Tag Archives: brainstorming

Five Simple Heuristics for Instant Innovation

I just returned from Saul Kaplan’s 9th Business Innovation Factory (BIF-9) Summit in Providence, Rhode Island — where, to my blissful surprise, I had just as much of a transformational experience as I had at Burning Man this year. I love it when so many conscious people gather together and indulge in the realm of possibilities and the certainty of optimism. 

Amidst the hundreds of insights that were shared, one of my favorites came from TED creator Richard Saul Wurman. He shared these 5 simple ways to catalyze idea generation, easily remembered by looking at his face (ANOSE):

Addition: Add something new to your process, product, project, or whatever it is you’re trying to create new value around. (I’ll call it the “entity” from now on.)

Need: Explore the needs of the people who engage with the entity now, or might encounter it in the future.

Opposites: Whatever it is you’re doing, try doing the opposite! He gave the example of peeling a banana. Even though humans tend to peel bananas from the stem part, did you know that monkeys do the exact opposite – and peel from the stumpy bottom part? Apparently it’s a much more efficient way to get to the fruit inside.

Subtraction: Take something away from your process, product, project, or whatever it is you’re trying to create new value around! Too much of a good thing can sometimes inhibit the creation of new value.

Epiphany: Sometimes you just have those explosive “a-HA!” moments — and you should pay attention to them! It was an epiphany that led to the branding of the iconic Trapper Keeper in the mid-80’s… over martinis. (Thanks to Siva Vaidhyanathan for raising my awareness about that story.)

This reminded me a little of TRIZ, but with fewer mental gymnastics required. And easier to remember if you’re stuck on a desert island (or in a conference room without coffee).

All About TRIZ for Innovation

TRIZ, the “theory of inventive problem solving” conceived by the Russian innovator Genrich Altshuller in the mid-1940’s, is a collection of analytical tools intended to capture “innovation logic” so it can be systematically applied to solve engineering problems. Using TRIZ, individuals and teams have an actionable guide for thinking out-of-the-box and generating breakthrough insights to help solve problems. These problems can be related to new product design, enhancements to existing products, process design and improvement, or quality improvement. The acronym is derived from the Russian Теория решения изобретательских задач (Триз) or, alternatively, the Anglicized Teoriya Resheniya Izobreatatelskikh Zadatch (TRIZ). Reflecting its Russian origin, TRIZ is pronounced like “breeze”.

TRIZ was initially conceived as a set of 40 “design principles” that can be used to accelerate the innovation process. Later, this was expanded into the Matrix of Contradictions which can be used to identify which of the 40 design principles are applicable to a particular problem. The assumption underlying this matrix is that new inventions become possible when technical contradictions are resolved. Since Altshuller’s initial development of these tools, several teams of TRIZ practitioners and researchers have expanded the techniques that are now associated with TRIZ, although the 40 principles remain central to the technique.

Altshuller developed the core of TRIZ during his experience as a patent clerk for the Russian Navy, where he examined trends and patterns as he screened hundreds of patents that had realized innovative potential. He investigated the characteristics that made each patent successful, and eventually determined his fundamental axiom of TRIZ, that technical systems evolve according to objective laws. The most common modes of evolution were captured in the 40 principles. Believing that the newly developed technique could help rebuild the USSR in the aftermath of World War II, Altshuller proposed some initiatives to his government. However, rather than being rewarded for his work and allowed to help his country, he was punished for his heretical viewpoints and sentenced to 25 years in a labor camp in Vorkuta in 1949, a sentence he shared with many other academics and intellectuals who educated one another in their fields as a defense against the brutality. After his release from the camp in 1955, Altshuller began publishing not only about TRIZ, but also science fiction books, since it was so difficult for newly released prisoners to find employment. By 1985, Altshuller had conducted hundreds of seminars on TRIZ, had worked with students in elementary and secondary school on inventive problem solving, and had earned his reputation as a leader in innovative thought.

The core of TRIZ, its 40 design principles, must be used in the context of a problem-solving approach. This is called the TRIZ process, and consists of 1) stating the contradiction (what is not working), 2) expanding your understanding of the materials being used, equipment being used, environmental conditions, work methods, and people involved, 3) defining the ideal state of the evolved system, and 4) generating ideas using the 40 principles. This process is different than brainstorming because it does not rely on randomly identifying ideas, but takes a structured approach to exploring the system and the technological contradictions that might reveal potential avenues for innovation.

