C00 - INCOSE SE Handbook v2a in Preparation for the CSEP Exam (Sat and Sun 2-day Course; Minimum enrollment 10)
John Clark, Northrop Grumman

Bio:
John O. Clark is a Chief Engineer with Defense Mission Systems, a Division of Northrop Grumman Mission Systems. He is located at the Warfare Systems Engineering Department in Virginia Beach, VA. John currently supports the CVN 21 aircraft carrier program and the NAVSEA PEO Integrated Warfare System Technical Director. He has over 40 years experience applying systems and software engineering to the acquisition, development, verification/testing, operations, and support/maintenance of military command, control, communications, computer, intelligence, radar, sonar, electronic warfare, identification, weapon, network, scientific, and information systems. John received a BS in Electrical Engineering from the Pennsylvania State University and an MS in Electrical Engineering from the State University of New York.

Abstract:
The goals of this tutorial are to: 1) provide a tutorial on the INCOSE SE Handbook v2a, 2) describe the CSEP process and provide sample questions, and 3) help candidates prepare for the CSEP Exam. This tutorial was developed by the Hampton Roads Area (HRA) Chapter of INCOSE.

SEA - SEANET Workshop (doctoral students)(Full Day)
Systems Engineering and Architecting Doctoral Student Network (SEANET) workshop

Time:0900-1600 (9 AM - 4 PM)
Location: Diego State University (SDSU)
Transportation: Public transportation will be available from the conference hotel to SDSU

Systems Engineering and Architecting Doctoral Student Network (SEANET) workshop
Open to SEANET alumni and students who are enrolled (or will be in Fall 2007) in a doctoral program in systems engineering or related field. Participants will receive more information upon registering.

F0A - Response Enabling Architecture & Design Principle for Agile Systems and Enterprises
Rick Dove, Stevens Institute of Technology

Bio:
Rick Dove is a Professor at Stevens Institute of Technology teaching graduate courses in Agile Systems and Enterprises. He is Chairman of Paradigm Shift International, a research and project management group specializing in agile enterprise strategies and systems. He has run companies producing software, manufacturing machinery, fine wine, rapid manufacturing services, strategic planning services, and interim executive services. He has led engineering, R&D, IT, information security, sales, and marketing in a variety of companies. He was co-principle investigator of the 1991 project at Lehigh University that gave birth to the concept of Agile Enterprise, and led the subsequent Agility Forum’s research and industry involvement activity. He is author of two books and over 175 publications. A full resume and publication list can be found at http://www.parshift.com/Files/PsiDocs/RkdBio.pdf

Abstract:
More than any other aspect, the architecture of a system determines its ability to respond to unforeseen conditions. Systems that do this well are called agile systems. They share a general set of common domain-independent design principles - whether they be weapons systems, enterprises, products, or development processes. This tutorial explores those principles and their application to a wide variety of system types, with real case studies. A distinction will be made between class 1 (reconfigurable) and class 2 (reconfiguring) agile systems. Minds-on activities will exercise the application of these principles. A distinction will be made between reactive and proactive response capabilities; showing that agile systems are both resilient and innovative as they dance with reality. Materials are drawn form the Agile Systems and Enterprises graduate certificate courses at Stevens Institute of Technology.

F0B - The Evolutionary Project Management Method: Practical Rules, Principles & Templates to Practice Evolutionary Project Management
Tom Gilb, RPL

Bio:
Tom Gilb is an international consultant, teacher and author. His 9th book is ‘Competitive Engineering: A Handbook For Systems Engineering, Requirements Engineering, and Software Engineering Using Planguage’ (January 2005 Publication, Elsevier)’ which is a definition of the planning language ‘Planguage’ and includes Evolutionary Project Management as a Major subject. He works with major multinationals such as Bosch, Qualcomm, Siemens, HP, IBM, Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, US DOD, UK MOD, Symbian, Philips, BAe, Intel, Citigroup, Boeing, and many others. See www.Gilb.com for much more detail, and free publications on Planguage

Tom has implemented this (Evo) method on a large scale at HP starting in 1988. There are 2 MIT/Sloan MSc Studies on the data from a large number of HP Projects (Bronson, Sharma) validating the characteristics of Tom’s method. He introduced the Evo method to over 25 real projects of Aircraft Engineering at Douglas Aircraft in 1990. At Wiki Tom is cited as the ‘Notable Pioneer’ of Evolutionary Processes. (http://www.logicjungle.com/wiki/List_of_software_engineering_topics) His pioneer Evo publications are documented in Larman and Basili: Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History, IEEE Computer June 2003.

Abstract:
Iterative, Incremental, and Evolutionary project management methods are increasing in popularity. This tutorial will focus on a set of practical tools for Evolutionary Project Management; spearheaded by the drive for quantified critical performance objectives.

This tutorial will supply the participant with the pragmatics of doing evolutionary project management. The Evo toolkit. How do you specify objectives that you can evolve towards in small steps? How do you specify designs that can be decomposed into smaller delivery steps? How do you specify and control evolutionary stakeholder-value-delivery steps themselves? The toolkit gives practical help.

Evo has major impact on the whole way in which systems engineering is carried out. All systems engineering processes (requirements, design, build, test, and quality control) are suddenly encapsulated into an early and frequent evolutionary result delivery step. If you know what you are doing, you will soon produce results for stakeholders. If not, you won’t; and must consequently fix your engineering processes and designs.

The Content - a toolkit.

1. Evo Policy template
2. Basic Evo principles
3. Principles for decomposing into small Evo steps.
4. Defined Evo processes (Agile and not so agile)
5. Templates for Quantified Requirements and Quantified Design
6. Templates for Quantified Evo step specification
7. Impact Estimation Table Evo project management
8. Organizational considerations when doing Evo
9. Evo contracting template

As time permits: Exercises in Evo planning.

