1© 2007 A.Y Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
TOCICO CONFERENCE 2007
TRIZ for Jonahs
Presented By: David Bergland, Avraham Y. Goldratt InstitutePresented By: David Bergland, Avraham Y. Goldratt InstituteDate:Date: November 5, 2007November 5, 2007
*
* pronounced trees
®
2© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
DeliverProduce
The Need to Speed and Focus Innovation
The Need for Speed:
“If the 1980s were about quality and the 1990s were about reengineering, then the 2000s will be about velocity.”
Business @ the Speed of Thought by Bill Gates, 1999.
Theory of Constraints (TOC) Solutions are already providing SPEED WITH DIRECTION strategies for developing, producing and delivering.
In this talk we will focus on improving the speed to invent.
DevelopInvent
3© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
The Product Innovation Dilemma
In order to
We must In order to We must
We must In order to We must
The injection is to use TOC with TRIZ to BREAK THE MARKET CONSTRAINT by “Getting to the market quickly” without
“Accepting design compromises”
Create asuccessful
new product
Get to themarket quickly
Acceptdesign
compromises
Avoiddesign
compromises
Deliversignificant
improvements
== Is in direct conflict with
4© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
How can we Break the Product Innovation Dilemma
We will speed and focus innovation by:•
Using the Theory of Constraints (TOC) to focus the Russian Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ) to rapidly create new products and services that require:−
Breakthrough Inventions−
Unrefusable, Implementable Offers to the market (UROs)−
Contradiction Analysis / Conflict Resolution−
Innovative Thinking
•
This should help satisfy the “Need for Speed” in the first link of the chain
DevelopInvent Produce Deliver
5© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
What is TRIZ?
•
A name for the Russian “Theory of Inventive Problem Solving”
−
The letters T, R, I, Z form an English acronym for the Russian words Teoriya Resheniya Izobretatelskikh Zadatch that means, “Theory of the Solution of Inventive Problems”
•
A methodical process for knowledge-based innovation originally developed by Genrich (Henry) Altshuller (1926-1998) in the USSR
−
Classification of inventions was started in 1946 when he was employed in the patent department of the Soviet navy
−
Proved “Inventive problems can be codified, classified, and solved methodically, just like other engineering problems.”
6© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Has TRIZ Been Useful?
“ I believe that TRIZ is the reason the Soviet Union was able to stay as close to the United States as it did during the Cold War even though they had only one tenth the computing resources.” [1]
Eli Goldratt
7© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Today’s TRIZ is Based on the Abstraction of Knowledge from over 3 Million Patents
~3,000,000
~600,000
Some Key Findings
• Definition of inventive problem• Levels of invention• Patterns of evolution• Patterns of invention
PatentsWorldwide (est.) [5]
TRANSFERABLE
General PurposePrinciples
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
8© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
How can the General Purpose Principles help you find a Solution to Your Problem?
TRIZ GeneralProblem
TRIZ GeneralSolution
Your specificproblem
Your specificsolution
The TRIZ tools follow the upper path
Abstraction Specialization
Operators
Trial and Error
9© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Why TRIZ Works for Inventive Problems
Three Key Discoveries:
1.
Problems and solutions were repeated across industries and sciences.
2.
Patterns of technical evolution were repeated across industries and sciences.
3.
Innovations used scientific effects outside the field where they were developed.
10© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
When is an Inventive Solution Required?
In TRIZ there are two types of contradictions: technical and physical
In TRIZ there are two types of contradictions: technical and physical
Apply 4 Separation Principles• Separation in time• Separation in space• Separation between the
parts and the whole• Separation upon conditions
Known means to address the problem exist but they require breaking one or more contradictionsNo known means exist to address the problem –we need to come up with something new. [5]
Relate to the 39 ParametersApply the 40 Inventive Principles
Convert
11© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Technical Contradictions
•
An improvement in one system characteristic results in the deterioration of another
−
Example: Acceleration of a car vs. economical operation
•
Traditionally, technical contradictions are resolved by trade-off or compromise
•
Both TOC and TRIZ have techniques for resolving contradictions without the use of trade-offs or compromise
•
The 40 Innovation Principles can augment TOC methods for finding injections that break clouds where there is a technical contradiction
12© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Physical Contradictions
•
A characteristic must be higher and lower (self- opposing)
−
Example: An airplane wing should have large area for easy takeoff but small area for higher speed
•
A characteristic must be present and absent−
Example: Aircraft landing gears are needed for landing but undesired in flight
•
The 4 Separation Principles can often be used to resolve process contradictions as well as physical contradictions.
13© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Levels of Invention
Level 5: Discovery (1%)
Level 4: Invention outside the paradigm (4%)
Level 3: Invention inside the paradigm (18%)
Level 2: Improvement (45%)
Level 1: Apparent solution (no innovation) (32%)
Mov
ing
to h
ighe
r le
vels
of
inno
vatio
n
Inventive Solutions
(which break contradictions) are in level 3 and level 4
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
14© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Patterns of Invention
•
Altshuller recognized that the same fundamental problem (contradiction) had been addressed by a number of inventions in different areas of technology.
•
He also observed that the same fundamental solutions were used over and over again, often separated by many years.
•
He reasoned that if the latter innovator had had knowledge of the earlier solution, their task would have been straightforward.
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
15© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
•
TOC can:−
Model cause-effect relationships between useful and harmful effects in very focused ways
−
Focus TRIZ on options addressing core problem(s) and key leverage points
−
Clearly verbalize contradictions and their underlying assumptions
−
Verify the completeness and power of a solution
The TRIZ for JONAHS approach: Leverage TRIZ and TOC Knowledge
TRIZ can:−
Model cause-effect relationships between useful and harmful functions, events and conditions in very flexible ways using software
−
Generate a voluminous set of solution directions to explore using standard solutions, principles and scientific effects
−
Suggest injections for breaking contradictions
Focus
16© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
The TRIZ for JONAHS Strategy
Leverage TOC and TRIZ to create powerful inventive solutions faster
−
Use TOC to identify the high leverage points of the problem
−
Focus on the TRIZ “Directions for a Solution” related to these leverage points
17© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
The TRIZ for JONAHS Tactics
This strategy will be implemented by:•
Restricting the problem model to cause-effect (necessary condition) logic
•
Using focusing techniques analogous to those used in the TOC Thinking Processes to identify core conflicts and key leverage points
•
Converting contradictions from the TRIZ Problem Formulation Diagram to TOC Conflict Clouds
•
Using both TRIZ and TOC to find injections
18© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 1 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process
Step
1
Action
Define the problem
Approach
Write story line of the problem andlist useful and harmful effects
19© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 1a: Write the Story Line of the “Plating Metal Parts” Example
•
To plate metal parts with nickel they were placed in a bath of nickel salt. The bath was heated to increase the productivity of the process. However, heating reduced the stability of the salt solution and it started to decompose.
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
20© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 1b: List Useful and Harmful Effects
•
Primary Useful Effect−
Productivity increases
•
Useful Effects−
Parts move faster
−
Salt solution is heated
•
Harmful Effects−
Material is wasted
−
Salt solution decomposes
−
Stability of solution is reduced
21© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 2 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process
Step
1
2
Action
Define the problem
Model the problem
Approach
Write story line of the problem andlist useful and harmful effects
Connect the effects using “produces” and “counteracts” logic
22© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Steps to connect the Effects using “produces” and “counteracts” logic
Harmful Effect
PrimaryUseful Effect
Useful Effect
Harmful Effect
Harmful Effect
Harmful Effect
Useful Effect
Useful Effect
Useful Effect
Useful Effect
1. Connect the “harmful” and “useful” effects
2. Use “produces” and “is produced by” plus “counteracts” and “is counteracted by” logic
3. Stay focused on the real problem(s) and the mechanisms causing those problems
4. At a minimum the model must contain the major “harmful” effects plus the “primary useful effect”
5. This is a focused variant of the Problem Formulation Diagram in TRIZ
23© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 2: Connect Harmful Effects to Desired Useful Effects
Salt Solution isless stable
Salt solutiondecomposes
Material is wasted
Parts move faster
Productivityincreases
Salt solutionIs heated
24© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 3 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process
Step
1
2
Action
Define the problem
Model the problem
3 Focus Attention then Formulate Directions
Approach
Write story line of the problem andlist useful and harmful effects
Connect the effects using “produces” and “counteracts” logic
At contradictions and leverage points formulate directions for a solution
25© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Recognizing Contradictions in Problem Formulation Diagrams
Three of the patterns that generate contradictions
Note that all three patterns have both a green and red arrow coming from the same effect
Useful Effect
Harmful Effect
Useful Effect
Useful Effect
Harmful Effect
Harmful Effect
Useful Effect
Harmful Effect
Useful Effect
Type 1
Type 2 Type 3
26© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 3a: Focus on Contradictions and Key Leverage Points
Salt solutiondecomposes
Salt solutionis less stable
Material is wasted
Parts move faster
Productivityincreases
Salt solutionIs heated
27© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Problem Formulation
The formulation of a problem is often far more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill.