The 40 design principles of TRIZ are:

  1. Segmentation. Break an object into different independent parts to uncover opportunities for creative assembly, disassembly, or component design.
  2. Taking Out. Remove one part of a product or process to explore alternative ways to achieve the required function.
  3. Local Quality. Explore the potential for one object or process to serve an additional or unexpected function, like a hammer with a nail remover attached.
  4. Asymmetry. Change the shape of an object from symmetrical to asymmetrical, or make an object more asymmetrical, to reveal opportunities for alternative designs.
  5. Merging. Identify how people, objects and subsystems can be combined to satisfy the requirements of the system in novel ways.
  6. Universality. Determine how one object or component can perform multiple functions.
  7. Russian Dolls. Also called nesting, this principle encourages placing objects within one another in various configurations to explore design alternatives.
  8. Anti-weight. Explore ways to counterweight the system when it is impacted by negative external influences.
  9. Preliminary Anti-action. By anticipating problems, steps can be taken to prevent their occurrence or to mitigate negative consequences when the problems arise.
  10. Preliminary Action. By anticipating scheduled changes in the state of a system (e.g. knowing which machines will be used in an upcoming shift) action can be taken to ease the transition between states.
  11. Beforehand Cushioning. Identify how to detect and respond to potential failures.
  12. Equipotentiality. Explore how moving things side to side, instead of up and down, might impact the ability of the system to achieve its required functions without unnecessarily expending energy.
  13. The Other Way Around. Determine whether turning components upside down, or inverting steps in a process, will resolve technical incongruities.
  14. Spheroidality/Curvature. Identify how flat or planar parts could be changed to curved or spheroidal components, for example, ball bearings or spirals.
  15. Dynamics. Explore how external forces acting on the system will impact its structure and integrity.
  16. Partial or Excessive Action. Determine whether doing less of something, or doing more of something, can solve the problem.
  17. Another Dimension. If a problem cannot be resolved in the number of dimensions allowed for the problem, increase the number of dimensions. Add corners, planes, or bends, or go around components within the system, or introduce the time dimension.
  18. Mechanical Vibration. Inject energy into a system by shaking it or applyind sound and investigate how it responds.
  19. Periodic Action. Determine how parts of the system where continuous force is applied would need to be changed if the force occurs in bursts.
  20. Continuity of Useful Action. Identify how to reduce idle time or make alternative use of time.
  21. Skipping. Explore how performing process steps more rapidly might impact introduction of errors.
  22. Blessing in Disguise. Determine whether adverse impacts or waste can be reframed and treated as benefits, or even increased to strengthen the potential for indirect benefits.
  23. Feedback. Monitor points within the system and evaluate whether utilizing that information can reveal new opportunities for improving the product or process.
  24. Intermediary. Explore adding a new component to a system to temporarily or permanently reduce adverse impacts.
  25. Self-service. Assess whether there are aspects of the system that can be self-regulating and self-repairing.
  26. Copying. Evaluate whether one instance of a component in the system could be used rather than two or more of the same component.
  27. Cheap Short-lived Objects. Identify whether short-term disposables play a role in the solution.
  28. Mechanics Substitution. Replace mechanical systems with invisible or software systems to see how components of the product or process would be required to adjust.
  29. Pneumatics and Hydraulics. Replace solids with liquids or gases to see how components of the product or process would be required to adjust.
  30. Flexible Shells and Thin Films. Identify whether introducing thin sheets of materials into parts of the system would alleviate the problem.
  31. Porous Materials. Determine whether pores should be introduced or closed within the materials comprising the system.
  32. Color Changes. Adjust the color of the component or the system to signal different meanings to users or customers, or identify whether color changes indicate that new information must be acted upon.
  33. Homogeneity. Explore how the system would change if you used one type of material for its construction.
  34. Discarding and Recovering. Determine how rejecting or regenerating components might adjust the constructs within the system.
  35. Parameter Changes. Also described as transforming physical and chemical states, this requires evaluating how resistant the system is to changes in physical composition and parameters in the external environment, such as temperature.
  36. Phase Transitions. Explore how to stop, start, and otherwise influence transitions between different states within the system.
  37. Thermal Expansion. Identify how heating or cooling a system will influence its structure, feedback between the components, or other factors.
  38. Strong Oxidants. Determine whether adding or removing oxygen from the system will change its structure or constitution.
  39. Inert Atmosphere. If environmental variables are negative impacts, explore the result of moving those from the system.
  40. Composite Materials. Explore whether replacing traditional materials with composites will remove the technical contradictions.

