Difference makes the DIFFERENCE
Categorised Menu List
To simplify the idea behind TRIZ:
we can summarise the entire concept in the words of Malcom Muggeridge, a British Journalist, as
In other words, all new inventions or innovative works are done by some one, some where, some time, some how, and we are re-doing it. So, according to Altschuller (Russsian Scientist), we donot need to re-invent the wheel and waste our time, instead, find out, if there is a similar solution, check if it suits 'as is' else, with minor modifications, implement it.
The primary advantage above all others is that, there exists already a proven method or solution which is necessary and sufficient to the given contradictions. Hence, no need to experiment the solution at every stage of implementation. This will obviously save much time and effort. Thus, will help to accomplish, better work, faster.
Primarily, TRIZ originates from the former Soviet Union, where it was postulated and advocated by Genrich Saulovich Altshuller (1926–1998). He lived most of his life in Baku, but for 1950–1954, when he was confined to prison (by the grace of Stalin) and his later years in Petrozavodsk, northern Russia.
Altschuler (as generally addressed) worked in Patent Office, he was curious to know, what and how each patent is different from another. Hence, he studied many of these patents, and drew some common conclusions. These common conclusions are nothing but 40 principles of TRIZ. Thus, these 40 principles are the underlying common phenomenon, based on which, these patents are being filed on.
TRIZ (/ˈtriːz/; Russian: теория решения изобретательских задач,
teoriya resheniya izobretatelskikh zadach,
literally: "theory of the resolution of invention-related tasks") - Source: Wikipedia
in simple English: Theory of Inventive Problem Solving
Any good solution:
TRIZ is not a complicted theory (atleast for my perspective). One need not be an expert to understand and implement this theory, just like, one need not be an expert car mechanic to drive a car.
There are many good theories that ruled the world in their areas of competence. Some are extended beyond their scope (eg: Six Sigma methodology is ideally designed for manufacturing sector but is used heavily in Service Sector as well). Some other theories, for eg: Theory of Constraints (by Eliyahu Goldratt) is used in many spheres of knowledge, including education and trainings, management concerns, and others, QFD (Quality Function Deployment) is primarily intended to understand the VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER, ie., to understand his priorities vs requirements. QFD can also be a very good solution towards choosing a best product of the available products.
The following picture displays a layman's understanding of integrating some of the known methodologies towards an near ideal or near perfect solution:
For a bird's eye view of different methodologies, I would like to compare TRIZ and Six Sigma, though they look alike (similar), they are never the same. As the former depends on proven examples while the later depends on statistical and mathematical metrics.
Though Six Sigma, in today's world looks depleted or said as theory of the past, the methodological approach towards the problem solving will be inherent in the "PROBLEM-SOLUTION CONTINUUM".
To endorse my view, I would like to quote Britishers' when they left India, regarding their administrative and governing practices in India. The quote reads as "though, you, the people of India can get rid of us (the Britishers), you can never get rid of the administrative practices that we have established - referred as STEEL FRAME OF INDIAN ADMINISTRATION (then called ICS - Indian Civil Servcies)
Before moving on to the question, I would like to take an example for an easy understanding: Taking the growth or development concern: Psychology says: FEAR is the factor for development, Economics says: NEED OR WANT is the factor for development, Sociology says: gregarious nature of man is the factor for development and like wise...
So, which of these studies hold good? Looking at them individually, all seems to be a perfect contributing factor for development, and ideally, none can be ignored.
Can we ignore all... as they see the world through lenses? The answer should be an absolute NO. Just because, each has a unique distinguishing factor with the other, and having a different outlook towards human life and development, these subjects cannot useless.
Moreover, knowing these (atleast two of them) can enhance our thinking perspective, think through different views (sources of knowledge), understand the problem as:is, and project near a perfect solution to the concern or contradiction.
The same works well with this concept as well. More over all the hard work of dwelving through the intricacies of many such experiments and innovations is taken care of. Left us with 40 different priciples, which are summarises of COMMON IDEA behind similar innovations.
The following are some of my observations:
......... will list down others as I encounter them...