Fish Bone Chart Essay

Abstraction

The experiment aims to analyse the causes of each job ( consequence ) identified in natural eggs and mayonnaise merchandises during fabrication and processing through the usage of fish-bone diagrams or Ishikawa diagrams ( cause and consequence diagrams ) . Additionally. scattering analysis and procedure categorization type fish-bone diagrams were used. The consequence of the experiment showed that procedure categorization diagram is more effectual in nailing specific causes of error/ jobs therefore assist more in preparation of disciplinary actions to be taken. However. scattering analysis concentrates more in analysing the general root causes of the errors/ jobs. therefore fails to place minor causes of the jobs.

I. Introduction

A fish-bone diagram. besides known as Ishikawa diagram or a cause-and-effect diagram. is an organized tool that helps makers in placing the possible causes of quality jobs ( Forman. 2001 ) . This ocular tool is besides used for forming possible causes of defect in different classs. It has angled lines. or the ‘bones’ . which represents a possible cause of mistake. Each bone can hold ‘sub-bones’ which contains further inside informations about a possible cause of mistake. The ‘bones’ are joined together in a remarkable consecutive line that describes the chief defect. This outline gives a form similar to the castanetss of a fish. hence the name fishbone chart as seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Fishbone Diagram ( Cinergix Ltd. undated )

There are three chief types of fishbone diagrams viz. . the scattering analysis type. merchandise procedure categorization type. and the cause numbering type. The scattering analysis type organizes and relates the factors that result in the difference among the merchandise and other procedure results. The production procedure categorization type is made by doing the stairss in the production procedure be the major ribs of the fishbone diagram. It focuses on each measure of the procedure to find all possible causes of the mistake. In the cause numbering type. all possible causes that consequences to the defect is determined and so organized to demo the relationships to the facet of merchandise of procedure quality that is being examined ( Florac. 1999 ) .

II. METHODOLOGY

Prior to the exercising. the group identified and listed possible defects in both eggs and mayonnaise. One possible defect was so chosen for each the natural stuff ( eggs ) and the finished merchandise ( mayonnaise ) . The possible defects chosen were cracked eggshells and unstable emulsion for the natural stuff and finished merchandise. severally. The group so constructed two types of fishbone diagrams ( Dispersion Analysis and Process Classification ) for each of the chosen possible defects by placing and composing its chief causes and farther causes in the diagram. The diagrams were so analyzed by the group to find the root cause of the defects and to place and propose disciplinary actions to extinguish it. The effectivity and efficiency of the disciplinary actions were besides considered and analyzed. The group so presented the diagrams to the category.

III. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

( See Appendix )
IV. INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

Dispersion analysis and procedure categorization type of fishbone diagrams are used in the analyzation of the causes of the jobs identified. Dispersion analysis cause and consequence diagrams are structured in such a manner that the factors lending to the job under survey are classified into the “standard six” which are manpower. methods. stuffs. measuring. operators. and environments. Process categorization diagrams on the other manus are structured in such a manner that the factors are classified harmonizing to stairss involved in the procedure ( Brassard and Ritter. 1994 ) . In the instance of mayonnaise. some of the stairss are sifting. commixture and filling. In footings of accent. scattering analysis CE diagrams are advantageous in such a manner that it helps form and associate the factors that lead up to the job.

However its drawback is that it may neglect to place minor causes that may be overlooked ( Omachonu & A ; Ross. 2005 ) . On the other manus. the advantage of procedure categorization CE diagrams is that is easier to make because it follows the procedure in a merchandise. However. redundancy may happen. Process categorization is frequently used when the job encountered can non be isolated into a individual section ( Basu. 2011 ) . An illustration of which is defective mill workers which may be a reoccurring job in all stairss.

This makes it difficult to trap indicate what disciplinary action should be performed ( Omachonu & A ; Ross. 2005 ) . Based on the exercising. it was observed that the usage of procedure categorization CE diagrams are more effectual in being able to place the specific causes of mistakes within a procedure nevertheless ; scattering analysis CE diagrams were able to nail general root causes of the job by contracting down the beginnings of mistakes into the “standard six” . General disciplinary actions can be generated utilizing scattering analysis CE diagrams but procedure specific disciplinary actions can be generated from procedure categorization CE diagrams

V. REFERENCES
Basu. R. ( 2011 ) . Fit sigma: A thin approac to edifice stustaiable quality beyond six sigma. ( 1st erectile dysfunction. . p. 71 ) . United kingdom: John WIley and Sons Ltd.

Brassard. M. and D. Ritter. ( 1994 ) The Memory Jogger II: A Pocket Guide of Tools for Continuous Improvement & A ; Effective Planning. Methuen. Ma: Goal/QPC. Accessed via: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. goalqpc. com

Cinergix Ltd. ( n. d. ) . Graphic Organizer Templates. Retrieved January 3. 2012. from Creately: hypertext transfer protocol: //creately. com/examples/Graphic-Organizer-Templates

Florac. W. C. ( 1999 ) . Measuring the Software Process: Statistical Process Control for Software Process Improvement. Indianopolis: Addison-Wesley Professional.

Forman. E. S. ( 2001 ) . Decision by Aims: How to Convert Others That You Are Right. Washington: World Scientific. Omachonu. V. K. . & A ; Ross. J. E. ( 2005 ) . Principles of totaly quality. ( 3rd erectile dysfunction. . p. 265 ) . New York: CRC PRess.