What does it take to grow a business?

Key Findings:
Commit to Superior Customer Value

Directions for Future TRIZ
Development and Applications`

Quality & Price`

Innovation — Products & Services

Focus on Five Sources of Revenue Growth`Base Retention`

Market Share Gain`

Market Position`

Adjacent Markets`

New Lines of Business

Manage a Growth Portfolio
Sergei Ikovenko, Dr.-Eng.,PhD, PE, TRIZ Master
Professor Adjuncts (MIT)`Hedge risks by investing in multiple initiatives`

Break the challenge into manageable pieces

Sergei.Ikovenko@Gen3Partners.com(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

© 2006 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

www.GEN3.com

Share
Share
Gain
Gain
MarketMarketPositioning
Positioning

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

2

Diversified Approach: Companies Don’t Know Where to Place the Big
Bets

Focus on Five Sources of Revenue Growth
Base
Base
Retention
Retention(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society• Keeping more of your current customers• “To grow we first have to stop shrinking”

I am a bitrisk adverse• Use better value to take business directly from competitors• The toughest way to grow — to win, someone else must lose

• Companies struggle

to identify andprioritize
opportunities for
growth• Companies don’t• Half of success is showing up where growth is going toknow which ideas
are winners – sothey make manysmall bets

happen• Find the new growth segments before anyone else

Adjacent
Adjacent
Markets
Markets• Attack neighboring markets• But, only when immediate and practical advantage is in hand

New
New Lines
Linesofof BusinessBusiness• Acquire in unrelated markets• But, only when management has superior investment skill• Weak initiatives are

difficult to kill

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

… many initiatives,few successes –high costs3© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

4

Risk vs. Impactful Results

Risk vs. Impactful Results

Ambition Imbalance:
Maximize the risk-adjusted return on innovation

Ambition Imbalance:
Maximize the risk-adjusted return on innovation

high

high

high

incremental

IMPACT OF RESULTIMPACT OF RESULT
low

low

low

breakthrough© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Innovation
Innovationis
isrewardingrewardinglowincremental

Level of Innovation
Source: Treacy - Innovation as a Last Resort – Harvard Business Review (July/August 2004)

LIKELIHOOD OF RESULT

Innovation
Innovationis
isrewardingrewardinghighInnovation
Innovationis
is
risky
risky

LIKELIHOOD OF RESULT

Innovation
Innovationis
is
risky
risky

breakthroughLevel of Innovation

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

5

Opportunities Are Often Squandered Because …

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

6

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Innovation Approach: Opportunities get Discovered and PrioritizedObjective
ObjectiveTrends
Trendsofof
Evolution
Evolution

MarketMarketSurveys
Surveysetc.
etc.

• They go undiscovered• Methods for prioritizing

opportunities are faulty

Voice of the
Customer• Opportunities are dynamic –Product

Voice of theTechnology

they migrate over time© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Outdated Product
Minimizing Cost

Maximizing Reliability

Maximizing Efficiency

Maximizing Performance• Companies inherently focus on

their core competencies,
eventually making
improvements when they are
no longer needed

Development Limit
Main
Parameter

Making It Work Right
Making It Work

Standard Approach“They all look like opportunities to me!”Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 20087

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

• •Richer
RicherMPVs
MPVs• •Technology
TechnologyEvolution
Evolution
Dynamics
Dynamics• •Market/Technology
Market/TechnologyTrends
TrendsSynergy
Synergy• •Reduced
ReducedUncertainty
Uncertainty(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

8

MPV Analysis

Main Parameters of Value – Definitions and General Logic` Main Strategic Parameters of Value (MSPV) are the Product attributes thatdefine Customer behavior on the market

Product
ProductValue
Value

Traditional Value Estimation` Main Functional Parameters of Value (MFPV) are objective technical (physical,
chemical, geometrical, biological, etc.) parameters that are responsible for
MSPVTarget Parameters
Main Strategic
Parameters ofValue (MSPV)

Customer Value Estimation` Traditional parameters (like Performance, Convenience, Safety, Styling,
Indulgence, Cost, etc.) are too general, and are not instrumental for innovation` Not all these parameters are equally important to customers (usually, only 2-3
SPV are really MSPV)

Main Functional Parameters of Value(MFPV)

G3:ID Value Estimation` There are some latent parameters that are not even recognized by the market
as MSPV. Process the Voice of the Customer – do not take it literally.

