| Incident | Area | Severity | Occ/mo | Detection | RPN | Likely theme |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seal leak after changeover | Packaging | 4 | 3.0 | 4 | 80 | Process / Method |
| Sensor drift causing false rejects | Production | 3 | 1.0 | 5 | 45 | Measurement / Controls |
| Wrong label applied on two pallets | Warehouse | 3 | 0.3 | 3 | 18 | People / Training |
- ≤ 0.1 → 1
- ≤ 0.5 → 2
- ≤ 2 → 3
- ≤ 8 → 4
- > 8 → 5
- Describe the incident with a short, specific title.
- Enter severity, detection, and monthly occurrence realistically.
- Rate contributing conditions: complexity, equipment, training, adherence, environment.
- Submit to view RPN, risk score, top root themes, and actions.
- Export CSV for trend tracking or PDF for an incident report.
This calculator converts incident signals into comparable numbers so teams can prioritize objectively. The base index is an RPN from 1 to 125, calculated as Severity × OccurrenceRating × Detection. OccurrenceRating is mapped from monthly frequency: ≤0.1→1, ≤0.5→2, ≤2→3, ≤8→4, and >8→5. This mapping keeps rare events visible without overstating noise.
To reduce bias from a single rating, the tool blends RPN with operational context into a 0–100 score. The weighting emphasizes RPN (45%), then containment time (10%), cost impact (10%), customer impact (8%), repeat behavior (7%), complexity (7%), equipment condition (5%), training and adherence gaps (7% combined), and environment stability (1%). Scores above 80 indicate critical review; 60–79 suggest high depth; 35–59 is standard; under 35 is a light triage.
The ranked themes—Process, People, Equipment, Measurement, Materials, and Environment—help you start with the most likely contributors. For example, high detection difficulty combined with weaker evidence increases the Measurement/Controls theme. Poor equipment ratings elevate Equipment/Maintenance, while weak training or inconsistent adherence raise People/Training. Use these rankings as hypotheses to verify on the floor.
Each submission is stored for the session and can be exported to CSV for quick dashboards. Track counts by area, average risk score, and recurring top themes. A simple Pareto on “top roots” often shows that 20–30% of themes drive most repeat issues. Exported PDFs support audits by standardizing what was evaluated, which thresholds were triggered, and which actions were recommended.
Use the risk score to match effort to impact. Critical and high cases should include a verification plan, control updates, and recurrence blockers. For teams new to scoring, run ten historical incidents: compare calculated depth with actual effort. If mismatched, tune weights and rating definitions, then lock them for quarterly review across all sites. Standard cases benefit from a focused 5 Whys, containment review, and short-term monitoring. Light cases still need documentation and a defined owner. Re-score after fixes; a meaningful improvement often shows as lower occurrence, better detection, and reduced containment hours.
1) What does the RPN represent here?
RPN is a fast triage index: Severity × OccurrenceRating × Detection. It ranges from 1 to 125 and supports consistent comparisons across incidents.
2) Why is occurrence entered as “per month”?
Monthly frequency is easy to estimate and aligns with many quality reporting cycles. The value is mapped to a 1–5 rating to stabilize scoring.
3) Is the 0–100 risk score a compliance standard?
No. It is an internal prioritization aid that combines RPN with context factors. Use it to guide investigation depth, then validate with evidence.
4) Do root theme percentages prove the cause?
No. They indicate relative likelihood based on the entered signals. Treat them as starting hypotheses and confirm with checks, data, and observation.
5) How should teams set thresholds for action?
Start with the built-in bands: >80 critical, 60–79 high, 35–59 standard, <35 light. Adjust after reviewing outcomes and recurrence rates.
6) What’s the best way to use the exports?
Use CSV for trend tracking and Pareto by area and root theme. Use the PDF for incident reviews, audits, and consistent documentation of decisions.