International Council on Systems Engineering Introduction…..

1. International Council on Systems EngineeringIntroduction….. Susan Jones, INCOSE Region V Director for Industry Affairs The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA USA susan.e.jones@aero.org

2. Outline Overview Ken Kepchar Region V Director Technical Committees and John SnodderlyWorking Groups President Elect Past Technical Board Chair Education and Research TC Dennis Buede Technical Committee Chair Chesapeake Chapter Jerry WoodallChapter President Washington Metro Area Chapter Bruce SheltonChapter President Southern Maryland Chapter Karl GeistChapter President

3. Our Past Started in 1990 by 35 US leaders as National Council on Systems Engineering (NCOSE) First Annual Symposium held in 1991 Most early members from defense/aerospace Most early activity focused on sharing within the organization Became International (INCOSE) in 1996

4. Our PresentINCOSE is an international authoritative body promoting the application of an interdisciplinary systems approach to enable the realization of successful systems

5. Our Present Steady growth in membership with increasing diversity Non-US participation and leadership has increased significantly Key participant in industry standards and models Increasing collaboration between university, industry, and government Affiliations/interactions with other professionals bodies and industry societies to produce shared outcomes

6. INCOSE Goals Provide a focal point for dissemination of knowledge Promote collaboration in systems engineering education and research Establish professional standards for integrity in the practice of systems engineering Improve professional status of all people engaged in the of practice of systems engineering Encourage support from government and industry for research and educational programs

7. INCOSE Regions III I IV II VI V

8. INCOSE Governance Structure Board of Directors Executive Committee (officers) Corporate Advisory Board Technical Board Technical Committees (7) Working Groups/ Interest Groups (30+) Systems Engineering Center of Excellence Administrative Committees (5) Chapters, Communications, Membership, Symposium, Ways & Means Central Office

9. Corporate Advisory Board Consists of one representative from each corporate sponsor (37 and growing) Provides recommendations to INCOSE on overall direction, focus, and priorities Acts as a conduit between INCOSE and sponsoring corporations for resolving key issues Seeks to influence the future of systems engineering standards, practices, education, research and other key issues NASA joined as a CAB Member in 1999

10. Aerojet The Aerospace Corporation Astrium GmbH BAE Systems The Boeing Company Boeing Satellite Systems Boeing - Military Aircraft & Missiles Systems C.S. Draper Laboratory The Defence Evaluation and Research Agency Delphi Automotive Systems EADS Military Aircraft Division Department of Energy - Idaho General Dynamics Corporation Honeywell International Israel Aircraft Industries Jet Propulsion Laboratory Litton/PRC Litton/TASC Lockheed Martin Corporation The MITRE Corporation Motorola National Aeronautics and Space Administration Naval Air Systems Command Naval Surface Warfare Center - Dahlgren Division Northrop Grumman Corporation Raytheon Systems Company Raytheon Systems Company/Texas Rockwell Collins Avionics & Communications Science Application International Corporation Structural Dynamics Research Corporation Software Productivity Consortium TRW Systems & Information Technology Group Telelogic AB Thomson-CSF Racal PLC United Technologies Vitech Corporation Xerox Corporation CAB Members

11. INCOSE Membership Benefits INCOSE Journal INSIGHT Symposia, Workshops, Conferences Membership discounts Early visibility into emerging standards Knowledge of engineering from a global perspective Means to tap expertise of industry experts Networking with colleagues from around the world …..and more

12. Chapters Interest Group Region Branch Geographical Domains INCOSE Networking Technical Professional Committee Disciplines Working Groups Joint Activities

13. Our FutureINCOSE is the world’s premier engineering professional society for enabling holistic solutions to problems and needs

14. Six Strategic Priorities (1) Provide high value products and services and opportunities for professional networking (2) Position INCOSE as a unifying force across engineering communities and related specialties (3) Promote growth through diversification of stakeholder base and products/services

15. Six Strategic Priorities (4) Attract highly qualified leaders and provide infrastructure and balanced leadership organization to accomplish targeted initiatives (5) Gain further recognition of the importance of systems engineering (6) Achieve wide acceptance of INCOSE as the leading systems engineering society

16. Advancement Develop products and services to foster advancement of individual member’s knowledge • SE Body of Knowledge Examine means to create partnerships between industry & universities • Academic Forum Foster selected research opportunities through INCOSE Systems Engineering Center of Excellence (SECOE) Expand the circulation of the INCOSE journal

