Towards a Grand Unified Theory of Systems Engineering (GUTSE)

Temasek Defence Systems InstituteTemasek Defence Systems Institute

Towards a Grand Unified Theory of Systems Engineering

(GUTSE)Joseph Kasser

Yang-Yang Zhao

Version 1.01


Topics• Need for a GUTSE• Characteristics of a GUTSE• Frameworks• A brief summary of candidate Frameworks• Summary• Conclusions• Questions and comments

2


State of the art?• Systems engineering has been defined as

– “the science of designing complex systems in their totality to ensure that the component subsystems making up the system are designed, fitted together, checked and operated in the most efficient way” (Jenkins, 1969).

• However, in the ensuring 45 years, systems engineers seem to have been busy creating more and more complex models and processes.

3


Building artificial complexity

4


IS 2009 submission (not in proceedings)

Streamlined? 5


Published perceptions over 20 years• Systems engineering overlaps problem-solving, project

management and other disciplines• The role of the systems engineer in the workplace depends on the

situation• Myths and defects abound unquestioned• Various views and opinions on the nature of systems engineering

– Process, problem-solving, meta-discipline, etc.– Different process views

• Use of language that encourages confusion– Terminology with overlapping and different meanings

6


Text books (a selection)

7


Need for a GUTSE

• Articulated at NCOSE* 1994– Closing session of NCOSE

symposium– George Friedman, PINCOSE– About the same time this

research started• Written in Insight 2006

8* Before INCOSE there was NCOSE


Applying Holistic Thinking

http://signature-strength.com/confidence/changing-perspective/, accessed 28/2/2014

• Descriptive HTPs• Provide understanding

• Scientific HTP • Different views of systems engineering

are views of ‘something’ from different single perspectives

• Problem is to determine the ‘something’• It is like solving a jig-saw puzzle

without a picture

9

http://signature-strength.com/confidence/changing-perspective/


And our elephant is … ? • If all views are partial, can they be used to create a

conceptual whole (A GUTSE)?– Similar to creating a model by finding relationships between

sets of parameters and then combining them into a model• Characteristics of a GUTSE

1. Differentiates SE from other disciplines2. Founded on theory rather than opinion3. Encompasses all current views4. Fills gaps in current combination of views5. Remedies overlaps6. Encourages best practice7. Provides a fundamental framework or frameworks

10


Framework (chemistry)

Pictures from Wikipedia Commons, March 2014

Sorted elements based on properties and left

gaps in the Table

11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Discovery10svg.svg


Frameworks (electrical engineering)

Ohm’s law1827

Maxwell’s equations

1873

Pictures from Wikipedia commons

12Allowed predictions


Frameworks (systems engineering)• Lifecycle?

– Projects• Process?

13


Candidate Frameworks to build a GUTSE1. Holistic Thinking*

2. Types of Systems Engineering3. A Problem Classification Matrix*

4. Hitchins-Kasser-Massie Framework (HKMF) for understanding systems engineering*

5. Differentiating between Systems Engineering the Role (SETR) and Systems Engineering the Activity (SETA)*

6. A Systems Engineering Competency Maturity Model Framework*

7. The extended problem-solving process*

8. The Nine-Systems Model*

* Published14


Holistic Thinking Perspectives (HTP)1. Big picture2. Operational3. Functional4. Structural5. Generic6. Continuum7. Temporal8. Quantitative9. Scientific

Systems Engineering

1

2

9

54

73

8

6

15


Holistic Thinking: Structural perspective

Systems thinking Analysis

16









* Published17


Types of systems engineering1. Pure systems engineering

– Systems, cognitive skills, problem formulation/solving, quantitative methods, decision-making

2. Applied systems engineering– Requirements, architectures, V&V, engineering

management, engineering, ‘*.ilities, etc.

3. Domain systems engineering– Defence, commercial, etc.

18

Similar to Pure and Applied Math









* Published19


Problem classification matrix*

WickedHere be dragons

(there are no solutions)Ill-structuredWell-

structured Simple ComplicatedNon-complex

Easy Medium Ugly HardLevel of difficulty

Subjective

Objective

* Kasser, J.E., “Complex solutions for complex problems”, proceedings of the Third International Engineering Systems Symposium (CESUN), Delft, Holland, 2012.

