From a posting dated July 27:
<<
I know that K-T is probably dated, but my own experience is that
>managers try to apply systematic processes wherever possible. perhaps
someone
>could comment on what has become of the K-T approach, and/or similar
>methodology?
So far as I know, the K-T approach is alive and well. The workshop
promotional materials still come around and the methodology is still as
situationally sound as ever it was. If the classic K-T approach suffers
from a flaw, it is that the approach is essentially one of troubleshooting
or fault isolation. This is a dandy technique when something suddenly goes
wrong and the aim is to put things back the way they were, however, it is
much more limited in other circumstances.
>>
Systematic Problem Solving, or in a larger extent Systematic Innovation
is not so much concerned with the analysis of existing systems that
happen to go wrong by defect or external influences. There K-P's way
is certainly a very useful approach.
Systematic Innovation focusses more on finding solutions to make
something better, faster, or reduce cost. The second major application
is creating what has not been done before. Included in this is risk
management, because as we all know, many things go wrong and we wonder
why nobogy thought about the consequences.
In an even larger extent the organization as a whole is the focus,
as an innovation generator or inhibitor. Again there are systematic
steps to change the environment and retain it.
The concept is based on the morphological approach.
Emil Zahner
Innovation Coach
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/canmor/index19.htm