Thursday, October 31, 2013


Day 3 ETRIA TFC in Paris: Wow!

The plenary speaker for day 3 at ETRIA TFC Paris is Professor Serge Tichkiewitch, President of EMIRAcle (European Manufacturing and Innovation Research Association), who was introduced by Denis Cavallucci as one of the primary champions for the recognition of TRIZ in Europe.   Prof. Tichkiewitch spoke on 3 topics

1.       ResEUr, an online course for development of entrepreneurs

2.      The “valley of death” – barriers to acceptance of innovation

3.      Cross cutting issues for industrial innovation

He concluded with challenges to take advantage of the publicly supported programs, and to overcome the weaknesses of lack of focus, emphasis on current technology, and psychological and historical resistance to risk.   The partnerships between research, government and industry of EMIRAcle are aimed at developing the strengths of these systems and overcoming the weaknesses. 

“TRIZ education using Pictographs and Music” by Jeongho Shin demonstrated his approach to finding an engaging starting point for TRIZ for children and adults, as well as his own entrepreneurial journey from conventional TRIZ in LG to the music and art world.  The clarity of the simple examples (with design help from his young children to keep the pictographs meaningful, clear and simple) were impressive.   Segmentation—pictograph cards for adults have words, the ones for kids have charming cartoons.   They were tested at the National (Korean) Science Museum recently with 200 children in 30 minutes sessions—each card stimulated many inventions!   The audience loved singing Shin’s song of 8 principles!
Pascal Sire announced a joint venture between KATA and TRIZ France to create new programs for children.    The audience donated 1 euro per pack of cards to support this effort.

We returned to conventional presentation mode for Manabu Sawaguchi’s approach to TRIZ for risk prevention with new technologies that have new kinds of risk.  KYK and KYT combine direct observation of the system in work at the workplace with knowledge from past history of  problems.  CRMART is a complementary method that reverses thinking, asking “how can we create risks?” in order to reveal vulnerability.   This is an application of principle 13, turning thinking upside down, to challenge people to find potential risks.   The harmful function diagram from value engineering is then used for generating mitigation plans.   (There appear to be some subtle difference between CRMART and the AFD or Subversion method that has been used in TRIZ in the past.)

The Value of TRIZ and Its Derivatives for Interdisciplinary Problem Solving” is a fascinating project—a large, diverse group of people were given a half day of TRIZ and USIT training, and another group got classical creativity training,  then placed in small groups and asked to solve a biological problem (adenovirus attack on children with compromised immune systems) for which none of them had any technical background, although research materials on the details of the problem were provided.    The multidisciplinary teams with TRIZ training produced the greatest number of ideas, but the monodisciplinary teams with conventional training produced the highest rated (by technical experts) idea.  No surprise since practical applicability was one of the criteria for evaluation.    Read this paper—lots of good analysis and good experimental design in a field where we have only had people’s opinions in the past.
The team from the host university presented “TRIZ methodology adapted to hybrid powertrain evaluation.”   Analysis of the designs based on mathematical models of fuel use were compared to evaluation based in the ideal final result, for traction, vehicle stop and coasting, and regenerative braking, and the conclusions were used to suggest changes to powertrain architecture.      The method was then applied to 2 different situations for the urban customer and the highway customer. Next steps will be to use the TRIZ problem solving methods to design the powertrain defined in these architecture studies.

“Systematic search and ranking of physical contradictions using graph theory principles: Toward a systematic analysis of design strategies and their impacts” by a multi-disciplinary team from Aalto University and Tampere University and 4 companies (Metso, Solving, Kone Cranes, and the Finnish Defense Forces.)    Research problems: 

1.       How to improve paper roll cleanness and minimize energy use

2.      How to diminish energy consumption of air bearing technology

3.      How to develop computer supported tools for use in early stage modeling and simulation (effects of early decisions are usually not seen until late in the design phase)

Hypothesis:   They can integrate computer systems for requirement analysis and search for contradictions.   It became obvious that they needed language tools to extract contradictions from the natural language descriptions of the specific problems.   The results of this study are being incorporated into software being developed by a start-up company being created by former students in the program.
Koichi Makino  presented “A quantifiable evaluation method for generated ideas with many varieties.”   The method is based on the number and variety of ideas (which is challenged as relevant criteria by those who want a small number of highly innovative and applicable ideas.)

