Difference between revisions of "Organizing Business and Enterprises to Perform Systems Engineering"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Components of Business and Enterprise SE Capability== | ==Components of Business and Enterprise SE Capability== | ||
| − | === Organisation issues - culture and | + | === Organisation issues - culture, knowledge, information and infrastructure ==== |
| − | The way | + | The way SE is managed is descibed in [[Systems Engineering Governance]] , which both impacts and responds to the SE [[Culture]] and approach. |
| − | Knowledge and Information are key assets in a business, and their management is critical. (Fasser and Brettner 2002) discuss knowledge management extensively | + | ==== Knowledge and Information ==== |
| − | + | Knowledge and Information are key assets in a business, and their management is critical. (Fasser and Brettner 2002) discuss knowledge management extensively. They assert that “we may think that knowledge transfer is just an information technology issue, but in actuality, it is also a psychological, cultural, and managerial issue – in short a human issue”; and “only information in action can create knowledge”. Organizations need to manage SE know-how, integration of SE with other organizational processes and activities, and knowledge of their business domain. The INCOSE Intelligent Enterprise Working Group's work on knowledge management in an SE context led to the publication of a “Concept of Operations for a Systems Engineering Educational Community” (Ring et al. 2004). | |
| − | Organizations need to manage SE know-how, integration of SE with other organizational processes and activities, and knowledge of their business domain | ||
Information has to be both shared and protected in complex organizations. Sharing is key to effective collaboration and is constrained by the need to protect intellectual property and commercially and nationally sensitive material. Different cultures and personal styles make best use of information presented in different ways and in different orders (i.e. in levels of abstraction, big picture first or detail, principles first or practical examples). (Sillitto 2011b) describes the knowledge management challenges for large multi-national organizations. | Information has to be both shared and protected in complex organizations. Sharing is key to effective collaboration and is constrained by the need to protect intellectual property and commercially and nationally sensitive material. Different cultures and personal styles make best use of information presented in different ways and in different orders (i.e. in levels of abstraction, big picture first or detail, principles first or practical examples). (Sillitto 2011b) describes the knowledge management challenges for large multi-national organizations. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 18: | ||
System information needs to be maintained throughout the life of the system and made available to relevant stakeholders – including those designing new systems that have to interface to the system of interest - to allow system management, maintenance, reconfiguration, upgrade and disposal, and forensics after accidents and near-misses. (Elliot et al. 2008) suggests that information management is the dominant problem in SE in service systems; and that the cost and difficulty of establishing “current state” and legacy constraints before starting to implement a change is often underestimated. | System information needs to be maintained throughout the life of the system and made available to relevant stakeholders – including those designing new systems that have to interface to the system of interest - to allow system management, maintenance, reconfiguration, upgrade and disposal, and forensics after accidents and near-misses. (Elliot et al. 2008) suggests that information management is the dominant problem in SE in service systems; and that the cost and difficulty of establishing “current state” and legacy constraints before starting to implement a change is often underestimated. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "Infostructure" (information infrastructure) to support the system lifecycle will include: | ||
| + | *Information assets such as process libraries, document templates, preferred parts lists, component re-use libraries, as-specified and as-tested information about legacy systems, capitalized metrics for organizational performance on previous similar projects, all with appropriate configuration control | ||
| + | *Modeling and simulation tools, data sets and run-time environments | ||
| + | *Shared working environments – workspaces for co-located teams, areas for people to interact with each other to develop ideas and explore concepts, work areas suitable for analysis tasks, meeting rooms, access control provision, etc. | ||
| + | *IT facilities - computer file structures, software licenses, IT equipment, computer and wall displays to support collaborative working, printers, all with appropriate security provision and back-up facilities, procedures for efficient use, and acceptable performance and usability | ||
| + | *Security provisions to protect own, customer, supplier and third part [[Acronyms|IPR]] and enforce necessary protective working practices while allowing efficient access to information for those with a need to know | ||
| + | |||
