Discovering Why Targeted Objects are Required

Acknowledgements

This book is the work of a collaborative group.

Contributors
Larry Ball (Primary Author)
David Troness
Kartik Ariyur
Jason Huang
Steve Hickman
Petr Krupansky
Larry Miller

Editors
Erika Ball
Larry Ball
David Troness
Paul Dwyer
Robert Lang

Illustrators
Larry Ball
David Troness

Other Authors, Theoreticians, Practitioners Whose Writings or Teachings have Impacted This Work
Genrich Altshuller
Ellen Domb
Roni Horowitz
John Terninko
Alla Zusman
Boris Zlotin
Lev Shulyak
Yuri Salamatov
Victor Fey
Eugene Rivin
Darrell Mann
Sergei Ikovenko
Simon Litvin
Peter Ulan
Lane Desborough
Clayton Christensen
Renee Mauborgne
Kim Chan

Where the Material Comes From

Much of the material for this book was inspired by the thought leaders referenced. The original intent was to codify the insights of these thought leaders, but the process of codification ultimately led to the synthesis of other experimental methods. This is because codification required recognizing patterns of similarity among tools. Once this was achieved, the various tools were grouped with key decisions. Decisions require and generate information that flows to subsequent decisions. Patterns and gaps became visible during this formative process. Experimental methods were introduced to fill those gaps. The effectiveness of these experimental methods hinges on whether they actually assist the problem solver in identifying product or process characteristics that will delight the market.

Introduction to Discovering Why Objects Are Required

Prerequisite Knowledge: If you have not yet read the TRIZ Power Tools Working with Functions and Discovering Cause, please do so before reading this book.

Why the Need for This Book
All useful elements exist to provide functions that other elements in the system or super-system require. Often, elements exist because they are needed to solve a problem introduced by other elements. Something in the system is not functioning properly, and an element is introduced to fix the issue. Almost any useful function can be viewed through this lens. If we can uncover these deeper problems and resolve them without adding new elements, the system becomes simpler.

Most useful functions can be framed as compensating functions. For instance, the grass must be mowed because it isn’t fulfilling its role. If it were, it would grow to the perfect length like eyebrows or eyelashes and then fall out. Therefore, we can see mowing the lawn as a compensating function.

Harmful elements exist because someone has deemed them unavoidable or because their detrimental effects have not yet been recognized and removed. Most harmful elements also serve a useful function, making them difficult to eliminate. If we could understand why these harmful elements exist, we would be better positioned to remove them by addressing a deeper issue.

Understanding and eliminating the need for (or cause of) the target element allows us to potentially remove large groups of elements from the system. Many elements or sub-systems are necessary to compensate for other elements that are not performing their functions. There is a deeper function that is flawed or harmful, and this fact has become obscured. The element that is not functioning correctly is being hidden by compensating elements. If we can identify this weakness and correct it, then the compensating elements can be removed. This method of simplifying systems and alleviating burdens is very powerful.

Simplified Method for Discovering Why Required

Method

Step 1: Look at the function diagram and determine whether it is evident which functions need to be idealized to remove elements from the system.

Example—Pet Feeding System

A pet feeding system consists of multiple functions, including harmful ones that complicate the process. These harmful functions require human attention and maintenance.

Step 1: Look at the function diagram and determine whether it is evident which functions need to be idealized to remove elements from the system. Identify the functions that require idealization.

From the diagram below, we observe that many harmful functions are linked to bacteria. We can hypothesize that the pet contaminates or introduces the bacteria into the water. The pet cannot perform this function on its own. The water carries away the bacteria from the pet’s muzzle and tongue and continues to nourish it, especially in warm climates. We conclude that the harmful function of harboring and nourishing the bacteria is the one we aim to idealize.

Discovering Why Targeted Elements are Required

Method

Step 1: Start with the burdensome function and demonstrate the existence of elements as inputs:

Step 2: Show what causes the objects to exist if they are not required by the system.

Step 3: If the element is required, then turn the existence knob for all elements and indicate “??” in the resulting functions to signify that no element performs these required functions.

Step 4: Display the resulting problems that arise if the functions are not performed due to the absence of the elements.

Step 5: Present object attributes that lead to the detrimental or missing effects of the absent functions.

Step 6: Continue constructing the causal diagram in this manner, remembering to use existence as an attribute for each function.

Step 7: Using the causal diagram, identify functions that, if idealized, will allow for the removal of the most system elements. If these are useful functions, they are typically closer to the system product on the function diagram. Enhancing these functions allows for the removal of auxiliary elements that are further from the system product.

Step 8: Summarize the key functions that should be idealized and the key parameters that need to be altered to improve the situation.