H0C - Using Risk Management to Boost an Enterprise’s IQ (AM)
Mark Powell, SAIC, Stevens Institute of Technology

Bio:
Mark Powell has practiced Systems Engineering for over 35 years in a wide variety of technical environments including DoD, NASA, DOE, and commercial. His roles in these environments have included project manager, engineering manager, chief systems engineer, and research scientist. Mr. Powell began teaching in academia in 1980, and has been teaching Systems Engineering at the graduate level since 1989. He is currently a member of the Stevens Institute of Technology Systems Engineering Faculty. Mr. Powell maintains an active engineering and management consulting practice (currently in affiliation with SAIC), providing consultation to the Army’s Future Combat Systems program during 2003-2005, and now for the NASA’s Constellation Program. He is an active member of Sigma Xi, ISBA, and helped to found the Texas Gulf Coast Chapter when he joined INCOSE in 1991.

Abstract:
We manage risk every day of our lives. You would think all good SE’s would be good risk managers. Yet many enterprises fail because some unidentified or un-handled risk materializes. Many enterprises fail to take advantage of positive risks (opportunities) that could all but ensure success. Risk Management is not as easy as it seems it should be.

This tutorial reveals to both the new SE and the seasoned veteran looking for a refresher the secrets of Risk Management and how to make it work in an Intelligent Enterprise. We will review the basic concepts of formal Risk Management and how it is executed in Systems Engineering. We will cover in depth all seven areas of Risk Management: Identification, Analysis, Assessment, Mitigation, Accounting, Planning, and Communication. Each of these areas will be approached with a specific emphasis on how they work together to make an enterprise successful. Further, we will set up a framework for introducing Risk Management within Systems Engineering, to work synergistically with Project Management. And as icing on the cake, we will introduce some new methods for risk assessment that make the practice much more effective.

H0D - Model Based Systems Engineering For Project Success: The Complete Process (PM)
James Long, Vitech Corporation

Bio:
Mr. James Long is the CEO of Vitech Corporation. He has been a performing system engineer and innovator since creating the first behavior diagrams (then called Function Sequence Diagrams) at TRW in 1967. He played a key technical and management role in the maturing and application of that system engineering process and technology at TRW and Vitech. Mr. Long worked on many system developments with an emphasis on complex MIL/AERO, satellite, and C3I systems with embedded software for over 45 years. He is a member of INCOSE, active in NDIA’s Systems Engineering Division and its M&S Committee, and supported the OMG’s efforts to expand UML 2.0 to systems engineering (SysML).

Mr. Long has authored many technical papers and delivered tutorials in System Engineering techniques and applications to much of the Defense and Intelligence community. Mr. Long received the M.S. in Astronautics from Purdue and the B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from General Motors Institute.

Mr. Long has been elected as a Fellow of INCOSE and was also selected as an Eminent Engineer by Tau Beta Pi, the honorary engineering scholastic society. The eminent engineering designation is recognition for career achievement in engineering.

Abstract:
This basic tutorial identifies the elements and benefits of a complete, proven MBSE system engineering process, and demonstrates its tailorability and value for project success using vignettes from an information management system and a sample System of Systems (SoS) application. The tutorial illustrates how the model-based system engineering process supports both document-driven and model-based paradigms, whether in top-down, middle-out, or reverse engineering environments. It discusses how to know when each element of the process has been completed, and how to develop and validate functional and physical architectures using executable architectures. The requirement for concurrent engineering, the onion model, and synchronization of models and data are presented.

The participants will be introduced to a flexible system engineering process suitable for system development tasks across the complexity spectrum. In addition to the process description, the tutorial will include a sample solution to illustrate the recommended techniques, views, completion conditions, and products of an MBSE system development methodology.

This tutorial is focused on highlighting how the use of model-based systems engineering can meet the government requirements for delivering architecture framework products while allowing the engineering organizations (industry and government) to successfully perform the systems engineering required to develop an executable design.

H0E - AP233 Systems Engineering and Design Overview (AM)
Philip Spiby, Eurostep Limited

Bio:
Dr Philip Spiby is a key developer of the proposed International Standard AP233 System Engineering and Design. He was project lead for the International Standard Information Modeling Language EXPRESS, and has contributed to the development of a number of other Engineering Standards. He works for Eurostep Limited a small consultancy company specializing in providing Information management through data exchange and sharing to a large number of multi-national companies and Government agencies. As such he has worked for over 18 years in the Aerospace, Defense, Automotive, Civil Engineering and Pharmaceutical areas.

Abstract:
Many in INCOSE are investigating Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). MBSE has a number of components and required capabilities; a required capability of MBSE is the ability to exchange SE models between similar and dissimilar systems through data exchange standards.

INCOSE has been working with the International Standards Organisation (ISO) to define a Systems Engineering and Design data exchange standard. ISO/CD 10303-233 (AP233 as it widely known) is the result of this initiative. The standard supports exchange and sharing of Systems Engineering data between dissimilar systems used by different partners in a virtual enterprise. It therefore enables integrated product and project views in an enterprise development program.

The scope of AP233 is wide ranging, from the business data such as project management, issue management and risk management, through to technical data such as requirements management, system modelling (both structure and behaviour), trade studies and links to analysis, etc. AP233 builds upon and extends the capabilities in other industry standards such as STEP and PLCS. It provides a means of integrating product data from requirements, through systems engineering, including design, manufacturing into maintenance and disposal.

This tutorial provides an introduction to AP233, and how it addresses the needs of Systems Engineering and MBSE in particular. It is directed at Systems Engineers and Managers in all Systems Engineering disciplines. The tutorial covers the following topics:

• Motivation for AP233
• Key areas supported
• Scenarios where AP233 is being used
• The bigger picture: how AP233 is integrated with STEP and PLCS and its relationship to SysML.

