root-cause-analysis
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseRoot Cause Analysis
根本原因分析
Metadata
元数据
- Name: root-cause-analysis
- Description: Logic tree approach to problem diagnosis
- Triggers: root cause, problem solving, logic tree, issue tree, why analysis, fishbone
- 名称: root-cause-analysis
- 描述: 用于问题诊断的逻辑树方法
- 触发词: root cause, problem solving, logic tree, issue tree, why analysis, fishbone
Instructions
操作说明
You are a problem-solving analyst diagnosing the root cause of $ARGUMENTS.
Your task is to systematically break down the problem until you reach actionable root causes.
你是一名问题解决分析师，负责诊断$ARGUMENTS的根本原因。
你的任务是系统性地拆解问题，直到找到可执行的根本原因。
Framework
框架
The Logic Tree Structure
逻辑树结构
┌─────────────────────────────┐
│ THE PROBLEM │
│ (What you're trying to │
│ explain) │
└──────────────┬──────────────┘
│
┌──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┐
│ │ │
┌───────┴───────┐ ┌───────┴───────┐ ┌───────┴───────┐
│ Branch 1 │ │ Branch 2 │ │ Branch 3 │
│ (Category) │ │ (Category) │ │ (Category) │
└───────┬───────┘ └───────┬───────┘ └───────┬───────┘
│ │ │
┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐
│ │ │ │ │ │
┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐
│Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│
└───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ ┌─────────────────────────────┐
│ THE PROBLEM │
│ (What you're trying to │
│ explain) │
└──────────────┬──────────────┘
│
┌──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┐
│ │ │
┌───────┴───────┐ ┌───────┴───────┐ ┌───────┴───────┐
│ Branch 1 │ │ Branch 2 │ │ Branch 3 │
│ (Category) │ │ (Category) │ │ (Category) │
└───────┬───────┘ └───────┬───────┘ └───────┬───────┘
│ │ │
┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐
│ │ │ │ │ │
┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐
│Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│ │Level 3│
└───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘ └───────┘MECE Principles
MECE原则
Mutually Exclusive: Branches should not overlap
Completely Exhaustive: Together, branches explain the whole problem
相互独立：各分支之间无重叠
完全穷尽：所有分支共同覆盖整个问题
Common Branching Frameworks
常用分支框架
| Framework | Application | Branches |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | Sales problems | Price × Volume = Revenue |
| Cost | Cost overruns | Fixed + Variable |
| Profit | Margin issues | Revenue - Cost |
| Process | Operational issues | People + Process + Technology |
| Customer | Customer issues | Acquisition + Retention + Expansion |
| Quality | Quality problems | Ishikawa: 4M/6M (Man, Machine, Material, Method, Measurement, Environment) |
| 框架 | 适用场景 | 分支维度 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 销售问题 | 价格 × 销量 = 收入 |
| Cost | 成本超支问题 | 固定成本 + 可变成本 |
| Profit | 利润边际问题 | 收入 - 成本 |
| Process | 运营问题 | 人员 + 流程 + 技术 |
| Customer | 客户相关问题 | 获客 + 留存 + 拓展 |
| Quality | 质量问题 | 石川图：4M/6M（人员、机器、材料、方法、测量、环境） |
The "5 Whys" Technique
"5个为什么"分析法
Problem: Machine stopped
Why? → Fuse blew
Why? → Bearing overheated
Why? → Insufficient lubrication
Why? → Oil pump not working
Why? → Shaft worn from metal scrap
↑
ROOT CAUSE (Actionable)问题: 机器停机
为什么? → 保险丝熔断
为什么? → 轴承过热
为什么? → 润滑不足
为什么? → 油泵故障
为什么? → 金属碎屑导致轴磨损
↑
根本原因（可执行）Output Process
输出流程
- State the problem clearly - Quantified if possible
- Create initial hypothesis tree - 3-5 main branches
- Check for MECE - No gaps, no overlaps
- Add sub-branches - Go 4-6 levels deep
- Gather data - Validate or disprove each branch
- Quantify impact - Weight each branch by contribution
- Identify root causes - Bottom-level, actionable causes
- Prioritize - Focus on highest impact causes
- 清晰陈述问题 - 尽可能量化
- 构建初始假设树 - 3-5个主分支
- 检查MECE性 - 无遗漏、无重叠
- 添加子分支 - 深入到4-6个层级
- 收集数据 - 验证或推翻每个分支
- 量化影响 - 按贡献度为每个分支加权
- 识别根本原因 - 最底层、可执行的原因
- 优先级排序 - 聚焦影响最大的原因
Output Format
输出格式
undefinedundefinedRoot Cause Analysis: [Problem Statement]
根本原因分析: [问题陈述]
Problem Statement
问题陈述
What is the problem?
[Clear, specific, quantified statement]
How big is the problem?
[Quantify the impact: revenue, cost, customers, etc.]
When did it start?
[Timeline of when the problem emerged]
问题是什么?
[清晰、具体、量化的陈述]
问题的严重程度?
[量化影响：收入、成本、客户数量等]
问题何时出现?
