TRIZ + TOC

®

TOCICO 2007 Conference

TOCICO CONFERENCE 2007
*
TRIZ for Jonahs

Presented By: David Bergland, Avraham Y. Goldratt Institute
Date: November 5, 2007
* pronounced trees
© 2007 A.Y Goldratt Institute 1

The Need to Speed and Focus Innovation

The Need for Speed:

“If the 1980s were about quality and the 1990s were about
reengineering, then the 2000s will be about velocity.”
Business @ the Speed of Thought by Bill Gates, 1999.

Theory of Constraints (TOC) Solutions are already providing
SPEED WITH DIRECTION strategies for developing, producing
and delivering.

In this talk we will focus on improving the speed to invent.

Invent Develop Produce Deliver

© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute 2

The Product Innovation Dilemma

We must In order to We must

Get to the Accept
In order to
market design
quickly compromises
Create a
successful == Is in direct conflict with

new product We must In order to We must

Deliver Avoid
significant design
improvements compromises

The injection is to use TOC with TRIZ to BREAK THE MARKET
CONSTRAINT by “Getting to the market quickly” without
“Accepting design compromises”

How can we Break the Product
Innovation Dilemma

We will speed and focus innovation by:
• Using the Theory of Constraints (TOC) to focus the Russian
Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ) to rapidly create new
products and services that require:
− Breakthrough Inventions
− Unrefusable, Implementable Offers to the market (UROs)
− Contradiction Analysis / Conflict Resolution
− Innovative Thinking
• This should help satisfy the “Need for Speed” in the first link of
the chain



What is TRIZ?

• A name for the Russian “Theory of Inventive Problem
Solving”
− The letters T, R, I, Z form an English acronym for the Russian
words Teoriya Resheniya Izobretatelskikh Zadatch that means,
“Theory of the Solution of Inventive Problems”
• A methodical process for knowledge-based innovation
originally developed by Genrich (Henry) Altshuller (1926-1998)
in the USSR
− Classification of inventions was started in 1946 when he was
employed in the patent department of the Soviet navy
− Proved “Inventive problems can be codified, classified, and
solved methodically, just like other engineering problems.”


Has TRIZ Been Useful?

“ I believe that TRIZ is the reason the Soviet
Union was able to stay as close to the United
States as it did during the Cold War even
though they had only one tenth the
computing resources.” [1]
Eli Goldratt


Today’s TRIZ is Based on the Abstraction of
Knowledge from over 3 Million Patents

Patents
Worldwide (est.) [5] Some Key Findings
~3,0 T
00,0 • Definition of inventive problem
R
00 A
• Levels of invention N
S
• Patterns of evolution F
• Patterns of invention E
~600
, 000 R
A
B
L
E

General Purpose
Principles

© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute[5]
© Ideation International 2007 7

How can the General Purpose Principles help
you find a Solution to Your Problem?

Operators
TRIZ General TRIZ General
Problem Solution

Abstraction Specialization

Your specific Trial and Error Your specific
problem solution

The TRIZ tools follow the upper path


Why TRIZ Works for Inventive Problems

Three Key Discoveries:
1. Problems and solutions were repeated across
industries and sciences.
2. Patterns of technical evolution were repeated
across industries and sciences.
3. Innovations used scientific effects outside the field
where they were developed.


When is an Inventive Solution Required?

Known means to address the problem exist but
they require breaking one or more contradictions
No known means exist to address the problem –
we need to come up with something new. [5]

In TRIZ there are two types of contradictions:
In TRIZ there are two types of contradictions:
technical and physical
technical and physical

Convert
Relate to the 39 Parameters Apply 4 Separation Principles
Apply the 40 Inventive Principles • Separation in time
• Separation in space
• Separation between the
parts and the whole
• Separation upon conditions

Technical Contradictions

• An improvement in one system characteristic results
in the deterioration of another
− Example: Acceleration of a car vs. economical operation

• Traditionally, technical contradictions are resolved by
trade-off or compromise
• Both TOC and TRIZ have techniques for resolving
contradictions without the use of trade-offs or
compromise
• The 40 Innovation Principles can augment TOC
methods for finding injections that break clouds
where there is a technical contradiction


Physical Contradictions

• A characteristic must be higher and lower (self-
opposing)
− Example: An airplane wing should have large area
for easy takeoff but small area for higher speed

• A characteristic must be present and absent
− Example: Aircraft landing gears are needed for
landing but undesired in flight

• The 4 Separation Principles can often be used
to resolve process contradictions as well as
physical contradictions.

