Key concepts
- Basic deviations.- They are those in which it is evident that there is an error in an operation. They are analogous to what might be called "dazzling mistakes." Symptoms.- are the adverse events that occur in an operation but that have not developed to the point of becoming basic deviations and that if overlooked may become so. Effect problems.- Are those problems that are superficial. For example, when an Investigator solves an effect problem. You will only be applying a workaround and it is very likely that the same problem will reappear or a similar one will appear. Cause problems.- Also called root problems. When the Investigator resolves a cause problem, he anticipates that it will not return.
Introduction
The beginning of a research process for any project implies scientific knowledge about a professional discipline oriented to reality and this is an orderly and systematic process giving rise to the modality of scientific knowledge, which is why it is intended to construct explanations for phenomena and observed facts, these are intended to increase your degree of knowledge, involves identifying the characteristics and elements of the object, under previous experiences with value judgments, reality judgments and conditions that affect it, to knowledge expressed in theoretical propositions with situations typical of reality.
So to do the research different tools are used, the experience as an advisor in thesis research projects and professor in the Research Workshop chair that I have at the Ricardo Palma University I have developed this causal analysis tool to help us with the development of the problem statement.
The text is clear and tries to be as didactic as possible. It has a broad focus on two aspects: What steps to follow to identify the problem and The ability that the researcher must have or must develop to get to the bottom of the problem, that is, not only see the fact superficially, but have a very acute sense of smell to get to the true source of the problem.
The researcher, like the medical science professional, must have extensive knowledge to provide efficient and permanent solution alternatives, so as not to become a firefighter who only extinguishes fires as a result of a poor approach or a poorly analyzed solution.
In such a way that this tool can not only serve for scientific research but also to find any problem found in the organization.
In other words, it can be used as a tool for a general diagnosis for organizational problems and at the same time this same tool can be used to find a specific problem and develop it in greater detail or as it can be applied with professionals. in the medical sciences for a general practitioner who diagnoses generically and this same tool for a specialist; that is to say that administrators can be general practitioners and it is possible to detect general problems that organizations have and at the same time specialists in the different professions that the administration has (marketing, finance, personnel, etc.) in order to be able to reach More comprehensive way to detect a problem.
In such a way that the development of this tool in the first column gives us the effects or symptoms, which brings us a general description of the phenomena that occur in the reality of the company. Observation is an intellectual and intentional process that the Researcher performs on facts or events, data and relationships that indicate the existence of a phenomenon that can be explained in the framework of science. It means that the same phenomenon implies different observation and explanation according to theoretical models in such a way that the description will lead the investigator to present the facts as they occur; It could be affirmed that it groups and converts information, facts and events that characterize the observed reality.
In the second column, carry out an analysis to determine the place or location of the phenomena that occur, and in the third, a more detailed analysis is required to determine the causes that produce the effects.
The description of these three columns give us the first step of the investigation that may be the subject of the investigation and the approach to the problem. That includes the description of the "current situation" that characterizes the "object of knowledge" (symptoms, facts and causes), (diagnosis) identification of future situations by sustaining the current situation (prognosis) presentation of alternatives to overcome the current situation (forecast control). To then formulate the problem.
Analysis of the problem
For example: If the doctor diagnoses appendicitis and the problem is ulceration, the treatment will fail.
The same happens in companies, if the investigator makes a mistake in identifying the problem, he will completely fail in the solution he takes or that "temporarily extinguishes the fire."
Five activities are proposed in which the analysis of the complete problem can be divided, they constitute a systematic and practical method for the Investigator to analyze the problem.
At first, two precautions must be taken: first, activities are far from being independent of each other.
Second, the method used when analyzing the problem should not be limited.
This matrix works as an analytical work table that allows the person to develop a systematic method.
The researcher who wants to improve will have to review all the activities and study them separately.
1.- Reporting mistakes
The first activity of problem analysis is to point out especially what is wrong or what needs to be improved.
For example:
- Machine 256 is producing defective parts, In the department of José Díaz there are excess absences, Department 40E does not meet its production objectives.
These kinds of problems automatically catch the Investigator's attention and are basic deviations from well-defined norms.
The Investigator who concentrates only on these types of deviations deals with problems of effect but not of cause.
Similar crisis situations will reappear and only until the real cause or problem is identified will they be definitively eliminated.
The challenge is in those more difficult situations where the Investigator feels that the results could have been better or that there could be something wrong.
