Loading…

Case Studies for Complexity Pattern Identification

The INCOSE Complex Systems Working Group Heuristics Team has selected 67 Principles and Heuristics that are considered to be particularly relevant to Complex Systems. These have been incorporated into a Difficulty Assessment Tool that prioritizes the list of Principles and Heuristics based on scorin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:INCOSE International Symposium 2024-07, Vol.34 (1), p.544-569
Main Authors: Pickard, Andrew C, Beasley, Richard, Beale, Dean, McKinney, Dorothy, Oosthuizen, Rudolph, Stewart, Dave, Cureton, Kenneth, Mirchandani, Chandru
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c772-f3e1a29093b759efe03a5068bdc5d23a07de4fea13d7d8e423da44390da8710f3
container_end_page 569
container_issue 1
container_start_page 544
container_title INCOSE International Symposium
container_volume 34
creator Pickard, Andrew C
Beasley, Richard
Beale, Dean
McKinney, Dorothy
Oosthuizen, Rudolph
Stewart, Dave
Cureton, Kenneth
Mirchandani, Chandru
description The INCOSE Complex Systems Working Group Heuristics Team has selected 67 Principles and Heuristics that are considered to be particularly relevant to Complex Systems. These have been incorporated into a Difficulty Assessment Tool that prioritizes the list of Principles and Heuristics based on scoring of a matrix of four Difficulty Elements and six System Elements (to characterize the nature of the complexity). The purpose of this paper is to describe an initial assessment of the effectiveness and usefulness of the Difficulty Assessment Tool. The Tool has been used to assess eight Case Studies by five assessment teams — one with three people working together, one with two people and the remaining three with individual assessments. The results of these assessments have been compared using four different correlation methods, using the total weighted Heuristic score, the maximum weighted Heuristic score, a Match / Mismatch analysis of the top fifteen and bottom seven Heuristics, and a difference ranking between pairs of assessors of all 67 Principles and Heuristics. The last two assessment methods are shown to be more insightful. The assessment teams then reviewed the relevance of the highest and lowest‐ranked Principles and Heuristics to the full Case Study definitions (Problem and Outcome). There is good agreement of relevance for the highest‐ranking Principles and Heuristics, less so for the lowest‐ranking ones. Based on this initial assessment, the DAT shows promise to help people develop complex systems. The paper concludes with recommendations for further assessment of the Difficulty Assessment Tool.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/iis2.13162
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1002_iis2_13162</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>IIS213162</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c772-f3e1a29093b759efe03a5068bdc5d23a07de4fea13d7d8e423da44390da8710f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9j01LxDAURYMoOIyz8Rd0LXR8yUubdinFj8KAwsw-ZJoXiHTaIYlo_72OdTErV_cuzr1wGLvlsOYA4t77KNYceSku2EIgyryoUF2e9Wu2ivEdALhUZYmwYKIxkbJt-rCeYubGkDXj4djTl09T9mZSojBkraUheec7k_w43LArZ_pIq79cst3T4655yTevz23zsMk7pUTukLgRNdS4V0VNjgBNAWW1t11hBRpQlqQjw9EqW5EUaI2UWIM1leLgcMnu5tsujDEGcvoY_MGESXPQJ1998tW_vj8wn-FP39P0D6nbdivmzTcFslcO</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Case Studies for Complexity Pattern Identification</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Pickard, Andrew C ; Beasley, Richard ; Beale, Dean ; McKinney, Dorothy ; Oosthuizen, Rudolph ; Stewart, Dave ; Cureton, Kenneth ; Mirchandani, Chandru</creator><creatorcontrib>Pickard, Andrew C ; Beasley, Richard ; Beale, Dean ; McKinney, Dorothy ; Oosthuizen, Rudolph ; Stewart, Dave ; Cureton, Kenneth ; Mirchandani, Chandru</creatorcontrib><description>The INCOSE Complex Systems Working Group Heuristics Team has selected 67 Principles and Heuristics that are considered to be particularly relevant to Complex Systems. These have been incorporated into a Difficulty Assessment Tool that prioritizes the list of Principles and Heuristics based on scoring of a matrix of four Difficulty Elements and six System Elements (to characterize the nature of the complexity). The purpose of this paper is to describe an initial assessment of the effectiveness and usefulness of the Difficulty Assessment Tool. The Tool has been used to assess eight Case Studies by five assessment teams — one with three people working together, one with two people and the remaining three with individual assessments. The results of these assessments have been compared using four different correlation