Systems Engineering in the News — INCOSE Chesapeake Chapter

Stephen J. Sutton, PE-Retired, ESEP — Stephen J. Sutton, *PE-Retired, ESEP*

When I directed the Systems Engineering Program at the University of Maryland Institute for Systems Research several years ago, my students had a regular weekly assignment to find “Systems Engineering in the News”. I wanted students to see that we can find systems engineering ideas, systems thinking, or the lack of such in the world outside of engineering. They diligently reported about books, various articles in newspapers, magazines, and other media and discussed how the information related to systems engineering and what they learned in class.

I thought of that assignment recently when I found two instances which made me say, “That’s really applying systems engineering principles.” In the Sports section of the Washington Post, an article about the negotiations between the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) and Major League Baseball (MLB) quoted the MLBPA Executive Director, Tony Clark, as saying,

“Every conversation about changing the game is implying on some level that something is wrong with it. For me the question is, ‘What has changed, and why has it changed?’ For me, once you answer that question, you can talk about what may need to be adjusted or more. Players are willing to talk about adjustments. Players are willing to talk about best ways to move the game forward. Players are also interested in talking about what the game has always been.”

*Major League Baseball takes a systems thinking view to changing the game – maybe more homeruns and less strikeouts*

If you follow baseball, you know that MLB wants to change the game: speed it up, get more action, keep fans engaged. In the Minor Leagues, MLB has started experiments that increase the distance between the pitching rubber and home plate and using an automated system to call balls and strikes, and the National League is considering the Designated Hitter – substituting a more productive hitter for the pitcher in the lineup. The discussion can seem a bit muddled without clear purpose in mind. So, when Mr. Clark says what has changed and why, he is really saying what requirements no longer seem valid and why? He is a stakeholder (or the players he represents are) and he wants to understand the basis for change and what the game will look like if the requirements get changed. I perceive that he advocates an SE approach: understand the problem, identify how the system should behave before looking at possible solutions. For the solutions to be tested, one has a basis upon which to decide if the solution has stakeholders support and meet their expectations.

*Understanding the human genome leads to the ability to edit hereditable characteristics – with the moral challenges, the approach to achieve this requires systems thinking*

My second instance involves the recent book by Walter Issacson, The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race. At the conclusion of the book, Mr. Issacson discusses the future, given what scientists have learned about using genetics and gene editing to attack viruses, create treatments and vaccines and the potential to permanently cure diseases or change human heritable characteristics. He advocates a well-conceived approach to applying this knowledge by asking society to decide how we envision the future and then taking slow, careful steps to achieve that future. Isn’t he just applying good SE practice to have stakeholders define their needs and then perhaps applying agile approaches to allow careful evaluation of each step toward the future?

To me these examples show that systems engineering practice is present in our society. If we SEs want to influence society, then we must engage with society to show that our approach and methods can help address many different problems. Take examples like those above and spread the word.