Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

1 Introduction

Since Genrich Altshuller introduced the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ) at the end of the 1940s, it has been greatly developed and refined both by Altshuller and by his numerous colleagues and followers.

Over time, TRIZ has demonstrated great efficacy in solving difficult technical problems, many books on TRIZ have been issued, and thousands of people have been taught TRIZ and become certified TRIZ specialists.

TRIZ has not, however, become a standalone best industry practice for developing new products, technologies and services. In fact, very few innovations have been developed using TRIZ.

Moreover, even after years of intensive development, TRIZ still has not manifested itself as a serious science. For example, as shown in a recent review by Chechurin (2016), only 1200 publications with the word “TRIZ” were indexed in Scopus (the largest database of peer-reviewed literature from scientific journals, books and conference proceedings) by July 2014; another paper by Chechurin et al. (2015) indicates 1333 publications indexed by mid-2015. Considering that Scopus indexes about 21,000 scientific journals and contains about 50 million records, this number is quite small.

The goal of this work is to clarify the current status of TRIZ and its acceptance in the world, and to identify why TRIZ does not play the important role it deserves.

Research on these topics was recently done by Abramov (2016). In this chapter, the authors present further elaboration on the matter.

2 Method

The current status of TRIZ was determined by studying the following parameters:

  • How far TRIZ has spread around the world;

  • How much world interest in TRIZ there is;

  • How intensively TRIZ is used in industry and what its recognized area of application is; and

  • How aware the world is of TRIZ compared to other innovation methodologies.

The first three items were evaluated by analyzing available reports and research papers, while the last parameter was assessed by analyzing the number of web pages relating to TRIZ and other popular innovation methodologies revealed by advanced Google search.

3 Results of the Research

3.1 Worldwide Propagation of TRIZ Is Decelerating

At first glance, TRIZ has circulated around the world fairly successfully: as pointed out by Goldense (2016), the number of certified TRIZ experts worldwide has grown steadily, reaching the impressive number of 18,000 in 2015. Based on the International TRIZ Association (MATRIZ) data, in 2017 the number of certified TRIZ experts exceeded 24,000 (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

The total number of certified TRIZ specialists: growth over years

Full size image

This number, however, is distributed across countries very unevenly (Goldense 2016):

  • Of certified TRIZ specialists, 65% are now located in South Korea, where the government has actively supported the propagation of TRIZ;

  • Most of the remaining 35% are in China, Germany and Russia; and

  • A few other countries have a miniscule share of TRIZ specialists.

Using Goldense’s data, Abramov (2016) has shown that, after peaking in 2014, the number of specialists certified annually has begun decreasing (see Fig. 2), which likely reflects the fact that the popularity of TRIZ in South Korea, a major contributor to the number of TRIZ specialists, started to decrease at that time.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Number of new TRIZ specialists certified annually

Full size image

From Figs. 1 and 2, it can be concluded that the popularity of TRIZ reached its peak in about 2014; that is, TRIZ in its current/classical form is either at the third (maturity) stage of its evolution or in the beginning of the fourth (stagnation) stage.

3.2 World Interest in TRIZ Is Declining

Research conducted by Patrishkoff (2012) revealed that world interest in TRIZ is currently diminishing. The research is based on Google statistics of web searches, which shows that since 2004 worldwide interest in “TRIZ” has steadily decreased, and in 2011 it was down 55% while worldwide interest in “Innovation” decreased only ~25% by 2007 compared to 2004, and after 2007 it remains stable (Patrishkoff 2012b).

In contrast, worldwide interest in “Lean Six Sigma” has steadily increased and in 2011 it was up 110% relative to 2004; worldwide interest in “Lean” demonstrated only a slight down trend during 2004–2011 (Patrishkoff 2012a).

The current decline of world interest in TRIZ is confirmed indirectly by the dramatic reduction in the amount of web pages containing the word “TRIZ,” which has been observed in the last few years (Abramov 2016).

Based on this data, we can conclude that worldwide popularity of TRIZ has already passed its peak and is now declining, despite the fact that world interest in innovation remains stable.

