a simple theory underlying structured, problem-solving methodologies – asit… · 2006-10-03 ·...

Structured Problem Solving Theory 1

A Simple Theory UnderlyingStructured, Problem-Solving

Methodologies

– ASIT, TRIZ, USIT and Others

Ed Sickafus, PhD


They way we think duringstructured-problem solving differs

from the way it is taught.

Understanding this difference andhow we use our mental resourcescan aid our innovative application

of structured methodology.


Structured problem-solving methods arelogical and organized while our natural

thinking is not.

Assumption

A cause of methodology complexity is itslogical idealization as compared with our

natural method of thinking.


Although neither organized nor logical,natural thinking has resources often

overlooked.

Assumption

Our innovative problem-solving skillscan be improved with more natural

thinking and the use of all our thinkingresources.


We will examine

• natural thinking,

• thinking resources

• innovation ,

and their relation to how we mentallyexecute structured problem-solving.


Two halves of our brains think

Both perform reasoning,remembering, communication, andproblem solving. But they do themdifferently and share their results.

Example:

One is better at logic and the otherbetter at understanding metaphors.


LH and RH simultaneously receivethe same sensor information butprocess it by their own protocols.

Each is aware of the other throughthe joining corpus callosum.

How they think is unknown.


LH usually controls language and logic.

Technologists are considered to beinfluenced more by their LHs andartisans more by their RHs.

RH is better at visualization of spatialrelationships and use of metaphors.


Problem solving in dreams

History has many tales oftechnologists being stymied by aproblem for long periods, thendiscovering the answer metaphoricallyin a dream.

Is this RH finally being heard?

LH RH


LH RH

RH analyzes spatial informationbut can’t verbalize its results.

Try describing a spiral staircase whilesitting on your hands.

Psychologist David Galin


Definition of a creative person

“ … someone who can process innew ways information directly at hand– the ordinary sensory data availableto all of us.” Betty Edwards, PhD

= one having a new point of view.

LH RH


Herein, thinking refers to theconscious and subconsciousprocesses used in problem solving.

We are aware of the conscious, wecannot know the subconscious.

Conscious

Subconscious

LH RH


While we cannot know the activitiesof our subconscious we can, throughintrospection, make useful deductionsabout thinking and use them toengage best practices for innovation.

Conscious

Subconscious

LH RHThis requireslanguage –an LH trait.


Our natural thinking is unorganizedand uncontrolled.

It is at times logical, other times illogical.It can be rational and whimsical.

It jumps uncontrollably between differenttopics interrupting concentration.

It pulls together unusual objects andfunctions creating wholly new concepts.


Communication of problem solvingis orderly,

like this …

Definition SolutionAnalysis


Thinking while problem solving isnot orderly.

It is not like this …

nor this …

Definition SolutionAnalysis

Definition Analysis

Solution


Typically, we begin with aninstantaneous, intuitive, solution concept.It is tested and modified iteratively asnecessary for acceptance or rejection.

Definition simplifies / Analysis clarifies

IdeaSolutionAnalysis

Definition Solution

DefinitionAnalysis

IdeaIdea

Idea


From this observation we learn that inour natural mode of thinking, whileproblem solving,

the content of structure is importantnot its order.

LH RH


Communication must be organized

Organization is a heuristic forcommunication not for thinking.

We think disorganized thoughts butmust organize them forcommunication – a tedious process.

Several types of thinking have beenidentified with tendencies for LH and

RH preferences.


Understanding metaphorsKeeping time

MusicHigher-order mathematics

Experiencing & expressingemotions

Holistic processing

Reading facesSymbolic relationships

Discrimination of shapesSkilled movement

Copying of designsLanguage skillsRight HemisphereLeft Hemisphere


Summary of our thinking traits

NonverbalSyntheticActual, realAnalogicNon-temporalNon-rationalSpatialIntuitiveHolistic

VerbalAnalytic

SymbolicAbstract

TemporalRational

DigitalLogicalLinear

LH RHNon-verbal cognitionForm whole thingsRelating to the presentUnderstand metaphorSpace more importantSuspend judgmentHow parts go togetherLeaps of insightSee overall pattern


To maximize our creative thinking(not communication) we need tosubdue LH’s logical reasoning whileencouraging RH’s metaphoricalthinking.

Structure and language are the toolsof logical communication.

Image and metaphor are the toolsof creative thinking.


A flowchart is not needed, it is tooorganized and works againstunregulated random thinking.

A simple model of consciouslyseeding the subconscious can beused instead.

