Genrich Altshuller, or Hank, as I like to call him, was a Russian engineer, scientist, journalist, and writer who once embarked on a mission to establish a set of generic rules to explain the conception of new, patentable ideas. After studying hundreds of thousands of patents, Altshuller discovered that there are only about 1,500 basic problems, each of which can be solved by applying one or more of the 40 Universal Answers.
Altshuller called his theory TRIZ, the Russian acronym for the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving. He referred to the solutions as principles, rather than answers. His original intention for TRIZ was to solve engineering and design issues, however, the principles of TRIZ are now being successfully applied to both social issues and business dilemmas. TRIZ is a set of tools, or as I like to call them, lenses, for generating innovative ideas and solutions.
I refer to the 40 Answers or Principles as lenses because most people find it easier to examine the problem when they can look through the magnifying lens of TRIZ to see the solution. I encourage people to ask themselves, “Which lens can I use to solve this problem?”, or “How would I solve this problem if I were looking at it through this lens?”
In contrast to brainstorming techniques that rely on random idea generation, TRIZ is designed to create an algorithmic approach to the invention of new systems and the refinement of old systems.
At the foundation of TRIZ is this underlying principle:
“Somebody someplace has already solved this problem (or one very similar to it). Creativity is now finding that solution and adapting it to this particular problem.”
TRIZ relies on three basic findings:
1. Problems and solutions are repeated across industries and sciences. The classification of the contradictions in each problem predicts the creative solutions to that problem.
2. Patterns of technical evolution are repeated across industries and sciences.
3. Creative innovations use scientific effects outside the field where they were developed.
A thorough understanding of TRIZ involves learning the repeating patterns of problem solutions, the patterns of technical evolution, and the methods of scientific effects, and then applying the TRIZ patterns to a specific solution. The chart below illustrates this process in simpler terms.
A fundamental element of TRIZ lies in the recognition that contradictions should be eliminated. These contradictions are broken into two categories:
1. Technical contradictions, or classical “trade-offs” are an obstacle to the desired solution because something else in the system prevents the desired solution. In other words, when one thing gets better, another element gets worse. For example:
a. The product gets stronger (good), but the weight increases (bad).
b. Service is customized to each customer (good,) but the service delivery system becomes more complex (bad).
2. Physical or “inherent” contradictions are situations in which one object or system has contradictory, or opposite requirements. For example:
a. Software should be complex in order to include many features, but should be simple enough for the average user to learn.
b. Coffee should be served hot, but cold enough to prevent burning the customer.
Altshuller said, “Inventing is the removal of a technical contradiction with the help of certain principles.” He believed that in order to develop a “method” for the process of inventing, the individual must examine a great number of inventions, identify the underlying contradictions, and formulate the principle used by the inventor to remove the underlying contradictions.
The problem with TRIZ is that the concepts are usually taught by PhDs who get caught up in the technical definitions. The principles are complex, and these educators do nothing to simplify them for the average person in need of real answers.
Comments