17.06.2015 Views

6 steps beyond the 5 Whys - AMMJ

6 steps beyond the 5 Whys - AMMJ

6 steps beyond the 5 Whys - AMMJ

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Diving deeper:<br />

6 <strong>steps</strong> <strong>beyond</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong>


Introduction<br />

When an incident or accident occurs at your workplace, what do<br />

you do to fix <strong>the</strong> problem?<br />

The “5 <strong>Whys</strong> process” is a common method to identify causes of<br />

<strong>the</strong> incident. But what do you do if this technique only presents<br />

fur<strong>the</strong>r symptoms ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> real root causes?<br />

This eBook presents a useful method for taking <strong>the</strong> analysis<br />

fur<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process. The 6 <strong>steps</strong> <strong>beyond</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong><br />

presents a logical framework for getting to <strong>the</strong> bottom of any<br />

incident or accident in your workplace.


The 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process<br />

At a mine site in far north Queensland, a freight train sits idle on <strong>the</strong><br />

track. For some reason, <strong>the</strong> train cannot be loaded with its coal, and is<br />

causing a costly stoppage at <strong>the</strong> mine facility. The mine operator needs<br />

to know what’s stopping <strong>the</strong> normal loading procedure.<br />

A starting point might be to run with <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process, whereby you<br />

start asking questions – typically, at least 5 – about what happened.<br />

Why can’t <strong>the</strong> train be loaded?<br />

Because <strong>the</strong> loading conveyor belt has stopped.<br />

Why has <strong>the</strong> loading conveyor stopped?<br />

Because <strong>the</strong> drive motor on <strong>the</strong> conveyor pulley has tripped out.<br />

Why has <strong>the</strong> drive motor tripped out?<br />

Because <strong>the</strong>re was an overload on <strong>the</strong> drive motor.<br />

Why was <strong>the</strong>re an overload on <strong>the</strong> drive motor?<br />

Because <strong>the</strong> main bearing had seized.<br />

Why has <strong>the</strong> main bearing seized?<br />

Because <strong>the</strong>re was no lubrication in <strong>the</strong> bearing.<br />

By asking 5 simple questions, <strong>the</strong> mine operator arrives at a tangible<br />

solution: ensuring that bearings in <strong>the</strong> drive motor are adequately<br />

lubricated. As this simple example demonstrates, <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process<br />

could potentially be sufficient as a simple form of root cause analysis,<br />

with no fur<strong>the</strong>r investigation needed.<br />

Yet, while investigators could use <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process as a starting point,<br />

<strong>the</strong>y may however soon see <strong>the</strong> need to take <strong>the</strong> investigation fur<strong>the</strong>r.


A good first analysis…<br />

but is it enough?<br />

In some cases <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong>’ linear nature can<br />

cause people to jump to conclusions and fail to<br />

arrive at <strong>the</strong> true cause or causes of an incident<br />

or accident. While <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> technique can be<br />

successfully used for very basic investigations, it<br />

does have a few limitations which any investigator<br />

should be aware of before using it.<br />

The limitations of <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process include:<br />

• Tendency to stop at symptoms ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />

finding lower level root causes<br />

• Inability to go <strong>beyond</strong> <strong>the</strong> investigator’s current<br />

knowledge – you can’t find causes for things<br />

you don’t already know<br />

• Lack of support to help <strong>the</strong> investigator to ask<br />

<strong>the</strong> right “why” questions<br />

• Results aren’t repeatable – different people<br />

often come up with different causes for <strong>the</strong><br />

same problem<br />

• Branching can occur – indicating that a more<br />

in-depth analysis is needed to get to <strong>the</strong> root<br />

cause<br />

Given that <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process may not be enough,<br />

what follows? What should an investigator do<br />

when a more thorough, structured investigation is<br />

needed?


