Calibrate whether the problem requires invention or just search
Determine whether your problem is already solved elsewhere before investing in original invention.
Why it works
Altshuller classified inventions on a scale from level 1 (routine design: solution known in the field) to level 5 (discovery: new phenomenon required). Most practitioners over-estimate the novelty of their problem and under-invest in search, while genuine level-4 and level-5 problems get under-resourced because they look solvable with level-1 search. Calibrating the invention level prevents both wasted creative effort on solved problems and superficial search on genuinely hard ones.
How to do it
- Ask: "If I searched the literature, competitors, or adjacent industries for 2 hours, would I likely find this problem solved?" If yes, the invention level is low — search first.
- If search returns nothing close, ask: "Does solving this require a new principle or just a new combination of known principles?"
- Allocate creative investment proportionally: low-level problems get deep search; high-level problems get systematic inventive techniques.
Evidence
Altshuller’s five-level classification is a practitioner taxonomy from his patent analyses, not a psychologically validated scale. Its value is as a calibration heuristic: it prevents mismatching creative effort to problem difficulty. (anecdotal)
The level classification is a rough guide; many real problems span levels, and the boundary between "search" and "invention" is often unclear until after the fact.
Common mistake
Treating every problem as requiring original invention, which wastes effort rediscovering solutions that already exist and are simply unfamiliar.
Practice this with IX Coach
7 days free, then $40/month (~$1.30/day).
More practices for TRIZ: Systematic Invention and the Logic of Contradictions
- Name the contradiction at the heart of the problem
State exactly which parameter you need to improve and which parameter gets worse as a result.
- Sample inventive principles to generate solution directions
Apply one or more of TRIZ’s 40 inventive principles as generative lenses, even without the full contradiction matrix.
- Define the ideal final result first
Describe the perfect outcome as if the solution already exists and costs nothing, then work backward to what could enable it.
- Trim components to find what you can remove
Systematically ask which components in your current solution could be removed if another component took over their function.
- Inventory available resources before adding anything new
List all time, space, information, and energy already present in or around the problem — solutions often hide there.
Related concepts
- Problem Reframing: Solving the Right Problem First
Why the problem you first name is rarely the problem worth solving
- Constraint Relaxation: Escaping the Walls You Built Yourself
How over-constrained thinking blocks insight, and what to do about it
- Osborn’s Brainstorming Rules, Made Practical
The original four rules, the mechanisms behind them, and what the research actually shows