Causes and Effect Diagrams in Quality Management

Causes and Effect Diagrams in Quality Management CAUSE EFFECT DIAGRM IN INDUSTRY Definition of Cause Effect Diagram The cause effect diagram is the brainchild of Kaoru Ishikawa, who pioneered quality management processes in the Kawasaki shipyards, and in the process became one of the founding fathers of modern management. The cause and effect diagram is used to explore all the potential or real causes (or inputs) that result in a single effect (or output). Causes are arranged according to their level of importance or detail, resulting in a depiction of relationships and hierarchy of events. This can help you search for root causes, identify areas where there may be problems, and compare the relative importance of different causes. Causes in a cause effect diagram are frequently arranged into four major categories. While these categories can be anything, you will often see: manpower, methods, materials, and machinery (recommended for manufacturing) equipment, policies, procedures, and people (recommended for administration and service). These guidelines can be helpful but should not be used if they limit the diagram or are inappropriate. The categories you use should suit your needs. At SkyMark, we often create the branches of the cause and effect tree from the titles of the affinity sets in a preceding affinity diagram. The CE diagram is also known as the fishbone diagram because it was drawn to resemble the skeleton of a fish, with the main causal categories drawn as bones attached to the spine of the fish, as shown below. The fishbone diagram, as originally drawn by Kaoru Ishikawa, is the classic way of displaying root causes of an observed effect Cause effect diagrams can also be drawn as tree diagrams, resembling a tree turned on its side. From a single outcome or trunk, branches extend that represent major categories of inputs or causes that create that single outcome. These large branches then lead to smaller and smaller branches of causes all the way down to twigs at the ends. The tree structure has an advantage over the fishbone-style diagram. As a fishbone diagram becomes more and more complex, it becomes difficult to find and compare items that are the same distance from the effect because they are dispersed over the diagram. With the tree structure, all items on the same causal level are aligned vertically. History Ishikawa diagram, in fishbone shape, showing factors of Equipment, Process, People, Materials, Environment and Management, all affecting the overall problem. Smaller arrows connect the sub-causes to major causes. Ishikawa diagrams were proposed by Kaoru Ishikawa in the 1960s, who pioneered quality management processes in the Kawasaki shipyards, and in the process became one of the founding fathers of modern management. It was first used in the 1960s, and is considered one of the seven basic tools of quality control. It is known as a fishbone diagram because of its shape, similar to the side view of a fish skeleton. Mazda Motors famously used an Ishikawa diagram in the development of the Miata sports car, where the required result was Jinba Ittai or Horse and Rider as One. The main causes included such aspects as touch and braking with the lesser causes including highly granular factors such as 50/50 weight distribution and able to rest elbow on top of drivers door. Every factor identified in the diagram was included in the final design. The Cause Effect (CE) diagram, also sometimes called the ‘fishbone diagram, is a tool for discovering all the possible causes for a particular effect. The effect being examined is normally some troublesome aspect of product or service quality, such as a machined part not to specification, delivery times varying too widely, excessive number of bugs in software under development, and so on, but the effect may also relate to internal processes such as high rate of team failures. The major purpose of the CE Diagram is to act as a first step in problem solving by generating a comprehensive list of possible causes. It can lead to immediate identification of major causes and point to the potential remedial actions or, failing this, it may indicate the best potential areas for further exploration and analysis. At a minimum, preparing a CE Diagram will lead to greater The CE Diagram was invented by Professor Kaoru Ishikawa of Tokyo University, a highly regarded Japanese expert in quality management. He first used it in 1943 to help explain to a group of engineers at Kawasaki Steel Works how a complex set of factors could be related to help understand a problem. CE Diagrams have since become a standard tool of analysis in Japan and in the West in conjunction with other analytical and problem-solving tools and techniques. CE Diagrams are also often called Ishikawa Diagrams, after their inventor, or Fishbone Diagrams because the diagram itself can look like the skeleton of a fish. Typical categories are: The 4 Ms (used in manufacturing) understanding of the problem. Machine (Technology) Method (Process/Inspection) Material (Raw, Consumables etc.) Man Power (physical work)/Mind Power (Brain Work): Kaizens, Suggestions The 8 Ps (used in service industry) Product=Service Price Place Promotion People Process Physical Evidence Productivity Quality The 4 Ss (used in service industry) Surroundings Suppliers Systems Skills More Ms Mother Nature (Environment) Measurement (Inspection) Maintenance Money Power Management Why Use a Cause Effect Diagram? A cause effect diagram helps to determine the causes of a problem or quality characteristic using a structured approach. It encourages group participation and utilizes team