6 <strong>steps</strong> <strong>beyond</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong><br />

If <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process does not deliver <strong>the</strong> right answers, <strong>the</strong>n it would be<br />

pertinent to enact <strong>the</strong> following 6 <strong>steps</strong> for a more rigorous investigation of <strong>the</strong><br />

incident or accident. Try to do this as soon as possible, particularly step one.<br />

Collect more information<br />

Assemble <strong>the</strong> team<br />

Conduct <strong>the</strong> RCA<br />

Implement <strong>the</strong> solution<br />

(corrective actions)<br />

Measure <strong>the</strong> success of<br />

<strong>the</strong> corrective actions<br />

Advertise your successes


Collect more<br />

information


Collect more information<br />

Without <strong>the</strong> right information,<br />

assumptions and guesswork can lead<br />

you astray in your understanding of a<br />

problem… and will deliver no certainty<br />

in <strong>the</strong> outcomes of corrective actions.<br />

To really understand a problem, you need plenty of evidence.<br />

And you need it as soon as possible.<br />

As soon you identify that <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process is not sufficient<br />

to resolve an incident, you should trigger an urgent search for<br />

more information. This becomes <strong>the</strong> first step <strong>beyond</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5<br />

<strong>Whys</strong>.<br />

Assign a person to <strong>the</strong> task of collecting as much information<br />

relating to <strong>the</strong> incident as possible. Put simply, <strong>the</strong> more<br />

information you have, <strong>the</strong> better off you’ll be.<br />

By acting quickly, <strong>the</strong> quality and quantity of <strong>the</strong> information<br />

you collect will be more consistent. A delay of hours – or,<br />

even worse, days – will negatively impact on <strong>the</strong> quality of <strong>the</strong><br />

information you ga<strong>the</strong>r, and hence <strong>the</strong> subsequent analysis<br />

could be hindered.


Collect more information<br />

Protect your information by<br />

cordoning off an area. Don’t allow<br />

people to touch or interfere with<br />

important evidence.<br />

Get statements from everyone who<br />

saw or had anything to do with<br />

<strong>the</strong> problem. A delay in ga<strong>the</strong>ring<br />

statements allows people to<br />

think about and rationalise what<br />

<strong>the</strong>y saw. The information in <strong>the</strong><br />

statements will subsequently<br />

change and people will be hard<br />

pressed to stick to <strong>the</strong> facts or be<br />

able to recognise <strong>the</strong> changes that<br />

have been made from what <strong>the</strong>y<br />

originally saw.<br />

Top tips<br />

• Act quickly to ga<strong>the</strong>r as much information as you can<br />

• The more evidence you can collect, <strong>the</strong> better<br />

• Assign one person to <strong>the</strong> job of collecting evidence<br />

• Don’t throw evidence away when cleaning up after an<br />

incident… make sure you save it!


Assemble<br />

<strong>the</strong> team


Assemble <strong>the</strong> team<br />

The team may need to be available for<br />

a significant period of time – so you’ll<br />

need <strong>the</strong> backing of management.<br />

Get <strong>the</strong> right people toge<strong>the</strong>r – people with <strong>the</strong> knowledge and<br />

experience to help you understand <strong>the</strong> problem.<br />

Assembling <strong>the</strong> team may take a few days or longer, but it is<br />

important. Without <strong>the</strong> right people, your investigation will lack<br />

<strong>the</strong> specific detail you need – resulting in a more generic report,<br />

which resembles a Failure Modes Effects Analysis (FMEA)<br />

that lists all possible causes with no real insight into <strong>the</strong> root<br />

causes.<br />

With <strong>the</strong> right people on board, your analysis will dive<br />

sufficiently deep to arrive at a workable solution.<br />

So who do you need to get? You want people who bring<br />

experience across different – yet relevant – job roles and people<br />

who have direct knowledge of <strong>the</strong> incident. Pick people with<br />

open minds who are willing to listen, to contribute and will<br />

help <strong>the</strong> investigation. These people should possess specific,<br />

relevant understanding of <strong>the</strong> issue - which will help you to<br />

arrive at a specific solution.


Assemble <strong>the</strong> team<br />

Assign a skilled and experienced<br />

facilitator who is adept at<br />

controlling a group and keeping<br />

<strong>the</strong> investigation on track – without<br />

bias. Be wary of appointing a<br />

subject matter expert as <strong>the</strong>y may<br />

steer <strong>the</strong> group in a particular<br />

direction and who is going to argue<br />

with <strong>the</strong> subject matter expert?<br />

Top tips<br />

• Get management support to bring <strong>the</strong> people you need<br />

to <strong>the</strong> team, for as long as is needed<br />

• Appoint a skilled and experienced facilitator<br />

• The number of people should reflect <strong>the</strong> complexity of<br />

<strong>the</strong> incident<br />

• You may need an independent expert<br />

to join <strong>the</strong> team


Conduct <strong>the</strong> Root<br />

Cause Analysis


Conduct <strong>the</strong> Root Cause Analysis<br />

During <strong>the</strong> RCA, <strong>the</strong> facilitator should<br />

be inclusive, ask all <strong>the</strong> questions<br />

that need to be asked, and pursue<br />

all causal pathways to <strong>the</strong>ir logical<br />

conclusions<br />

Your goal is to conduct <strong>the</strong> RCA as soon as possible after <strong>the</strong> incident or<br />

