This paper briefly explores the expected impact of the 'Global Drivers' (such as population demographics, food security; energy security; community security and safety), and the role of sustainability engineering in mitigating the potential effects of these Global Drivers. The message of the paper is that sustainability requires a significant input from Ergonomics/ Human Factors, but the profession needs some expansion in its thinking in order to make this contribution.Creating a future sustainable world in which people experience an acceptable way of life will not happen without a large input from manufacturing industry into all the Global Drivers, both in delivering products that meet sustainability criteria (such as durability, reliability, minimised material requirement and low energy consumption), and in developing sustainable processes to deliver products for sustainability (such as minimum waste, minimum emissions and low energy consumption). Appropriate changes are already being implemented in manufacturing industry, including new business models, new jobs and new skills.Considerable high-level planning around the world is in progress and is bringing about these changes; for example, there is the US 'Advanced Manufacturing National Program' (AMNP)', the German 'Industrie 4.0' plan, the French plan 'la nouvelle France industrielle' and the UK Foresight publications on the 'Future of Manufacturing'.All of these activities recognise the central part that humans will continue to play in the new manufacturing paradigms; however, they do not discuss many of the issues that systems ergonomics professionals acknowledge. This paper discusses a number of these issues, highlighting the need for some new thinking and knowledge capture by systems ergonomics professionals. Among these are ethical issues, job content and skills issues.Towards the end, there is a summary of knowledge extensions considered necessary in order that Systems Ergonomists can be fully effective in this new environment, together with suggestions for the means to acquire and disseminate the knowledge extensions.

This paper proposes a multi-dimensional framework approach to defining the System of Interest (SOI) for System of Systems (SoS). A number of dimensions are described in detail, enabling development of a more comprehensive model that illustrates the relationships between these dimensions in SoS. The resultant framework model is evaluated using 2 practical case studies in the domains of Defence and ICT to indicate the applicability and suitability of the proposed approach. The potential benefits of the framework are described within the context of the case studies, in conjunction with the limitations of this initial framework. A brief description of intended further research is provided giving some insight into future development of the framework.

Through Life Capability Management (TLCM) is the dominant theme of proposed changes to UK defence acquisition, but progress has been hindered by a lack of agreed interpretations for key concepts. This paper provides some clarity for Capability, Network Enabled Capability (NEC), TLCM, and Affordability and notes, in particular, the fractal nature of capability.Through stakeholder analysis and concept maps, we identify some of the major challenges associated with TLCM. These include affordability (which is the motivation for TLCM but may also be its stumbling block); the increased priority of agility, adaptability, and flexibility in capability planning; and the need for appropriate TLCM metrics. The lack of an explicit learning mechanism within the capability planning process is also a major deficiency, because TLCM relies on effective knowledge management.The changing role of industry is considered and the need for an holistic view of capability is emphasised.

No abstract

This article provides an introduction and overview of basic concepts of systems of systems (SoS). Beginning with the definition of SoS and SoS engineering, the paper describes the characteristics of SoS. It compares systems with SoS and discusses the implications for systems engineering. Finally, the paper concludes with a discussion of the challenges SoS pose for systems engineering with a description of recognized SoS ‘pain points.’