Let’s analyze the problem solving process. From our perspective, Functional Modelling (one of the well-known TRIZ tools) is the best way to analyze a system. An additional article describing Functional Modeling (FM) in greater details will be prepared and published later on. For the purpose of this discussion, we are going to provide a very brief explanation of how the Functional Model tool helped me to investigate the problem solving process.
At a high level, the principles of FM tool are as follows:
All relevant components of a system are mapped and connected with arrows according to an existing functional relation between the components. In addition to the system components, a product (an objective of the system functionality) and super-system components (components that are not direct parts of the system) should be defined and taken into consideration.
Functions could be of four types:
For the purpose of this analysis, we built a Functional Model of the problem solving process (our system) and assigned the components as follows:
The resulting Functional Model is shown on the chart below.
Note: This is our vision of problem solving Functional Model. You are more than welcome to disagree, comment and propose your versions. Please, leave your comments below the end of this post.
Based on the model above, we have calculated the Functional and Problem Ranking of the system components. The component with the highest Functional Rank is the main contributor to the successful creation of the “product”. Problem Rank indicates components that prevent the successful creation of the “product”.
The Functional and Problem Ranking chart is shown below:
Based on the ranking chart we can extract interesting conclusions:
Summarizing the ranking, we can point out that Problem Solver is the most creative component of the system. On the other hand, Problem Solver, Inventive Thinking Tools, and Psychological Inertia are the most problematic components of the system.
Both, Inventive Thinking Tools and Psychological Inertia do not operate without a Problem Solver; therefore, a Problem Solver is the most problematic and the most creative component simultaneously.
Psychological Inertia and Inventive Thinking Tools affect the result in opposite directions:
This is a very typical situation when people are trying to avoid inventive thinking tools while they honestly believe that it will take them a very long time to achieve the result. While being under stress to solve a problem, the majority of people prefer to use artless brainstorming rather than problem solving instruments. They invite their colleagues to the meeting and start collecting ideas generated spontaneously. In most cases, the ideas are not even related to the problem. In this situation, people are strongly affected by psychological inertia and propose a number of well-known solutions, but they are motivated by what it is easier to accomplish instead of concentrating on solving the actual problem.
Artless brainstorming is similar to gambling in a casino and cannot bring any reasonable solution to the problem.
Trying to provide a solution fast, people prefer to skip Failure Description (Disadvantage, Evidence, and Symptoms) and jump directly to the problem statement.
This is a huge mistake!
The Failure description is the only correct method for building the correct Problem Statement. More often than not, a disadvantage is treated as a problem. For instance, in the case of a punctured tire, they define the actual puncture as a problem. And that is incorrect! The punctured tire is a disadvantage resulting in evidence – the release of air from the tire. Disadvantages and evidence cannot be solved, therefore they cannot be problems. The problem is the fact that you now have to act differently from what you originally planned.
For example, you cannot continue driving, you cannot get to a destination on time, you have to cover the unplanned costs of repair.
The problem is not what you see, hear or feel; the problem is what you should do as a result of what you see, hear or feel.
The description of failure evidence and correct problem statement definition is a crucial step that cannot be skipped.
Often people make a mistake and assume that the root cause of the problem is a fundamental reason for the occurrence of the problem. This is an incorrect approach, as a fundamental reason typically cannot be fixed or even changed. The correct root cause should be chosen based on the capability to remove or reduce the defect and solve the problem. A root cause is a source of the problem that if terminated, the problem is removed or solved.
Cause and Effect Chain (CEC) Analysis is an excellent tool for a root cause search. The tool looks trivial, but in reality, it is more complex when the analysis is performed. Starting from the Target disadvantage a problem solver is required to answer a single easy question: “Why?”. And he has to answer honestly and reasonably.
There is another important requirement of CEC, it should be completed all the way down to the endpoint (dead-end). Where the dead-end is the cause that cannot be fixed or changed.
Once the entire chain is completed, we can be sure that all possible causes are on the list. We can then start choosing an acceptable root cause by moving upwards from the dead-end to the target disadvantage.
Brief example about a punctured tire is shown below:
We defined all the causes of the Cause-Effect Chain and got to the dead-end. So, the dead-end is a fundamental root cause but it is useless for solving the actual problem. As one can see, all intermediate causes are much more useful since each one of them could help us to generate ideas and solve the problem.
Note: CEC tool is still under development and we will release a dedicated article once released.