“Measuring the efficiency of inventive activities along inventive projects in R&D” Ali Taheria, Denis Cavallucci, David Ogeta included extensive data from over 100 companies on their experiences with multiple methods in R&D.   The project is to create a metric for design efficiency to compare methods, then to evaluate that metric vs. the opinions of the designers.  Efficiency in time and cost are much easier to measure than the human aspect of the use of brain-power.   Refinements are expected in the next phase of the work.



I will not be able to report on the afternoon papers or the membership meeting, since I’m traveling to the UK for tomorrow’s UK TRIZ Forum—I’ll post a report on Saturday for that one-day session.


This kind of sequential blog may not capture the spirit of either the ETRIA or the UK meeting.   Hearing the papers in the words of the authors is useful, but the “gossip” and the conversations and the fellowship of the meetings cannot be captured in the papers.     Hearing that TRIZ for children has “escaped” from the TRIZ experts because 100 college teachers have now taught many schoolteachers who are now teaching systematic methods to 17,000 students in France—WOW!   Meetings in Bavaria of dozens of companies to share innovation concepts (and not just once, 4 or more a year for multiple years…) Wow!  Formation of TRIZCampus, a community of practice—TRIZ teachers sharing all their methods and materials.   Internal TRIZ societies at GE and Phillips and Siemens…Wow and wow and wow….


Blogger’s advice:  Start now to plan for the time and budget to attend at least one meeting in the next year to be part of the Wow!   Lots of choices:

            Iberoamerican Innovation Congress:  November in Mexico

            Altshuller Institute:   December on-line

            Malaysia in February

            China in Spring

            Korea and Society of Systematic Innovation (in the US this year)  in July

            Japan in September,

            And many regional meetings ranging from TRIZ France and Apeiron (Italy)  and Iran and Israel and India to “Pizza, Beer, and TRIZ” in several cities. 


I’ll be glad to host any reports of any of these meetings on this blog.


Comments invited!







Day 2 European TRIZ Association Paris Meeting

The Wednesday program began with Denis Cavallucci (Past President of both ETRIA and TRIZFrance) introducing Dr. Ing. Mihai SOCOLIUC - Head of Scientific Communities at PSA Peugeot-Citroën, and recalling the role of the company in starting TRIZ activities in France.  Dr. Socoliuc introduced the history of the company, starting with Peugeot as a metallurgy company in 1810, with many technological and scientific innovations.   The science activities of the company are now organized to emphasize energy, mechanics, and fluidics, with major work in human factors and interactive simulation. “OpenLabs” emphasize open innovation and partnerships with other organizations—one in Marseilles for motion and in Bordeaux for energy, and others around France for design, fluidics, etc.  

Dr. Socoluic then surprised the audience with his challenge to us—after 14 years of pioneering work with TRIZ, it is still not part of the daily life at PSA Peugeot-Citroen.  He asked the audience 10 questions about how to re-birth the excitement of TRIZ in all the OpenLabs, which resulted in a vigorous dialog and multi-log with the audience.

The morning program continued with 3 plenary sessions chaired by Paul Filmore.   Paul-Armand Verhaegen from the University of Leuven, presented “Organism Aspects for systematic BID”  which we would call biomimetics.   They have developed extensive algorithms and adapted technology from text mining to filtering biological data to identify the aspects of organisms that are applicable to other kinds of problem solving.   These algorithms are very tolerant of high-noise situations.  Paul gave a live demonstration of using the databases to find a list of organisms to study for a particular display problem (swallowtail butterflies, strawberry poison frogs and Steller’s jay were the top candidates.)

Giacomo Bersano presented a joint French-Italian project “Supporting ECO-innovation in SMEs by TRIZ Eco-guidelines.”   Impressive results—companies generated savings of 10-15x the money spent on training and workshops through improved design incorporating the Eco-guidelines.   A simplified fast method designed to appeal to the SME companies was tested with diverse companies (electronics, chemicals, machine tools, home appliances,) and the assessment of the usefulness of the method was based on life cycle analysis of the designs, not on the opinions of the SMEs or the researchers.  Reduction of weight and power by 20% each and increase of re-usable parts by 50% are all impressive results!  The TRIZ emphasis was on ideality, particularly full use of resources, and understanding why resources had not been fully used in the older designs. 

