Asking “why” is the basic act of probing. Searching for root causes takes strategy formulation away from the unconscious repetition of past patterns and mimicry of competitors. Asking “why” leads to new insights and innovations that sometimes yield important competitive advantages.
Asking “why” repeatedly is a source of continuous self-renewal, but the act of inquiry itself is an art. It can evoke strong reactions from the questioned. It is rarely welcomed. It is sometimes met with defensiveness and hostility, on the one hand, or, on the other, the patronizing patience reserved by the knowledgeable for the uninformed.
To ask “why” – and “why not” – about basics is to violate the social convention that expertise is to be respected, not challenged. Functional organizations in mature industries have a particular problem in this regard. But growing enterprises in new frontiers must eventually confront the reasons for their success or be displaced by competitors who see things differently.
One risks a lot to challenge the “lord” in his fiefdom.
Questioning the basics – the assumptions that “knowledgeable” people don't question – is disruptive. Probing slows things down, but often to good effect. Probing can yield revolutionary new thoughts in quite unexpected places.
Few new thoughts have been as revolutionary as the Japanese Manufacturing Technique. Toyota was the leader in its development, and over more than 40 years slowly learned to turn upside down the most basic assumptions about how manufacturing must be conceived and organized. Central to this rethinking was tireless probing.
In his book on the Toyota Production System, Taiichi Ohno, formally the vice-president of manufacturing of Toyota, cites the practice of “the five why's.” He gives an example of how asking “why” five times (or more) led him through all the explanations to find the most important root cause.
It's easy to say, but difficult to practice.
Suppose a machine stops functioning.
1. “Why did the machine stop functioning?”
“There was an overload, and the fuse blew.”
2. “Why was there an overload?”
“It was because lubrication of the bearing was not sufficient.”
3. “Why was the lubrication not sufficient?”
“Because the lubrication pump was not pumping sufficiently.”
4. “Why was it not pumping sufficiently?”
“The shaft of the pump was worn, and it was rattling.”
5. “Why was the shaft worn out?”
“There was no strainer attached, and this caused metal scrap to get in.”
To have stopped anywhere along the way would have ended the search before the root cause was found. And there is still value in this example of asking even more “whys.” To probe to the limits is to simplify the problem to its essentials and solve one problem rather than five.
To pursue such probing takes a special, strongly motivated person, unless one makes such questioning the norm for the organization. Asking “why” five times is easy to say, but hard to do. It challenges people's knowledge and even self-respect. It can call into question their diligence and the basis of their expertise. It requires fresh thinking on all sides. Yet it's so basic to learning, to seeing new things from the familiar.
But the risks of asking “why” are real. The “Lord” in his fiefdom can inflict great pain on the questioner. In the early 19th century, doctors routinely went, without washing, from autopsies to the treatment of patients – with disastrous results. Ignaz Semmelweis is the man who first hypothesized the basic relationship and proposed and tested a change to clean hands – yet in his own time he was rejected by his peers, because he questioned the accepted practice. Mr. Semmelweis was only vindicated by research that occurred after his death in an insane asylum.
The “lord” must be handled with great interpersonal skill. If you face a “lord” try using the “five whys” by yourself, first. Then invite the “lord” to share his wisdom and experience to help you refine and extend your initial effort. If possible, re-visit a decision whose outcome the “lord” is unhappy with and work with him using five “whys” to see if the decision is indeed the correct one.
Good strategy depends critically on knowing the root causes. Finding them is often a task beyond quantitative analysis. One must look to broader frames of reference and bring basic judgment and common sense to bear. Probing – asking why – is the often intuitive search for the logic that heavy data analysis can miss or bury.
Asking “why” is a qualitative act. It is different from quantitative analysis, but the one gains power from the other. It propels analysis forward by raising new questions to be subjected to rigorous analysis. It takes us beyond the numbers to new answers, new solutions, and new opportunities.
Asking “why” five times is easy in concept, but harder in practice. It can be very rewarding. Why not do it?
Asking the question
Asking “why” can raise the questions that are fundamental, but not necessarily answerable through rigorous analysis itself. These are the basic questions of leadership and common sense. They are the search for “the point.”
For example:
Why do we continue in this business?
Why should anyone buy this product?
What will prevent competitors from matching us?
What will we do then?
Why are we making so much money?
Why won't it eventually come to an end?
What must we do now to prepare for or moderate that change?
These sorts of probes search for the bedrock reasons for value and advantages to test how enduring they may be. They ask whether the shape and character of the business and its strategy make sense.
George Stalk Jr. is senior vice-president of Boston Consulting Group of Canada Ltd. and adjunct professor of strategic management for the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.