| + | SE is a knowledge activity and systems engineers need appropriate facilities for accessing, sharing and capturing knowledge and for interacting effectively with the whole set of stakeholders. Warfield (2006) describes collaborative workspaces, and environments and processes for developing a shared understanding of a problem situation. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Enabling Infrastructure ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The ISO/IEC 15288 (ISO 2008) Infrastructure Management Process provides the enabling infrastructure and services to support organization and project objectives throughout the life cycle. Infrastructure to support the system life cycle will often include: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Integration and test environment – bench and lab facilities, facilities for development testing as well as acceptance testing at various levels of integration, calibration and configuration management of test environment | ||
| + | *Trials and validation environment – access to test ranges, test tracks, calibrated targets, support and storage for trials-equipment, harbor, airfield and road facilities, safe storage for fuel, ordnance, etc. | ||
| + | *Training and support infrastructure – training simulators, embedded training, tools and test equipment for operational support and maintenance, etc. | ||
| Line 35: | Line 51: | ||
Guidance on organizational process management is provided by such frameworks as the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) (SEI 2010) which has two process areas on organizational process: [[Organizational Process Development (OPD) (glossary)]]), concerned with organizational definition and tailoring of the SE lifecycle processes discussed in detail elsewhere in this document; and [[Organizational Process Focus (OPF) (glossary)]], concerned with establishing a process culture in an organization. | Guidance on organizational process management is provided by such frameworks as the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) (SEI 2010) which has two process areas on organizational process: [[Organizational Process Development (OPD) (glossary)]]), concerned with organizational definition and tailoring of the SE lifecycle processes discussed in detail elsewhere in this document; and [[Organizational Process Focus (OPF) (glossary)]], concerned with establishing a process culture in an organization. | ||
| − | + | Assessment and measure performance of performance is covered in [[Assessing Systems Engineering Performance of Business and Enterprises]]. | |
| − | |||
| − | [[ | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | === Tools and Methods === | |
| − | Tools and | + | SE organizations often invest in SE tools and models, developing their own, and/or integrating off-the-shelf tools into their particular business/enterprise processes. Tools require great attention to culture and training, to developing a consistent “style” of use so that people can understand each others’ work, and configuration manage the information so that people are working on common and correct information. It is important that as well as tools there are methods, particularly to support [[Systems Thinking]]. |
It is common practice in large SE organizations to have a tool support infrastructure which ensures that tools support the organizational standard processes and are fully integrated with training, and that projects and teams can use the tools to do their job and are not distracted by tool management issues that are more efficiently handled centrally. Smaller SE organizations often operate more informally. | It is common practice in large SE organizations to have a tool support infrastructure which ensures that tools support the organizational standard processes and are fully integrated with training, and that projects and teams can use the tools to do their job and are not distracted by tool management issues that are more efficiently handled centrally. Smaller SE organizations often operate more informally. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Fitting it All Together == | == Fitting it All Together == | ||
| Line 102: | Line 97: | ||
Ring, J. and A.W. Wymore (eds.) 2004. ''Concept of Operations (conops) of A Systems Engineering Education Community (SEEC).'' Seattle, WA, USA: INCOSE Education Measurement Working Group (EMWG), INCOSE-TP-2003-015-01. Accessed on September 14, 2011. Available at http://www.incose.org/ProductsPubs/PDF/ConopsOfAnSEEdCommunity_2004-0315.pdf. | Ring, J. and A.W. Wymore (eds.) 2004. ''Concept of Operations (conops) of A Systems Engineering Education Community (SEEC).'' Seattle, WA, USA: INCOSE Education Measurement Working Group (EMWG), INCOSE-TP-2003-015-01. Accessed on September 14, 2011. Available at http://www.incose.org/ProductsPubs/PDF/ConopsOfAnSEEdCommunity_2004-0315.pdf. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
SEI. 2010. ''Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI) for Development,'' version 1.3. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Software Engineering Institute (SEI)/Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). | SEI. 2010. ''Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI) for Development,'' version 1.3. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Software Engineering Institute (SEI)/Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). | ||
Revision as of 16:35, 5 July 2012
Each business organisationis unique. [[Deciding on Desired Systems Engineering Capabilities within Businesses and Enterprises ]] determines the particular way systems engineering (SE) is to be deployed and carried out to suit the purpose of the business or enterprise (called "business" as a shorthand because a business is a specific type of enterprise that has sufficiently strong central authority and motivation to take steps to enable SE).
