TRIZ for Business: Application of RCA+ to Analyze and Solve Business and Management Problems

Abstract

This paper presents a basic process for solving business and management problems using a combination of classical TRIZ and additional techniques to organize a systematic approach to all phases of the problem solving process: from problem documentation to idea evaluation and assessment. We specifically focus on extending TRIZ with Root Conflict Analysis, which allows us to extract and map the contradictions arising in business systems and their environment that are the root cause of certain problems. To illustrate the successful application of TRIZ for Business a case study is included.

Full text

© 2006 by Valeri Souchkov, Rudy Hoeboer, Mathijs van Zutphen.
TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE
AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
Valeri Souchkov
ICG Training & Consulting, Enschede, The Netherlands, valeri@xtriz.com
Rudy Hoeboer
Crossing Signals, Amstelveen, The Netherlands, rudy@xignals.com
Mathijs van Zutphen
Crossing Signals, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, mathijs@xignals.com
Edited version based on the paper presented at ETRIA TFC 2006 Conference in Kortrijk,
Belgium, October 9-11, 2006
Published in the Online TRIZ Journal (www.triz-journal.com), February, 2007
Abstract
This paper presents a basic process for solving business and management problems
using a combination of classical TRIZ and additional techniques to organize a
systematic approach to all phases of the problem solving process: from problem
documentation to idea evaluation and assessment. We specifically focus on
extending TRIZ with Root Conflict Analysis, which allows us to extract and map the
contradictions arising in business systems and their environment that are the root
cause of certain problems. To illustrate the successful application of TRIZ for
Business a case study is included.
Keywords: TRIZ, Contradiction, Problem Solving, Root Conflict Analysis, Business
and Management Innovation.
1. Introduction
In recent years, a number of TRIZ researchers and practitioners have been
experimenting with extending TRIZ to a range of non-technical areas, including business
and management systems [4,5,7,8]. The basic premise behind such experiments is that
the TRIZ methodology for solving complex and difficult problems - which demand “out-
of-the-box” thinking - is independent from the area of application and can address all
kinds of problems arising in artificial systems, e.g. technological, social, business,
cultural, artistic, and so forth. We intend to show that this is in fact the case; TRIZ is
evolving into a general methodology that can be effectively applied to many domains of
problem solving.
One of the authors of this paper initiated this work in 1998 [9] and acquired extensive
experience using TRIZ to help resolve business and management conflicts. During the
last six years, a number of successful projects helped develop a process-based method
titled “xTRIZ” (where ‘x” stands for ”eXtended TRIZ”) which helps to analyze business
and management problems, to identify root conflicts and causes, to select the problems
to solve, to generate new ideas and solution strategies, and evaluate the final results.
The approach organizes the use of both basic and advanced TRIZ tools and can be
applied to both technological and business systems. In addition to standard TRIZ tools,
the process includes additional techniques to enhance the problem solving and decision
making process, such as; Root Conflict Analysis, a Comparative Ranking Scorecard and
Multi-Criteria Decision Matrix. In this paper, we limit ourselves to presenting the general
principles of the xTRIZ process and illustrate its application in a specific case.
The basic process of the xTRIZ for business applications are shown in Fig. 1. Each step of
the process is supported with techniques intended to systematically process input

