Comments on: How the CEO of Zappos Solves Problems

By: Bob Haddad

Bob Haddad — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:21:59 +0000

There is nothing new under the sun…this problem solving tool has been around forever. In the late 80s and 90s, as part of the popular quality initiatives, it was called the 5 Whys. It is part of the bigger problem solving and coaching strategy of asking purposeful questions in order to discover the reality. From there you can coach through the gap to the desired outcome or goal.

By: tilton2010

tilton2010 — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:08:41 +0000

This technique is an age old lean/sigma tool referred to as “The 5 Whys”.

By: Karen W

Karen W — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:56:27 +0000

Great article Dan. You’ve covered some excellent points. I particularly like the 5 Why’s though I would also like to add it is important to include the organization’s entire system in problem solving exercises. Leaders exist at all levels and they approach problems from dramatically different angles. By presenting a perceived problem with an entire system (or representatives from the system) in the room you open up possibilities and opportunities that may have been missed by limiting the thought process to one area. I like Scott’s idea of generating synergy!

By: MrunalAsher

MrunalAsher — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:42:18 +0000

A wonderful post! An eye opener to say. The lesson- ‘Speed problem simplifying and slow solution finding’.

The best way is to involve all concerned and check on the real problem with brief discussion and allow time to analyse the problem with factual information/data with an innocent approach and do more of listening. The collective wisdom can work better to identify the exact problem which also ca lead to a good workable solution.

Always consult to understand the real problem with possible reasons. Never take decisions without collecting the facts and never ever be in a haste to conclude with a single mind or on the basis of a pre-set perception.

By: Haydn Thomas

Haydn Thomas — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 23:17:14 +0000

Enter the role of the Business Analyst. There role is to analyse the organisation firstly, seek alignment to strategy, define the what before the how, so as to avoid solutionism. Have a problem or not sure you have one, call in a Business Analyst.

By: Martha Ware

Martha Ware — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 15:21:19 +0000

Completely agree: find the actual problem and the solution will come…

By: estiko

estiko — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 13:46:22 +0000

I think the biggest problem is if we don’t know that wehave a problem.The question why for problem solving approach are widely use in companies which adopt Japanese manufacturing style. In Indonesia, we could find in the biggest automotive group where their people intensively using Quality Control Circle to improve their workplace with questioning 5Why 1 How.

By: Howard E. Hillman

Howard E. Hillman — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 03:41:21 +0000

I believe the 5 Why analysis which is explained beautifully in the the article is a great approach to solving problems. I have used the Ishikawa “aka fishbone” diagram is another tool to use in conjunction with the 5 Why analysis. This helps to keep the effects of the problems focused on specific areas and not on people. Then as you drill down on the 5 whys you can stay more focused on solving the right problems.

By: docdisc

docdisc — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 19:16:08 +0000

The cautionary leadership piece for this might be to noob leaders starting out (am a perpetual noob myself, can beg forgiveness with the best of em!), to not use the blame dance card with 'why'. Many old models of leadership jump to finding 'who caused this' when, according to Deming and others, it probably is leadership if you have to blame...it is the process 90+% of the time. Who is responsible for the process, leadership. If it is a training issue, who is responsible for the training, leadership. If it is ineffective training, who is responsible for outcomes of training, leadership. There of course is a smaller percentage that is a personnel issue...see I went straight to the blame dance! So the piece to answer with 'why' is what caused this to occur, not necessarily 'who'. The other very uncomfortable dynamic with asking why at least 5 times, is that you end up uncovering other 'opportunities'/problems that you have to own and eventually deal with. The goods news, sort of, is that which you uncover either had partial cause or effect of the core issue, so you are doing 'continuous improvement' if you do address the miss-steps along the way as you waltz your way through the show... Perhaps a precursor to the asking of why is setting the expectation that the organization is not perfect, can always (and will seek to) improve. With that as a foundation, you can actively seek out those pesky opportunities.

By: Redge

Redge — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 18:50:43 +0000

Great post and a method I can attest to that works. The 5-Why analysis is common place in the automotive industry and more specifically with Toyota and Honda. It has subsequently been adopted by the North American automakers as well.

The only “problem” with the approach is that it is not necessarily repeatable. Give more than one group a problem, and you are bound to arrive at potentially different root causes.

The real Why series tends to converge on root cause. Once found, the solution series is a divergent number of possibilities.