The session concluded with a Samsung Electronics case study “Enhanced Unlatched Operation of Hard Disk Drive” presented by Kyoung-Whan Oh.   He emphasized the primary role of ideality in developing and improving the design.   See the proceedings for a pictorial explanation of the damage mechanism and the flux patterns for the magnetic fields in the conventional design of hard disk head and disk.   3% of drives showed unlatch failure at low temperature—with 5 million units a month produced, this kind of failure is intolerable.  Mr. Oh did a very thorough job of defining the physical and technical contradictions of the latched and unlatched states, and the practical limits of the time that each change would take vs. the time available until product launch.   Using  resources already in the system (especially using compression of a rubber part as a source of energy!) made it possible to make the correction without redesign and without delay to product launch.  The insights came from su-field modeling, “smart little people” modeling, detailed resource listing, and in later iterations principles 9 and 14.   The audience appreciation was very visible.

I was the chair of the case study session, so I was unable to take notes – 4 case studies with different lessons but one theme:     TRIZ works!    See the proceedings for full reports, and for reports on the parallel sessions.

Michel Chaux from Michelin   was the afternoon keynote speaker.   He told us about Michelin’s 4 innovation strategies: 

1.        Inova Go, spontaneous, individual idea generation

2.       Innov’Up, open challenges, both inside the company and outside

3.       Creativity events, which require strong preparation and experienced facilitator

4.       TRIZ,  with supporting training and facilitation.    

Europe, Japan, and US Michelin centers have the same basic facilitator training, but each group is encouraged to modify their methods to respect and take advantage of local culture.

Goodwin Ekong,  reported on the plans to use TRIZ for airport management in Nigeria

Petr Lepsik from the Czech Republic presented “Increasing of car seat safety using TRIZplus – FOS Method”  FOS  is function oriented search, and adds depth to the general TRIZ approach of looking outside the previous science and technology.



Prof. Kyeongwon Lee from Korea Polytechnic University presented both good and bad experiences with the propagation of TRIZ into industry, and strategies based on lessons learned.  In the early stage of deployment, LG introduced TRIZ in 1996, and in 1996-2004 there were  experiences of  “overexaggeration”  and expensive, un-workable proposed solutions and overtones of Russian mysticism which were  in conflict with Korean engineering culture.   In addition, both companies and universities experimented with software such as TechOptimizer, Goldfire, and IWB, with disappointing results (my comment:  because they just had software without real understanding of TRIZ!)  TRIZ disappeared in Korea, and started to re-emerge after 2004.    Samsung’s TRIZ system is well known, starting with cost reduction and using their own success to move the method into all aspects of creativity.  Hyundai incorporated TRIZ into Six Sigma, and is experiencing growing world-wide recognition for creativity.    

Prof. Lee’s conclusions are

1.       The TRIZ  users must understand the problem model and contradictions and work with tools from other methods to develop practical, fast solutions, rather than to emphasize learning many different tools. 

2.      TRIZ proponents should avoid criticizing Six Sigma and other methods that have had demonstrated success.

3.      Use my flow chart (he had the version from the TRIZ journal ) as a starting point, to be modified for each company, with the emphasis on getting early success on pilot projects that are meaningful to the company, and which can be used by those who become TRIZ trainers as culturally-suitable examples.   Prof. Kim gave particular attention to the idea that people, even at the very beginning of TRIZ study, should solve their own problems rather than have the TRIZ experts solve problems for them.  

4.      Pay attention to the company hierarchy—recruit support for projects using the technical experts, their bosses, and their budgeting process.  

5.      Universities need standard textbooks and standard methods in order to incorporate TRIZ into their curricula.  The disagreements between TRIZ experts cause the professors to avoid TRIZ.

He concluded by inviting us to the 5th Global TRIZCON, July 8-10, 2014 in Korea.   The audience was most appreciative of the examination of failures, and Prof. Lee’s extraction of lessons from the failures.

