在TRIZ理論中，介紹到許多相關可使用的工具及手法，但對於使用者來說，如何真正有效的將問題明確進行清楚定義，以及使用者對於TRIZ工具之間的相關性可能並無充分認識。且使用者在解決問題時往往只注重在問題點上，而較對
系統進行全盤思考。因此在本研究將建立一套有效的系統描述機制，首先在問題描述上加5W1H1G和技術上和企業上的限制，幫助使用者明確的把問題模式化。接續結合TRIZ理論中四種解題工具，分別為：(1)功能屬性分析-辨識出系統或元件的相關功能及屬性，在輔以線上資料庫進行相關專利搜尋參考；(2)功能關係分析-繪製功能關係圖後找到系統衝突點-提出解題問句；(3)因果鏈分析-辨識工程系統中的負面因素，其連結關係為負面目標一層一層的往回推，找到最初始的問題起源，即關鍵負面因素(做為根源衝突分析的痛點)。(4)根源衝突分析-問5個why幫助使用者找到衝突。此四項工具所找出之衝突，分別依據衝突特性使用矛盾矩陣(技術衝突)或分離原則(物理衝突)來得到觸發解，且導入個案，以幫助使用者理解此系統之運作流程，利用得到之觸發解來思考更詳細且周全之解題答案。

TRIZ theory has introduced numerous tools to solve problems. However, for the user the real problem is how to clearly define the problem itself as well as the possibility that the user does not thoroughly comprehend TRIZ itself. In the past, while solving the problem, user usually focuses on one point of the problem and practically abandons the need to consider the whole system of the problem. Thus, this research proposes a very systematic procedure. Starting from the first step in defining problem, this research proposes the importance to utilize 5W1H1G (What, When, Where, Why, Who, How, Goal) and also both technical and business constraints, which let user model the problem precisely. Then, it is followed by embedding TRIZ’s three kinds of solving problem tool, i.e. (1) Function-Attribute Analysis –draws a function-attribute diagram, identifies the system’s or component’s functions and attributes, then collecting patents from internet for reference, followed by expanding the attributes of components that are related in a harmful relationship (contradiction point) and matching them to engineering parameters; (2) Function-Relationship Analysis –draws a function-relationship diagram, then captures the system’s contradiction through the useful and harmful relationships from the drawing, and finally offers a list of III questions related to the problem solving; (3) Cause Effect Chain Analysis - identifying the negative factors in an engineering system, and using the cause-effect chain relationship to make a step-by-step drawback to find out the very initial problem, furthermore using the key negative factor as the input for Root Contradiction Analysis；(4) Root Contradiction Analysis –asks 5 Why’s (the first Why being the sore-point, and the other Why’s being its causes), then from user’s responses find out the likely improving and worsening parameters. The contradiction is found by using those tools, then based on the contradiction’s characteristics Contradiction Matrix (Technical Contradiction) or Separation Principles (Physical Contradiction) may be applied separately to obtain the final solution. This research also combines those four tools to achieve the highest effectiveness. An example is given to clearly show how the entire system runs. This research is intended to use final solution and the collected patents to inspire user finding the best solution to solve the problem.

[1] 朱晏樟，「整合TRIZ 與功能分析之設計方法研究」，國立成功大學機械工程學系碩士論文，(2003)。
[2] 李子平，「智慧型質場分析解題助手」，國立清華大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文，(2008)。
[3] 李榮貴，張盛鴻，TOC限制理論，中國生產力中心，(2005)。
[4] 范耀仁，「系統化TRIZ方法及其統合應用」，(2001)。
[5] 許棟樑，「系統性創新課程教材」，(2007)。
[6] 陳家豪、劉志成、張祥唐，「綠色創新設計方法之研究」，(2003)。
[7] 游邦彥，「半導體製造業創新發明原則與矛盾矩陣雛型建立－以化學機械研磨為例」，國立清華大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文，(2007)。
[8] 鄭景安、黃永東，「整合TOC 和TRIZ 在ISO14001 的研究-以製造業為例」，現代管理與創新學術研討會，明新科技大學，(2007)。
[9] 劉棨庭，「使用萃思工具及價值工程於產品簡約設計研究」，國立清華大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文，(2008)。
[10] 劉志成、陳家豪，「一種沒有矛盾訊息下的TRIZ 創新設計方法」，中華民國第十二屆全自動化科技研討會，(2001)。
[11] 謝百芳，「以系統方法建立汽車業環境管理指標之研究」，國立中央大學環境工程研究所碩士論文，(2005)。
[12] 簡惠燕， 「國小學童在科學問題解決過程中創造力與後設認知之相關研究」，屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，(2000)。
[13] Altshuller,G，“And suddenly the inventor appeared：TRIZ，the theory of inventive problem solving”，(1996)。
[14] Creax Database，(2000)。
[15] Denis Cavallucci，François Rousselot and Cecilia Zanni，“On contradiction clouds”，(2008)。
[16] Dirk Riehle and Heinz Zullighoven，“Understanding and using patterns in software development”，Theory and Practice of Object Systems，(1996)。
[17] Darrell L. Mann，“Hands-on Systematic Innovation”，(2002)。
[18] Dr. Eliyahu M Goldratt，“The Goal”，(1984)。
[19] Graham Rawlinson，“TRIZ, Contradictions and Morality”，(2002)。
[20] Hongyul Yoon and Marino Kim，“How to Find and Formulate Contradictions out of the Initial Problem Situation”，(2002)。
[21] Innovation WorkBench Software，(2006)。
[22] John Terninko，Alla Zusman and Boris Zoltin，“Systematic Innovation An Introduction to TRIZ”，(1998)。
[23] Kaoru Ishikawa，Introduction to Quality Control，(1990)。
[24] Keaev’s Korner ，“Resource Analysis”，(2005)。
[25] Ludmila Semenova，“Resolution of contradictions in organizational systems”， (2002)。
[26] SirnonD ewulf.V incenTt heeten，“Directed Variation - Solving Conflicts in TRIZ”，(2005)。
[27] Savransky、Semyon D，“Engineering of creativity：introduction to TRIZ methodology of inventive problem solving”，(2000)。
[28] S. Ikovenko ，“Matriz classnote”，(2009)。
[29] Valeri Souchkov，“Value-Conflict Mapping (VCM) To Structure Innovation Strategy”，TRIZ-Future Conference 2008“Synthesis in Innovation，(2008)。
[30] Yuri Salamatov，“Schemes of Conflicts in Models of Problems”，(2002)。