For example, the result of machine 256 is adequate but not as desirable as it could be. Employees of a certain department achieve the standards, but with an apparent degree of pessimism, the employee does his job but does not develop his full capacity.
All of these examples are situations with symptoms of deeper problems and are often overlooked into basic deviations.
To identify situations that require improvement, three points must be observed.
A).- First, to have an exact and complete awareness of the specific standards of execution and the capabilities of the team and personnel under their command.
B).- Second, to have an acute perception of the current level of execution of the Department, related to specific standards. Know what is happening and point out deviations from situations that need to be improved before they become problems.
When they are quantitative matters, they do not represent much of a problem; Furthermore, the Investigator must have a sixth sense.
From the point of view of quantity production, situations in which workers have low morale may not be shown and if the Investigator does not grasp this, it may be the basis of a serious problem.
C).- Third, have a “maximum results” orientation.
The Investigator must look beyond the difficulties that require immediate attention and find out those of greater depth that could become primary difficulties.
In summary, an Investigator must have:
- Accurate and complete awareness of performance standards. Sharp perception of the level of execution of the department. Orientation of “maximum results.
They are of importance for example: in the number of things (apparently unrelated) they seem to be wrong, and there are many phases of the operation that seem to be in this situation.
For example:
- when schedules are not met, when components or raw materials are not available when needed, when supervisors have to make constant adjustments to resolve emergencies, when staff work outside of regular hours and work appears to be under constant pressure.
These are situations that need improvement, they are not problems.
These are situations that reflect much more complex difficulties, such as the lack of an effective work planning and control system.
Concentration of efforts in individual circumstances and difficulties will not find a definitive solution, only until the total operation is reviewed and the real problem identified (lack of effective planning and control program) will the permanent solution be achieved.
2.- Location of the facts
This activity is the key to move on to the third, which is extremely important.
In a given situation some of the necessary facts are obvious and easy, while others are not at all.
It is a debatable attitude is of importance to gather the facts.
It is not enough to point out that machine 256 is producing faulty parts.
This statement must be extensively checked.
- What specifically is defective in the parts? Are the holes off-center, or poorly widened? Is the speed of the machine neglected or has it increased to some extent? Where is it happening? Are the defective parts made on all shifts or one in particular? Is the same operator on the machine all the time?
With the union of the facts it is about distinguishing or identifying all the key factors that surround a situation.
The Investigator should be allowed to clarify the situation.
For the defective parts, the Investigator could now determine:
- that the holes are off-center, that this only happens on the second shift, that the number of off-center holes is the same as those that are fine, there is a new operator on the second shift, and that the machine speed is faster.
The collection of data appears superficially and is rather simple and academic, a rigorous and analytical study of this activity should be made.
You must go beyond the readily available and obvious facts in an effort to uncover all the relevant information that is helpful in explaining and clarifying the situation.
3.- Investigation of possible causes and identification of the real problem.
It involves identifying the real problem, and investigating possible causes.
At first, the situation or event that catches the Investigator's attention is often a factor, but not the actual problem.
The problem has a deeper root.
For example:
- If there is an unusual number of complaints in an department, each of them will be resolved based on the complaint itself. And after some time has passed and many adjustments have been made, the real problem will be uncovered, which ultimately was the manager's attitude toward his subordinates and his relationship with them.
It often happens that a series of apparently unrelated symptoms have the same basic problem as a common denominator.
The overall situation will not improve if each symptom is treated independently.
The process of investigating possible causes should be approached with caution.
There is pressure to act quickly when a situation needs to be corrected, and because of this pressure there are tendencies to jump to conclusions and take hasty action.
Often the first adequate evidence is called a cause, and if action is taken, the result is frustrating and unsuccessful.
The Investigator must judiciously consider all the possible causes that have originated a situation. Sometimes the facts suggest the cause of a particular situation once they are discovered and tested and in fact confirmed. However, other times they suggest some cause that is not close to the real problem, and they reject that which was considered as a possible cause.
The previous case is often caused by general deficiency, when there are a number of assumed scenarios that are unrelated and appear opposite.
The one of the Department, with excessive complaints is a good example. The facts on which each complaint is based suggest a particular cause of injustice, and the actual problem is not discovered until the investigator exposes it to the manager that he is the one who may be the possible cause of this situation.
