We talked about the danger of High Gravity Ideas that can just pull everything towards them. The strategy I suggest is to use probably my favourite tool out of the TRIZ tool kit. This tool is called the Ideal Final Result (IFR) .  I use this tool at the start of an innovation session to break the fixation on looking at the problem and start moving towards the solution.

A very similar technique is used in NLP to break psychological inertia and when I am facilitating a group of working with individuals I would probably be using NLP techniques to help focus them on the solution.

You will commonly start off with a system and that system has problems or limitations and you’d like to fix them. A product is also considered to be a system, even raw materials are chemical or biological systems really. We consider these problems and limitations to be disadvantages of the system. Your system/product probably has good things too that are useful and valued, These are the advantages of the system and you’d like to keep them. An Ideal system would have none of the Disadvantages and all of the Advantages. This gives us the first two Characteristics of an IFR.

  • Eliminates the disadvantages of the original system
  • Preserves the advantages of the original system

Great!, lets go fix our machine or product but therein lies a common misconception.

The trap to avoid is to think only in terms of the current system or situation.

To avoid this we need to “chunk up” or start to think at a higher level.  Ask the question: “why do we want to solve this problem?” or “what is the purpose of this system?” We have to start thinking in terms of the Result. Why do we want  a car? Why do we want a mobile phone? Leaving aside the Bling aspects of a Porsche or iPhone;  it is about safe personal point to point travel and instant communications. (There is a great book about identifying these higher levels or jobs in a structured way called What Customers Want:. It’s a good read and doing the Importance/Satisfaction mapping can really help a team focus on Ideal Results.) Does the statement safe personal point to point travel have the word “car” in it? No. In fact, the Ideal Final Result doesn’t have any machines or tools. It occupies no space, has no weight, requires no labour and requires no maintenance. At this point it sounds like fantasy or magic but in fact it is the opposite.

Magic is breaking the laws of physics, Ideal Final Results are bound only by those laws.

Ideal Final Results are not bound by assumptions, by current business models or by the current solutions. Further more. because the Ideal Final Result doesn’t have any machines or tools it would be considered non ideal to start adding complexity and additional elements to the current system. Characteristic number three:

  • Does not make the system more complicated (uses free or available resources.)

An ideal system is not a bandaged up old one or the newer model. You should not have to buy any new equipment or materials, ideally you have everything you need already. Before we go any further, you don’t want to add any other costs, financial or otherwise. No deadly processes or dangerous environments or materials either. Characteristic number four:

  • no new harm

These four characteristics make up the Ideal Final Result. I am aware that TRIZ gets a bit of a bashing from people who say they can’t afford to retool their factories, chuck away all the investments they have made just because it is not “Ideal”.  In reality, most problems have pretty hard boundary conditions and are not Blue Sky.

In fact, just like you don’t build any other muscles without exercising against resistance you won’t build any innovation muscles  without facing reality.

The Ideal Final Result for you and your situation recognises that you have a current system and that adding cost or complexity isn’t going to seen to be a brillant innovative success. Ideality starts where you are now. Bashing of TRIZ is not called for! IFR does however force you to look at the constraints of the problem, and consider which constraints are required by the laws of physics, and which are self-imposed. It does ask you to look at the resources you have available to you to see how they can help. It encourages thinking about how you can get to the result – that higher purpose – in the simplest, lowest cost, lowest harm way.

In practice, I use these four guidelines like a compass. I don’t try to force teams too much, too early to hone in completely on an Ideal FINAL result. Your system will evolve to perfect ideality with enough time but maybe you can give the customers what they want in a better, cheaper safer way fashion right now with what you have available.

You start off heading for ideality, check the ideas you are coming up against the four criteria, improve them so they fit. Ask what is stopping you from achieving the Ideal solution not what is the problem with the current tools and machines. Try to look for the conditions under which that interference doesn’t apply. You will avoid those High Gravity Ideas that add no value because you have criteria now to help you find the areas in which to look.

I have seen in many occasions this tool to become the keystone of problem solving teams success. I’d love to hear your stories.

Welcome Back. Don't forget to leave a comment. Thanks.