20









* Published21


HKMF: Applied systems engineering

Lifecycle phases

Com

plex

ity

22



2. Types of Systems Engineering3. Hitchins-Kasser-Massie Framework (HKMF) for

understanding systems engineering*


5. A Problem Classification Matrix*




* Published23


Systems engineering paradigms*

• SETR: activities performed by personnel known as systems engineers. – Examples are network systems engineering, control system engineering,

communications systems engineering, etc. – In many instances the type of system is dropped from the title. – This systems engineering overlaps other disciplines and the exact

role depends on the situation• Broad range of competencies

• SETA: activities concerned with problem identification and solution realization at the system level – This systems engineering is an enabling discipline (like mathematics)

for remedying undesirable situations

* Kasser and Hitchins, 2009 (FUSE, Chapter 29) 24


SETR and SETA• Systems Engineering -

The Role (SETR)– Cannot be differentiated

from other disciplines– What systems engineers do

in the workplace– Combination of SETA and

non-SETA– “Growing” into Meta-

discipline

• Systems Engineering - The Activity (SETA)– Can be differentiated

from other disciplines– Can be performed by

anyone

* Kasser and Hitchins, 201225



2. Types of Systems Engineering3. Hitchins-Kasser-Massie Framework (HKMF) for

understanding systems engineering*


5. A Problem Classification Matrix*




* Published26


Five types of systems engineers*

• Type V [Innovator, engineer-leader]– Problem formulator and problem solver– Directs and performs systems engineering

• Type IV [Problem formulator]– Has the ability to examine the situation and define the problem – [Cannot conceptualise a solution]

• Type III [Problem solver]– Has the expertise to conceptualize the solution system and plan the

implementation of the solution• Type II [Apprentice, doer]

– Has the ability to follow a process to implement a physical solution system • Type I [Problem causer]

– Has to be told “how” to so something27

* Kasser, Hitchins and Huynh, 2009


Mapping abilities to TypesAbility to find

similarities among objects which seem

to be different

High Problem solvers Innovators

Low Imitators, Doers Problem formulators

Low HighAbility to find differences among objects which seem to be similar

* Original table in Gordon G. et al. “A Contingency Model for the Design of Problem Solving Research Program”, Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, p 184-220, 1974 cited by Gharajedaghi, System Thinking: Managing chaos and Complexity, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1999

Generic perspective

Continuum perspective

“Ability to find” generally comes mainly from

application of Generic and Continuum HTPs

(Type III) (Type V)

(Type II) (Type IV)

6-28


A Systems Engineering Competency Maturity Model Framework

Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type VKnowledge areas Applied systems engineering in a domain

Systems engineering Declarative Procedural Conditional Conditional Conditional

Problem domain Declarative Declarative Conditional Conditional ConditionalSolution domain Declarative Declarative Conditional Conditional ConditionalImplementation

domainDeclarative Declarative Conditional Conditional Conditional

Cognitive characteristics (Holistic Thinking) – Pure systems engineeringDescriptive HTPs(8) Declarative Procedural Conditional Conditional ConditionalPrescriptive HTP (1) No No Procedural No Conditional

Critical Thinking Confused fact finder

Perpetual analyser

Pragmatic performer

Pragmatic performer

Strategic re-visioner

Individual traits (sample)Communications Needed Needed Needed Needed Needed

Management Not needed Needed Needed Needed NeededLeadership Not needed Not needed Needed Needed Needed

Others (specific to situation)

Organization specific




Organization specific 29









* Published30


Holistic systems approach to managing problems and solutions

Undesirable situation (t0)

Feasible Conceptual Future Desirable

Situation (FCFDS) (t0)

Problem

Remedial action

(problem solving)

SolutionActual situation

(t1)

Still undesirable?

No

Yes or partial

End


32


Framing the problem1. The undesirable situation2. The FCFDS3. The problems

1. To determine the cause(s) of undesirability2. To determine the transition approach

4. The solution– A system operating in the context of the evolved

actual situation

33


Activities in the context of problem solving

Problem solving process[Solution] System

development process (SDP)

Large or complex problems Small problemsAre elaborated

into many

Uses

Undesirable situationSolution system

Series of (sequential and parallel) activities

remedies

ProducesKicks off

Uses

Based on IEEE 122034









* Published35




Feasible Conceptual Future Desirable Situation

(FCFDS) (t0)

Problem

Remedial action

(problem solving)


(t1)

Still undesirable?

No

Yes or partial

End


What happens here?

What happens in here?

36




Feasible Conceptual Future Desirable Situation

(FCFDS) (t0)

Problem

Remedial action

(problem solving)


(t1)

Still undesirable?

No

Yes or partial

End


S1

S2

S3

S4 S5 S6

S7

S8

S1’ Nine-System Model

3737


The Nine-System model

1. The solution systems and the adjacent systems are subsystems in the actual situation

2. Considered as one [class of] system but generally is at least two organizations

(S1) Undesirable situation (S3) Feasible Conceptual

Future Desirable Situation (FCFDS)

(S7) Actual (created) situation1

(S8) Process to determine degree of remedy

(S6) Solution system

(S5) Process performing transition to S7

(S2) Process developing S3

Operating in context of

(S4) Process planning transition to S7

S8S5S2

Organization(s) (S9)2

S4 S6

Functional HTP

Structural HTP

Realizes

39


The Nine-System model Undesirable Situation S1 Concept dev. process S2 FCFDS S3 Planning process S4 Realization process S5 Solution system S6 Created situation S7 Validation process S8 Undesirable Situation’ S1’

t0 t1 t2Time

Temporal HTP

SRR

4040


S1. Undesirable situation• Perceived from

– Holistic Thinking Perspectives– Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology

