Systems Engineering Beyond Aerospace and Defense

Transcription

1 Systems Engineering Beyond Aerospace and Defense Don S. Gelosh Ph.D., CSEP-Acq.

2 White Paper Systems Engineering Beyond Aerospace and Defense By Don S. Gelosh, Ph.D., CSEP-Acq. Director, Systems Engineering Programs, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Objective This whitepaper explores how and why companies outside of the aerospace and defense industries can successfully implement Systems Engineering. It is designed to educate readers about this particular topic and provide a methodology for approaching Systems Engineering. 1 of 10

3 Table of Contents.5 Tailoring Systems Engineering 7 Phased Approach to Adopting Systems Engineering 8 Summary.8 About the Author.10 2 of 10

4 Myths vs. Facts When companies outside the aerospace and defense industries consider adopting the methods and techniques of systems engineering, they initially face several myths. ;; in other words, the myths provide reasons not to adopt systems engineering. It is very important to recognize that these myths do exist and are valued as the truth by some. We will examine some of the more prominent myths and then look at the real facts about Systems Engineering. - Systems Engineering only works for large-scale, complex aerospace and defense systems - Systems Engineering costs too much to implement - It takes too long to educate and train Systems Engineers - Companies are unique;; Systems Engineering k for them One myth is that systems engineering only works for large scale complex aerospace and defense systems. This myth is partially true in that Systems Engineering does work for large scale complex systems and goes a long way to enable success. The myth part is that it only works for these large systems. This myth is also emboldened because the Department of Defense requires their contractors to implement Systems Engineering methods and techniques and to spell out exactly how they plan to do that in a Systems Engineering Plan (SEP). The SEP is a required deliverable on every major defense acquisition program. This can easily lead some to believe that Systems Engineering is a rigorous and robust set of processes only applicable to large complex systems. The fact is Systems Engineering can be scaled and tailored to support development of smaller systems across a wide range of industry domains. Some examples include companies that produce medical devices, digital storage devices, laboratory diagnostic equipment and organizations that seek to increase reliability of the power grid. Another myth is that Systems Engineering costs too much to implement. There is some truth in this myth as well. If you implement Systems Engineering for large complex systems, then it could cost a lot of money to implement, no question;; however, it is possible to scale and tailor Systems Engineering methods and techniques for developing smaller systems so it 3 of 10

5 does not cost too much to implement. In addition, recent studies 1, 2 have shown that the proper application of Systems Engineering actually decreases overall program cost, reduces schedule slippage and improves product performance. A myth about the development of Systems Engineers is also easy to believe. Some believe that it takes too long to educate and train Systems Engineers. Some would even argue that it takes 15 to 20 years to produce a good Chief Systems Engineer. Yes, this may be true in some cases, but you have to consider a few facts. While some would question the value of an undergraduate program in Systems Engineering because the students may not have real world scar tissue, these programs do exist, they provide high quality education, and their graduates are hired by industry. These graduates also have a working knowledge of Systems Engineering and are able to provide value to their companies from day one. Once these Systems Engineers and other engineers have a few years of real world experience, degree in Systems Engineering. Most master s degrees take from 18 months to 3 years, depending on the program and whether the student is full or part time. One could say this adds to the time it takes to develop a Systems Engineer and they would be right;; however, we have to consider that most students need to keep working and have to complete their s degree in part time mode. This usually means that many are working as an engineer somewhere on a fulltime basis while in the program. So as they learn new methods and techniques, in most cases, they will be able to apply them to their jobs the next day. The point is that as we are training and educating Systems Engineers, they are working, gaining experience and increasing their value to their companies and the Systems Engineering community at large. Yes, it may take 15 to 20 years to develop a Chief Systems Engineer, but all along the way, they are providing value and providing them with the latest education and training increases their knowledge, skills, abilities and overall value. One of the myths that is very prevalent generates unique;;. This is an interesting statement. How do they know? Have they tried it? Probably not. This feeling of uniqueness is perhaps rooted in the other myths;; they believe that it costs too much to implement, and it takes too long to develop the 1 and Systems Institute, University of South Australia urgh, PA of 10