accident occurs – so that <strong>the</strong> information is still fresh in people’s minds<br />

and remains untainted.<br />

Appoint a time and place for <strong>the</strong> investigation to occur, as soon as <strong>the</strong><br />

required group can be convened. Then, once <strong>the</strong> group meets, set basic<br />

ground rules around respecting o<strong>the</strong>rs’ opinions and encouraging an<br />

open dialogue.<br />

The first task in an RCA is to define <strong>the</strong> problem. Add context to <strong>the</strong><br />

problem by including information about when and where it happened,<br />

and clearly articulate <strong>the</strong> significance of <strong>the</strong> problem. This will<br />

determine <strong>the</strong> time and resources allocated to resolving it – and is an<br />

important beginning. At <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> day it will also constitute your<br />

business case that you present to management for endorsement of your<br />

recommendations.<br />

Then, create your cause and effect chart. Collect information from all<br />

<strong>the</strong> people in <strong>the</strong> room and organise it logically according to <strong>the</strong> process<br />

that you are using.<br />

With <strong>the</strong> help of <strong>the</strong> entire group, you will gain a clear picture of <strong>the</strong><br />

problem at hand. At <strong>the</strong> same time, you will see what is unknown – and<br />

thus what requires fur<strong>the</strong>r investigation.


Conduct <strong>the</strong> Root Cause Analysis<br />

Use <strong>the</strong> completed cause and effect<br />

chart to assist you in searching for<br />

solutions. If you can eliminate a cause -<br />

you break <strong>the</strong> link between causes and<br />

<strong>the</strong> effect won’t happen. By eliminating<br />

just one cause you can demonstrate to<br />

everyone <strong>the</strong> effect that it will have by<br />

referring to your cause and effect chart.<br />

If you do end up with a large number<br />

of possible solutions, consider how to<br />

achieve <strong>the</strong> desired outcome with <strong>the</strong><br />

least amount of time, effort, or money.<br />

Prioritise your options and implement<br />

<strong>the</strong> best of <strong>the</strong>m. Establish a set of<br />

criteria by which you can objectively<br />

judge which are <strong>the</strong> better solutions.<br />

Top tips<br />

• Follow <strong>the</strong> RCA process<br />

• You don’t have to be <strong>the</strong> subject matter expert, so don’t<br />

profess to be one<br />

• Teamwork is key – value all participants’ contributions<br />

• Keep asking “why” or “caused by” questions for as long as<br />

you need to<br />

• Don’t stop too soon with your questioning


Implement <strong>the</strong> solutions<br />

(corrective actions)


Implement <strong>the</strong> solutions (corrective actions)<br />

Be clear about who is responsible for<br />

each corrective action. You don’t want<br />

to create <strong>the</strong> opportunity for people<br />

to be able to pass <strong>the</strong> buck with “I<br />

thought Bob was going to do it.”<br />

Your RCA should produce a number of corrective actions.<br />

These should be implemented as soon as practically<br />

possible.<br />

Have a mechanism in place by which <strong>the</strong> implementation<br />

of corrective actions can be tracked. This system should<br />

appoint a single person to each corrective action, and<br />

include a clear timeframe for completion. This allows for<br />

progress to be evaluated.


Implement <strong>the</strong> solutions (corrective actions)<br />

Make sure you follow up<br />

on each corrective action –<br />

check back with <strong>the</strong> individual<br />

responsible, to make sure that<br />

progress is being made.<br />

Top tips<br />

• Give ownership of a solution to an individual, not a group<br />

or department<br />

• Assign a due-date for each corrective action<br />

• Support people in <strong>the</strong>ir efforts to implement corrective<br />

actions


Measure <strong>the</strong> success of<br />

<strong>the</strong> corrective actions


Measure <strong>the</strong> success of <strong>the</strong> corrective actions<br />

By quantifying <strong>the</strong> success of your<br />

efforts, you are unequivocally<br />

demonstrating <strong>the</strong> value of RCA.<br />

How much downtime have you avoided? How much money have<br />

you saved? Measure <strong>the</strong> impact of your RCA and its subsequent<br />

corrective actions.<br />

By talking in figures – about increases in production tonnes,<br />

or a decrease in downtime, or dollars saved – you will be able<br />

to demonstrate <strong>the</strong> success of your actions. After all, <strong>the</strong>se<br />

measures are often <strong>the</strong> very reason you did <strong>the</strong> RCA in <strong>the</strong><br />

first place; plus, <strong>the</strong>y are tangible and readily understood by<br />

management.


