Real Innovation
Click To Learn More About PremiumLinks
Search:

Resolving Contradictions with 40 Inventive Principles

Bookmark This Page Bookmark This Page
Email This Page Email This Page
Format for Printing Format for Printing
Submit an Article Submit an Article
Innovation Article Archive Read More Articles
Related Tools & Articles
  • Discussion Forum
    "Is there a way to request a new (contradiction) matrix for biology?"

    Contribute to this Discussion

    By Ellen Domb

    Innovation practitioners can all benefit from one of the basic concepts of the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ). The father of TRIZ, Genrich Altshuller, deserves credit for the insight that at the heart of many problems is a contradiction, and that much of innovation involves finding ways to solve the contradiction.

    The most common kind of contradiction is a trade-off. There are trade-offs in all kinds of problems – business, personal, product and service development, and operations – as shown in Table 1.

    Table 1: Trade-off Contradiction Examples

    The Good

    The Bad

    The more new things I learn

    The less time I have to apply what I learn

    Customer service gets better

    But the number of employees increases

    I want my suitcase to be strong to protect my belongings

    But it gets heavy and hard to carry

    Service is customized to each customer

    But the service delivery system becomes complicated

    The method for resolving these contradictions is accessible to anybody, without extensive TRIZ training. There are 40 solutions (or inventive principles) that are generally applicable to all of these problems. The contradiction matrix shows which of the 40 inventive principles to start with when looking for a solution. Figure 1 shows a subset of a complete contradiction matrix.

     Figure 1: Section of Contradiction Matrix
    Section of Contradiction Matrix

    The first step is deciding what is getting better and what is getting worse (or what is preventing things from improving) in the problem. Consider the last example in Table 1, in which the "customization of service" gets better and "complexity" gets worse. The parameters that match best are "adaptability and versatility" (improving) and "system complexity" (worsening). The circled cell in Figure 2 shows the numbers of the principles that have been most popular for solving that class of problems, in descending order. Begin with principle 15, which says to make the system more flexible and more dynamic, making it adaptable without making it complex. Perhaps the system could use physical flexibility (such as building in parts that fold up) or maybe it could be "virtually" flexible (like letting the user select how many "help" hints she wants in a program). If the cell that matches the problem is blank, use all 40 to find the principle(s) that best fit the problem.

    One caution: The matrix shows which principles have been most popular, not which are necessarily the best for a particular situation. It is a good idea to start with the suggested inventive principles the contradiction matrix suggests, but it can be an even better idea to use all 40 principles. It only takes 80 minutes, at two minutes per principle.

    Beyond the Suggested Principles

    There are 18 lists of the 40 principles – the principles are the same, but the examples are specific to a variety of businesses and technologies (public health, sales/marketing, quality improvement, for chemical engineering, etc.). Some people find their creativity is stimulated by reading examples from other industries, and some people find it helps them get started to read examples from their own industry – try both!

    Many people find that after some practice with the matrix, they get very good at analyzing their contradictions, and identifying the assumptions that caused the contradiction in the first place. In this example, the assumption that a stronger suitcase must be heavier is based on the idea that the way to make something stronger is to add more of the same material that the thing is made of. If there is a way to make it stronger with a different material, or by changing the shape, or some other means, it is possible to get rid of the contradiction. "Customer service gets better but number of employees gets worse" because it was assumed that the only way to make service better is to hire more people to handle the problems. But if the product was made better (or the packaging or instructions), people would not have to use customer service for complaints/questions.

    Conclusion

    Try understanding problems as trade-offs, and use the contradiction matrix and 40 inventive principles to get rid of the problems.Try understanding problems trade offs trade-offs, and use the contradiction matrix and 40 inventive principles to get rid of the problems.

    About the Author:

    Ellen Domb is the founder and principal TRIZ consultant of the PQR Group. She is also the founding editor of The TRIZ Journal and a commentator for Real Innovation. Contact Ellen Domb at ellendomb (at) trizpqrgroup.com or visit http://www.trizpqrgroup.com.

     
    Rate This Article:  Current Rating: 3.25
      Poor    Excellent     
              1    2    3     4    5
    Copyright © 2006-2010 – RealInnovation.com, CTQ Media. All Rights Reserved
    Reproduction Without Permission Is Strictly Prohibited – Request Permission


    Publish an Article: Do you have a innovation tip, learning or case study?
    Share it with the largest community of Innovation professionals, and be recognized by your peers.
    It's a great way to promote your expertise and/or build your resume. Read more about submitting an article.



    Business Innovation in the 21st Century (eBook)

    Advertise on Real Innovation and The TRIZ Journal