Why Traditional Brainstorming for Failure Modes Falls Short

FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis) is a cornerstone of reliability engineering—but the way we often approach it is outdated. Teams spend weeks or even months in workshops, trying to predict what could go wrong. While this seems thorough, it has major limitations.

1. Brainstorming Relies on Assumptions

Traditional FMEA sessions depend on human experience and imagination. This means:

• You only capture what your team knows or thinks might happen.

• Rare or emerging failure modes are often missed.

• Bias creeps in—people focus on familiar problems, not unknown risks.

2. FMEA Is Not “Set and Forget”

Many organisations treat FMEA as a one-time exercise. In reality:

• Systems evolve, operating conditions change, and new technologies introduce new risks.

• A static FMEA quickly becomes outdated.

• Without continuous updates, your risk analysis loses relevance.

3. The Cost of Missed Failures

When brainstorming misses critical failure modes:

• Maintenance strategies become reactive instead of proactive.

• Unexpected downtime and safety incidents occur.

• The cost of failure skyrockets compared to the cost of prevention.

The Better Way: Data-Driven Failure Mode Discovery

Instead of guessing, leverage real-world data:

• Instant access to actual failure cases from global industries.

• AI-powered filtering to remove noise and highlight relevant risks.

• Continuous updates so your FMEA evolves with your system.

Bottom Line

Brainstorming alone is not enough. FMEA should be a living tool, enriched by real-world insights and modern technology. By combining expert judgment with data-driven intelligence, you create a proactive, resilient reliability strategy.