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
2
information from the previous process step and provide output for the next step. This is
an iterative process where wrong assumptions or decisions made in earlier stages can be
corrected by creating a feedback loop back to the step where the assumption or decision
was initially made.
Figure 1. Six-step Basic xTRIZ Process
In case when the basic xTRIZ process does not result in viable ideas and solutions, more
advanced TRIZ techniques are used; however we do not present them due to the scope
of this paper.
2. Process Overview and Case Study
Throughout the rest of the paper we will demonstrate how the xTRIZ process works by
elaborating on the steps shown above and illustrate them in a case study. We selected
the following case1:
A company with a core competence in developing and manufacturing electronic devices
for hardware testing invested a considerable effort in creating sophisticated software,
which was embedded in the device to collect and analyze data to produce actual reports
and forecasts. However the company was unable to convince most of its customers to
pay a higher price for devices equipped with this software. Thus, the actual sales volume
was much lower than expected.
The xTRIZ process was used to identify core problems and explore what could be done to
solve these problems. As a rule, the entire process is performed by a TRIZ expert
together with the company’s project team including managers and professionals familiar
with different aspects of the problem.
2.1 Problem Analysis
At this stage, the problem is documented and major targets, constraints, and limitations,
are identified which are used as criteria for evaluating and assessing new ideas
generated in step 5 of the xTRIZ process.
1 Although based on an actual situation, the case presented in the paper is an aggregation of several projects to
provide more clarity and educational value.
Problem identification and documentation; defining
constraints and limitations; establishing targets and goals
Solution strategies evaluation and assessment
with Multi-Criteria Decision Matrix and TRIZ criteria
Problem analysis and diagnostics with RCA+; finding, linking
and grouping conflicts/contradictions
Assessment of the RCA+ diagram and selection of a
contradiction(s) to solve
Using Contradiction Matrix and Inventive Principles to
generate new solution ideas and strategies
Resource Analysis within a conflict space
1
2
3
4
5
6

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
3
Management focus on
technical and not
business issues
Business value for the
customer is not
explained well
Sales volume is low
High price of the
package
Customers do not
match value and
price
Considerable
effort to create
software
Extended
functionality
Size of the
market segment
is small
Inadequate reaction to
the high price
Understanding of the
customer’s value
chain is weak
Cooperation with
customer is
insufficient
Missing in the
organization’s
strategy
Customers are not willing to pay
much for the software
Sales focus on technical
aspects only
Interface is
too simple
Too narrow
application area
Complex
specifications
Customers expect free
software supplied with
products
Lack of business
competence by sales
force
Software is
complex
Technical
excellence
Easy to
use
Customer
satisfaction
Higher
revenues
Sales people are
engineers
Technology is
explained well
Software
modules
for reuse are not
available
2.2. Applying RCA+ to extract and map contradictions
To understand and diagnose the problem, we perform Root Conflict Analysis (RCA+) of
the situation given. RCA+ is a technique for analyzing inventive problems and situations
developed as a result of combining the methods for causal problem decomposition such
as Root Cause Analysis [3,13], Theory of Constraints [2,6], and TRIZ philosophy of
problem definition [1,12]. The difference with traditional cause-effect approaches is that
RCA+ is targeted at extracting and presenting contradictions that contribute a general
problem in a structured tree-like way rather than explore negative causes only in a
random manner. One of the main advantages of RCA+ is that one can stop at the level
were a cause is found which significantly contributes to the problem at hand, without
having to explore every possible cause. In more detail, RCA+ for technology applications
is presented in [10].
Figure 2. Resulting Root Conflict Analysis (RCA+) diagram
The starting point for composing the RCA+ diagram was the main negative effect “Sales
volume is low”. Our goal was to explore all factors that have been contributing to this
main negative effect by revealing and presenting all interrelated contradictions. An RCA+
diagram is built in a top-down manner by presenting a cause and asking a series of
1.1
2
.1
2
.
2
2
.
3
3
.
1
4
.1
.1
4
.1
4
.1
.2
4
.1
.3
4
.
2.1
4
.
2.2