17. Influence Sponsor/participate in targeted conferences • Many regional/chapter events, and INCOSE track at Software Technology Conference • 34th Engineering and Technical Management Conference (EIA/GEIA, INCOSE, NDIA) • 2nd European Systems Engineering Conference Continue participation and leadership in standards • ISO, IEEE, EIA and others Offer INCOSE's expertise and participation in selected industry initiatives/advisory boards • BOD voted yes; opportunities being identified

18. 2001 International Symposium

19. Other Events Regional Conferences Events hosted by regions or chapters with most of the elements of the annual symposium Chapter Events Local events which may include chapter business meetings, special working sessions, tutorials, speakers Working/Interest Group Meetings Events held in one location or as virtual meetings with focus on a particular product or topic area

20. SUMMARY • Local Chapters Sponsor a Variety of Activities of Interest for NASA Personnel • The Mid-Atlantic Chapters Work Together to Bring Quality Programs to their Members • The Chapter Meetings and Programs Provide an Avenue • For Attendees to Exchange Ideas • Learn New Concepts to Employ at Work • Develop New Resources for Research

21. International Council on Systems EngineeringAdvancing the State of the Art in Systems Engineering John Snodderly, INCOSE President Elect and Past Technical Committee Chair Defense Systems Management College Fort Belvoir, VA USA john.snodderly@incose.org

22. Vision An international body comprised of leading organizations and experts contributing to the body of knowledge on systems engineering An organization whose leadership and members are recognized as having the highest expertise to solve systems problems A contributing partner in strategic alliances with other professional societies and leading universities worldwide A center of competence for research, theory, and practices applied to systems challenges INCOSE is the world’s premier engineering professional society for enabling holistic solutions to problems and needs

23. WHY is INCOSE Needed ? • Is the world of SE in trouble today? • How would you know? • What are some recent examples that point out a lack of SE?

24. DoD SE Problems • “USAF Urges F-22 Production Without Test- …ready to move into its production phase even if an important software milestone, which legally must be reached first, is not passed”* • “Software Pushes Up JSF Price Tag to $31 Million - …Marketplace changes, the software went straight up. Turns out it was more for software than we thought.”* • “…A draft report from the GAO, a government watchdog agency here, charges that the JSF program is rushing to the engineering manufacturing and development stage before critical technologies have matured.”* • “Integrating JSF engine-control software with avionics software has proven challenging.”* *Defense news April 10, 2000

25. From the Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board Phase I Report: • Absence of a mission systems engineer during the operations phase to provide the bridge between the spacecraft system, the instrument system and the ground/operations system. • Lack of identification of acceptable risk by the operations team in the context of the “Faster, Better, Cheaper” philosophy. • Navigation requirements set at too high a management level, insufficient flowdown of requirements and inadequate validation of these requirements. • Several significant system and subsystem design and development issues, uncovered after the launch of the Mars Climate Orbiter • Inadequate attention, within the system engineering process, to the transition from development to operations.

26. From the Wide-field Infrared Explorer Mishap Investigation Board Report (Briefing by Darrell Branscome, Board Chair): • “Detailed, independent technical peer reviews are essential. Furthermore, it is essential that peer reviews be done to assess the integrity of the system design, including an evaluation of system/mission consequences of the detailed design and implementation.” • “Perform electronics power turn-on characterization tests, particularly for applications involving irreversible events.” • “Test for correct functional behavior and test for anomalous behavior, especially during initial turn-on and power-on reset conditions.”

27. From Lewis Spacecraft Mission Failure Investigation Board Report: • Especially in “Faster, Better, Cheaper” projects, communication of decisions to senior NASA and contractor management is essential to successful program implementation. • “Requirements changes without adequate resource adjustments” indirectly contributed to the failure. • “Inadequate engineering discipline” indirectly contributed to the failure. • “The Government and the contractor must be clear on the mutual roles and responsibilities of all parties, including the level of reviews and what is required of each side and each participant in the Integrated Product Development Team.”

28. From the “Faster, Better, Cheaper” Study (Briefing by Tony Spear): • NASA must pick capable PMs. PMs should be “certified.” • Important to communicate project risks to project team, senior management, and to the public. PMs should project a “risk profile” or “risk signature” at start of project, monitor for changes over life of project and explain them. • Peer reviews must include the “right” people. • For a lander mission, it’s important to have telemetry on spacecraft descent. • PMs must pick capable project teams. Certification of project team members should be considered.