knowledge of the process. It uses an orderly, easy-to-read format to diagram cause-and-effect relationships. It increases knowledge of the process by helping everyone to learn more about the factors at work and how they relate. It indicates possible causes of variation in a process and identifies areas where data should be collected for further study. Example of cause effect diagram How to draw CE diagram in industries This is a three step process. Step 1 Write down the effect to be investigated and draw the backbone arrow to it. In the example shown below the effect is Incorrect deliveries. Step 2 Identify all the broad areas of enquiry in which the causes of the effect being investigated may lie. For incorrect deliveries the diagram may then become: For manufacturing processes, the broad areas of enquiry which are most often used are Materials (raw materials), Equipment (machines and tools), Workers (methods of work), and Inspection (measuring method). Step 3 This step requires the greatest amount of work and imagination because it requires you (or you and your team) to write in all the detailed possible causes in each of the broad areas of enquiry. Each cause identified should be fully explored for further more specific causes which, in turn, contribute to them. You continue this process of branching off into more and more directions until every possible cause has been identified. The final result will represent a sort of a mind dump of all the factors relating to the effect being explored and the relationships between them. Different types of CE Diagram There are three different types of CE Diagram. The basic type explained above is called the Dispersion analysis type. The other two are the Production process classification type and the Cause enumeration type. Production classification type This type differs from the basic type above in that each discrete stage in the production process leading up to the effect being examined is shown along the main arrow or backbone of the diagram. Possible causes are then shown as branches off these as shown in the illustration overleaf. This type of CE Diagram is often easier to construct and understand because those involved are already familiar with each of the production steps identified. Cause enumeration type This is not so much a different type of diagram but a different method of constructing a diagram. Instead of building up a chart gradually (starting with the backbone, deciding broad areas, then adding more and more branches), you postpone drawing the chart and simply list all the possible causes first. Then draw the chart in order to relate the causes to each other. This method has the advantage that the list of possible causes will be more comprehensive because the process has a more free-form nature. The disadvantage is that it is more difficult to draw the diagram from this list rather than from scratch. This method of drawing a CE Diagram can be used in conjunction with Brainstorming by using it to distil the brainstorm output down into a logical and useable set of information. Good and bad CE diagrams A good CE diagram is one which explores all possibilities so it is likely to be large and complex-looking as twig after twig sprouts for each new related idea noted down. Be suspicious of CE Diagrams with few factors, or which are neat and well ordered. These may reflect a lack of knowledge of the situation, or show that the effort to draw the diagram was not creative and exhaustive enough. The cause and effect diagram can also be drawn with right angles, which makes it less tangled, and easier to see what layer of causality is being considered at any given time. How to Use the Tool in cause and effect diagram : Follow these steps to solve a problem with a Cause and Effect Diagram: 1. Identify the problem: Write down the exact problem you face in detail. Where appropriate identify who is involved, what the problem is, and when and where it occurs. Write the problem in a box on the left hand side of a large sheet of paper. Draw a line across the paper horizontally from the box. This arrangement, looking like the head and spine of a fish, gives you space to develop ideas. 2. Work out the major factors involved: Next identify the factors that may contribute to the problem. Draw lines off the spine for each factor, and label it. These may be people involved with the problem, systems, equipment, materials, external forces, etc. Try to draw out as many possible factors as possible. If you are trying to solve the problem as part of a group, then this may be a good time for some brainstorming. Using the Fish bone analogy, the factors you find can be thought of as the bones of the fish. 3. Identify possible causes: For each of the factors you considered in stage 2, brainstorm possible causes of the problem that may be related to the factor. Show these as smaller lines coming off the bones of the fish. Where a cause is large or complex, then it may be best to break the it down into sub-causes. Show these as lines coming off each cause line. 4. Analyze your diagram: By this stage you should have a diagram showing all the possible causes of your problem that you can think of. Depending on the complexity and importance of the problem, you can now investigate the most likely causes further. This may involve setting up investigations, carrying out surveys, etc. These will be designed to test whether your assessments are correct. There are three main applications of cause-and-effect diagrams in industries: 1. Cause enumeration is one of the most widely used graphical techniques for quality control and improvement. Sometime it may be very difficult to determine the primary causes to be included in the diagram. If that is the case, after we have determined the characteristic or effect we are examining, we follow these steps: †¢ Use brainstorming to create a list of all the possible causes. The list will contain a mixture of primary, secondary and tertiary (or big bone, middle sized bone and small bone) causes. †¢ Sort the list by grouping causes that are related. †¢ Identify or name each major grouping and make your cause-and-effect diagram. (Thus cause enumeration facilitates the identification of root causes because all conceivable causes are listed.) †¢ Machine, Manpower, Material, Measurement, Method and Environment are frequently used major causes that can apply to many processes. 