Eight step problem solving model for deficiency resolution

  • Published
  • By Ed Delker
  • Office of the Inspector General OO-ALC gatekeeper
HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah --  This is part three in a series of articles from Hill Air Force Base Inspector General office on the problem solving model.

In the previous articles we looked at problems solving for the first five steps of the process. Now we will look at the remaining steps, but first here are some key things to keep in mind.

A concise document is extremely valuable for problem solving. Answering what is the deficiency, what is the root cause, what are the corrective actions and current status, in a clear and concise manner is what the Inspector General is looking for. Most steps can be documented with a single sentence or usually a short paragraph.

Demonstrate a sense of urgency with clearly defined timelines. Passive statements i.e., we are planning to, eventually we hope to, may unintentionally show a relaxed approach to resolution. Action statements i.e., accomplished plan implementation, 50 percent complete, reviewing with an Estimated Close Date (ECD) of Jan. 5, clearly defines and exhibits active engagement. Remember the IG is looking for: "Who will do what by when."

Frequently the individual that identified the deficiency is also expected to develop the resolution. At times this may be appropriate, but often a team of knowledgeable members with a depth of experience and synergy develop better Root Cause Analyses (RCAs) and corrective actions.

Never start the process with the concept of "I already know what the problem is and how to fix it." Often this ends in failure because not all the facts are explored and information that points to another problem or solutions are ignored. Always go through the process and look at all the facts critically. Only then can you create a corrective action plan that will eliminate deficiency reoccurrence.

Step 6, Implementation of Correction Action: Usually all the steps identified in the corrective action will be implemented, but sometimes restrictions limit what can be accomplished.For example, during the process corrective actions were identified that required additional personnel, funding and equipment. Leadership has to implement these corrective actions.Although they may be able to get additional personnel and equipment, funding was not obtainable. In this section you would identify that personnel and equipment corrective actions were implemented, but the funding was not.

Step 7, Validation: Any number of methods can be utilized to validate, but it is important to ensure that the corrective action was effective. Some possible options are to run the checklist again, QA review, Operational Readiness Exercise, supervisor review.

Step 8, Standardization: When a deficiency is identified that could apply to other organizations i.e., training, security, safety, etc., use this section to highlight the corrective action for other organizations' similar deficiencies.