158
Engineering Systems Integration
guidelines for the system’s developers (e.g., in development—logic, data,
physical, functions, performance, software, etc., and in operations—maintenance, operational reliability, affordability, etc.). The trade spaces examined
in each of these systems engineering development stages are inputs to frame
the tasks and complete the planning for integration.
Integration is believed to have a reasonably common and acceptable meaning across disciplines, generally expressed as combining things to make a
whole. However, there are few mentions of the workings of integration in the
literature. How do you combine things? In what fashion should objects be
combined? When is a whole a whole? When is a whole not a whole? The
subtleties of integration are largely lost or not discussed in presentations on
integration, most narrowly focusing on a one- or two-sentence definition. It is
as if the subject of integration was unworthy of elaboration, taken to mean the
common view of “you know, just do it.” From that point onward, the word
integration is used with great candor, often applied with zeal to anything that
would seem to benefit from being put together with something else.
The subject of integration is the entry discussion for systems, thinking in
systems, and systems engineering. Even as a topic for systems science, integration has been substantially ignored. This book offers a look at the
essence of integration for the purpose that integration be considered and
discussed as an enigmatic science. My aim is to pose the topic of integration
as a topic for mainstream enquiry and inference,* to investigate it from
beyond the peripheral duties of a few technical artisans, intimate with the
skills and techniques of integration. Even for theorist and craftspeople familiar
with practical methods and tools, the tendency has been to rely on the sys* The settled rationale of Western scientific advancement has been to unify existing paradigms
of thought around epistemic, methodological, and empirical qualities. Researchers in every
discipline apply various principles to developing theories supported by careful examination
of phenomenological variables that are thought to be significant. While the wisdoms and
knowledge cast during the past several thousand years are closely coupled with basic principles of earthy truths, the procedures of enquiry are driven by methods of experimentation
and reason. The verities of biases and perspectives of observation advance knowledge in one
of two ways—either through a rather step-wise continuous extension of previous thought and
knowledge or as a result of amalgamating precipitous changes in direction of thinking to
disrupt an existing paradigm and thrust enquiry into new areas with perhaps different form.
The test for knowledge is in our ability to use what and how we think as influenced by emotion and experience. Indeed, the progress of knowledge is merely the integration of inspiration with evidence that is compelling to a preponderance of learned review. This nexus of the
theory of knowledge, the principles and procedures of enquiry, and measurable observations
is the nature of enquiry that concerns the development of every field of endeavor. Enquiry is
the development of “truths” that represent knowledge. The growth in any discipline is
immediately hampered if set within a myopic view of domain-specific principles. Without a
broad appreciation of abstractions that do or could transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries, precipitous advances are rare. It is the unity of truths which abstracts domain-specific
knowledge to a simple, small set of generalizations that has help change our structures of
knowledge through better verification and falsification of existing observations. (See Endnote
2 at the end of this chapter.)
Engineering Systems Integration
guidelines for the system’s developers (e.g., in development—logic, data,
physical, functions, performance, software, etc., and in operations—maintenance, operational reliability, affordability, etc.). The trade spaces examined
in each of these systems engineering development stages are inputs to frame
the tasks and complete the planning for integration.
Integration is believed to have a reasonably common and acceptable meaning across disciplines, generally expressed as combining things to make a
whole. However, there are few mentions of the workings of integration in the
literature. How do you combine things? In what fashion should objects be
combined? When is a whole a whole? When is a whole not a whole? The
subtleties of integration are largely lost or not discussed in presentations on
integration, most narrowly focusing on a one- or two-sentence definition. It is
as if the subject of integration was unworthy of elaboration, taken to mean the
common view of “you know, just do it.” From that point onward, the word
integration is used with great candor, often applied with zeal to anything that
would seem to benefit from being put together with something else.
The subject of integration is the entry discussion for systems, thinking in
systems, and systems engineering. Even as a topic for systems science, integration has been substantially ignored. This book offers a look at the
essence of integration for the purpose that integration be considered and
discussed as an enigmatic science. My aim is to pose the topic of integration
as a topic for mainstream enquiry and inference,* to investigate it from
beyond the peripheral duties of a few technical artisans, intimate with the
skills and techniques of integration. Even for theorist and craftspeople familiar
with practical methods and tools, the tendency has been to rely on the sys* The settled rationale of Western scientific advancement has been to unify existing paradigms
of thought around epistemic, methodological, and empirical qualities. Researchers in every
discipline apply various principles to developing theories supported by careful examination
of phenomenological variables that are thought to be significant. While the wisdoms and
knowledge cast during the past several thousand years are closely coupled with basic principles of earthy truths, the procedures of enquiry are driven by methods of experimentation
and reason. The verities of biases and perspectives of observation advance knowledge in one
of two ways—either through a rather step-wise continuous extension of previous thought and
knowledge or as a result of amalgamating precipitous changes in direction of thinking to
disrupt an existing paradigm and thrust enquiry into new areas with perhaps different form.
The test for knowledge is in our ability to use what and how we think as influenced by emotion and experience. Indeed, the progress of knowledge is merely the integration of inspiration with evidence that is compelling to a preponderance of learned review. This nexus of the
theory of knowledge, the principles and procedures of enquiry, and measurable observations
is the nature of enquiry that concerns the development of every field of endeavor. Enquiry is
the development of “truths” that represent knowledge. The growth in any discipline is
immediately hampered if set within a myopic view of domain-specific principles. Without a
broad appreciation of abstractions that do or could transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries, precipitous advances are rare. It is the unity of truths which abstracts domain-specific
knowledge to a simple, small set of generalizations that has help change our structures of
knowledge through better verification and falsification of existing observations. (See Endnote
2 at the end of this chapter.)