Enabling systems thinking to accelerate the development of senior systems engineers

As engineering systems become more complex, the roles involved in developing and managing such systems also become more complex. Thus, there is increasing interest in educating and training engineering professionals to think more systemically. In particular, there is an increasing need to accelerate the development of senior systems engineers. As new educational degree programs in systems rapidly emerge and as companies scurry to establish systems training programs to meet this need, fundamental questions still remain about how systems thinking develops in engineers. Increased understanding of the mechanisms that develop systems thinking will enable effective and efficient development of senior systems professionals. After reviewing related literature, an exploratory and inductive study was designed to gather data on enablers, barriers, and precursors to systems thinking development in engineers. In a field study conducted primarily in the United States aerospace sector, 205 interviews were conducted in 10 host companies. Senior systems engineers were studied to better understand how they developed systems thinking, and information was collected on company procedures for developing systems engineers. Using interview and survey data, comparisons were made of two control groups and senior systems engineers. Proven stellar systems thinkers were also interviewed. To summarize the results, even though systems thinking definitions diverge, there is consensus on primary mechanisms that enable or obstruct systems thinking development in engineers. In order to reconcile the divergent definitions observed, a systems thinking framework, definition, and accompanying conceptual illustration are given. The data show that the primary mechanisms that enable systems thinking development include experiential learning, specific individual characteristics, and a supporting environment. This document defines the research space on this topic and suggests applications for the results. Better understanding of systems thinking development provides a foundation for educational interventions and employee development in systems thinking for engineering professionals across industry, government, and academia. Thesis Supervisor: Deborah J. Nightingale Title: Professor of the Practice of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 440 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Engineering projects are growing in scale and complexity, government agencies in the United States are demanding improved systems engineering capabilities in contractors, and commercial companies are facing customer demands for more complex products. As engineering systems become more complex and as companies become more responsible for systems solutions, there is increasing interest in training engineering professionals to think systemically. In particular, there is an increasing need to accelerate the development of senior systems engineers. To address this need to develop systems professionals, academia, industry, and government are reacting with a flurry of activity. As hundreds of systems professionals are being hired, new educational degree programs in systems are rapidly emerging. Companies are scurrying to establish systems training and development programs. Nonetheless, fundamental questions still remain about how systems thinking develops in engineers. Increased understanding of the mechanisms that develop systems thinking will enable effective and efficient development of senior systems professionals. There are questions both about what the requisite skills indeed are and how these skills develop. The type of thinking required by systems professionals is sometimes referred to as “systems thinking.” While systems thinking may be found throughout organizations, there is a specialized category of engineers called systems engineers who are charged with the responsibility to apply systems thinking to engineering systems. ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 440 The purpose of this research is to better understand systems thinking development and to better understand how senior systems engineers develop. Specifically, there are three key research questions: (1) What are enablers, barriers, and precursors to the development of systems thinking in engineers, (2) How do senior systems engineers develop, and (3) What are the mechanisms that develop systems thinking in engineers? There is not empirical evidence to show how systems thinking develops in people of all types, and it is not yet known if systems thinking develops differently in different disciplines. This research investigates only systems thinking in the engineering population. The terms systems professional and systems engineer are used interchangeably in this research. After reviewing related literature, an exploratory and inductive study was designed to gather data on enablers, barriers, and precursors to systems thinking development in engineers. In a field study conducted primarily in the United States aerospace sector, 205 interviews were conducted in 10 host companies. After working with a point-of-contact to determine the company’s interest in participating, the researchers worked with a point-of-contact to identify an “expert panel.” This group consisted of approximately four individuals who are very familiar with the policies and practices of how that company develops senior systems engineers. Next, the Expert Panelists in each company were asked to identify subjects in three groups: (1) Senior Systems Engineers, (2) Junior Systems Engineers, and (3) Senior Technical Specialists. The selection of the follow-on subjects was dependent on the opinions of the Expert Panelists. Of course, the primary interest was in the characteristics, development histories, and opinions of the senior systems professionals. The other two groups were control groups. ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 440 In the survey, information was gathered on specific individual characteristics, assigned work roles, and educational interventions that inhibit or accelerate systems thinking development. The Expert Panelists were asked for formal company procedures for developing systems engineers. For all the subjects, the interview included questions about a definition for systems thinking, a reaction to a given definition of systems thinking, enablers and barriers to systems thinking, individual characteristics that predict the development of systems thinking, key steps to systems thinking development, etc. Additional interviews with proven stellar systems thinkers were also conducted. The study provides data to support and discredit existing heuristics on how senior systems engineers develop. To summarize the results, even though systems thinking definitions diverge, there is remarkable convergence on mechanisms that enable and obstruct systems thinking development. The data show that the primary mechanisms that enable systems thinking development include experiential learning, various individual characteristics, and a supporting environment. In order to reconcile the divergent definitions observed, an original systems thinking framework, definition and accompanying conceptual illustration are given. Synthesizing all the definitions considered, five foundational elements describe a systems thinking framework, which include the (1) componential, (2) relational, (3) contextual, (4) dynamic, and (5) modal elements. The resulting definition is that, “Systems thinking is utilizing modal elements to consider the componential, relational, contextual, and dynamic elements of the system of interest.” In addition to defining the research space on this topic, this document also suggests applications for this research. First, levels of intervention maturity are shown. Applications of research for government are: (1) Provide incentives to promote strong systems thinking, (2) ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 440 adjust policies to emphasize experiential learning for systems thinking development, (3) change acquisition strategy to provide more programs and opportunities for engineers to develop systems thinking, (4) promote research on the mechanisms for effective systems thinking development, and (5) encourage systems programs that teach systems skills and systems thinking. The applications of the research for industry: (1) structure systems thinking interventions to emphasize experiential learning, (2) offer systems programs to teach systems skills and systems thinking, (3) filter and foster identified individual characteristics in systems organizations, (4) provide an environment supportive to the development of systems thinking, and (5) clearly communicate how strength of systems thinking is assessed. The applications of the research for academia are: (1) offer systems programs to teach systems skills and systems thinking, (2) use feedback mechanisms to continually improve systems programs and systems courses, (3) structure programs and courses to emphasize experiential learning, (4) structure courses and programs to promote systems thinking by emphasizing context and knowledge integration, and (5) continue research on the mechanisms for effective systems thinking development. In the midst of the flurry of activity surrounding the currently urgent topic of systems, the results of this exploratory study demand that systems professionals step back to think. The mechanisms which develop systems thinking are not yet well understood, and the mechanisms that are currently being utilized are not necessarily the most effective. Before valuable resources are poured into systems development interventions, it is important to look at what the data in this study say about how systems thinking develops in engineers. Future research suggestions are given, since considerable work still needs to be completed in this area. Better understanding of ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 440 systems thinking development provides a foundation for educational interventions and employee development in systems thinking for engineering professionals across industry, government, and