Levels of Invention

Inventive Solutions
(which break contradictions)
are in level 3 and level 4

Level 5: Discovery (1%)
levels of innovation
Moving to higher

Level 4: Invention outside the paradigm (4%)

Level 3: Invention inside the paradigm (18%)

Level 2: Improvement (45%)

Level 1: Apparent solution (no innovation) (32%)


Patterns of Invention

• Altshuller recognized that the same fundamental
problem (contradiction) had been addressed by a
number of inventions in different areas of
technology.
• He also observed that the same fundamental
solutions were used over and over again, often
separated by many years.
• He reasoned that if the latter innovator had had
knowledge of the earlier solution, their task would
have been straightforward.


The TRIZ for JONAHS approach: Leverage
TRIZ and TOC Knowledge

TRIZ can: • TOC can:
− Model cause-effect − Model cause-effect
relationships between relationships between
useful and harmful useful and harmful
functions, events and effects in very focused
conditions in very flexible ways
ways using software − Focus TRIZ on options
− Generate a voluminous addressing core
set of solution directions problem(s) and key
to explore using standard leverage points
solutions, principles and − Clearly verbalize
scientific effects contradictions and their
− Suggest injections for underlying assumptions
breaking contradictions − Verify the completeness
and power of a solution

The TRIZ for JONAHS Strategy

Leverage TOC and TRIZ to create powerful
inventive solutions faster
− Use TOC to identify the high leverage points of
the problem
− Focus on the TRIZ “Directions for a Solution”
related to these leverage points


The TRIZ for JONAHS Tactics

This strategy will be implemented by:
• Restricting the problem model to cause-effect
(necessary condition) logic
• Using focusing techniques analogous to those used
in the TOC Thinking Processes to identify core
conflicts and key leverage points
• Converting contradictions from the TRIZ Problem
Formulation Diagram to TOC Conflict Clouds
• Using both TRIZ and TOC to find injections


Step 1 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic
Process

Step Action Approach
Write story line of the problem and
1 Define the problem
list useful and harmful effects


Step 1a: Write the Story Line of the
“Plating Metal Parts” Example

• To plate metal parts with nickel they were
placed in a bath of nickel salt. The bath was
heated to increase the productivity of the
process. However, heating reduced the stability
of the salt solution and it started to decompose.


Step 1b: List Useful and Harmful Effects

• Primary Useful Effect
− Productivity increases

• Useful Effects
− Parts move faster
− Salt solution is heated

• Harmful Effects
− Material is wasted
− Salt solution decomposes
− Stability of solution is reduced

Step 2 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process

Connect the effects using
2 Model the problem
“produces” and “counteracts” logic


Steps to connect the Effects using

1. Connect the “harmful”
and “useful” effects Primary
Harmful
2. Use “produces” and “is Useful
Effect
produced by” plus Effect
“counteracts” and “is
counteracted by” logic
3. Stay focused on the real Useful
problem(s) and the Effect
mechanisms causing
those problems Harmful
4. At a minimum the model Effect
must contain the major
“harmful” effects plus Harmful Harmful Useful
the “primary useful Effect Effect Effect
effect”
5. This is a focused variant
of the Problem Useful Useful Useful
Formulation Diagram in Effect Effect Effect
TRIZ

Step 2: Connect Harmful Effects to
Desired Useful Effects

Productivity Material is
increases wasted

Parts move Salt solution
faster decomposes

Salt solution Salt Solution is
Is heated less stable



2 Model the problem
Focus Attention then At contradictions and leverage points
3
Formulate Directions formulate directions for a solution


