The Five Why’s
The five why’s design method allows those who use it to think more critically and identify the root cause or implications of any given problem. This design method was created by Sakichi Toyoda and is a part of Six Sigma. While its original purpose is to find the root cause of an issue by asking why something has occurred five times, my team asked why our problem statement was a problem five times to repurpose this design method. By practicing this process in this manner, some underlying or hidden truths might be uncovered where they were otherwise not on the team’s radar. For example, my team used this design method when we established a problem statement regarding students lacking resources to keep their momentum alive once they left a sustainability education program. We asked why it was a problem that students don’t have long-term support once they leave the program. This led us to think that students might give up on their interest in sustainability and never make it to having a career in the industry. By the end of the five why’s, we realized that this problem can impact the general population’s access to sustainable, clean energy, thereby affecting our environment further.
The advantages of using this design method include having everyone on the team align to focus on one single problem statement, to begin with. Next, the team brainstorms and offers different ideas and nuances when thinking about why every factor is a problem. This continues until the team realizes the main problem a few “why’s” down. The disadvantage to this design method is that you can arrive at a final problem that is too intricate for one single project to solve. This design method can also gain complexity when there is more than one why for each problem, and this leads to a matrix of problems to ponder.
I would recommend this design method to any team that is lost or confused regarding the deeper meaning of the problem at hand. This design method can be a great tool to align the team by getting everyone on the same page and seeing the bigger picture. By setting a foundation for the purpose and meaning of the design project, the team will gain a deeper sense of understanding for the seemingly simpler problem statement.
As far as my advice when using this design method, it’s important to be as focused and specific as possible. You don’t want to deviate from the original problem too much or else you will end up more confused than when you began the process. Another piece of advice is to answer the questions factually rather than based on opinions. At the end of the day, you can’t solve a design problem that only exists in your world. The end product should be a statement that everyone can agree on and use as their base for the remainder of the project.