There is no assumed pre-knowledge for the attendees of this tutorial. The learning objectives for the participants are to understand how AP233 can be used to enable communication internal to an enterprise or across the Virtual Enterprise and facilitate MBSE.

H0F - AP233 Systems Engineering and Design Implementation (PM)
Philip Spiby, Eurostep Limited

Bio:
Dr Philip Spiby is a key developer of the proposed International Standard AP233 System Engineering and Design. He was project lead for the International Standard Information Modeling Language EXPRESS, and has contributed to the development of a number of other Engineering Standards. He works for Eurostep Limited a small consultancy company specializing in providing Information management through data exchange and sharing to a large number of multi-national companies and Government agencies. As such he has worked for over 18 years in the Aerospace, Defense, Automotive, Civil Engineering and Pharmaceutical areas.

Abstract:
Many in INCOSE are investigating Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). MBSE has a number of components and required capabilities; one required capability of MBSE is the ability to exchange Systems Engineering models between similar and dissimilar development tools through data exchange standards.

A major issue with Systems Engineering tools is the number and diversity of tools in use within individual organizations and across the organizational boarders in collaborative projects. The use of standard data exchange mechanisms such as AP233 vastly reduces these problems when implemented. However, therein lies a problem, understanding of the standard data exchange mechanism can be costly and unless implemented consistently may not solve all data exchange issues. INCOSE, through this tutorial, are helping the COTS tool vendors and internal tool developers by providing training to understand and start implementing AP233.

This tutorial takes the basic concepts given in the AP233 Systems Engineering and Design: Overview tutorial and develops them to a detailed level suitable for implementers to start developing AP233 based tools. The tutorial is directed at the vendor community with COTS implementations of Systems Engineering tools and the internal developers wanting to communicate with COTS systems.

The tutorial will cover the following topics:

• Detailed walk through of the standard
• Data templates used in the standard
• Implementation methods
• Extension mechanisms
• Interaction with SysML

It is assumed the students have had some system modelling and/or implementation experience and attended the Free AP233 Overview tutorial. The learning objectives for the participants are to understand AP233 and to know how to start implementing AP233.

F01 - An Introduction to the OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML)
Sanford. Friedenthal, Lockheed Martin
Alan. Moore, Mathworks
Rick. Steiner, Raytheon

Bios:
Sanford Friedenthal is a Principal System Engineer for the Lockheed Martin. His experience spans the system life cycle from conceptual design, through development and production on a broad range of systems including missile systems, fire control, and IT systems. He has been a department manager for systems engineering responsible for ensuring systems engineering processes are implemented on programs. He has also been a lead developer of advanced systems engineering processes and methods including the Lockheed Martin Integrated Engineering Process, the Software Productivity Consortium’s Integrated Systems and Software Engineering Process, and the Object-Oriented Systems Engineering Method (OOSEM). Mr. Friedenthal led the Industry Standards effort through the Object Management Group (OMG) and INCOSE to develop a UML-based systems modeling language (OMG SysML™) that was adopted by the OMG in 2006.

object-oriented methodologies, and their application in a variety of problem domains. Previously at ARTiSAN Software Tools, he was responsible for the development and evolution of Real-time Perspective, ARTiSAN’s process for real-time systems development. He is an active member of the Object Management Group and chaired both the finalisation and revision task forces for the UML Profile for Schedulability and Performance and Time, and was a long time co-chair of the OMG’s Real-time Analysis and Design Working Group. Most recently he has acted as the Specification Architect for the SysML Submission Team.

Rich Steiner is an Engineering Fellow at Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems. He has participated in the INCOSE Model Driven System Design Working Group since its inception in 1994, focusing on pragmatic application of systems engineering modeling techniques. Mr. Steiner has given several tutorials on the subject of model driven system development. As of this writing, Mr. Steiner is serving as Chair of the internal Raytheon Systems Engineering Technology Network (SETN). He has served as chief engineer/architect for several naval electronics programs at Raytheon, and led the application of the Object-Oriented Systems Engineering Method (OOSEM) for a naval combat system development program. Mr. Steiner has been a key contributor to the requirements for SysML, and also the development of SysML specification. His main contribution to SysML has been the allocation chapter and the sample problem appendix.

Mr. Steiner holds a BS in Engineering from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA 1980) and an MS in Engineering from California State University, Fullerton (CSUF 1987).

Abstract:
The OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML™) is a general-purpose graphical modeling language for specifying, analyzing, designing, and verifying complex systems that may include hardware, software, information, personnel, procedures, and facilities. In particular, the language provides graphical representations with a semantic foundation for modeling system requirements, behavior, and structure, and integrating with engineering analysis. SysML represents a subset of UML 2.0 with extensions needed to satisfy the requirements of the UML™ for Systems Engineering RFP.

The SysML specification was developed by a diverse group of tool vendors, end users, academia, and government representatives. The OMG SysML™ Specification was adopted in May 2006. Several tool vendors now have SysML implementations.

This full day tutorial provides an introduction to how SysML can address the needs of the systems engineer. It includes background and motivation for the language, an overview of the SysML diagram types and language concepts, and selected sample problems to demonstrate how the language can be used as part of a typical SE process. Refer to the official OMG SysML website at http://www.omgsysml.org/ for additional information on SysML, including a summary description, publications, tool vendors, and the OMG SysML Discussion Group.

F02 -Architecture Frameworks & Modeling
James Martin, The Aerospace Corporation

Bio:
James N. Martin is an internationally known writer and lecturer on systems engineering. He wrote one of the most widely read books on systems engineering, "Systems Engineering Guidebook," published by CRC Press. His experience includes over twenty five years in systems development of telecommunications products and services (most of this with Bell Labs) as program manager, systems engineering manager, system architect, requirements manager, and lead systems engineer. His experience with technology includes mobile wireless, underwater fiber optic, satellite broadband wireless, reconnaissance sensors and distribution networks, and airborne network hubs.