A standard way of describing the capabilities needed is based on the Toyota (Morgan and Liker 2006) approach of considering people, processes and tools. This sepeatation is used to structure this topic, with the addition of some specific issues about SE and the enabling organization.
Components of Business and Enterprise SE Capability
Organisation issues - culture, knowledge, information and infrastructure =
The way SE is managed is descibed in Systems Engineering Governance , which both impacts and responds to the SE Culture and approach.
Knowledge and Information
Knowledge and Information are key assets in a business, and their management is critical. (Fasser and Brettner 2002) discuss knowledge management extensively. They assert that “we may think that knowledge transfer is just an information technology issue, but in actuality, it is also a psychological, cultural, and managerial issue – in short a human issue”; and “only information in action can create knowledge”. Organizations need to manage SE know-how, integration of SE with other organizational processes and activities, and knowledge of their business domain. The INCOSE Intelligent Enterprise Working Group's work on knowledge management in an SE context led to the publication of a “Concept of Operations for a Systems Engineering Educational Community” (Ring et al. 2004).
Information has to be both shared and protected in complex organizations. Sharing is key to effective collaboration and is constrained by the need to protect intellectual property and commercially and nationally sensitive material. Different cultures and personal styles make best use of information presented in different ways and in different orders (i.e. in levels of abstraction, big picture first or detail, principles first or practical examples). (Sillitto 2011b) describes the knowledge management challenges for large multi-national organizations.
Projects need to manage project information and establish configuration control over formal contractual information; and the information that defines the product/service being developed, supplied, or operated. A key role of systems engineers is to “language the project” (Ring et al. 2004). Good data management and tool support will allow people to “document once, use many times”; and ensure consistency of information over time and between different teams.
System information needs to be maintained throughout the life of the system and made available to relevant stakeholders – including those designing new systems that have to interface to the system of interest - to allow system management, maintenance, reconfiguration, upgrade and disposal, and forensics after accidents and near-misses. (Elliot et al. 2008) suggests that information management is the dominant problem in SE in service systems; and that the cost and difficulty of establishing “current state” and legacy constraints before starting to implement a change is often underestimated.
"Infostructure" (information infrastructure) to support the system lifecycle will include:
- Information assets such as process libraries, document templates, preferred parts lists, component re-use libraries, as-specified and as-tested information about legacy systems, capitalized metrics for organizational performance on previous similar projects, all with appropriate configuration control
- Modeling and simulation tools, data sets and run-time environments
- Shared working environments – workspaces for co-located teams, areas for people to interact with each other to develop ideas and explore concepts, work areas suitable for analysis tasks, meeting rooms, access control provision, etc.
- IT facilities - computer file structures, software licenses, IT equipment, computer and wall displays to support collaborative working, printers, all with appropriate security provision and back-up facilities, procedures for efficient use, and acceptable performance and usability
- Security provisions to protect own, customer, supplier and third part IPR and enforce necessary protective working practices while allowing efficient access to information for those with a need to know
SE is a knowledge activity and systems engineers need appropriate facilities for accessing, sharing and capturing knowledge and for interacting effectively with the whole set of stakeholders. Warfield (2006) describes collaborative workspaces, and environments and processes for developing a shared understanding of a problem situation.
Enabling Infrastructure
The ISO/IEC 15288 (ISO 2008) Infrastructure Management Process provides the enabling infrastructure and services to support organization and project objectives throughout the life cycle. Infrastructure to support the system life cycle will often include:
- Integration and test environment – bench and lab facilities, facilities for development testing as well as acceptance testing at various levels of integration, calibration and configuration management of test environment
- Trials and validation environment – access to test ranges, test tracks, calibrated targets, support and storage for trials-equipment, harbor, airfield and road facilities, safe storage for fuel, ordnance, etc.
- Training and support infrastructure – training simulators, embedded training, tools and test equipment for operational support and maintenance, etc.
People
The roles people fill are typically defined by the business/enterprise (see Deciding on Desired Systems Engineering Capabilities within Businesses and Enterprises, although those decisions may be pushed down to teams. Enabling Teams to Perform Systems Engineering explains how people are used in teams; and Enabling Individuals to Perform Systems Engineering describes the development of an individual's SE competence.
