In practical problem solving, we normally move from the problem to the

cause and finally to the corrective action. However, we must recognise

that on many occasions, the manifestation of a particular problem does not
necessarily have a unique and identifiable cause and so there may be other
intermediate steps to take into account in determining the real cause of the
problem. This situation can be described schematically as follows:
Problem-primary cause-contributing factors-corrective action
Or in more simple terms as:
What is seen-why-because of-corrective action
The basic process becomes apparent if we consider two examples of
problems in breadmaking; the first low-bread volume and the second
collapse of the sides of an open top pan loaf, often referred to as �keyholing�
(see page 4).
1.1.1 Low-bread volume
Externally, we observe that the bread is smaller than we expect, and this
may also have led to a paler crust colour due to the poorer heat transfer to
the dough surface during baking. Internally, the cell structure may be more
open than usual.
As bread volume is a consequence of the expansion of the dough by carbon
dioxide gas from yeast fermentation and the retention of that gas within
the dough matrix (Cauvain, 2015), there are two potential primary causes of
this problem # Lack of gas production and lack of gas retention. To separate
the two, we will need more observations, and an important one will be
whether the rate of expansion of the dough in the prover and oven was normal
or lower than usual. If the former was the case, then the primary cause
of the problem is likely to be lack of gas production and potential contributing
factors may include the following:
# yeast activity or level too low;
# lack of yeast substrate (food);
# dough temperature too low;
# proving temperature too low;
# proving time too short;
# salt level too high;
# proving temperature/time/yeast combination incorrect.