Loading…
A pragmatic representation of systems engineering based on technological learning
Summary form only given,as follows. In this paper, the authors make the argument that the apparent tendency for large engineering projects to produce other than intended results stems not from the particulars of the projects but, more basically, from representing them as overly simplified, highly li...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Conference Proceeding |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Request full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 423 vol.1 |
container_title | |
container_volume | 1 |
creator | Carayannis, E.G. Forbes, J. Alexander, J.M. |
description | Summary form only given,as follows. In this paper, the authors make the argument that the apparent tendency for large engineering projects to produce other than intended results stems not from the particulars of the projects but, more basically, from representing them as overly simplified, highly linear, and often hyper-rational schemes to begin with. As anyone who has applied systems dynamics will recognize, even linear relationships lead to nonlinear behavior when feedback is included. The paper argues that the practice of reliability engineering, logistics engineering and systems engineering generally, rather than being bad engineering or bad application of good engineering, can instead be reformulated as an ongoing sensemaking activity embedded in an adaptive social process. When so viewed, what presently appear to be perverse outcomes are, instead, natural and expected, potentially even managed. They begin with three mini-case studies that will serve as archetypes for three fairly common results. The three cases are "unexpected opportunity," "failure then success," and "technophobia." Each case study has two parts. In the first part we present the specifics of the case in abbreviated form. In the second part of each case, they place what happened within a common conceptual framework. In the second part of the paper, they expand on the common conceptual framework and discuss some of the implications for systems engineering. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1109/PICMET.2001.952333 |
format | conference_proceeding |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>ieee_6IE</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_952333</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>952333</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>952333</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-ieee_primary_9523333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9zr0OgjAUBeAmxsQ_XoDpvoDYUqowGoLRwUQTdlLxUmugJS0Lby-Jzp7l5ORbDiEhoxFjNNvdLvm1KKOYUhZlIuacz8iKpRlNE073hwUJvH_TKUkiEiGW5H6E3knVyUHX4LB36NEM07IGbAN-9AN2HtAobRCdNgoe0uMTJh-wfhnbWqVr2UKL0pnJN2TeyNZj8Os1CU9FmZ-3GhGr3ulOurH6nuN_8QNNyT_c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>A pragmatic representation of systems engineering based on technological learning</title><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</source><creator>Carayannis, E.G. ; Forbes, J. ; Alexander, J.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Carayannis, E.G. ; Forbes, J. ; Alexander, J.M.</creatorcontrib><description>Summary form only given,as follows. In this paper, the authors make the argument that the apparent tendency for large engineering projects to produce other than intended results stems not from the particulars of the projects but, more basically, from representing them as overly simplified, highly linear, and often hyper-rational schemes to begin with. As anyone who has applied systems dynamics will recognize, even linear relationships lead to nonlinear behavior when feedback is included. The paper argues that the practice of reliability engineering, logistics engineering and systems engineering generally, rather than being bad engineering or bad application of good engineering, can instead be reformulated as an ongoing sensemaking activity embedded in an adaptive social process. When so viewed, what presently appear to be perverse outcomes are, instead, natural and expected, potentially even managed. They begin with three mini-case studies that will serve as archetypes for three fairly common results. The three cases are "unexpected opportunity," "failure then success," and "technophobia." Each case study has two parts. In the first part we present the specifics of the case in abbreviated form. In the second part of each case, they place what happened within a common conceptual framework. In the second part of the paper, they expand on the common conceptual framework and discuss some of the implications for systems engineering.</description><identifier>ISBN: 1890843067</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 9781890843069</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/PICMET.2001.952333</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>IEEE</publisher><subject>Engineering management ; Feedback ; Logistics ; Project management ; Reliability engineering ; Systems engineering and theory</subject><ispartof>PICMET '01. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings Vol.1: Book of Summaries (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37199), 2001, Vol.1, p.423 vol.1</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/952333$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,776,780,785,786,2052,4036,4037,27902,54895</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/952333$$EView_record_in_IEEE$$FView_record_in_$$GIEEE</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carayannis, E.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forbes, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alexander, J.M.</creatorcontrib><title>A pragmatic representation of systems engineering based on technological learning</title><title>PICMET '01. