RE: Root cause???

["John Constantine" <thesfg1@cox.net>]

Harry Nimon wrote recently

* I really do not believe there is a difference that is economical.  IMHO
the
difference is that a special cause is one that acts like a catalyst on the
root cause without actually 'taking part' in the reaction.  For example:
after 9/11 the airline industry suffered a near meltdown.  The 'Root Cause'
was rider reluctance to travel...the special cause was the terrorism threat.
<
I don't know if the meltdown was not already on its way to "happening", due
to other factors. May I suggest that the absence of something does not mean
the presence of something, only the possibility?
As to the "essence" of root causes; does Deming not imply that all data are
subject to error? That there is no true value? Does this not imply further
that discussion of root causes may themselves be flawed and imperfect?
Meltdowns - too much infrastructure, too little capital, bad timing, aging
fleet, etc...who knows?
We just don't know what we don't know...yet. Or, do we?
Regards,
_______________________
John Constantine
thesfg1@cox.net