presentation from may 9, 2006 dinner meeting

8/9/2019 Presentation from May 9, 2006 Dinner Meeting

1/18

1

Systems Engineering

Vision 2020

Presentation to Washington Metropolitan Area Chapter

9 May 2006

Dr. Harry E. Crisp

[email protected]


2/18

2

Background

SE Vision is one of the INCOSE Top 4 Projects

Intent is to provide a consensus SE communitydocument and to regularly update it

Current focus areas include:- Future Systems

- Public Systems

- Model-Based SE

- Global Systems Engineering Environment- Process Evolution

- Human Roles

- SE Education


3/18

3

Background (Cont.)

Format of the Vision:

Current State of the Practice

New/Emerging Drivers & Technologies

Inhibitors

Vision State of the Art in 2010

Vision State of the Art in 2020


4/18

4

Progress to Date

INCOSE International Workshop: January 2004

Version 1.5 of the SE Vision: November 2005

http://www.incose.org/membersonly2005/

INCOSE International Workshop: January 2006 Conference on SE Research: April 2006


5/18

5

IW 2006 SE Vision

2020 Workshop

Future Systems

Model-Based Systems Engineering

Global Systems Engineering Environment Process Evolution

Systems Engineering Education


6/18

6

Global SE Environment

State of the Practice Emerging Drivers Inhibitors 2010 2020

Awkwardcommunicationsbetween companies

and countries

Some progress

betweenprofessionalorganizations andsocieties

Lack of consistentterminology and

definitions

Manufacturing basemoving to China,Taiwan, Korea, etc.

SW development ismoving to India

Regulatory issuesdrive SE in publicpolicy

Commercialenterprise SEdrivers includemulti-sourceresilience; changingnature of value

chain Inherent tensions

Cultural styles

Language

Terminology

SE scalability to

small projects

IP protection Inability to articulate

value of SE

Inability to visualizethe global systemof systems contextand environment

Advanced systemstheory, methods,and tools

Interdisciplinaryemphasis in

engineeringeducation

Improveduse/integration ofengineeringspecialties

Improvedunderstanding ofpsychology

languages andcultural differences

Interdisciplinarity

Agile enterprises

Multiplicity of SoSSE environmentsfor full

collaboration,modeling andprediction


7/18

7

SE Process Evolution

State of Practice Emerging Drivers Inhibitors 2010 2020

Limitedunderstanding andapplication of SE

processes beyonddefense andaerospace

Lack of usefulexecutable processmodels

Disagreement onapplicability of SE

to socio-technicaleconomic andpolitical problems

Perception that SEis burdensome andheavy-weight

Drive to harmonizesystemsengineering

process standards

Greater agility,

adaptability androbustness indefining andadapting SEprocesses

Accelerating

changes in userneeds and externalenvironments

Technologyadvances

Teaming fordevelopment

Cultural resistanceto change

Terminologyinconsistencies

Lack of

empowerment Focus on short-

term profits

Increasedintegration ofengineering PM

and businessprocesses

Betterunderstanding ofSE processes

Executable models

Harmonizationacross disciplines

Process agility

SE cost estimationmodels

Cultural andprocess awareness

Education andtraining of SEssupport of SE

vision

Continuous processimprovement

Common lexiconthat crossessectors, domainsand disciplines

Only value-addprocesses get used


8/18

8

Future SystemsEmerging Drivers Inhibitors 2010 2020

Role of humans in theentire system life cycle,rising expectations,

disruptive technologies,rapid technologychanges, integrity,robustness

Affordability,sustainability, trust,health and socialsystems, globalenvironment, anti-terrorism, transportation,national/internationalpriorities, regulatoryenvironment

Systems of Systems,infrastructure (humanand physical)

Limited bandwidth, lackof collaboration, NIHsyndrome, lack of

interoperabilitystandards, lack of SEtheory and practice tohandle complexity, silodisciplines

Regulatory environment,government/userinflexibility; lack ofsystems thinking outsideof engineering domain;failure of SE in priorsystems efforts

Lack of appropriatemature technology andprocesses, ingrainednature of legacysystems, inertia (e.g.,cost of replacement,political legacy), business

competition

Regional scale SoS;some interconnectedsystems and

communities ofsystems

Experimenting with new

SE approaches beyondthe technical to includepolitical, economic, legal,etc.

Gathering experience onhow to handle legacy,

e.g., doing patch-up jobsand design throughexperimentation

Extensive inter-connectedness, globalscale SoS

Stakeholders will havegreater role in systemrequirements and

acceptability; the rangeof environmentalpossibilities which mayexist and are difficult topredict; new approachesincorporated fromexperiments

Robust consideration oflegacy in designenvironment includingreplacement of legacyelements as a deliberatestrategy; infrastructurewill have built-inupgradeability


9/18

9

Model Based Systems EngineeringState of Practice Emerging Drivers Inhibitors 2010 2020

Limited use ofarchitectural framework

Models not coherent and

logically consistent

Campaign/missionmodels not integrated

with engineeringmodels

System to component

Across domain

specific (electrical,)