Many tools for quality improvement fit nicely within the TRIZ structure. For example, CTQ Trees can be used to investigate #1, Segmentation, and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) can be used to explore #11, Beforehand Cushioning. As a result TRIZ can be used to catalyze innovation not only for design efforts (including new product design), but also to stimulate innovation through the quality improvement process.

What’s Next? I envision new, artistic, right-brained TRIZ-like games for innovative brainstorming like Bizku’s (with a long u). 

See also:  lean, INNOVATION, PROBLEM SOLVING, FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS (FMEA), CTQ TREES

Further Reading:

Biography of Genrikh Altshuller: http://www.aitriz.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=26

Dew, John. TRIZ: A Creative Breeze for Quality Professionals. Quality Progress, January 2006, p. 44-51.

Scanlan, James. TRIZ 40 Design Principles. Retrieved on December 1, 2009 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/21798337/TRIZ-40-Principles

Wallace, Mark. The Science of Invention. Salon, June 2000. Retrieved on December 1, 2009 from http://mobile.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/29/altshuller/index.html.

Eliminating Waste using Zombie War Analysis

If quality and continuous improvement are important to you, you should have a fundamental understanding of zombies and the role they play in quality management. Furthermore, understanding zombies might help you understand yourself better too. In fact, performing a zombie war analysis (on either yourself or your organization) could be the next great lean tool for identifying and eliminating waste from processes.

Huh??!?! Zombies… are you sure? Yeah, I’m sure. And no, I didn’t know much about zombies either until yesterday, when I read My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead in the New York Times by Chuck Klosterman. (The savvy zombie thumbnail at the left by AMC is from his article.) In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a zombie movie before. That might change, though, now that I see the zombie concept has a direct bearing on understanding modern work life.

Here’s why: battling the endless barrage of emails, texts, requests for your time, and sorting through the steady stream of social media chatter is like a zombie apocalypse. They just keep coming and coming, and you just keep fighting and trying to let it all not overtake you and drive you nuts. And the whole thing might never end:

Every zombie war is a war of attrition. It’s always a numbers game. And it’s more repetitive than complex. In other words, zombie killing is philosophically similar to reading and deleting 400 work e-mails on a Monday morning or filling out paperwork that only generates more paperwork, or following Twitter gossip out of obligation, or performing tedious tasks in which the only true risk is being consumed by the avalanche. The principle downside to any zombie attack is that the zombies will never stop coming; the principle downside to life is that you will be never be finished with whatever it is you do…

This is our collective fear projection: that we will be consumed. Zombies are like the Internet and the media and every conversation we don’t want to have. All of it comes at us endlessly (and thoughtlessly), and — if we surrender — we will be overtaken and absorbed. Yet this war is manageable, if not necessarily winnable. As long we keep deleting whatever’s directly in front of us, we survive. We live to eliminate the zombies of tomorrow. We are able to remain human, at least for the time being. Our enemy is relentless and colossal, but also uncreative and stupid.

Battling zombies is like battling anything … or everything.

The only way to WIN the war is to reduce the number of zombies that you have to deal with. So, my appeal to quality managers everywhere: Ask your people what processes feel like zombie wars, and brainstorm ways to reduce the number of zombies so you don’t have to shoot so much. By tapping into the highly sensitive emotional wisdom of everyone who has to work with or deal with a process, you can call out the zombies and start eliminating them.

My appeal to PEOPLE everywhere: ask yourself what aspects of your life feel like a zombie war, and brainstorm ways to reduce the number of zombies. You’ll eliminate waste from the processes that the zombies are appearing in, while saving on ammunition, reducing stress, and possibly even increasing the joy in your life.

The simple act of thinking about the “things you’ve got to deal with” in terms of which ones are zombies (and which ones are not) might be just the innovative boost you need to identify and eliminate critical packets of waste floating around your organization. Or your life.