Diagnosing Problems: Fishbones & 5 Whys

Leaders must be skilled at diagnosing various problems within an organisation. Think of a doctor diagnosing a patient's illness. A failure to diagnose accurately will make it difficult for the doctor to treat the patient. Wrong diagnosis, wrong solution.

Moreover, today's solution can become tomorrow's problem. It is not surprising that a patient may receive one medicine to treat an illness and, at the same time, a second medicine to reduce the side effects of the first. But what about the future effects of the second medicine? Will a third medicine eventually be needed?

This illustrates an important reality: there is no perfect decision when leaders are solving organisational problems. This is often why business decisions take so long. Leaders may be searching for a perfect decision—one that creates no additional problems either today or in the future. But is such a decision really possible?

Problem diagnosis is therefore an essential leadership competency. Leaders can use various methods, such as Fishbone Analysis and the 5 Whys.

Fishbone: Looking at Problems from Different Perspectives

A Fishbone Analysis helps leaders search for the root causes of a problem through the branching structure of a fishbone diagram. Each bone represents a different mindset, perspective, assumption, or belief about a problem and its possible solutions within the organisation. Fishbone Analysis helps leaders identify different ways of thinking and different perspectives, reduce disagreements, and develop a more shared understanding of the problem.

Suppose you want to understand why it is difficult to retain employees—in other words, why employee turnover is high. You can use Fishbone Analysis to examine the root causes of employee turnover from several different perspectives.

• The first fishbone could be the salary system. Does the salary system fail to distinguish between high-performing and low-performing employees? Does the salary system fail to provide a sense of fairness compared with other organisations?
• The second fishbone could be leadership. Is the leadership perceived negatively by employees? Does the leadership fail to empower employees?
• The third fishbone could be job design. Does the way work is designed provide insufficient room for employees to be creative?
• The fourth fishbone could be work facilities. Are the facilities inadequate, making it difficult for employees to perform their work effectively?

Each fishbone gives leaders a different perspective from which to understand and solve the problem. Different perspectives lead to different definitions of the problem, and different definitions of the problem lead to different solutions.

It is therefore useful for leaders to conduct a focus group discussion (FGD) involving several leaders and employees. Using the different fishbone perspectives, they can explore the root causes of employee turnover and possible solutions.

These differences in perspective are also what create differences in how people evaluate and criticise the solutions selected by leaders. A leader's ability to choose the most appropriate perspective for understanding both the problem and its solution will ultimately influence the effectiveness of their leadership.

5 Whys: Putting the Problem Under a Microscope

After Fishbone Analysis has helped leaders develop a richer range of perspectives for examining problems and solutions, they can continue the diagnosis using a more microscopic approach: the 5 Whys.

Suppose one of the identified fishbones is job design, and you want to investigate more deeply why job design may be contributing to high employee turnover. Once again, you can conduct an FGD involving owners, leaders, and employees in one discussion to explore and confirm five levels of the question ‘Why?’

Think of the 5 Whys as a microscope. A microscope enlarges something very small until it can be seen clearly. In the same way, the 5 Whys helps leaders examine a problem more closely until both the problem and its potential solution become clearer. For instance,

Why 1: Why does the way the job is designed cause many employees not to stay for long? Suppose the conclusion from the discussion is that employees experience boredom, monotony, and feel that the work is inhumane.

Why 2: Why are employees bored? Suppose the majority of participants respond that the work is too mechanistic, making employees feel as though they are working like robots.

Why 3: Why do employees feel as though they are working like robots? The participants may answer that the work does not provide enough room for creativity.

Why 4: Why is the work so mechanistic and restrictive? Participants may explain that employees are not given enough room to be creative in determining how they complete their work.

Why 5: Why are employees unable to be creative in completing their work? Participants may answer that leaders are too insistent that everyone follows the same Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), even though different types of work may require different SOPs.

The answer to Why 5 suggests that employees should still work according to SOPs, but different SOPs may need to be developed for different types of work. However, suppose participants answer Why 5 differently. They may say that varied types of work do not require SOPs at all. In that case, leaders may need to redesign the work from a mechanistic, process-oriented approach towards a more organic, results-oriented approach. This demonstrates why diagnosis through the 5 Whys is so important for understanding both the problem and its appropriate solution.

Organisational Problems Are Interconnected

You can continue using the 5 Whys for the other fishbones, including the salary system, leadership, and work facilities. However, you need to be prepared for the possibility that every fishbone will reveal different problems and require different solutions. Why? Because an organisation is an integrated system.

An intervention designed to transform one fishbone may need to be accompanied by interventions in the others. Leaders therefore need to decide wisely which fishbone should be prioritised first and which should be addressed subsequently. Ideally, interventions should eventually address all relevant fishbones if the organisation wants to reduce employee turnover—or perhaps even eliminate it. This helps explain why some leaders succeed in solving organisational problems while others are less successful or fail entirely.

Consider doctors again. Why are some doctors highly trusted by patients and constantly in demand, while others may struggle to gain patients' confidence? Diagnosis determines a doctor's ability to treat a patient's illness effectively. However, diagnosis alone is not enough. A doctor also needs extensive knowledge and experience to interpret the diagnostic results, understand the illness, prescribe the appropriate medicine, and determine the right treatment for the patient.

The same applies to leadership. Diagnosis must be accompanied by knowledge and experience. Without sufficient knowledge and experience—without enough hours in the field—a leader's diagnostic capability may fail to uncover the real problem and may result in an inappropriate solution. If the organisational symptom is employee turnover, then you need extensive knowledge and experience in people management to diagnose and address it effectively. How about your organisation?