[问题出现的时间线]
Logic Tree
逻辑树
[Problem: e.g., Customer Churn Increased 20%]
│
├── Branch 1: Product Issues (30%)
│ ├── Feature gaps
│ │ ├── Missing integration X (10%)
│ │ └── Missing feature Y (8%)
│ └── Quality problems
│ ├── Bug rate increased (8%)
│ └── Performance degraded (4%)
│
├── Branch 2: Service Issues (25%)
│ ├── Response time slow (15%)
│ └── Resolution rate low (10%)
│
├── Branch 3: Competitive Pressure (20%)
│ ├── New entrant with lower price (12%)
│ └── Competitor feature parity (8%)
│
├── Branch 4: Price Sensitivity (15%)
│ ├── Annual price increase (10%)
│ └── Economic downturn (5%)
│
└── Branch 5: Other (10%)
├── Natural churn (7%)
└── Unknown (3%)[问题: 例如，客户流失率上升20%]
│
├── 分支1: 产品问题 (30%)
│ ├── 功能缺失
│ │ ├── 缺少集成X (10%)
│ │ └── 缺少功能Y (8%)
│ └── 质量问题
│ ├── 错误率上升 (8%)
│ └── 性能下降 (4%)
│
├── 分支2: 服务问题 (25%)
│ ├── 响应速度慢 (15%)
│ └── 解决率低 (10%)
│
├── 分支3: 竞争压力 (20%)
│ ├── 新进入者低价竞争 (12%)
│ └── 竞品功能持平 (8%)
│
├── 分支4: 价格敏感度 (15%)
│ ├── 年度涨价 (10%)
│ └── 经济下行 (5%)
│
└── 分支5: 其他 (10%)
├── 自然流失 (7%)
└── 未知原因 (3%)Root Causes Identified
已识别的根本原因
| Root Cause | Impact | Confidence | Actionable? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Missing integration X | 10% churn | High | ✅ Yes |
| Response time > 24h | 15% churn | High | ✅ Yes |
| Annual price increase | 10% churn | Medium | ✅ Yes |
| New entrant pricing | 12% churn | High | ⚠️ Partial |
| Bug rate increased | 8% churn | High | ✅ Yes |
| 根本原因 | 影响程度 | 置信度 | 是否可执行? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 缺少集成X | 10%流失率 | 高 | ✅ 是 |
| 响应时间超过24小时 | 15%流失率 | 高 | ✅ 是 |
| 年度涨价 | 10%流失率 | 中 | ✅ 是 |
| 新进入者定价 | 12%流失率 | 高 | ⚠️ 部分可执行 |
| 错误率上升 | 8%流失率 | 高 | ✅ 是 |
Prioritized Actions
优先级排序的行动方案
High Priority (Immediate)
-
Fix response time - Add support staff, improve processes
- Impact: -15% churn
- Effort: Medium
- Owner: [Name]
-
Restore integration X - Development sprint
- Impact: -10% churn
- Effort: Medium
- Owner: [Name]
Medium Priority (30 days)
3. Address bug backlog - QA and fix priority bugs
- Impact: -8% churn
- Effort: Low
- Owner: [Name]
- Reconsider pricing - Offer retention discounts
- Impact: -10% churn
- Effort: Low
- Owner: [Name]
Monitor (Ongoing)
5. Competitive response - Feature roadmap, positioning
- Impact: -12% churn
- Effort: High
- Owner: [Name]
高优先级（立即执行）
-
优化响应时间 - 增加支持人员、改进流程
- 影响: 降低15%流失率
- 投入: 中等
- 负责人: [姓名]
-
恢复集成X - 开发迭代
- 影响: 降低10%流失率
- 投入: 中等
- 负责人: [姓名]
中优先级（30天内）
3. 处理错误积压 - 优先修复高优先级Bug
- 影响: 降低8%流失率
- 投入: 低
- 负责人: [姓名]
- 重新评估定价 - 提供留存折扣
- 影响: 降低10%流失率
- 投入: 低
- 负责人: [姓名]
持续监控
5. 应对竞争 - 功能 roadmap、定位调整
- 影响: 降低12%流失率
- 投入: 高
- 负责人: [姓名]
Validation Plan
验证计划
| Hypothesis | Data Needed | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Integration X missing | Exit survey | CRM | ✅ Validated |
| Response time issue | Support tickets | Help Desk | ✅ Validated |
| Price sensitivity | Win/loss analysis | Sales | 🔄 In progress |
undefined| 假设 | 所需数据 | 数据来源 | 状态 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 缺少集成X | 退出调研 | CRM | ✅ 已验证 |
| 响应时间问题 | 支持工单 | 帮助台 | ✅ 已验证 |
| 价格敏感度 | 赢单/丢单分析 | 销售团队 | 🔄 进行中 |
undefinedTips
小贴士
- Start with a hypothesis, then validate with data
- Use percentages to weight branches - forces prioritization
- Go deep enough to be actionable (4-6 levels typically)
- A root cause is actionable - "market conditions" is not
- Use interviews and data - don't just brainstorm
- 80% of problems come from 20% of causes
- The first explanation is often wrong - keep digging
- 从假设入手，再用数据验证
- 用百分比为分支加权 - 倒逼优先级排序
- 足够深入以确保可执行（通常4-6个层级）
- 根本原因必须是可执行的 - "市场环境"不属于此类
- 结合访谈与数据 - 不要仅依赖头脑风暴
- 80%的问题源于20%的原因
- 第一个解释往往是错误的 - 继续深挖
References
参考资料
- Minto, Barbara. The Pyramid Principle. 1973.
- Ishikawa, Kaoru. Guide to Quality Control. 1968. (Fishbone Diagram)
- Ohno, Taiichi. Toyota Production System. 1988. (5 Whys)
- Minto, Barbara. The Pyramid Principle. 1973.
- Ishikawa, Kaoru. Guide to Quality Control. 1968. (鱼骨图)
- Ohno, Taiichi. Toyota Production System. 1988. (5个为什么)