6 expertise in their companies. The fact here is that it is possible to scale and tailor Systems Engineering so it can work for their unique company. In fact, or even program managers from these companies about their design and build life cycle processes, they may tell you their processes are proprietary. But when you press them on the issue and start walking them through the standard System Engineering processes, they are surprised that you already know about their proprietary life cycle. This goes to show that Systems Engineering really is about applying broad thinking and common sense methods and techniques to your products and services. In fact, there are companies who produce medical devices, lab instrumentation, digital storage devices, and endeavor to increase reliability of the power grid that are already successfully adopting and integrating Systems Engineering into their proprietary life cycle processes. - Systems Engineering can be scaled and tailored to benefit all types of products and services. - Recent studies have shown that Systems Engineering can decrease program cost and schedule, and can improve product performance. - Companies working on medical devices, lab instrumentation, the power grid, and digital storage devices are already adopting Systems Engineering. Three Views of Systems Engineering One of the easiest ways to understand how Systems Engineering can benefit your company is to look at the primary views. There are three primary views of Systems Engineering: Perspective, Process and Profession 3. The Systems Engineering Perspective view is based on Systems Thinking. This means that Systems Engineers must take a holistic view of the design of the whole system, taking into account all relevant parts and exploring how they relate to the whole system, including the intended operational 3 INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities, version San Diego, CA, USA: International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), INCOSE-TP of 10

7 environment. This Systems Thinking view is key to the adoption and tailoring of Systems Engineering by any company. If you view the company that wants to adopt Systems Engineering methods and techniques as the target system, applying Systems Thinking would enable you to consider the whole target company and all essential parts of the company. This in turn, would enable you to apply and enhance any of the Systems Engineering processes to parts of the target company and to the company overall. Systems Thinking would enable you to consider and understand all the interrelationships among the applicable Systems e cycle development processes. for the causes and effects for the parts of the company and for the whole target company as it functions in the intended operational environment, otherwise known as the business marketplace. The Systems Engineering Process view is based on a set of interdisciplinary, iterative, and tailorable processes. These processes can be categorized into four general areas: Organizational Project-Enabling Processes, Agreement Processes, Project Processes, and Technical Processes. It should be easy to see how these four general categories can be applicable to a wide range of companies. There is an additional category called Tailoring Processes which enables an even finer scaling and customization of Systems Engineering across a wide range of companies. The Systems Engineering Profession view is based on Systems Engineers and how they must function as leaders and decision makers. In order to be a successful Systems Engineer, you must have depth, breadth and leadership in the profession. The Systems Engineer must have depth which includes extensive expertise and experience in one or more engineering disciplines and in one or more product domains. The Systems Engineer must have breadth with an awareness of and appreciation for other functional areas, an understanding of the system lifecycle and processes, a working knowledge of other engineering disciplines and how they integrate into the system solution, and extensive knowledge of product domains. Finally, the Systems Engineer must be a leader with the ability to motivate and inspire individuals and teams and to demonstrate a certain level of comfort in dealing with complexity. The Systems Engineer leader must also be focused on 6 of 10