- Albert Einstein
28© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 3b: Formulate Directions for a Solution from the Contradiction Block
•
1. Find an alternative way to heat the salt solution that lets the parts move faster but does not cause the solution to be less stable.
•
2. Try to resolve the following contradiction: The salt solution should be heated to let the parts move faster, and should not be heated to avoid making the solution less stable.
*
*
See [3,4]
29© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
The Beauty of Formulation
Note for Jonahs: In the TOC Thinking Processes, this corresponds to examining possible negative branches of each course of action before selecting the final direction of the solution.
“The beauty of formulation is in obtaining an exhaustive set of possible directions. Ideally we would like to resolve the contradiction. However, there is no guarantee the contradiction can be resolved
given the existing resources and limitations. And even it can be resolved, we do not know in advance if this solution is going to be the best possible.
Resolving contradiction only means that we have found a way to satisfy both original conflicting requirements, but it can have new side effects (consequent contradiction) while a solution to other problem statements might not have side effects or they are negligible…”
-
Alla Zusman
30© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process
Step
1
2
Action
Define the problem
Model the problem
3 Focus Attention then Formulate Directions
4 Generate Ideas
Approach
Write story line of the problem andlist useful and harmful effects
Connect the effects using “produces” and “counteracts” logic
At contradictions and leverage points formulate directions for a solution
Use TOC, clouds, inventive and separation principles, and effects
31© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
How to Express a TRIZ Contradiction as a TOC Conflict Cloud
Technical Contradiction Physical Contradiction
In order to have A, we must have B, in order to have B, we must have DIn order to have A, we must have C, in order to have C, we must have D’D jeopardizes C D’ jeopardizes B D is in direct conflict with D’
A
B
C
D
D’Common objective
A
B
C
D
D’
Useful function
Important Needs Actions / Means
ImproveMaintain
TRIZ
TOC
32© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4a: Write the TRIZ Contradiction as a TOC Conflict Cloud
AProductivityincreases
BParts move
faster
CMaterial is not
wasted
DSalt solution
Is heated
D’Salt solutionIs not heated
Common objective
Important Needs Actions / Means
Technical Contradiction Physical Contradiction
Useful function
TRIZ
TOC
ImproveMaintain
33© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Altshuller’s 39 engineering parameters for expressing Technical Contradictions
Weight of moving objectWeight of non-moving objectLength of moving objectLength of non-moving objectArea of moving objectArea of non-moving objectVolume of moving objectVolume of non-moving objectSpeedForceTension, pressureShapeStability of objectStrengthDurability of moving objectDurability of non-moving objectTemperatureBrightnessEnergy spent by moving object
Energy spent by non-moving objectPowerWaste of energyWaste of substanceLoss of informationWaste of timeAmount of substanceReliabilityAccuracy of measurementAccuracy of manufacturingHarmful factors acting on objectHarmful side effectsManufacturabilityConvenience of useRepairabilityAdaptabilityComplexity of deviceComplexity of controlLevel of automationProductivity
2021222324252627282930313233343536373839
123456789
10111213141516171819
34© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4b: Express each “need” of the cloud as one of Altshuller’s 39 parameters
AProductivityincreases
BIncrease “speed”
CNot cause “waste
of substance”
DSalt solution
Is heated
D’Salt solutionIs not heated
35© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Altshuller’s Contradiction Table for Resolving Technical Contradictions
•
Altshuller selected several recommended Principles for Conflict Resolution for each combination of the 39 parameters
•
These recommended principles are shown in Altshuller’s Contradiction Table
•
The rows of the table display the parameters needing improvement
•
The columns of the table display the parameters that need to be protected from degradation as the row parameters are improved
•
The recommended Principles are listed in priority order at the intersection of the rows and columns
•
The table is not necessarily symmetric
36© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4c: Find “Principles” for resolving the conflict from the Contradiction Table*
As shown in Systematic Innovation: An Introduction to TRIZ, by John Terninko, Alla Zusman and Boris Zlotin*
Feature to Improve
Feature to Maintain
9
17
39
13 23 31
Speed
Productivity
Temperature
