C-10
Technical troubleshooting and root cause analysis
Working back from an abnormal result to the thing that actually caused it, and proving the fix worked.
TRAINING / C-10
The course
Working back from an abnormal result to the thing that actually caused it, and proving the fix worked.
Who it is for
01 / 05Analysts, supervisors and technical managers who investigate abnormal results, instrument problems and technical deviations.
Delegates work real investigations through the structured tools during the two days, using cases from their own laboratories where they can bring them.
What is covered
02 / 05The syllabus below is the standard shape of the course. It is adjusted to the matrices, methods and instruments you actually run, which is agreed before delivery rather than discovered on the day.
Framing
Defining the problem precisely enough to be investigable
Immediate action
Containment and impact assessment before the investigation starts
Tools
Five whys, fishbone, fault tree and is/is-not analysis, and when each fits
Laboratory failure modes
Sample, reagent, standard, instrument, environment, method, analyst
Evidence
Testing a hypothesis instead of accepting the first plausible cause
Closure
Corrective action, effectiveness verification and knowing when it is closed
What you leave able to do
03 / 05Courses are written around what a delegate can do afterwards, not what was presented to them. These are the outcomes this one is built to produce.
- Define an investigable problem statement from a vague abnormal result.
- Choose and run the right structured tool rather than defaulting to five whys.
- Distinguish a cause you have evidenced from one that is merely plausible.
- Verify that a corrective action worked, and close the investigation on evidence.
Why this course exists
04 / 05"Analyst error" is the most common recorded root cause in laboratory investigations and is almost never the actual one. It is what an investigation records when it stopped early, and it produces a corrective action — retraining — that fixes nothing and recurs.
The second failure is closing on the fix rather than on evidence the fix worked. An investigation with no effectiveness check is a hypothesis with paperwork.
How it is delivered
05 / 05Delivered over 2 days, at your site or at the laboratory, in English or Arabic. Sessions are built around real records, real data and real failures rather than slides of clause numbers, and the people delivering them spend the rest of the week doing the thing being taught.
Group size is agreed in advance — practical sessions are capped so that everyone works rather than watches. An attendance certificate is issued to each delegate on completion.
Ask about any subject not listed here. If it is not something we teach well, we will say so rather than build it for the sake of the booking.
At a glance
- Duration
- 2 days
- Delivered
- On site or at the laboratory
- Language
- English or Arabic
- Certificate
- Attendance certificate issued
CONTINUE
Where to next
Method validation and verification
The difference between validating a method and verifying one, and how to evidence either so it survives an assessment.
ReadMethod performance and result validity
Accuracy, precision, bias and recovery — what each one measures, and which of them your result actually depends on.
ReadAll courses
The full catalogue, grouped by subject.
ReadRequests are read at the bench.
Send the sample question or the instrument list. It is read by a bench professional, not routed through a ticket queue. Call +966 59 637 8052 or write to lab-mgr@qsinexus.com.