Explanation

We begin the process of determining why targeted elements are required (or where they originate from if they serve no useful function) by considering their existence. The issue exists because an element is present. If a useful element does not exist, a new problem emerges. This represents an alternative problem path similar to those we have encountered previously. This path will elucidate why the element is necessary within the system. This will be crucial when we consider potential solutions. Most elements are required because something else in the system is not functioning as it should or because useful elements can also cause harm.

Practically, we ascertain why elements are required in the system by removing them and subsequently asking, “what worsens?” This is a novel and powerful technique that we incorporate into the causal analysis diagram. The process of identifying elements and then removing them to observe the effects continues until we can trace the chain of causes that explains why elements are necessary. Along the way, we discover that some elements exist to prevent or mitigate harm or because something performs a function but does so inadequately to be useful. If we could resolve this issue, we would no longer need the element in question.

Once we fully comprehend the key functions that need to be rectified, we will idealize them or their attributes. Our goal is to idealize functions in such a way that the fundamental problem is entirely resolved and we can remove the maximum number of elements from the system.

Shortcutting the Causal Analysis
In most instances, it is not essential to understand the complete cause before solving the problem. We can grasp why targeted elements are needed before gaining a comprehensive understanding of the underlying problem causes. For many years, it was the author’s practice to conduct a thorough causal analysis. This can be very enlightening, but it is also time-consuming. Under the time pressures that exist in competitive commercial environments, it is not always feasible to perform a complete causal analysis. If the system primarily relies on physics, it is often possible to remove elements without fully comprehending the root of the problem.

There are exceptions to this guideline, particularly when the system is notably complex or when human involvement is necessary; it may be essential to conduct a complete causal analysis first.

Example—Pet Feeding System

We previously determined that the birds, bacteria, and insects were likely targets for removal. Let’s examine the bacteria first.

Step 1: Start with the burdensome function and illustrate the existence of elements as inputs:

The burdensome function we are considering is the harmful effect of the bacteria on the pet.

Step 2: Show what causes the objects to exist if they are not required by the system.

We could trace the existence of the pet in the system for innovative solutions, but instead, let’s examine the bacteria more closely since it is not essential in the system. Where does it come from, and what enables it to persist in the system? We note that the bacteria primarily originate from the pet’s muzzle and tongue. The bacterial food also comes from the same source. The pet places its muzzle into the pet food, and particles of this food are then transferred to the water, becoming sustenance for the bacteria.

Step 3: If the element is required, then adjust the existence knob for all elements and display “??” in the resulting functions to indicate that no element performs these necessary functions.

In this case, the pet is required, but the bacteria are not. We will not explore why the pet is necessary for this example.

Step 4: Illustrate the resulting problems that arise if the functions are not performed due to the absence of the elements.

As we are not addressing the requirement for the pet at this stage, this is not yet necessary.

Step 5: Display object attributes that lead to the harmful or absent effects of the missing functions.

At this point, this is not required.

Step 6: Continue constructing the causal diagram in this manner, keeping in mind to use existence as an attribute for each function.

We advance the diagram by highlighting the necessity of water. As this is a crucial element, steps 3-5 are now applicable.

The existence of the bacteria is further elaborated. Space does not allow us to illustrate all the attributes of the water and the watering bowl that regulate this, but one notable attribute in the diagram is the volume of water in the bowl and its shape. The water volume determines how long the bacteria can feed on the food and water, while the shape allows the bacterial food to gather in corners. We can imagine that if the volume were bucket-sized, the bacteria might never be removed. Conversely, if the volume matched the water consumed each time, then the bacteria would be expelled anytime the pet took a drink. Additionally, we note that if the water volume is smaller than the food washed off the muzzle, it becomes significantly less effective. We have developed the diagram sufficiently to illustrate the utility of this method. Remember that we are aiming to identify key elements, which, if eliminated, allow us to remove other system elements simultaneously. At this stage, the bacteria in the water are part of the system. They present an additional burden to both the pet and its owner. Our goal is to eliminate the bacteria from the system if possible.

Step 7: Using the causal diagram, identify functions that, if idealized, will enable the removal of the most system elements. If these are valuable functions, they are typically closer to the system product on the function diagram. Enhancing these functions allows for the removal of auxiliary elements that are further from the system product.

The removal of water by the pet is a key weak function. This deeper problem, if resolved, allows the system to simplify and eliminates one of the primary constraints on the target market, which is the harm that bacteria pose to the pet. If the water were removed more completely, the bacterial problem would largely diminish. Our analysis indicates that this is mainly influenced by the volume of water and the shape of the pet bowl. Additionally, we observe that the removal of food from the pet’s muzzle also correlates with the volume of water.

Step 8: Summarize the key functions that should be idealized and the key parameters that need to be changed to improve the situation.