A model


Consciously seed the subconsciouswith verbal and graphic metaphors

Subconscious

Conscious

Solution

Analysis

Definition

Intuitiveconcepts

METAPHORS


Intuitive concepts are of two types:

• Instant recall of past experience --known problems;

• Recall of experience that approximatesthe given problem.

Innovation requires new and unusualassembly of parts with leaps of insight.


Problem situations arise as collections ofobjects, attributes, functions, unwantedeffects, causes, and extraneousinformation, which we must identify, sort,cull, and minimize – logical thinking.

Object – Attribute

Unwanted Effect Attribute – Object

Object – Attribute

Extraneous Information


Goal of DEFINITION

… to reduce a problem situationconsisting of objects, attributes,functions, unwanted effects,extraneous information, andimages …

to a well-defined problem


Well-defined problem-- rational and logical

Simplify:

Sort, cull, and minimize

Generify:

Use verbal and graphicmetaphors.

New perspectiveinnovative insight

DEFINITION

Input:Objects, Attributes, Functions, Unwanted effects,Extraneous information, Images


Graphic of a well-defined problem:

O – AU Am – O

O – A

Two active attributes support a functionor an unwanted effect.

One U,

Two causal A’s,

One affected Am,

Subdued O’s


Goal of ANALYSIS

… to identify root causes forclarification of a problem through itsphenomenology.

… and to generatenew and effective insights.

A tool


ANALYSIS

findingplausible

root causes…

Unwanted effect

Object A Object B

AttributeCauseEffect

CauseEffect

Attribute Attribute

Attribute… whilecreating

metaphoricalseeds


Problem Definition and Analysis

Candle

Flame

Light

A simple model for how to invent

Problem SituationOur Company

makes candles. Itis loosing market

share and needs abetter product in

order to compete.


Pick an unwanted effect,it defines the problem

Candle

Flame

Light

An Unwanted Effect

- an improved function

or

- a new function

UE = “Insufficient light”


Simplify to two objects in contactcontaining the problem

Candle

Flame

Light

UE = “Insufficient light”

Flame

Candle

Analyze & model for clarity


O – A

U Am – O

O – A

Simple model:

Flame – Temperature

Insufficient light Visibility – Table

Fuel – Rate of combustionTwo objects

Flame

Fuel (genericname for candle)


Analyze & modify

Plasma – Temperature


Fuel – Rate of combustionTwo objects

Flame

FuelTime

Dim Bright


Analyze & modify

Plasma – Temperature


Fuel – Rate of combustion

Attribute raisesquestion of whatdetermines rate?Takes us to the nextlevel of insight.

Plasma

Fuel vapor

Liquid fuel

Solid fuel

Wick


Solution strategies need to be

• simple,• graphic, and

• metaphorical with

minimum structure,expressed generically


Goal of SOLUTIONIs to resolve an unwanted effect.

There are 3 solution strategies

• Utilization

• Nullification

• Elimination


The 3 Generic Solution Strategies:

1. Utilization

A( U = F) A

A

U becomes a function, F

(Examine space/time dependence)


2. Nullification

AU A F – A

A

A new function is introduced, F,to counteract U.


3. Elimination

A( … )

A

Deactivation of a causal attribute(Decouple interaction of objects)


Mental attitudes forsimplifying problem solvingand encouraging moreinnovative solutions byengaging RH metaphoricalresources …

METAPHORS


• Recognize that order and logiccan encourage LH-logic versusRH-metaphorical thinking.

• Use structure as a heuristic notas a necessity.

• Components not order ofstructure are important.

METAPHORS


• Use simple sketches to engageRH metaphorical thinking.

• Match verbal descriptions withgraphic expressions.

• Suspend judgment of ideas inorder to encourage intuitiveleaps of insight.

METAPHORS


• Simplify a problem to a singleunwanted effect and minimize thenumber of objects in order toenable a holistic view of a problem.

• Seed the subconscious withverbal metaphors.

• Start with solutions.

METAPHORS


• Iterate between solution, analysis,and definition in steps rather thancomplete one before moving on.

• Search concepts at every step.

• Follow your inspiration.

The goal of a methodology is tospark new concepts from newviewpoints.

METAPHORS


By understanding how we think, and

by motivating metaphorical

participation of both brain

hemispheres in problem solving, we

can learn, practice, and teach

problem solving with innovative

effectiveness.


With language we search the depthsof our rational thinking.

With metaphor we search the depthsof our imagination.

Together they inspire insight andinnovation.

Ed Sickafus2006


To be creative

U-SIT

and thinkIntegrate logic and metaphors

Ed Sickafus2006

METAPHORS

a simple theory underlying structured, problem-solving methodologies – asit… · 2006-10-03 ·...

Documents