11/25/[email protected]. 11/25/[email protected] Note: The following charts are excerpts from a...

11/25/2005 [email protected] 1

Valuing Thinking Processes Valuing Thinking Processes Used In Systems EngineeringUsed In Systems Engineering

INCOSE San Diego ChapterINCOSE San Diego Chapter

Mini-ConferenceMini-Conference

Nov. 18, 2005Nov. 18, 2005

Jack RingJack Ring


Note:The following charts are excerpts from a much

larger set. These were chosen, 6/1/2012, for relevance to

Gene Bellinger’s STW forum.


My 3X3 Topics

Observing – the art of seeing what might not be readily apparent

Visualizing -- seeing something in your mind’s eye

Abstracting – looking at something complicated and find its underlying simplicity

Recognizing patterns – discovering connections between things previously perceived as unrelated

Forming patterns – combining two or more functional elements

Envisioning – ability to form a purposeful relationship between things that are otherwise unalike by analogic or metaphoric thinking.

Dimensional thinking – mentally mapping from a flat plane into 3 dimensions or through time.

Synthesizing – borrowing ideas from different sources to create something new and better

Playing – let’s see what happens if…


The Language of Thinking“We all started using our language for reasoning before we learned to use our language for the purpose of communicating with one another.

Reasoning depends on Knowledge. Also, reasoning can foster further knowledge.

Most knowledge consists of facts (concepts) whereas reasoning involves propositions among the facts.

The correct use of propositions and chains of propositions is critical to appropriate adult behavior.”

“Language and Human Behavior,” Prof. Derek Bickerton, U. of Washington Press, 1995


A Thinking Process Model

Fact stack

Functor stack

e.g. vocabulary (semiotic signs)

operands

operators

Concepts

Scenarios

Abstractions

Chunksa

a = Miller’s 7 2

Translating, Transpositioning, Transforming, Shadowing, Sorting, Clustering, Blending, Chunking, Abstracting, Role Playing,

Extensible, apparently without limit


Basic Thinking

Reasoning• Analyze – discern the elements (entities and relationships)• Synthesize – compose, per a procedure or to satisfy rules.• Compare – discern similarities and differences • Classify – discern similarities between A and the choices in a

Reference set (typically based on differences), e.g. allocating mail by Zip Code.

• Evaluate—not only noticing similarities and differences between A and B but also deciding the significance of A or B relative to some goal, objective or purpose. Also may involve predicting the value of the significance at yet another level.

• Either by Induction and Deduction – inferring the general case from a specific example. Or inferring a specific case from a general rule or principle.

FeelingIntuition


A Person Thinking About Systems• Person i

X + Y + Z = 6 2X + 2Y + Z = 9 3Y = 6

• Person j X + Y + Z = 6 2X + 2Y + Z = 9 Is Z an even number?

• Person k N entities R = N(N-1)/2 Relationship instances M Relationship types

More examples later.


N People Thinking About Systems: Influence Structure of‘Barriers to Communication in Group Problem Solving’

Demand for an answer too quickly (J-53)

Inadequately prepared facilitator (A-35)

Fundamentally different viewpoints (B-3)

Failure to listen

(G-6)

Need for power (H-11)

Demise of trust (H-1)

Resistance to change (I-92)

No personal investment

(I- 56)

Emergence of coalitions or subgroups (J-28)

Failure to voice real opinion (H-21)

Perceived difference in power between group members (H-40)

Existence of “win-lose” mindset (G- 36)

Lack of clearly defined goals (C-82)

Universal lack of necessary and accurate information (E-34)

Inadequate Physical environment (D-32)

Inability to have a supportive organizational culture. (H-46)

Legend

-- The arrow should be interpreted as: “Significantly Aggravates”

-- The tag after each statement indicates the category in which the item was grouped plus the tracking number for the item (indicating the order in which it was originally generated in the group process).

Warfield Interpretive Structural ModelExercise in COM 691,

Arizona State University(Updated 02/05/05)

11/25/2005 [email protected] 9Thinking About SystemsThinking About Systems


What do You Mean by SE?

CommunitySituationProblem Discerned

Problem System Understood

Solution EffectEnvisioned

Intervention Strategy

PSS S><R Specified

PSS Envisioned

PSS Designed& Architected Components

Specified - Developed - Assembled

PSS Tested

Operational Readiness

PSS Activated

POSIWID Known

OperationalResults

Context Adapted

Value of System Quantified

Effects on Problem Known

Focus on System

Focus on Purpose

Focus on Value

Evaluate

Engineer

Discover

System CharacterizedBoK Updated

S = Stimulus R = Response PSS = Problem Suppression System


•Control•Educing•Discovery

& Description

SE Field of Discourse

Problematique

Kinds of Systems

Kinds of SE

Kinds of Practitioners

H

M

LExtentVariety Ambiguity

•Prescient•Pursuit•Generative

Kinds ofTechnologies

ThermodynamicInformaticsTeleonomicsSocial Dynamics

Kinds ofInfrastructures

I&D AutomationPSE’s MediationeLearningValue Generated

•Cut/Paste•PSE’s•Critics

FixedAdaptableAutocataly

tic

FixedAdaptableAutocataly

tic

• = Endogenous, class, property = Exogenous, type, characteristic

PerformCollaborat

eCo-learn


Thinking about Learning

““Some things must be believed to be Some things must be believed to be seen.seen.”” –Ralph Hodgson –Ralph Hodgson

"It is impossible for a man to learn what "It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows." --Epictetushe thinks he already knows." --Epictetus


Value Proposition• A Systems Thinking Maturity Model is proposed.