2. In Dispersion analysis, each major cause is thoroughly analyzed by investigating the sub-causes and their impact on the quality characteristics (or effect) in question. The key to this diagrams effectiveness lies in the reiteration of the question, Why does this dispersion (cause) occur? This diagram helps us outlining the reasons for any variability, or dispersion. Unlike cause enumeration where smaller causes that are considered insignificant are still listed, in dispersion analysis, causes that dont fit the selected categories are not listed. In other words, sometimes small causes are not isolated or observed. Consequently, it is possible that some root causes will not be identified in dispersion analysis. 3. When cause-and-effect diagrams are constructed for process analysis, the emphasis is on listing the causes in the sequence in which the operations are actually conducted. The advantage of this diagram is that, since it follows the sequence of the production process, it is easy to assemble and understand. The disadvantage is that similar causes appear again and again, and causes due to a combination of more than one factor are difficult to illustrate. Fishbone diagram Uses of cause effect diagram in industries:- Use your diagram to develop a common understanding of the factors potentially influencing or causing a quality problem. Use your diagram as a road map for collecting data to verify the causal relationship of various factors to the characteristic. Continue to annotate and modify your diagram as you verify relationships and learn more. Using a cause-and-effect diagram this way will help you to see which factors in your process need to be checked, modified or eliminated Example The example below shows a Cause Effect diagram drawn by a manager who is having trouble getting cooperation from a branch office If the manager had not thought the problem through, he might have dealt with the problem by assuming that people were being difficult. Instead he might think that the best approach is to arrange a meeting with the Branch Manager. This would allow him to brief the manager fully, and talk through any problems that he may be facing. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES ADVANTAGES Fishbone diagrams permit a thoughtful analysis that avoids overlooking any possible root causes for a need. The fishbone technique is easy to implement and creates an easy†to†understand visual representation of the causes, categories of causes, and the need. By using a fishbone diagram, you are able to focus the group on the Ê ºbig pictureÊ º as to possible causes or factors influencing the problem/need. Even after the need has been addressed, the fishbone diagram shows areas of weakness that † once exposed † can be rectified before causing more sustained difficulties. DISADVANTAGES The simplicity of a fishbone diagram can be both its strength and its weakness. As a weakness, the  simplicity of the fishbone diagram may make it difficult to represent the truly interrelated nature of problems and causes in some very complex situations. Unless you have an extremely large space on which to draw and develop the fishbone diagram, you may find that you are not able to explore the cause and effect relationships in as much detail as you would like to.

Alberti and urban context

Among Renaissance architects, Leon Batista Alberti was perhaps the most visionary authority on urban context and city planning.Though he was not an urban planner in the modern sense, he had a keen understanding of the city as an integrated, organic whole, and his designs and writings reveal his view that cities should be well-ordered and buildings should integrate themselves smoothly into that overall fabric.   In this regard, he was well ahead of his time and anticipated the ideas of urban context that exist today.Despite his visionary skill and prowess at architecture, Alberti (1404-72) was actually not a professional architect and seems never to have actually even supervised the construction of any of his works.   He was a polymath, or â€Å"Renaissance man† – cultured, well-educated, and well-versed in various academic fields, from art and religion to science and mathematics.According to art historians Ludwig Heydenreich and Wolfgang Lotz, Alberti â€Å"remaine d to the end the adviser who laid down the general lines and occasionally gave instruction for details . . . but he never set one stone on another.†[1]   Biographer Anthony Grafton’s description is even more to the point – â€Å"an impresario of society and space.†[2]Indeed, Alberti lacked the practical building experience most contemporary architects had, mainly because he was trained to advise and administer rather than actually build.   Born illegitimate but privileged in Genoa, he was well-educated as a youth and in 1428 took both a degree in canon law and orders in the Catholic Church.For much of the remainder of his life, Alberti served as an administrator and advisor to the popes, most notably Nicholas V, a friend from youth, who hired him to consult on major building projects in Rome.   