Why root cause analysis often fails and how to fix it

Root cause analysis (RCA) remains one of the most important tools organisations rely on to learn from incidents, prevent recurrence, andstrengthen operational resilience. Yet for many organisations, RCA often falls short of delivering the insights and lasting improvement it promises. Investigations are completed, reports are written, but repeat failures still occur. Problems reappear. Lessons are lost.

The issue is rarely a lack of effort or intent. Instead, most RCA failures are rooted in process weaknesses, structural gaps, and investigative limitations that prevent organisations from truly understanding why failures happen. The good news is these challenges can be addressed when organisations shift how they approach RCA entirely.

Eight reasons root cause analysis often falls short

Stopping at symptoms, not true causes
Many investigations focus on what went wrong rather than why it happened. Immediate triggers are identified, but underlying systemic drivers are missed. Without identifying the deeper causes beneath events, organisations treat symptoms rather than removing the conditions that allow failure to recur.

Treating human error as the conclusion, not the starting point
In many investigations, human error is labelled as the root cause. An operator made a mistake. A maintenance step was skipped. A decision was poorly executed. In reality, human error is rarely the final answer. It is almost always a symptom of weaknesses in systems, processes, training, leadership, or organisational conditions that shaped behaviour. Treating human error as an endpoint prevents organisations from identifying correctable systemic factors.

Inconsistent investigation methods across teams and sites
Without a consistent investigation methodology embedded across the organisation, RCA quality depends heavily on individual investigator skill. Teams interpret processes differently. Evidence is collected inconsistently. Investigations vary in depth and rigour. As a result, cross-organisational learning becomes difficult, and systemic risks remain hidden. Explore our imperfect investigator profiles

Limited visibility of organisational and leadershipfactors
Many traditional RCA approaches focus primarily on technical or process failures. While these factors are important, most high-consequence incidents involve a combination of technical, human, leadership, and organisational contributors. Without the ability to systematically analyse leadership decisions, communication gaps, cultural norms, and management systems, organisations miss critical opportunities to address root vulnerabilities.

Fragmented investigation tools and disconnected data
Many organisations rely on a combination of forms, templates, spreadsheets, interviews, and manual documentation to conduct investigations. This fragmented approach leads to inconsistent outputs, limited data integration, and weak cross-incident learning. Key insights are locked within individual reports rather than contributing to organisational learning.

Jumping to solutions too early
Under pressure to resolve issues quickly, investigation teams often movedirectly to corrective actions before fully understanding causal relationships.Without a clear chain of cause and effect, corrective actions may addresssurface-level issues while leaving root causes unresolved.

Inability to learn across multiple incidents
Isolated investigations rarely deliver enterprise-level learning. Without consistent taxonomies, data structures, and analysis across investigations, organisations cannot identify systemic patterns that emerge across business units, locations, or time. Repeat failures continue, often for years, because organisations are not seeing the broader patterns hidden across individual events.

Lack of defensibility and external confidence
In regulated industries, investigations must not only deliver internal learning but also withstand scrutiny from regulators, auditors, insurers, and external stakeholders. When investigations lack consistent structure, transparency, and auditability, confidence in findings can be undermined, exposing organisations to reputational and legal risk.

How COMET bridges the gaps in root cause learning
COMET was purpose-built to resolve the persistent investigation weaknesses that limit many organisations. Rather than relying on standalone tools or investigator-dependent methods, COMET embeds a structured and consistent investigation approach directly into every analysis, ensuring that systemic, human, organisational, and technical contributors are fully explored. By unifying investigation processes across sites, teams, and functions, COMET enables organisations to build defensible, repeatable investigations that go beyond symptoms and deliver meaningful organisational learning.

As investigations become more complex and enterprise risks expand, COMET gives leadership the visibility, confidence, and consistency required to turn individual incidents into organisation-wide insight. Whether managing high-risk operations, regulatory compliance, or continuous improvement, COMET provides a scalable investigation system that strengthens governance and resilience at every level. To see COMET in action, you can explore our on-demand demo, request a free guided trial, or learn more about ourstructured investigation platform.

Watch the on-demand demo
Start your free guided trial
Learn more about COMET Investigations and RCA

Moving from activity to learning
The most common failure in root cause analysis is not lack of investigation. It is the failure to transform investigation activity into organisational learning. Without structure, consistency, defensibility, and enterprise-level transparency, even the most well-intended investigations risk repeating the same limitations.

COMET was designed to ensure organisations break this cycle. By delivering a fully integrated root cause investigation system that embeds structure into every stage of the process, COMET helps organisations move from fragmented investigations to consistent, enterprise-wide learning that protects people, assets, reputation and operational performance.