The Kepner-Tregoe Approach
Paul Morris
CIS144

Problem
Analysis
Past
What is the fault?
Situation Analysis
(Where are we?)
Decision
Analysis
Present
How to correct the fault?
Potential
Problem Analysis
Future
How to prevent future faults?

“You think you have problems”

Timing

How urgent is the problem?


Is a deadline involved?
What will happen if nothing is done for a while?

Bakery and malfunctioning oven

“You think you have problems”

Trend

What is the problem potential for growth?

Bakery and malfunctioning oven

“You think you have problems”

Impact

How serious is the problem

What are the effects on the people, the product, the organization, and its policies?

Bakery and malfunctioning oven

“You think you have problems”

“You know it’s a really bad day when” problem

Pareto Analysis and Diagram



This method shows the relative importance of each individual problem to the other problems in the situation.
This analysis draws its name from the Pareto Principle (80% of the trouble comes from 20% of the problems)
Vital few concerns vs. the trivial many

Toasty O’s Product Problem
A. Inferior printing on boxes
(smeared/blurred)

10,000
B. Overfilling boxes (too much weight)

30,000
C. Boxes damaged during shipping

2,000
D. Inner wrapper not sealed (stale)

25,000
E. No prize in box

50,000

Toasty O’s Boxes Analysis
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
A
B
C
D
E
S1

Toasty O’s Product Problem
A. Inferior printing on boxes
(smeared/blurred)

$100
B. Overfilling boxes (too much weight)

$6,000
C. Boxes damaged during shipping

$7,000
D. Inner wrapper not sealed (stale)

$87,500
E. No prize in box

$17,500

Boxes vs. Lost Revenue
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
A
B
C
S1
D
E
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
A
B
C
D
E
S2

K.T. Problem Analysis and
Troubleshooting
The basic premise of KT PA is that there is always something that distinguishes what the problem IS from what it IS NOT.
Fear of Flying Problem

Decision Analysis




Prepare a decision statement with both an action and a result component
Establish strategic requirements
(Musts), operational objectives
(Wants), and restraints (Limits)
Rank objectives and assign relative weights
Generate alternatives

Decision Analysis




Assign a relative score for each alternative on an objective-byobjective basis
Calculate weighted score for each alternative and identify top two or three
List adverse consequences for each top alternative and evaluate probability and severity
Make a final single choice

Example of Decision Analysis



Our company is looking for a new site for construction of a branch office.
We have determined our MUSTs and several other factors to consider
Two sites have been brought to our attention.

General Factors for Our Example
Factor
1 Developable >= 25acres
2 Favorable physical site attrib.
3 Competitive location costs
4 Access to quality/trainable workforce
5 Quality transportation access
6 Capacity & flexibility of utility services
7 Regional air quality designations
Weight
“Must”
6
7
8
10
5
8

Comparative Analysis
Factor
Favorable phy. site
Competitive costs
Access to qual. workforce
Wt.
6
7
8
Quality trans. access
Utility services
Air Quality
Total
10
5
8
Site A
Facts
Great size & config
Low Land dev. $
Dense Pop; many compare ind.
30 miles to
I-5 with good access
All systems meet req.
Near nonattainment
Scor e
10
8
9
7
7
4
Wt.
Score
60
56
72
70
35
32
325
Site B
Facts
Poor config & soil
High Land dev. $
Adeq. Pop; high unemplyment
Right on Freeway; good access
All systems meet req.
80 miles to nonattainment
Score
4
6
8
9
8
8
Wt.
Score
24
42
64
90
40
64
324

Potential Problem Analysis




Potential Problems

Deadlines, Something New


Complexity, Unfamiliar
Assigning Responsibility,
Possible Causes
Preventative Action
Contingent Actions