8 underpinning decisions with data and must have the capability to make and take responsibility for the tough technical decisions. Overall, Systems Engineering is a broad discipline that can be tailored and applied to virtually any field to provide leadership, manage risk, and deal with complexity 4. Therefore, Systems Engineering can be applied to virtually any company to grow their business by improving performance and reducing cost, schedule time, and risk. Tailoring Systems Engineering One of the main keys to tailoring Systems Engineering is to use caution in a deliberate Systems Thinking approach. When Systems Engineering is tailored, there is always the risk of reduced communication, coordination, control and traceability. This can happen when Systems Engineering is tailored too much or too much of the rigor is removed. Companies looking to adopt Systems Engineering need to make sure that tailoring does not adversely affect such success-enhancing factors as: well-defined and verified system requirements, configuration management and performance metrics;; proper identification and allocation of appropriate resources in the engineering disciplines and specialties;; and acceptable program schedule, cost and technical risks. Companies should use a Systems Thinking approach to analyze what they are tailoring and why in terms of the enterprise and business of the company. There are also several traps that should be avoided when tailoring Systems Engineering. For example, it is not a good idea to reuse a tailored baseline from another organization or company without repeating the tailoring process. What may work for one organization may not work for another. It is not a good idea to use. This is not tailoring at all;; this is wholesale adoption of Systems Engineering and this will cost more than really needed in terms of resources. Using a pre established tailored baseline is also not a good idea because it may not be relevant to what the organization is trying to achieve. Another bad idea is failing to include relevant stakeholders throughout the tailoring efforts. It is very important to keep all relevant stakeholders informed of the tailoring process and to solicit and consider their input. This helps ensure the tailored baseline makes sense for the organization or company. An exceptionally bad trap is failure to think through the reasons for tailoring. Companies must maintain a Systems Thinking approach when tailoring Systems Engineering. Any process that is tailored without a solid agreed upon reason is really a waste of time. 4 Ibid. 7 of 10

9 Phased Approach to Adopting Systems Engineering It would be extremely difficult and challenging to implement Systems Engineering methods and techniques across any com once. It would be much better to implement a phased approach. The first Initial Awareness Systems Engineering through such efforts as exploring best practices and lessons learned, conducting workshops, developing white papers like this one, and developing and submitting conference presentations and papers. This initial awareness should showcase the benefits of Systems Engineering and debunk the myths. A good next step would be to obtain education and training on the essentials of Systems Engineering through one to two day seminars, technical short courses, workshops, etc. The idea here is to provide more exposure to the benefits of Systems Engineering and to begin discussions on how it could be implemented. A follow on step could be to experiment with implementation. This could be achieved through pilot projects where you start small, obtain metrics, show results, analyze favorable and unfavorable results, determine what went well and what went wrong and why, try to derive a positive experience, etc. The objective here is to actually try Systems Engineering methods on a small project and see how it goes. Another useful and necessary effort is creating a culture shift towards embracing the value and essence of Systems Thinking and Engineering across the company. Without a solid culture shift all the way up, down and throughout the organization, Systems Engineering will not be able to take hold and provide the necessary benefits. Summary It is possible for companies outside the aerospace and defense industries to successfully tailor and adopt Systems Engineering methods and techniques;; in fact some companies that produce medical devices, digital storage devices, laboratory diagnostic equipment and organizations that seek to increase reliability of the power grid are already doing it. The key to implementing Systems Engineering is to use a Systems Thinking approach. 8 of 10

10 You must consider the whole situation at the company and carefully work through where and when Systems Engineering methods make sense. You also have to be careful when you tailor Systems Engineering so you can avoid the risk of reduced communication, coordination, control and traceability. the benefits. Again, you should use a Systems Thinking approach to analyze what you are tailoring and why. Finally, it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to implement Systems Engineering across the life cycle all at once. It would be much better to implement a phased approach through initial awareness, education and training, pilot projects and eventually a culture shift. Make sure Systems Engineering works for your company through a deliberate and thoughtful approach. 9 of 10

11 About the Author Dr. Don Gelosh is the first Director of Systems Engineering Programs at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI). He is responsible for growing and developing the various Systems Engineering programs Education department. Dr. Gelosh has over 38 years of systems engineering experience from the US Air Force, government, industry, and academia. Before WPI, Dr. Gelosh was Deputy Director for Workforce Development, working for the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering at the Pentagon. In previous assignments, he was lead systems engineer for communications supporting the Space Shuttle, he taught Electrical and Computer Engineering at the USAF Academy, he served as Deputy Department Head for Electrical and Computer Engineering at the Air Force Institute of Technology and was Dean of Learning and Technology at the National Defense University. Dr. Gelosh received his PhD in Electrical Engineering from the University of and Computer Engineering from The Ohio State University. He holds an INCOSE CSEP-Acquisition certification and is Defense Acquisition Corps Level III certified in Systems Engineering. 10 of 10