Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I hate the "5 whys" as they imply every event has a single root cause." That's an implication you're imposing yourself: there's no reason why asking the answer to any single question looking for cause will only have a single cause. Even Wikipedia's cursory overview includes this: > "Not all problems have a single root cause. If one wishes to uncover multiple root causes, the method must be repeated asking a differ…
The issue is with the concept of root cause. Many systems are better understood as having influencing factors, yet none of them could be called a root cause. If you can never say, "That's why it happened," then the 5-whys method fails.
Substitute "underlying causes" for "root cause" and be on your way. Yes, precision in language can be important, but letting it get in the way of being useful is throwing baby out with the bathwater. You can see the same thing happen when people get hung up on precise definitions of agile implementations or pedantically quibbling over terms like "serverless". I personally get annoyed when people misuse the phrase "steep learning curve" when referring to something that's difficult to learn. But you know what? I still know what they mean, and that's the point. I set my annoyance aside, move past it, and decide to focus on getting something done.