Inconsistent data

sources andassumptions

Lack of execution

capabilities in tools

Automated codegeneration and testing

Emphasis on technology

vs. human centric

SysML just being adopted

Complexity Shorten cycle

time

IT explosion

Evolving profile of

an SE

User andcustomer

acceptance

Learning curve ofMBSE

Limited maturity

of SYSML

SYSMLcompatible tools

Increased use of MBSE across lifecycle

Architecture model being used as

unifying framework

Higher degree of model cohesion

Disciplines

Levels of design (system tocomponent)

Models for development,

production and delivery

Integration of models across lifecycle

Integration between system

design, analysis, and simulationmodels

Improved integration between

models and empirical data(semi-empirical models)

Executable specifications and

design models including code

generation Partly improved modeling of human

interaction

Effects based modeling / multiplerelationships

Composable federations which

encapsulate proprietary data (SOA)

Standard data exchange andimproved data sharing (key to model

integration)

Fully coherent models(component to

enterprise/business)

Trustworthy models witheasy, reliable and

unambiguous datainterchange

Complete models

including humaninteraction, social

aspects, enablingsystems

Automated impacts

across models

Domain specific standardlanguages


10/18

10

Systems Engineering EducationState of Practice Emerging Drivers Inhibitors 2010 2020

Undergraduate level haschanged little in past 10

years

No standard atundergraduate level for

defining SE education

Some specialty/domainareas starting to infuse a

systems view

Struggling to fill openacademic positions

Globalization hasbecome a major

driver; virtualclassroom is

everywhere

New technologyrequires constant

refreshing ofeducational

pursuit

Still need to train

engineers to

operate existingsystems and to

thinksystematically to

improve

Environmentalissues, natural

disasters, globalterrorist issues

present differentkinds of SE

evaluations

Relatively fewengineers are

educated in asystems manner

SE not

considered ascience

4-year

undergraduateprogram

constraints push

systems thinking

to next level

Most educatorsstill teach using

old methods

Many employersdo not

understand valueof people with

broader system

skills

Expansion of SE thought intoan expanded curriculum

Stable common core of SE

courses for expanding traditionalengineering disciplines

Increased influence of the SE

techniques in a technicalsociety

Drug abuse prevention,

homeland security, crimeprevention, urban expansion,infrastructure development, etc.

New techniques for SEeducation delivery

Just-in-time education; web-enabled education; information

chunking

Increased collaboration

Between management and SE;

societies interested in SE;persons with interdisciplinary

interests

Curriculum expansion,collaboration, use of

newer technologies will

continue

Influence of systems

thinking will get applied togovernments and large

scale societal problemsolving

Use of technology will

create major innovations

for SE education

Simulation,

visualization,gaming, etc.


11/18

11

Common Themes 2010 & 2020

Integrating and Managing Complexity

Rapidly Evolving & Unpredictable SE Environment

Leveraging Legacy Systems Assets with COTS

Increasing Realization SE is Multidisciplinary & Needs

Collaborative Approaches

More Standardized Processes and Lexicon Needed

Increasing Need for SE Tools & Technology

Identifying, Responding to and Managing Disruptive

Technologies


12/18

12

Common Themes 2010 & 2020

Increased Role of SE Education

Need for Better Collaboration Across University

Departments, Professional Societies and SE

Communities

Realization of the Pervasive Impact of Globalizationon SE

Emergence of Family & System of Systems

Engineering of More Robust Processes and Systems

Better Integration of the Human is Important


13/18

13

SE Vision forms a Framework

Use outcome of SE Vision Workshops to

construct a roadmap to achieve the vision

Roadmap used to establish a collaborationframework

Use best athlete approach to pair most

capable organization with the work to be

done recognize that it wont always be

us!


14/18

14

Operating Environment Study

Identify relevant organizations:

Leadership

Charters Membership

Strengths & Weaknesses

Existing Liaisons / Partnerships with INCOSE


15/18

15

Approach to Partnering with Other

Professional Organizations

Operating Environment Study

Identify SE Vision Capability Needs

Identify Who Can Best Address the Needs Determine Optimal Partnership Type

Identify the Right INCOSE Liaison

Establish the Partnership Maintain the Partnership


16/18

16

Establishing Partnerships

Adopt a more strategic approach forestablishing partnerships with others:

Value to us

Cost to us versus payoff

Value to the profession

Other considerations?

Define several levels of partnership

depending on parameters identified above Strategically pick our liaison

representatives


17/18

17

Maintaining Partnerships

Periodic Health Checks are needed toassure the partnership is still effective:

May require level adjustments

May require liaison changes Should be closed when no longer productive

Need to keep an accessible record of

standing partnerships and associated

liaisons


18/18

18

Workshop

At CSER06:

Research

Workshop

At IW2007:

Energy

Workshop

At IS2007:

Complex

Systems

Workshop

At CSER07:

Education

Workshop

At IS2006:

Modelling &

Simulation

Workshop

At CSER08:

Research

Workshop

At IS2008:

Infrastructure SE

Trends in

SE Education

Trends in SE

Research

Trends in SE

Research

Trends inEnergy SE

Trends in SE

of ComplexSystems

Major

UpdateWorkshop

At IW2006

Vision

1.5

Vision

3.0

Vision

2.0

Major

UpdateWorkshop

At IW2008

Trends in

InfrastructureSE

Latest Vision documentas input to workshop

Trends documentinforms update of Vision

Draft SE Vision Roadmap

Trends in SE

Modelling &Simulation

presentation from may 9, 2006 dinner meeting

Documents