Vol. 2, No. 2, Summer 2007

The SDM Pulse@MITThe newsletter of Massachusetts Institute of Technology’sSystem Design and Management Program

MIT System Design and Management

I N T H I S I S S U E

Virtual Mission Planner WinsSoldier Design Competition

1

Welcome

2

Alumnus Adds Value atEaton Corporation

3

Women in SDM

4

The Core: SystemsEngineering

6

Can Systems TheoryProduce Better Medicines?

7

INCOSE Symposium

8

$100K Finalist Team

8

SEARI Research

9

Hiring SDM Grads

10

Calendar

12

Systems approach helpsteam win Soldier Design prize

By Arthur Mak, SDM ’07Over the past several months, I have found

my SDM learnings invaluable for navigating

the complex technical and managerial chal-

lenges of designing a new product: a

portable mission planner that allows individ-

ual soldiers to rehearse missions in a virtual

environment.

This work was done for MIT’s Soldier Design

Competition (SDC), whose goal is to gener-

ate new products and systems that will

enhance soldier survivability and combat

effectiveness. Sponsored by MIT’s Institute

for Soldier Nanotechnologies, the competi-

tion is open to teams from MIT and from the

U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

Two talented undergrads, Brian Wong and

Albert Park, generated the core idea—a

spherical, surrounding computer environ-

ment to replace computer monitors, which

are so limited in scope. They presented the

concept for this complex system of integrat-

ed hardware and software to SDC judges,

and the Atmosphere Systems team

advanced to the finals.

With only five months to take the project from

concept to working prototype, Wong and

Park needed more resources. They asked

Major Nathan Minami, a 14-year Army veter-

an and SDM ’06 student, to be the team’s

mentor and lead user. Undergrads Jeremy

Richardson, Aseem Kishore and Jason Vuu

were recruited to develop hardware and soft-

ware components. I was brought onboard to

help with overall technology and IP develop-

ment, using my system design background.

The key ingredient of the display system is its

carefully conceived system architecture,

which is built around the core display

> continued on page 11

SDM fellow Arthur Mak, second from left, poses with his prize-winning team. They are (from left) Aseem Kishore, Jeremy Richardson, SDM fellow Nathan Minami, Jason Vuu, Brian Wong and Albert Park.

Photo by Forrest Liau

Welcome to the third issue of the SDM Pulse@MIT. In an effort to expand the views andperspectives we are offering of the SDM program, this edition introduces three ongoingseries. I hope you will follow along for the next few issues as we explore the depth of theprogram through these articles.

One series examines the core courses in SDM, starting with systems engineering; the article in this issue centers on a case study that will be presented this summer byCummins Inc. (page 6). We are also highlighting the women in SDM with an article onwomen currently in the program (page 4). In our third series, we are planning to follow oneof our students as he goes through SDM, developing his course interests and their appli-cations within the context of product development in the pharmaceutical industry (page 7).

In other news, you will read about how one of our SDM alumni, Bill Taylor, has progressedin his career since graduating. (We are always interested in hearing about industry’s expe-riences with SDM graduates—so please contact us with your thoughts.) In addition, anarticle by SDM fellow Arthur Mak will give you some insight on the rewards possible forenterprising students in the MIT SDM environment, as well as the value they can bring tosociety.

This issue also contains information on: the System Engineering Advanced ResearchInitiative (SEARI) at MIT; the upcoming annual meeting of the International Conference onSystem Engineering (INCOSE); hiring SDM fellows; and upcoming events. Enjoy!

Best regards,

John M. GraceIndustry CodirectorMIT System Design and Management Programjmgrace@mit.edu

Welcome

Publisher: John M. Grace, MIT SDM Industry Codirector

Editors: Kathryn O’Neill and Lois Slavin, Communications Director, MIT EngineeringSystems Division

Contributors: Ragu Bharadwaj, Aparna Chennapragada, Patty Eames, Arthur Mak, LindaNguyen, Donna H. Rhodes, William Taylor, Helen Trimble, Kelly Yedinak

Proofreader: Patty Eames

Graphic design: Janice Hall, TTF Design

Printer: Arlington Lithograph

MIT’s SDM program is cosponsored by the MIT Sloan School of Management and MIT’sSchool of Engineering. SDM resides within MIT’s Engineering Systems Division.