At the Aerospace Corporation, Dr. Martin is a system architect for communications networks and space systems. He also teaches at The Aerospace Institute and at seminars around the world. He led the development of ANSI/EIA 632, the US national standard that defines the processes for engineering a system. Dr. Martin graduated with a PhD from GMU, an MS from Stanford and a BS from Texas A&M. He is a Fellow member of INCOSE.

Abstract:
Architecture provides the unifying structure (or roadmap) for exploration of the problem space and for characterization of the solution space such that better decisions can be made. Architecture is an arrangement of feature and function that maximizes some objective. This tutorial will describe fundamental concepts used in architecture modeling that will assist you in developing and using your own architectures.

The notion of levels in a hierarchy of architectures will be discussed along with how to use this to structure your modeling and simulation activity. The differences between enterprise architectures and system architectures will also be discussed.

The use of an architecture framework leads to a more model-driven systems approach and allows you to "discover" the essential attributes of the problem space that must be addressed by the system solution. Architecture models are where these essential attributes are defined and evaluated. This approach to architecting will be described within the context of the DOD Architecture Framework (DODAF) and other frameworks like the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) and the Zachman Framework. The various modeling constructs within the DOD Architecture Framework will be described so that you can see how a framework can integrate the overall systems architecting and engineering activities.

H01 - Integrating Systems Engineering with Earned Value Management (PM)
Paul Solomon, Performance Based Earned Value

Bio:
Responsible for Earned Value Management (EVM) on Northrop Grumman B-2, Global Hawk, and F-35 programs. Won DoD David Packard Excellence in Acquisition Award for co-authorship of EVMS ANSI Standard. Author of book, "Performance-Based Earned Value." Trained thousands in EVM in U.S. and India. Holds BA and MBA degrees from Dartmouth College and is a certified Project Management Professional.

Abstract:
This tutorial shows how to integrate Systems Engineering (SE) with Earned Value Management (EVM). Learn how to integrate technical/schedule/cost planning and baseline control as required by Federal Acquisition Regulation. Key SE work products to be integrated are:

• Technical baselines
• Product metrics for performance-based progress measurement
• Entry and exit criteria of technical reviews.

Guidance is based on SE and project management standards:

• EEE Std 1220
• EIA 632
• CMMI®
• Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®) Guide
• INCOSE SE Handbook
• Earned Value Management Systems (ANSI-EIA-748 (EVMS))

Link EV with all plans and schedules per DoD guides:

• Defense Acquisition Guidebook
• Integrating SE Plan into DoD Acquisition Contracts
• SE Plan Preparation
• Work Breakdown Structure Handbook
• Integrated Master Plan and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) Preparation and Use
• Risk Management

Examples show how to base earned value on progress towards:

• Decomposing, validating, and allocating the requirements
• Completing the enabling work products, such as drawings, and technical maturity of the system design
• Meeting the product requirements and expected Quality

The techniques are based on guidelines that enhance EVMS called Performance-Based Earned Value® (PBEV). PBEV guidelines meet the Office of Management and Budget requirement to measure progress in terms of "capability of the investment to meet specified requirements and quality."

Best practices, examples, and templates will enable:

• Tieing EV to requirements management and traceability
• Meaningful variance analysis
• Measuring rework and trade studies
• Tieing award fee or other contract incentives to:
• Success criteria of technical reviews
• Technical performance
• Integration of EVM, TPM WBS, IMS, risk management

Finally, learn to conduct or prepare for Integrated Baseline Reviews, technical reviews, and independent assessments.

H02 - Thinking & Learning- Outside the Box (PM)
Howard Eisner, The George Washington University

Bio:
Howard Eisner, since 1989, has served as Distinguished Research Professor and Professor in the Department of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering at The George Washington University. Prior to that time, he worked in Industry for 30 years as a research engineer and executive. In the latter role, he was the President of two systems and software companies (Intercon Systems Corpor-ation and the Atlantic Research Services Corporation). He also served on the Boards of Directors of 3 enterprises.

He is a Life Fellow of the IEEE, and a Fellow of INCOSE and the New York Academy of Sciences. He is also a member of Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Sigma Xi and Omega Rho. In 1993, he received the Outstanding Achievement Award from the GWU Engineering Alumni. Dr. Eisner has written four books. Two relate specifically to systems engineering and its management. A third focuses on reengineering yourself and your company. The fourth book is called "Managing Complex Systems - Thinking Outside the Box", and was published by John Wiley & Sons.

Dr. Eisner holds the following degrees: a BEE from the City College of New York, an MS from Columbia University and a Doctor of Science from The George Washington University.

Abstract:
This tutorial addresses specific ways of thinking that are considered to be "out of the box". The domain of interest is systems engineering, and many related topics, such as systems integration, requirements engineering and the architecting of systems. These patterns of thinking are drawn from the author’s new book "Managing Complex Systems - Thinking Outside the Box". Mastery of these newly articulated ways of thinking, it is suggested, will help an individual think more effectively and an enterprise become a learning organization.

The centerpieces for new ways of thinking are nine specific suggestions that have been developed by the author during thirty years in industry as well as sixteen years in the academic world. They are called "outside the box" thinking since they may be seen, in many cases, to run contrary to conventional wisdom. Each of the nine is discussed in detail, exploring where they came from as well as several areas of application. Illustrative topics of interest include: (1) the integration of stovepipes, (2) requirements analysis, (3) systems architecting, (4) design by iteration (5) systems engineering problems, (6) software engineering problems (7) project management problems, (8) system acquisition issues, (9) system measurements, and (10) organizational matters associated with "out of the box thinking".

