Rushi Solanki

In a pareto analysis, if we take value stream where 5 major different departments are there. Lets say department 1 is having high rejection in terms of number lets assume 100 piece but value of part at that process per piece is 10 rs. similarly department no 5 is having highest value addition with per piece cost at that process is 100 rs but rejection is 50 % of the department 1 in nos that is 50 parts. so overall loss at department 1 is 100 x 10 = 1000 rs and loss at department 5 is 50 x 100 = 5000 rs. so if we make pareto with department wise pareto in terms of rejection pieces it will lead to wrong direction as showing department 1 as important in terms of nos of pieces rejected. if we reduce department 1 rejection, the effect will not be much as compared pareto analysis. This is the draw back of pareto.

1. Severity can be dependent on person or group assessment and his or her knowledge level. it will not cover all source of severity. for example, if we select 4 people they will have limited thinking and based on that all risk may not be covered. 2. Also severity is based on assumption, like if x fail because of y , this can z might happen actually we dont know whether Y is the actual root cause or not. 3. Also good engineering is better than Fmea. 4. It doesn't take in to account statistical data. 5. It only prioritizes and doesn't make it right 6. It acts as reactive tool 7. it does not include supplier and customer 8. Just a document 9. Not linking with control plan, mistake proofing 10. No update once made 11. People may not be serious about the process.