Standardization vs Site-Specific Optimization
Document which deviations from standard design are locally mandated versus discretionary, ensuring regulatory compliance is never sacrificed for standardization.
CyberTRIZ analysis · GreenFieldIndustrialProjects contradiction GFP028 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Standard designs reduce engineering effort, simplify procurement, improve maintainability, and increase organizational familiarity. Yet differences in climate, geology, regulation, utilities, labor, logistics, and operating conditions can make a standard solution inefficient at a particular site.
Green Field Industrial Projects TRIZ Resolution
Standardize stable functional modules and interfaces while allowing controlled adaptation where local conditions materially affect performance. Preserve common architecture without requiring identical physical solutions everywhere.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 1 – Segmentation separates standardized modules from site-specific elements.
Principle 3 – Local Quality adapts selected systems to local conditions.
Principle 6 – Universality develops reusable solutions capable of functioning across multiple project environments.
Expected Outcome
Reduced engineering effort
Better local performance
Greater equipment commonality
Lower unnecessary customization
Decision Indicators
Standard designs require extensive field modification.
Site conditions are forced into unsuitable corporate standards.
Every project develops unique solutions for common functions.
Spare-parts diversity grows unnecessarily.
Local optimization eliminates useful organizational standardization.