Three other subjects are included in this tutorial. The first expands the list of ways of thinking to other suggestions that have been put forth by persons other than this author. The second examines group processes and how they help or hinder overall decisions that might be made in a group situation. Finally, there is a brief discussion of how the new ways of thinking might contribute to achieving a learning organization.

F03 - From Research to Reality: Making COSYSMO a Trusted Estimation Tool in Your Organization
Ricardo Valerdi, MIT
Chris Miller, SSCI

Bios:
Ricardo Valerdi is a Research Associate at MIT in the Lean Aerospace Initiative and the developer of COSYSMO. He obtained his MS and PhD from USC and his BS from the University of San Diego.

Chris Miller is the Chief Technologist in Measurement at SSCI and the Chair of the INCOSE Measurement Working Group. He is a PhD candidate at George Washington University. He obtained his BS from Penn State University.

Abstract:
Participants will learn the fundamentals of systems engineering cost estimation through a hands-on approach to using COSYSMO. Previous experience in cost estimation is not required but it is assumed that students are equipped with a basic knowledge of systems engineering. The tutorial will provide an overview of the model inputs and outputs, a 10-step approach for implementing COSYSMO in an organization, and ways in which COSYSMO can be extended to improve its organizational usability. Application of the model will take place through a hands-on simulation highlighting different stakeholder perspectives. Teams will give a presentation based on their use of the model. Advanced concepts such as model usability will be discussed in the context of the simulation.

F04 - How to Define Practical Systems Engineering Metrics
Tim Olson, Quality Improvement Consultants

Bio:
Mr. Timothy G. Olson is Founder and President of Quality Improvement Consultants, Inc (QIC). While performing quality consulting, Mr. Olson has helped organizations measurably improve quality and productivity, save millions of dollars in costs of poor quality, and has helped numerous organizations reach higher Software Engineering Institute (SEI) maturity levels. Mr. Olson was employed at the SEI for almost 7 years in the Process Program, where he was a lead-author of SEI Assessments, SEI Software Process Definition Training, and the SEI Software Process Framework for the CMM®. Mr. Olson has been formally trained in Crosby, Deming, Juran, ISO, CMM®, and CMMISM quality approaches. Mr. Olson is also a Juran Institute Associate. Mr. Olson was a lead-author of a Software Quality Course for the University of Minnesota, and he is currently a member of IEEE and a Senior Member of ASQ.

Abstract:
Most organizations struggle with metrics. Some metrics are easy to collect but are not very useful. Other metrics are too expensive to collect. Some organizations collect too many metrics, and then don’t use them effectively. What is a good metric? What are the vital few metrics? This tutorial will describe "what is a good metric", and provide a baseline of the vital few system engineering metrics. An award winning Measurement Framework will also be described. The Measurement Framework is based upon the popular Goal/Question/Metric (G/Q/M) paradigm, the Juran Quality Trilogy, and the initial core measures recommended by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI). The G/Q/M Paradigm is applied to the goals of planning, control, and improvement and based on powerful metrics that have a proven track record. In order to illustrate the power of the Measurement Framework, real examples from industry are used. Finally, the Measurement Framework helps to ensure that all metrics are collected (e.g., on a form) and stored (e.g., in a database). There will be hands on exercises, as well as time for questions and answers.

H03 - Connecting Enterprise Modeling and Requirements Using an Object-Oriented Approach (PM)
Hermann Kaindl, Vienna University of Technology, ICT

Bio:
Prof. Hermann Kaindl joined the Institute of Computer Technology at the Vienna University of Technology in Vienna, Austria, in early 2003. Prior to moving to academia as a full professor, he was a senior consultant with the division of program and systems engineering at Siemens AG Austria. There he has gained more than 24 years of industrial experience in software development. His current research interests include software and systems engineering with a focus on requirements engineering, and human-computer interaction as it relates to scenario-based design. He has published four books and more than ninety papers in refereed journals, books and conference proceedings. He is a senior member of the IEEE, a member of the ACM and the INCOSE, and is on the executive board of the Austrian Society for Artificial Intelligence.

Abstract:

• How can the relation of the application domain in the enterprise and the requirements be better understood?
• How do business scenarios fit together with functional requirements?

These questions are relevant for industrial software and systems development but too many misunderstandings still exist with regard to OO processes and methods as related to requirements engineering and its embedding into enterprise modeling. All kinds of requirements typically make statements about the application domain, which should be first represented in an enterprise domain model of conceptual classes, in order to make the requirements better understandable. This tutorial explains also how functional requirements can be systematically derived from scenarios in the business processes.

Much as any other complex system, an enterprise may be better understood through modeling. Once an enterprise is better understood, it may be easier to make it intelligent.

engineering, the likelihood of such a fit is increased.

Object-oriented modeling offers a uniform approach to connecting enterprise modeling and requirements engineering.

H04 - Managing Technical Uncertainty (PM)
Robert Dale, MBDA

Bio:
Bob Dale has worked as a Systems Engineer in the defence industry since 1970, although his first job was to design software for a real-time control system on Concorde. In the 1980s he led a team developing a system to guide a low-flying aircraft or missile using a stored digital map; a system which is in service on several types of military aircraft in the UK and USA and is the part of the guidance system of the Storm Shadow cruise missile. Since then, he has had a variety of roles in missile development including Requirements Manager for a £1bn 6-nation contract. . He has been a member of INCOSE since 1996.

Abstract:
Systems Engineering is about the management of technical information concerning complex products and services. Inherent in this information is an element of uncertainty: uncertainty in the problem needing to be solved, in the solution itself and in the communications defining each of these. Uncertainty is not necessarily bad - it is better to question than to accept blindly - and it forms a stepping stone to reasoned certainty.

