1.1.3 Educating Systems Engineers: Encouraging Divergent Thinking

Ph.D., PE William H. McCumber; Sloan, Crystal D.

doi:10.1002/j.2334-5837.2002.tb02436.x

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If we analyze typical engineering career paths, most engineers spend only 5 to 10 years of their 40+ year nominal careers directly applying the knowledge obtained as part of their undergraduate engineering degree program. McCumber and Sloan [11] citing (Friedman,[12]) observe that most engineers are educated and trained to be "domain engineers." They add that it requires about five years of industrial maturity to evolve engineers into System Engineering.…”

Section: Shifting the Undergraduate Engineering Education Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

1.2.1 System Engineering Competency The Missing Element in Engineering Education

Wasson¹

2010

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The "engineering of systems" performed in many organizations is often characterized as chaotic, ineffective, and inefficient. Objective evidence of these characteristics is reflected in program performance metrics such as non-compliance to requirements, overrun budgets, and late schedule deliveries. Causal analysis reveals a number of factors contribute to this condition: a lack of technical leadership, a lack of understanding the user's problem / solution spaces, point design architectures and solutions, a lack of integrated decision making, et al. Further analysis indicates these factors are symptomatic of a much larger competency issue traceable to undergraduate engineering education -the lack of a course in Systems Engineering fundamentals taught by seasoned instructors with robust, industrial experience acquired from a diversity of small to large, complex systems. This paper explores the ad hoc, chaotic, and dysfunctional nature of technical planning and execution. We trace its origins to the industrial Plug and Chug … Specify-Design-Build-Test-Fix Paradigm and its predecessor Plug and Chug … Design-Build-Test-Fix Paradigm acquired informally in engineering school. Whereas these paradigms may be effective for academic application, they are not suitable or scalable to larger, complex system, product, or service development efforts.The solution is to bolster the competency of the engineering workforce at two stages: 1) upgrade undergraduate engineering education to include a System Engineering fundamentals course and 2) shift the industrial System Engineering paradigm through education and training to employ scalable SE problem solving / solution development methodologies for projects ranging in size from small to large, complex systems.

show abstract

Section: Shifting the Undergraduate Engineering Education Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

1.2.1 System Engineering Competency The Missing Element in Engineering Education

Wasson¹

2010

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, anecdotal evidence and estimates suggest they spend from 50% to 75% of their total career-hours, on average, collaborating with others concerning the engineering of systems ... for which they may have no formal education or training. McCumber and Sloan [45] citing Friedman [46] observe that most engineers are educated and trained to be "domain engineers." They add that it requires about five years of industrial maturity to evolve engineers into System Engineering."…”

Section: Shifting the Undergraduate Engineering Education Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

System Engineering Competency: The Missing Course in Engineering Education

Wasson¹

2012 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

is an engineering textbook author, instructor, and consultant for Wasson Strategics, LLC, a professional training and consulting services firm specializing in systems engineering, technical project management, organizational development, and team development. In 2006, Wasson authored a new systems engineering text entitled System Analysis, Design, and Development: Concepts, Principles, and Practices as part of the John Wiley & Sons' System Engineering and Management series. The text received the Engineering Sciences Book of the Year Award from the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) in Paris, France. As an internationally recognized author and instructor in system engineering and its organizational application, he is an invited guest speaker and panelist at professional meetings and symposia. Wasson champions the need to strengthen undergraduate engineering programs with a course in the fundamentals of system engineering. He holds B.S.E.E. and M.B.A. degrees from Mississippi State University and a certificate in systems engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology. His professional affiliations include the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), the International Council on System Engineering (INCOSE), and the Project Management Institute (PMI).

show abstract

“Changing the Acquisition Game” Alleviating Unreasonable PM‐SE Constraint Risks

Esep¹,

Hahn

Neill

et al. 2018

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poor project performance is often attributed erroneously to PMs and SEs that must perform in an environment characterized by: Inadequate proposal preparation and analytical due diligence in understanding the user's problem space and operational needs. Unrealistic proposal assumptions and contract constraints – such as overly aggressive schedules and inadequate funding. A Source Selection Evaluation Process that is overshadowed by a highly competitive “Acquisition Game” of perceptions, influence, persuasion, and potential conflicts of interest. Project Management and Engineering “stovepipes” that limit understanding of each other's roles, accountabilities, and their respective contributions. Contract “requirements creep” by the Acquirer with an expectation or Developer accommodation without appropriate contract cost modification. Deficiencies in Engineering and Systems Engineering due to outdated educational and competency paradigms. As a result of unreasonable and unrealistic constraints by the “game” conditions, no one really wins ‐ the User, the Acquirer, the Developer, or supporting subcontractors and vendors. Indeed, upon contract award, the project conundrum becomes: “Good news! We won the contract … Bad news. We won the contract!” Project Managers and Systems Engineers are then burdened with the impossible task of achieving contract financial, technical, and schedule “stretch” objectives in which they may have had little opportunity for input. This paper explores each of these conditions, through illustrative examples from a range of business domains and industries perspectives, along with potential opportunities for improvement so that, fundamentally, the game itself is changed – changed to one that can be won.

show abstract

1.1.3 Educating Systems Engineers: Encouraging Divergent Thinking

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

1.2.1 System Engineering Competency The Missing Element in Engineering Education

1.2.1 System Engineering Competency The Missing Element in Engineering Education

System Engineering Competency: The Missing Course in Engineering Education

“Changing the Acquisition Game” Alleviating Unreasonable PM‐SE Constraint Risks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About