Recognizing Contradictions in Problem
Formulation Diagrams

Three of the patterns that Useful Harmful
generate contradictions Effect Effect
Note that all three patterns
have both a green and red
Useful
arrow coming from the
Effect Type 1
same effect

Harmful Harmful Harmful Useful
Effect Effect Effect Effect

Useful Useful
Effect Type 2 Effect Type 3


Step 3a: Focus on Contradictions and
Key Leverage Points

Productivity Material is
increases wasted

Parts move Salt solution
faster decomposes

Salt solution Salt solution
Is heated is less stable


Problem Formulation

The formulation of a problem is often far
more essential than its solution, which
may be merely a matter of mathematical or
experimental skill.
- Albert Einstein


Step 3b: Formulate Directions for a Solution
*
from the Contradiction Block

• 1. Find an alternative way to heat the salt solution
that lets the parts move faster but does not cause
the solution to be less stable.
• 2. Try to resolve the following contradiction: The
salt solution should be heated to let the parts move
faster, and should not be heated to avoid making
the solution less stable.

* See [3,4]

The Beauty of Formulation

“The beauty of formulation is in obtaining an exhaustive set of
possible directions. Ideally we would like to resolve the contradiction.
However, there is no guarantee the contradiction can be resolved given
the existing resources and limitations. And even it can be resolved, we
do not know in advance if this solution is going to be the best possible.
Resolving contradiction only means that we have found a way to
satisfy both original conflicting requirements, but it can have new side
effects (consequent contradiction) while a solution to other problem
statements might not have side effects or they are negligible…”
- Alla Zusman
Note for Jonahs: In the TOC Thinking Processes, this corresponds
to examining possible negative branches of each course of action
before selecting the final direction of the solution.


2 Model the problem
3
Use TOC, clouds, inventive and
4 Generate Ideas
separation principles, and effects


How to Express a TRIZ Contradiction as a
TOC Conflict Cloud

TRIZ Technical Contradiction Physical Contradiction

Useful
function B D

Improve
A
Maintain

Common C D’
objective

TOC Important Needs Actions / Means

In order to have A, we must have B, in order to have B, we must have D
In order to have A, we must have C, in order to have C, we must have D’
D jeopardizes C D’ jeopardizes B D is in direct conflict with D’


Step 4a: Write the TRIZ Contradiction as a
TOC Conflict Cloud

TRIZ Technical Contradiction Physical Contradiction

Useful B D
function Parts move Salt solution
faster Is heated
A Improve
Productivity
increases Maintain

C D’
Common Material is not Salt solution
objective wasted Is not heated

TOC Important Needs Actions / Means


Altshuller’s 39 engineering parameters for
expressing Technical Contradictions

1 Weight of moving object 20 Energy spent by non-moving object
2 Weight of non-moving object 21 Power
3 Length of moving object 22 Waste of energy
4 Length of non-moving object 23 Waste of substance
5 Area of moving object 24 Loss of information
6 Area of non-moving object 25 Waste of time
7 Volume of moving object 26 Amount of substance
8 Volume of non-moving object 27 Reliability
9 Speed 28 Accuracy of measurement
10 Force 29 Accuracy of manufacturing
11 Tension, pressure 30 Harmful factors acting on object
12 Shape 31 Harmful side effects
13 Stability of object 32 Manufacturability
14 Strength 33 Convenience of use
15 Durability of moving object 34 Repairability
16 Durability of non-moving object 35 Adaptability
17 Temperature 36 Complexity of device
18 Brightness 37 Complexity of control
19 Energy spent by moving object 38 Level of automation
39 Productivity

Step 4b: Express each “need” of the cloud
as one of Altshuller’s 39 parameters

B D
Increase Salt solution
“speed” Is heated
A
Productivity
increases
C D’
Not cause “waste Salt solution
of substance” Is not heated


