Blog

Pragmatic innovations – part 2

A week ago, we published the first installment of a three-part series by Błażej Czajkowski, originally featured in Production Manager. Today, we’re excited to present the second part, which explores how the idealized theories of TRIZ evolve into practical tools that drive real-world innovation. From overcoming economic challenges to solving complex industry problems, this chapter reveals the fascinating journey of turning innovation into an actionable framework.

Pragmatic innovations…

…or how creating innovation became an innovation in itself

Part 2, or how the theory turns into practice

Like most theories, Genrikh Altshuller’s TRIZ is an idealized construct. In its theoretical framework, the tools and algorithms work flawlessly, and the results are always clear and interpretable. But how does this translate into real-world practice? Outside the training room, where knowledge is passed from one brilliant mind to many aspiring ones, can the theory truly be applied? In the case of TRIZ, history strongly suggests that it can. The work of Invention Machine Corporation and its successors has repeatedly demonstrated that TRIZ principles are highly effective in fostering innovation. But let’s unpack the story step by step.

The primary mission of Invention Machine Corporation was to further develop software leveraging semantic search. At the same time, the company pursued two complementary lines of work: training, led in part by Sergei Ikovenko (the company’s third hire), and consulting, which focused on applying TRIZ tools and Invention Machine software to assist enterprises in R&D and innovation projects. Early versions of the software incorporated just three TRIZ tools: the Contradiction Matrix, the Scientific Effects Database, and the Standard Invention Principles. Even so, these features provided significant value to clients.

However, the early 1990s were not the most favorable time to launch such a venture. The U.S. economy was grappling with a recession, making investors hesitant to provide funding. Many potential corporate clients, though interested, faced budget constraints that prevented them from making new purchases. A telling example was General Motors, where Tsurikov received a letter stating that while the company was keen to buy the Invention Machine software, the Board of Directors had frozen funds for such expenditures for at least a year.

The company’s survival was hanging by a thread when a breakthrough came at a trade show in Pittsburgh. There, the team caught the attention of AlliedSignal (now part of the Honeywell conglomerate), a multidisciplinary engineering company. A small but vital contract with AlliedSignal provided the lifeline Invention Machine Corporation needed to stay afloat. This gave the company just enough time to survive until 1994, when Tsurikov secured a pivotal contract with Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC).

Figure 1. Valery Tsurikov with an invoice signed by DEC.
Source: https://dev.by/news/true-machina.

Delivering software and a five-day training course to DEC brought the company approximately $20,000 in revenue – a remarkable achievement after two years of financial hardship. In hindsight, this contract marked a pivotal moment for Invention Machine Corporation, sparking an almost exponential growth trajectory. Investors soon began to take notice. The first was an American investor originally from Glebokie, a village in the Vitebsk region of Belarus. Not long after, the vice president of one of Canada’s largest investment funds invested $3 million. Intel Capital also stepped in, injecting $5 million into the company and inviting its representatives to a seminar at the U.S. Congress in Washington, D.C.

Invention Machine also expanded into consulting projects. One of its first TRIZ-based initiatives was conducted in Finland, addressing the challenge of harvesting dry peat from the region’s abundant marshlands. Peat briquettes are an excellent source of fuel, but the traditional methods of collection were flawed. The most common approach involved using a bulldozer with a blade to push the top layer of peat. While simple and relatively inexpensive, this method was highly inaccurate. Uneven terrain often left portions of dry peat uncollected, while wet, muddy peat sometimes mixed into the heap, lowering the raw material’s quality.

An alternative method was also tested – best described as a large industrial vacuum cleaner. This technique used a massive nozzle to suction the top layer of peat, leaving the wet layer behind. While this method was highly precise, it proved prohibitively expensive to operate.

The development team applied one of the TRIZ tools, now known as Feature Transfer (also referred to as Alternative Systems Design). The proposed solution involved equipping the blade with additional air nozzles, which significantly improved the precision of peat collection. This innovation prevented contamination with wet material while keeping the process costs manageable. The solution effectively combined the positive features and functions of both systems while eliminating their disadvantages.

