| Amnesty Policy |
 |
The issues of blame, discipline, fear,
punishment, and accountability are near the root of why we don't learn more
from things that go wrong. There is most certainly a need for rules,
regulations, policies, and procedures in our businesses. Likewise,
there is most certainly a need to enforce them by applying discipline to
those who do not abide. However, it is vitally important to
acknowledge the reason for our rules (etc); they exist to help PREVENT
incidents. The time for discipline is BEFORE an incident, not after
one.
Unfortunately, most organizations have it
backwards. They do not apply their disciplinary policies in a
consistent manner ahead of time. Instead, they wait for something
awful to happen and then go after the person. This is outrageous,
illogical, and immoral. Instead of disciplining people involved in an
incident, Failsafe STRONGLY encourages the following policy:
The management of
this organization promises that no-one will be disciplined as a result of
this LCA unless they have broken a criminal law. In return, the
management of this organization expects all involved parties to participate
in the LCA as requested to make sure we learn as much as possible. |
| Combing Process |
 |
The Combing Process is
an FMEA-based (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis) tool for identifying your
"significant few" chronic failures RAPIDLY (hours or days).
It is NOT the tedious and time-consuming "hazards analysis" tool many are familiar
with, but a means of identifying ACTUAL failures occurring in an EXISTING
operating environment. It is an approach which goes to the hands-on
operating and maintenance people for information, rather than on relying on
existing data-bases. It is based on the concept of the "invisible plant,"
which is known only by the people and NOT by the data. It fits right
into Failsafe's overall philosophy for Latent Cause Analysis, which focuses on
shock and surprise (discovery) to help make the case for change.
|
| Evidence |
 |
Nothing in our existence happens without it being known in one form or
another. Evidence
is the word we use to describe how we become aware of something. More
specifically, evidence is "the way an event or condition
manifests itself." Evidence contains "everything we need to
know" about an undesired event. In fact, evidence includes
everything we need to know about life itself. Without evidence, an
RCA is impossible because RCA's, by definition, are evidence-driven
endeavors.
Note: Without evidence, one can hypothesize, theorize, speculate,
and agree on the causes of an event. However, such endeavors
should not be called Latent Cause Analyses! RCA's must be
EVIDENCE-DRIVEN. |
| Golden Rule of a Latent Cause Analysis |
 |
"When something goes wrong, we will all try to understand why each
person (at all levels) did what they did to such an extent we're convinced we would have
done the same thing." |
| Human Cause |
 |
Human beings are responsible for
everything that goes wrong (and, of course, everything that goes right).
Any attempt to sidestep this truth is, in itself, a major cause of our
problems. When we do RCA's, we need to acknowledge how we
intervened (interacted with the physical world) to cause a problem. Therefore, Human
Causes answer the question: Who did what wrong?
Human Causes are written in bullet-form, in past tense,
are very specific, and are always tactical in nature (specific acts
of commission or omission). They are the "sharpest end" of human
intervention with the physical system. |
| Inculcation (with respect to Latent Cause Analysis) |
 |
It's unresolved small problems that cause our big problems. We
should have learned this by now. Whereas most organizations seem
content to wait for something big to go wrong, then pounce on it with a
rigorous investigation, it would be much more effective to act on small
problems BEFORE they cause the large one. Inculcation is word used
to describe the effort to involve everyone in addressing the small
problems in their lives. It acknowledges a need to ingrain a
root cause mentality throughout
the workforce, "drip-by-drip," involving more and more
people, eventually pervading the organization. It focuses on
people's attitudes towards "small problems." It focuses on
changing people's minds about "why things go wrong." |
| Latency |
 |
Imagine being born, growing-up, and
living your whole life on a Merry-Go-Round. The spinning, whirling
motion would affect everything you did, every day of your life.
This concealed, hidden, veiled, but ACTIVE, POTENT, and MATURE force in
our lives distracts us from doing what we OUGHT to be doing. It is
"the way I am," or "the way we are," and "the way things have always
been." Latency is the primary target of Failsafe's approach to
Latent (Root) Cause Analysis because it is the most effective thing we can
control. |
| Latent Cause |
 |
Latent Causes are spoken admissions
made by the people that contributed to the incident and answer the
question: "What is it about the way I am that contributed to
this incident?" Latent Causes are written in present
tense (this helps point-out that they are still causing problems),
generic, and as seen through the involved person's eyes after having
experienced the evidence. |
| Latent Cause Analysis |
LCA |
Latent Cause Analysis is most
understood in contrast to "Root Cause Analysis." Root Cause
Analysis is a misnomer. No-one does it, and yet everyone says they
do it. Root Cause Analyses that do not point to "Adam and Eve," or
"The Big Bang," or "The Beginning of Time" are NOT Root Cause Analyses.
Latent Cause Analysis is a more truthful, appropriate, and effective
endeavor that helps everyone see themselves as part of the problem
instead of blaming equipment, other people, or even systems.