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
4
control questions to understand whether the presented cause is a contradiction or not,
whether it needs other conditions or not, and what the underlying causes leading towards
this specific cause are. The resulting diagram (shown in a simplified form for optimal
clarity) is presented in Fig. 2.
All negative causes are tagged with a minus (-) sign, all positive effects with a plus (+)
sign. Causes with both positive and negative effects are identified as contradictions. A
cause of a contradiction is tagged with a combined “plus-minus” (+-) sign.
In this case, the overall complexity of the problem is caused by a number of
contradictions all in some way contributing to the general negative effect. Contradictions
that are closer to the top-level problem contribute more strongly to that problem. For
this reason focusing on the top-level contradictions would eliminate the main negative
effect with more limited scope. The bottom-level contradictions (root contradictions)
usually express problems solutions to which have a broader range of consequences for
the entire system. Our experience has shown that solving bottom-level contradictions
leads to long-term solutions with potential side benefits and solving top-level
contradictions helps to obtain faster but short-term solutions. The danger of causing
unwanted effects in related systems by solving bottom level contradictions is eliminated
by using a holistic approach to the whole system and by iteration of solutions that do not
survive evaluation.
The diagram involves two types of relationships between causes: “OR” when a certain
effect is caused by two or more independently acting causes (shown as several arrow-
head lines from two or more different causes towards the same effect at the diagram),
and “AND” relationship, when both causes act together to provide a negative effect
(shown as a circle at the diagram). For instance:
1. The effect “Customers are not willing to pay much for the software” is caused by
both “High price of the software” and “Inadequate reaction to high price”. A high
price alone does not cause an inadequate reaction; this happens only in our
particular case, where customers are not willing to pay a higher price. If we
remove any one of these two causes, no matter which one, the negative effect will
cease to exist.
2. “Inadequate reaction to high price” is caused by two causes acting independently:
i) “Customers used to free software supplied with the device”, and ii) Customers
do not match value of software and its price”. Even if we remove one of the
causes, the effect will still be present.
An important observation is that once we identify a contradiction and study its roots, it is
very probable that other causes contributing to this particular contradiction will be
contradictions as well because there is an inheritance effect.
These contradictions might be coupled with other negative effects via OR/AND
relationships or caused by non-changeable conditions that lead to the creation of
conflicts, such as local and international policies, legal obligations and so forth.
2.3. Contradiction Analysis
The next step is to select the contradiction to analyze and solve which will have the
greatest impact on the main negative effect.
In “AND” relationships, where two different causes are linked, it is enough to solve any
one of the contributing contradictions and the general effect will disappear. In “OR”
relationships the whole chain of causes that contribute to a negative effect should be
eliminated. It is not always the case that solving a single contradiction eliminates the
negative effect, because several independent contradictions may be creating the negative
effect from different parts of the system. Although in certain situations a solution to one

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
5
contradiction can resolve another contradiction as well. The best scenario is to search for
a single solution to eliminate all alternative causes simultaneously. The best way to do
this we have found is by combining several potential solution directions – by applying
inventive principles from one or more contradictions simultaneously - into one and
translating that direction to a solution that fits in the overall context of the system.
Suffice it to say that just as in the technology context of TRIZ — though highly desirable,
— this is not always possible.
In our case, the main negative effect is caused by two contradiction chains linked by the
relationship “AND”, which means that selecting either the cause “High price of the
software” or the cause “Inadequate reaction to high price” will solve the problem.
Depending on the problem solving goals, i.e. the effects and scope of the solution,
there are three strategies to selecting the contradiction(s) to solve:
1. The first strategy is to select the highest contradiction(s) in a chain which
contributes to the main negative effect. Usually solving such a contradiction
results in solutions that solve a very specific problem.
2. To obtain a strategic solution within a broader scope, another strategy is to
select a root contradiction.
3. The third strategy is to combine both approaches, and perform comparative
ranking of all contradictions along the entire selected chain of contradictions to
select the most “promising” contradiction.
In the case under consideration, the combined strategy was used. We have two sub-trees
of contradictions which contribute to the same cause “Customers are not willing to pay
much for the software”: the first sub-tree is comprised by contradictions from 1.1. to 3.1,
and the second sub-tree is comprised by contradictions from 4.1 to 4.2.3. In this paper
we limit ourselves to the first sub-tree.
Note that contradictions 1.1, 2.1 (including the contradictions causing them), and 3.1 are
linked by the “OR” relationship which means that they independently contribute to the
negative effect. To reduce the complexity of solving each problem independently, all
three chains of contradictions are included in the comparative ranking.
As a definition of the negative effect in the table of contradictions below, we take the
closest negative effect to the contradiction. The same contradiction can contribute to
several positive and negative effects; therefore we select those effects that are closest to
the context of the problem (Table 1).
Cause Positive effect Negative effect
1.1 Customers expect free
software supplied with
products
Customer satisfaction Inadequate reaction to
high price
2.1 Sales focus on
technical aspects only
Technology is explained
well
Lack of business
competence by sales force
2.2 Sales people are
engineers
Technology is
explained well
Lack of business
competence by sales force
2.3 Management focus on
technical and not
business issues
Technology is explained
well
Understanding of the
customer’s value chain was
not included to
organization’s strategy
3.1 Interface is too simple Easy to use Customers do not match
value and price
Table 1. Contradictions within a sub-tree

