All methods
Problem SolvingIntermediate

Liberating Structures TRIZ

A Liberating Structure that uses creative destruction to help groups stop perpetuating counterproductive behaviours. Named after the Russian innovation methodology, LS TRIZ inverts the problem: 'What would we do if we wanted to make things as bad as possible?' Once the 'perfect failure' is mapped, groups identify which of those sabotaging behaviours already exist — and stop doing them. More effective than conventional improvement planning.

Duration
30m–1h
Group size
5–100 people
Materials
sticky notes, markers, flip chart

Facilitation script

  1. 1

    Frame the inversion: name the group's shared goal, then ask 'What would we do if we wanted to absolutely guarantee the worst possible outcome?' Give explicit permission to be playful — laughter here is generative, not off-task.

    5 min
  2. 2

    Rapidly generate 'guaranteed failure' behaviours on sticky notes, one per note. Keep the pace high and accept everything without critique.

    7 min
  3. 3

    Cluster the notes on a flip chart and review the full list of failure behaviours together.

    8 min
  4. 4

    Ask the pivotal question: 'Are any of these things we are already doing — even a little?' Mark every item the group recognises. Slow down here; this is where the method does its work.

    10 min
  5. 5

    For each marked item, ask 'What first step could we take to stop doing this?' Keep the answers about stopping, not about launching new initiatives.

    8 min
  6. 6

    Commit to concrete stopping actions, each with a named owner and a timeline.

    5 min
  7. 7

    Debrief: ask what was surprising about what is already happening, and capture any insights for the wider team.

    5 min

Tips

  • The power is in Step 3 — when the group recognises their own sabotaging behaviours in the list.

  • This produces more honest action than any conventional problem-solving approach.

  • Allow genuine laughter during Step 1; it's generative.

Common pitfalls

  • Rushing or skipping the 'are we already doing this?' question — the group has fun listing failures but never confronts its own behaviour, and the exercise stays a joke

  • Dampening the laughter in the generation round — the humour is exactly what makes the later self-recognition safe, and a solemn TRIZ produces guarded lists

  • Letting stop-doing actions mutate into new improvement projects — the method's power is subtraction, and fresh to-do lists recreate the inertia it exists to break

  • Closing without owners and timelines on the stopping actions, so sabotaging behaviours get admitted in the room and quietly continued afterwards

  • Allowing critique or debate during the rapid generation round — it slows the flow and signals that wild answers are not welcome

Variations

Combine with 1-2-4-All for larger groups. Run a 'TRIZ for Meetings': what would make our meetings as bad as possible? Then stop doing those things. Consider running multiple rounds to deepen the understanding of unwanted results. Connect TRIZ outcomes with broader strategic reviews using methods like Ecocycle Planning.

Where it fits

Breaking organisational inertiaImproving team practicesInnovation workshopsCulture change initiativesReducing harm in patient safety initiatives.Improving diversity and inclusion policies.Preventing the development of unusable IT systems.Encouraging leadership to break out of ineffective routines.

When to use it

  • A team keeps launching improvement initiatives that change nothing because the underlying counterproductive behaviours never get named

  • Conventional problem-solving has produced only polite, safe answers and you need the inversion — plus the laughter it licenses — to unlock honesty

  • You want to break organisational inertia before a change or culture initiative, by clearing away sabotaging habits first

  • Before planning something new, to create space with a stop-doing list before the group writes yet another to-do list

  • Leadership is stuck in ineffective routines and needs a low-threat way to recognise its own part in the problem

When not to use it

  • The problem is a technical or engineering contradiction — that is the territory of classical Russian TRIZ or structured root-cause analysis, not this exercise

  • The group needs to generate new ideas rather than stop existing behaviours — run a brainstorm or Worst Possible Idea for ideation instead

  • The project has not started yet, so nothing is 'already being done' — a Premortem on the future project fits far better

  • Trust is so low that admitting 'we already do this' would be punished — have leadership model candour first, or the pivotal Step 3 will produce silence

  • Fewer than 5 people are in the room — below the method's minimum, a frank retrospective conversation is faster and less ceremonial

Related methods

Further reading

Frequently asked questions

What is TRIZ in Liberating Structures?

In Liberating Structures, TRIZ — full name 'Making Space with TRIZ' — is a creative-destruction exercise in which a group first designs the perfect failure ('What would we do to guarantee the worst possible outcome?'), then marks which of those sabotaging behaviours it is already doing, and finally commits to concrete first steps to stop them. It runs in 30-60 minutes with anywhere from 5 to 100 participants and is used to clear counterproductive habits out of the way before building anything new.

How is Liberating Structures TRIZ different from classical Russian TRIZ?

Classical TRIZ is Genrich Altshuller's engineering methodology for resolving technical contradictions, distilled from patent analysis into tools like the 40 inventive principles. Liberating Structures TRIZ borrows only the name and the inversion spirit: it is a facilitation exercise for stopping counterproductive organisational behaviours, needs no engineering toolkit, and any group can run it with sticky notes, markers, and a flip chart in under an hour.

What are the three questions in the TRIZ exercise?

First: 'What would we do if we wanted to absolutely guarantee the worst possible outcome for our goal?' Second: 'Are any of these things we are already doing — even a little?' Third: 'What first step could we take to stop doing this?' The second question is where the method's power lies — the moment a group recognises its own sabotaging behaviours in the failure list it just wrote.

How long does a TRIZ session take and how many people can join?

Plan 30-60 minutes: roughly 5-7 minutes of rapid failure ideation, then clustering, marking what is already happening, agreeing stopping actions, and a short debrief. It works from 5 up to around 100 participants — for larger groups, combine it with 1-2-4-All so everyone generates and discusses in small units before sharing.

Why use TRIZ instead of conventional problem-solving?

Asking a group how to make things worse lowers defensiveness: nobody has to confess a failure, they only have to recognise their own behaviour in a deliberately absurd list, and the laughter along the way makes that admission safe. This tends to produce more honest, actionable commitments than conventional improvement planning, which invites people to defend the status quo instead of naming what they should stop doing.

🪡

Plan your next workshop with AI

Workshop Weaver helps you combine methods like Liberating Structures TRIZ into a complete, timed agenda in minutes.

Try it free

Method descriptions on Workshop Weaver are original content written by our team, based on established facilitation practices. This method was inspired by work from Liberating Structures.