This tutorial describes a model expressing three "views". The first is a perceptual view of why uncertainty arises. The second is a state-machine looking at how the uncertainty changes with the actions you take. The third is a black-box view of how the development environmental influences your programme and the impact of your decisions. (Full paper attached) Recommended practises - based upon real-life events - are suggested against each part of the model to show their effects on uncertainty as a unifying factor that can be actively managed. The attendees are given an opportunity to try out these practices against a realistic business scenario covering a 3-year development programme.

F05 - Complex Systems for the Systems Engineer
Sarah Sheard, The George Washington

Bio:
Sarah Sheard is an INCOSE Fellow, Certified Systems Engineering Practitioner, and Founder’s Award winner. She has been an INCOSE member since 1992, when she won Best Presentation for her paper, "Capturing the Systems Engineering Process." Sarah’s enthusiastic and engaging style draws standing-room only crowds at every symposium presentation.

This tutorial was created in 2005 and since its first offering it has been presented in three countries on two continents.

Abstract:
This tutorial addresses the need for systems engineering to base its research knowledge on the sciences of Complex Systems, namely chaos and complexity theory, complex adaptive systems, networks, small world theory, and other related sciences such as cognitive science.

Today’s increasingly complex systems jeopardize the ability of systems engineers to solve problems using only the "bag of tricks" available in 1980. Systems analysts and managers are beginning to understand how to modify their understanding of systems and implement some of the network simulations and swarm technologies researched in the fields collectively known as "Complex Systems" to create systems of unprecedented and evolving functionality.

This is an evolution of the author’s 2006 tutorial on Complexity Theory: "What You Need to Know About Chaos, Complexity, and Complex Adaptive Systems to Do Systems Engineering Well in the 21st Century." Attendees of the first few presentations enjoyed the day tremendously but requested more systems engineering applications and information about them earlier in the day. The tutorial now weaves in systems engineering applications throughout the day rather than addressing them only in the last module of the tutorial.

Topics include principles of chaos theory; principles of complex adaptive systems; random, small-world, and neural networks and their use as information models; and the development and operation of systems of systems, in addition to describing and referencing changes to the systems engineering body of knowledge that will result from practice in complex adaptive systems.

F06 - Applying System Engineering to the Intelligent Enterprise and its Work Products
Charles Wasson, Author

Bio:
Charles S. Wasson, BSEE/MBA, is a member of INCOSE and the IEEE. He has held systems engineering, program and technical management, and functional management positions in several Fortune 500 companies. As a member of the Lockheed Martin System Engineering Senior Staff, his SE accomplishments include membership on the corporation’s System Engineering Subcouncil, leadership of the Education and Professional Development Working Group, and several multi-divisional teams.

In 2006, Charles released a new System Engineering textbook entitled System Analysis, Design, and Development. The text, which was published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (New York), is part of their highly acclaimed System Engineering and Management Series.

The International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) headquartered in Paris, France, selected the text for their most prestigious of four book types of awards, the 2006 Engineering Sciences Book Award. The IAA announced the award at their Congress in Valencia, Spain on October 1. Of particular significance, the IAA traditionally selects space-flight centric publications for the award; this text was written was application across a broad spectrum of business domains.

Abstract:
Intelligent Enterprises are characterized by organizations integrated into an architectural framework that enables a highly productive and efficient workflow to accomplish corporate goals and objectives. As a system, IEs understand what business they are in as exemplified by attributes such as: visionary leadership, integrated strategic and tactical planning and execution, clear communications, and continuous improvement, and stable growth.

Achievement of these organizations requires insightful, knowledgeable, leadership who can integrate, motivate, and focus resources such as personnel, equipment, processes and methods, and tools on design, development, and production of systems, products, and services that satisfy customer/user operational needs. In contrast, traditional "Business as Usual" organizations have shortfalls in these attributes as reflected by poor contract and task performance.

practices via a quantum leap from requirements to a point solution. The leap is rationalized on the premise of economizing and expediting schedules only to result in cost overruns, schedule risk from rework, or system failure with potential catastrophic consequences.

This tutorial illustrates how System Engineering concepts, principles, and practices apply to IEs and contract programs, as organizational systems, to achieve success as well as deliver systems, products, and services on-time, within budget, with acceptable risk. It illustrates how knowledge of what tasks must be accomplished can be tailored and scaled to deliver quality systems, products, and services that satisfy contract requirements and achieve IE goals and objectives.

H05 - Systems Engineering SE Tools- Applying Systems to Defining, Choosing, and Developing SE Tools (PM)
Mark Sampson, UGS

Bio:
Mark E. Sampson has worked in the CAD/CAE field for the 20 plus years developing and applying tools for EE’s, SW, and Systems Engineers-in such organizations as TI, GM, P&G, Intel, Caterpillar, Boeing, J&J, and others. He has a BS in Computer Engineering and a MS in Systems Engineering from USC. Mark sits on the Technical Board of INCOSE (International Council on Systems Engineering) as chair of the Modeling and Tools Technical Committee (which currently oversees the development of ISO STEP AP-233 data exchange standard for SE tools and the recently released SE Extensions for UML 2.0--SysML)

He is an adjunct professor at Southern Methodist University in the Systems Engineering Program.

Abstract:
This half-day course applies Systems Engineering (SE) processes, techniques and tools/methods to choosing systems engineering tools for an organization-doing two things at the same time-learning about available tools to help systems engineering and applying systems engineering processes to decide which tools to apply and how to successfully deploy them to your organization.

The tutorial walks through a systems process of defining the problem the tools will solve, defining what the tools need to do to solve the problem, defining and evaluating alternative tools, and planning SE tool implementation/deployment.

If your organization is thinking about purchasing and implementing systems engineering tools, bring a team to this tutorial; you will leave with the scope, a set of tool requirements for evaluation, an implementation plan, and justification/ROI for tools.