The implementation of these roles needs further consideration. (Sheard 1996) lists twelve system engineering roles. (Sheard 2000) draws an important distinction between roles involved in the "discovery phase”, characterized by a high level of uncertainty, the “program phase”, which is more deterministic and defined, and the overall systems engineering “approach”. (Kasser et al. 2009) identify five types of systems engineer distinguished by the need to work at increasing levels of abstraction, ambiguity, scope and innovation. (Sillitto 2011a) discusses a number of SE roles and the characteristics required of them, in the context of the wider engineering and business professional landscape.
Systems engineering exists within an enterprise “ecosystem”. Two key aspects to consider:
- How much should the business/enterprise nurture and value the systems engineer?
- How much should the business/enterprise pull value from systems engineers, rather than wait for systems engineers to "push" value on the business/enterprise.
Process
Many SE organizations maintain a set of organizational standard processes, integrated in their quality and business management system, adapted to their business, and with tailoring guidelines to help projects apply the standard processes to their unique circumstances. Guidance on organizational process management is provided by such frameworks as the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) (SEI 2010) which has two process areas on organizational process: Organizational Process Development (OPD) (glossary)), concerned with organizational definition and tailoring of the SE lifecycle processes discussed in detail elsewhere in this document; and Organizational Process Focus (OPF) (glossary), concerned with establishing a process culture in an organization.
Assessment and measure performance of performance is covered in Assessing Systems Engineering Performance of Business and Enterprises.
Tools and Methods
SE organizations often invest in SE tools and models, developing their own, and/or integrating off-the-shelf tools into their particular business/enterprise processes. Tools require great attention to culture and training, to developing a consistent “style” of use so that people can understand each others’ work, and configuration manage the information so that people are working on common and correct information. It is important that as well as tools there are methods, particularly to support Systems Thinking.
It is common practice in large SE organizations to have a tool support infrastructure which ensures that tools support the organizational standard processes and are fully integrated with training, and that projects and teams can use the tools to do their job and are not distracted by tool management issues that are more efficiently handled centrally. Smaller SE organizations often operate more informally.
Fitting it All Together
The concept map in Figure 1 below shows the relationships between the various aspects of organization, resource, responsibility and governance.
_Concept_maps_additions_hgs_15_Aug.png)
Interface to Other Organizations
Outside official engineering and SE organizations within an enterprise, there are other organizations whose charter is not technical. Nevertheless, these organizations have an important SE role. Following are some examples:
- Customer Interface Organizations. There are organizations with titles like Marketing and Customer Engineering. These are the organizations with the most direct interface with customers or potential customers. Their role is to determine customer needs and communicate these needs to the SE organization for conversion to product requirements and other system requirements. Kossiakoff and Sweet (2003, p. 173) discuss the importance of understanding customer needs.
- Contracts Organizations. These organizations interface with both customer and supplier organizations. Their role is to develop clearly stated contracts for the developer or the supplier. These contracts convey tasks and responsibilities for all SE roles of all parties. Technical specifications are attached to the contracts. Responsibilities for verification and validation are specified.
- Supplier Management Organizations. These organizations are responsible for selecting and managing suppliers and assuring that both contractual and technical products are in place. These organizations balance cost and risk to assure that supplier products are delivered, verified, and validated to assure quality products. Blanchard and Fabrycky (2006, pp. 696-698) discuss the importance of supplier selection and agreement.
References
Works Cited
Blanchard, B. and W.J. Fabrycky. 2006. Systems Engineering and Analysis. Edited by W. J. Fabrycky and J. H. Mize. 4th ed, Prentise Hall International Series in Industrial and Systems Engineering. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentise Hall. Original edition, 1981.
Kossiakoff, A., and W.N. Sweet. 2003. Systems Engineering: Principles and Practice. Edited by A. Sage, Wiley Series in Systems Engineering and Management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Elliott et al. 2008. INCOSE UK Chapter Working Group on Applying Systems Engineering to In-Service Systems, Final Report. Somerset, UK: INCOSE UK Chapter Working Group. Accessed September 6, 2011. Available at http://www.incoseonline.org.uk/Documents/Groups/InServiceSystems/is_tr_001_final_report_final_1_0.pdf.
Fasser, Y. and D. Brettner. 2002. Management for Quality in High-Technology Enterprises. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons -Interscience.