methods, using the total weighted Heuristic score, the maximum weighted Heuristic score, a Match / Mismatch analysis of the top fifteen and bottom seven Heuristics, and a difference ranking between pairs of assessors of all 67 Principles and Heuristics. The last two assessment methods are shown to be more insightful. The assessment teams then reviewed the relevance of the highest and lowest‐ranked Principles and Heuristics to the full Case Study definitions (Problem and Outcome). There is good agreement of relevance for the highest‐ranking Principles and Heuristics, less so for the lowest‐ranking ones. Based on this initial assessment, the DAT shows promise to help people develop complex systems. The paper concludes with recommendations for further assessment of the Difficulty Assessment Tool.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2334-5837</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2334-5837</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/iis2.13162</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Assessment ; Chaotic ; Complex ; Complicated ; Heuristic ; Pattern</subject><ispartof>INCOSE International Symposium, 2024-07, Vol.34 (1), p.544-569</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2024 by Andy Pickard, Richard Beasley, Dean Beale, Dorothy McKinney, Rudolph Oosthuizen, Dave Stewart, Ken Cureton and Chandru Mirchandani covering © Crown Copyright 2024. Permission granted to INCOSE to publish and use.</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c772-f3e1a29093b759efe03a5068bdc5d23a07de4fea13d7d8e423da44390da8710f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pickard, Andrew C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beasley, Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beale, Dean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKinney, Dorothy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oosthuizen, Rudolph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Dave</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cureton, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mirchandani, Chandru</creatorcontrib><title>Case Studies for Complexity Pattern Identification</title><title>INCOSE International Symposium</title><description>The INCOSE Complex Systems Working Group Heuristics Team has selected 67 Principles and Heuristics that are considered to be particularly relevant to Complex Systems. These have been incorporated into a Difficulty Assessment Tool that prioritizes the list of Principles and Heuristics based on scoring of a matrix of four Difficulty Elements and six System Elements (to characterize the nature of the complexity). The purpose of this paper is to describe an initial assessment of the effectiveness and usefulness of the Difficulty Assessment Tool. The Tool has been used to assess eight Case Studies by five assessment teams — one with three people working together, one with two people and the remaining three with individual assessments. The results of these assessments have been compared using four different correlation methods, using the total weighted Heuristic score, the maximum weighted Heuristic score, a Match / Mismatch analysis of the top fifteen and bottom seven Heuristics, and a difference ranking between pairs of assessors of all 67 Principles and Heuristics. The last two assessment methods are shown to be more insightful. The assessment teams then reviewed the relevance of the highest and lowest‐ranked Principles and Heuristics to the full Case Study definitions (Problem and Outcome). There is good agreement of relevance for the highest‐ranking Principles and Heuristics, less so for the lowest‐ranking ones. Based on this initial assessment, the DAT shows promise to help people develop complex systems. The paper concludes with recommendations for further assessment of the Difficulty Assessment Tool.</description><subject>Assessment</subject><subject>Chaotic</subject><subject>Complex</subject><subject>Complicated</subject><subject>Heuristic</subject><subject>Pattern</subject><issn>2334-5837</issn><issn>2334-5837</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9j01LxDAURYMoOIyz8Rd0LXR8yUubdinFj8KAwsw-ZJoXiHTaIYlo_72OdTErV_cuzr1wGLvlsOYA4t77KNYceSku2EIgyryoUF2e9Wu2ivEdALhUZYmwYKIxkbJt-rCeYubGkDXj4djTl09T9mZSojBkraUheec7k_w43LArZ_pIq79cst3T4655yTevz23zsMk7pUTukLgRNdS4V0VNjgBNAWW1t11hBRpQlqQjw9EqW5EUaI2UWIM1leLgcMnu5tsujDEGcvoY_MGESXPQJ1998tW_vj8wn-FP39P0D6nbdivmzTcFslcO</recordid><startdate>202407</startdate><enddate>202407</enddate><creator>Pickard, Andrew