Identification and Assessment of Cost and Effort Criteria for Prioritisation during Root Cause Analysis

Abstract

Purpose: This study sought to provide a matrix by which to prioritise hypotheses in an Ishikawa diagram while considering a combination of the hypotheses' relation to the problem and the cost and effort to investigate because potential failure causes in an Ishikawa diagram are often prioritised for investigation using subjective methods, and not concrete criteria. Methodology/Approach: A survey was sent to organisations seeking to determine three levels of prioritisation for effort in hours to investigate a problem and costs to investigate. The results were then entered into a matrix that listed three levels of relationship between the hypothesis and the problem as well as three levels of costs and effort. A scenario was given to study participants in the industry to determine if participants with the hypothesis prioritisation matrix could find the correct hypotheses to investigate first, more often than participants without the matrix. Findings: The survey resulted in criteria for prioritisation of hypotheses to investigate. A study with employees in the industry found that participants with a hypothesis prioritisation matrix identified the correct hypotheses to investigate first more often than participants without the matrix. Research Limitation/implication: This paper provides concrete criteria for prioritising hypotheses to investigate during a root cause analysis. Originality/Value of paper: This paper provides concrete criteria for prioritising hypotheses.