Trends of Technical Evolution (TRIZ)
Eight classical evolution trajectories — locate the system and identify the next stage jump
Overview
Altshuller's patent analysis shows: technical systems do not evolve randomly but along a small number of recurring evolution trajectories. Placing the current system on these evolution trajectories predicts with high hit rate where the next product generation will go.
The module collects eight classical trends. Each line has clearly named stages — the jump to the next stage is an innovation hypothesis the team can systematically check.
- Aggregation: mono → bi → poly → integrated system (e.g. single headlight → twin → LED matrix → adaptive lighting system).
- Dynamism: rigid → jointed → elastic → fluid → field (e.g. steel beam → spring element → hydraulics → electromagnet).
- Scale: macro → meso → micro → nano (e.g. mechanical pump → MEMS pump → molecular transport).
- Automation: manual → mechanised → automatic → autonomous (e.g. knob → servo → controller → AI control).
- Completeness: engine → transmission → tool → control — the system gradually internalises all four sub-functions.
- Controllability: open loop → measured → adaptive → smart (e.g. fixed feed rate → feed sensor → adaptive control → learning).
- Niche matching: universal → adjustable → individually fitted → self-adapting (e.g. off-the-shelf shoe → orthotic shoe → custom-made → self-fitting sole).
- Uneven development: which subsystem lags? The classical bottleneck phenomenon — one component dictates the progress of the whole system.
The eighth element ("uneven development") is qualitative — no fixed stages, only a note. It complements the other seven by asking for the weakest link.
Approach
- Name the system — a concrete technical unit, not a whole product portfolio.
- Walk through every trend and place the system on the stage scale. When in doubt, pick the closest stage — the rating is not the point, the complete walk is.
- Per trend, write a note on the next stage: what would the jump mean concretely? Which component / behaviour would have to change?
- For the eighth trend (uneven development), identify the weakest subsystem — usually the component that blocks the jump on one of the other seven trends.
- Prioritise the resulting list of "next-stage opportunities" (with other TRIZ tools or simply by cost / impact).
Trends cannot be driven arbitrarily far: each line saturates. A system at the top stage of a line has no further headroom in that dimension — progress moves to other trends. Recognising this saturation is often more important than the next stage jump.
Relation to other TRIZ tools
- 9-Windows — the future column of the 9-Windows is the free-form sibling of this checklist. Placing the system on the eight trends gives that column structure.
- Ideal Final Result (IFR) — the next stage jump in a trend is often a good IFR candidate.
- Resources Checklist — many stage jumps need a concrete resource (e.g. the jump from "mechanised" to "automatic" needs a sensor signal).
- Contradiction Matrix — when the stage jump fails on a technical contradiction, formalise it there.
References & further reading
- G. S. Altshuller: "Creativity as an Exact Science" (1984) — chapter on laws of technical evolution.
- D. Mann: "Hands-On Systematic Innovation" — chapter "Trends of Evolution" (most extensive modern treatment).
- V. Souchkov: "TRIZ Body of Knowledge" — definition Patterns of Evolution.
- Y. Salamatov: "TRIZ — The Right Solution at the Right Time" — well-illustrated industry examples per trend.
Examples
This module ships with the following example datasets — load any of them in the app with a single click.
Available in the following cycles
- No fixed phase in cycle DMAIC (lives in the "More" tile).
- No fixed phase in cycle DMADV (lives in the "More" tile).
- 8D: D5 — Corrective Actions