Though mostly a career church administrator, Alberti pursued a wide array of intellectual interests and â€Å"presented himself as a master of all the ration al arts of living upon which his contemporaries set great store.†[3]In accordance with the Renaissance’s reverence for ancient Greek and Roman models, Alberti drew heavily from antiquity – not merely for decoration (which he believed should be used sparingly and tastefully, not simply for the sake of decoration alone), but for proportion and, more importantly, placement within a given physical and historical context.For example, in one of his first major works, the church of San Francesco at Rimini (whose renovation and redesign he supervised around 1450), Alberti used exterior motifs drawn from the area’s ancient monuments, varying these to suit the building itself and thus let it reflect the local architectural, cultural, and political contexts.The church’s faà §ade uses simple forms and a scale suited to the buildings around it, because, says Heydenreich, no single person’s vision would dominate that setting: â€Å"[It] was the product o f a collaboration between patron, adviser, and working architects. . . . ‘Local styles’ of this kind occasionally appear, but only where the political structure of the region favours them. . . .†[4]   In this sense, he heralded the post-modernists of the late twentieth century, who believe in urban fabric and context rather simply in designing buildings with no relationship to their surroundings.Alberti’s works in Florence between 1455 and 1470 demonstrate, in Heydenreich’s words, â€Å"[how] deeply the traditional forces in a city can influence the idiom of an architect.†[5]   There, his church of Santa Maria Novello draws heavily from local Tuscan styles and fuses them with a large Roman scale (as mandated by the Pope), making a distinctive building that fits with its prominent neighboring structures.(Though he used local elements freely, Alberti rarely directly imitated other buildings; when he borrowed forms or elements, he tended to f use them with those on nearby structures.)   Also, and perhaps more importantly, it embraces a unity of design, both within itself and in relation to the buildings around it, so that it does not appear incongruous or artificially imposed on its immediate context.Alberti also aimed to site buildings according to surveys he conducted, in keeping with his mathematical and cartographic skills.   Using a measuring disk he created, his survey of Rome (conducted around 1444, when he first entered architecture) â€Å"allowed him to establish the radial coordinates of Rome’s main churches and the towers on the city walls and to plot those in plan.†[1] L Heydenreich & W Lotz, Architecture in Italy, 1400 to 1600, Penguin, London, 1974, p. 27. [2] A Grafton, Leon Batista Alberti, Hill & Wang, New York, 2000, p. 263. [3] Grafton, p. 21. [4] Heydenreich & Lotz, p. 32. [5] Heydenreich & Lotz, p. 33. [6] R Tavernor, On Alberti and the art of building, Yale University Press, New Ha ven, 1998, p. 13.

Nursing in Perspectives

Nursing is a profound profession which requires professional skills and knowledge, high level of expertise and managerial skills. Following Parker & Clare (2006): â€Å"Critical thinking is a vital skill to have as a nurse. Nurses are engaged in providing care to people who have a right to high quality professional conduct and health services (p296).Applied to nursing profession, critical thinking aims to improve healthcare services through new methods and self-developed professional skills of nurses. Critical thinking combines the ability to meet the requirement of a new age and respond effectively to technological innovations and scientific discoveries. Changing economic environment and globalization process has a great impact on the nursing science, and compel to specify concepts of management and its fields. During the last decades, the definitions of critical thinking in nursing have been changes. For instance, Ennis & Milman in 1985 defined critical thinking in nursing as â€Å"reasonable, reflective thinking focused on what to believe or do† (Critical Thinking in Nursing 2007). In five years, McPeck, (1990) defined it as: â€Å"the propensity to engage in an activity with reflective skepticism† (Critical Thinking in Nursing 2007). Monitoring was an important method that helped to search for new trends in nursing. Today, nurses take into account internal and external factors that influence a patient. The most recent explanation of critical thinking is proposed by the University of New Mexico (2007): â€Å"nursing utilizes critical thinking as diagnostic reasoning and professional or clinical judgment. Critical thinking in nursing is based on a triggering event or situation, a starting point, scaffolds, processes, and outcomes that make up a continuous or iterative feedback loop† (Critical Thinking in Nursing 2007). In modern world, critical thinking in nursing is a broad concept with include advanced knowledge and discovering, creativity and passion, authenticity and ability to foresee coming changes. Critical thinking in nursing aims to extend traditional nursing roles in order to keep abreast of time and rapidly changing technology. Daniels (2004) underlines that it may be exercised as an attribute of position or because of personal knowledge or wisdom. Modern nurses see themselves more as conservators and regulators of the exist ­ing order of affairs with which they identify, and from which they gain rewards. Critical thinking helps to create a