Returning to the growth of Invention Machine, the company’s list of major clients began to expand rapidly. One of the first was Procter & Gamble, which signed a contract worth $400,000 for a comprehensive range of innovation services. What led a global cosmetics giant to collaborate with an unassuming startup from the former USSR? Perhaps it was the immediate success Procter & Gamble’s engineers experienced during their first interaction with Invention Machine’s software. After just a few clicks, the system proposed using ultrasound to accelerate the solidification process of liquid soap. This innovation reduced the thickening time from eight hours to just a few minutes per batch – an astonishing achievement even for P&G’s seasoned engineers.

Development projects soon followed for industry leaders such as Xerox, Intel, NASA, Boeing, Sony, and Samsung. Approximately seven years after its founding, Invention Machine even captured the attention of the automotive sector. The company secured contracts with brands like Ferrari, Harley-Davidson, and BMW. One notable project was with Japan’s Honda, where the team worked on a groundbreaking system to cool a vehicle’s interior using the thermoacoustic effect. This approach transformed engine noise into a temperature drop, eliminating the need for additional energy. Honda engineers shared this innovation with their Boeing counterparts, leading the aerospace company to purchase a suite of Invention Machine software.

NASA also utilized the software in its spacecraft project designed to search for signals from space. The team’s expertise extended to more unconventional industries as well. For Chanel, they developed an original packaging concept for a new lipstick line, showcasing the versatility of their creative solutions.

By 1997, Invention Machine Corporation had grown to employ approximately 200 people. About half of the workforce were software developers based in Minsk, while around 50 were TRIZ specialists located in St. Petersburg, focused on R&D and innovation projects. For reasons of security and business optimization, the St. Petersburg team was spun off into a separate entity in 1997, leading to the creation of Pragmatic Vision International.

This separation of business lines did not hinder the growth of Tsurikov’s company. In fact, 1998 brought another significant achievement: Spaceport Magazine [1] readers voted Invention Machine’s software as the most innovative product in America. The following year, Fortune magazine named Valery Tsurikov a “Hero of U.S. Manufacturing,” cementing the company’s reputation as a leader in innovation.

At this point, it’s worth pausing the story of Invention Machine to revisit the charts illustrating the rise in patent filings and brand value for Samsung and Hyundai (presented in part 1 of this article). As you might expect, the moment these companies began to accelerate their growth aligns with the full implementation of TRIZ methodology within their operations. Both companies, after completing a few initial projects, recognized the immense potential of TRIZ tools and decided to fundamentally shift their approach to research and development.

In both cases, Sergei Ikovenko played a pivotal role in training and implementing TRIZ. His expertise helped establish a more algorithmic approach to innovation, which proved to be a game-changer. This decision significantly contributed to the remarkable growth and success of both Samsung and Hyundai.

Returning to the story, the late 1990s marked a period of remarkable success for both Invention Machine Corporation and Pragmatic Vision International. Nearly every Fortune 500 [2] technology company at the time utilized their services, and knowledge of Pragmatic Vision International’s innovation-driven approach spread rapidly throughout the business world. Clients were delighted, as the innovations they adopted often disrupted entire market segments, rendering competing solutions obsolete. Meanwhile, Invention Machine Corporation secured $35 million in funding through four financing rounds, supported by major investors such as Citigroup, Dassault Systèmes, Intel Capital, and Motorola.

However, significant changes unfolded in the early 2000s. In 2001, founder Valery Tsurikov left the company. Invention Machine Corporation shifted its focus toward developing software for semantic search, while team members with stronger ties to TRIZ transitioned to Pragmatic Vision International’s R&D consulting division, where Professor Sergei Ikovenko also eventually joined.

Tsurikov’s departure did not hinder the growth of Pragmatic Vision International. Throughout the early 2000s, the company thrived. Its U.S. team of approximately 15 people worked closely with a top-tier group of TRIZ specialists in St. Petersburg. As the prolonged effects of the 1990s economic crisis diminished investor interest in software companies like Invention Machine, Pragmatic Vision’s unique R&D consulting services – including innovation development and production problem-solving – captured the attention of new investors. The company’s impressive client portfolio further bolstered its appeal.

One such investor was James Sims, renowned for founding Cambridge Technology Partners. He was supported by Michael Treacy, a management professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, and Arthur Toscanini, the CFO of Cambridge Technology Partners. In the late 1990s, these three established GEN3 Partners, originally envisioned as a software company [3]. However, the economic crisis prompted a strategic pivot. The founders redirected their funds toward acquiring Pragmatic Vision International, bringing its entire team and portfolio under the GEN3 Partners banner.

