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

Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

shmula.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 24 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#11

Post by jerf »

jodrellblank wrote: post #10

That's only four why's, and it doesn't address why the employee suddenly needed a table. Which means it may not be the "root cause", either, and the offered "more tables" solution may not help.

I don't think there's anything particularly magical about the number five. We weren't there and that may have been adequately deep analysis; we don't have the information to tell.

Personally, I can't say I'm inclined to think "the employee needs a table" is likely to have any useful root cause that goes any deeper... "I need a table" is hardly some sort of exotic need.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#12

Post by byrneseyeview »

gruseom wrote: post #9
tholder wrote: post #7

Has everyone forgotten this? http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sect... Seems like Jeff could do with getting down to the distribution floor again!

I hadn't seen that. Amazon is a puzzle to me. They do so many things right, yet I keep hearing that it is not a good place to work.

Probably because they do the software stuff right, but a huge number of their employees are schlepping boxes in warehouses, or doing customer service?

Anyway, it's not an especially big deal to me that they would fire someone for taking too many sick days right before Christmas. If they disclose this to employees beforehand, they're likely to weed out people who tend to take sick days, whether for legitimate reasons or not.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#13

Post by mattmcknight »

jerf wrote: post #11
jodrellblank wrote: post #10

That's only four why's, and it doesn't address why the employee suddenly needed a table. Which means it may not be the "root cause", either, and the offered "more tables" solution may not help.

I don't think there's anything particularly magical about the number five. We weren't there and that may have been adequately deep analysis; we don't have the information to tell. Personally, I can't say I'm inclined to think "the employee needs a table" is likely to have any useful root cause that goes any deeper... "I need a table" is hardly some sort of exotic need.

The whole episode is recounted from memory, not a transcript, so it's probably off a little. The real why answer is 'because he didn't have anywhere else to place objects in the work area'. The table is one solution. You could go another layer deep and wonder why the work area was designed without a stable horizontal work surface. Maybe the job duties changed, maybe the designers didn't know. At the fundamental level though, you've discovered a good corrective action.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#14

Post by gruseom »

byrneseyeview wrote: post #12
gruseom wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't seen that. Amazon is a puzzle to me. They do so many things right, yet I keep hearing that it is not a good place to work.

Probably because they do the software stuff right, but a huge number of their employees are schlepping boxes in warehouses, or doing customer service? Anyway, it's not an especially big deal to me that they would fire someone for taking too many sick days right before Christmas. If they disclose this to employees beforehand, they're likely to weed out people who tend to take sick days, whether for legitimate reasons…

I've also heard from software people that it isn't a good place to work. In fact, I've only heard it from software people. I haven't talked to or read blog posts from anyone who's worked in their warehouses.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#15

Post by extension »

jodrellblank wrote: post #10

That's only four why's, and it doesn't address why the employee suddenly needed a table. Which means it may not be the "root cause", either, and the offered "more tables" solution may not help.

I commented about this on the linked site and it was deleted.

Adding a table strikes me distinctly as ignoring the root of the problem, which probably has more to do with safety standards and training. There has to be a more robust way to prevent accidents than luring people away from them.

So, ironically, this seems to be an example of asking too many questions, and we're not even at 5 yet.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#16

Post by akd »

extension wrote: post #15
jodrellblank wrote: post #10

That's only four why's, and it doesn't address why the employee suddenly needed a table. Which means it may not be the "root cause", either, and the offered "more tables" solution may not help.

I commented about this on the linked site and it was deleted. Adding a table strikes me distinctly as ignoring the root of the problem, which probably has more to do with safety standards and training. There has to be a more robust way to prevent accidents than luring people away from them. So, ironically, this seems to be an example of asking too many questions, and we're not even at 5 yet.

The "5 whys" don't need to be exactly 5; it's just the name for the process of getting to the root cause of a problem.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#17

Post by fauigerzigerk »

jodrellblank wrote: post #10

That's only four why's, and it doesn't address why the employee suddenly needed a table. Which means it may not be the "root cause", either, and the offered "more tables" solution may not help.

I suspect that there is a long tail of root causes when it comes to accidents. So a little more analysis of a number of cases might have led to a better conclusion.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#18

Post by h34t »

ChaitanyaSai wrote: post #3

Kind of off-topic, but does Yahoo (or is it the publisher?) really think that interjecting ads in the middle of a narrative actually makes people want to click on the link? Do they really not know the least about human psychology? Most people who get to that point in the article have an inertial interest in finishing, and also a bias towards skimming over any contextual discontinuity. There are contrast effects that…

I would guess they pay more attention to what works and what doesn't than to psychological theory or conjecture. It's easy for anyone to monitor what kind of ads perform better than others, and since ads are much of Yahoo's bread and butter, you can be sure they are paying attention.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#19

Post by potatolicious »

extension wrote: post #15
jodrellblank wrote: post #10

That's only four why's, and it doesn't address why the employee suddenly needed a table. Which means it may not be the "root cause", either, and the offered "more tables" solution may not help.

I commented about this on the linked site and it was deleted. Adding a table strikes me distinctly as ignoring the root of the problem, which probably has more to do with safety standards and training. There has to be a more robust way to prevent accidents than luring people away from them. So, ironically, this seems to be an example of asking too many questions, and we're not even at 5 yet.

Actually, "luring" people away from accidents is often a better way than strict training. "Don't jay-walk across the freeway" will only work when a viable (and safe) crossing is close by. Otherwise your users will simply ignore your training to make their lives easier.

Re: Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis

#20

Post by potatolicious »

gruseom wrote: post #14
byrneseyeview wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because they do the software stuff right, but a huge number of their employees are schlepping boxes in warehouses, or doing customer service? Anyway, it's not an especially big deal to me that they would fire someone for taking too many sick days right before Christmas. If they disclose this to employees beforehand, they're likely to weed out people who tend to take sick days, whether for legitimate reasons…

I've also heard from software people that it isn't a good place to work. In fact, I've only heard it from software people. I haven't talked to or read blog posts from anyone who's worked in their warehouses.

Depends on where you are. "Front-facing" teams (e.g. site front-end and whatnot) tend to have a lot of sleepless nights when things blow up and a fix is immediately needed.

Software guys in the "back" tend to not live such a stressful existence, since there's far more time leeway for fixing things.

Post reply on HN