Latent Cause Analysis is Failsafe's version of Root Cause Analysis. |
| Maxi-RCA |
 |
Maxi-RCA's are performed on Maxi-Events. By
definition, they are always lead by an outsider, always involve
at least 3 additional outside evidence-gatherers, always involve
the stakeholders, and always define Physical, Human, and Latent
Causes. Maxi-RCA's ought to be performed about once per year
for each 100 person site. Maxi-RCA triggers ought to be adjusted accordingly.
|
| Midi-RCA |
 |
Midi-RCA's are performed on
Midi-Events. They are lead by an insider (someone from
the affected site but as detached as possible from the specific event), always involve at least 3 additional
evidence-gatherers, always involve the stakeholders, and
always define Physical, Human, and Latent Causes. Midi-RCA's ought
to be performed about 4 times per 100 people per year. Midi-RCA triggers
ought to be set accordingly. |
| Mini-RCA |
 |
Mini-RCA's are performed on Mini (or
normal) events. They are performed by one person, a few people, or
larger group of people -- whoever comes
in contact with the event. They do NOT involve additional,
detached
evidence-gatherers, nor any additional stakeholder meeting -- the
stakeholders are often involved throughout the whole process.
Mini-RCA's always define Physical,
Human, and Latent Causes. Everyone in the organization ought to be
involved in 4 Mini-RCA's per year, analyzing any problem that
is not a Maxi or Midi-Event. |
| Mother-Source |
 |
The Mother-Source is the nurturing
entity that helps people inculcate a latent cause mentality throughout an
organization. It is a caring group of people that has banded
together to make invisible issues visible. The creation of a
Mother-Source is the single most important step towards changing an
organizational culture in a positive direction. It is typically a
group of 5 or so individuals that feel the responsibility of making
"latent cause thinking" a part of an organization. |
| Mother-Source-Central |
 |
Mother-Source-Central (MSC) is a
licensed network
of Mother-Source resources from all over the world to help any
organization inculcate a latent cause mentality at their site. It is
comprised of people who are available to investigate your incidents,
help train you on how to investigate, lead the RCA effort at your site,
or support it in any manner you wish. |
| Operation Failsafe |
 |
Operation Failsafe is an evolving and
comprehensive plan for ingraining the latent cause mentality within people and their
organizations. Dependent on the formation of a
"Mother-Source," it is a bold, aggressive pursuit into the causes of an organization's failures with an
end-objective in mind: people who DESIRE to know and act on the
truth behind why things go wrong.
|
| Paper Evidence |
 |
As time marches-on, history
accumulates. Paper Evidence is usually relegated to "whatever has
been WRITTEN" about our history. It usually includes maintenance,
training, operational, and similar data. It can written on paper
(thus PAPER evidence), or stored digitally, or even available on the
internet. Paper Evidence is one of the three key forms of
evidence.
|
| People Evidence |
 |
When something goes wrong, people know
about it through their senses. They absorb the event as if they
were a sponge absorbing water. People Evidence is "whatever has
been absorbed." It resides within the human mind. It
contains historical as well as interpersonal information. It is
the most important of the three key forms of evidence. Although
people usually know EVERYTHING about "why things go wrong," they will
often not share what they know because of fear and other negative
emotional factors. |
| Physical Cause |
 |
Physical Causes explain the PHYSICS of
an event or condition. Physical Causes are written in
paragraph-form, are always "past-tense," and must be stated in as
specific a way as possible. |
| Physical Evidence |
 |
Physical Evidence focuses on "the way
it ended-up." Physical Evidence can usually be divided into 2
facets: positional evidence and parts evidence.
Positional Evidence captures WHERE things are. Parts Evidence
characterizes the CONDITION of each piece. Although engineers
usually think this is the most important form of evidence, it usually
yields little about the LATENT causes of an event or condition. |
| Principal Investigator |
 |
The
Principal Investigator (PI) is the person who leads a Latent Cause
Analysis. This person should be ignorant of the problem being
investigated (including ignorant of the equipment, people, culture,
systems, and everything surrounding the event), experienced in Latent
Cause Analysis, and available to work on the LCA full-time until it is
completed. More importantly, this person ought to have a PASSION
for revealing truth, and COMPASSION for people. |
| ROOTS: Failsafe's Investigative Process |
 |
ROOTS is the acronym
that defines Failsafe's investigative method. It is a flexible, open-ended,
practical approach which helps the inquirer DISCOVER the physical, human,
then latent causes of failure. It is NOT a form-driven, pick-list-based, computerized, software package with "canned" questions or
other "boxed-in" ways of doing things. Rather, it is a means of intentionally
driving the serious inquirer into areas most in need of clarification. --
a totally EVIDENCE-driven process.