Was
te o
f su
bsta
nce
Sta
bilit
y of
obje
ct
Har
mfu
lsi
de e
ffect
s
28, 33,1, 18
1, 35,32
35, 3,22, 39
10, 13,28, 38
21, 36,29, 31
28, 10,35, 23
2, 24,35, 21
22, 35,2, 24
35, 22,18, 39
37© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Altshuller’s 40 Inventive Principles for Conflict Resolution
SegmentationExtractionLocal conditionsAsymmetryCombiningUniversalityNestingAnti-weightPrior counter-actionPrior ActionCushion in advanceEquipotentialityInversionSpheroidalityDynamicityPartial-excessive actionShift to a new dimensionMechanical vibrationPeriodic actionContinuity of a useful action
Rushing throughConvert a harm into a benefitFeedbackMediatorSelf-serviceCopyingDisposable objectReplacement of a mechanical systemUse a pneumatic or hydraulic constructionFlexible film or thin membranesUse of porous materialChanging the colorHomogeneityRejecting and regenerating partsTransformation of physical and chemical statesPhase transitionThermal expansionUse strong oxidizersInert environmentComposite materials
2122232425262728293031323334353637383940
123456789
1011121314151617181920
38© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Generating Ideas from the 40 Inventive Principles
•
For each principle ask:
-
Is there anything about this that can help me solve my problem?-
What are the analogies between my problem and the examples?
•
List each concept you come up with
•
Develop the best concepts enough to see if any new problems are created.
39© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4d: Apply the Recommended Inventive Principles to the Example
10. Prior actiona. Carry out all or part of the required action in advanceb. Arrange objects so they can go into action in a timely
matter and from a convenient position
13. Inversiona. Instead of an action dictated by the specifications of the
problem, implement an opposite actionb. Make a moving part of the object or the outside
environment immovable and the non-moving part movable
c. Turn the object upside-down
IDEAS? INJECTIONS?:
40© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4e: Apply the Separation Principles to Resolve the Physical Contradiction
AProductivityincreases
BIncrease“speed”
CNot cause “waste
of substance”
DSalt solution
Is heated
D’Salt solutionIs not heated
Important Needs Actions / Means
Technical Contradiction Physical Contradiction
Useful function
Common objective
41© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 4f: The “Separation Principles” and an example of a Relevant Scientific Effect
The following Separation Principles can address any situation with contradictory actions / needs in the TOC cloud
1. Separate opposite requirements in time
2. Separate opposite requirements in space−
Illustration of a relevant scientific effect: Coating method
3. Separate opposite requirements between the whole object and its parts
4. Separate opposite requirements via changing conditions
42© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Coating Method “Scientific Effect” Illustration
•
Metallic surfaces are chemically coated as follows: the metallic product is placed in a pool filled with a metal salt solution (e.g. nickel, cobalt, etc.). During the ensuing reduction reaction, metal from the solution precipitates onto the product surface. The higher the temperature, the faster the process; however, the solution decomposes at high temperatures, and up to 75% of the chemicals are wasted, settling on the bottom and walls of the pool. Adding stabilizers is not effective, and conducting the process at a low temperature sharply decreases production.
•
Alternatively, the product is heated to a high temperature before it is immersed in the solution, and the process itself is conducted at a low temperature. In this case, the solution is hot where it is near the product, but cold everywhere else. One way of heating the product is to apply an electric current to it during the coating process.
Ideas?
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
43© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 5 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process
Step
1
2
Action
Define the problem
Model the problem
3 Focus Attention then Formulate Directions
4 Generate Ideas
5 Develop Concepts
Approach
Write story line of the problem andlist useful and harmful effects
Connect the effects using “produces” and “counteracts” logic
At contradictions and leverage points formulate directions for a solutionUse TOC, clouds, innovation and separation principles, and effects
Select a set of injections that “flip” harmful effects into useful effects
44© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 5a: Develop Solution Concepts
Idea:Most of the parts of the "coating method illustration" are directly useful. This approach breaks the physical conflict by separating opposite requirements in space.
