Lorna Noble, February 2025
We tend to only think about why we do things when something goes wrong. Once a decision has been made, a habit formed, or a process codified, we (both as individuals and as organisations) tend to run on autopilot. We do things this way because “That’s the way we do things”. We put so much effort into getting the process right in the first instance that we forget to check that it continues to be useful as circumstances change.
While the Five Whys framework is helpful when exploring decisions and outcomes it is often insufficient. I believe that this is because it does not explicitly include the context in which a decision is being made or reviewed when repeatedly asking Why.
Kipling’s poem “I keep six honest serving-men” starts: I keep six honest serving-men (They taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When And How and Where and Who.
Using all six questions, rather than just Five Whys, can provide greater clarity and insight both in retrospective reviews and in planning.
- Ask the Six Questions
- Use the Five Whys to explore each answer
- Consider what has changed
- Clarify the purpose and desired outcomes (now, not as they were initially)
- Explore alternatives (use the Six Questions and Five Whys to clarify your thoughts)
- Take action (and review the effects of that action)
One way in which I have used the Six Honest Serving-Men is as a framework within which to review how intangible resources are allocated (time, attention, energy). In a sense this is the opposite of the usual Five Whys approach, where one goes from the specific to the general.
These ideas were triggered by an episode of the podcast Developer Tea “Match your Action to Intention - Pairing Five Whats with Five Whys”. https://developertea.simplecast.com/episodes/match-your-action-to-intention-pairing-five-whats-with-five-whys
Taiichi Ohno at Toyota described the Five Whys technique which was formalised (also at Toyota) by Sakichi Toyoda and originally used to understand why new product features or manufacturing techniques were needed rather than for root cause analysis.
- What: Focus Time
- Why: I believed I was unproductive because of interruptions
- When: Daily
- How: A block in the google calendar marked as ‘unavailable’ which automatically declines all meetings
- Where: A place with minimal local distractions
- Who: The developer
- Why: I believed I was unproductive because of interruptions
- Why: I am getting meeting invitations during my most productive working time
- Why: Company meetings are scheduled without regard for unbroken working time
- Why: Coding is unusual in requiring large blocks of uninterrupted time
- Why: Company meetings are scheduled without regard for unbroken working time
- Why: I am getting meeting invitations during my most productive working time
- When: Daily
- Why: It will get people used to my not being available
- Why: Two hours a day of focus time is the minimum I feel I need to get anything done at all
- Why: More than two hours could impact my colleagues if they need my input
- How: A 2-4pm block in the google calendar which automatically declines all meetings
- Why: It doesn’t require me to take any explicit action to decline meetings
- Why: the whole point is to reduce distractions, not add extra work
- Why: I can be available for standup and planning meetings in the morning
- Why: It doesn’t require me to take any explicit action to decline meetings
- Where: A place with minimal local distractions
- Why: there’s no point in blocking off time from meetings only to be distracted by people
- Who: me!
- Why: It’s me who needs to be more productive
- I have fewer, and much more experienced, offshore colleagues.
- I have more onshore colleagues with similar skills and experience to mine.
- Blocking out time in google calendar prevents meetings being scheduled, but has no effect on Teams messages or calls now that we have moved communication to that platform.
- Interruptions are much more likely to be via Teams than scheduled meetings.
- I am more likely to decline a meeting invitation or suggest an alternative time if it is inconvenient.
- I believed that I needed to schedule time for uninterrupted focus work in order to be productive.
- I have had consistent feedback that I am doing valuable, and valued, work.
- The number of urgent interruptions from colleagues has reduced greatly.
(these are the conclusions I came to after using the process)
- I need to increase my skills and knowledge, rather than avoid interruptions, to be more productive
- I’ve considered online courses (egghead.io), worked examples (codecrafters), and books.
- Remove the daily focus time block
- Schedule non-blocking time (one hour weekly) for completing an Egghead.io course on React
- Review of this is scheduled for August 2025 (6 months)
- What: Quarterly Team Meeting
- Why: To spend time together in person as the whole company.
- When: Quarterly on the last Thursday of the month (January, April, July, October)
- How:
- A full day update meeting in person (online available via Google Meet but discouraged)
- 7 presentations from SLT & CEO
- Meme and photo competition live voting.
- A fast food lunch
- Where: The company office (~30 miles NNE of Bristol Temple Meads, an hour by car at peak times)
- Who: All UK-based employees
Why: To spend time together in person as the whole company
- Why: to find out what the rest of the company is doing
- Why: because inter-department communication is problematic, and collaboration limited
- Why: to see the company financial status and forecasts
- Why: to provide data for better decisions
- Why: to boost staff morale
- Why: to allow for spontaneous social interaction
- Why: to improve company cohesion
- Why: in-person interaction is better than online
- Why: interactions do not need to be scheduled
- Why: chance conversations can be overheard
- Why: most of the team work remotely most of the time
- Why: they prefer it
- Why: the office layout does not allow for focussed work
- Why: Bristol traffic is terrible making the commute unpleasant
- Why: we couldn’t hire the righ* t people at the right price in the local area
- Why: they prefer it
- When: Quarterly on the last Th ursday of the month (January, April, July, October)*
- Why: people don’t want to come e* very month
- How: In person, with 7 present ations and a fast food lunch*
- Why: each department head must give a presentation
- Why: there is no local restaurant or similar
- Where: The company office
- Why: we have an office
- Why: every proper company must have an office
- Why: staff need to attend the office once a week
- Why: we don’t have to pay extra to use the office
- Why: the office is convenient for the decision makers
- Who: All UK-based employees
- Why: staff need to demonstrate that they are invested in the company
- Why: flying folk in from around the world would be too expensive
- Around 40 people now vs sub-10.
- Layers of management vs a completely flat organisational structure.
- Vastly improved technology for virtual communication
- Seven formal departmental presentations vs. individuals talking to each other.
- Employees across the globe vs mainly in the local area.
- Now a partly-owned subsidiary of a non-UK company, with VC buyout in progress.
- Information distribution (one-way communication)?
- Email allows folk to review later. An online dashboard shows progress towards KPIs and OKRs.
- Social interaction?
- Two 15 minute breaks plus a 45 minute lunch doesn’t allow for much.
- Public accountability and reporting on expected team performance?
- Should be between manager/report.
- Collaboration?
- Brainstorming and free-form discussions can work better in person, but we don’t do that.
- They also require a room per discussion, whiteboards, and a willingness to experiment.
To consider:
- Does spending time in person listening to presentations improve company cohesion?
- Does the current schedule allow for a meaningful amount of spontaneous social interaction?
- Are the office location and facilities suitable for a meeting of 40 people from across the UK?
- Is there a way to better include those who cannot attend meetings in person?
- Is the office setup suitable for individual and group conversations?
- Are people energised or exhausted by the meeting?
- Is the information presented relevant to the people attending, and in a useful format?
- Staff turnover - are all the invitees still appropriate?
- Is the frequency of the meeting appropriate?
- What meaningful change has resulted from this meeting in the past year?
- Consider the answers given by other attendees.
- Agree on a change
- Make the change
- Schedule a time to review the effects of that change
(Given this is hypothetical and at least partly tongue-in-cheek I’m not going to make suggestions here)