29. Orlando Figueroa's 5 major points • Engineering Excellence in NASA • Advance Engineering excellence in NASA & Strengthen Systems Engineering • Process Documentation • PAPAC (Agency -wide process) Policy 7120 • Promote infrastructure to move to a collaborative environment • Advanced Engineering Environments • NASA Collaboration with National & International bodies(i.e. INCOSE) • Stimulate NASA Engineering participation in National Academy of Engineering

30. How does INCOSE Advance the SE State of the Art? • Through innovative INCOSE Technical Board Products & Services • Provide Products and services by INCOSE Working Groups & Interests Groups • Examples

31. Technical Committees Hierarchy Diagram Technical Committees Technical Board Education & Research Technical Committee SE Applications Technical Committee Measurement Technical Committee Process & Methods Technical Committee Standards Technical Committee Education Development Working Group Comm & Public Internet Working Group Capability Assessment Working Group Principles Working Group SE Management Technical Committee Space Systems Working Group Concepts & Terms Working Group Measurement Working Group Systems Architecture Working Group Requirements Working Group Resource Mgmt. Working Group Education Measurements Working Group Human Systems Working Group Modeling & Tools Technical Committee Telecommunications. Working Group Risk Management Working Group Systems & Supportability Interface Research Working Group (SECOE) SE Handbook Working Group Tools Database Working Group Joint Comm. Aircraft Working Group SE Mgmt Methodology Working Group SE and the Internet Interest Group Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SE BOK) Working Group Tools Integration Working Group Environmental Systems Working Group Verification & Validation Interest Group Model-Driven System Design Working Group Motor Vehicles. Interest Group Infrastructure Systems Working Group Configuration Mgmt. Interest Group Information Model & Process Working Group Railway Transportation Interest Group Health Care Interest Group Soft Systems Interest Group 1.2

32. Systems Engineering Applications Technical Committee (SEATC) Excerpts from: International Workshop Summary Presentation Mesa, AZ January 2001 Dr. William Mackey, Chair Ralph Godau, Co-Chair Scott Jackson, Co-Chair Pat Sweeney, Co-Chair

33. Systems Engineering Applications Technical Committee Charter • Foster formation and operation of working groups and interest groups • Specific application domains • Across domains • Examine systems engineering tools, techniques, and processes within specific application domains • WG/IGs grow from a core WG (the CPIWG) into specific application domain WG/IGs

34. Interfaces With Other Technical Committees and Working Groups Education and Research Modeling and Tools Processes and Methods SE Management Communications Measurement Standards Cross Applications Commercial and Public Interest Commercial Aircraft Environmental Systems Infrastructure Systems Engineering Resource Management Space Systems Telecommunications Health Care Motor Vehicles Railway Transportation INSIGHT V1-I3-1998 Joint Symposium Panel UMUC Profiles Specific Applications Aircraft Guidelines UNLV Seminar INSIGHT V2-I2-1999 INSIGHT V3-I3-2000 U. Birming Rail Activity

35. Where We Are Today • Transportation Sector—Ashok Jain • Joint Commercial Aircraft Working Group (JCAWG)— Greg Mathers, and Erwin Duurland • Motor Vehicles Interest Group (MVIG)—Paul Berry • Railway Transportation Interest Group (RWTIG)—John Williams and Jeff Allan • Resources Sector—Ralph Godau • Infrastructure Systems Engineering Working Group (ISEWG)—Pat Sweeney and Ralph Godau • Resource Management Working Group (RMWG)— Ted Dolton and Bill Cutler • Environment Systems Working Group (ESWG)—Ralph Hill

36. Where We Are Today (Cont’d) • Public Services Sector—Pat Sweeney • Commercial and Public Interest Working Group—Jerry Bauknight and William Mackey • Space Systems Working Group (SSWG)—David Durham and Ray Granata • Telecommunications Working Group (TELWG)—Martin Warner and Ruediger Kaffenberger • Health Care Interest Group (HCIG)—John Zaleski and Orlando Illi

37. SEATC Accomplishments • Approximately 242 SE applications papers have been presented in 20 commercial and public interest domains at the Symposia from 1992 to 2000 • The SEATC has offered application specific sessions at the symposia since 1996 • Nine symposia panels and five regional seminars in commercial and public interest domains have been presented

