2.5.

5-why technique
Background:

Problem:

1|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique

Solution:

Implementation:

2|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique

5 Why Technique - Case Study:

Benefits:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique

 Case study 5Why Technique

Root Cause Analysis for New E-learning Application

Rahul: Hi Nitin, Let us look into the system testing defects and do a root cause analysis. There by, we
can quickly implemented the corrective and preventive steps.

Nitin : Yes Rahul, but which technique do we use?

Rahul : Let's use the 5-WHY. That is a simple technique which can quickly identify the root cause. Once
we have the cause identified, we can come up with the corrective and preventive actions for those.
Cognizant template for 5-WHY captures the root causes and the corrective and preventive actions.

Nitin : Oh, we have a template for it? I was not aware of that!

Rahul : Yes, We do. You can get it from C2.0 Process Space.

Nitin : Oh Rahul, I will pull up that and the list of defects. One of the major defects is that the website
went down yesterday while testing the Display Course feature.

Rahul : Ok, Do we have an answer to the first level? why did the website go down?

Nitin: Yes, Rahul . The website went down since the CPU utilization reached 100%.

Rahul : It could be due to server performance issue or any other programming errors. But if it is a
server issue, there would have been problems while testing the other features also.

Nitin: Yes, Rahul. It is not a performance problem. Other features are working fine.

Rahul : So that eliminates the server performance from a list of possible causes. This is how we apply
the elimination techniques in 5-WHY analysis, to narrow down into single cause.

Nitin: Yes, we have applied elimination. And we found out that it is a programming error. An infinite
loop was causing the trouble.

Rahul : Opps! An infinite loop! Why did that happen?

Nitin: That was a careless programming mistake. The new programmer in the team wrote that place. I
will ask the programmer to be more careful. I think we can move on to the next one.

4|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique

Nitin: How do we continue in this case, Rahul?

Rahul: I agree that it was a careless programming mistake. But why did the code get checked in? We do
a unit testing for the entire code before we check in, correct?

Nitin: Oh yes Rahul. so that means this feature was not unit tested properly.

Rahul: Correct and that is the next level cause here. Why was it not unit tested?

Nitin: There is no unit test case written for the feature, Rahul. The programmer has missed to include
that.

Rahul: Have we trained the new programmer on unit test coverage?

Nitin: No Rahul. He was not trained.

Rahul: Why was he not trained.

Nitin: He is a new entrant, training sessions happened before he joined.

Rahul: So, that is flaw in our training process. That does not ensure that all new entrants are trained
properly, which is the root cause. We should steps to prevent this.

Nitin: Sure, Rahul.

Rahul: This way. we need to get to the final root cause, instead of stopping with 1-2 levels, while using
the 5-WHY techniques. The common tendency in using this technique is to stop with symptoms, rather
than getting to the actual cause.

Nitin: Ok. so that one of the pitfalls in using this technique which should be avoided.

5|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique

Rahul: That's right. Let's go to the next one - Missed functionality. 'The home page is not displaying the
courses sorted by the usage score' Why is it so?

Nitin: We have not implemented the sort feature, Rahul.

Rahul: Oh, Why did we miss that?

Nitin: We have not designed the feature, Rahul. It is an oversight of requirements.

Rahul: But I see that the requirement document has the feature mentioned clearly. Design review
should have captured this problem. Why didn't we identify it then?

Nitin: We us Requirement Traceability Matrix (RTM) as the base for design review. I think the RTM
would not have captured the requirement correctly.

Rahul: Are you sure on that Nitin, Shall we check it right away?

Nitin: Sure. Let me check what the RTM has. Here Rahul, RTM does not talk about the sort feature. It
mentions display of courses alone.

Rahul: Why did we not have granular details as this, in the RTM?

Nitin: Our understanding was, the RTM should capture high level details alone. this is the reason why
we missed it, when we reviewed the RTM against requirements.

Rahul: So, the root cause is lack of understanding on the coverage of requirements in RTM. We need to
identify the steps which will ensure that the team rightly understands the purpose of RTM and the
points to be covered while creating it.

Nitin: Sure Rahul. I see that we are easily getting to the cause using this technique.

Rahul: Yes, but there is one point to be noted here. The technique is limited by the knowledge of those
who participate in the exercise. We arrive at the root causes based on our expertise. That is a limitation
of this technique.

Nitin: Does that mean, we should be repeating this exercise with another set of people?

6|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique

Rahul: Sure Rahul, I will take care of the next steps. Thank you

Nitin: Thanks Nitin.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7|P a g e CCA - STA – (Defect Management)  5.5-Why Technique