Measure <strong>the</strong> success of <strong>the</strong> corrective actions<br />

Many industries fall over when it<br />

comes to <strong>the</strong> measurement of any<br />

change that <strong>the</strong> corrective actions<br />

have engendered. Yet this step is<br />

very important. By substantiating<br />

<strong>the</strong> success of corrective actions,<br />

greater credibility is given to<br />

<strong>the</strong> investigation process and<br />

any future investigations will<br />

receive even more support from<br />

management teams.<br />

Top tips<br />

• Identify which key performance indicators are being used<br />

to measure success<br />

• Use ‘before and after’ figures to prove it


Advertise your<br />

successes


Advertise your successes<br />

By demonstrating how much value<br />

you’ve brought to your company, it<br />

will be easier to bring <strong>the</strong> right people<br />

to <strong>the</strong> investigative team next time<br />

around.<br />

Publish your RCA report, and promote <strong>the</strong> great results<br />

that you measured in <strong>the</strong> previous step.<br />

As you will have discovered, <strong>the</strong> 6 <strong>steps</strong> <strong>beyond</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5<br />

<strong>Whys</strong> require a significant investment of both time and<br />

resources.<br />

To help ensure that <strong>the</strong>se resources are made available<br />

for <strong>the</strong> next RCA, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> positive outcomes of <strong>the</strong><br />

investigation conducted should be advertised to <strong>the</strong><br />

broader work community.


Advertise your successes<br />

Promoting your results will<br />

engender management<br />

support for <strong>the</strong> RCA process<br />

and <strong>the</strong> process itself will gain<br />

favour and support from your<br />

colleagues.<br />

Sharing <strong>the</strong> report will also<br />

help <strong>the</strong> entire business unit<br />

to learn from <strong>the</strong> incidents or<br />

accidents that have occurred.<br />

By sharing all of your findings,<br />

you will be building on <strong>the</strong><br />

collective wisdom of your<br />

company.<br />

Top tips<br />

• Put <strong>the</strong> results on a poster in a prominent position<br />

• Share <strong>the</strong> full report with all relevant stakeholders<br />

• Share with <strong>the</strong> broader work community<br />

• Quantify your successes in a way that is easy<br />

for o<strong>the</strong>rs to understand


Case Study<br />

Now that you have a good understanding<br />

of each of <strong>the</strong> 6 Steps Beyond <strong>the</strong> 5 Why’s,<br />

let’s refer back to <strong>the</strong> initial case study<br />

used to illustrate <strong>the</strong> 5 Why method and<br />

how diving deeper <strong>beyond</strong> this method,<br />

using <strong>the</strong> “6 <strong>steps</strong>”, can allow you to get to<br />

<strong>the</strong> root causes of a problem.<br />

If we were to initiate <strong>the</strong> “6 Steps”, a<br />

search for all relevant information would<br />

be undertaken. Statements, photographs<br />

and a search for all maintenance history<br />

on <strong>the</strong> drive motor are all collected.<br />

(Step 1)<br />

The RCA is <strong>the</strong>n undertaken (Step 3).<br />

Clarification of <strong>the</strong> purpose of <strong>the</strong><br />

investigation, in this case preventing <strong>the</strong><br />

recurrence of <strong>the</strong> “Delay in loading <strong>the</strong><br />

train”, is <strong>the</strong> first step. Then context to<br />

<strong>the</strong> problem is included by identifying<br />

“When” it occurred, “Where” it happened<br />

and how “Significant” <strong>the</strong> problem is (for<br />

example; damage to reputation, cost of<br />

any demurrage for delayed shipments<br />

etc). Quantifying <strong>the</strong> costs will create an<br />

understanding of just how significant this<br />

problem is.<br />

With management’s support, key<br />

personnel have been identified to<br />

participate in <strong>the</strong> investigation and invited<br />

to attend. An experienced facilitator has<br />

been appointed based on <strong>the</strong>ir ability to<br />

handle all <strong>the</strong> individuals in <strong>the</strong> group and<br />

to control <strong>the</strong> (potentially large) group<br />

size.<br />

The room that has been booked is suited<br />

for <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> group and <strong>the</strong> facilities<br />

allow for <strong>the</strong> recording and organisation of<br />

large amounts of information. The more<br />

room <strong>the</strong>re is <strong>the</strong> better as it allows <strong>the</strong><br />

facilitator to spread <strong>the</strong> information out in<br />

logical paths to make it easy for o<strong>the</strong>rs to<br />

follow. The facilitator can <strong>the</strong>n separate<br />

cause paths and cater for <strong>the</strong> expansion of<br />

<strong>the</strong>m. (Step 2)


