Flyer  Program  Registration  Hotels  Maps  Proceedings

ImageSSS-TripleLogo-New-720wide

Socorro Systems Summit 2016–Program

Download Printable PDF Program Here

Co-sponsors: INCOSE Enchantment Chapter and New Mexico Tech Electrical Engineering Department.
Practitioners gathering for knowledge exchange and development on issues of mutual interest.
Location: New Mexico Tech (NMT), Socorro, New Mexico.

Day-1: Choose four from eight ¼-day topic introductions, collaboratively setting objectives for Day-2.
Day-2: Choose two from eight ½-day topic workshops, for developing collective knowledge.

Organizers

ImageSocorroSystemsSummit  Program Committee

Collaborative Exchange at the Summit

Workshop abstracts below are suggestions by the moderators, but workshop participants will own the
agenda
. Moderators will instigate discussion with a brief introduction on the first day, and then turn the floor
over to participants for convergence on objectives for the second day. Moderators welcome pre-Summit
communication – see Program Committee listing for email addresses.

Systems Engineering Cultural Transformation
Ed Carroll, Sandia National Labs

A systems engineering culture is an umbrella of shared values and behaviors that transcends the individual
cultures of teams, departments, and disciplines—rooted in the appreciation of overarching system concepts
and system relationships. Engineering is an ancient discipline, but systems engineering has a history of only a
few decades. The primary benefits of systems engineering have been stated as the ability to control
complexity, improve communication, and prevent defects. Systems engineering and particularly model-based
systems engineering, is often touted as the approach to ensure high reliability from systems that are at the
same time becoming more auto-mated, adaptable, agile, and interoperable. These systems tend to also
become more complex system-of-system solutions.

If systems engineering is the approach to control this explosion of complexity and assurance of reliability, then
why is the transformation to a systems engineering culture so difficult? It has been said that determining the
return-on-investment for a transformation to a systems engineering approach is practical-ly impossible to
determine. What, then, is the paradigm shift that needs to happen to implement a successful systems
engineering culture? What is required for an effective transformation? What impedes the recognition and
realization of value here?

This workshop will explore individual and organizational challenges that need to be overcome to effect a
transformation toward a successful systems engineering culture.

Organizational Teaming for Joint Project Pursuit
Kevin Forsberg, OGR Systems, INCOSE Fellow, ESEP.

Joint project teaming brings together different organizations with diverse capabilities to satisfy a customer need
competitively. An “A” team covers all the project bases with specialty expertise, capability, and experience,
presenting no weak spots. Appreciating and seeking the values of joint-team strength can be inhibited by
organizational culture, tradition, and politics. Finding appropriate team members that can fill the technical gaps,
improve proposal reception, and/or deliver superior results can be problematic under time pressures and the
hurdles of new-relationship trust and respect development. There are awesome resources available for A team
configurations.

What are the values of joint-project teaming that can out-weigh the obstacles? What are the obstacles? What
requirements must be satisfied to encourage and realize beneficial teaming relationships? How might joint-
teaming opportunities be enabled and facilitated to compelling benefit?

This workshop will open the dialog, explore the opportunity, and identify means for advancing the pursuit of
organizational joint-project teaming.

High Performance Teaming
Dr. Celeste Drewien, Sandia National Labs.

A high performance team is a group of people committed to a common purpose, who consistently show high
levels of collaboration and innovation. A high performance team produces superior results and a sense of
personal joy in every participant - it takes the work out of work. There is plenty written on the characteristics of
high performing teams and high performance teaming. So why isn’t high performance teaming very prevalent?
Why isn’t it a compelling behavior that draws all of us in naturally? Is it a fault of leadership? Or is it a collection
of personal issues and systemic organizational conflicts?

What are the compelling personal values for working in a high performing team and what inhibits an irresistible
pull in that direction for all of us? What motivates people to create a team culture of high performance? What
personal issues stand in the way, no matter how much it is wanted? Claiming lack of enlightened leadership
and corporate strategic imperative is an excuse to live with the status quo. High performance teaming is fueled
most effectively by personal desire, personal motivation, and personal initiative, coupled with a trust-filled team
environment. Many of us have had the occasion to be a member of a high performing team, but all too
occasionally. If you’ve ever experienced it you know it’s fun, rewarding, and memorable.

This workshop will explore the personal and organizational inhibiting barriers, requirements for a personally-
compelling solution, and personal initiatives to make a difference.

Fail-Fast Rapid Innovation Concepts
Bill Schindel, ICTT Systems Science, CSEP.

Innovation delivers new stakeholder value, and includes discovery of new system configurations—including
those which are insufficient or inadequate. The value of well-organized exploration efforts is that they will, on
the average, produce higher-value results for a given investment of resources than other approaches. But “Fail-
Fast Rapid Innovation” cannot simply mean quickly producing a series of rejected options. The discovery and
experimental aspects of engineering are sometimes overshadowed by a belief that engineering proceeds only
by syllogistic reasoning from a known place and first principles to a new place, but that is not the nature of
innovation, which is itself not always so well understood.

If we must organize and direct resources into completely unknown territory, what roadmap can we use for
planning, budgeting, and scheduling? How can we optimize use of our resources so that these investments are
well-justified and understood?