The key differentiator of the new entity was its multidisciplinary approach and its ability to collaborate with companies across virtually any industry. As its then-Executive Director, Sam Kogan, famously remarked, “GEN3’s strength is its ability to work across all industries – we literally work from potato chips to electronic chips [4].” The phrase perfectly captured the company’s versatility. GEN3 Partners’ client roster included notable names such as Boston Scientific Corp., General Mills Inc., Chiquita Brands International Inc., and Alcoa Inc. The company’s success was such that, in 2005, it launched a $50 million venture fund aimed at developing early-stage companies – primarily from Russia and Israel – while staying true to the principles of TRIZ and pragmatic innovation.

Over the years, however, GEN3 Partners evolved significantly, and today it is nearly defunct. Many team members branched out to establish their own ventures, resulting in companies like Gen5 Group, Gen TRIZ, and the DFP Institute, founded by Sergei Ikovenko. For the sake of completeness, it’s worth noting that Invention Machine Corporation also underwent significant changes, eventually being acquired by IHS Markit in 2012 for $40 million [5].

Despite these transformations, the structured and pragmatic approach to innovation championed by these organizations remains as relevant as ever. Numerous companies worldwide – particularly in Asia (e.g., South Korea, China, Japan, and India) – have embraced this methodology. Many not only rely on consultants but have also integrated adapted versions of these principles into their R&D departments. Notable examples include Samsung and Hyundai, as previously discussed.

Unfortunately, not many consulting firms, particularly in Poland, specialize in helping clients address technological challenges, develop innovations, or even teach the basics of TRIZ methodology. Moreover, the direct use of the name TRIZ has become less common over time. This may be because TRIZ, as a methodology, resembles an innovative technical system in itself. Like many groundbreaking discoveries, it required recognizing seemingly obvious patterns to bring them to light – yet it also took the genius of Genrikh Altshuler to make this recognition possible.

The initial tools of TRIZ quickly evolved into a comprehensive theory, enriched by numerous complementary tools and algorithms. Today, even those who use parts of these tools or entire frameworks often forget – or are unaware – of their origins. This raises an interesting debate: did TRIZ truly play a pivotal role in the successes of major American and Asian corporations, especially considering its roots and the context of its development? In my view, it absolutely did. The enduring interest and amazement sparked by the innovation projects of that era stand as evidence – particularly the way TRIZ helped produce groundbreaking solutions in industries with which its specialists had no prior experience. During a conversation with Professor Sergei Ikovenko, I asked him for examples of projects that vividly illustrate how TRIZ tools have been applied to create innovative solutions. Here are a few noteworthy cases:

1. Cost-efficient switch design for General Electric

Over a decade ago, General Electric faced challenges with one of its simplest products: the switch. Despite its long presence in the market, the switch’s complexity drove production costs uncompetitively high. The goal was to redesign the product to reduce manufacturing expenses. By applying the principles of trimming and transitioning to another dimension, the team created a new design where the housing consisted of just two identical components. These components could be stamped out efficiently and then rotated 180 degrees to fit together, forming a tight enclosure for the internal electronics. This redesign reduced unit production costs by approximately 40%.

Figure 2. GE switch prototype.
Source: Training materials by Sergei Ikovenko / GEN3 Partners.

Reducing the vast range of parameters encountered in projects to just 39 generalized ones is a remarkable achievement. Although attempts have been made over time to expand this list [4], the classic set has proven sufficient for the vast majority of projects. However, Altshuller’s true genius lay in analyzing tens of thousands of patent solutions that addressed these contradictions and distilling the most common approaches to resolving them. Ultimately, he identified 40 universal methods and termed them Inventive Principles. He integrated these principles into his matrix, guiding inventors and engineers to potential solution paths when faced with contradictions in their creative processes.

2. Simplifying mayonnaise production for Kraft Heinz

At one point, Kraft Heinz identified inefficiencies in its mayonnaise production process. The issue stemmed from vinegar – one of the main ingredients – which had to be added in a separate container only after the oil and egg yolks were pre-mixed. Adding vinegar too early triggered a reaction with the yolks, disrupting the emulsification process. This extra step increased both costs and production time.

