titlemaster_med
Ishikawa fishbone diagram
Ing.J.Skorkovský,CSc.
Department of Corporate Economy
ESF-MU Czech Republic

Introduction (FBD= fishbone diagram)
nFDB is a tool to find out relationships:
n
n
n
nUse in QM especially in automotive industry
nOn of the tool set used to create so called 8D report (8 disciplines=FBD+5WHYs+PA+QM)
nAnother tool : 5  WHYs – will be cleared later  Another tool : PARETO=PA analysis will be shown
later
n
n
•
•Effect
•Cause

How to create FBD
•Resource :Ilie G. and. Ciocoiu C.N.
•APPLICATION OF FISHBONE DIAGRAM TO DETERMINE THE RISK OF AN EVENT WITH MULTIPLE CAUSES
•MANAGEMENT RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Vol. 2 Issue 1 (2010) p: 1-20
•it might not be  so easy !!!

Fishbone diagram
•
•Dissatisfied worker
•Machines
•Management
•Mother Nature
•Men
•(Methods, Material, Manpower, Measurement, Machines, Mother Nature,Management)
•Training
•Salary
•Obsolete
•
•Dangerous
•Treacherous
•Incapable
•To hot
•Terrible cold

Some chosen problems which could be find out during ERP support process I
nlong response time  to requirements
nrequirement is directed to unsuitable consultant
nbad documentation about service action (poor log)
npeople ask repeatedly same questions at different moments and different consultants are asked
nsolution of  disputes :complaint- standard service
npayment asked for supplied services
1.how much (to whom, type of  task, type of the error- see diagram
2.starting time for invoiced services, response time
1.requirement is handed over till the problem is  solved
2.time of starting solving -solved
3.start of implementaion of the bad object till end of testing
4.training
5.
l


nbad training methodology
nbad consultants
nbad communication protocol
1.telephone
2.e-mail
3.SKYPE
nlack of interest of the management of both parties
nright specification of reaction time
nspecification to the error types and related response times
l
nresponse time of the distributor (ERP integrator ERP)
n
n
1.
n
Some chosen problems which could be find out during ERP support process II

Diagram – response time
•
•handed over requirement
•find suitable resource (K1)
•
•K1 starts solving
•K1 solved
•K1 did not solved
•
•
•
• K1 handed over
• to distributor (D)
•D started
•work
•
•D solved the problem
•D ->K1
•K1 handed over to customer
•
•
•
•
•
•RESPONSE TIME
•
•RESPONSE TIME II
•
•= active work
•
•= idle time
•
•
•Telephone
• call

Fishbone diagram-support
•
•Dissatisfied customer
•
•Machines
•Management
•Mother Nature
•Men
•(Methods, Material, Manpower, Measurement, Machines)
•Phlegmatic person reacts later
•than expected
•Bad SW
•for support
•(HELP DESK)
•Bad communication
•Interest in
•golf only
•Incapable
•Consultant  is on  sick leave
•Consultant takes
•      holiday
•Lower quality
•of the consultants
•
•heart
•of the
• problem
Toy-Poodle-For-Sale

FBD-Loosing Specialists-example



Dissatisfied employee I



  Dissatisfied employee II



5WHYs
nWHY 1 :Why my car had stopped ?
nNo petrol in tank
nWHY 2 :Why i did not have a petrol in my tank ?
nI did not buy in the morning on my way to work WHY 3 :Why i did not buy a petrol ?
nNo money in my pockets
nWHY 4 : Why no money i my pockets?
nEvening poker
nWHY 5 : Why i did not win a poker game?
nI do not know how to bluff!
n

5WHYs
w-you're-bluffing%20(2) no%2520petrol
•Cause
•Effect

TQM and Ishikawa FBD and Pareto
Reject type (effects);
Reason 1
(cause)
Reason 2
(cause)
Reason 3
(cause)
Reason 4
(cause)
L19
8
9
2
4
L20
0
1
4
6
L21
7
2
3
5
•     Manual for urgent
•reject cause elimination
•
•(to establish correct priority of remedy actions)
•
•    Score
•
•
Inventory
Suppliers
Machines
Measurement
•Every reject type ->one Ishikawa diagram (electronic version)

Evaluation of set of rejects
nEvery reject is assigned to one Ishikawa tree
nEvery tree with empty table is handed over to chosen company of responsible experts
nAll tables are collected and evaluated
nSee example with two rejects and two experts
1.
l
Domain
Machines
Input control
Setup
Routing
Method
Breakdowns
Workers
Measurment
Reject code








L1
3,5
9
6,5
2
2,5
6
3
1,5
L2
9,5
2,5
2
5,5
6
8
3,5
2,5

Expert
Reject
John
L1
3
8
9
3
2
7
2
1
Linda
L1
4
10
4
1
3
5
4
2
Expert
Reject
John
L2
9
3
3
5
7
8
4
3
Linda
L2
10
2
1
6
5
8
3
2

Pareto chart : possibility to split up reject and setup priorities
•Lorenz curve
•High priorities

Pareto analysis per every type of reject – next step ->practical example of Pareto use in ERP MS
Dynamics NAV
•17
Type of reject
Cause 1
Cause 2
Cause 3
Cause 4
Cause 5
Cause 6
Total


L1
7
2
4
1
8
0
22
L2
2
4
6
8
0
9
29
L3
4
0
0
5
6
7
22
L4
5
7
2
0
1
3
18
L5
0
2
7
3
0
1
13

L6
9
7
5
2
3
6
32
L7
0
7
0
2
3
4
16
L8
1
8
6
2
4
0
21
L9
2
0
5
7
1
4
19
L10
7
2
8
9
7
5
38
C
C5 %
C1 %
C3 %
C2 %
C4 %
C6%
L1
31,82
9,09
18,18
4,54
36,36
0,00
100
Lorenz curve
68,18
95,45
86,36
100,00
36,36
Higher priorities for reject type L1
•36,36
•36,36 + 31,82=68,18
•Firstly, it is necessary to correct
•causes of  C5 a C1 !!!
•68,18+18,18 = 86,36
•86,36 + 9,09 =95,45
• C4: 95,45 + 4,54=100
•

Pareto analysis II



Pareto analysis II - data
nDifficulty
nResignation
nUnderestimation
nLow motivation
n6  - (35,29 )- (35,29)
n5 - ( 29,41 )- (64,71)
n4 - ( 23,53 )- (88,24)
n2 - ( 11,76 )- (100,00)
n
•Frequency    Freq (%)    Freq accum(%)
•

Pareto analysis II



Current Reality Tree and Ishikava (Pareto)
Cost Worlds Tendency
No investment in software
Inefficient  communication tool (SW)
Late assignment of tasks to resources
No workflow software (method and tool)
Overburdened  resources
Bad multitasking
Outdated project management method (SW)
Tasks are delayed
Project is late and overspend budget
4
3
2
1
9
8
6
7
10
11
Customer is unhappy
12
•SW=software
1
•=  Management
2
•= Methodology
3
•= Men
4
•= Machine (SW)
12
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
7
4
6

1
2
3
4
6
7
John
8
7
4
3
5
6
Caroline
9
5
7
8
5
6
Mean
8,5
6
5,5
5,5
5
6

Vilfredo Pareto.jpg
Vilfredo Pareto in person…