Premium
How combinations of TRIZ tools are used in companies – results of a cluster analysis
Author(s) -
Moehrle Martin G.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
randd management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.253
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1467-9310
pISSN - 0033-6807
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00390.x
Subject(s) - triz , acronym , field (mathematics) , computer science , process (computing) , creativity , resource (disambiguation) , manufacturing engineering , engineering , artificial intelligence , mathematics , psychology , social psychology , computer network , philosophy , linguistics , pure mathematics , operating system
Many engineers and natural scientists in companies are using tools directly or indirectly related to the theory of inventive problem solving (abbreviation derived from the Russian title: TRIZ) by Altshuller (1984, 1996). Some of the TRIZ tools are based on the application of condensed technical knowledge, others are special techniques for directed creativity. The usage of TRIZ and its tools should lead to improvement of efficiency within the innovation process as well as to more and smarter problem solutions. More than 40 reported applications of TRIZ in companies show that usually not the whole set of TRIZ tools is used. This is surprising, because in the original TRIZ literature all the tools are recommended for usage in a classified order named ARIS (Russian acronym for ‘algorithm for inventive problem solving’). A cluster analysis of the applications reveals that there are three subsets: (i) basic TRIZ, (ii) resource and ideality‐based TRIZ, and (iii) substance‐field based TRIZ. This leads to important consequences: TRIZ training and TRIZ implementation should be structured according to the three subsets.