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
6
Once a combined strategy was selected, the project team ranked the contradictions
according to criteria previously agreed upon and presented the results as a scorecard
(Table 2).
Cause 1.1 2.1 2.2
2.3
3.1
Score
1.1 Customers used to free software 1 1 -1 1 2
2.1 Sales focus on technical aspects
only
-1 0 -1 1 -1
2.2 Sales people are engineers -1 0 -1 1 -1
2.3 Management focus on technical
and not business issues
1 1 1 1 4
3.1 Interface is too simple -1 -1 -1 -1 -4
Table 2. Comparative Ranking Scorecard
As a result, two contradictions were selected to investigate, i.e. 1.1 and 2.3.. In the
following we will focus on how contradiction 1.1. was solved (Fig. 3).
Figure 3. Selected contradiction
2.4. Resource Analysis
After selecting the contradiction to solve, we need to make an inventory of the available
resources within the systemic context of the contradiction, which is done in accordance
with classical TRIZ procedures:
Companies that produce similar combinations of device-
software
SUPERSYSTEM:
SIMILAR/IDENTICAL/INVERSE5
6
4
3
2
1
Customers, product environment, suppliers, investors,
independent analysts, internet, independent experts,
retailers, research and academic facilities;
communication capabilities between customers,
suppliers, experts, analystsSUPERSYSTEM: ENVIRONMENT
Company people, sales people, engineers, analysts,
software developers, IT infrastructure of the company,
Product, domain expertise, Business expertise,
Communication capabilities inside companySYSTEM
Information about existing customers, competitors,
suppliers, information about domain, information about
short- and long-term benefitsINFORMATION
Customer space, company space, external possibilitiesSPACE
Time before sales; time during sales.TIME
DESCRIPTIONRESOURCE
Companies that produce similar combinations of device-
software
SUPERSYSTEM:
SIMILAR/IDENTICAL/INVERSE5
6
4
3
2
1
Customers, product environment, suppliers, investors,
independent analysts, internet, independent experts,
retailers, research and academic facilities;
communication capabilities between customers,
suppliers, experts, analystsSUPERSYSTEM: ENVIRONMENT
Company people, sales people, engineers, analysts,
software developers, IT infrastructure of the company,
Product, domain expertise, Business expertise,
Communication capabilities inside companySYSTEM
Information about existing customers, competitors,
suppliers, information about domain, information about
short- and long-term benefitsINFORMATION
Customer space, company space, external possibilitiesSPACE
Time before sales; time during sales.TIME
DESCRIPTIONRESOURCE
Inadequate reaction to
high price
Customers used to
free software supplied
with products
Customer
satisfaction
Positive Effect
Negative
Effect
1.1