sense of identity which does not depend upon membership or work roles. On the one hand, nursing gendered identity and cultural identity has a great impact on their skills and ability to deliver high quality service. Many problems associated with the relationships between people of different cultures stem from variations in norms and values. Modern society is marked by cultural diversity problems which influence healthcare services and service delivery. Critical thinking is crucial for culturally competent nurse because it helps to communicate with diverse clients and meet their needs. For instance, Hindus and Asians share specific beliefs as for parts of the body and health, and in this case a nurse should take into account cultural and religious practices of these patients. Following Dreher and Macnaughton (2002): â€Å"the health care system has nested the accountability for cultural competency with the clinician who provides direct services to individuals, where the application of cultural information is likely to be least useful† (p181). For a nurse, the key advantages of convergence are that ideas and techniques developed in one cultural or national setting may be transferred to another and used effectively. These variables shape the values and hence the behavior of people (Potter & Perry, 2005). Critical thinking determines the quality of decisions and actions of a nurse. A higher level of professional autonomy and shared governance should be seen as the main features of critical thinking. Critical thinking is exercised through greater knowledge and exper ­tise. It may also be based on the per ­sonal qualities of the nurse and the manner in which authority is exercised. In contrast to traditional theories of nursing leadership, nursing expert power is based on new knowledge about technology and critical thinking used in nursing profession. Critical thinking is based on credibility and clear evidence of knowledge or expertise; for example, the expert knowledge of ‘functional' specialists. Stone (2000) states that if the information is satisfactorily ascertained from secondary sources, the nurse opts to complete this component of the assessment by relying on past records. Documentary data obtained from patients' records is often termed ‘secondary' because the information has originally been collected by other people and for other purposes. Thus, critical thinking determines further actions and behavior patterns which support clinical and service development. In several decades ago, nurses were limited by strict rules and tasks which prevented them to respond effectively to changing environment (Potter & Perry 2005). Today, technology and information technology demands critical thinking and decision making in nursing (Sharp, 2000). Also, there is a great shift in organizational values and personal traits of the nurses. Changing social environment influences human values and conflicts with human dignity and importance (Sullivan & Decker, 2005). The balance of power has undoubtedly shifted to nurses who have more choice over how to conducts relationships with their administration, colleagues and patients. Critical thinking in nursing is aimed to improve influences on the environment and determine perspectives of further development on the macro- and micro- level. In this situation, to be an effective and professional nurse, it is necessary to exercise the role of critical thinker based on advanced knowledge and expertise (Durgahee, 2003). A common view is that the job of the nurse requires the ability of critical thinking and that leadership is in effect a sub-set of management. In terms of critical thinking, there is a need to be flexible and be ready to innovate and to adopt new technologies as they come along. The way in which healthcare organization has to employ the latest technology can be an important determinant of its competitive advantage. For instance, increased role of computers and technological solutions require new skills and decision making practices in medicine. For instance, if technology does not work properly and it threatens life of a patient, a nurse should react accordingly to the situation and replace it with alternative solution (Kozier et al 2004). Critics (Sullivan & Decker, 2005) admit that three decades ago nurses were not ready and prepared to apply critical thinking to their work and this led to high death rates caused by technology failure. Healthcare is one of the main industries responsible for exceptional service quality and interpersonal communication. Service quality is determined by technological processes and innovations in its field. Critical thinking has speeded up health delivery processes, transformed working practices and increased the efficiency of healthcare services. Interestingly, it is in the technological environment that it is some ­times possible for large healthcare organizations to actually exert influence rather than be the recipients of it. Respect and personal worth of every patient are the core human-related factors employed by the nurses (Garrison 2004). Nursing staff is responsible for communication and interaction with the patients. For this reason, nurses should be flexible to respond effectively to changing environment and customers groups. As a result, high degree of autonomy cannot be effectively used by all nursing staff. Healthcare organizations start to apply ‘critical thinking’ into practice seeing it as a high level of specialist practice and competitive advantage in healthcare services. Also, critical thinking in nursing is concerned with those activities involved in recruiting of professional staff, training, and development within the