H06 - Architecting & Engineering Systems, Processes, & Organization Using the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) (PM)
Tyson Browning, Texas Christian University

Bio:
Dr. Tyson R. Browning is Assistant Professor of Enterprise Operations at the Neeley School of Business at Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas. He teaches Operations Management, Project Management, and Program Management in the MBA program and conducts research on engineering management, process modeling, product development, enterprise engineering, and systems engineering.

Prior to joining TCU, he was a Senior Project Manager in Integrated Company Operations at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, where he was the technical lead and chief integrator of the enterprise process architecture and author of company policies and processes driving the transition to a process-based company. Before joining Lockheed Martin, he worked with the Lean Aerospace Initiative at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, conducting on-site research at Boeing, Texas Instruments (now Raytheon), McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing), Lockheed Martin, General Electric Aircraft Engines, Sundstrand (now Hamilton Sundstrand), and Chrysler (now Daimler Chrysler). He has also worked for Honeywell Space Systems in Clearwater, Florida (where he grew up) and Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

Tyson received a B.S. in Engineering Physics from Abilene Christian University and two Master’s degrees and a Ph.D. from MIT. He has authored or co-authored over 25 papers on engineering management, risk management, the design structure matrix, organization design, process modeling, and value measurement-publishing in IEEE Transactions in Engineering Management,, Project Management Journal, Systems Engineering Technology Management Handbook, and others-including ten papers at past INCOSE symposia. A paper he co-authored for the 2005 symposium in Rochester received the best paper award. He is a member of INCOSE (since 1995), the Production and Operations Management Society (POMS), and the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS), and he serves on the Editorial Board for the journal Systems Engineering.

Abstract:
Enterprises must deal with a variety of complex systems, including their products, processes, and organizations. An advantageous method is coming into mainstream practice for representing and analyzing complex system architectures. This method, the design structure matrix (DSM), is helping practitioners plan and manage product architectures, organizational structures, and process flows at the enterprise, program, and project levels.

Akin to a traditional N2 diagram and the System2 matrix (SV-3) in the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF), the DSM is a square matrix that documents dependencies between system components. These components can be product parts, teams, processes, activities, or other elements. By doing some simple analysis, one can prescribe a modular system architecture or organization structure. Adding a time-basis enables one to prescribe a faster, lower-risk process. Because the DSM highlights process feedbacks, it helps identify iteration and rework loops-key drivers of cost and schedule risk. The DSM can also show how delays in external inputs, such as requirements and equipment, trace directly to increased cost, schedule, and risk. The DSM is concise and visually appealing and is in use in a number of industries, companies, and agencies. People have found the tool extremely useful for fostering architectural and organizational innovation, and for enabling the situation awareness and empowerment that motivates people executing complex processes.

This tutorial introduces the DSM and four distinctive applications useful to product developers, project planners, project managers, systems engineers, and organizational designers. Real-life examples are presented, along with a number of practical applications in the aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, information technology, and other industries. Participants will engage in hands-on exercises (building DSM models) and come away with a clear understanding of why dependencies and interfaces are important and how to manage them. Participants will leave with a course notebook of descriptive materials and access to free tools that can be applied immediately to projects for quick results and insights.

H07 - ISO/IEC 15288 & CMMI: Systems Engineering Similarities & Differences (AM)
David Walden, Sysnovation, LLC

Bio:
David D. Walden, CSEP, has over 23 years of industry experience. In 2006 he formed Sysnovation, LLC, a Minnesota-based consulting firm, to provide education and consulting services to help clients succeed in the areas of Systems Engineering, Innovation, Leadership, and Enterprise Transformation.

the Technical Director and Systems Engineering Lead for the GDAIS part of the United States Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) program, the Integrated Computing System (ICS). In this position, he led all the Systems Engineering activities of the FCS ICS program and had personnel in five different GDAIS and partner/supplier sites supporting this complex system-of-systems program. Dave was also the Director of Integrated Process and Quality at GDAIS and was responsible for creating a seamless set of common processes that were compliant with ISO 9001:2000, CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS Level 5, and several other external standards. Dave also worked at McDonnell Aircraft Company (now part of Boeing) in St. Louis for 10 years.

Dave has been a member of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) since 1994. He is past chair of the INCOSE Corporate Advisory Board (CAB) and served on the INCOSE Board of Directors (BOD). He was also a founding member and the first President of INCOSE’s North Star Chapter. He was also recognized as part of the first group of INCOSE Certified Systems Engineering Professional (CSEP) recipients. Dave is also a member of IEEE, NDIA, and Tau Beta Pi.

Dave has an M.S. in Management of Technology (MOT) from the University of Minnesota, an M.S. in Electrical Engineering and an M.S. in Computer Science from Washington University in St. Louis, and a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Valparaiso University in Indiana.

Abstract:
Two documents are poised to significantly influence the practice of Systems Engineering over the next several years. One is ISO/IEC 15288, "Systems engineering - System life cycle processes," which was released in 2002 as an international standard. The other is the Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI®), of which Version 1.2 was released by the Software Engineering Institute in 2006. As demonstrated compliance to these documents becomes more prevalent, it is becoming increasingly important for practitioners and organizations to understand their key features.

The purpose of this tutorial is to provide an introduction to the key Systems Engineering aspects of ISO/IEC 15288 and the CMMI®. The focus will be on the required activities outlined in the two documents and how they fit in to the overall Systems Engineering process. The tutorial will also highlight some of the key similarities and differences between the two documents with respect to the discipline of Systems Engineering.

The learning objectives of this tutorial include:

• An introductory-level overview of these two important documents
• Instilling an understanding of the Systems Engineering aspects of these two documents
• Understanding the similarities and differences in how Systems Engineering is treated in each document
• Practical advice on how to apply this information as a practitioner

Participants of this tutorial will also participate in several in-class exercises to solidify the key Systems Engineering aspects of ISO/IEC 15288 and the CMMI®.

