This reference article presents a unifying theory explaining the common foundations of major structured creative problem-solving methodologies: ASIT, TRIZ, USIT and others. Presented as a keynote at the Second TRIZ Symposium in Japan in 2006, this work by Ed Sickafus offers an essential theoretical perspective for understanding why and how these methods work.
Sickafus's central thesis is particularly enlightening: how we actually think during problem solving fundamentally differs from how structured methodologies are taught and communicated. This theoretical understanding enables using these methods much more effectively and innovatively, fully mobilising our natural mental resources rather than artificially constraining them.
Structured problem-solving methodologies are perceived as complex and difficult to master. Sickafus identifies a fundamental cause for this difficulty: these methods are taught and presented in a logical and organised manner, whereas our natural thinking does not work this way. This mismatch between the logical structure of methods and the actual functioning of our thinking creates artificial complexity that hinders innovation.
The complexity of structured methodologies stems from their logical idealisation compared to our natural thinking method. By better understanding how we really think and using all our mental resources, we can significantly improve our ability to solve problems innovatively.
The article establishes a crucial distinction: problem-solving communication follows a logical order (Definition then Analysis then Solution), but real thinking during solving never follows this linear order. Our natural thinking is disorganised and uncontrolled. It can be logical or illogical, rational or capricious. It jumps uncontrollably between different subjects, interrupting our concentration. But it also assembles unusual objects and functions, thus creating entirely new concepts.
From this observation, Sickafus draws a fundamental lesson: in our natural thinking mode during problem solving, the content of the structure is important, not its order. Organisation is a heuristic for communication, not for thinking itself. We think disorganised ideas but must organise them to communicate, which constitutes a tedious process.
The theoretical foundation rests on understanding the functioning of our brain's two hemispheres. Both hemispheres perform reasoning, memory, communication and problem solving, but they do so differently and share their results via the corpus callosum that connects them.
Left Hemisphere (LH) generally controls language and logic. It is characterised by verbal, analytical, symbolic, abstract, temporal, rational, digital, logical and linear thinking. Technologists are considered more influenced by their left hemisphere.
Right Hemisphere (RH) excels in visualising spatial relationships and using metaphors. It is characterised by non-verbal, synthetic, concrete, analogical, non-temporal, non-rational, spatial, intuitive and holistic thinking. Artisans are considered more influenced by their right hemisphere.
The article reveals a fascinating phenomenon: the right hemisphere analyses spatial information but cannot verbalise its results. As psychologist David Galin illustrates: try describing a spiral staircase while sitting on your hands. This limitation explains why creative solutions sometimes appear in dreams, the right hemisphere finally finding a way to be heard.
Sickafus cites Betty Edwards to define a creative person: someone who can process in a new way the directly available information, the ordinary sensory data accessible to everyone. In other words, a creative person is one who possesses a new perspective, which is precisely a capacity of the right hemisphere.
Thinking here refers to conscious and subconscious processes used in problem solving. We are aware of the conscious but cannot know the subconscious. However, through introspection, we can make useful deductions about thinking and use them to engage best innovation practices. This requires language, a characteristic of the left hemisphere.
The theoretical framework establishes that structure and language are the tools of logical communication, while image and metaphor are the tools of creative thinking. To maximise our creative thinking (not communication), we must calm the logical reasoning of the left hemisphere while encouraging the metaphorical thinking of the right hemisphere.
The article clearly positions ASIT among structured problem-solving methodologies alongside TRIZ and USIT. From the title and throughout the article, Sickafus explicitly mentions ASIT as one of the methods sharing the same theoretical foundations. This inclusion in the same theoretical framework as TRIZ and USIT constitutes important academic validation of ASIT by one of the world's leading experts in these approaches.
Sickafus demonstrates that ASIT, TRIZ and USIT share a simple but powerful underlying theory. These three methods rely on the same fundamental principles concerning how innovative thinking actually works. This common theory explains why these methods, although presented differently, all produce innovative results: they exploit the same natural cognitive mechanisms.
The article develops a generic model applicable to all structured methodologies, including ASIT. This model has three phases, but the major insight is that their order is not important in method practice, only in its communication.
Definition: Reduce a complex problem situation (comprising objects, attributes, functions, undesirable effects, foreign information and images) to a well-defined problem. This involves two processes: simplify (sort, eliminate and minimise) and generalise (use verbal and graphical metaphors). The typical graphical model shows two objects in contact, two causal attributes and one undesirable effect.
Analysis: Identify root causes to clarify a problem via its phenomenology, while generating new effective insights. Analysis creates metaphorical seeds that feed the subconscious. It progresses by identifying plausible causes via cause-effect chains, while creating metaphorical seeds.
Solution: Solve an undesirable effect via three generic strategies. These three strategies constitute the common operational core of ASIT, TRIZ and USIT.
Sickafus presents three solution strategies that are at the heart of all structured methods, including ASIT:
1. Utilisation: The undesirable effect U becomes a function F. Formally: A → (U=F) → A. This involves examining spatial and temporal dependencies to transform the problem into a resource.
2. Nullification: A new function F is introduced to counterbalance U. Formally: A → U → A ← F ← A. This strategy consists of adding an element that cancels the undesirable effect.
3. Elimination: Deactivation of a causal attribute, which amounts to decoupling object interaction. Formally: A → (deactivated) → A. This involves removing the cause of the problem.
These three strategies correspond to the operational principles found in ASIT tools (Unification, Multiplication, Division, Suppression, Symmetry Breaking), thus demonstrating theoretical coherence between different methods.