This workshop will explore the nature and properties of the innovation process as related to effectiveness of
experimentation and discovery as key parts of innovation.

Systems of Systems Evolutionary Integrity
Dr. Scott Workinger, Workinger Consulting.

Evolutionary integrity in System of Systems is concerned with upgrades to constituent systems during
operation and mitigating disruptions that arise from asynchronous and unpredictable changes when
independent constituent systems change without warning. Effective integrity management seeks seamless up-
grades to constituent systems and the SoS as a whole. Yet, in practice, service-outage windows often don’t
accommodate major upgrades, and lengthening the outage can create an un-acceptable disruption to SoS
capabilities. Moreover, self-serving changes in constituent systems can interfere with total-SoS functionality.
Even with well-meaning efforts to manage constituent systems, emergent behavior from constituent system
interactions can arise unpredictably, creating serious disruptions.

In general, what are the barriers to integrity management in an SoS composed of independently-owned
systems? What inhibits sustained integrity in a complex collection of interacting systems and how can we
define integrity for an SoS with no central authority to approve changes? What are the characteristics of a
workable integrity management approach? Are these characteristics of effective integrity management
represented in examples that we can share? Are there general principles that we can identify and apply to
achieve robust integrity management?

This workshop will explore these questions and others that participants have, with the objective of profiling the
issues, converging on a set of general needs that an effective integrity management approach must satisfy,
and sharing knowledge and experience on approaches that show some effectiveness.

SE as Multidiscipline Enabler/Art/Science
Dr. Regina Griego, Sandia Nat’l Labs, INCOSE Fellow.

The branding of systems engineering in many companies and with too many systems engineers is that
systems engineering is about developing good process and enabling that process in an organization to achieve
systems that are delivered on time, within schedule, and meets requirements. While process is an enabler, it is
like the score of music that a good conductor interprets with talented musicians and instruments to deliver a
system that not only meets customer expectations, but indeed delights the customer and has an enduring
quality. The conductor (systems engineer) knows how to adjust the score for the effect they are trying to
achieve and integrates the musicians effectively based on their unique abilities.

Think about the systems that you are most proud of, or the times that you have been a part of a system
development effort that felt exciting, even exhilarating. Would you say they are works of art, or simply science,
process, and project management? Systems architecture and design are the most obvious areas where the art
of systems engineering is applied, but it is equally important to apply the art of understanding people and
teaming. In systems engineering you are working with at least two systems, the system you are delivering and
the system that is delivering. When have you experienced the flow as a systems engineer? How would you
characterize systems engineering in your organization: process and project management or a blend of art and
science?

This workshop will explore the art and science of systems engineering and the notion of the systems
engineering brand.

Agile Security Adaptable to Attack Evolution
Jack Ring, OntoPilot, INCOSE Fellow.

Agile security must be reactively resilient and proactively composable at the pace of unpredictable and evolving
adversarial attackers and their attack methods. The adversarial at-tack may originate from outside the system
or, particularly in system of system scenarios, from inside the system. This idea encompasses information
systems, cyberphysical systems, physical systems, infrastructure systems, and national defense systems.
Success demands close collaboration and co-learning by system engineering and security engineering
interests. System engineering seeks sustainable systems. Security engineering seeks sustainable system
defense. It takes both to succeed against agile adversaries. The respective practitioners march to separate
drum beats. Security engineering must educate systems engineers on the kinds and sources of threats and
needs for detecting and defeating them. System engineering must satisfy new demands on system
architecture, system design, systems engineering, and security engineering. All need to better understand their
requisite interoperability.

What stands in the way of synergistic engineering cooperation? What are the requirements for an effective
engineering-team approach? What can systems engineering do to enable and facilitate the needs of agile-
security engineers? What can security engineering do to enable and facilitate engagement with systems
engineers?

This workshop will explore values and needs for cooperative agile-security engineering, identify the inhibiting
barriers, suggest concepts that any effective solution must address, and open a dialog on potential solutions.

Agile Hardware Development Infrastructure/ConOps
Rick Dove, Paradigm Shift Int’l, INCOSE Fellow.

An agile development infrastructure provides an architectural framework for component interconnect that
enables asynchronous, incremental, and iterative component development. An agile hardware-development
infrastructure would facilitate asynchronous component testing, alignment with agile soft-ware development,
demonstrable and testable work-in-process of mixed component releases/prototypes/simulations, and
operational system evolution. But hardware development is very different than software development. Agile
software development relies on object-oriented infrastructure and web-page hyperlink couplings as
architectural underpinnings. Soft-ware developers are simultaneously designers and fabricators, and
incremental development lends itself to incremental test and demonstration. In contrast, hardware development
has issues of tooling; communication between designers, fabricators, and assemblers; and costly re-work.

An agile approach is beneficial when development occurs under uncertainty, unpredictability, and situational
evolution – requiring the application of incremental learning during development. What are the barriers to
incremental and iterative hardware development? Can concepts from product-line engineering, open system
architecture, or live-virtual-constructive approaches offer guidance? Are proprietary approaches the only
avenue, or is there opportunity for affordable common development-platform tools?

This workshop will explore the values, the issues, and the requirements for possible solutions.