Seeking a solution, Kraft Heinz engaged a team of consultants who performed a detailed analysis of the process. They proposed a concept that allowed all ingredients to be introduced into the tank simultaneously. The key to this breakthrough was ensuring that the vinegar remained inactive for a specific period. This was achieved by freezing the vinegar before adding it to the mixture, allowing it to thaw during the mixing process.

The consultants arrived at this innovative solution using the TRIZ Inventive Principles tool, specifically leveraging the principle of physico-chemical changes. This seemingly simple idea revolutionized the manufacturing process, making it more efficient and cost-effective.

Figure 3. A schematic representation of ingredient addition in the mayonnaise production process.
Source: Training materials by Sergei Ikovenko / GEN3 Partners.

3. Revolutionizing teeth whitening with Procter & Gamble

Procter & Gamble was a pioneer in home teeth whitening technology, being the first to introduce kits that included a rubber cap for the teeth and a small ultraviolet lamp to activate a hydrogen peroxide-based gel with whitening properties. However, the product faced significant challenges. The concentration of hydrogen peroxide in the gel had to remain low to avoid harming sensitive soft tissues in the mouth. This limitation required ultraviolet light as an additional activator and frequent application to achieve noticeable results. While consumer interest was high, the product’s complexity discouraged widespread adoption.

Determined not to lose this promising market, P&G enlisted a team of TRIZ consultants to rethink the concept. The solution was a radical departure from the original approach, inspired by nicotine patches, which were gaining popularity at the time. If patches could precisely release nicotine through the skin, why not design a similar product to deliver hydrogen peroxide directly to tooth enamel? The result was WhiteStrips – a simple, innovative solution that revolutionized the market and quickly outperformed competitors.

According to unofficial sources, WhiteStrips generated over $100 million in profit during its first year on the market, cementing its status as a game-changer in the teeth whitening industry.

Figure 4. Final product – WhiteStrips.
Source: Training materials by Sergei Ikovenko / GEN3 Partners.

4. Solving photoresist challenges for Intel

Intel faced a unique challenge in its processor production process, which demands extreme precision and sterility. A critical step involved applying a layer of photoresist – a photosensitive emulsion – onto a silicon substrate. This layer needed to be perfectly even and smooth. However, air bubbles often became trapped in the viscous photoresist during application, causing grooves in the layer during the spinning process. These imperfections rendered the layer unusable, requiring its removal and reapplication – wasting both time and resources.

The consulting team approached the problem by acknowledging that while no one had directly faced this issue before, a solution might exist in a completely unrelated field. They decided to dig deeper into the root cause: the formation of gas bubbles in liquids. This led them to an unlikely industry – sparkling wine production. For champagne producers, controlling the timing of bubble formation is critical for the quality of the product.

The key lay in a valve that ensured laminar flow of liquid, preventing premature bubble formation. After adapting this concept for Intel’s purposes, the solution was successfully implemented, eliminating the issue of air bubbles in the photoresist and streamlining the production process.

Figure 5. A schematic picture of the damage formation in the photoresist layer.
Source: Training materials by Sergei Ikovenko / GEN3 Partners.

5. Hyundai Motor Group’s variable compression ratio engine

Hyundai Motor Group faced a significant challenge when it recognized the need for a variable compression ratio (VCR) engine to stay competitive in the market. While the concept was well-known, the technology was heavily protected by patents held by the industry leader, Nissan Group. Hyundai set out to develop a solution that could incorporate the best features of the competition without infringing on Nissan’s intellectual property rights.

To achieve this, Hyundai enlisted a team of consultants who began by thoroughly analyzing and modeling Nissan’s patented solution. The engine component responsible for varying cylinder pressure was dissected down to its smallest elements, with particular attention given to the independent and dependent claims outlined in the patent. Using TRIZ tools such as trimming, the consultants simplified the design to the extent that Hyundai could patent their own version of the technology.

Taking it a step further, Hyundai developed and patented two additional versions of the solution – not with the intention of producing them, but to strategically block competitors from introducing similar designs. This innovative approach ensured Hyundai’s competitiveness in the VCR engine market while safeguarding their intellectual property [6].

Figure 6. Diagram of piston operation in a Nissan engine.
Source: Sergei Ikovenko’s training materials.

