Easy-to-Use Ideation Technique Based on Five Cross-Industry Analogies Enhances Engineering Creativity of Students and Specialists

Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 597)


Cross-Industry Innovation is commonly understood as identification of analogies and interdisciplinary transfer or copying of technologies, processes, technical solutions, working principles or models between industrial sectors. In general, creative thinking in analogies belongs to the efficient ideation techniques. However, engineering graduates and specialists frequently lack the skills to think across the industry boundaries systematically. To overcome this drawback an easy-to-use method based on five analogies has been evaluated through its applications by students and engineers in numerous experiments and industrial case studies. The proposed analogies help to identify and resolve engineering contradictions and apply approaches of the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving TRIZ and biomimetics. The paper analyses the outcomes of the systematized analogies-based ideation and outlines that its performance continuously grows with the engineering experience. It defines metrics for ideation efficiency and ideation performance function. Finally, a comparison with other TRIZ inventive techniques, such as nine fields of the Substance-Field Analysis and 40 Inventive Principles is presented.


Engineering creativity Ideation performance function Ideation efficiency Cross-industry innovation TRIZ 


  1. 1.
    Badran, I.: Enhancing creativity and innovation in engineering education. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 32(5), 573–585 (2007). Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chechurin, L., Borgianni, Y.: Understanding TRIZ through the review of top cited publications. Comput. Ind. 82, 119–134 (2016). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Altshuller, G.S.: Creativity as an Exact Science. The Theory of the Solution of Inventive Problems. Gordon & Breach Science Publishers, New-York (1984). ISSN 0275-5807Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cascini, G., Regazzoni, D., Rizzi, C., Russo, C.: Enhancing the innovation capabilities of engineering students. In: Horváth, I., Rusák, Z. (eds.) Proceedings of the TMCE Conference, Izmir, Turkey, pp. 733–742, April 21–25 2008. ISBN 978-90-5155-045-0Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Belski, I., et al.: Can simple ideation techniques influence idea generation: comparing results from Australia, Czech Republic, Finland and Russian Federation. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education AAEE 2015, pp. 474–483. Deakin University, School of Engineering, Geelong (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Livotov, P., Chandra Sekaran, A.P., Mas’udah: Lower abstraction level of TRIZ inventive principles improves ideation productivity of engineering students. In: Benmoussa, R., De Guio, R., Dubois, S., Koziołek, S. (eds.) New Opportunities for Innovation Breakthroughs for Developing Countries and Emerging Economies, TFC 2019. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol. 572, pp. 526–538, Springer, Cham (2019).
  7. 7.
    Gordon, W.: Synectics: The Development of Creative Capacity. Harper, New York (1961)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Enkel, E., Gassmann, O.: Creative imitation: exploring the case of cross-industry innovation. R&D Manag. 40(3), 256–270 (2010). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Echterhoff, N., Amshoff, B., Gausemeier, J.: Cross-industry innovations – systematic identification of ideas for radical problem solving. In: International Conference on Innovation and Management (ICIM), February 27–28, 2013, Barcelona, vol. 74, pp. 935–944 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    VDI Standard 4521: Inventive problem solving with TRIZ. Fundamentals, Terms and Definitions. The Association of German Engineers (VDI), Beuth publishers, Duesseldorf, Germany (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Livotov, P.: Enhancing innovation and entrepreneurial competences of engineering students through a systematic cross-industry innovation learning course. Paper Presented at the 29th Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education, Hamilton, New Zealand (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shah, J.J., Vargas-Hernandez, N., Smith, S.M.: Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness. Des. Stud. 24(2), 111–134 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Briggs, R., Reinig, B.: Bounded ideation theory. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 27, 123–144 (2010). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Belski, I., Livotov, P., Mayer, O.: Eight fields of MATCEMIB help students to generate more ideas. Procedia CIRP 39, 85–90 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Osborn, A.F.: Applied Imagination. Scribner, New York (1963)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chandra Sekaran, A.P., Livotov, P., Mas’udah: Classification of TRIZ inventive principles and sub-principles for process engineering problems. In: Benmoussa, R., De Guio, R., Dubois, S., Koziolek, S. (eds.) New Opportunities for Innovation Breakthroughs for Developing Countries and Emerging Economies. TFC 2019. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol. 572, pp. 314–327. Springer, Cham (2019).

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Offenburg University of Applied SciencesOffenburgGermany

Personalised recommendations