• MSPV = ƒ(MFPV1, MFPV2,… MFPVn)` For different market segments, MSPV are different• MFPV – quantitative evaluation of MSPV
© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

9MPV

1 Level MPV

2 Level MPV` Form drag` Resistance from friction
against external surfaces

Aerodynamic
drag

3 Level MPV (MFPV)` Air temperature` Resistance generated byprotruding parts of the car` Area of the largest cross-section of the car` Turbulence resistance` Shape (size) of cabin, fairings, trailer

To increase
temperature of fuelcombustion` Car speed` Van-der-Waals forces (forces of mutual attraction of molecules)` Combustible mixture density

EconomyEngine efficiency` Size (arrangement) of piston-rod group` Size of particles of atomized fuelAddition ofwhat
substances
would raisethetemperature offuelcombustion?

How toreduce theenergy ofactivation offuel oxidation
reaction?

` Air temperature` Excessive air coefficient` Structure (composition) ofroad surface` Unevenness of road surface` Truck weight` Shape (relief) of tire protector` Weight of cargo carried` Mechanical parameters (rigidity, elasticity) of tire

` Quality and number ofrolling contact bearings` Metal density

How tointroduce
additives into
the fuel prior tofeeding fuel into
the combustion
chamber?

` Unevenness of tire surface` Size of point of contact between wheel and road pavement` Load on one axis of truck` Optimality of load-bearing structure© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200811

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

To increase oxygen
concentration in
the air

How toincrease rateof fuelcombustion?

` Uniformity of fuel mixture spray

Rolling
resistance

Sept. 10-12, 200810

` Air viscosity` Combusting temperature of combustible mixture

Cost
effectivenessof engine

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

How to increase combusting
temperature of combustible mixture ?

` Air density` Material surface energy

Fuel(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Main Parameters of Value – General approach

Main Parameters of Value – General approach
Strategic© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

How to make thecatalyst act
upon the fuelprior to feeding
fuel into the
combustion
chamber orinside the
combustion
chamber?

How toremovenitrogenfrom the air
prior tofeeding air or
inside the
combustion
chamber?

How to raise
the pressure of
the fuel
mixture insidethe
combustion
chamber?

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

To increase oxidative
activity of air

How to ionize
oxygen?

How to generate
ozone from theair?

How to ionize
the air oxygen
prior to feeding
air into the
combustion
chamber orinside the
combustion
chamber?

How to generate
ozone from the air
prior to feeding air
into thecombustion
chamber or inside
the combustion
chamber?

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

12

Main Parameters of Value.
S-curve Analysis

S-Curve Analysis for Different MPVs

Parameter 2

Parameter 1

The main parameters of an engineering system change as the system evolves
over time, forming S-shaped curves
Stage 3

2000

t, years

P

1900

2000

Parameter 4

Parameter 3

1900

Main parameter
Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 3

Physical limit for
operational principlet, years

Stage 2

Stage 1

Stage 11900

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

2000

t, years(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

1900

2000

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Timet, years
13

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Main Parameters of Value.
S-curve Analysis

Today© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 200814

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Main Parameters of Value.
S-curve Analysis

Operating Speed (kg.r p m)

1/Damping (m/N.s)
Air bearings

Magnetic bearings

Magnetic bearings

Air bearings
Existing mechanical bearings

Existing mechanical bearings

Stage 3

Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 2

Stage 2

Stage 2
Stage 1

Stage 1Today
© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Today

Time
Sept. 10-12, 200815

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Time
Sept. 10-12, 200816

Main Parameters of Value.
S-curve Analysis
Operating Life (hours)
Air bearings
Magnetic bearings
Existing mechanical bearings

