In the Plan phase - the first step of the PDCA cycle, or at the beginning of any other problem solving method, you should describe the problem in detail. Often at this point we ask ourselves "Is this all we know?". 5W2H is a tool that will allow us to better structure the problem definition by answering 5 questions starting with "W" and 2 starting with "H". These are English questions:
What?
When answering these questions, we need to be clear about “what” happened and what the non-compliance is. It is worth adding detailed information about which product or order we are talking about. It is best to use numbers or names that will allow for unambiguous identification and are available to all interested parties.
When?
Is the problem specific to a specific point in production or has it started and persists until now? It is very important to narrow down the time frame of the occurrence of the problem - this will allow you to reduce the list of factors that could have influenced its occurrence. If it is difficult for us to determine the exact hour and minute "when" the discrepancy was noticed, let's try to define the last moment when the defect did not exist yet.
Where?
The place of occurrence of the problem as well as the place of its identification is very important. First, we need to know if only one area, one machine, or the entire production line is affected by the problem. The location where the non-compliance is defined will help us implement actions and improve our systems to prevent recurrence.
Who?
Who noticed the problem? Who else can it concern? For whom this situation or inconsistency is a problem. Thanks to this, we will improve our communication and we will be sure that all interested parties are kept informed about the results of our work and difficulties related to the problem.
Why?
When answering this question, we are not looking for the root cause! However, we need to determine "why" this situation is a problem for us - what standard, what product parameter we do not meet. Or is it a security issue? Context is very important. This way we will ensure that we are dealing with a real problem – a situation that is unacceptable.
How?
The “how” question is designed to find out how we learned about the non-compliance. How it was detected and what method was used to measure or verify the defect. It may turn out that a semi-finished product that seems incompatible to us because it does not match the rest of the product is an improvement, but another part is defective and the problem is in a completely different place.
How many?
Depending on the scale of the problem, we will make different decisions and implement other actions. Product is non-compliant and needs to be scrapped? Since it's only one piece out of 800 produced every hour, maybe it's not worth stopping the entire line? By answering this question, we will find out how severe our problem is and how much it costs us.
These are basic questions and shouldn't take too long to answer. Despite everything, very often we encounter a situation where the team skips this stage and goes to ... solutions. Then, despite sincere intentions, we do not always find a solution to the cause of the problem, but only minimize the effects using chewing gum. Experience shows that in the long run such an approach is very costly and problems once unsolved return with multiplied strength.
