Engineering framework for the future: Cynefin for engineers

Vollmar, Jan; Gepp, Michael; Palm, Herbert; Calà, Ambra

doi:10.1109/syseng.2017.8088286

Cited by 6 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consortia or Joint Ventures will likely be required to bring together the expertise and joint commitment to innovation. Hence, this is much more characteristics of the 'pioneer projects' described by Vollmar et al [27,28]. Situated at the bottom right of the model, bespoke solutions are developed but with lower relational linkages.…”

Section: Figure 4: Prescriptive Model Showing Investment Characteristmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Vollmar et al [27,28] suggest that a number of global forces are increasing the complexity and uncertainty related to departments managing engineering designs. Hence, different engineering approaches will be required depending on the technical complexity of engineering work, as well as the uniqueness and technological novelty involved.…”

Section: Engineering Design and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Organisations that operate in design intensive engineer-to-order scenarios, for instance in construction, shipbuilding, machinery and capital goods, must be vigilant to ensure that there is not an assumption that only the 'Easy Engineering' scenario exists. Hence, complexity and unexpected events cause considerable disruption because the coping mechanisms do not exist via 'Easy Engineering' approaches [27,29].…”

Section: Engineering Design and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Relational Investments and Contractual Choices for Diverse Engineering Designs

Gosling

Hewlett

2022

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Engineering design has a major impact on downstream performance, but is often guided, in both procurement and solution type, by intuition rather than a solid science base. Engineering is also increasingly collaborative, crossing organisational boundaries. However, the long-term close partnerships, as often proposed, are difficult to achieve in the context of individual engineering projects. Building on concepts related to investments in specific assets, this study describes the underlying characteristics of engineering design investments and then prescribes the relational investment and contract forms to select them, thereby contributing to our understanding of the engineering design and relational investments that can and should be made. We undertook multiple case study research, which is presented in two phases. The descriptive phase identifies positive outcomes for solutions based on off-the-shelf designs with fixed price mechanisms, for solutions based on adaptive designs with target cost mechanisms, and for bespoke solutions contracted either on cost-plus mechanisms or, if in bite-sized pieces, on fixed price mechanisms. Negative performance outcomes were found for adaptive solutions with Fixed Price mechanisms. A prescriptive phase, yielding a visualized model, then offers guidance for relational investments and contract mechanisms that are suitable for different engineering designs. Applicability zones and three potential transitions to challenge and guide current practice are developed to inform decision making. Managerial relevance statement Complex engineering projects are increasingly collaborative, involving multiple organisations, and involve innovative aspects. Sometimes these innovative aspects are developed especially for a single customer from fundamental research and development activity, whereas other times it may be possible to adapt previous engineering solutions. Clients of such projects must establish the conditions for project success through robust procurement approaches; on the one hand, contractors will be concerned that the risk and reward profile of their contracts is appropriate; on the other, there is little guidance for clients as to how to establish the right approach. Our paper focuses on establishing appropriate governance, including contractual forms and relational types, for different engineering design categories. This is operationalized through the concept of specialized investments. The descriptive model offers insights for practitioners into how governance is approached in a number of cases. The final visualized prescriptive model offers guidance for decision makers. Using our model, appropriate levels of relational investment, as well as a contract mechanism, can be aligned with different engineering design categories. Overall, we propose that the model forms an intellectual

show abstract

Section: Figure 4: Prescriptive Model Showing Investment Characteristmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Engineering Design and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Engineering Design and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relational Investments and Contractual Choices for Diverse Engineering Designs

Gosling

Hewlett

2022

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of course, it is not possible to precisely demarcate the domains and there may be opportunities to use a particular tool or technique, in addition to those specific for a particular domain, in more than one domain to enhance decision making. Kurtz and Snowden (2003), Snowden and Boone (2007) and Vollmar et al (2017), in the systems approach to problem solving. But what we do find is that many of the applications in the other three domains are attempts at avoiding going into chaos by enhancing supply chain or operational resilience or related capabilities, including robustness, flexibility, agility or leanness (Purvis et al, 2016, Adobor andMcMullen, 2018).…”