6. Posco’s Innovative Solution for metallurgical pig iron purification

Another example from South Korea highlights the ingenuity of Posco, a global steelmaking giant, in tackling a challenge during the purification of metallurgical pig iron. To ensure the final product met desired specifications, specific substances were added to the pig iron to precipitate impurities. However, these impurities needed to be removed from the crucible afterward. The conventional method involved using a pressurized stream of argon gas to rotate the crucible’s contents, forcing impurities to deposit on its porous walls. Unfortunately, this process also caused significant cooling of the molten material, which was undesirable and required additional heating – substantially increasing production costs.

While exploring solutions, Posco discovered a patent from the defunct Mannesmann company. The patent described a system involving a layered crucible cover and a pump to remove gas from between the layers, preventing thermal bridges and retaining heat – essentially functioning like a thermos. Although Posco considered purchasing this patent, the cost proved prohibitive, leading the company to develop its own alternative.

Using TRIZ methodology, Posco identified the pump – a noisy, costly, and unreliable component – as a candidate for elimination from the technical system. The challenge, however, was how to force air to evacuate itself from between the crucible’s layers without the pump. The team realized that the pressurized argon used in the process carried momentum, providing energy that could be harnessed. They turned to the scientific effects database and discovered the Venturi effect, which creates a static pressure drop in a pipeline when a high-pressure fluid flows through it.

By integrating a Venturi nozzle into the air extraction system for the crucible cover, Posco engineers utilized this local pressure drop to efficiently remove air. The physical principles took care of the rest. While the air extraction process itself couldn’t be patented, the specially optimized Venturi nozzle design could – and was patented. This innovation allowed Posco to significantly improve its purification process while reducing costs and maintaining operational efficiency.

Figure 7. Schematic picture of the innovative air extraction solution.
Source: Training materials by Sergei Ikovenko / GEN3 Partners.

Professor Ikovenko’s team has been instrumental in developing numerous innovations. For instance, they created a car windshield wiper design that prevents water from being pulled back onto the windshield when retracted. They also devised a method for manufacturing baby diapers that replaces needles with particle jets to perforate the absorbent layers – a concept borrowed directly from space technology. The team assisted Honda in integrating a fuel tank into the frame of a scooter and worked with Chiquita Brands International (the well-known banana company) to develop an innovative storage method that ensures bananas ripen precisely when they reach store shelves.

These examples demonstrate that TRIZ methodology is far more than a collection of theoretical principles or idealized tools disconnected from practical application. TRIZ enables the creation of real-world solutions and groundbreaking innovations that have disrupted and transformed markets time and time again.

*

To be continued… 😊

*

About the author

Błażej Czajkowski
An expert in grants and support instruments with over 15 years of experience advising companies on obtaining and managing financial assistance for investment and R&D projects. A passionate advocate of the TRIZ methodology.

References

1. Spaceport Magazine is NASA’s monthly magazine aimed at both Kennedy Space Center employees and the American public.
2. An annual ranking, created and published by the U.S. business magazine Fortune, listing the 500 largest U.S. companies, ranked by gross revenue.
3. For founding GEN3 Partnes, Sims and Toscanini were taken to court by Jim Sims’ former company (Cambridge Technology Partners) on charges of violating a non-compete: https://www.cnet.com/news/cambridge-technology-sues-founder/
4. Those eager to hear Sam Kogan talk about his fascination with a systematic, structured approach to innovation, and how innovation should not just be the result of bright ideas, but rather a scientific and structured approach, are invited to a short talk: https://vimeopro.com/user6432304/ispim-boston-2016/video/169440566
5. IHS Markit was a company founded in 1959 (as Information Handling Services) by Richard O’Brien that provided microfilmed databases to aerospace engineers as a service – https://ihsmarkit.com/about/history.html
6. For details of the Hyundai project, see the following materials:
7. https://www.osaka-gu.ac.jp/php/nakagawa/TRIZ/eTRIZ/epapers/e2011Papers/eHWLeeTRIZSymp2010/E11eS-HWLee(Korea)-100810.pdf
8. Kim, J., Kim, I., Lee, H. and Park, B., “A Study on the Role of TRIZ in DFSS,”. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars.
9. Mech. Syst. 5(1):2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-0068. – https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/2012-01-0068/