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
7
2.5. Solution Strategies Generation
To resolve the contradiction “Customer satisfaction” versus “Inadequate reaction to high
price”, we can use several methods. The standard method would be to apply the
contradiction matrix for business and management described in [4,5]. By identifying a
contradiction as a predefined parameter “Demand” (positive effect) versus another
predefined parameter “Amount of Information” (negative effect), we obtain references to
several inventive principles: 2, 29, 3, 35. For instance, the use of principle 2 “Taking
Away” led to the following ideas:
Place analytical part on a server that can be downloaded after payment.
5
Offer two versions of the package: one expensive with installed complex
software and one with locked complex part that can be unlocked after extra
payment.
5
Remove the analytical part of the software from the device and relocate it on
a server for paid access.
2
Introduce smaller monthly payments instead of one large one-time fee
6
4
3
1
#
Do not charge for the software, charge for the consulting service provided as
additional service to get most results from the analytical part of the software.
Link embedded software with server software to get customized reports,
charge for server service.
Transfer software to an independent company that will sell software
independently.
PROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGIES BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE “TAKING AWAY”
Place analytical part on a server that can be downloaded after payment.
5
Offer two versions of the package: one expensive with installed complex
software and one with locked complex part that can be unlocked after extra
payment.
5
Remove the analytical part of the software from the device and relocate it on
a server for paid access.
2
Introduce smaller monthly payments instead of one large one-time fee
6
4
3
1
#
Do not charge for the software, charge for the consulting service provided as
additional service to get most results from the analytical part of the software.
Link embedded software with server software to get customized reports,
charge for server service.
Transfer software to an independent company that will sell software
independently.
PROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGIES BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE “TAKING AWAY”
2.6. Ideas Evaluation and Assessment
The same process was repeated for other contradictions, and the resulting list of ideas
and solution strategies was compiled and ranked according to a set of criteria established
at the phase of Problem Documentation with the use of a Multi-Criteria Decision Matrix
[11] (a limited selection of concepts is shown):
28Introduce monthly payment system instead of large one-time fee
12
28Transfer partly software to a server for analysis as a paid service
11
-4Enrich software interface with “power” functionality
4
4Launch website with self-explanatory simulations
7
11Replace Managing Director
1
10Enrich sales team with business people
3
10Study customer’s value chain and adjust sales strategy
6
13Charge not for software but for consulting service
9
21Establish consulting unit by hiring engineers from sales as consultants
8
9Launch free explanatory workshops for customers
14
11Link embedded software with server software to get customized reports
10
14Launch interactive customer feedback service
13
2
5
15
#
17License software to a new independent company
19Hire external marketing expertise
24Introduce two different (“light” and “pro”) versions of the package
SCOREPROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGY
28Introduce monthly payment system instead of large one-time fee
12
28Transfer partly software to a server for analysis as a paid service
11
-4Enrich software interface with “power” functionality
4
4Launch website with self-explanatory simulations
7
11Replace Managing Director
1
10Enrich sales team with business people
3
10Study customer’s value chain and adjust sales strategy
6
13Charge not for software but for consulting service
9
21Establish consulting unit by hiring engineers from sales as consultants
8
9Launch free explanatory workshops for customers
14
11Link embedded software with server software to get customized reports
10
14Launch interactive customer feedback service
13
2
5
15
#
17License software to a new independent company
19Hire external marketing expertise
24Introduce two different (“light” and “pro”) versions of the package
SCOREPROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGY

