Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image
Scroll to top




| On 01, Jan 2010

Message: 1207
Posted by: B. McDonaldsen
Posted on: Monday, 28th January 2008

Is the root cause analysis that one would do for innovation the same as one would do in SS?

Message: 1213
Posted by: Valeri Souchkov
Posted on: Saturday, 2nd February 2008

It depends on which RCA version is used. Sometimes classical RCA or ToC can be used, but to specifically support innovation we recently introduced a technique called “Root Conflict Analysis” which maps  underlying contradictions leading to negative effects. In TRIZ philosophy, resolving contradictions results in bringing a system to the next step of evolution, which means innovation.

Message: 1214
Posted by: B. McDonaldsen
Posted on: Sunday, 3rd February 2008

Does ToC in your reply mean Theory of Constraints?

Thank you.

Message: 1215
Posted by: Valeri Souchkov
Posted on: Tuesday, 5th February 2008

Yes, I meant Theory of Constraints. Because in many cases it might be important to identify and understand what exactly constrains a certain parameter or a property of a product (or any other system) to evolve further and what creates a barrier for further innovation. Root Conflict Analysis incorporates the same idea, and we are looking for contradictions that prevent us from smooth transition to an improved or evolved product. For instance, one of the constraining factors to improve fuel economy is weight of a car, which we can't easily reduce since we also need to ensure safety and strength of the car.

Message: 1216
Posted by: Joe Marotta
Posted on: Wednesday, 6th February 2008

Another very quick idea:

Subversion analysis can be used in either structured innovation or Six Sigma, but is a little more prevalent in the innovation community.  Essentially, you see yourself as an element of the system and look at what contradictions <i>prevent you from causing problems<i>.  This is a more predictive technique, however, and likely somewhat tangential to your question.