The article particularly emphasises the crucial role of metaphors in innovation, a fundamental aspect for understanding ASIT's effectiveness. Metaphors allow generalising problems, accessing right hemisphere brain resources, and creating intuitive leaps towards innovative solutions. ASIT, through its simplicity and visual approach, naturally facilitates this metaphorical work.
The heuristics presented by Sickafus for effectively using structured methods correspond remarkably well to ASIT's philosophy: simplify the problem to a single undesirable effect and minimal number of objects, use simple sketches to engage metaphorical thinking, suspend judgement to encourage intuitive leaps, start with solutions rather than rigidly following a logical order.
By placing ASIT in the same theoretical framework as TRIZ and USIT, Sickafus validates the ASIT approach as a legitimate and effective structured method. Furthermore, the article suggests that ASIT, through its relative simplicity compared to TRIZ, might be better aligned with the exposed theoretical principles: less rigid structure, more room for natural metaphorical thinking.
This article brings major theoretical validation to ASIT by positioning it at the same level as TRIZ in a unified theoretical framework. Coming from Ed Sickafus, creator of USIT and world-renowned expert, this academic recognition considerably strengthens ASIT's scientific credibility. The article demonstrates that ASIT does not rely on isolated empirical principles, but fits into a solid cognitive theory shared with other major structured creativity methods.
The article explains why ASIT works by revealing the underlying cognitive mechanisms. Understanding the respective roles of the two brain hemispheres illuminates ASIT approach effectiveness: its simplicity reduces left hemisphere cognitive load, its visual representations engage the right hemisphere, its metaphors facilitate creative leaps. This theoretical explanation enables ASIT practitioners to understand not only how to apply the method, but why it generates innovations.
The METAPHORS heuristics presented by Sickafus offer a valuable pedagogical framework for teaching ASIT more effectively. Rather than teaching ASIT as a rigid sequence of steps, these heuristics suggest a more flexible approach: recognise that order and logic can encourage left hemisphere thinking to the detriment of the right metaphorical hemisphere, use structure as heuristic not necessity, value components more than order, encourage iterations between solution, analysis and definition rather than completing one phase before moving to the next.
Identifying the three generic solution strategies (Utilisation, Nullification, Elimination) offers a simplified reading grid for understanding ASIT tools. ASIT's five tools can be linked to these three fundamental strategies, thus showing the method's deep coherence with universal creative problem-solving principles.
The article clarifies a fundamental misunderstanding: the structure of methods like ASIT is not there to constrain thinking, but to facilitate solution communication. The content of the structure (the elements to consider) is important, not its order. This understanding liberates ASIT practitioners from the obsession of following a rigid sequence and encourages them to follow their creative inspiration while using structured tools as support points.
The article emphasises that metaphors - visual and verbal - are the tools of creative thinking, while structure and language are the tools of logical communication. This distinction illuminates why ASIT insists on simple graphical problem modelling and generalisation via generic terms: these practices feed the subconscious with metaphorical seeds that promote creative leaps.
Although this article is theoretical, its implications are immediately operational for ASIT practitioners. Understanding that our natural thinking is disorganised liberates from the guilt of not following a method linearly. Knowing that the right hemisphere generates insights but cannot verbalise them encourages allowing time for incubation and intuition. Recognising that metaphors are essential to innovation justifies the simplification and generalisation effort that characterises ASIT.
The article suggests evolution paths for structured methods, including ASIT: more room for visual and metaphorical representations, less emphasis on sequential step order, more attention to balance between analytical thinking (left hemisphere) and intuitive thinking (right hemisphere). These theoretical perspectives guide ASIT's future development and its pedagogical applications.
The article concludes with a phrase perfectly summarising the philosophy applicable to ASIT: "With language, we explore the depths of our rational thinking. With metaphor, we explore the depths of our imagination. Together, they inspire insight and innovation." This vision perfectly integrates ASIT's dual nature: structured method (language, rationality) and creativity tool (metaphor, imagination).
Author: Ed Sickafus, PhD
Title: A Simple Theory Underlying Structured, Problem-Solving Methodologies – ASIT, TRIZ, USIT and Others
Type: Scientific article (Keynote presentation)
Event: Second TRIZ Symposium in Japan
Date: 31 August - 2 September 2006
Location: Suita, Osaka, Japan
Format: Presentation (slides)
Number of pages: 50 slides
Language: English
Keywords: ASIT, TRIZ, USIT, structured problem solving, metaphors, brain hemispheres, creative thinking, innovation, cognitive theory
Canonical link (official source): Osaka Gakuin University - TRIZ Archive
This document is hosted in the TRIZ archives of Osaka Gakuin University, in the Ed Sickafus memorial section. We recommend consulting the document via this official link to respect copyright and access the reference version.
APA Format:
Sickafus, E. (2006, August 31 - September 2). A simple theory underlying structured, problem-solving methodologies – ASIT, TRIZ, USIT and others [Keynote presentation]. Second TRIZ Symposium in Japan, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
ISO 690 Format:
SICKAFUS, Ed. A Simple Theory Underlying Structured, Problem-Solving Methodologies – ASIT, TRIZ, USIT and Others. Keynote presentation. Second TRIZ Symposium in Japan, Suita, Osaka, Japan, 31 August - 2 September 2006.
This article demonstrates that ASIT relies on solid cognitive theory. Ready to use this knowledge to innovate more effectively?