In the example of the 256 machine, the facts could indicate that the second shift is where the defective parts are made because there is a new operator in the machine. It could be indicated that the real problem is not the operator but due to the increase in the speed of the machine in the second shift and that said speed has no tolerances.
When investigating possible causes, you should ask yourself:
- Has the procedure or policy been violated? Is any procedure missing? Have any changes been made? What is there now that was not there before this situation arose? Is there something that has not been done and that should have been done? done?
The actual problem could be identified once the cause has been specifically and precisely pinpointed.
In simple cases this statement of the real problem can only be the reaffirmation of a previously identified cause.
The manager with perception should always ask himself:
If I solve this problem:
- Will I completely put out the fire or will there be any spark that causes another? Is there a relationship between the different situations that I have to face that cause a problem whose background is greater than that suggested by a specific incident?
4.- Identification as objectives of the necessary requirements to achieve a satisfactory solution.
Identify the requirements as objectives to achieve a solution.
The reason for what is behind all this is tripled.
First, it ensures that the process has direction.
The ultimate purpose of any decision is to get results.
Second, this statement serves as a focal point for obtaining additional facts.
Establishing the desired results would determine in which areas additional data needs to be collected.
Often these requirements can and will be in any case derived from those situations that require modification.
Finally, this indication ensures objectivity in the development and analysis of alternatives.
5.- Identification of restrictions or limits of a satisfactory solution
In summary, problem analysis requires that the constraints or limits of the solution be noted.
The typical restrictions are those that include cost, personnel and those facts that cannot be modified, it is not very useful to take mental solutions, even when they are adequate, if there are no foundations.
It means that new ideas and approaches to solving problems suppress without careful analysis.
The approach to the analysis of the problem must be systematized (at least in the initial phases) to adapt to the modern use of the current Investigator.
Exercise: Problem Analysis
A front-line supervisor has learned that the assembly line has a delay that occurs regularly.
He thinks that he can easily solve it, but he has the impression that said solution will not solve the real or "causal" problem, but will only solve the superficial or "effect" problem.
In order to organize your approach to problem analysis, you have decided to develop a sheet that includes the causal analysis matrix.
Causal analysis matrix
| Symptoms: that it is bad or needs improvement | Specific facts: What? When? How? | Possible causes: Why does this occur? | Determination of the real problem | Objectives What do you want to achieve? What is the purpose? | Restrictions of a possible solution |
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Don Hellriegel / Jonh W. Slocum. "Administration". Publisher: Thomson Editores International. Edition: 7th edition. Year 2006 ROBBINS, Stephen and COULTER, Mary: Administration ”- 8th edition Edit Pearsons Year 2005ECO, Umberto: How to do a thesis. Ed. Gedisa, Barcelona, 1992.Arieta Pinedo, I. and González Labra, MJ Probabilistic reasoning. In MJ González Labra (Ed.) (1998). Introduction to the psychology of thought. (pp. 323-366). Madrid: Trotta. León, OG (2001). Make difficult decisions. Madrid: McGraw-Hill.Grandson, AM Uncertainty and decision. In C. Saiz (Ed., 2002). Critical thinking: basic concepts and practical activities (pp. 237-275). Madrid: Pirámide.ACOSTA HOYOS, Luis E.: Practical guide for research and report writing. Ed. Piadós, Buenos Aires, 1978. ALCINA FRANCH, J.: Learn to investigate:working methods for writing doctoral theses. Ed. Compañía Literaria, Madrid, 1994. 238 pp. BELMONTE NIETO, Manuel: Teaching to investigate. Practical guidance. Ed. Mensajero, Bilbao, 2002.ICART, MT and others: Preparation and presentation of a research project and a dissertation. Ed. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, 2001. * SIERRA BRAVO, Restituto: Doctoral theses and scientific research works (3rd ed. Rev. And ampl..). Ed. Auditorium, Madrid, 1994. * WALKER, Melissa: How to write research papers. Ed. Gedisa, Barcelona, 2000.Bernabé Tierno. I learn to live. Editorial Temas de Hoy.Rojas, Enrique. The conquest of the will. Editorial Topics of Today.Williams, AL How to improve yourself. Editorial Grijalbo.Mary Emily B. "Decision making". Address of the page: www.monografias.com/trabajos13/ltomadec/ltomadec.shtmlTitle: "Introduction to Cost Theory". Marina Ivnisky Address of the page: www.monografias.com/trabajos13/costestan/costestan.shtmlwww.monografias.com/trabajos4/costos/costos.shtml