It was determined that the removal of water by the pet constitutes a key weak function for eliminating bacteria. The primary issue with this function is that the amount of water removed does not equate to the total in the bowl. This underlying problem, if addressed, can simplify the system and relieve a primary constraint on the target market, namely the harm bacteria cause to the pet. If the water were removed more thoroughly, the bacterial problem would largely be resolved. The volume of water dictates how long bacteria can feed on the food and water. If the volume were substantial, the bacteria may never be fully eliminated. The requirement, therefore, becomes to limit the amount of water available. Moreover, if the volume matches the amount consumed each time by the pet, the bacteria would be eliminated every time the pet drinks. We also note that with a smaller volume of water, the amount of food washed off the muzzle would decrease significantly. The net outcome is that the amount of water available should equal what the pet consumes. Further analysis of the water removal process showed that the shape of the bowl allows food for the bacteria to collect in corners. Our analysis reveals that all these factors are largely controlled by the volume of water, and the shape of the pet bowl should ensure that nothing can accumulate in corners. There should be no corners in a pet bowl. The pet should drink from a “spoon.” With all these requirements met, the water bowl becomes “self-cleaning” because the pet naturally removes any food and bacteria each time it drinks. Thus, there is an additional requirement that the small amount of water be replenished after or during the time the pet drinks.

Example—Acid Container

In the upcoming section, which serves as a tutorial on causal analysis, an example is provided regarding acid corroding a pan used to hold test cubes. The acid damages the cubes, but it also harms an expensive pan that contains both the cubes and the acid. Most people would begin by seeking cheaper materials or methods to mitigate acid damage without considering that the pan may be unnecessary. If the pan is not required, we can entirely avoid compensating for acid damage. By employing the following process, we can identify the issue that necessitates the pan. If this problem is resolved (rather than compensated), we can eliminate the need for the pan, and potentially other system elements.

Step 1: Start with the burdensome function and show the existence of elements as inputs:

The burdensome function we are considering is the harmful effect of the acid on the container.

Step 2: Show what causes the objects to exist if they are not required by the system.

In this case, the creation or provision of the acid and pan are not considered because both are necessary for the current system to function. They are not produced products or unwanted waste, for example. We will bypass this step in this iteration.

Step 3: Turn the existence knob for all elements and then show “??” in the resulting functions to indicate that no element performs these required functions.

In this case, there is nothing to corrode the cubes and nothing to position the acid. Essentially, we have stated “the acid is required to corrode the cubes” and “the pan is required to position the acid relative to the cubes.” It may seem like a lot of effort to phrase it this way, but notice that we have also explored the possibility of addressing the problem by altering a rarely adjusted knob, existence. This opens the potential for resolving the contradiction that something must and must not exist. Furthermore, we have remained consistent with a straightforward set of rules connecting functions through the use of attributes.

Step 4: Show the resulting problems that occur if the functions are not executed because the elements do not exist.

In this case, there is no corrosion of the cubes, which is the primary reason that the acid is needed, and the acid is distributed everywhere except where the cubes are. Clearly, the essential function is not executed for both reasons. There is either no acid, or the placement of the acid is insufficient to corrode the cubes and ends up in the oven. This raises the possibility that the issue could be resolved by employing other functions.

Step 5: Show object attributes that contribute to the harmful or absent effects of the missing functions.

To conserve space, we will not address additional attributes that result in the absence of corrosion in the cubes. Regarding the ineffectiveness or potential harm of the acid’s location, there are several object attributes that influence this. First, the force of gravity pulls the acid away from the cubes, and the acid, being in liquid form, flows easily under gravity’s influence. The attraction of the acid to the cubes is low, while the weight of the acid is significant.

Step 6: Continue building the causal diagram in this manner, remembering to use existence as an attribute for each function.

We will illustrate one more addition to make the next step clearer and provide questions that can lead to important insights. We will include the harmful effect of gravity on the acid.

Step 7: Using the causal diagram, identify functions that, if idealized, would enable the removal of the most system elements. If these functions are deemed useful, they are typically positioned closer to the system product on the function diagram. Optimizing these functions allows for the elimination of auxiliary elements that are further from the system product.

The two key functions that need to be idealized are: the corrosion of the cubes and the positioning of the acid. The corrosion of the cubes is more closely related to the system product. In other words, if the corrosion of the cubes were carried out differently than the acid, then the pan would not be necessary.

Step 8: Summarize the key functions that should be idealized and the key parameters that need to be changed to enhance the situation.

Although the corrosion of the cubes could be approached differently, the decision has been made to explore various methods for positioning the acid.

References

In Progress.

Subscribe to receive updates on new eBooks and exclusive content.

*By subscribing you agree to our Terms & Conditions