Comparison of Creativity Enhancement and Idea Generation Methods in Engineering Design Training

  • Motyl Barbara
  • Filippi Stefano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8510)


The research presented in this paper aims at evaluating how simple and intuitive are the learning, understanding, and application of some creativity enhancement methods by non-expert users in an engineering design context. The three methods under investigation are TRIZ, C-K theory and SCAMPER. To evaluate the training experience the authors set an evaluation framework based on Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation and used a questionnaire to collect students’ experiences. The results show that the understanding and the consequent application of the three creativity enhancement and idea generation methods are judged positively by the participants. In particular, TRIZ method represents the most appreciated at all, while SCAMPER stands out for its intuitiveness and easiness of use. Finally, C-K theory is revealed as the newest one and very promising for future developments.


TRIZ C-K theory SCAMPER training evaluation engineering education 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chulvi, V., Mulet, E., Chakrabarti, A., Lopez-Mesa, B., González-Cruz, C.: Comparison of the degree of creativity in the design outcomes using different design methods. J. Eng. Des. 23, 241–269 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chulvi, V., González-Cruz, M.C., Mulet, E., Aguilar-Zambrano, J.: Influence of the type of idea-generation method on the creativity of solutions. Res. Eng. Des. 24, 33–41 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shah, J.J., Kulkarni, S.V., Vargas-Hernandez, N.: Evaluation of idea generation methods for conceptual design: effectiveness metrics and design of experiments. J. Mech. Des. 122, 377–384 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Altshuller, G.: And suddenly the inventor appears. Appeared-TRIZ, the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving. Technical Innovation Center, INC., Worcester, MA (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gadd, K.: TRIZ for engineers. In: Enabling Inventive Problem Solving. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rantanen, K., Domb, E.: Simplified TRIZ: New Problem Solving Applications for Engi-neers and Manufacturing Professionals. St Lucie Press, Boca Raton (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hatchuel, A., Le Masson, P., Weil, B.: C-K theory in practice: lessons from industrial applications. In: Proceedings of International Design Conference - DESIGN 2004, Dubrovnik, May 18-21 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hatchuel, A., Weil, B.: C-K design theory: an advanced formulation. Res. Eng. Des. 19, 181–192 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Le Masson, P., Weil, B., Hatchuel, A.: Strategic management of innovation and design. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eberle, B.: Scamper: Games for imagination development. Prufrock Press, Waco (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Serrat, O.: The SCAMPER technique. Asian Development Bank, Washington, DC (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burgess, S.C.: A Backwards Design Method for Mechanical Conceptual Design. J. Mech. Des. 134, 031002–1 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kirkpatrick, J.: The hidden power of Kirkpatrick’s four levels. T and D 61, 34 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alliger, G.M., Janak, E.A.: Kirkpatrick’s levels of training criteria: Thirty years later. Personnel Psychology 42(2), 331–342 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Praslova, L.: Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in Higher Education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability 22(3), 215–225 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shartrand, A.M., Gomez, R.L., Weilerstein, P.: Answering the call for innovation: three faculty development models to enhance innovation and entrepreneurship education in engineering. In: Proceedings of 2012 ASEE Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Motyl Barbara
    • 1
  • Filippi Stefano
    • 1
  1. 1.DIEGM – Department of Electrical, Management and Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of UdineUdineItaly

Personalised recommendations