256
Engineering Systems Integration
the schedule. But the systems engineer should not and cannot rely on intuition
for such matters. A systems engineer is inclined to analyze the details and
view the project as a system of systems. A manager may rely on the analysis
provided, but often has a good intuition for what the situation warrants to
initiate the project. Without the decision to compress the schedule, the work
may have been awarded to another group of developers. The first step is to
secure the work under conditions that are conducive to its successful completion. Since the project team agreed with the project manager, no problem
occurred. Isenberg (Isenberg 1984 as referenced by Busman 2008) suggests
that there are circumstances in which intuition is used. These include sensing when a problem exists and circumventing detailed analysis and move
expeditiously to posit a solution. The approaches of the project manager and
the systems engineer are quite dissimilar, but their goal of a successful project is paramount. The thinking of the manager and the systems engineer are
not only different, but they must also be different to provide the checks and
balances necessary to navigate project pitfalls. Interestingly, systems engineers with different backgrounds interpret problems differently—applying
different sets of criteria using different approaches (Bernstein 2001). After
some discussion, most systems engineers will agree on the problem (and the
related subsets of needs that helped determine the problems).
Stakeholder’s Perspective of a Problem
A problem is devised in relation to a need that accomplishes something
that a key stakeholder cannot do because of some objective reason(s), that
is, availability, technology, science, opportunity, or resources, or condition
(limitation or constraints). A problem is also considered with regard to
circumstances. In relative terms, a problem for one person may not be a problem for another. Since problems are relative, the solutions are also relative
(often based on the predecessor systems that existed before the stakeholders
deemed that they had a problem).
For systems engineering, stating the problem was the founding notion.
Beginning with a key stakeholder who had a need that was causing a problem
(that could be defined) suggested a tangible benefit from finding a solution.
The engineering mind (and most other disciplines are challenged intellectually to solve problems, whether self-imposed or otherwise). The academic
literature and the public media bait the researcher with problems faced by
society, military, and government. Problems seem to be omnipresent, with
everyone gaining fame and fortune by solving “big” problems. Industry
rewards people who solve problems, so that revenue and profits can increase.
The betting public rewards companies who solve problems and gain marketshare. Waring nations are rewarded by winning battles and war(s) by solving the problem of defeating the adversary. Problem solving is tantamount to
one of the best roles which inspires movies and best-selling books. Heroines
and heroes might ask, “What is wrong with solving problem?” The answer
Engineering Systems Integration
the schedule. But the systems engineer should not and cannot rely on intuition
for such matters. A systems engineer is inclined to analyze the details and
view the project as a system of systems. A manager may rely on the analysis
provided, but often has a good intuition for what the situation warrants to
initiate the project. Without the decision to compress the schedule, the work
may have been awarded to another group of developers. The first step is to
secure the work under conditions that are conducive to its successful completion. Since the project team agreed with the project manager, no problem
occurred. Isenberg (Isenberg 1984 as referenced by Busman 2008) suggests
that there are circumstances in which intuition is used. These include sensing when a problem exists and circumventing detailed analysis and move
expeditiously to posit a solution. The approaches of the project manager and
the systems engineer are quite dissimilar, but their goal of a successful project is paramount. The thinking of the manager and the systems engineer are
not only different, but they must also be different to provide the checks and
balances necessary to navigate project pitfalls. Interestingly, systems engineers with different backgrounds interpret problems differently—applying
different sets of criteria using different approaches (Bernstein 2001). After
some discussion, most systems engineers will agree on the problem (and the
related subsets of needs that helped determine the problems).
Stakeholder’s Perspective of a Problem
A problem is devised in relation to a need that accomplishes something
that a key stakeholder cannot do because of some objective reason(s), that
is, availability, technology, science, opportunity, or resources, or condition
(limitation or constraints). A problem is also considered with regard to
circumstances. In relative terms, a problem for one person may not be a problem for another. Since problems are relative, the solutions are also relative
(often based on the predecessor systems that existed before the stakeholders
deemed that they had a problem).
For systems engineering, stating the problem was the founding notion.
Beginning with a key stakeholder who had a need that was causing a problem
(that could be defined) suggested a tangible benefit from finding a solution.
The engineering mind (and most other disciplines are challenged intellectually to solve problems, whether self-imposed or otherwise). The academic
literature and the public media bait the researcher with problems faced by
society, military, and government. Problems seem to be omnipresent, with
everyone gaining fame and fortune by solving “big” problems. Industry
rewards people who solve problems, so that revenue and profits can increase.
The betting public rewards companies who solve problems and gain marketshare. Waring nations are rewarded by winning battles and war(s) by solving the problem of defeating the adversary. Problem solving is tantamount to
one of the best roles which inspires movies and best-selling books. Heroines
and heroes might ask, “What is wrong with solving problem?” The answer