Introduction

The crazier the conflict you imagine, the better solution you get. In previous chapters, we briefly defined two different types of contradictions: tradeoffs and inherent contradictions. We have considered tradeoffs in detail. In this chapter, we learn how to to move from the tradeoff to the inherent contradiction, and how to intensify the contradiction.

Why, in addition to tradeoffs, do we need another contradiction? First, the formulation of the inherent contradiction helps to get the best solutions because it helps find the key problem. There are always many problems and tradeoffs, but not all problems are equally important. One problem is key. The solution of this problem leads to the solution of others. Recall the fast-food example in the beginning. Old drive-in restaurants had many problems and tradeoffs: slow service, high costs, uneven quality, not always the best reputation, and others. The whole bundle of drawbacks resulted from one inherent contradiction: the restaurant needed many service people, and it needed very few service people.

The second reason is that the formulation of the inherent contradiction includes one element of the good solution. The inherent contradiction should be removed. The self-service concept clearly removed the contradiction "many-few service people." There are no service people. At the same time, we can say that there is one service person to each customer himself or herself.

Third, if we can focus on one key problem, we can present problems and their solutions much better to all possible customers, as well as management,...