How do we fix Systems Engineering?

Paper number

IAC-10.D1.5.4

Author

Dr. Michael Griffin, University of Alabama in Huntsville, United States

Year

2010

Abstract

The now half-century-old multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary
discipline that we call "system engineering" is the classic half-
empty, half-full glass; optimists and pessimists can look at the same
thing and draw opposing conclusions.

Optimistically, the maturing of system engineering into a recognized
discipline from its roots in the development of large aerospace and
defense systems has been, and will remain, an enabling factor in the
ability of societies to deal with the macroscale problems facing us in
energy, environment, and other key areas.

Pessimistically, system engineers have some explaining to do.  How is
it that we see, every so often, the failure of an important and
complex system where everything thought to be important in the way of
process was done, and yet the system failed.  Each time this occurs,
we as an engineering community vow to redouble our efforts in system
engineering process, and yet such events continue to occur.  The
answer cannot lie in continuing to do more of the same thing while
expecting a different outcome.

We need to rise above process, to examine the technical, cultural, and
political mix that is "system engineering", and examine the education
training we are providing to those who would practice this
discipline.  This paper will discuss that training from a new
perspective, the perspective of design elegance, how we identify it,
and how we can design with elegance as a value.

Abstract document

IAC-10.D1.5.4.brief.pdf

Manuscript document

IAC-10.D1.5.4.pdf (🔒 authorized access only).

To get the manuscript, please contact IAF Secretariat.