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings Vol.1: Book of Summaries (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37199)</title><addtitle>PICMET</addtitle><description>Summary form only given,as follows. In this paper, the authors make the argument that the apparent tendency for large engineering projects to produce other than intended results stems not from the particulars of the projects but, more basically, from representing them as overly simplified, highly linear, and often hyper-rational schemes to begin with. As anyone who has applied systems dynamics will recognize, even linear relationships lead to nonlinear behavior when feedback is included. The paper argues that the practice of reliability engineering, logistics engineering and systems engineering generally, rather than being bad engineering or bad application of good engineering, can instead be reformulated as an ongoing sensemaking activity embedded in an adaptive social process. When so viewed, what presently appear to be perverse outcomes are, instead, natural and expected, potentially even managed. They begin with three mini-case studies that will serve as archetypes for three fairly common results. The three cases are "unexpected opportunity," "failure then success," and "technophobia." Each case study has two parts. In the first part we present the specifics of the case in abbreviated form. In the second part of each case, they place what happened within a common conceptual framework. In the second part of the paper, they expand on the common conceptual framework and discuss some of the implications for systems engineering.</description><subject>Engineering management</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Logistics</subject><subject>Project management</subject><subject>Reliability engineering</subject><subject>Systems engineering and theory</subject><isbn>1890843067</isbn><isbn>9781890843069</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><sourceid>6IE</sourceid><recordid>eNp9zr0OgjAUBeAmxsQ_XoDpvoDYUqowGoLRwUQTdlLxUmugJS0Lby-Jzp7l5ORbDiEhoxFjNNvdLvm1KKOYUhZlIuacz8iKpRlNE073hwUJvH_TKUkiEiGW5H6E3knVyUHX4LB36NEM07IGbAN-9AN2HtAobRCdNgoe0uMTJh-wfhnbWqVr2UKL0pnJN2TeyNZj8Os1CU9FmZ-3GhGr3ulOurH6nuN_8QNNyT_c</recordid><startdate>2001</startdate><enddate>2001</enddate><creator>Carayannis, E.G.</creator><creator>Forbes, J.</creator><creator>Alexander, J.M.</creator><general>IEEE</general><scope>6IE</scope><scope>6IH</scope><scope>CBEJK</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>RIO</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2001</creationdate><title>A pragmatic representation of systems engineering based on technological learning</title><author>Carayannis, E.G. ; Forbes, J. ; Alexander, J.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-ieee_primary_9523333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Engineering management</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Logistics</topic><topic>Project management</topic><topic>Reliability engineering</topic><topic>Systems engineering and theory</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carayannis, E.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forbes, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alexander, J.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plan (POP) 1998-present by volume</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore All Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plans (POP) 1998-present</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carayannis, E.G.</au><au>Forbes, J.</au><au>Alexander, J.M.</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>A pragmatic representation of systems engineering based on technological learning</atitle><btitle>PICMET '01. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings Vol.1: Book of Summaries (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37199)</btitle><stitle>PICMET</stitle><date>2001</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>1</volume><spage>423 vol.1</spage><pages>423 vol.1-</pages><isbn>1890843067</isbn><isbn>9781890843069</isbn><abstract>Summary form only given,as follows. In this paper, the authors make the argument that the apparent tendency for large engineering projects to produce other than intended results stems not from the particulars of the projects but, more basically, from representing them as overly simplified, highly linear, and often hyper-rational schemes to begin with. As anyone who has applied systems dynamics will recognize, even linear relationships lead to nonlinear behavior when feedback is included. The paper argues that the practice of reliability engineering, logistics engineering and systems engineering generally, rather than being bad engineering or bad application of good engineering, can instead be reformulated as an ongoing sensemaking activity embedded in an adaptive social process. When so viewed, what presently appear to be perverse outcomes are, instead, natural and expected, potentially even managed. They begin with three mini-case studies that will serve as archetypes for three fairly common results. The three cases are "unexpected opportunity," "failure then success," and "technophobia." Each case study has two parts. In the first part we present the specifics of the case in abbreviated form. In the second part of each case, they place what happened within a common conceptual framework. In the second part of the paper, they expand on the common conceptual framework and discuss some of the implications for systems engineering.</abstract><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/PICMET.2001.952333</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISBN: 1890843067 |
ispartof | PICMET '01. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings Vol.1: Book of Summaries (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37199), 2001, Vol.1, p.423 vol.1 |
issn | |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_ieee_primary_952333 |
source | IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings |
subjects | Engineering management Feedback Logistics Project management Reliability engineering Systems engineering and theory |
title | A pragmatic representation of systems engineering based on technological learning |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-22T11%3A47%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ieee_6IE&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=A%20pragmatic%20representation%20of%20systems%20engineering%20based%20on%20technological%20learning&rft.btitle=PICMET%20'01.%20Portland%20International%20Conference%20on%20Management%20of%20Engineering%20and%20Technology.%20Proceedings%20Vol.1:%20Book%20of%20Summaries%20(IEEE%20Cat.%20No.01CH37199)&rft.au=Carayannis,%20E.G.&rft.date=2001&rft.volume=1&rft.spage=423%20vol.1&rft.pages=423%20vol.1-&rft.isbn=1890843067&rft.isbn_list=9781890843069&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/PICMET.2001.952333&rft_dat=%3Cieee_6IE%3E952333%3C/ieee_6IE%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-ieee_primary_9523333%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=952333&rfr_iscdi=true |