Ideal Final Result

Out of two systems/solutions with similar functions the one with a higher ideality degree (ratio of useful functions and costs) is more preferable. The “Ideal Final result” notion is linked to the “Ideal System” notion, i.e. a system which does not exist (it does not require time, power, use of any resources or space), while at the same time fully performing its functions.

For the issue chosen at the previous step an Ideal Final Result (IFR) is formulated.
Possible options (in ideality decreasing order, with corresponding shifts from reasons to consequences):

  • The problem disappears by itself
  • The required action happens by itself
  • The undesirable effect disappears by itself
  • The undesired effect is compensated by itself
  • The attitude towards the undesired effect stops being negative

The IFR in terms of the functional analysis
(“Reason-Consequence” and “System to Super-system” scale-wise):

  • The necessity of the function this element is fulfilling falls out
  • The necessity of the function this element is fulfilling falls out
  • The function is done by the object itself
  • The function is done by other elements of the given system
  • The function is done by the closest systems or a super-system


“We cannot kiln dry properly, as we do not know the moisture content of the sawn wood when it is inside the kilns – we regularly open the kilns to check, it takes time…” – the ideal final result for the problem “as it is given” would be “we always know the moisture content” and the solution is quite obvious (putting scanners inside the kilns) at least for a single kiln. IFR for the same problem in terms of consequences might be: “boards with out of spec moisture content are separated automatically” with an equally visible technical solution (putting scanners at the dry sorting). However, the best results are likely to follow from the line of IFR for the following causes: “There is no need in measurements, we know exactly how much time each product would have to stay in certain kilns to reach a certain moisture content”.

Three ways to “improve ideality”

Increasing the “degree of ideality” can typically be achieved in one of the following three ways:

  • The functions – all or partially, starting from supporting and managing – are jumping to a super-system level. As an example, all production related functions remain under the mill’s control, whereas all logistics, distribution and marketing related functions are transferred to a corporate level. One element within the corporate level will perform a function, which was previously carried out by several elements: each mill had a function of its own. Another good example is storing data and software in a high level system in case of mobile gadgets.Ideality1
  • An opposite phenomenon is zooming supporting elements in until they scale down (contract) to the main working element. The main working element is directly involved in fulfilling the main useful function of the system. Contraction occurs when the main elements receive functions of the supporting ones (the production becomes also responsible for security; the sales receive functions of accounting, logistics and marketing etc.). In case of technical systems the phenomenon typically involves a miniaturization of a gadget and its proximity to a receiving point (a combination of a player and a radio-set is installed inside ear-phones: it does not require wires or a housing and is placed close to an ear).Ideality2
  • The third way is to increase the number of functions the system can perform, i.e. make it multi-functional (the system becomes capable of performing more useful functions). In case of technical systems this way is preferred, if for some reason further miniaturization is not feasible. An example is a mobile phone. Its further miniaturization does not make sence but instead it acquired functions of a PC, radio-set, satnav, remote control etc.Ideality3

More phrases about ideality you can find here and here.