Ido Lapidot, the TRIZ advocate for  Intel in Israel entertained AND educated the group with “TRIZ is mostly dead, but mostly dead is partly alive.”  His talk was inspired by a Google Trend search on TRIZ, which shows a severe decline (allowing for countries where Google lacks coverage.)  He compared the TRIZ  trend to the Kodak history  and the Crocs shoes history, and finally a search for innovation and problem solving.  Six Sigma is declining, Lean is noisy and rising.    Crowdsourcing is on a steeper rise than open innovation, which is also rising.    

Network analysis of the genes and memes was used to look at the survivability of TRIZ (which is a meme-plex.)   Adding complexity makes the system more stable and thus more survivable but also makes it more complex and intimidating to newcomers.

BUT because TRIZ is small it can still grow!   TRIZ should be simplified, use open TRIZ innovation, make it cheap and easy to get started, ride the wave of crowdsourcing.   Finally, Lapidot proposes that we do new TRIZ research, using modern search tools, to create solutions databases for software, for biotech, for communications.  

 Minkyoung (Linda) Kwon  from POSCO continued the theme of the keynote yesterday by developing the 36 strategies of Sun-tzu, and creating  a strategy matrix similar to the contradiction matrix.  They demonstrated the use of the strategies for the sales of slag powder—this is a very realistic case for a steel company!  Midmapping was a useful technique for showing how all the parts of the  problem analysis and problem solving/strategy development system interact (this means “go read the proceedings to see details.”)  The military analogies were not fully portable (first kill the leader of the competitor “army” was reinterpreted as bribing the leader of the other company) to modern business situations, but the analogies were definitely challenging to conventional thinking. 

Application of Substance-Field Analysis for Failure Analysis” was presented by Ann Belski.   Briefly, an auxiliary field FA  is  introduced in each of the relationships in the Su-Field model, and is hypothesized to cause failure in the system.  Then a real scenario is developed that would create the failure situation.  Finally, another Su-Field analysis is done to find a way to overcome the failure mode.    Case study examples made the model very appealing—Ms. Belski showed a complex Su-field model for a ship sinking in the ocean and a wiper blade switch failure in an automotive application.   In the latter case, the engineers went from 4 possible failures to more than 30, greatly increasing their opportunity of finding the actual cause.    The Singapore/Dutch challenge to world-wide students for minimizing turbidity created during backhoe dredging.    Her Su-field model showed deep technical knowledge of the dredging process, and the auxiliary fields gave a strong set of solutions (not implemented because of cost, but showing promise for the future.)

Minsoo Kim from Samsung Display addressed “Group Creativity plus TRIZ.”   He modeled TRIZ classically as 1) analysis to develop the problem understanding and 2)problem solving to develop solution ideas.   He reviewed the TRIZ training system, and highlighted the need for group processes, as well as TRIZ knowledge, for people to solve complex problems.  He used the model from “The Medici Effect” to suggest that multiple experts, each expert in his/her own field, will stimulate creativity  for each other and the group.    A long-life, big, bright, low-weight display was a good example of group creativity, calling on multiple experts, using the intersection method—improving the intersection between the subsystems to give direction to the full project.

 Ivan Masin from the Technical University of Liberec in the Czech Republic concluded the session with “Inventive principles application in the nano-structures field.” The first project used the “nanospider”—a roller electro-spinning technology that produces non-woven nanofiber material.  They used the 40 principles as a checklist, looking to see if each could be used on the technology for producing the structures OR on the structures themselves.   He showed us a great variety of examples—segmented roller, curved fibers, self-regulating fibers, etc.   All 40 principles were relevant in the production methods, some were not found in the fiber structure area.   The second step was to look at potential improvements in the roller technology—the project was successful and patents are being pursued right now, so details were not presented.   A third project was to eliminate the time for exchange of rollers in the machine—again very successful.


Gala dinner in Paris!    The group enjoyed a boat tour of the Seine River, starting from the base of the Eiffel tower,  and cruising past many historic and artistic monuments.   Great food, great wine, great company, great talk!   (And why the day 2 blog is being posted on day 3)  

Tuesday, October 29, 2013


ETRIA TRIZ Futures Conference, Paris. Day 1 afternoon.

We had a short walk to the Paris City Hall for a beautiful lunch -- 3 courses with 2 wines!   The afternoon speakers will have a challenge rousing the audience.   Good news, there was lots of afternoon excitement.