Next, <strong>the</strong> cause and effect chart is created. The problem is already known, so <strong>the</strong> team now<br />

undertakes an exhaustive search for all causes. Being minimalistic may speed things up but<br />

will also limit <strong>the</strong> number of opportunities that present <strong>the</strong>mselves to control <strong>the</strong> problem.<br />

If minimalistic, you will probably end up with strong lineal connection of information. If<br />

expansive, we will see a chart that will grow from your initial effect and expand into a number<br />

of causal pathways. Please refer to <strong>the</strong> example below.<br />

Action<br />

Conveyor has stopped<br />

Caused by<br />

Primary Effect<br />

Delay in train loading<br />

Caused by<br />

Condition<br />

Conveyor loads <strong>the</strong> train<br />

Condition<br />

Only 1 Loading Conveyor<br />

Caused by<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

STOP<br />

Condition<br />

6 hours to replace<br />

drive motor<br />

Caused by<br />

?<br />

When expanded on fur<strong>the</strong>r, this is what a chart starts to look like.<br />

Condition<br />

motor operating<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Conveyor has stopped<br />

Caused by<br />

Condition<br />

Drive Motor Drives<br />

conveyor<br />

Action<br />

Drive motor tripped out<br />

Caused by<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

Action<br />

Motor was overloaded<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Bearing seized<br />

Condition<br />

Seized bearing overloads<br />

motor<br />

Caused by<br />

Caused by<br />

Condition<br />

Motor has overload<br />

protection<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

Primary Effect<br />

Delay in train loading<br />

Caused by<br />

Condition<br />

Conveyor loads <strong>the</strong> train<br />

Condition<br />

Only 1 Loading Conveyor<br />

Caused by<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

STOP<br />

Condition<br />

6 hours to replace<br />

drive motor<br />

Caused by<br />

?<br />

This is before <strong>the</strong> team has even got to why <strong>the</strong> bearing has seized. Problems are rarely as<br />

simple as <strong>the</strong>y seem. We tend to want to do things simply however this comes at <strong>the</strong> cost of<br />

good understanding. Whilst you may understand, it is possible that o<strong>the</strong>rs will struggle to<br />

follow your logic. If all <strong>the</strong> information is not put into play <strong>the</strong>n you rely on assumptions and a<br />

common interpretation, which is precisely why many misunderstandings occur.


Let’s explore fur<strong>the</strong>r on why <strong>the</strong> bearing seized by adding to <strong>the</strong> existing chart.<br />

Primary Effect<br />

Bearing seized<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Metal welded toge<strong>the</strong>r<br />

Condition<br />

welding seizes<br />

<strong>the</strong> bearing<br />

Caused<br />

by<br />

STOP<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Temperature exceeded<br />

melting point<br />

Condition<br />

Metal melting point “X”<br />

Caused<br />

by<br />

STOP<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Bearing was operating<br />

Condition<br />

High friction in bearing<br />

Condition<br />

Didn’t trip out<br />

Caused by<br />

?<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Metal expansion<br />

in bearing<br />

Condition<br />

Minimal clearnace<br />

in bearing<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

High heat generated<br />

Condition<br />

Metal expands with heat<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Bearing operating<br />

Condition<br />

Low lubrication<br />

Caused by<br />

?<br />

Caused by<br />

Action<br />

Tube Blocked<br />

Condition<br />

Autolube System<br />

Caused by<br />

STOP<br />

So what do we notice? The same problem has been explored, however <strong>the</strong> complexity and<br />

detail of <strong>the</strong> problem has certainly increased. If you want to establish a comprehensive<br />

understanding of <strong>the</strong> problem throughout <strong>the</strong> company, <strong>the</strong> 6 Steps Beyond 5 Why’s will allow<br />

you to do this. A strong understanding of <strong>the</strong> problem will lead to implementing effective and<br />

timely solutions. (Step 4)<br />

Measuring <strong>the</strong> success of <strong>the</strong> corrective action will need to be undertaken after a period of<br />

time to ascertain <strong>the</strong> success of <strong>the</strong> solutions. (Step 5)<br />

