REVELANCE TREE

This method - adopted by various American corporations and the Army, too – can help you to make the best choice among a number of solutions.
Break down your problem into tree branches. You can follow different procedures: you can divide your problem into processes, systems, techniques, means...Stop only when you have identified your solutions. Obviously, your previous solutions need to be written on the tree (which could not be outlined without them!). Our experience shows that trees are meaningful and their only presence can generate further ideas.
The Relevance Tree is divided into different levels (usually 3-4); each level implies one or more selection criteria that can be objective or subjective but are not to be overlapped. Combining these criteria allows you to evaluate each technique and attain your final goal by using the branch with your desired solution.
The following example shows this technique:

Example 1: The silver contacts fairy tale

“A production company for electric appliances wanted to improve its existing solutions for implementing low power contacts.
During a normative creative meeting a certain number of potential solutions was generated and added to the already existing solutions. It was impossible to examine all chances in detail. So the project office suggested the most interesting solutions to the management.
They needed to implement an electric contact. They soon realized that there were two possible solutions: either to weld or to rivet, through massive silver or gold plated on a less noble metal...
Before evaluating these solutions, they made a quick choice and left out too similar or impracticable solutions...So three of them were suddenly put down...Seven solutions were kept and finally evaluated according to two types of criteria:

- the electric quality criteria (welding or riveting) of the relevant technique to fulfil the objective, i.e. making contact;
- three relevance criteria for the solution using a given technique;
- the solution implementation costs;
- the practicability of the technique;
- the mechanical contact resistence.” (Joly, 1993, p. 174-179).

The following table refers to the above mentioned example; it outlines:

- the technique relevance in fulfilling your objective;
- the solution relevance for the technique (welding or riveting);
- the final outcome.

Figure 3-14: example 1 (Source: Joly M., 1993)

The figure shows that solution 3 stands out from the group; it is immediately followed by three solutions, among which two envisage riveting. As a result, assuming that this technique is to be put down because riveting is electrically worse than welding would prove wrong.

CLASS	B
PHASE	Evaluation
DESCRIPTION	This method - adopted by various American corporations and the Army, too – can help you to make the best choice among a number of solutions. Break down your problem into tree branches. You can follow different procedures: you can divide your problem into processes, systems, techniques, means...Stop only when you have identified your solutions. Obviously, your previous solutions need to be written on the tree (which could not be outlined without them!). Our experience shows that trees are meaningful and their only presence can generate further ideas. The Relevance Tree is divided into different levels (usually 3-4); each level implies one or more selection criteria that can be objective or subjective but are not to be overlapped. Combining these criteria allows you to evaluate each technique and attain your final goal by using the branch with your desired solution. The following example shows this technique: Example 1: The silver contacts fairy tale “A production company for electric appliances wanted to improve its existing solutions for implementing low power contacts. During a normative creative meeting a certain number of potential solutions was generated and added to the already existing solutions. It was impossible to examine all chances in detail. So the project office suggested the most interesting solutions to the management. They needed to implement an electric contact. They soon realized that there were two possible solutions: either to weld or to rivet, through massive silver or gold plated on a less noble metal... Before evaluating these solutions, they made a quick choice and left out too similar or impracticable solutions...So three of them were suddenly put down...Seven solutions were kept and finally evaluated according to two types of criteria: - the electric quality criteria (welding or riveting) of the relevant technique to fulfil the objective, i.e. making contact; - three relevance criteria for the solution using a given technique; - the solution implementation costs; - the practicability of the technique; - the mechanical contact resistence.” (Joly, 1993, p. 174-179). The following table refers to the above mentioned example; it outlines: - the technique relevance in fulfilling your objective; - the solution relevance for the technique (welding or riveting); - the final outcome. Figure 3-14: example 1 (Source: Joly M., 1993) The figure shows that solution 3 stands out from the group; it is immediately followed by three solutions, among which two envisage riveting. As a result, assuming that this technique is to be put down because riveting is electrically worse than welding would prove wrong.
REFERENCES	Joly M., Des idées qui repportent… ca se trouve! Démystifier la crèativité industrielle, Paris, Les Édition d'Organisation, 1992