Val Souchkov was the chairman of the afternoon session on TRIZ with other tools.   First speaker was Ms. Yui Kato with Manabu Sawaguchi, “Design Process Management based on Redesigned Contradiction Matrix in Aesthetic field.”  She gave a detailed explanation of the issues of design workflow and individual designers’ differences that contribute to the need for improvement in design work.   This study is limited to the product design work phase of product development (excluding market research and product planning that come before, and production and distribution that come after.)    They have hybridized the stages of design based on AHP (especially weighting and evaluation) and the stages based on TRIZ (design and problem solving).   Improvements to designs that have a good sales history are different in some details from new products.  A typical esthetic conflict was improving Impact vs. declining  Color Harmony; a sample of 11 elements of an aesthetic issues matrix was shown,  with a 48-element version described that included some of the classical Altshuller matrix elements.   Future work will include extension of the examples of application of the principles to the design problems. 

“Lean-TRIZ instead of TRIZ Lean” was introduced by Prof. Christian Thurnes (the lean guy) and Dr. Frank Zeihsel  (the TRIZ guy.)  They start with the assertion that  lean methods have had a lot of money and management attention over the last 30 years, whereas TRIZ has been an expert method with very  little management attention. They have enriched TRIZ tools with lean elements, and then used them to work on lean problems.   For example, they have made specific separation principles that include separation of non-value added work, separate set-up tasks from operating tasks, etc.   Likewise, ideality was easily combined with lean—what is the ideal production rate, what is the ideal transportation unit, …what are the ideal functions of the product, ….Then they reversed the process and found areas of weakness in Lean that can be improved with TRIZ, such as treating “necessary waste” as a physical contradiction, then applying the usual separation principles to resolving the contradiction.     They conclude that these practices have a high potential for spread in the lean world, with case studies and stories needed to support the dissipation of the methods.

I presented the paper written with Tim Brewer, Joe Miller, and Darrell Mann on the crowdsourcing and crowdfunding business models, and how the TRIZ model of the complete system helps to understand these emerging models.   I’ll post the full paper on this site when I get back from the meetings.

Prof. Paul Filmore presented the work done with Mir Abubakr Shahdad  on the application of TRIZ to graphic design, using genetic algorithms.  They developed software, now in its 7th generation to create a computer-aided innovation tool.   Genetic algorithms are used because of their ability to deal with extremely large search space.   Font design was the specific graphic design task that was chosen.  The designer selects “chromosomes” and the system generates the next generation;   the designer selects  the “parents” of the next generation, and the system does the iterations.    A similar process is applied to logos.  Feedback from the designers is that they find it very fast, works well for initial concept creation, and enables them to benefit from TRIZ without studying it.   New studies will include examining the difference between the use by graphic designers and engineers, and inclusion of additional TRIZ principles. 

“A novel hybridized TRIZ-based Design Approach for Concept Generation” was presented by Aiman Ziout and Ahmed Azab from the University of Windsor, Canada.   They demonstrated the method with the design problem of an active joint, one that can be disassembled by some external trigger.   Active joints are important at the end of product life, for disassembly, as an element of sustainable design.   Function analysis and patterns of evolution were combined with Cladistics (a biological method of classifying solutions) to create lines of ideas.  

Valeri Souchkov presented “Trend of Functionality Evolution” which is based on some of Altshuller’s work, expanded by his personal experience with over 100 products and projects.   During his work, Val realized that something was missing in TRIZ, and he used TRIZ-based function analysis and value analysis to complete the missing element, the evolution of the functionalities.  He saw 18 steps of evolution, 11 of expansion and 7 of convolution.   He called on his experience in the The Netherlands to use the evolution of the bicycle to illustrate the 18 steps.   Business-targeted products (B2B) have a somewhat different emphasis from B2C products, and the order of the patterns is not always the same.   Val’s challenge to the audience is to use these trends of functionality evolution to support innovation road mapping and risk management.

Eric Prevost’s presentation “TRIZ for Business”   emphasized the need for different vocabulary and different psychology than those used for engineering/technical  TRIZ.   His first approach is to create fear—show the statistics on the vanishing of companies (87% of the Fortune 500 changed in 20 years…) and to show new paradigms in technology and manufacturing,  as well as new paradigms of selling and other elements of business – sensors in tires and engines and many products make it possible to sell based on performance and lifetime rather than price.   Innovation models are changing—particularly integration of service into products accelerates innovation, but requires new business models with new partners.   As an example, he showed a conventional business process used at CapGemini, then inserted TRIZ into the process, and did 3 one day workshops (sales, talent management, and project funding.)  Result:  lots of ideas, reusable content, and great TRIZ interest. 

