Advertisement

Differences and Complementarities Between C-K and TRIZ

  • Sébastien DuboisEmail author
  • Roland De Guio
  • Hicham Chibane
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 572)

Abstract

TRIZ and C-K are both presented as theories aiming to facilitate innovations. In recent years several authors have published articles enlightening differences between TRIZ and C-K. C-K was initially a descriptive theory of innovation, which has gradually been developed into methods with an operational focus.

To clarify if both TRIZ and C-K could be recognized as theories, a first question will be considered, what is a theory? Are then TRIZ and C-K design theories, and if so, is it possible to consider two different theories of a single subject? This article is a first step in a more global perspective aiming at clarifying what a design theory should be and how these two proposals give part of answers, and they could be complementary.

Keywords

Design theory TRIZ C-K 

References

  1. 1.
    Hatchuel, A., Weil, B.: C-K design theory: an advanced formulation. Res. Eng. Des. 19(4), 181–192 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kazakçi, O.A.: A formalization of CK design theory based on Intuitionist Logic. In: Chakrabarti, A. (ed.) ICORD 2009, 2nd International Conference on Research into Design, Bangalore, India (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hatchuel, A., Le Masson, P., Weil, B.: C-K theory in practice: lessons from industrial applications. In: Marjanovic, D. (ed.) DESIGN 2004, the 8th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, pp. 245–258 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Souchkov, V.V.: A brief history of TRIZ. TRIZ J. (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Madara, D.S.: Theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ): his-story. IJISET-Int. J. Innov. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2(7), 86–95 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orloff, M.A.: Inventive Thinking Through TRIZ: A Practical Guide, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Altshuller, G.S.: Creativity as an Exact Science. Gordon and Breach, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Altshuller, G.S.: The Innovation Algorithm: TRIZ, systematic innovation and technical creativity. Technical Innovation Center, Inc., Worcester (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vorms, M.: Qu’est-ce qu’une théorie scientifique? Philosophie des Sciences. Vuibert (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maimo, O.Z., Horowitz, R.: Sufficient Conditions for Inventive Solutions. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 29(3), 349–361 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reitman, W.R.: Heuristic decision procedures, open constraints and the structure of III-defined problems. In: Shelly, M.W., Bryan, G.L. (eds.) Human Judgments and Optimality. Wiley, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simon, H.A.: The structure of ill-structured problems. Artif. Intell. 4, 181–201 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boden, M.A.: What is creativity? In: Dimensions of Creativity, pp. 75–117. Massachussets Institute of Technology (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gero, J.S., Computers and creative design. In: T.F.A.o.A. SAFA (ed.) ArchComp 1995, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 1–13 (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Horowitz, R.: Creative problem solving in engineering Design. Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Newell, A., Simon, H.A.: Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1972)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simon, H.A.: Problem forming, problem finding, and problem solving. In: 1st International Congress on Planning and Design Theory, Boston, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reed, S.K.: Cognition. Theory and applications, 7th edn. Thompson/Wadsworth, Belmont (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bonnardel, N.: Towards understanding and supporting creativity in design: analogies in a constrained cognitive environment. Knowl. Based Syst. 13, 505–513 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rasovska, I., Dubois, S., De Guio, R.: Mechanisms of model change in optimization and inventive problem solving methods. In: International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 2009, Stanford, CA, USA (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Novick, L.R.: Representational transfer in problem solving. Psychol. Sci. 1(2), 128–132 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reich, Y., et al.: A theoretical analysis of creativity methods in engineering design: casting and improving ASIT within C-K theory. J. Eng. Des. 23(1–3), 137–158 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hatchuel, A., Le Masson, P., Weil, B.: Studying creative design: the contribution of C-K theory. In: Studying design creativity: Design Science, Computer Science, Cognitive Science and Neuroscience Approaches, Aix-en-Provence, France (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Starovoytova, D.: Theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ): his-story. IJISET Int. J. Innov. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2(7), 86–95 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Altshuller, G.S.: Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving (ARIZ-85C). OTSM-TRIZ Technologies Center, Minsk, Belarus, p. 32 (1985)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sébastien Dubois
    • 1
    Email author
  • Roland De Guio
    • 1
  • Hicham Chibane
    • 1
  1. 1.CSIP, ICube LaboratoryStrasbourgFrance

Personalised recommendations