plan techniques during and after this transition. Also use the Cause Effect Diagram and Cause Effect Matrix to diagnose, solve, or at least mitigate any implementation problems encountered. 

Process capability (see Technique 37) is the metric by which you know if you are having any performance issues or defect problems to solve. Once you use process capability to determine this, you then use a Cause Effect Diagram to start analyzing the problem. 

These techniques are more or less applicable for the different V V activities. For verifying the implemented simulation model, software engineering techniques are most widely used which refer to the techniques displayed in the upper left cell in Table 4.8. Cause-effect-diagrams visualize relations between events and system outcomes. They can be compared with commonly accepted assumptions about relations between events and system outcomes to detect unintended model behaviour. Similarly, animation and trace analysis often help modellers and managers to check the plausibility of the model s behaviour over time. However, not aU programming mistakes uncover themselves in an animation or in the analysed traces. Moreover, rare events are hard to detect since animation is applied for rather short time frames and trace analysis is applied for a... 

Problem-solving methods This component looks for the application of quality-related problem-solving techniques such as cause-effect diagrams and design of experiments. 

The so-called Q7 tools and techniques, Cause and Effect Diagrams, Pareto Analysis, etc. (Bicheno, 1994 Dale and McQuater, 1998 Straker, 1995), are applicable to any stage of the product development process. Indeed they support the working of some of the techniques mentioned, for example using a Pareto chart for prioritizing the potential risks in terms of the RPN index for a design as determined in FMEA (see Appendix III). 

Statistical techniques can be used for a variety of reasons, from sampling product on receipt to market analysis. Any technique that uses statistical theory to reveal information is a statistical technique, but not all applications of statistics are governed by the requirements of this part of the standard. Techniques such as Pareto Analysis and cause and effect diagrams are regarded as statistical techniques in ISO 9000-2 and although numerical data is used, there is no probability theory involved. These techniques are used for problem solving, not for making product acceptance decisions. 

Cause-and-Effect Diagram Pareto Analysis Technique... 

There are many problem solving and improvement tools and techniques. The most common are root cause or cause and effect diagrams (also known as fish-bone or Ishikawa diagrams). Other techniques include flow charts, input-output analysis, scatter diagrams and why-why analysis. 

There are numerous methods and techniques developed in areas such as safety, reliability, and quality for conducting various types of analysis [23-25]. Some of these methods and techniques can also be used to perform rail safety analysis. These methods and techniques include fault-tree analysis, hazards and operability analysis, cause-and-effect diagram, interface safety analysis, failure modes and effect analysis, and Pareto diagram. One of these approaches (i.e., fault-tree analysis) is presented below, and information on other methods and techniques is available in Chapter 4 and in the literature [23-25]. 

The choice of experimental factors (what to vary in data collection) is a nontrivial matter of fundamental importance that is best handled by people with firsthand process knowledge. There are a number of popular techniques and tools (such as so-called cause and effect diagrams, discussed for instance in... 

The technique used to categorize and structure the JHA is the cause and effect diagram, which provides a visual picture of the job, its steps, and tasks. This diagram developed by Ishikawa is also known as a Fishbone diagram (Fishbone, n.d.j.The fishbone allows the JHA developer to list all of the elements of the job as well all of the tasks as they relate to specific steps. Additional fish bones are used to collect the data outlined above at both the macro level (steps) and a micro view (tasks). 

The technique used to categorize and structure the JHA is the cause and effect diagram, which provides a visual picture of the job, its steps and tasks. This diagram developed by Ishikawa or is also known as a Fishbone diagram. 

Using contributory factor framework, cause and effect method, tree diagram, barrier analysis and the five why s technique. Each contributory factor identified in the analysis could be a causal factor or an influencing factor... 

---