ABTRACT The TRIZ solution systems for production of knowledge resources are typically less oriented to services, as with innovation studies more generally, the study of services innovation has been increasingly concerned with the role of innovation systems. But many services are not well linked into the standard technology-oriented innovation systems, and the main systemic impetus to innovation they receive may be a more or less weak one coming from professional associations and similar network structures. Through reviewing the past literatures on fields of the TRIZ solving processes, it was found that there were several drawbacks in TRIZ solving processes, which were: (i) The TIRZ depended on the researchers’ subjective viewpoints; (ii) The TRIZ lacked a customized contradictory matrix and innovative principles; (iii) The innovative principle of TRIZ could not provide comprehensive solutions to apply to all service felids. For attempting to understand the reason of above drawbacks, a lot of literatures were organized and further found six cognitive gaps, which might support TRIZ implementation during TRIZ solving processes for Service System Design (SSD). The found six cognitive gaps are: (i) identifying the specific features and characteristics; (ii) the ideal contradiction matrix; (iii) evaluating by checking the KM-based tools; (iv) checking the KM-based context; (v) human factors and teamwork; (vi) innovative supplemental technologies. This study is also structured after reviewing six cognitive gaps to use TRIZ methods for SSD development after which new media tools that allow more reliable identification of user needs. To explore a method of TRIZ methodology for assist the SSD networks and System Innovative solving thinking approach, this study attempts to analyze solution accountability in the system with 40 principles.