Altshuller’s Contradiction Table for
Resolving Technical Contradictions

• Altshuller selected several recommended Principles for
Conflict Resolution for each combination of the 39 parameters
• These recommended principles are shown in Altshuller’s
Contradiction Table
• The rows of the table display the parameters needing
improvement
• The columns of the table display the parameters that need to
be protected from degradation as the row parameters are
improved
• The recommended Principles are listed in priority order at the
intersection of the rows and columns
• The table is not necessarily symmetric


Step 4c: Find “Principles” for resolving the
conflict from the Contradiction Table*

13 23 31
Feature to

Waste of
Stability of

substance
object

side effects
Harmful
Maintain

Feature
to Improve

28, 33, 10, 13, 2, 24,
9 Speed
1, 18 28, 38 35, 21

17 Temperature 1, 35, 21, 36, 22, 35,
32 29, 31 2, 24

39 Productivity 35, 3, 28, 10, 35, 22,
22, 39 35, 23 18, 39

* As shown in Systematic Innovation: An Introduction to
TRIZ, by John Terninko, Alla Zusman and Boris Zlotin

Altshuller’s 40 Inventive Principles for
Conflict Resolution

1 Segmentation 21 Rushing through
2 Extraction 22 Convert a harm into a benefit
3 Local conditions 23 Feedback
4 Asymmetry 24 Mediator
5 Combining 25 Self-service
6 Universality 26 Copying
7 Nesting 27 Disposable object
8 Anti-weight 28 Replacement of a mechanical system
9 Prior counter-action 29 Use a pneumatic or hydraulic construction
10 Prior Action 30 Flexible film or thin membranes
11 Cushion in advance 31 Use of porous material
12 Equipotentiality 32 Changing the color
13 Inversion 33 Homogeneity
14 Spheroidality 34 Rejecting and regenerating parts
15 Dynamicity 35 Transformation of physical and chemical states
16 Partial-excessive action 36 Phase transition
17 Shift to a new dimension 37 Thermal expansion
18 Mechanical vibration 38 Use strong oxidizers
19 Periodic action 39 Inert environment
20 Continuity of a useful action 40 Composite materials

Generating Ideas from the 40 Inventive
Principles

• For each principle ask:
- Is there anything about this that can help me solve my problem?
- What are the analogies between my problem and the examples?
• List each concept you come up with
• Develop the best concepts enough to see if any new problems are
created.


Step 4d: Apply the Recommended Inventive
Principles to the Example

10. Prior action
a. Carry out all or part of the required action in advance
b. Arrange objects so they can go into action in a timely
matter and from a convenient position

13. Inversion
a. Instead of an action dictated by the specifications of the
problem, implement an opposite action
b. Make a moving part of the object or the outside
environment immovable and the non-moving part
movable
c. Turn the object upside-down

IDEAS? INJECTIONS?:

Step 4e: Apply the Separation Principles to
Resolve the Physical Contradiction

Technical Contradiction Physical Contradiction

Useful B D
function Increase Salt solution
“speed” Is heated
A
Productivity
increases
C D’
Common Not cause “waste Salt solution
objective of substance” Is not heated

Important Needs Actions / Means


Step 4f: The “Separation Principles” and an
example of a Relevant Scientific Effect

The following Separation Principles can address
any situation with contradictory actions / needs
in the TOC cloud
1. Separate opposite requirements in time
2. Separate opposite requirements in space
− Illustration of a relevant scientific effect:
Coating method

3. Separate opposite requirements between the
whole object and its parts
4. Separate opposite requirements via changing
conditions


Coating Method “Scientific Effect”
Illustration

Ideas?