Advertising success and sharing reports will create a positive dynamic within <strong>the</strong> company for<br />

<strong>the</strong> support of <strong>the</strong> Root Cause Analysis program, whilst also educating all employees within<br />

<strong>the</strong> company at <strong>the</strong> same time. (Step 6)


Conclusion<br />

In this eBook, we looked at <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process – and identified<br />

that, in some cases, it does not get to <strong>the</strong> root causes of an<br />

incident or accident.<br />

Realising that you have to dive deeper, it is important to give<br />

this investigation some structure. This will help to guarantee<br />

<strong>the</strong> consistency – and performance – of outcomes.<br />

As <strong>the</strong> ‘6 <strong>steps</strong> <strong>beyond</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> demonstrates, planning and<br />

preparation are <strong>the</strong> keys to implementing a successful RCA and<br />

<strong>the</strong>n initiating corrective actions.<br />

To avoid <strong>the</strong> ‘blame game’ and really get to <strong>the</strong> bottom of<br />

incidents within your organisation, we encourage you to<br />

consider all <strong>the</strong> <strong>steps</strong> that have been outlined here when you<br />

next conduct an RCA that goes fur<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process.


PUBLIC TRAINING COURSES<br />

We hold public training courses in cities throughout <strong>the</strong> world. Learn<br />

more about our 2 Day Facilitators Course<br />

onsite training<br />

All our training courses are available for delivery onsite at your<br />

facility or a training venue of your choice. If you choose to book onsite<br />

training, we highly recommend doing <strong>the</strong> 3 day Facilitator course which<br />

offers students <strong>the</strong> opportunity to work on a real life problem from <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

workplace under <strong>the</strong> guidance of one of our experienced trainers.<br />

OnSite Training Benefits<br />

• Cost effective for a larger group size<br />

• Avoid travel expenses for attendees<br />

• Reduced time away from work for students<br />

• Schedule convenience - working around your availability and<br />

schedule<br />

• Personalisation and customisation for certain courses to make it<br />

relevant for students<br />

• Get all team members speaking a common RCA language<br />

FACILITATION SERVICES<br />

Sometimes <strong>the</strong>re will be an issue of sensitivity that requires greater<br />

objectivity and facilitation skills in finding out <strong>the</strong> root cause and<br />

developing solutions. Click to learn how we can help.<br />

Learn more about <strong>the</strong> Apollo Root Cause Analysis TM<br />

method at www.apollorootcause.com


About ARMS Reliability<br />

ARMS Reliability is a service, software, and training organisation<br />

providing a “one stop shop” for Root Cause Analysis, as well as<br />

Reliability Engineering, RAMS, and Maintenance Optimisation for both<br />

new and existing projects.<br />

Since 1997, ARMS Reliability has been an authorised training provider of<br />

<strong>the</strong> Apollo Root Cause Analysis TM methodology. In 2012, our agreement<br />

went global and ARMS Reliability now provides RCA training, software,<br />

and services throughout <strong>the</strong> world.<br />

5 <strong>Whys</strong> + Apollo Root Cause<br />

Analysis TM Method<br />

Many of our clients use <strong>the</strong> 5 <strong>Whys</strong> process as <strong>the</strong>ir base level<br />

methodology for very simple incidents and use <strong>the</strong> Apollo Root Cause<br />

Analysis TM method for more complex problems. The Apollo Root Cause<br />

Analysis TM method truly is scalable – it can be used for any size and<br />

complexity of problem and can be integrated into a root cause analysis<br />

program that is tailored to your organisation’s needs.<br />

For more information on how ARMS Reliability can help, please contact<br />

us at <strong>the</strong> office location nearest you (details below).<br />

You can also make an enquiry on www.apollorootcause.com<br />

www.apollorootcause.com<br />

info@apollorootcause.com<br />

NORTH / CENTRAL / SOUTH AMERICA<br />

P: +1 512 795 5291<br />

AUSTRALIA / ASIA / NEW ZEALAND<br />

P: +61 3 5255 5357<br />

EUROPE<br />

P: +44 122 445 9362<br />

SOUTH AFRICA<br />

P: +27 10 500 8232<br />

North America | Latin America | Europe | Asia | Africa | Australia

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!