healthcare infrastructure, namely the systems of planning, finance, medical service control, etc. which are crucially important to an strategic capability in all healthcare activities (Potter & Perry, 2005). Today, a special attention is given to proper function of medical staff and empowerment which helps to improve efficiency of medical practice. Critical thinking is one of the main requirements in modern service learning. In learning, â€Å"critical thinking [is] a reasoning process reflecting on ideas, actions, and decisions in clinical experience by the nursing student and others (Anaya et al 2003, p99). The advantages of critical thinking in nursing are fast response to changing conditions and environment and ability to apply recent technologies into practice. It increases confidence of nurses and level of healthcare services. Using critical thinking approach, nurses are able to shift the situation using these new creative approaches based on advanced relationships and inquiry. Also, it is strongly influenced by resources outside the healthcare organization which are an integral part of the chain of activities between the healthcare service design and the level of medial treatment (Sharp, 2000). Change is a threat to routine and their role in healthcare management. It is also true that many nurses do not know what their role is, and in recent years attempts have been made to clarify individual roles. Critical thinking is ‘a vital skill’ for nurses because it determines the style of management and leadership. Critical thinking can be interpreted as a response to the need to meet heightened customer expectations and face intensi ­fied technology solutions. Critical thinking encourages nurses to adopt a positive attitude and have personal involvement in service delivery. Also, it allows healthcare organization to expose nursing staff to new forms of service and management. Critical thinking is constructed on a rational basis and allows nurses respond to patients’ needs in an appropriate manner. For a modern nurse, it is crucial to be accountable to patients' families, and close friends who come to visit them. References 1.   Anaya, A., Doheny, M.O., Panthofer, N., Sedlak, C.A. (2003). Critical Thinking in Students' Service-Learning Experiences. College Teaching, 51 (3), 99-104. 2. Critical Thinking in Nursing The University of New Mexico (2007). Retrieved 31 May 2007, from   http://hsc.unm.edu/consg/conct/whatis.shtml 3.   Daniels, R. (2004). Nursing Fundamentals: Caring and Clinical Decision Making, Thomas Learning, Oregon. 4. Dreher, N., Macnaughton, N. (2002). Cultural competency in nursing: foundation or fallacy? Nursing Outlook, Sep-Oct; 50 (5):181-6. 5.   Durgahee, T. (2003). Higher level practice: degree of specialist practice? Nurse Education Today. Apr; 23 (3), 191-201. 6. Garrison, D.R., Morgan, D.H., Johnson, J.G. (2004). Thriving in chaos: Educating the nurse leaders of the future. Nursing Leadership Forum. Fall; 9 (1), 23-27. 7. Kozier B., Erb G., Berman A. & Snyder S. (2004). Fundamentals of Nursing: Concepts, Process and Practice, New Jersey, Pearson Education Inc. 8. Potter, P. & Perry, A. (2005). Fundamentals of Nursing. Elsevier PTE LTD, Singapore. 9.   Sharp, Nancy. (April 2000). The 21st century belongs to nurse practitioners. Nurse Practitioner, p. 56 10. Sullivan, E.J., Decker, Ph. J. (2005). Effective leadership & Management in Nursing 6th ed. Pearson Hall.   

A Brief Note On Death And Dying Project - 1241 Words

Patricia Plumb Dr. Klingenberg Developmental Phycology 250 April 15, 2015 Death and Dying Project Every culture has their own way to deal with the dying and dead. Some like to bury their dead, some will cremate, and others will just leave the body in the open. Every culture has their own special and specific way to do things. Some might mourn and others will celebrate. In Vietnam when a person is about to die family comes and visits, this is the moment of silence. The olds son or daughter would then bend over to hear the persons last dying words. At this time the oldest member of the family would then suggest a new name for the person, because it is bad luck to keep the same name that you had when you where alive. Vietnamese men usually†¦show more content†¦The funeral would normally be held three days after the person had died. On the day of the funeral, friends and family would have a memorial dinner. Then, on the ninth day, when the soul is believed to leave the body, a special church service and dinner are held. Fourteen days after the person has died, the soul is said to depart for the other world, and a service and dinner party are again held. At every one of these parties, a glass of vodka covered by a piece of black bread is left for the deceased. This would be the opposite of the traditional Russian custom of breaking black bread when meeting someone for the first time. Traditionally the person’s body would lay untouched and uncovered for the three days until the burial; however, cremations are becoming more popular because of how inexpensive they are. People would wear weeds, or drab clothing in black, to prevent the dead from returning. Covering the head in a black kerchief and wearing black continues for 40 days after the death. People also cover mirrors, stop watches, and take the TV from the room where the body lies in wait. When the body is carried to be buried its carried with its legs extended forward and done so that no part of the body touches the house on its way out, because of the fear that the dead will return to their home and take someone with them. Lakota parents often say to their children, Be kind to your brother, for someday he will die. The