Opportunity Mapping(Main Parameters of Value)

Stage 3

Stage 2

Stage 2

Stage 1Today
© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

TimeJapan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200817

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 200818

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Products Landscape
Portfolio Value Landscaping
MPV Performance-Price Landscape` Products Landscape shows:

Products Landscape

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements

0.9

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements

11) How products in the portfolio perform relative
to market requirements

12) How products are priced relative tocompetitors

0.8

Div.1
Div.2
Div.3
Div.4
Div. 5

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) price` Market requirements are expressed in terms of Main Parameters of Value — attributes of a product seen as
valuable by the customer

0.7` For each product family, an estimate is made with regard to:

0.6–

Customer requirements for each Main Parameter of Value (MPV)–

The actual performance of product with respect to each MPV

0.5` MPV Performance is the single measure of the extent to which a product achieves customer requirements (seedefinition and example on next page)

0.4` The gap between actual performance and customer requirements is a measure of scope for improving theperformance of a product` Relative Price is the ratio of the Client’s pricing to average pricing by competitors

0.3
0.7

` Both of these elements will be used as foundation to derive various perspectives on the product portfolio

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) price© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200819

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200820

Portfolio Value Landscaping
MPV Performance-Price LandscapeDefinition — Relative Price

Portfolio Value Landscaping
MPV Performance-Price Landscape

Products Landscape

S im p lifie d E x a m p le

` Relative Price is the ratio of the Client’s price tothe average price of competitors

0.8
0.7
0.6

1

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements` MPV Performance (P) is the average ofperformance relative to each MPV, weighted by
the importance of each MPV. A perfect score is
1.0

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements

1
0.9

Div.1
Div.2
Div.3
Div.4
Div. 5

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5

0.5
0.4

0.4
0.3
0.7

0.3
0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) price
0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) pricePricerelative =P e rfo rm a n c e
Im p o rt a n c e

$

y
li t
bi

h

cy
ea

en
ar

<Pricecomp>

M

ic

ro

an

w

sp

av

s

tc

es

re

hn

st
ic

st
E

la

an
H

To

Tr

g

ng
d li

li n

g la

C

to

e lf

g

S

li n
C

ug

ss

$

Priceclient’s

M a i n P a r a m e te r s o f V a l u e<Pricecomp> = Average of Competitor Price

1 N
P = ∑ α i pi ; ∑ α i = 1; pi ∈ 〈1..10〉 , N == number
number ofof criteria
MPV
10 i =1
p i == performance
performanc erelative
relativetotoMPV
Major
Parameter of Value iiα i == importanceimportance of
ofMPV
Major
Parameter of Value ii© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

21

Products Landscape© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 200822

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Products Gross Profit Potential
Products Landscape

140

Gross Profit Potential

120
100

Products Gross Profit Potential maps:

1) The value products in the portfolio deliver tocustomers

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements

1`Div. 1
Div. 2
Div. 3
Div.4
Div. 5

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.7

2) The aggregate profit potential from eachproduct category

80

Div.1
Div.2
Div.3
Div.4
Div. 5

0.9

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) price60` The vertical axis represents the total profit pool available to participants in the market. It is the theoreticalmaximum profit to be gained from a player with 100% market share. Products to the north have the greatest
financial potential

40
20` The horizontal axis represents the value delivered to the customer. Products to the west have the lowest value
delivered to customer requirements. Products to the east are delivering high value to customers0` Note: Other determinants of market share will be introduced in later stages of the Innovation Agenda process-20

Relative Customer Value© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200823

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200824

Customer Value
Gross Profit Potential
Products Landscape

Products Landscape
1
Div.1
Div.2
Div.3
Div.4
Div. 50.9` Customer Value is the MPV Performanceof Client’s product divided by relative
price

