TRIZ and Innovative Economics

G. L. Filkovsky, TRIZ Master,
New York, USA
e-mail:Gfilkovsky@us.nomura.com

Everyone tries to expand an area of TRIZ application nowadays, even the President Bush. However, while TRIZnics merely stretch TRIZ principles into non-manufacturing fields, George W and his team are stepping forward with a creative, can-do idea that itself is an astonishing application of TRIZ.

Their solution is proposed in the "Economic Report of the President". As Jim Hightower noticed, "In it, George W's top economists assert that all of those people working in such fast food joints as McDonalds and Subway really are not part of the service economy - but more accurately should be reclassified as manufacturing workers, just as those who make cars and other industrial products... After all, contend Bush's crack team of job classifiers, when you insert that meat patty, lettuce, cheese, and ketchup into a sliced bun, you are engaged in the combining of inputs to 'manufacture' a product."

"Bush's innovative economists," - Hightower continues, - "also note that manufacturing is officially defined as 'the mechanical, physical, or chemical transformation of materials into new products', and, they claim, when you heat ground beef, you are, in fact, chemically transforming it into a burger."

It's the "Other Way Around" TRIZ principle at work: instead of stretching TRIZ, stretch the field. Like other strong TRIZ-based ideas it has various advantages.

In addition to making TRIZ directly applicable to a wide new field, redefining of "hundreds of thousands of hamburger flippers as manufacturing workers allows Bush to statistically hush the critics who've been pointing to the drastic decline in these production jobs." Another upside: "since manufacturing gets special tax breaks, suddenly Bush's backers in the fast-food industry serendipitously qualify."

The only failure in this proposal is luck of TRIZ credit in the "Economic Report".

Post Scriptum:
The article is based on an observation and interpretation of the report by an article in "The New York Times". The above is only a TRIZ twist to it. I have to admit, that the interpretation goes farther than the quotations from the report - the report language is more rounded and hypothetical, but this is the direction of the policy: don't look just at "old manufacturing", the "service" industry is a new wave; plus, who knows where the difference is...