C</creator><creator>Beasley, Richard</creator><creator>Beale, Dean</creator><creator>McKinney, Dorothy</creator><creator>Oosthuizen, Rudolph</creator><creator>Stewart, Dave</creator><creator>Cureton, Kenneth</creator><creator>Mirchandani, Chandru</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202407</creationdate><title>Case Studies for Complexity Pattern Identification</title><author>Pickard, Andrew C ; Beasley, Richard ; Beale, Dean ; McKinney, Dorothy ; Oosthuizen, Rudolph ; Stewart, Dave ; Cureton, Kenneth ; Mirchandani, Chandru</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c772-f3e1a29093b759efe03a5068bdc5d23a07de4fea13d7d8e423da44390da8710f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Assessment</topic><topic>Chaotic</topic><topic>Complex</topic><topic>Complicated</topic><topic>Heuristic</topic><topic>Pattern</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pickard, Andrew C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beasley, Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beale, Dean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKinney, Dorothy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oosthuizen, Rudolph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Dave</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cureton, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mirchandani, Chandru</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>INCOSE International Symposium</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pickard, Andrew C</au><au>Beasley, Richard</au><au>Beale, Dean</au><au>McKinney, Dorothy</au><au>Oosthuizen, Rudolph</au><au>Stewart, Dave</au><au>Cureton, Kenneth</au><au>Mirchandani, Chandru</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Case Studies for Complexity Pattern Identification</atitle><jtitle>INCOSE International Symposium</jtitle><date>2024-07</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>544</spage><epage>569</epage><pages>544-569</pages><issn>2334-5837</issn><eissn>2334-5837</eissn><abstract>The INCOSE Complex Systems Working Group Heuristics Team has selected 67 Principles and Heuristics that are considered to be particularly relevant to Complex Systems. These have been incorporated into a Difficulty Assessment Tool that prioritizes the list of Principles and Heuristics based on scoring of a matrix of four Difficulty Elements and six System Elements (to characterize the nature of the complexity). The purpose of this paper is to describe an initial assessment of the effectiveness and usefulness of the Difficulty Assessment Tool. The Tool has been used to assess eight Case Studies by five assessment teams — one with three people working together, one with two people and the remaining three with individual assessments. The results of these assessments have been compared using four different correlation methods, using the total weighted Heuristic score, the maximum weighted Heuristic score, a Match / Mismatch analysis of the top fifteen and bottom seven Heuristics, and a difference ranking between pairs of assessors of all 67 Principles and Heuristics. The last two assessment methods are shown to be more insightful. The assessment teams then reviewed the relevance of the highest and lowest‐ranked Principles and Heuristics to the full Case Study definitions (Problem and Outcome). There is good agreement of relevance for the highest‐ranking Principles and Heuristics, less so for the lowest‐ranking ones. Based on this initial assessment, the DAT shows promise to help people develop complex systems. The paper concludes with recommendations for further assessment of the Difficulty Assessment Tool.</abstract><doi>10.1002/iis2.13162</doi><tpages>26</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2334-5837
ispartof INCOSE International Symposium, 2024-07, Vol.34 (1), p.544-569
issn 2334-5837
2334-5837
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1002_iis2_13162
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects Assessment
Chaotic
Complex
Complicated
Heuristic
Pattern
title Case Studies for Complexity Pattern Identification
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T14%3A39%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Case%20Studies%20for%20Complexity%20Pattern%20Identification&rft.jtitle=INCOSE%20International%20Symposium&rft.au=Pickard,%20Andrew%20C&rft.date=2024-07&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=544&rft.epage=569&rft.pages=544-569&rft.issn=2334-5837&rft.eissn=2334-5837&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/iis2.13162&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_cross%3EIIS213162%3C/wiley_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c772-f3e1a29093b759efe03a5068bdc5d23a07de4fea13d7d8e423da44390da8710f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true