1.3.1 Design principles for Ultra‐Large‐Scale (ULS) Systems

There is a need to properly define the “intellectual foundations of systems engineering”; and we need to look beyond systems engineering to do this. This paper presents a new framework for understanding and integrating the distinct and complementary contributions of systems science, systems thinking, and systems engineering to create an “integrated systems approach”. The key step is to properly separate out and understand the relationship between the triad of: systems science as an objective “science of systems”; systems thinking as concerned with “understanding systems in a human context”; and systems engineering as “creating, adjusting and configuring systems for a purpose”. None of these is a subset of another; all have to be considered as distinct though interdependent subjects. A key conclusion of the paper is that the “correct” choice of system boundary for a particular purpose depends on the property of interest. The insights necessary to inform this choice belong in the domain of “systems thinking”, which thus provides a key input to “systems engineering”. In many systems businesses, the role of “systems architect” or “systems engineer” integrates the skills of systems science, systems thinking and systems engineering ‐ which are therefore all essential competencies for the role.

Section: Generic System Theories and Modelsmentioning

confidence: 95%

4.3.2 Integrating Systems Science, Systems Thinking, and Systems Engineering: understanding the differences and exploiting the synergies

Sillitto

2012

“…• Application of systems thinking and a systems engineering approach to design tool-chain architecture (Anon 2011) (Cloutier et al 2015) • Use of a SPIT based framework for structuring viewpoints (Jinzhi 2016) (Sillitto 2010) • A model-based approach to support tool-chain development…”

Section: A System Thinking Way To Develop Mbse Tool-chainmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, since the collected viewpoints are unstructured and wide in scope, it is difficult to organize and analyze them in a systematic way. Therefore as illustrated in Table 3, we make use of a slightly revised SPIT framework oriented from (Sillitto 2010) to arrange and classify these viewpoints into four views: Social, Process, Information and Technique (Jinzhi 2016). From the business case for systems engineering study (Elm & Goldenson 2012), we found that a project plan and project monitoring and control are important factors influencing project performance when the research team adapts a system engineering approach.…”

Section: Spit Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of Functionalities of Future Tool‐chain for Aerospace Industry

Chen

Gürdür

et al. 2017

Model‐based systems engineering (MBSE) is advocated as one important means to deal with increasing product complexity. In this paper, we investigate the increasing interest and use of MBSE in the aerospace domain. The growth of MBSE tools causes new challenges in the corresponding tool‐chain development including data and information management, tool's applicability identification, tool‐integration, etc. In this paper, a literature survey into trends and usages of large‐scale MBSE tool‐chains is presented. It is found that the key functionalities include functional roles, elements, abstraction levels and tool integration techniques. Additionally, we propose a methodology to provide guidance in optimizing future MBSE tool‐chain functionalities for the aero‐industry. In closing, we present a case study in order to illustrate the decision making process required to develop expected tool‐chains by the proposed methodology.

“…The idea of having to be 100% clear on the requirements for a system element before starting work on it is plainly impractical and wrong (Beasley et al, 2014). The idea of a "wicked problem" shows that very often it is only by considering a potential solution can the requirements be considered (see Sillitto , 2010, andConklin, 2005 This leads to the idea that "requirements understanding" is concurrent with "solution development". This is developed much further in the idea of the spiral development model (see Boehm et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Requirements' eye view of product development

Beasley

Pickard

Nolan

2017

Systems Engineering is about making “wholes that work”. The Systems Engineering approach and processes should avoid silos and ensure work is integrated, both between disciplines and between levels, as the solution is developed. The integrating thread is requirements. Requirements understanding will vary, and the status of the requirements will change, throughout the lifecycle. Therefore the product development cycle is looked at “from a requirements eye view”.