Innovation in Analysis
Editor | On 01, Jan 2010
Message: 1177Posted by: Green Belt in Indiana
Posted on: Monday, 10th December 2007
We find the Xs impacting Ys in Analysis Phase. But sometimes the Xs aren't known. Is this a good place to use innovation tools? Anyone in particular?
Message: 1178
Posted by: MBB
Posted on: Monday, 10th December 2007
You can use Triz in six sigma in more than the analysis phase. This article shows how to also apply it in the define and measure phases. https://the-trizjournal.com/content/c070319a.asp
Message: 1184
Posted by: Ellen Domb
Posted on: Wednesday, 12th December 2007
TRIZ has a tool with many names (subversion analysis, AFD, anticipatory failure determination, predictive failure analysis, etc.) A very short explanation is that you see an undesired result, and don't know the cause (you have a Y and don't know the X's).
Pretend that you want the bad result.
Now make it even worse. Pretend that is what you want.
List all the resources that are in the problem.
Use TRIZ to figure out how you could get the terrible result using just the resources that are in the problem. Then do a validation experiment to see if that really is the cause (it is amazing how often this works!) Then get rid of the problem by disrupting the situation.
The TRIZ Journal has had many articles on this method–see the recent one by Jack Hipple, November 2007.
Message: 1185
Posted by: Jack Hipple
Posted on: Saturday, 15th December 2007
I would add another comment abut the use of this mental process. It just as effective, if not more so, in thinking about what MIGHT go wrong as opposed to what went wrong.
For example, we are about to introduce a new product to the market, a new personnel policy, a new business strategy, an adjustment to a process or machine. We usually use “checklists” of one sort or another to make sure nothing goes wrong and despite this, things do go wrong. Then this newly discovered cause is added to the checklist for future choose. Highly inefficient and time consuming. By changing from a “what” checklist mentality to an aggressive “how” saboteurial mentality, many more possibilities are discovered. Now not all ideas need to be dealt with–the normal TRIZ resource thinking comes into play here. This approach finds potential hazards and issues that conventional checklist tools such as HAZOP and FMEA do not find (demonstrated in applications). This is a standard part of training done for AIChE and ASME. It's been used in proprietary projects in the food, chemical, and banking industries.
Message: 1186
Posted by: Navneet Bhushan
Posted on: Sunday, 16th December 2007
I have experimented AFD/Subversion etc along with a system analysis technique I call the System Complexity Estimator (SCE). Although, my experiments have been more in software design you can use the framework I call it the Robust Inventive Software Design (RISD) framework – it combines SCE, TRIZ, Design Structure Matrix (DSM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). You can download the presentation from Boeing DSM 2005 Conference at http://www.dsmweb.org/workshops/DSM2005/dsm05conf/presentations/day_3/01_Day3_Navneet_Bhushan.pdf
The framework can be used for any system design – We shall call it Robust Inventive System Design (RISD) – acronym remains same.
-with warm regards
Navneet (http://innovationcrafting.blogspot.com)