About a month ago, I gave a workshop in a Systems Engineering course at a large hi-tech company. The topic was:
creativity in problem solving. I started the class with an exercise. I presented a tender issued by the Ministry of Transport for the development of a portable instrument for measuring drivers’ response time. A strong correlation has been found between slow response time and presence of alcohol/drugs in the blood system. The instrument would be used when a police officer pulls over a driver suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
The requirements were:
· Time measured is the response time of the brain to any exterior stimulus
· The device must be autonomous
· The range to be measured is 150-300 milliseconds
· Accuracy and reproducibility rates should be approximately 15% each
· The instrument must be highly reliable and user-friendly
· Number of units required: 6,000; to be delivered in three months.
The participants were divided into work groups, and were asked to come up with the system’s basic concept and cost. The models suggested by the groups ranged from $50 a piece to $900. The cheapest system had a light bulb for stimulus, a button for creating the response, an electronic component to measure the time lapse between the stimulus and response, a screen to display the result and a battery. The most expensive system combined similar elements in a palmtop (PDA).
I then pulled out this tool (it costs about 5 cents). The participants were stunned.
The following instructions are printed on the ruler:
Place fingers around the “zero” line, without touching the ruler. When the policeman drops the ruler, catch it with your fingers. Your reaction time (in milliseconds) appears in the “catching point”.Innovation is necessary (laser, palmtops, satellite GPS, cellular phones…) but we definitely also require creativity. As Einstein said:
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler!
The emphasis should be on both parts of the sentence.
Upper photo copyrights:Photo copyrights: ©iStockphoto.com/lisafx
hi Dov
Excellent. Greta idea and example. Indeed, so many things could and should be simpler thatn they are. Only problem I see is: who’s interest it would be. Imagine that we are invited to help a company who is bidding for this police tender. And imagine we help them come up with the 5 cent solution. Then what happens to their business? So there isnt really too much incentive for that kind of solutions. In who’s business interest is it to teach people they can solve their appetite, health, clothing and transportation problems with simpler solutions. Even the government wont like it. Why? Sell 5 cent rulers instead of $50 machines to the police and the GNP goes down.
So lucky there still are courses and exercises and not only businesses(:
Amnon hi
The second part of the story (that was not posted in the blog) touches exactlly the point you mentioned and was disscussed in the group. Too creative and too simple solutions are (sometimes) difficult to be adopted not only because of “economical” reasons (as you wrote) but also because these solutions seem to “violate” the law of energy conservation (you get a lot w/o paying a lot and we all know there are not “free meals” ) so we automatically suppose something is wrong with the solution. May be Einstein sentence should be rephrased: Make everything as cheap as possible, but not cheaper!
I’ve got a question: How is SIT usually applied for designing alternatives/solutions after a Request for Proposals is issued. In other words, how are customer centered and product centered design processes combined?
Well, this is a good question. Relating on my experience, too often, the provider of the RFP (Request for Proposal) defines not only the fundamental requirements from the system but also derived requirements that are hidden outcomes from the conceptual solution he has already in mind. Applying SIT methodology we begin by building a so called logical map that includes all the fundamental requirements (connected by AND gate) , from each requirement you may get more than one derived requirement ( OR gate) which will lead to performing the needed function. Sometimes by presenting this outcome to the RFP owner he may update the RFP and this will give you some degree of freedom to come up with a more creative solution. I will sum it up with an hypothetical example: An RFP for developing a personal missile includes a requirement that the missile weight will not be more than 12 Kg ,this requirement is based on the RFP owner understanding that the soldier should not carry more than 12 Kg . The hidden assumption of the customer is that the missile will be a “one piece 12 Kg max” missile, but if you choose a concept of a “two pieces missile” (SIT division tool) that can be carried by two soldiers separately than the 12 Kg missile weight limit is not relevant anymore.
Dov
Hello, just wanted you to know I have added your site to my Google bookmarks because of your great blog layout. But in earnest, I think your site has one of the simplest theme I’ve came across. It really helps make reading your blog a lot easier.
I really like your blog site.. excellent shades & style. Do a person pattern this excellent website oneself or even have people hire an attorney to make it happen available for you? Plz answer while I!|m seeking to style and design my very own blog as well as would wish to learn where u obtained this specific out of. thanks a lot