Val Souchkov presented Vladimir Petrov’s paper  On Su-Field Analysis for Information Processing

System” which was originally presented at the TRIZ Developers Summit.   Petrov replaces the Substance-Field interaction  with DFK  (Data coming into the system, Function that changes the data, and  Knowledge that is the aggregation of information about the incoming data and the function, and can be used to adjust the system. ) There are 3 laws:

1.        Multistage processing:  4 trends within this trend progress from simple to simple multistage, to coordinated multistage (knowledge about stages interacts, improving system function) to common multistage  which can have shared structure with shared knowledge. 

2.       Multiple sources of processing:  Independent processing of multiple kinds of data progress to coherent multiple source processing,  (video conference example, which video and audio data are processed separately, but knowledge about positions of people is used to modify the process and the data collection.)

3.       Accommodation:   And information system tends to accommodate past data to improve its performance.   The progress is from static, to learning, to evolving DFK systems.   The function stays the same but the knowledge is used differently at each level. 

Complex systems can be generating by combining systems from each of trends.

The meeting adjourned for the day, and we found congenial small restaurants for continuing the discussions.













Day 1 morning, ETRIA in Paris

The European TRIZ Association meeting, TRIZ FUTURES CONFERENCE 2013, started Oct 28 with 2 tutorial sessions.   As usual, this is a personal report, so you’ll only read about sessions I was actually in—for the rest, see the proceedings.      I missed the tutorials because of flight arrangements, but got to Paris in time for the opening reception.   It was great to see old friends and meet new people.  The TRIZ community is expanding!  Many photos will be posted on the conference site and the Facebook page, so I'll concentrate on the discussions and presentations.

The morning of Oct. 29 we were welcomed to the conference, to university, and to Paris. Paris Tech – Arts et Metiers is over 200 years old, and combines the historical view of engineering as art and engineering as “genius” in their approach to education.     ETRIA President Joost Dufluor  welcomed all participants, with particular note of the delegations from  Japan and  Korea, and other distant visitors, and he extended thanks to all the organizers and their employers  for all the time and energy of organizing and managing TFC 2013.

The local committee from TRIZ France announced new relationships including Switzerland and other French speaking countries and a new relationship between TRIZ France and KATA (Korea).

Denis Cavallucci and Marc Trela (the chairs of the committees) reviewed the preparations—119 abstracts eventually resulted in a 70% acceptance rate, and the schedule has expanded to accommodate all the papers, in “professional” and “scientific” sessions.

The opening keynote speaker is Se-Hyun Kim - President of the Korea Academic TRIZ Association and Senior VP of POSCO (and veteran of 24 years at Samsung.)   He started with a brief intro to POSCO, 5th largest steel company in the world, but “most competitive” and “most admired” in recent surveys by metal industries organizations.  POSCO’s concept of “smart innovation” includes Toyota’s biomimetics approach, Steve Jobs’s creativity based on convergence of art and technology.   POSCO challenges the blue ocean and nurtures creativity by using TRIZ.  “Creativity comes from insight.   Insight comes from observation”  is the motto on the Poreka (Posco +eureka) room.   Korean folk stories are full of stories of innovation based on observation and insight, charmingly explained by Mr. Kim.

He then gave us impressive statistics about the TRIZ efforts, including increasing numbers of patents, projects, and development of the internal databases that help subsequent projects.    TRIZ is being hybridized with Six Sigma and FMEA, and with the 36 principles of the Art of War strategy.  PTA is the POSCO TRIZ Association which involves 10 companies from the POSCO family, and sponsors workshops and mutual growth.   POSCO is also promoting TRIZ to SME’s and educational institutions (TRIZ summer camp sounds great!)  They have an internal conference annually as well as participating in MATRIZ, KATA, and ETRIA and other associations.  

