FMEA and cause and effect diagrams (also known as fishbone diagrams) are two commonly used analytical tools in the context of Six Sigma. However, some less experienced leaders often tend to confuse the two and may even use them interchangeably in conversation, despite them being quite different in fundamental application and purpose.

Understanding how the two differ from each other, and what the appropriate use for each is, can make a huge difference in how you approach the analysis of problems occurring in your daily operations. It can also help you spot some common mistakes in the workflow of your team (for example, when you notice someone using the wrong type of tool to analyze a certain situation).

What They Have in Common

Before we dig into the differences between the two tools, it can be useful to get a good idea of why people confuse them in the first place, and what the similarities between them are. The common points are mostly related to the core purpose of the two methodologies that is, what they’re used for and what kind of assistance they can offer you in your analysis of regularly occurring problems.

They are both designed to help you pinpoint exactly what went wrong in a problematic situation, and what factors contributed to the failure that occurred in the end. However, FMEA breaks down the problem into abstract components related to the operational structure of the organization, while cause and effect diagrams tend to be more focused on more substantial concepts, such as specific materials, procedures and so on.

Specific Differences

As we mentioned above, the cause and effect diagram is more closely concerned with how specific components of your organization have contributed to the failure. In addition, it shows a directed graph, with the failure being at the very right, and the distance between it and different components used to indicate how closely they are related to the failure itself. Something at the very end of the graph likely contributed very little to the problem, although its contribution is still non-negligible if it’s on the chart.

In contrast, FMEA groups contributing factors according to which part of the production process they occurred in is it a functional issue, a problem with the fundamental design, with the way the process is carried out, etc. There is some visual grouping in FMEA as well, but it serves a different purpose than in fishbone diagrams. The grouping here is more of a logical tool used to determine the closeness of certain components in a functional sense.

It’s also worth pointing out that cause and effect diagrams tend to look more closely at the root cause of the issue, whereas FMEA is concerned with improving the overall process in a sustainable way which leads to a reduction of flaws in the long run. That’s not to say that FMEA does not deal with root causes in any way but it tends to help you discover them more organically, leading you to the solution by aiding your intuition as it helps you see the big picture.

And to answer the big question that some people inevitably ask in these situations — there is no better tool between the two. Asking which the better one is would be a bit like asking a carpenter if the saw or hammer is the better tool. They both have their own applications in specific situations, and an experienced leader has to learn to realize the appropriate use for both, and know when to apply them.

Conclusion

There are many different tools that can help you gain a better understanding of how certain failures manifest themselves in your organization. Exploring this area and learning when each of those techniques is useful is one of the most important factors for a serious leader, and it’s something you should do as early as possible when implementing Six Sigma in your organization. Understanding what leads to the development of a specific issue is key to ensuring that your company as a whole will run in a sustainable way in the future.

The post Differences Between FMEA and the Cause and Effect Diagram appeared first on 6sigma.

Competitor Analytics: What’s It All About?

Dictionaries tell us competitor analytics involves identifying rival companies and evaluating their business strategies. This casts light on your competitors’ strengths and weaknesses, allowing you to make improvements to your organization based on this data. Furthermore, it paints a picture of your competitor’s place in the market. Their products and services, market shares, plus current and past business and marketing strategies. All these elements are key factors with which to drive your company’s success. Use competitor analytics most effectively to create strong improvement goals.

Imagine your product was a tablet computer and your competitor was slightly ahead of you in the market. Competitor analysis is helpful here as it enables you to discover ways you can improve your products or services to get ahead in the market. This also forms an essential part of your business’s marketing plan and helps to determine what makes your product or service stand out from the crowd. What makes it unique? Why should customers choose your product or service over a competitor’s? What threats do your competitors pose to your success? How can you overcome them? Competitor analytics helps you answer these questions so you can maximize your target market share.

Improve Your Competitor Analytics with Six Sigma

To learn how Six Sigma improves competitor analytics, we must highlight one of its key elements. One of the primary tasks involved in competitor analysis categorizing your competitors. Are they direct or indirect competition? If the former, are they primary or secondary? What threats do they pose to you? This isn’t an idle task. In fact, placing your competitors in categories allows you to understand them on a fundamental level. You can infer from your findings how their products and services fit into the market, plus how they relate to yours.

Six Sigma is highly effective here. Techniques like DMAIC focus on defining problems so you can measure and analyze the issues. You can then implement improvement solutions and preventative measures to control the problem and stop it reoccurring. Similarly, fishbone diagrams can help frame your problems as questions with an array of potential categories to help narrow down the answer. Furthermore, applying Lean Six Sigma principles to your competitor categorization will help streamline your operations. This also ensures you don’t lose sight of the task at hand, as none-value-adding tasks waste time and resources. Combining Six Sigma with competitor analytics also provides greater opportunities to capitalize on your rivals’ weaknesses. This bolsters your company’s success, allowing you to improve your products and services to drive greater customer appeal.

The post Six Sigma and Business Analytics: Competitor Analytics appeared first on 6sigma.

Step 1 – Materials For Your Fishbone Diagram

Creating your fishbone diagram will require several materials. In your group, ensure that you have a whiteboard, some butcher block paper, or a flip chart on which to draw. Sticky notes are useful to have on hand when listing potential causes. Sticky notes allow you to re-arrange your notes as you develop your diagram. Cards are a useful alternative. You might want to consider looking into various software packages designed for producing Fishbone Diagrams, such as EngineRoom for Microsoft Excel.

Step 2 – Stating the Problem

Once you have assembled your materials, write down your problem. Try to be as descriptive and detailed as possible. Cover every perspective you can. Write it down on one side of your whiteboard etc. (this side should be labeled Effect, the other Cause) and then draw your backbone. A simple horizontal line pointing towards your problem.

Step 3 – Categorize Your Problem

Next, decide on how you intend to categorize your causes. You can do this either of two ways:

• By function (the most frequently used approach)
• Or by process sequence

Now you need to include relevant categories for your diagram, usually manufacturing settings, such as Machine, Process, Resources, Measurement, Staff, Environment, and so on. Policies, or high-level decision rules, sometimes replace tasks like Machine and Process, while Procedures, i.e. particular tasks, replace others. All your categories should branch off of the main backbone to create a fishbone shape.

Step 4 – List Your Causes

Now list all the potential causes. Your diagram will lack detail at this point, but brainstorming sessions with your team will help fill out the remaining categories and subcategories. You can also use whatever data you have available. We find that the 5-Why strategy is a good choice here, as it consistently questions your subject, down to the finest details.

Step 5 – Deep Analysis

We recommend taking your analysis as deep as it will go. Techniques like Regression Analysis and Design of Experiments will help you quantify correlation and causation. Don’t forget, the helpfulness of your diagram depends on how far you develop it. The more detailed your diagram, the more detail with which you have to work. It may take some time, but a rigorous approach to designing your Fishbone Diagram will certainly pay off. As you continue to quantify your variables and contributing causes, add any new information to the chart. Be sure to keep to the fishbone structure, with new causes branching off from parent categories with each new addition. There you have it, your own Fishbone Diagram!

The post Six Sigma Toolkit: How to Use a Fishbone Diagram appeared first on 6sigma.