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
8
3. Summary and Conclusions
As is clear from the illustrated case study, the process for solving technological problems
can be used with little or no adaptation within the context of business and management
problems, and leads to a thorough understanding of the complexity of a problem in
addition to clearly generated effective solutions. The range of ideas and solution
strategies generated might not necessarily be regarded as “inventive” in the way this
term is understood within a technological context, nevertheless these solutions can be
innovative with respect to a given business system, company, organization or market
segment.
In summary, xTRIZ for business:
1. Provides a systematic, reproducible and context independent approach to
solving business and management problems.
2. Provides a common platform for teams to:
a. perform consistently;
b. be able to backtrack without having to start all over;
c. iteratively improve; and,
d. communicate results transparently throughout the entire process.
3. Provides supporting techniques to each step of the problem solving process; for
mapping problems, selecting the most promising sub-problem(s) to solve, and
evaluating the results.
4. Drastically accelerates the process of searching for new ideas and solutions.
5. Relaxes thinking constraints by providing a framework to think laterally (“out of
the box”) and parallel (“in multiple boxes at the same time”).
6. Provides a systematic approach to creating consensus within teams through a
common agreement on how to model the problem, selecting the most promising
problem to solve, and evaluating the ideas generated.
References
1. Altshuller G., Creativity as an Exact Science, Gordon & Breach, 1988.
2. Goldratt E.M., Theory of Constraints, North River Press, 1999.
3. Ishikawa K., Guide to Quality Control, Asian Productivity Organisation, Tokyo, 1991.
4. Mann D. & Domb E., “40 Inventive (Management) Principles With Examples”, The TRIZ
Journal, September, 1999, http://www.triz-journal.com/archives/1999/09/a/index.htm
5. Mann D., Hands-on Systematic Innovation for Business and Management, Lazarus Press,
2004.
6. Moura, E. C., “TOC Trees Help TRIZ”, The TRIZ Journal, September 1999.
http://www.triz-journal.com/archives/1999/09/e/index.htm
7. Ruchti B. & Livotov P., “TRIZ-based Innovation Principles and a Process for Problem Solving
in Business and Management”, The TRIZ Journal, December 2001, http://www.triz-
journal.com/archives/2001/12/c/index.htm
8. Smith H., “P-TRIZ Formulation”, #2 in a series, BPTrends.com, March 2006.
9. Souchkov V., “M-TRIZ: Application of TRIZ to Solve Business Problem”, white paper,
Insytec, 1999.
10. Souchkov V., “Root Conflict Analysis (RCA+): Structuring and Visualization of
Contradictions”, in Proc. ETRIA TRIZ Future 2005 Conference, Graz, November 16-18,
2005, Leykam Buchverlag, 2005.
11. Tague N. R., The Quality Toolbox, Second Edition, ASQ Quality Press, 2004.
12. Zlotin B. & Zussman A., Directed Evolution: Philosophy, Theory and Practice, Ideation
International Inc, 2001.
13. Private discussions with P. Hendriks and W. van Elschout, DSM, 2002-2003.
About Authors
Valeri Souchkov brings 18 years of experience with TRIZ and Systematic Innovation
since co-founding Invention Machine Labs in Minsk, Belarus in 1988. Since that time he
has been involved in training and consulting customers worldwide, among which are a
number of Fortune 500 companies. In 2000, he initiated and co-founded the European
TRIZ Association ETRIA (www.etria.net) and since 2003 heads ICG Training and
Consulting, a company in the Netherlands which develops, uses and promotes techniques
and tools of Systematic Innovation both for commercial and government organizations in

TRIZ FOR BUSINESS: APPLICATION OF RCA+ TO ANALYSE AND SOLVE BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
9
technology and business areas. Valeri is also an invited lecturer of the University of
Twente in TRIZ and Systematic Innovation. He can be reached at valeri@xtriz.com
Rudy Hoeboer spent ten years for Capgemini: from business consulting to international
account management after successful completion of Technical Management Studies at the
University of Twente. During the last five years Mr. Hoeboer has been responsible for
business development in the area of complex IT solutions, from writing and evaluating
business plans to setting up sales channels. Through his current company, Crossing
Signals, he is involved in helping multi-disciplinary teams solve complex issues through
collaboration and systematic innovation. Rudy Hoeboer can be reached at
rudy@xignals.com
Mathijs van Zutphen studied philosophy, cognitive science and logic at the University of
Amsterdam and the University of Edinburgh. After working as a lecturer at Karoli Gaspar
University in Budapest he pursued a career in ICT, first as a developer, later as the co-
founder of a successful internet start-up. After a period of focusing on business
intelligence, knowledge management and international trade, van Zutphen joined Crossing
Signals where he contributes to developing and marketing a service offering that is unique
in combining team-learning, empowerment, diversity, collaboration, and a creative
process structured through TRIZ. Mathijs van Zutphen can be reached at
mathijs@xignals.com