38. SEATC Accomplishments (Cont’d) • Key products include: • SE Applications Profiles Document (Version 3.0 on WEB) • SE Applications Organization Document (Version 1.0 on WEB) • Edited three commercial themed issues of INSIGHT (1998. 1999, 2000) • Framework for the Application of SE in the Commercial Aircraft Domain (Version 1.2 Released in July 2000) • Telecommunications Industry Application Guidebook (TBD) • Space Systems Application Guidebook (TBD) • 44 professional papers and 5 SE Applications Panels were conducted at the Minneapolis, MN Symposium • Several volunteer SE projects are underway in San Francisco Bay Area Chapter and other local chapters

39. Systems Engineering Applications Domains * * * 1. Agriculture 14. Housing and Building Systems 2. Commercial Aircraft 15. Information Systems 3. Commercial Avionics 16. Manufacturing 4. Criminal Justice and Legal 17. Medical Devices Systems 18. Motor Vehicles 5. Drug Abuse Prevention 19. Natural Resource Management 6. Emergency Systems 20. Political and Public Interest 7. Energy Systems 8. Environment Restoration 21. Service Industries 9. Facilities Systems Engineering 22. Space Systems 10. Food Service 23. Telecommunications 11. Geographic Information Systems 24. Transportation 12. Health Care 25. Urban Planning 13. Highway Transportation Systems 26. Waste Management and Disposal * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Applications domains currently represented in document

40. Standards Technical Committee January 2001 James Martin, Chair John Velman, Co-Chair Alain Faisandier, Co-Chair 1.1

41. Current SE Standards Co-developed by INCOSE • ANSI/EIA-632 • Processes for Engineering a System, Dec 1998 • www.geia.org/eoc/G47/main.html • EIA/IS-731 • Systems Engineering Capability Model, Dec 1998 • www.geia.org/eoc/G47/main.html • IEEE 1220 • Application and Management of the Systems Engineering Process, 1998 • ECSS-E-10A • System Engineering, Apr 1996 • European Cooperation for Space Standardization • www.estec.esa.nl/ecss/standard/status.html

42. International Standards(under development) • System Life Cycle Processes, ISO/IEC 15288 • JTC1/SC7/WG7 • SE Capability Maturity, ISO/IEC 15504 (SPICE) • JTC1/SC7/WG10 • SE Data Exchange, ISO 10303-AP233 • TC184/SC4/WG3/T8 • Systems Engineering (Space Systems) • TC20/SC14 • To adopt ECSS-E-10 as ISO standard

43. Other Standards (under development) • Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) • National Defense Industry Alliance (NDIA) • Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) • System Architecture, IEEE P1471 • INCOSE Architecture WG working this task • Engineering Management Book of Knowledge (EMBOK) • IEEE Engineering Mgmt Society • Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK) • Project Management Institute (PMI) • Currently available, but upgrades are planned

44. INTERNATIONAL ISO JTC1/SC7, Technical Liaison Robert Halligan appointed by BOD Standards 15288/15504 under authority of SC7 working groups ISO 15288, System Life Cycle Processes SC7 Liaison, Robert Halligan ISO 15504, Systems Engrg Capability Model SC7 Liaison, Robert Halligan ISO 10303-AP233, STEP Systems Engrg Data Exchange POC is Sylvain Barbeau David Oliver, INCOSE Liaison UNITED STATES EIA G47, Systems Engineering Committee TBD, primary Richard Harwell, alternate AIAA, Systems Engineering Technical Committee Informal POC is Richard Harwell Formal liaison being considered IEEE, Systems Engineering Standards Committee Liaison being worked with Paul Croll Liaison Activities

47. Chapters - Technical Board Combined Efforts • Positive Steps taken for cooperative efforts • Potential Funding of Special Projects By Chapters • EIA AP233 UML Effort • GEIA G-47

48. INSIGHT Magazine for July Reports from INCOSE’s Technical Board, Technical Committees and Working Groups

49. INCOSE Technical Journal Quarterly Publication Refereed Journal Andy Sage GMU Editor

50. Commercial Aircraft Guidebook Draft Circulated for comment July 00 • DRAFT • Framework for the Application of Systems Engineering in the • Commercial Aircraft Domain • Version 1.1 • Jun 15, 2000