Mr. Kim reviewed the history of TRIZ in Korea, starting with Samsung’s work with Russian experts starting in 2001, expanding through education and software (I-SPARK in 2006) and propagation through projects and involvement of their supplier community.   The future is the expansion of TRIZ to all activities, and specific challenges to application of TRIZ in Software development.  

Korean universities, Postech, Hanyang, Korea Polytechnic, and KIT, have TRIZ classes and outreach to local companies and programs for professors.   KATA sponsors industry-academic  knowledge sharing with 30 companies and 29 academic members, and is the host of the Global TRIZCON every summer and the Korea TRIZ Festival each winter.   Their new activities this year focus on social applications of TRIZ  (combating violence, increasing creativity.)

For the rest of the day I was back and forth between the 2 sessions.  Alexis Bultey  presented “ A proposal of a systematic  and consistent Substance-Field Analysis”   with the goal of resolving conflicts between different  methods of use of the 76 standard solutions and different Su-Field terminology, which result in limited use of TRIZ in industry.  The  development team started with a TRIZ expert team and TRIZ historical references both by Altshuller and from TRIZ Journal articles, then developed the modeling method using knowledge management methodologies to remove conflicts in definitions and logic, resulting in a “formal ontology” which was then processed to create and “operational ontology” which became the basis for a computer-based system.   Both measurement and product-type Su-field models were included.   Eight sets of rules were developed, which were familiar as groups of the 76 standards, but were described with a standard vocabulary.  

Claudia Hentschel used Horst Nadler as a simulated elderly person to demonstrate the need to understand the interactions between the user and the system as part of “Design thinking as a door-opener for TRIZ – paving the way for systematic innovation.”  She then had the audience make paper models of their solutions and the customer reply with “I like” and “I wish” about the candidate solutions.   This was a demonstration of the Self-Immersion method of design thinking.  Dr. Hentshcel proposed that the  usability issues and visionary issues  of the design can create TRIZ challenges when merged with the technological challenges.   This approach has created new appeal for TRIZ in business and academic communities that had originally rejected TRIZ as too complex, too hard to learn, etc.  Q&A featured the interaction of TRIZ with design, especially with design going beyond ideality while TRIZ returns the designer to practical ideality that can be implemented.

Bohuslav Busov presented the case study “TRIZ used for improvement of active hinge of the car bonnet.” The project was developed to meet the requirements for pedestrian survival resulting from recent auto industry requirement development.   The active hinge must lift up to prevent the head of the pedestrian from hitting the rigid parts of the engine.  Current solutions are both complex and expensive.   Initial analysis produced a list of principles to apply, but the limitation of people’s design experience and abstract thinking capability suggested that they should re-evaluate the problem from the point of view of the physical contradiction, between the simple, passive hinge and the complex, active hinge.  The solution was found in the “scientific effects” index – redesigning the dynamic element as part of the short arm of the hinge, using a much simpler actuator.   This explanation relies on pictures of the old and new hinges—I encourage readers to see the full case study to appreciate the multiple levels of TRIZ that were  used to create this new and much more elegant solution to saving pedestrian lives.  The audience was very interested and the speaker noted that his English would improve after one or two beers…

Bernard Monnier introduced R2B  (Research to business) as one phase of B2C (business to customer) .  He proposes that open innovation is the solution to increasing complexity in a world of decreasing financial support for development of new systems.   Complementary functions have been provided by suppliers, mixing external R&D with corporate systems for much of the recent past, but the corporate partners have frequently benefited more than the SME contributors.  A “creativity space” between research and development makes it possible for the benefits to be equalized and the process accelerated since both partners benefit from better management of the development process.

I ran back to the other room for Pascal Sire’s “How to leverage the knowledge spiral and creative meta-rules to train on TRIZ thinking while rescuing the sinking Titanic?” A wide variety of games and simulations were developed for students and teachers with a great variety of backgrounds.   One challenge is to create a method of measuring the effectiveness of these game-type training methods, and he recognized the  difficulty of developing the method while using it.   A short-term measure is that the students and teachers are both embracing the system. 
To be continued after lunch...







Thursday, October 10, 2013


TRIZ for business model innovation

My colleague David Conley,  has written a series of 4 articles that are a great basic introduction (or review) of TRIZ with a variety of examples from different business and technical situations.   

 For an introduction to Dave see  Let us know what you think of this series, please!

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?