-
Respond by
Freezing the Evidence
-
Organize a team
of Stakeholders
-
Order your
Conclusions with a WHY Tree
-
Translate your
Findings so that Others can understand
-
Sustain your
efforts by reporting back to the Mother-Source
|
| Root Cause Analysis |
RCA |
Root Cause Analysis is "whatever you
want it to be," because it depends on what you are willing to see.
Root Cause Analysis is no longer being taught by Failsafe, because
Failsafe has deemed it an overused, little-understood, and
inappropriately applied phrase. Beware of those who say they do
"Root Cause Analysis." Question them. Ask them what they
mean by "root cause." If you do, you'll see the problem. |
| Latent Cause Mentality |
 |
A latent cause mentality is a
growing, deepening thirst within an individual to understand why things
go wrong. It is not a tool, but a way of thinking that focuses on
understanding rather than blame. In the limit it is an
introspective journey focusing on ones-self instead of other people and
other things. |
| Root Cause Conference |
 |
The Root Cause Conference is a Yahoo-group email-based forum developed
and moderated by C. Robert Nelms. It
is
a
non-proprietary, inter-company, inter-industry body of people
from all over the world who are interested in root cause analysis.
Many of Failsafe's competitors are active on this forum, making it rich
in ideas and debate. |
| Root Cause |
 |
The cause of the cause of the cause of
the cause.... Please ask yourself where this questioning would
take you. True Root Cause Analyses will force you to look
beyond your own organization, and into things like local culture, family
situations, and national mindsets. But each of these things are,
in turn, also caused by something. It is an undeniable fact of
life that things today are caused by things that happened "yesterday."
Since each layer happened PRIOR TO the one before, the Root Cause of all
our problems must be at the beginning of time. Think about it. |
| the Significant 6 Barriers to Root Cause Discovery |
 |
a series of statements,
articles, and graphics intended to make the REAL issues visible -- VERY
visible. |
| Situation-Filter-Outcome (SFO) |
 |
Similar (but different) than ABC analysis
(antecedent, behavior, consequence), the SFO technique is a practical and decisive way to
help put yourself in someone else's shoes -- to
understand why people do what they do. The SFO technique is a rebuttal to those who insist that we must
be psychologists to understand our fellow human-beings. The SFO
technique is a way to surface the LATENT
causes of a failure in way which is bound to cause change. The SFO
technique is
guaranteed to make you a more UNDERSTANDING individual because if replaces BLAME
with UNDERSTANDING so that REAL CHANGE can occur. |
| Stakeholder |
 |
A stakeholder (with respect
to root cause analysis) is anyone whose behavior has to change as a
result of something that has gone wrong. Stakeholders are
identified after evidence is gathered and causes become apparent to the
evidence-gatherers. Stakeholders can be from any level of the of
the organization and typically include a cross section ranging from
hands-on to executive levels. |
| Stakeholder Meeting |
 |
After evidence is gathered by outside,
non-partial people, stakeholders are identified and asked to attend a
meeting. During this meeting, summarized evidence is presented to
the stakeholders. After adjourning for one night to think about
the evidence, the meeting is reconvened so that the STAKEHOLDERS
THEMSELVES can define the Physical, Human, and Latent Causes (as well as
any action items). |
| the 3 Ps |
 |
People Physical,
and Paper Evidence |
| the 4 Ps |
 |
People,
Position, Parts, and Paper Evidence |
| Vector Approach to Evidence-Gathering |
   |
People
Physical
Paper |
Bias is
the enemy of Root Cause Analysis. Most of the time, bias is not
even intentional -- it's part of being human. Each of us has
our own life experiences that taint our vision of truth.
Therefore, when a Maxi or Midi event occurs, it is important to do
"whatever it takes" to assure that the truth is revealed. A very
effective way of doing this is to take advantage of the notion of the
3Ps. The Vector Approach to Evidence-Gathering uses 3 separate
people to lead the evidence gathering -- one for each of the 3 Ps.
Most importantly, these 3 people are kept separate -- they are
not allowed to talk or share information, until the Principal
Investigator is ready to bring them all together. This helps to
assure that people are not pulled immediately down the wrong path
without considering all the evidence. |
| Why Tree |
 |
A WHY Tree is not a Fault
Tree, although it looks like one. It is not a logic tree (because logic trees are used to
guide people through KNOWN solutions to a problem). It is not a fishbone (because fishbones have pre-determined "bones"). Rather,
WHY Tree is a means of documenting
where you are in your current understanding of a problem, whether it be with a team or as
an individual. It is also a technique for keeping investigative teams on-track.
Most importantly, it is a way of
showing others what you have discovered in your RCA.
CAUTION: Constructing a WHY TREE is
NOT the same as doing a Root Cause Analysis!!! A WHY Tree is
NOT an answer-generating machine. The answers are in the
evidence, not in the WHY Tree. WHY Tree are usually not even
mentioned during the RCA, until you are finished and are ready to
document your findings. PLEASE do not bog-down your team in
drawing a WHY Tree when you should be confronting stakeholders with
evidence. |