0


展望2020年的未来

Looking Ahead to 2020
课程网址: http://videolectures.net/mitworld_rouse_lehman_skinner_stoewer_mo...  
主讲教师: Jr Robert Skinner; Heinz Stoewer; Rouse William B; Joel Moses David Lehman
开课单位: 麻省理工学院
开课时间: 2013-03-14
课程语种: 英语
中文简介:
系统工程(engineering)/工程(engineering)系统的实际实践者描述了年轻学科是如何塑造他们的大型企业的。在过去的10年里,大卫雷曼一直在Mitre公司内整合关键的系统工程思想。成功包括让项目领导人在政治和经济组织的背景下思考工程解决方案,并学习如何更好地沟通这些解决方案。Mitre已经与该领域的国防采办经理进行了交谈,以提取数据并创建模型,并将其传播给其他经理。但雷曼对美国国防部的收购方法仍然是大规模的、对迅速变化的形势没有反应感到失望。他想向项目经理展示如何“走出他们所学的东西”,并鼓励他们做正确的事情,而不是“遵守规章制度”。小罗伯特•斯金纳(Robert Skinner,Jr.)想知道工程系统的方法是否能帮助解决一些紧迫的问题:交通和土地的混合方式。例如,在城市地区使用决策,或地面运输的政府定价策略。斯金纳说,一个棘手的问题涉及到正确的分析范围。研究人员应该关注运输系统的组成部分还是整个企业?“当我们向下移动时,不确定性增加,社会系统和社会科学的作用进入其中;政治上下情况变得更加重要。”他补充说,“我们在政策世界中非常缺乏类似的东西来传递复杂的工程概念。如果分析远远超出了公众和决策者吸收分析的能力,那么一切都将化为乌有。“为什么这么多复杂的系统落后于计划和超出预算?”“Heinz Stoewer问道。Stoewer说,一行代码丢失会导致系统崩溃。大问题可能来自于人类在计算、会计或风险管理方面的缺陷。Stoewer认为,失败的另一个原因是项目经理和系统工程师“过于注重过程”,而且没有很好地协调一致。他们在项目的关键学科上可能缺乏足够的深度,导致产品设计或生产出现问题。为了提高成功的机会,Stoewer强调了早期阶段的重要性:“我可以告诉你二十多个处于困境中的项目,因为它们正在尽最大努力在即将完成的时候把事情做好。”对医疗、能源、环境、金融服务和军队的重大贡献。为了达到这样的效果,该领域应该关注“可能是系统架构的关键问题”。每一个工程领域都以不同的方式来思考架构,并且团队之间必须进行更好的沟通。摩西认为,教育者应该教授“什么造就了一个优秀的系统架构师”,而“系统思考很重要,但还不够。”一个优秀的系统架构师从整体上看待事物。摩西还指出,“一次性设计与一系列系统的区别”。
课程简介: Real-world practitioners of systems engineering/engineering systems describe how the young discipline has shaped their very large enterprises. For the past 10 years, David Lehman has been incorporating key systems engineering ideas within MITRE Corporation. Successes include getting project leaders to think about engineering solutions in the context of political and economic organization, and learning how to communicate these solutions better. MITRE has talked to defense acquisition managers in the field to extract data and create models that get disseminated to other managers. But Lehman is disappointed that Defense Department acquisition methods are still large-scale, and unresponsive to swiftly changing situations. He’d like to show program managers how “to step outside what they’ve been taught,” and create incentives for doing the right things rather than “sticking with regulations.” Robert Skinner, Jr. wonders if engineering systems approaches can help with some pressing questions: the way to mix transportation and land use decisions in urban areas, for instance, or government pricing strategies for surface transport. One nettlesome issue involves the right scope of analysis, says Skinner. Should researchers be looking at the components of the transportation system, or the whole enterprise? “As we move downward, uncertainty increases and the role of social systems and social science enters into it; politics upper and lower case becomes more significant.” And he adds, “We’re sorely lacking in analogs in the policy world to transmit complex engineering concepts. If analysis gets too far out ahead of the public’s and decision-makers’ ability to absorb it, it all comes to naught.” “Why are so many complex systems behind schedule and over budget?” asks Heinz Stoewer. A single line of code missing can cause system collapse, says Stoewer. And big problems can flow from human shortcomings in calculations, accounting or risk management. Stoewer believes another reason for failure is that program managers and systems engineers “are too process focused,” and not well enough aligned. They may lack sufficient depth in the key discipline of their projects, leading to faulty product design or production. To improve the chances of success, Stoewer emphasizes the importance of early phases: “I can tell you two dozen programs in trouble because they’re…making enormous efforts trying to get things right when they’re almost done.” By 2020, Joel Moses hopes that engineering systems will be recognized “as having made significant contributions” to health care, energy, environment, financial services and the military. To achieve such an impact, the field should focus on “maybe the key issue” of system architecture. Each engineering field thinks of architecture in different ways and groups must communicate better with each other. Moses believes educators should teach “what makes for a good system architect,” and that “systems thinking is important, but not enough.” A good system architect sees things holistically. Moses notes as well, “the difference between designing a one-off versus a family of systems.”
关 键 词: 系统工程; 运输系统; 风险管理; 金融服务
课程来源: 视频讲座网
最后编审: 2020-04-08:chenxin
阅读次数: 74