| name | fishbone-analysis |
| description | Build an Ishikawa diagram, cause and effect analysis, or 6M fishbone to brainstorm and categorise all possible causes before narrowing to root cause with 5-Why. Covers Man, Machine, Method, Material, Measurement, and Environment (Mother Nature). Essential for 8D D4 brainstorming sessions and CAPA root cause investigations. |
| license | MIT |
| metadata | {"author":"RBraga01","version":"1.1","iso-9001":"10.2","iatf-16949":"10.2.3","domain":"quality-engineering","subdomain":"problem-solving","industries":"automotive,electronics,aerospace,medical,general","status":"approved","created":"2026-06-01","last_updated":"2026-06-04","updated_by":"migmcc","reviewed_by":"RBraga01","standard_edition":"ISO 9001:2015"} |
Fishbone (Ishikawa) Analysis
When to use
Use fishbone analysis to brainstorm all possible causes of a quality problem before running 5-Why. It prevents tunnel vision and ensures no cause category is overlooked. Particularly valuable for complex defects with multiple potential contributing factors.
Typical use: 8D D4 brainstorming session, CAPA root cause investigation, initial problem analysis.
Prerequisites
- Problem clearly defined with Is/Is-Not or 5W2H
- Cross-functional team (quality, production, engineering at minimum)
- Access to the process, machine, or product where defect occurred
Required Fishbone Checklist
โ Problem statement defined and agreed before starting โ no cause language in the problem statement
โ All 6M categories addressed โ at least one entry per M, or documented justification if a category is not applicable
โ Brainstorming completed before any evaluation or elimination โ do not evaluate while generating
โ Every cause classified as Confirmed, Probable, or Unlikely using objective evidence โ not opinion alone
โ Confirmed = supported by data or physical evidence; Probable = logical, consistent with Is/Is-Not, not yet confirmed; Unlikely = contradicted by data
โ Confirmed and Probable causes cross-checked against existing PFMEA failure cause entries before proceeding to 5-Why
โ Each Confirmed or Probable cause carries forward to its own 5-Why chain
โ After root cause confirmed: horizontal deployment check โ could the same cause exist in similar parts, processes, or product families?
The 6M Framework
The six main "bones" of the fish. All six must be addressed. If a category genuinely does not apply, document: "No causes identified in this category after structured team review โ not applicable because [reason]."
1. Man (Human Factors)
Questions to ask:
- Was the task performed by a trained, qualified operator?
- Is competence documented and current?
- Was the operator following the correct work instruction?
- Could fatigue, shift change, or distraction contribute?
- Is the task ergonomically difficult or error-prone?
- Is the same defect found on all shifts or only one? (single-shift โ operator-specific)
2. Machine (Equipment)
Questions to ask:
- Is the machine calibrated? When was it last calibrated? Is it within interval?
- Has preventive maintenance been performed on schedule?
- Are there any known deviations (vibration, wear, temperature drift)?
- What is the machine capability (Cp, Cpk)? Is it capable for this feature?
- Is tooling worn or damaged?
- Is the jig or fixture functioning correctly?
3. Method (Process)
Questions to ask:
- Is there a documented work instruction for this operation?
- Is the work instruction current and at the workstation?
- Are process parameters (temperature, pressure, speed, torque) specified and controlled?
- Is there a control plan entry for this process step?
- Is the process sequence correct?
- Is the method different between shifts or operators?
4. Material (Input Material)
Questions to ask:
- Does the defect correlate with a specific incoming batch or supplier lot?
- Has the material specification been met (certificate of conformance, incoming inspection)?
- Has the material been stored correctly (temperature, humidity, FIFO)?
- Is the material traceable to its origin?
- Has the supplier changed anything recently (sub-supplier, process, location)?
5. Measurement (Measurement System)
Questions to ask:
- Is the measurement system capable (MSA / Gauge R&R performed)?
- Is the gauge calibrated and within its calibration interval?
- Is the measurement method standardised (same fixture, same operator technique)?
- Could measurement error mask the defect (false acceptable)?