Section: The Need To Revisit the Systems Approach To Design Resilient...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the whole systems approach: designing supply chains in a turbulent world

Naim

Gosling

2022

IJLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe systems approach is an exemplar of design science research (DSR), whereby specific designs yield generic knowledge. DSR is increasingly being adopted in logistics and operations management research, but many point to neglect of the human aspects of solutions developed. The authors argue that it is possible to look back at the history of the systems movement to seek precedent for ‘dealing’ with the social components, providing a methodologically pluralistic ‘research design’ framework. Thereby, systems approaches are foundational to providing a design-based ‘science’ to progressing the logistics and supply chain management field, dealing with contemporary topics such as resilience.Design/methodology/approachThe authors undertake a discursive assessment of relevant streams of engineering, social science and systems research, with a conceptual development of how the latter influences supply chain design approaches.FindingsBuilding on a phenomenological framework, the authors create a generic design science research design (DSRD) that enables researchers to choose and integrate the right tools and methods to address simple, complicated and complex problems, dealing with technological, process and social problems.Research limitations/implicationsThe DSRD provides a framework by which to exploit a range of methodological stances to problem solving, including quantitative modelling perspectives and ‘soft’ systems social science approaches. Four substantive gaps are identified for future research – establishing the root cause domain of the problem, how to deal with the hierarchy of systems within systems, establishing appropriate criteria for the solution design and how best to deal with chaotic and disordered systems.Originality/valueThe authors argue that the systems approaches offer methodological pluralism by which a generic DSRD may be applied to enhance supply chain design. The authors show the relevance of the DSRD to supply chain design problems including in reducing supply chain dynamics and enhance resilience. In doing so, the study points towards an integrated perspective and future research agenda for designing resilient supply chains.

show abstract

“…The Cynefin framework is gaining interest in research literature and can support project decision-making (Basha, 2017), including portfolio management (Shalbafan et al, 2018). Cynefin is seen as a potentially important new tool for project managers (Vollmar et al, 2017) and is found in several more recent handbooks, like (Hermano and Mart ın-Cruz, 2019), (Pirozzi, 2018) and (AXELOS, 2015).…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

Researching navigation of project complexity using action design research

Mikkelsen

Venable

Aaltonen³

2020

IJMPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeProject complexity is becoming increasingly challenging for project managers. Much valuable research has been done on the concept of project complexity. The research reported in this paper aims to provide a new means (the “Complexity Navigation Window”) and guiding principles for the navigation of project complexity in practice.Design/methodology/approachThis paper applied action design research (a methodology for design science research) to design and evaluate the Complexity Navigation Window (CNW), which will serve as a representation of project complexity as a key component of the user interface for a decision support system (DSS) for managing project complexity.FindingsFormative evaluations of the CNW by 16 project management practitioners indicated that the artefact is relevant, comprehensible and heading in a promising direction to guide decision-making. The evaluation also highlighted project managers' difficulty in using the (conceptual) representation by itself to assess a project's current situation accurately, which in turn limits their ability to understand a project's current complexity and decide an appropriate course of strategy. A conceptual framework by itself is insufficient. This finding motivates further research to develop and evaluate a DSS that would partially automate the assessment process (by surveying stakeholders and automatically assessing and representing project complexity according to the CNW), which should aid in increasing the accuracy (and timeliness) of project complexity assessments and contribute to appropriate strategy formulation and timely revision.Practical implicationsThe formative evaluation of the CNW indicates relevance for practitioners and the further features of the DSS may still yield even higher perceived utility from the full artefact.Originality/valueThe paper provides improved understanding of practitioners' perceptions of project complexity and ability to assess it for a given project. The paper describes the design of a new visualisation for navigating and managing complexity. The paper further presents four strategies for managing project complexity. Finally, the paper also provides a methodological discussion on the potential of ADR in advancing project management research.

show abstract

Engineering framework for the future: Cynefin for engineers

Cited by 6 publications

References 14 publications

Relational Investments and Contractual Choices for Diverse Engineering Designs

Relational Investments and Contractual Choices for Diverse Engineering Designs

Revisiting the whole systems approach: designing supply chains in a turbulent world

Researching navigation of project complexity using action design research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About