– to classify the capabilities of SE practitioners and – to motivate their evolution to more effective levels.

• Concerned with thinking styles and learning styles of SE practitioner. – should not be confused with any process maturity model.

• Expected to improve SE projects, SysRealization projects and Operational Systems Effectiveness 3X to 10X.

• Based on research findings regarding the brain, the mind, knowledge production and utilization, dissolution of cultural inhibitors and the impact of semantic network technology.

• This strawman version has seven levels of distinction across seven factors.

• Must yet be subjected to vetting of its embedded knowledge claims. • This presentation seeks to motivate dialogue and trial usages toward

that end.


Systems Thinking Maturity Model, STMMstrawman version

0. Attendee: The ‘Cut and Paste’ SE

1. Intern: Student gaining supervised, situated experience

2. Apprentice: Learning by doing in a variety of situations

3. Practitioner: Engaged in reflective learning while doing

4. Mentor: Collaborating in reflective learning

5. Master: Educating the reflective practitioner

6. Fellow: Co-educating reflective practitioners


Seven Key Attributes

• Field of discourse: spectrum of knowledge.• Dimension: the variety in the situation, e.g.,

Warfield’s Situation Complexity Index, SCI.• Style: interpersonal, learrning, risk aversion, etc.• Requisite Attitude: a key to success• Ethos: Quality, Productivity, Innovation:• EDAC: error detection and correction• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP:

Ratio of Exemplar Worth to Subject Worth.


0. Attendee

Field of discourse = not explicitDimension: 1 – 2Style: Analyze, Compare, Classify, Evaluate, Synthesize (by Induction and Deduction)Requisite Attitude: Pessimism or OptimismEthics:

Quality = Close enoughProductivity = indifferentInnovation = n/a

EDAC: typo’sPerformance Improvement Potential, PIP = > 16


1. InternAdvanced student gaining supervised, situated experience

• Field of discourse = Engineering; solve stated problems by foreseeing ways of pragmatically applying technologies.

• Dimensions: SCI: ≈ 50• Style: Level 0 + symbolic representation and manipulation • Attitude: Optimism or Pessimism• Ethos:

– Quality = Work passes acceptance tests– Productivity = Keep pace– Innovation = Self-assessed

• EDAC: PSS characteristics• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP = < 16


2. Apprentice Learning by doing in a variety of situations

• Field of discourse = Engineering, Adoption, Adaptation

• Dimensions: SCI < 100• Style: Level 1 + contrarian• Requisite Attitude: Optimism or Pessimism• Ethos:

– Quality = Customer Satisfaction– Productivity = Keep pace– Innovation = Claims for PSS, Self-assessed for SE

• EDAC: PSS properties• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP = < 8


3. PractitionerEngaged in reflective learning while doing

• Field of discourse = IDEAL of PS and PSS• Dimensions: SCI(PSS) < 200• SCI(SE) < 100• Style: Intuitive + Level 2 + Janusian• Requisite Attitude: Optimism• Ethos:

– Quality = Pursuit of Zero defects– Productivity = Set the pace– Innovation = Measure for both PSS and SE

• EDAC: Interpersonal style, LUC• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP = < 2


4. MasterCollaborating in reflective learning

• Field of discourse • = IDEAL of PSS and SE • Dimensions: SCI(SE) < 200• Style: Level 3 + Hegelian• Requisite Attitude: Drive to create the future• Ethos:

– Quality = Achieve Zero defects– Productivity = Kaizen– Innovation = Foster knowledge production and

utilization• EDAC: Groupthink, Clanthink, Spreadthink• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP = < 1.4


• Field of discourse = IDEAL of BFC PSE

• Dimensions: SCI (SE) > 200• Style: Level 4 at tri-levels• Requisite Attitude: Drive to create the future• Ethos:

– Quality = Customer rate of growth– Productivity = JIT, minimum time, maximum retention– Innovation = Main focus

• EDAC: Magical thinking• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP = < 1.1

5. MentorEducating the reflective practitioner


6. Fellow Co-educating reflective practitioners

• Field of discourse = IDEAL of BFC SE and PSS

• Dimensions: SCI(PSS) > 200• Style: Conceptual Blending• Requisite Attitude: Drive to create the future• Ethos:

– Quality = Zero defects– Productivity = Exemplary– Innovation = Exemplary

• EDAC: Language of SE• Performance Improvement Potential, PIP = < 1.03

11/25/[email protected]. 11/25/[email protected] Note: The following charts are excerpts from a...

Documents

Transcript of 11/25/[email protected]. 11/25/[email protected] Note: The following charts are excerpts from a...