Ideal Final Result (IFR)
In TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving), “Ideal Final Result” (IFR) refers to the desired state or outcome that fully addresses and resolves a problem or contradiction. It represents the ideal state in which all conflicts, contradictions, and limitations related to a problem are completely eliminated. The concept of IFR is used as a guiding principle to envision a solution that achieves the best possible result without any negative side effects or compromises. TRIZ encourages innovators to think beyond incremental improvements and aim for solutions that push the boundaries of what is currently thought possible. By defining an IFR, innovators can work backward to identify creative ways to achieve that result and overcome any existing conflicts or challenges. This approach helps to inspire innovative thinking and drive the development of breakthrough solutions in various problem-solving scenarios, from product design to process improvement. Altshuller first imagined the IFR] as a tool for thought in the 1950s. Two key philosophical ideas in TRIZ and “systematic creativity” are the idea of ideality as an evolutionary path and the idea of an “Ideal Final Result” (IFR). The method entails establishing the ideal outcome to be attained or problem that the solution under development is intended to solve before working backwards to find the best practical solution that is as close to IFR as is achievable. There are several ways to define ideality, however the following definition is frequently the most useful: Benefits (perceived) / (Cost + Harm) = Ideality Benefits (perceived) as Useful Functions / (Cost + Harmful Functions) = Ideality However, wherever human factors are involved even as a user or operator of the system, we would like to propose an alternative definition to measure the ideality of the designed system or proposed solution as Benefits (perceived) as Useful Functions + Feelings / (Cost + Harmful Functions + Feelings) = Ideality The IFR instrument is primarily designed and used as a questionnaire. The questionnaire is made up of a series of questions that can be used to reflect on the idea of ideality and pinpoint potential strategies for achieving it. If someone has already created a system that can do a particular function on its own, the self-x function is an excellent place to start looking. To investigate the possibility of shifting the responsibility for the desired function to the component(s) one or more levels up in the hierarchy, the system hierarchy aids in identifying the system’s components and sub-components. IFR method seeks the following step by step implementation: 1. Answer the questions in the exact order they are listed on the questionnaire. 2. The first query poses the difficult task of identifying all the USEFUL FUNCTION(s) & FEELINGS that the system must perform. 3. To increase ideality, consider how to supply the FUNCTION(s) & FEELINGS in the following way: “how could I maximize useful functions, feelings and outcomes as benefits and minimize cost or harmful functions and feelings to almost zero, negligible or non-existent”. 4. The final query aims to elicit “strong thinking” as described by Altshuller. The answers to this query include a list of all the obstacles stopping us to achieve the IFR. 5. The fourth and fifth questions are meant to challenge the responses to the previous questions. 6. The sixth question aims to establish a clear connection between ideality and the assets or resources that we need to define the overall problem. 7. The questionnaire’s final question serves as a bridge to the tools to solve the problems down the line. Most of the ideality-centered problems will result in a contradiction or a knowledge and effect type of a problem. 8. If the first time through the questionnaire results in the definition of a problem that cannot be solved, the ideality problem definition could lead to two different paths for further exploration: (i) investigate alternative problem definitions with less difficult IFR definitions since the stated IFR is unachievable (repeating steps 1–7 iteratively) or (ii) there are multiple factors that are making it difficult to meet a specified IFR, and we would want to learn in-depth about each one of them. IFR Questionnaire: 1. What is the final aim of the system? 2. What is the Ideal Final Result (IFR) outcome or scenario? 3. What is stopping you from achieving the IFR? 4. Why is it stopping you? 5. How could you make whatever (factor) is stopping you from achieving IFR to disappear? 6. What resources are available to help create these circumstances? 7. Has anyone else been able to solve this problem? Example: Detergent Business: Running the definition of a detergent business through the IFR questionnaire should give us something like: 1. What is the final aim of the system? Clean clothes 2. What is the Ideal Final Result (IFR) outcome or scenario? Clothes that clean themselves 3. What is stopping you from achieving this IFR? Cloth fibers are not able to perform this function 4. Why is it stopping you? If the fibers can’t perform the function, the clothes aren’t cleaned 5. How could you make whatever (factor) is stopping you from achieving IFR to disappear? If there was a fiber or fiber structure that was able to clean ‘itself’ 6. What resources are available to help create these circumstances? Fiber, atmosphere, wearer, wardrobe, sunlight, 7. Has anyone else been able to solve this problem? The ‘self-clean’ function is possible in nature (Lotus Plant), but the only man-made self-clean structures (e.g., ovens) use resources that are not present in this case. Alternative; disposable clothes. If having self-cleaning clothes is currently not a reality, how can we come up with a workable solution by identifying an alternative and taking a modest step back from the ideal. Fundamentally, the step back must incorporate an external cleaning system. We may choose from several other ideas, such as “clean clothes without using a washing machine,” “clean clothes without using water as a resource” and so forth, i.e., “clean clothes without using any external agents.” Then, using this IFR definition tool, we can look at all these conceptual possibilities that









