Ian Conradie ventured to write an article on application of TRIZ and TOC to the forest harvesting problem . The level of his comprehension of TRIZ is however evident from "The Dynamic Problem Formulation Diagram" presented on page 7 of his article.
The diagram explains how physical contradictions allegedly arise from technical contradictions. It does it on the following example. Increase in operating speed results in decrease in accuracy of measuring; and increase in measuring accuracy results in decrease of operating speed. Hence, according to the diagram, the physical contradiction is a contradiction between increasing of operating speed and decreasing of operating speed !
In other words, if improvement of a parameter A results in worsening of a parameter B and improvement of the parameter B results in worsening of the parameter A, then, according to the diagram, physical contradiction is as follows: the parameter A has to be good and bad (or has to be improved and worsened) !
Where did Ian Conradie ladle such a vision of TRIZ from ? Analysis of quotations in his article sheds some light on it. It is, of course, works of such "classics" of TRIZ as Ellen Domb, Semyon Savransky, etc. From the first he learned that "inventors using TRIZ experienced an improvement of 70 to 300% or more in the number of creative ideas". From the second he learned that "according to Savransky problems in engineering design are of two kinds: maxi and mini-problems". Well, 30 years ago it was according to Altshuller. But now it is already according to Savransky ! The appetite of this guy seems to be growing. In the past he did not cite just less famous authors.
After learning from classics like these, it is no wonder that Ian Conradie knows nothing of the classical (or real) TRIZ !
R E F E R E N C E S:
1. Ian Conradie, "TOC and TRIZ: Using a dual-methodological approach to solve a forest harvesting problem", The March 2005 issue of the TRIZ-journal.