Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

toyota-global.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 172 posts

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#91

Post by xyzzyz »

rileymat2 wrote: post #88

Sometimes I have multiple solutions to a problem in mind and want to throughly investigate them, but run into a minor road block when investigating one of them. In forums, some of the most annoying threads are people that are trying to help you "solve your real problem" instead of helping with the specific question at hand.

You know what's even more annoying? People who ask very misguided questions, because they're obviously trying to solve a wrong problem, and yet insist on doing things their own way even though it will lead them nowhere. They're much more common than people who know what they're talking about, and it's usually easy to tell them apart based on the communication style.

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#93

Post by manigandham »

prmph wrote: post #41
manigandham wrote: post #29

"Why" is my favorite question. It's also the most important and leads to solutions for 9/10 problems if you just keep asking it. Stop when you get to the root cause that you can fix (not some arbitrary number like 5).

But sometimes the whys do not converge; for example, in the case of a vicious cycle

When would that actually happen in reality?

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#94

Post by jdimov10 »

hammock wrote: post #61
iaskwhy wrote: post #9

I don't force it 5x but asking why was the best lesson I learnt working with users/clients as people tend to talk about solutions and not the problems. That's also where my nickname comes from.

I've tried forcing it 5x and found that the fifth Why is exactly the point where they get annoyed and stop talking to you. So there may be a magic insight at the fifth Why but you'll never hear it :)

The magic insight is always this: "Because I want to feel good." When someone doesn't want to put this in words, they get annoyed and stop talking to you.

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#96

Post by coredog64 »

adrianratnapala wrote: post #56
Piskvorrr wrote: post #35

Why is there no filter on the intake? It was proposed, but declined by management as "too costly". Why is it too costly? Because cutting visible costs is perceived as saving money and therefore Good, whereas prevention and maintenance are perceived as unnecessary, because Bad Stuff Just Happens Regardless. Why? Because people suck at statistics ("if we can't eliminate a risk altogether, there's no point in trying, le…

I was also disappointed that the example list didn't get into people issues. But it is not as simple as prevention vs. cost-cutting. In any place, there are thousands of things that might prevent a problem, but which of them are worth doing? One of many strategies for selecting the right precautions is an evolutionary one: fix the ones that caused problems in the past.

This. My management is like generals fighting the last war. They continue to push process as an answer to anything that has caused an outage instead of reworking the process that we already have.

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#98

Post by Piskvorrr »

jerf wrote: post #72
Piskvorrr wrote: post #35

Why is there no filter on the intake? It was proposed, but declined by management as "too costly". Why is it too costly? Because cutting visible costs is perceived as saving money and therefore Good, whereas prevention and maintenance are perceived as unnecessary, because Bad Stuff Just Happens Regardless. Why? Because people suck at statistics ("if we can't eliminate a risk altogether, there's no point in trying, le…

Just as "Five" is really just a rule of thumb as pointed out by other people, "Why" is really just a rule of thumb too. "What can we do to prevent the underlying problem?" just isn't as catchy, but it's closer to what you should be really asking. "People suck at statistics" is not an answer to that question. "Train people" is an answer, but only an answer. You've also got "something to make us more robust to bad stat…

Of course it's not an answer - just asking "why" gets you turtles all the way down, and "stop after five steps" may halt you with a stack that's too shallow; as you say, it's a rule of thumb.

And now we're finally getting somewhere :) Cynicism can be a tool, a catalyst - "these are all the things that are unfixable, because Eeeeverything Sucks" is a good set for asking "are they all, really? Are there those that are only hard to fix, and which of them are worth fixing?" As you say, it's rare that there's a single, clear-cut answer for an issue, especially when it's not purely technical one.

I didn't intend my reply as a rant, and surely didn't intend it to mean "everything is broken, get out of here" as a solution.

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#99

Post by gregpilling »

I have read Ohno's book. http://www.amazon.com/Toyota-Production-System-Beyond-Large-...

One thing that stuck out to me was how long everything took to figure out on the Toyota Production System. Ohno spent decades streamlining processes. The timeline is in the inside cover of my copy of the book.

Fascinating read, and easier to read than some other "Toyota Production" books written by academics. Recommend.

Re: “Ask 'why' five times about every matter”

#100

Post by Piskvorrr »

coredog64 wrote: post #96
adrianratnapala wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was also disappointed that the example list didn't get into people issues. But it is not as simple as prevention vs. cost-cutting. In any place, there are thousands of things that might prevent a problem, but which of them are worth doing? One of many strategies for selecting the right precautions is an evolutionary one: fix the ones that caused problems in the past.

This. My management is like generals fighting the last war. They continue to push process as an answer to anything that has caused an outage instead of reworking the process that we already have.

Unlike the Red Queen problem of arms race, "fighting the previous war" could help with one class of support problems (not always, not all problems). "Hmm, we've been here before, we know how to fix this; plus we should make it harder to get here again by accident."
Post reply on HN