Blog - IT CSI

When people skills are discussed in respect of Root Cause Analysis, the remark is often heard that it should be easy to use and also that it should be quick.  From this perspective, often the choice is to use the “5 Whys” method, since it is ‘easy’ and ‘quick’.  This approach to selecting a problem solving tool clearly demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding in respect of not only root cause analysis, but problem solving in general.

When deciding about root cause analysis and problem solving skills, we need to start with the issues we need solve and not people.  Not all problems are the same, it is common that problems differ vastly and that some are more difficult to solve than others.  Keeping the foregoing in mind, the nature and level of difficulty of a problem must therefore dictate the selection of the problem solving tool, rather than the fact that the tool may fit the desire of being simplistic and easy to use.

On a day to day basis our attention is consumed by events and incidents to which we react.  In response to some of these, we drill down and do root cause analysis to ensure that an incident does not recur.  Somehow it does not cross our minds that whilst we are doing the right things, we are only doing so reactively based on what has already happened.  We are in a perpetual cycle of fire fighting!

Dealing with end user incidents dominates service management environments.  Once the incidents are resolved, the service environment relaxes.  Resolving an incident implies less pressure from users, because no problem exists. 

IT Service Desks have a primary responsibility to “Maintain End User Satisfaction with IT Services”. Think of internet banking services: if the end user could not use the service at the time they wished to do so, it would be unacceptable to him/her.  The end user never accepts that “we met Service Level Requirements and are therefore performing well.” If the desired service is not available and functionally working, we are simply not meeting end user client requirements.

The foregoing is a dilemma; our service management can never be fast enough and we need to continually find ways to deliver faster without compromising quality of work.  Unless we become blazingly fast, the end user client will not only lose faith in us, but in this day and age will be very vocal about it, possibly causing reputational damage to the service provider.