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements` Gross Profit Potential (GPP) is the projectedmarket size (current market size adjusted forthree years of compound growth) multipliedby the projected gross margin percentage

MPV Performance relative
to market requirements

1

0.4
0.3
0.7

Div.1
Div.2
Div.3
Div.4
Div. 5

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

0.3
0.7

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) price

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Relative (normalized to mean competitor) price

GPP = M x (1+ΔM)3 x GM

Value =

PerformanceClient’s
Pricerelative

M = Current market size (millions)
ΔM = Rate of market growth
GM = Gross Margin© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Portfolio Value Landscaping
Gross Profit Potential-Customer Value Landscape

Sept. 10-12, 200825

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

Sept. 10-12, 200826

` The appropriate innovation strategy for a given product depends on
its position on the Portfolio Map
140

120

130
100

120

Gross Profit Potential

Gross Profit Potential

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Different Innovation Strategies for Different Products

Division of portfolio map
into quadrants

140

80
60
40
20
0

110
100

product features• HighImprove
profit potential
togain
greatershareof• Vulnerable to competitive
products
category
with superiorvalue profits• High priority for performance
improvement• Products deliver significant value• ProductsTarget
enjoy a Domainstrong market share

90
80
70
60
50

-20

• Products deliver low value toInnovate to expand
Improve
profit margin• Low
profitpotential
unattractive
markets
price/margin
or overall
•
Must
test
the
potentialof
products
toimprove
profit margins
and/or expand• Same competencies can be
category demandmarketdemandappliedto moreattractive markets

40
30

Relative Customer Value© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200827

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

Relative Customer Value(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200828

Evolution of Science of Innovation
Portfolio Value Landscaping
Gross Profit Potential-Customer Value Landscape140

Did I deliver significant movement
along the product’s MPV?

• TRIZ Body of Knowledge

130

Gross Profit Potential

120
110
100

Improve product features
to gain greater share of
category profits

Did I find a practical solution to
the right problem correctly?

Target Domain• MPV Analysis

Did I solve the rightproblem correctly?

90• Innovation
Roadmaps

80• Function-Oriented
Search70

Improve profit margin

60

Did I solve theproblem correctly?

Innovate to expand
price/margin or overall
category demand50• Resolving Contradictions• ARIZ40• TESE30• Standard Inventive
Solutions• Trimming• S-Curve, enhanced
Substantiation Tools• Feature Transfer• IP Evaluation• Cause-and-Effect
Chain Analysis• Parallel Evolutionary
Lines

1960

TRIZ

• Business Impact
Justification• Functional Modeling1980• MT/Trends ofEngineering
Systems
Evolution• Synergy Index

2000

Today

Relative Customer Value© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200829

© 2006 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

30

The G3:ID Product Innovation Roadmap

Cornerstones of G3:ID Product Innovation

Problem Identification
Trimming
G3:ID
Benchmarking

Function
AnalysisFlowAnalysis

ProblemSolving

Concept
Substantiation

Evolutionary
Trends Analysis
FeatureTransfer

Problem Solving
Problem
Identification

Cause-Effect
Chains Analysis

Key Problem
Analysis

Conceptual Direction
Development

ARIZ Application

Function-Oriented Search

Clone Problem Application

Standard Solution Application

Inventive Principle
Application

Scientific Data Base
Application

Concept Substantiation

Secondary Problem
Solving
Idea Substantiation
Supereffect Analysis
Concept Evaluation© 2006 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200831

© 2006 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200832

TRIZ Position on the S-Curve

Going Beyond Classical TRIZ
Utilizing TRIZ in New Applications:• IP Strategies• Long-term Technology
Forecasting• Design for Recycling & Reuse

Market Analysis:• MPV
Determination& Analysis• G3:ID
Benchmarking

Problem
Identification:• Function
Analysis• CECA• Trimming(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

