Using a Contradiction Matrix

	Bookmark This Page Email This Page Format for Printing Attach Document Show Entire Thread
	Search The Forum By Individual Post By Thread Past 1 Day of Posts Past 2 Days of Posts Past Week of Posts Forum Sponsor:

There's another challenge in using the contradiction table that comes up in either individual or group use and that's the "blank" boxes within it. The newer version of the matrix published by Creax has all intersection boxes filled in, but has also expanded the matrix to 48X48. 

The standard answer re: a blank box is that there were no overwhelming number of a few principles that were most frequently used, so we need to look at all 40. This can be disheartening if your contradiction happens to result in an empty box, but then you have to remind people that there are only 40 principles, and not a huge number that might be generated in a conventional brainstorming session.

Another issue that can cause early stage discouragement is a quick and dirty use of the table without sufficient thought and problem analysis, resulting in the choice of the wrong contradiction set. When the inventive principles suggested don't immediately suggest an obvious answer, discouragement sets in and the methodology is discarded. This would be the equivalent of running a conventional brainstorming session with no discussion of the problem and ceasing the idea generation after 30 seconds. When a problem has several possible parameter contradictions, one of the things I do is to look at all of them and list the principles suggested prior to doing any ideating.  It always turns out that there are 2-3 of the 40 principles that show up across the entire range of looking at a problem.  That's where we start using the principles to generate ideas. This is also a productive way for an individual to use the table on their own.

Jack Hipple

Innovation-TRIZ