A root cause is not the fundamental reason for the failure, a root cause is the source of the failure that is chosen as a reasonable step for the failure elimination or reduction.
The creation of a failure model is the
A failure model is a description of the features that
A system model is a description of the system’s operation including interactions between its components.
It is virtually impossible to build a failure model without the system model available.
The system model can be built using functional modeling. It will help you learn how the system operates, it will assist you in the understanding of failure mechanisms and guide you to the failure model creation.
Create a number of models, validate them and use only the valid model for solving the problem.
It is very common that a problem solver brings a brilliant idea or solution to the table, but others are not ready to accept it and even actively resist the implementation. They do not believe that the proposed solution is the correct one, because the solution is, so-called, unexpected.
This is a very well known phenomenon and resulted from pattern recognition.
Pattern recognition features:
Please remember that finding a
Be inventive to overcome pattern recognition when managing the implementation and destiny of your idea.
Please click any orange button to get to our online innovation platform. Start to innovate.
LOGIN to PRIZ Innovation Platform and start your project.
Answering the question, “Does everyone want to be profitable?”, depends on the goals set by the CEO and executives of the company regarding the desired outcomes from the systems used by the firm to drive profitability. In most cases, it is up to the managers and their engineers to generate profitability from the existing systems that are integral to the organization’s production of products and services. These products and services are then valued by customers, who pay a cost to the company in exchange for them. Challenges and Solutions The challenge that engineers and managers face alike is the complexity…
RCA thinking is a tool for learning how the system operates and creating solutions to problems.
Problem solving and innovation are often seen as separate concepts, but they are actually closely intertwined. While problem solving involves finding solutions to complex issues, innovation is about introducing new ideas or approaches. Effective problem solving incorporates innovative thinking, whether it’s in designing projects, analyzing data, or collaborating with others. In our modern era, where systems are more complex than ever, problem solving requires a structured and systematic approach. Leading companies like Samsung, LG Electronics, and TSMC have recognized the value of this approach and have achieved success by applying innovative methods. By adopting these practices, businesses can improve operational…
Have you ever found yourself skipping the creation of a detailed description of the failure and jumping right into solutioning? Don’t worry, we’ve been there too! We are thrilled to announce the release of a new feature on the PRIZ platform that is designed to enhance the quality and completeness of project overviews. With this new feature, engineers and project leads can receive a thorough review of their written background and also get guidance and suggestions for improvement. One of the main problems this feature solves is that many engineers tend to jump straight into solutions without investing enough effort…
This article discusses the importance of using engineering thinking to solve problems in an engineering environment instead of resorting to engineering guessing. It covers the dangers of engineering guessing and the benefits of using engineering thinking. The article also outlines a systematic approach to problem-solving using problem-solving tools and facilitation, such as the PRIZ Innovation platform. Proper documentation, defining the problem statement, identifying root causes, and understanding the process are all essential components of engineering thinking, which is the only way to generate fast and effective solutions. Types of Problems in a Production Environment A healthy and growing production can…
As an engineer or innovator, you may often find yourself faced with complex problems that require a solution. In these situations, it can be tempting to rely solely on your own knowledge and experience to find a solution. However, have you ever considered the benefits of using problem-solving tools? Why do we need these tools, and what can we gain from incorporating creative thinking instruments into our problem-solving process? In this article, we’ll explore the importance of problem-solving tools and the advantages they offer for engineers and innovators. Let’s start with a definition, and try to answer what is engineering…
40 Principles is one of the strongest problem-solving instruments that could and should be widely used for industry. This article describes the case study of how to create an optimal production process using problem-solving techniques. Let’s solve a chemical problem. You do not have to be a chemist, not at all. You have to be a problem solver. For an endless number of chemists, there is a minimal number of problem solvers. How do we identify a problem solver? It is very easy. A problem solver always uses problem-solving tools. So, let’s begin. The Request Create a structure as per…
Have you ever been in a situation where while discussing different solutions for a problem, you and your group is trying to solve, people finding all kind of reasons why something is impossible or extremely difficult? The arguments might sound like “It’s very difficult”, “This solution is very expensive”, “It’s not going to work!”, or even “This is a stupid idea!” I am pretty certain you have. This phenomenon, and many more, are part of Psychological Inertia. Now, let’s dive into the details. Definition I always like to start with the plain and dry definition. Unfortunately, Cambridge dictionary does…