_It was another busy morning at the monthly operations meeting. Lindsay, the operations manager at TechElectronics, a growing manufacturer of consumer electronics, called the meeting to order. As usual, they started with the routine updates—inventory levels, production schedules, and customer complaints. But today there was something more pressing on the agenda: delivery delays.

“All right, team,” Lindsay began. “We’ve been missing some crucial KPIs and not getting our products to customers on time. The warehouse is properly stocked, production is on schedule, but our products aren’t getting out the door as quickly as they should be. We’ve had a few near-misses with our major retail partners, and that’s not a position we can afford to be in.”

Lindsay paused and looked around the room. Everyone was silent and a bit puzzled. They had all worked hard to optimize the company’s inventory management system, improve production efficiency, and streamline the logistics process. So why were they still facing these delays?

Lindsay and his team had been brainstorming for days, trying to pinpoint the source of the problem. He had even called in an outside consultant to help analyze the situation but couldn’t see a solution. Then while discussing the issue with his colleague Henrietta, who had recently joined the team as a consultant for process improvements, she mentioned something intriguing: Occam’s razor.

“It’s a problem-solving principle,” Henrietta said. “It’s the idea that, when confronted with multiple possible explanations for something, the simplest one is usually the right one. In other words, don’t overcomplicate things. Sometimes the answer is right under your nose.” As the 14th-century philosopher William of Ockham stated, “Plurality should not be posited without necessity.”

That got Lindsay thinking. Maybe they were overcomplicating the problem. “All right,” he said. “Let’s start from scratch and think about the simplest explanation first.”

The simplest explanation: It’s all about timing

Lindsay gathered his team for a quick brainstorming session. They began by reviewing the basics—the company’s ERP system, production schedules, and distribution processes. After a few hours of analysis, one thing became glaringly obvious: There was a timing issue between production readiness and shipping schedules.

They had two critical issues:
• Production teams were ready to ship products on time, but...
• Shipping schedules weren’t always in sync with production. Transportation slots weren’t always available when the products were ready to leave the warehouse.

At first, it seemed too simple to be the cause. But after eliminating all the other possibilities, Lindsay realized that maybe Occam’s razor was on the mark. The most straightforward explanation—the misalignment of production and logistics—was the real issue.

TRIZ to the rescue

Now that the problem had been simplified, Lindsay was ready to investigate how the production and logistics teams could work more efficiently together. It appeared that they didn’t need new equipment or massive system overhauls. What they needed was a better way to coordinate the existing resources.

Lindsay and Henrietta decided to apply some principles of TRIZ (teoriya resheniya izobretatelskikh zadatch, Russian that translates to “theory of inventive problem solving”). “Let’s think about the ideal final result,” Henrietta said. “What do we really want here?”

Lindsay thought for a moment. “We want products to be shipped on time, with no delays—simple enough.”

“Exactly,” Henrietta said. “Now, let’s invert the ideal final result. Imagine the worst-case scenario—products are stuck in the warehouse, waiting for transportation, and there’s no way to get them out. Exaggerate that failure even more and think about how that would happen.”

Lindsay frowned. “If we wanted to make the delays worse, we’d keep producing as much as possible and not worry about when transportation would be available. We’d just build up inventory and let it sit there for days. That’s exactly what’s happening now, right?”

“Right,” Henrietta said. “Now, let’s dig into the contradiction. You want to produce more, but you also need transportation availability to align with production. What’s the solution?”

They spent the next few hours going through various TRIZ principles. They landed on a few interesting ideas:

Segmentation: Rather than producing in large batches, they could break production into smaller, more manageable runs. This would allow products to be shipped as soon as they were ready, rather than waiting for a massive shipment to be ready all at once.

Prior action: Anticipating transportation needs earlier in the production process was key. By coordinating with the logistics team ahead of time, they could ensure that transportation slots were reserved based on the production forecast, reducing last-minute rushes.

Dynamism: Using dynamic scheduling software, the team could automatically adjust the production pace to match available transportation. If shipping slots were filling up quickly, production could speed up or slow down to keep pace.

Testing the solution

Lindsay and the team implemented these changes over a few weeks. Instead of waiting for large volumes of products to build up, they started shipping smaller batches more frequently. They also integrated a new system for predicting transportation needs based on the production schedule. And most important, they set up weekly coordination meetings between production and logistics to ensure everyone was on the same page.

The results came in fast. Delivery times improved, the warehouse was less crowded, and customers began to notice. Retail partners reported fewer late shipments, and the company’s customer satisfaction ratings climbed.

A simpler solution than expected

As the team gathered to debrief, Lindsay looked around at his colleagues. They had tackled a complex problem, but in the end, it came down to something simple: aligning production and logistics more effectively.

“The issue wasn’t complex software bugs or mismanagement,” Lindsay said. “It was just a timing issue—pure and simple. Occam’s razor and TRIZ helped us see that.”

Henrietta smiled. “Sometimes, the most effective solutions are the simplest ones. TRIZ helped us get creative with our existing resources. And Occam’s razor helped us focus on the right solution.”

Conclusion

Applying Occam’s razor and TRIZ in this case study helped the team at TechElectronics resolve a persistent supply chain issue with minimal complexity. By starting with the simplest explanation—misaligned production and shipping schedules—they were able to use TRIZ principles to design an inventive solution that worked with existing resources.

Lindsay’s team learned a valuable lesson: Sometimes, when a problem seems overwhelming, it’s best to first simplify things. And once the issue is clear, TRIZ can provide the tools needed to turn it into an opportunity for improvement.

The six-step TRIZ process (in context):
1. Identify the ideal final result: Timely deliveries with minimal waiting time for transportation.
2. Invert the ideal state: Products ready to ship, but no transportation slots are available.
3. Exaggerate the inverted ideal state: Products build up in the warehouse, delayed indefinitely.
4. Identify the resources involved: Production speed, transportation slots, warehouse space.
5. Validate the cause: Timing misalignment between production and logistics.
6.  Use TRIZ to resolve resulting problems: Implement segmented production, prior action scheduling, and dynamic scheduling software.

As the meeting wrapped up, Lindsay couldn’t help but feel grateful for the straightforward approach that had saved the company time, resources, and customer relationships.

Key takeaways:
• Occam’s razor guided the team to a simpler, clearer understanding of the supply chain issue.
• TRIZ provided the systematic tools to resolve the contradiction and devise an inventive solution.
• Simplicity and systematic thinking can go a long way in solving real-world operational challenges.