176
Engineering Systems Integration
human integration and a set of generally applicable principles and fundaments need to be considered as the baseline of experiments. The principles
and fundamentals help formulate a theoretical and practical basis for integration. The test for selecting principles and fundaments is to discern their
relevance, applicability, and reflectivity of the best practices used by
researchers and practitioners in the various disciplines and fields involved
with systems integration (either by its execution or from is application for
analysis). The framework must be constructed to maintain a balance between
theory and practice that are the distilled and abstracted lessons* and essences
of empirical observations and anecdotal evidence. This balance is maintained by adhering to a governing set of rules:
• For every theoretical construct (theory, model, framework, or
frame), there shall be corresponding best practices that typifies the
application.
• For every best practice there shall be a corresponding theory that
embodies its use and relates to the framework through its context.
A theoretical construct for systems integration spans all the apparent relations and underlying principles that relate to the empirical observations and
conjectural notions the key variables that have been shown to represent the
substantial essences of integration. Some degree of verification of each relation and principle is required. The form and method of verification are not
stipulated, but must pass scrutiny by reasonable inquiry, analysis, and evaluation (often considered part of peer review). As the relations between key
variables begin to form, the categorization may be accomplished in any number of ways—the result being a consistency of defined terms that can be seen
replicated from experiment to experiment. Here, the notion of experiment is
broadly considered as any grouping of tasks that are goal directed. A project
is intended to be an experiment for this purpose. The critical determinant of
a theoretical construct is to first ensure the causal objects have been identified; second, define the objects in a manner consistent with their relations
and categorization; third, parse the categorizations into like-kind frames
(frames reflect the commonality typical in a discipline or field that have
proven efficacious in analyzing, evaluating, and predicting in a verifiable
way); and fourth, determine the relations between the frames (if any) that
when juxtaposed provide a causal mapping between the relations (and
thereby the frames). This portrayal is consistent with Michael Stankosky’s
view that if a subject (in his case knowledge management (Stankosky 2000))
“. . . is to be applicable, universal, and relevant across all enterprises, and
rightly claim its place among academic disciplines in this knowledge age,
knowledge management requires theoretical support” (DiGiacomo 2003).
* Lessons learned; lessons spurned.
Engineering Systems Integration
human integration and a set of generally applicable principles and fundaments need to be considered as the baseline of experiments. The principles
and fundamentals help formulate a theoretical and practical basis for integration. The test for selecting principles and fundaments is to discern their
relevance, applicability, and reflectivity of the best practices used by
researchers and practitioners in the various disciplines and fields involved
with systems integration (either by its execution or from is application for
analysis). The framework must be constructed to maintain a balance between
theory and practice that are the distilled and abstracted lessons* and essences
of empirical observations and anecdotal evidence. This balance is maintained by adhering to a governing set of rules:
• For every theoretical construct (theory, model, framework, or
frame), there shall be corresponding best practices that typifies the
application.
• For every best practice there shall be a corresponding theory that
embodies its use and relates to the framework through its context.
A theoretical construct for systems integration spans all the apparent relations and underlying principles that relate to the empirical observations and
conjectural notions the key variables that have been shown to represent the
substantial essences of integration. Some degree of verification of each relation and principle is required. The form and method of verification are not
stipulated, but must pass scrutiny by reasonable inquiry, analysis, and evaluation (often considered part of peer review). As the relations between key
variables begin to form, the categorization may be accomplished in any number of ways—the result being a consistency of defined terms that can be seen
replicated from experiment to experiment. Here, the notion of experiment is
broadly considered as any grouping of tasks that are goal directed. A project
is intended to be an experiment for this purpose. The critical determinant of
a theoretical construct is to first ensure the causal objects have been identified; second, define the objects in a manner consistent with their relations
and categorization; third, parse the categorizations into like-kind frames
(frames reflect the commonality typical in a discipline or field that have
proven efficacious in analyzing, evaluating, and predicting in a verifiable
way); and fourth, determine the relations between the frames (if any) that
when juxtaposed provide a causal mapping between the relations (and
thereby the frames). This portrayal is consistent with Michael Stankosky’s
view that if a subject (in his case knowledge management (Stankosky 2000))
“. . . is to be applicable, universal, and relevant across all enterprises, and
rightly claim its place among academic disciplines in this knowledge age,
knowledge management requires theoretical support” (DiGiacomo 2003).
* Lessons learned; lessons spurned.