Idea:The Prior Action and Inversion principles suggest heating the metal parts before putting them in the bath instead of heating the bath before the metal parts are put in. When this is done, the solution touching the metal parts will be hotter than the rest of the solution in the bath. As in the “coating method illustration”
this maintains the stability of the salt solution.
45© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 5b: Create injections that will “flip” the harmful effects into useful effects
•
The metal parts are heated before being placed in the solution
•
The metal parts heat only the solution touching the parts
•
The temperature of the rest of the solution is not increased
•
The injection for the Problem Formulation Diagram is therefore:
−
Parts heat only the solution touching the parts
46© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 5c: Connect injections to “flipped” harmful effects and original useful effects
Parts heat onlythe solution
touching the parts
Salt solution touching the part
Is heated
The salt solution isstable
Parts movefaster
The salt solutiondoesn’t decompose
Productivityincreases
Material is notwasted
47© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Step 6 of the TRIZ for JONAHS Basic Process
Step
1
2
Action
Define the problem
Model the problem
3 Focus Attention then Formulate Directions
4 Generate Ideas
5 Develop Concepts
6 Evaluate Results andPlan Implementation
Approach
Write story line of the problem andlist useful and harmful effects
Connect the effects using “produces” and “counteracts” logic
At contradictions and leverage points formulate directions for a solutionUse TOC, clouds, innovation and separation principles, and effects
Select a set of injections that “flip” harmful effects into useful effects
Go back until “harmful effects” are all “flipped” then develop project plan
48© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Summary of “Plating Metal Parts” Problem
•
To plate metal parts with nickel they were placed in a bath of nickel salt. The bath was heated to increase the productivity of the process. However, heating reduced the stability of the salt solution and it started to decompose.
Parts are heated by the liquid
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
49© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
Summary of “Plating Metal Parts” Solution
•
In the nickel plating of parts, increased temperature is necessary only in proximity to the parts. To accomplish this, the parts themselves may be heated, rather than the salt solution.
The liquid touching the parts is heated by the parts
©
Ideation International 2007 [5]
50© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
TRIZ for JONAHS Helps Satisfy the “Need For Speed” in Innovation
Starting Point
Knowledge Required to
Make a Good Decision
PracticalKnowledge
Time
Gradual Accumulation of
Practical Knowledge
ConfidentDecision Point Focused Development of
Practical Knowledge versus Time
DevelopInvent Produce Deliver
51© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
References
1. Goldratt, E., (private communication), 2000.
2. Self Sufficiency in Inventive Problem Solving Workshop Notes, Ideation International Inc., Southfield, MI, 2000.
3. IWB Software, Ideation International Inc., Southfield, MI, 2000.
4. Terninko, J., Zusman, A., Zlotin, B., Systematic Innovation: An Introduction to TRIZ, St. Lucie Press, New York, 1998.
5. Zusman, A., (private communication), 2005, 2007.
52© 2007 A. Y. Goldratt Institute
TOCICO 2007 Conference
About David Bergland
••Advisory TOC Consultant at AGIAdvisory TOC Consultant at AGI
••AGI JonahAGI Jonah’’s Jonah certified in all of the s Jonah certified in all of the TOC application areas.TOC application areas.
••Founder and Partner of TOC Solutions, Founder and Partner of TOC Solutions, LLCLLC
••First Stanley Chair of Interdisciplinary First Stanley Chair of Interdisciplinary Engineering at Iowa State University Engineering at Iowa State University teaching TOC and TRIZ teaching TOC and TRIZ
••Head of the Executive Consulting Head of the Executive Consulting Department at AT&T Bell LaboratoriesDepartment at AT&T Bell Laboratories
••Honorable Mention as Eta Kappa Nu Honorable Mention as Eta Kappa Nu Outstanding Young Electrical EngineerOutstanding Young Electrical Engineer
••PhD in Electrical Engineering with PhD in Electrical Engineering with minors in Math and Physicsminors in Math and Physics
••Attended inAttended in--house AT&T MBA programhouse AT&T MBA program
[Color Photo of Presenter][Color Photo of Presenter]
Top Related