8/3/2019 Surface Complexity- IEI Journal Added Ref

1/2

Surface Complexity, Deep Simplicity-Problem Solving, Innovation andTRIZ

Barry WinklessInnovation Specialist

An engineer is a person who possessesknowledge of mathematics and naturalsciencesandapplies this knowledge to the solution of problemsEide 2002.1

1. IntroductionThe solution of problems is a day to day activity for most engineers, scientists andtechnologists. These problems may be simple, or extremely complex, but fundamentally thesolution of problems is at the very core of successful innovation. Innovation, in fact, can beviewed as the solution of problems- simple, difficult or otherwise. According to CSC (2004) Allsignificant innovations embody solutions to complex problems. If, for example, I want to havea hot cup of coffee to take away, but the coffee cup is burning my hands then a problem

exists. The solution of this problem, whether through the use of a corrugated sleeve or a voidof air, creates a concept innovation, and one could argue a more ideal take away coffee.Throughout the life cycle of any product or process problems are identified and solved,creating an improved or more ideal system over time until it is superseded by a nextgeneration system that can deliver substantially greater functional or critical to quality

performance (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Problems over the lifecycle of a product, technology or service

2. Problem Solving- it isnt easy.

Problem solving is not, however, a simple thing to do. Of course most engineers can developa number of solutions for a particular problem- by using their own inherent technical expertise,

by asking peers, or consulting engineering data (both internal and external informationsources). At best this process is generally carried out in an ad-hoc fashion using traditionalmethods such as brainstorming. In many cases engineers fall back on experience. Severalstudies have shown however that experience in a given job can actually lead to worseperformance in solving problems (Hecht and Proffitt 1995). Frensch and Stenberg (1985)have also noted that specialist knowledge can lead to an impairment in the ability of

engineers to incorporate new ways into their thinking.

1Eide, A.R., Jenison, R.D., Mashaw, L.H., and Northup, L.L. Engineering Fundamentals and Problem Solving, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2002

BIRTH

GROWTH

MATURE A large number of small problems. Increasing effort

and time spent on the problems, diminishingfunctional and performance gains.Next generation system on the horizon.

A number of intermediate problems. The problemsare based around efficiency, optimisation, cost

cutting. Better understanding of the system allowslarge jumps in functionality and performance.Generally low to medium level solution

inventiveness is used

A few big problems. The solution of these problemsis essential to ensure the proper functioning of a

system. Generally high level inventivenessrequired.

8/3/2019 Surface Complexity- IEI Journal Added Ref

2/2

Davidson and Sternberg (2003) have noted that everyone approaches a problem situationwith a unique knowledge base. The utilisation of professional terms and specific knowledgecan lead to a psychological inertia where the solution will most likely come from an engineersprofessional field. In many instances this knowledge cage prevents identification of the mostoptimal solution, particularly when confronted with difficult or non-routine problems.

Figure 2: The knowledge cage

So what are the major qualities that engineers should possess in order to become problem

solvers and inventors par excellence? Savransky (2000) cites three:1. He/She must obtain very high quality solutions with a high level of recognition in a

short time.2. He/She has to know practically all relevant human knowledge

3. A good problem solver must turn off his/her psychological inertia.

Most engineers would fall somewhat short if measured against the criteria set by Savransky,particularly in relation to knowing all relevant human knowledge! There is an inventive

problem solving methodology, however, that is based on the systematic study of inventionsfrom all knowledge fields. Its name is TRIZ- the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving. Itrepresents the next competitive advantage for organisations wishing to increase theirinnovation potential.

3. TRIZ- the next competitive advantageTriz was developed by a Russian Engineer, Geinrich Altshuller. Through a systematicanalysis of the patent databases (initial study involved the analysis of 400,000 patents)

2

Altshuller realised that 98% of patented inventions used some already known physicalprinciple and that the same generic engineering problems and solutions occur again and

again across diverse technological fields. Alsthuller categorised solutions into 5 levels (Figure3), known as the levels of invention. At each succeeding level, more knowledge from diversefields is needed, and more solutions required before an ideal solution can be found.

Figure 3: The five Levels of Invention

3.1 Surface Complexity Deep SimplicityAll technological or scientific inventions at their surface level seem complex- but at their core

lie solution and evolution principles that are common across diverse scientific and engineeringdisciplines. This is the essence of TRIZ and the effective utilization of this methodologyrequires the transformation of very specific problems into abstract ones. By using thisPrinciples of Solution by Abstraction (Kaplan 1996:7) the problem solver can identifyanalogous solutions from sectors as diverse as pharmaceutical to agricultural and apply thesesolutions to their particular problem (Figure 4).

2Most recent estimates suggest that over 3 million patents have now been codified using the Triz approach

Level 1 Conventional solution 32%

Level 2 Small improvements, with company 45%

Level 3 Major Improvement, within industry 18%

Level 4 New innovation using science, outside of industry 4%

Level 5 Major Discovery 1%