• As-is• Baselined at t0

– Eight descriptive perspectives• Observations• Assumptions

– Scientific perspective• Causes of undesirability

– May be more than one• Statement of problems

– A hypothesis of 1. cause of undesirability2. what it will take to remedy the undesirable situation

41


S2. Process: early stage• Develops FCFDS• Develops CONOPS of solution system

operating within FCFDS• Uses Steps 2-6 in Hitchins’ systems

engineering approach to problem solving– Hitchins, 2007

42


S3. FCFDS• Begin with the end in mind

– 7 Habits of …, Covey, 1989• Work back from the answer

– Ackoff 1991• Assumption

– FCFDS will remedy the undesirable situation• Sometimes consensus on FCFDS may be

achieved without consensus on the underlying cause of the undesirable situation

• Described from eight descriptive HTPs43


S4. Process: planning the transition• Planning/creating the process that will provide the solution

system – Assembled from activities documented in textbooks, Standards,

experience, etc.– Build/buy decisions– Creates SEMP and TEMP– Biemer and Sage 2009, Kasser and Palmer 2005

• Step 7 in Hitchins systems engineering process• Creating the matched set of specifications for the solution

system • Taught in Project Management classes• Generally terminates with a SRR

44


S5. Process: performing the transition• Short problem-solving process

– Problem – process - solution• Commonly known as the

– ‘system development process (SDP)’– ‘system development lifecycle (SDLC)’ – “systems engineering process (SEP)”

• Three streams of work between milestones1. Management2. Development/production3. Development Test and Evaluation (DT&E)

• May require several iterations– Temporal perspective

• Must be able to cope with changes in need before process terminates

45


S6. Solution system• Conceived as part of FCFDS• Realized in providing actual situation• May comprise more than one system• Contains mission and support functions• Conforms to 7 principles paper

– Kasser, J. E. and Hitchins, D. K., "Unifying systems engineering: Seven principles for systems engineered solution systems", proceedings of the 21st International Symposium of the INCOSE, Denver, 2011.

• May be provided in stages or Builds• Contains a mixture of technology and people

46


S6: Solution system• Big Picture perspective

– Subsystem of S7• Operational perspective

– Interactions with adjacent systems– What the system does (mission and support scenarios)

• Functional perspective– Internal functions

• Structural perspective– Technology and physical components

• Quantitative perspective– Numbers associated with functions, structures and other aspects

• costs, reliability, etc.• Continuum perspective

– May contain unanticipated undesirable emergent properties47


S7. Actual (created) situation• Realization of the FCFDS

– Situation at time solution system (S6) is realized• Contains solution system (S6) and adjacent systems

operating interdependently• May only partially remedy original undesirable situation• May not remedy new undesirable aspects that show up

during time taken by realization process• May contain unanticipated undesirable emergent

properties from solution system (S6) and its interactions with adjacent systems in the situation

• May be realized in partial remedies48


S8. Process closing stage• Determines if the solution system, operating in

its context, remedies the new evolved undesirable situation at t1.

• Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E)• Acceptance test at end of first iteration• Evolves into change management process

– Triggers new iteration via change process to modify/upgrade solution system

– May lead to disposal phase49


S9. System containing processes• Organizations

– Generally at least two organizations• Customer and contractor

– Grouped as one system because of common features

• Each organization is an instance of a class of systems

• Provides personnel and other resources to process systems

50


Focus of the Standards, Hitchins, SIMILAR, SSM, problem-solving, MBSE and the nine systems

System MIL-STD-499

EIA-632

IEEE 1220

ISO/IEC 15288

Hitchins (2007)

SIMILAR MBSE SSM problem-solving

S1 X X X

S2 X X

S3 X X X

S4 X Partial X X X

S5 X X X X X X

S6 X X X X X

S7 X

S8 X X

S9 Partial X

51


GUTSE Frameworks Summary

52

1. Holistic Thinking

Perspectives

Thinking

2. Types of Systems

Engineering

3. A Problem Classification

Matrix

Nature of Problem

4.HKMF

5. SETR and SETA

Nature of Project

6. Competency

Maturity Model

Framework

Human & Knowledge

Assets

7. Extended problem-solving process

8. Nine-Systems Model

Methodology


Summary• Need for a GUTSE• Characteristics of a GUTSE• Frameworks• A brief summary of candidate Frameworks• Summary• Conclusions• Questions and comments

53


Conclusions • Characteristics of a GUTSE

1. Differentiates SE from other disciplines2. Founded on theory rather than opinion3. Encompasses all current views4. Fills gaps in current combination of views5. Remedies overlaps6. Encourages best practice7. Provides a fundamental framework or

frameworks• Not quite there yet

54


Systems engineering Systems engineering is a part of the application of a systemic and systematic holistic approach to remedying complex problems

55


Questions?

0-56