- Are measurement results repeatable between operators?
6. Mother Nature / Environment
Questions to ask:
- Does the defect correlate with ambient temperature or humidity?
- Are there vibration or contamination sources nearby?
- Is lighting adequate for visual inspection?
- Are there seasonal patterns?
- Does the cleanroom or ESD environment meet requirements?
Workflow
Step 1 โ Draw the diagram
Write the problem (effect) at the head (right side). Draw the spine. Add six main bones labelled with the 6M categories.
Step 2 โ Brainstorm with the team
For each M category: "What in [M] could cause [the problem]?"
Capture all ideas without judgment โ quantity first, evaluation second. Do not evaluate or discard during brainstorming. Allocate 30โ60 minutes minimum. Time pressure is the most common reason causes are missed.
Add each cause as a sub-bone to the relevant M category. Sub-bones can branch further (cause of a cause).
Step 3 โ Evaluate and prioritise
Mark each cause as:
- Confirmed (supported by data or direct physical evidence โ not opinion)
- Probable (logical, consistent with the Is/Is-Not pattern, but not yet confirmed by data)
- Unlikely (contradicted by data or the Is/Is-Not pattern)
Discard Unlikely causes. Investigate Confirmed and Probable causes. A cause cannot be classified as Confirmed without objective evidence (measurement data, physical demonstration, reproduction test, or direct record review).
Step 4 โ PFMEA cross-check
Before proceeding to 5-Why, cross-check Confirmed and Probable causes against the existing PFMEA:
- Is this failure cause already documented in the PFMEA? If yes, was its detection or prevention control supposed to prevent this defect?
- If the PFMEA did not capture this cause, flag it โ the PFMEA must be updated after the root cause is confirmed.
Step 5 โ Connect to 5-Why
For each Confirmed or Probable cause, run a 5-Why chain to reach the systemic root cause.
The fishbone identifies candidate causes. The 5-Why validates and deepens them.
After root cause is confirmed: assess whether the same cause could exist in similar parts, processes, or product families. Document horizontal deployment actions if applicable.
Output format
Document the fishbone as a table (easier to include in reports than a diagram):
| M Category | Possible Cause | Evidence / Status | Proceed to 5-Why? |
|---|
| Man | Untrained operator | Training record missing for operator 12 | Yes |
| Machine | Jig worn | Measured wear 0.3mm โ limit 0.1mm | Yes |
| Method | No contingency instruction | Work instruction reviewed โ confirmed absent | Yes |
| Material | Batch variation | No batch correlation found | No |
| Measurement | Gauge repeatability | GR&R = 8% โ acceptable | No |
| Environment | Temperature | Controlled at 22ยฐC ยฑ 2ยฐC โ stable | No |
All 6M categories must appear in the table. If a category has no entries after structured brainstorming, document: "No causes identified in this category after structured team review."
Common mistakes
- Brainstorming under time pressure โ causes are missed; allocate 30โ60 minutes minimum
- Stopping at first-level causes โ "machine not calibrated" is a cause, but add sub-bone: why was it not calibrated?
- Not using data to confirm/discard โ every cause must be validated against objective evidence, not just listed
- Using fishbone as the root cause โ fishbone finds candidate causes; 5-Why finds root cause
- Skipping categories โ if a category is left blank without justification, the analysis is incomplete and may miss the real cause
- Classifying causes as Confirmed based on team opinion โ Confirmed requires evidence; without it, classify as Probable and plan verification
Output Format
At the start of each use, ask the user:
"How would you like to receive the output?
A โ Structured Markdown (formatted tables and sections, ready to copy)
B โ Plain tables (simplified structure for Excel or Word)
C โ Narrative report (flowing text for a formal document or email)
Default: A."
Adapt all output sections to the chosen format. If the platform or session context already defines a format preference, skip this question.
Changelog
| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|
| 1.0 | 2026-06-01 | @RBraga01 | Initial release |
| 1.1 | 2026-06-04 | @migmcc | Polished 6M categories, added validation criteria and 5-Why integration |