®Capability Maturity Model and CMMI are registered marks of Carnegie Mellon University

H08 - Managing Requirements Risk (AM)
David Gelperin, Clear Specs Enterprises

Bio:
David Gelperin is Chief Technology Officer of ClearSpecs Enterprises. He has more than 35 years experience in software engineering with an emphasis on software quality, verification, and testing and software process engineering. David cofounded Software Quality Engineering and catalyzed the launch of Better Software magazine. He chaired the working groups that developed the ANSI/IEEE standards on software testing - 829 on software test documentation and 1008 on software unit testing. David received a PhD in Computer Science from the Ohio State University. More information is available at www.clearspecs.com under the About tab.

Abstract:

The Problem

Requirements development is hard.

• Fred Brooks is still right: The hardest single part of building a software system is deciding precisely what to build

• Arthur Schlesinger is right: … the possibilities of the future are more various than the human intellect is designed to conceive

• Specification is hard: Ambiguity is the rule, not the exception. The devil’s in the details

• Checking is hard: "Best practice" reviews miss 2/3 of the defects - Gilb

Requirements development is very hard.

• Some measures
• types of info (~40)
• discovery techniques (~20)
• recording techniques (~30)
• checking techniques (~50)
• Each project is a new puzzle
• Learning and change happen
• Human factors get in the way

Major requirements-related problems remain, especially on large projects, even after using basic development and management practices such as: (1) identifying enterprise needs and opportunities (2) identifying and involving critical stakeholders (3) defining vision and scope (4) making a business case (5) discovering, specifying, prioritizing, and verifying requirements, and (6) managing versions and changes.

Some (e.g., in the agile community) believe that large-scale requirements cannot be done effectively - and they may be right. History provides strong evidence for this view. A different interpretation of history is that just doing the basics is not enough.

Sound requirements development practices must be supplemented with focused and proactive Requirements Risk Management (RRM). Focus is provided by knowledge of errors (root causes), defects, and failures that are likely to occur during requirements development.

This presentation will survey 25 general tactics for RRM. You will learn about tactics for preparing, staffing, and planning for RRM, avoiding requirements risk, preventing and detecting requirements defects, and mitigating requirements-based failures.

H09 - Enterprise Architecture Standards for Intelligent Enterprise SE (AM)
Richard Martin, Tinwisle Corporation
Edward Robertson, Indiana University;
L. Mark Walker, Lockheed Martin Corporation

Bios:
Richard Martin is President of Tinwisle Corporation in Bloomington, Indiana, USA, where he manages a staff responsible for the provisioning of information systems services focused on enterprise integration to companies in the manufacturing, distribution, and services sectors. Prior to forming Tinwisle in 1981 he spent 15 years providing and managing the design and construction of automated research laboratory instrumentation at Indiana University. Mr. Martin is a senior member of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, and member of IEEE, ACM, and INCOSE. In addition to his corporate duties he participates in an active research program, in conjunction with the Computer Science Department at Indiana University, to formalize the frameworks now in use for the management of model-based artifacts created in the course of enterprise operations. His professional activities include participation in the USTAG of ISO TC184/SC5 as Convener of WG1. His public service includes a current appointment to the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals of Monroe County, Indiana.

Edward Robertson is Professor of Computer Science and Associate Dean of the School of Informatics, Indiana University. He leads the Database Interest Group within the Computer Science Department where he has taught since 1978 and served as Chairmen from 1982 - 1988. His course on "Software Engineering of Information Systems" is a unique 2-semester, project oriented learning experience for both graduate and undergraduate students.

Loren Mark Walker has over 39 years of systems design, development, deployment, integration and testing experience in DoD and defense industry organizations. He has published several articles on systems engineering, presented papers at INCOSE Symposia and is a contributor to three international systems engineering standards developments (ISO, ANSI/GEIA and IEEE). Mr. Walker has founded systems engineering working groups in DoD and defense organizations, has led the development of and taught systems engineering courses, and continues to support systems engineering through INCOSE, LMC and his customer. He is presently the INCOSE Liaison to the ISO/TC184/SC5 focused on Enterprise Architectures Standards and is a member of several INCOSE working groups and the Standards Technical Committee. He has been the President of the INCOSE Chesapeake Chapter twice. Mr. Walker is a Lockheed Martin employee.

Abstract:

For over 20 years, participants from the domain of industrial automation have been using and codifying standards related to the architecture and modeling of complex systems. Under the auspices of the ISO, Working Group 1 (WG1) of TC184/SC5 has published a set of international standards that specify rules, requirements, framework, and modeling constructs for use in developing enterprise architectures and models for complex intelligent systems of systems applications.

While the focus area has been industrial automation, these standards have broad application for any complex system, enterprise, or business sector that involves human activity coupled with software and hardware. The ISO effort is driven by the desire to achieve executable models capable of integrating humans and machinery into large interoperable systems for delivery of products and services in intelligent enterprises. Particular attention is given to the people aspect of enterprise scale systems and the criticality of operational responsibility and authority.

The standards to be presented and discussed are:

ISO 14258:1998 Industrial automation systems - Concepts and rules for enterprise models, which provides a foundation for system architecture;
ISO 15704:2000 Industrial automation systems - Requirements for enterprise-reference architectures and methodologies, which establishes an architectural and model-based reference;

ISO 19439:2006 Enterprise integration - Framework for enterprise modeling, which articulates a unified approach for enterprise models; and,
ISO/FDIS 19440 Enterprise integration - Constructs for enterprise modeling, which provides a set of modeling elements for the unified framework.

Each of these standards builds upon the requirements of its predecessor and other international standards. Informative annexes extend the normative content and provide guidance for their practical application. The principles and concepts that ground these standards can be applied to intelligent enterprise domains (e.g., where IT is a critical aspect) and form the basis for broader application. Comparisons to several domain efforts are discussed.