This most probably means that competing methods for innovation, such as Lean Six Sigma, have become more widely adopted than TRIZ.

3.3 World Awareness of TRIZ Is Low

In order to identify how well TRIZ-related information is presented in the public domain, the authors have conducted a brief study. This involved a Google web search for a few popular competing methods and processes for solving technical and business problems, and developing new products (NPD). Besides TRIZ, these methods included Lean methodology, Theory of Constraints (TOC), Six Sigma, crowdsourcing and Design Thinking.

The following keywords were used to perform the search: Lean Method; Theory of Constraints (TOC); “Six Sigma”; “Design Thinking”; crowdsourcing; TRIZ. Only exact matches were searched.

The authors performed the search twice: in July 2016 and in January 2018 (see Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Results of Google search for innovation methods

Full size image

As seen from Fig. 3, there is far less TRIZ-related information on the Internet than information on other problem-solving and NPD methods. For example, the number of web pages related to Lean, Six Sigma and TOC are about two orders of magnitude larger than that of TRIZ-related pages.

This seems to be an accurate representation of how little the world knows about TRIZ compared to the other methodologies for innovating considered in the current research.

Moreover, Fig. 3 shows that TRIZ-related information on the Internet further decreased ~10% since July 2016, while the information on almost all other methods considered in this research noticeably increased over the same period. This may indicate that the downward trend in world interest in TRIZ, identified by Patrishkoff (2012), continues.

3.4 Recognized Area of TRIZ Application Is Narrow

Despite the fact that TRIZ is not very well known to the world and that whatever world interest does exist is falling, it must be admitted that TRIZ has been recognized and even adopted by popular best industry practices for NPD, such as Design for Six Sigma (DFSS).

Unfortunately, as shown by Kim et al. (2012), TRIZ is used in the DFSS process only at the concept development stage—when, or if, it is necessary to solve difficult technical problems.

It is clear from literature on Six Sigma, including the DFSS handbook by Yang and El-Haik (2009), that TRIZ tools employed in the DFSS process include only basic problem-solving tools from older “classical TRIZ” such as the Contradiction Matrix and 40 Inventive Principles, S-curve analysis, Trimming and so on.

The survey of TRIZ industrial case studies performed by Spreafico and Russo (2016) also identifies the Contradiction Matrix and 40 Inventive Principles as being the most frequently utilized tools.

TRIZ tools reduce technical risks associated with an NPD process. This is why the idea of integrating TRIZ into best industry practices has been popular among TRIZ developers since early 2000–2001. However, all publications on this matter so far have included only basic TRIZ tools—see, for example papers by Domb (2001), Sibalija and Majstorovic (2009), and Ilevbare et al. (2011).

The more advanced tools developed in modern TRIZ, for example, Function Oriented Search (FOS) (Litvin 2005), Main Parameters of Value (MPV) analysis (Malinin 2010; Litvin 2011) and Voice of the Product (VOP) (Abramov 2015a), are not yet recognized by the world, and, therefore, not used in existing best industry practices.

The authors’ conclusions, which correlate with those found in Chechurin’s review (Chechurin 2016), are:

  • TRIZ has been adopted for use in some popular NPD methods alongside other (non-TRIZ) tools;

  • The area for applying TRIZ, as currently recognized by the world, is too narrow because it is limited to the design of products/processes; and

  • The TRIZ tools that are recognized and most frequently used are the simpler, basic tools from old, classical TRIZ.

3.5 Practical Application of TRIZ in Industry Is Not Huge

In their survey of TRIZ industrial case studies, Spreafico and Russo (2016) said: “the spread of TRIZ has never reached the level of capillarity expected.”

Moreover, based on the time distribution of the published industrial case studies that they considered (see Fig. 4), it may be concluded that the practical application of TRIZ in industry has been rapidly declining since 2011.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Time distribution of TRIZ industrial case studies

Full size image

The decrease in the application of TRIZ in industry can be illustrated by the following example: Adunka (2008) reported that by 2008 about 41 engineers had passed a five-day TRIZ training course at Siemens, while by mid-2016 there had been 104 participants of MATRIZ level 1 training courses—which seems to represent the total number of engineers trained in TRIZ at Siemens. This means that only about 60 people had passed TRIZ training in the eight years since 2008, which is not a very impressive number for a company with almost half a million employees (in those years). This may reflect a general decline of industry’s interest in using TRIZ.