33

Trends of Engineering System Evolution`

Hierarchy ofTrendsTrend of
Elimination of
Human Involvement(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

34

Trends of Engineering System Evolution` Trend of Increasing Value and S-Curve Evolution
Trend of S-curve evolution

Trend of Increasing
Completeness of
SystemComponents

Trend of Increasing
Degree of Trimming

Trend of Increasing
Coordination

∑F
∑C ↓

const

MPV

Trend of Increasing
Value

Trend ofTransition to theSupersystem© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

TRIZClassical TRIZ Tools Development:• TESE (trends, sub-trends, andtheir mechanisms)• Feature Transfer• Function-Oriented Search• Micro-ARIZ• Rules and Recommendations
for Trimming

Transitional Stage© 2006 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

Concept
Substantiation:• Failure
Anticipation
Analysis• Secondary
Problem Solving• FunctionOriented Search

3rd stage∑F ↑∑C

Trend of
Optimizationof Flows

4th stageconst∑ F ↑↑∑C ↑Trend of Uneven
Development of
System Components

2nd stage

∑F ↑
∑C ↓

Trend of Increasing
Controllability∑F ↓∑ C ↓↓∑F ↑∑C ↓1st stageTime© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

Trend of Increasing
Dynamicity(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200835

© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200836

Some Directions of TRIZ Future Development

Open Innovation
Open Innovation, as it is approached now, is difficult to implement, since
world of challenges is weakly connected to the world of existing expertise,capabilities, knowledge, and technologies

1. Pragmatic S-Curve Analysis – the time axis.
2. Trends of Engineering System Evolution – mechanisms andalgorithms.
3. Open Innovation.

Business Goals?

!

Capabilities

Challenges

Knowledge

Problems© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200837

Open Innovation© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

ExpertiseTechnology(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

38

Open Innovation

Open Innovation becomes straightforward in a Functionally Structured World

Problems

Business Goals?

Challenges• Business
Goals• Challenges• Problems

Solutions

Functionally Structured
Problem Statement

Expertise!

Capabilities

Company
Company
Company

Knowledge

Problems(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Solutions?

!

Functionally Structured
Platform

Functional
Indexing
Functionally Structured
SolutionsTechnology• Expertise• Capabilities• Knowledge• Technology© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

Problems

Focusing

39© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

Focusing(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200840

Open Innovation

Open Innovation

Company
Company

DemandFocusing• Business
Goals• Challenges• Problems

Functionally Structured
Problem Statement

Problems

Solutions?

!

Open Innovation Router
Demand Network

Demand Network

Open Innovation Router

Functionally Structured
Platform

Company
Company• Business
Goals• Challenges• Problems

Supply Network

Supply Network

SupplyFocusing© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

Directions for Future TRIZ Development
and Applications
Thank you!

Sergei Ikovenko, Dr.-Eng.,PhD, PE,TRIZ Master
Professor Adjuncts (MIT)Sergei.Ikovenko@Gen3Partners.com(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society

MPV Æ
PhysicalParameters

Functionally Structured

Functional
Indexing
Functionally Structured
SolutionsCompany
Company

MPV
Determination

Portfolio
Analysis

Problem Statement

Functional
Indexing• Expertise• Capabilities• Knowledge• Technology

DemandFocusing

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 2008

www.GEN3.com

41

Functionally Structured
Solutions• Expertise• Capabilities• Knowledge• Technology

Company
Company© 2008 GEN3 Partners, Inc.

SupplyFocusing

Portfolio
Analysis(c) The Author & Japan TRIZ Society• Expertise• Capabilities• Knowledge

Problem
Identification

Functionally Structured
Platform
ProblemSolution
Matching

Solution
Adoption

SolutionsRanking

Discrepancy
Analysis•Technology
Æ PhysicalParameters

Japan TRIZ Symposium 2008

Sept. 10-12, 200842