Ishikawa Diagram
A Cause and Effect Diagram, also known as a Fishbone Diagram or Ishikawa Diagram, is a visual tool used to:
- Identify and organize potential causes of a specific problem or effect.
- Systematically analyze the root causes of an issue by visually representing the various factors that may contribute to it.
This in turns links to Root Cause Analysis.
Root Cause Analysis
I have used Cause and Effect Diagrams and Root Cause Analysis many times in my career as a Commercial Manager / Quantity Surveyor in the Construction Industry. Sometimes as part of Contractual Claims preparation or defence, as it is essential to know the primary cause and the associated Contract Clauses upon which the whole stack of cards, or story, and subsequent evaluation is based.
Another use is to to with company re-engineering, process engineering, and strategy development. Whichever of the names used, which is just a sense of scale and timing, the thoughts are similar, based it to two groups.
The first group is something is wrong and need to be put right. Hence you must find the root cause of the problem to be able to properly fix it. The strategy can then be developed to rectify the cause of the problem or problems not just looking at the symptoms and applying a sticking plaster. Sometimes the cause can be something as small as a simple process, which needs reworking and adjusting. Other times, the whole company needs to be re-engineered to save the company from its own demise.
The second group is similar, but different. There is no fault to find, but a direction needs to be found. A strategy for a change and development initiative. What does success look like? What is the mission and the associated mission statement. It could be a new company or a new product, or new project. It could be transformational change of a whole industry. Either way, the first steps are to find the things that will impact and influence the success or failure. Understanding the root and the influences is key to drafting a strategy which has any reasonable hope of success.
So what has all of the above to do with my travelogue?
In Eastern Turkey, in 1978, there was a significant event, which fundamentally changed the Encounter Overland expedition from London to Kathmandu. You can read about the truck breakdown here.
From time to time I think about that day, and those moments. Not dwelling mordinity, just thinking it over.
We approached a queue of trucks at what appeared to be some road works. On another trip we had encountered similar but had stopped and ended up having a friendly snowball fight. We lost a lot of time but it did not matter on that day.
On other occasions there were trucks that were part of the roadworks, expecting to be passed by the trough traffic.
However, on this occasion, although I could not see the whole of the line of trucks, the last on in the queue was a truck with stone in it. That itself is the route cause of all that happened after that.
There are things and experiences that happened before which had an influence on the turn of events. There are also preconceived ideas about the environment and circumstances.
However, the root cause was that it was potentially a construction truck. In all probability, if it had been a cargo truck, I would have pulled up behind it. I would not have thought it was part of the construction works and would therefore not have commenced jumping the queue. The kids on the back of the stone truck would not have thrown stones at the back of our truck. If I had not been predispositioned that this part of Eastern Turkey was bandit country and the act of throwing stones at the people in the back of our truck was a hostile act, I would not have tried to escape. If it was not hostile but just displeasure, I could have stopped and just rolled back a little to join the queue.
All ifs and buts, I know, and in no way is this an attempt at changing my responsibility. However, it is interesting to me to realise how such small events can change so much.
One of the phrases in measuring construction claims is, "but for".
But for this incident we would have arrived in Iran earlier, when hotels were being set on fire if they had westerners in them. Would we have been impacted?
But for this incident Ian Way would not have flown out to Eastern Turkey and subsequently taken them through Iran by public transport, as advised by local officials from Rezaieh, or Rezaiyeh, now known as Urmia.
But for this incident I would not have caught a bus from Yüksekova, Hakkari, Turkey, all the way to the capital, Ankara, with a Swiss girl, a volunteer EM, because she spoke German, more prevalent in Turkey as a second language than English. A journey of 1,326 km, about 18 hours, both according to Google Maps.
But for this incident, we could all have had a successful trip all the way to Kathmandu, with only the normal level of trials and tribulations. I could have seen the Buddhas of Bamiyan in Afghanistan before they were blown up several years later.
The ripples continue.