4 Discussion

As mentioned, classical TRIZ seems to be reaching the maturity, or even the stagnation, stage of its evolution just as world interest in TRIZ is declining.

According to a TRIZ S-curve analysis, it is fair to expect a more advanced innovation methodology to spark a new S-curve in the near future.

This new innovation methodology may be a modern, next-generation TRIZ—providing that it overcomes the main flaws in classical TRIZ.

One of these flaws, mentioned by Chechurin and Renev (2016), is a lack of specific tools for individual industries. In an industry-specific environment, universal TRIZ tools can be too cumbersome for practical use.

Some other researchers also consider classical TRIZ as not being particularly practical for industry. For example, Howard et al. (2009) said: “Creative stimuli in the form of the TRIZ inventive principles have shown much potential, however the industrial uptake of such stimuli is limited due to the practicalities of using this TRIZ approach.”

Another—and more serious—TRIZ flaw is the neglect of business and market needs.

In their report, Ilevbare et al. (2011) clearly describe the strength and flaw of TRIZ in current use: “TRIZ has its major strength in its ability to solve difficult innovation problems in a systematic and logical manner. However, it appears to pay little attention to linking the inventive problems and their solutions to market needs and drivers. Therefore there exists the unpleasant possibility of TRIZ providing a solution to a problem which has little or no profitability or commercial benefit to an organization.”

Modern TRIZ, however, has tools such as MPV analysis (Malinin 2010; Litvin 2011) and the VOP approach (Abramov 2015a), which are aimed specifically at addressing business/market needs. These tools may eliminate the main drawback of classical TRIZ and allow for more comprehensive integration of TRIZ into best industry practices.

This integration should involve using modern TRIZ tools at all stages of the NPD process, as suggested by one of the authors in an earlier paper (Abramov 2014).

Such comprehensive integration of TRIZ into the product development process dramatically reduces technical and business risks, which may be especially beneficial for businesses related to technological startups, specifically those that implement the Lean Startup methodology (Ries 2011). In lean startups rapid prototyping is the key, and utilization of TRIZ tools can make this process more efficient.

Moreover, before starting the development of any technical solutions, the Lean Startup methodology assumes performing so-called customer development. This involves validating assumptions about customer needs and checking the correctness of a customer portrait, which is further used as an input for developing new technical solutions—possibly using TRIZ. The TRIZ VOP approach (Abramov 2015a) can make the customer development process more reliable and objective.

An example of another opportunity to link TRIZ with business needs involves enhancing such popular systems-management methodology as the Theory of Constraints (TOC) with TRIZ tools as suggested by Domb and Dettmer (1999).

In the TOC, TRIZ tools can be beneficial for finding root causes using, for example, TRIZ-based Cause and Effect Chain Analysis (Abramov 2015b), and for efficiently solving the root causes.

5 Conclusions

Based on the results of this research, the following conclusions can be made.

World interest in TRIZ as well as the practical application of TRIZ in industry is declining, and classical TRIZ seems to be reaching the maturity, or even stagnation, stage in terms of its propagation and popularity.

The world-recognized application of TRIZ is currently limited to solving difficult technical problems at the concept generation stage.

Only basic, classical TRIZ tools have been adopted for this purpose by best industry practices, for example, by DFSS methodology.

Further development of TRIZ should focus on (but not be limited to) addressing business and market needs, which may include:

  • Developing business/market-oriented tools that are missing in classical TRIZ. Examples of such tools are VOP and MPV analysis;

  • Integrating TRIZ more fully with the most popular best industry NPD practices, such as Six Sigma, DFSS, TOC, and so on; and

  • Incorporating TRIZ tools into the most popular business approaches, for example, into the Lean Startup method.

Addressing business and market needs may initiate a new S-curve of TRIZ popularity and result in much wider adoption of TRIZ.