TRIZ, ASIT, CK Connections and Disconnections between Three Major Theoretical Frameworks on Creativity


  • Luc E Brunet APEKSA


Palabras clave:

triz, asit, ck theory, Creativity


This paper intend to propose a comparative analysis of three major theoretical framework engineers and creative companies frequently use. All of them propose to help users to break psychological walls hiding creative solutions. Beyond the individual preferences and the mimesis effect, studying what is the DNA, often fruit of the History of Europe, behind these theories and analyzing how they are or not connected allows us to understand how we come to the future society of knowledge.


Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.


CAVALUCCI, D. (1999). TRIZ, l'approche altschullerienne de la créativité. In Technique de l'Ingénieur. WEAK, Fasicule A5211.

FESTINGER, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford-California

GIRARD, R. (1987). Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World. Stanford University Press, Stanford-California.

HATCHUEL, A. and Weil, B. (2009). C-K design theory: an advanced formulation. Research in Engineering Design, 19 (4), 181-192.

HOROWITZ, R. (1999). Creative problem solving in engineering design. PhD thesis– Tel Aviv University.

LONG, C. H. (1974). Cargo cults as cultural historical phenomena. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, XLII (3), 403-414.

MAIMON, O. Z. and Horowitz, R. (1999). Sufficient conditions for inventive solutions. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, IEEE Transactions on, 29 (3), 349-361.

REICH, Y., Hatchuel, A., Shai, O., and Subrahmanian, E. (2010). A theoretical analysis of creativity methods in engineering design: casting and improving ASIT within C–K theory. Journal of Engineering Design, 23 (2), 137-158.




Cómo citar

Brunet, L. E. (2013). TRIZ, ASIT, CK Connections and Disconnections between Three Major Theoretical Frameworks on Creativity. Current Opinion in Creativity, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(2).



Current Opinion