ISO/IEC 2008. Systems and Software Engineering -- System Life Cycle Processes. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation / International Electrotechnical Commissions. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2008.
Kasser, J., D. Hitchins, and T. Huynh. 2009. Re-engineering Systems Engineering. Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Asia-Pacific Conference on Systems Engineering (APCOSE). 20-23 July 2009. Singapore.
Morgan, J. and J. Liker. 2006. The Toyota Product Development System: Integrating People, Process and Technology. London, UK: Taylor & Francis Group, Productivity Press.
Oppenheim et al. 2010. "Lean Enablers for Systems Engineering." Systems Engineering. 14(1). Access on September 14, 2011. Available at http://cse.lmu.edu/Assets/Lean+Enablers.pdf.
Project Management Institute (PMI). 2008. The Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 4th edition. Newton Square, PA, USA: Project Management Institute, Inc. An American National Standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2008.
Reason, J. 1997. Managing the Risks of Organisational Accidents. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Ring, J. and A.W. Wymore (eds.) 2004. Concept of Operations (conops) of A Systems Engineering Education Community (SEEC). Seattle, WA, USA: INCOSE Education Measurement Working Group (EMWG), INCOSE-TP-2003-015-01. Accessed on September 14, 2011. Available at http://www.incose.org/ProductsPubs/PDF/ConopsOfAnSEEdCommunity_2004-0315.pdf.
SEI. 2010. Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI) for Development, version 1.3. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Software Engineering Institute (SEI)/Carnegie Mellon University (CMU).
Sheard, S. 1996. "12 Systems Engineering Roles." Paper presented at the Sixth Annual International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) International Symposium. 7-11 July 1996. Boston, MA, USA. Accessed on September 6, 2011. Available at: http://www.incose.org/educationcareers/PDF/12-roles.pdf.
Sheard, S. 2000. "The 12 Systems Engineering Roles Revisited." Paper presented at the INCOSE Mid-Atlantic Regional Conference. April 2000. Reston, VA, USA. p 5.2-1 - 5.2-9.
Sillitto, H. 2011a. "Unravelling Systems Engineers from Systems Engineering - Frameworks for Understanding the Extent, Variety and Ambiguity of Systems Engineering and Systems Engineers." Paper presented at the 21st Annual International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) International Symposium. 20-23 June 2011. Denver, CO, USA.
Sillitto, H. 2011b. "Sharing Systems Engineering Knowledge through INCOSE: INCOSE as An Ultra-Large-Scale System? INCOSE Insight. 14(1) (April): 20.
Warfield, J. 2006. An Introduction to Systems Science. Washington, D.C., USA: The National Academies Press, World Scientific.
Primary References
Kotter, J. 1995. Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business Review (March–April 1995).
Sheard, S. 2000. The 12 Systems Engineering Roles Revisited. Paper presented at the INCOSE Mid-Atlantic Regional Conference. April 2000. Reston, VA, USA. p 5.2-1 - 5.2-9.
Additional References
Blanchard, B. and W. Fabrycky. 2005. Systems Engineering and Analysis, 4th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.
Construction Management (CM) Guide. 2009. Project Organization Types. Accessed on September 6, 2011. Available at http://cmguide.org/archives/319.
Defense Acquisition University (DAU). 2001. Systems Engineering Fundamentals. Fort Belvoir, VA, USA: Defense Acquisition University Press. Accessed on September 6, 2011. Available at http://www.dau.mil/pubscats/PubsCats/SEFGuide%2001-01.pdf.
Handy, C.B. 1985. Understanding Organizations. London, UK: Penguin Business.
SEBoK Discussion
Please provide your comments and feedback on the SEBoK below. You will need to log in to DISQUS using an existing account (e.g. Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) or create a DISQUS account. Simply type your comment in the text field below and DISQUS will guide you through the login or registration steps. Feedback will be archived and used for future updates to the SEBoK. If you provided a comment that is no longer listed, that comment has been adjudicated. You can view adjudication for comments submitted prior to SEBoK v. 1.0 at SEBoK Review and Adjudication. Later comments are addressed and changes are summarized in the Letter from the Editor and Acknowledgements and Release History.
If you would like to provide edits on this article, recommend new content, or make comments on the SEBoK as a whole, please see the SEBoK Sandbox.
blog comments powered by Disqus