• Metallic surfaces are chemically coated as follows: the metallic product is placed in a
pool filled with a metal salt solution (e.g. nickel, cobalt, etc.). During the ensuing
reduction reaction, metal from the solution precipitates onto the product surface. The
higher the temperature, the faster the process; however, the solution decomposes at high
temperatures, and up to 75% of the chemicals are wasted, settling on the bottom and
walls of the pool. Adding stabilizers is not effective, and conducting the process at a low
temperature sharply decreases production.
• Alternatively, the product is heated to a high temperature before it is immersed in the
solution, and the process itself is conducted at a low temperature. In this case, the
solution is hot where it is near the product, but cold everywhere else. One way of heating
the product is to apply an electric current to it during the coating process.



2 Model the problem
3
Use TOC, clouds, innovation and
4 Generate Ideas
Select a set of injections that “flip”
5 Develop Concepts
harmful effects into useful effects


Step 5a: Develop Solution Concepts

Idea:
Most of the parts of the "coating method illustration" are directly
useful. This approach breaks the physical conflict by
separating opposite requirements in space.

Idea:
The Prior Action and Inversion principles suggest heating the
metal parts before putting them in the bath instead of heating
the bath before the metal parts are put in. When this is done,
the solution touching the metal parts will be hotter than the rest
of the solution in the bath. As in the “coating method
illustration” this maintains the stability of the salt solution.


Step 5b: Create injections that will “flip” the

• The metal parts are heated before being placed in the
solution
• The metal parts heat only the solution touching the parts
• The temperature of the rest of the solution is not increased

• The injection for the Problem Formulation Diagram is
therefore:
− Parts heat only the solution touching the parts


Step 5c: Connect injections to “flipped”
harmful effects and original useful effects

Productivity Material is not
increases wasted

Parts move The salt solution
faster doesn’t decompose

Salt solution
The salt solution is
touching the part
stable
Is heated

Parts heat only
the solution
touching the parts

Step 6 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic
Process

2 Model the problem
3
Use TOC, clouds, innovation and
4 Generate Ideas
Select a set of injections that “flip”
5 Develop Concepts
Evaluate Results and Go back until “harmful effects” are all
6
Plan Implementation “flipped” then develop project plan


Summary of “Plating Metal Parts” Problem

• To plate metal parts with nickel they were placed
in a bath of nickel salt. The bath was heated to
increase the productivity of the process.
However, heating reduced the stability of the salt
solution and it started to decompose.

Parts are heated by the liquid


Summary of “Plating Metal Parts” Solution

• In the nickel plating of parts, increased temperature
is necessary only in proximity to the parts. To
accomplish this, the parts themselves may be
heated, rather than the salt solution.

The liquid touching the parts is heated by the parts


TRIZ for JONAHS Helps Satisfy the
“Need For Speed” in Innovation

Practical Confident
Knowledge Decision Point Focused Development of
Practical Knowledge versus Time

Knowledge
Required to f
la ti o n o
Make a Good Ac cumu dge
Decision Gra dual l Knowle
a
P ractic
Starting
Time
Point


References

1. Goldratt, E., (private communication), 2000.
2. Self Sufficiency in Inventive Problem Solving
Workshop Notes, Ideation International Inc.,
Southfield, MI, 2000.
3. IWB Software, Ideation International Inc.,
Southfield, MI, 2000.
4. Terninko, J., Zusman, A., Zlotin, B., Systematic
Innovation: An Introduction to TRIZ, St. Lucie
Press, New York, 1998.
5. Zusman, A., (private communication), 2005, 2007.


About David Bergland

•Advisory TOC Consultant at AGI [Color Photo of Presenter]
•AGI Jonah’s Jonah certified in all of the
TOC application areas.
•Founder and Partner of TOC Solutions,
LLC
•First Stanley Chair of Interdisciplinary
Engineering at Iowa State University
teaching TOC and TRIZ
•Head of the Executive Consulting
Department at AT&T Bell Laboratories
•Honorable Mention as Eta Kappa Nu
Outstanding Young Electrical Engineer
•PhD in Electrical Engineering with
minors in Math and Physics
•Attended in-house AT&T MBA program


TRIZ + TOC

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to TRIZ + TOC

Similar to TRIZ + TOC (20)

More from [note.bene]

More from [note.bene] (15)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

TRIZ + TOC