For further information on MIT System Design and Management program, visitsdm.mit.edu.

(c) Copyright 2007 MIT. All Rights Reserved

The SDM Pulse@MITVOLUME 2, NUMBER 2 SUMMER 2007

2

3

SDM fuels engineer’s move to technical management

By William Taylor, chief engineer for engine integration at Eaton Corporation and SDM alumnus

I graduated from MIT’s System Design and Management

Program in 2002. Since that time, my career has taken me

to Eaton Corporation in Southfield, Michigan, where I'm

chief engineer for engine integration in Eaton's truck division.

Although my job and responsibilities have changed a lot over

the years, I still use lessons from the SDM program every

day.

Before SDM, I was working as an engineer in the Advanced

Technologies Group at ArvinMeritor, performing CFD and

FEA simulations for advanced products. At that time I was a

capable engineer, but I had never been a manager of peo-

ple. When I returned to the company after the SDM pro-

gram, I was given oversight of a new R&D program with six

to seven engineers.

After a couple years, I moved up to become a director of

R&D at ArvinMeritor’s emissions technology group, oversee-

ing the work of around 20 people in our controls group. That

was a challenging role, navigating the development of new

technologies under the pressure of product deadlines. It

really required me to put my MIT education into practice.

In research and development, sometimes the best ideas are

hiding in the shadows. There were two engineers with a

great product idea—a concept for an emission-control sys-

tem that they had developed on the side. It was given the

green light by top management, and my team was charged

with making it into a product.

At first, the two originators were involved in every aspect of

the design—it was their baby. But as the team grew, it

became clear that these two people couldn't make every

decision. I had to increase the team, to 10-15 engineers.

And I had to transfer decision-making away from the original

two-man team and into a structured teamwide process.

I decomposed the full system down into four key subsys-

tems, using the DSM tool as taught in SDM. Because the

system was so new, it required

many judgment calls about which

components to lump together into

subsystems. Here, I relied heavily

on principles from MIT's System

Architecture course. In the end,

the system was broken down into

four key subsystems: combustor,

air subsystem, fuel subsystem and

controls.

Each subsystem had an owner, and each owner had design

authority over his piece. With this structure in place, the

experts called the shots, and my job became focused on

integration. For example, conflicts would arise between the

air systems team (who wanted a small, inexpensive air

source) and the combustor team (who wanted more air for

more complete combustion). My job was to help them work

together—and sometimes, to force them to work together.

My SDM experience ultimately taught me how to manage

the people and the technology successfully. We were able to

create a viable product from the technology, and systems

thinking made it happen.

Engineering R&D isn’t the only part of my job that I do bet-

ter thanks to the SDM program. Tools from SDM also help

me interact with customers during the product design

process. In my current role at Eaton, we take a strategic

view of product design. This means developing a deeper

understanding of our customer and tuning our value propo-

sition precisely to their needs.

Ultimately, what's most important is for our engineers to

make decisions that drive value for our customers. When my

team members understand the customer, they can design

and develop products accordingly; I get involved only where

necessary. MIT gave me the insights and education to lead

a systems-oriented team.

William Taylor

SDM women offer perspectives on the program

Editor’s note: This is the first in a series of articles spotlighting women in the SDM program.

The women of the System Design and Management Program

are a diverse group of highly skilled individuals united by their

interest in stretching beyond technical competence to under-

stand and integrate whole systems for the benefit of their com-

panies and their industries.

Three women currently enrolled in the program recently took

the time to describe their experiences in the program for the

SDM Pulse@MIT.

Aparna Chennapragada SDM

’06 works for Akamai Technologies

as a software architect. She

received her master’s in computer

science from the University of

Texas-Austin and her bachelor’s

in computer science from the

Indian Institute of Technology-

Madras.

Linda Nguyen SDM ’07 comes

to MIT from Procter and Gamble,

where she is a senior product

engineer. She received her S.B.

in mechanical engineering from

MIT.

Kelly Yedinak SDM ’07 is a

deputy program manager at

Northrop Grumman. She re-

ceived her B.S. in electrical engi-

neering from the University of

Washington.

Q: Why is SDM the right program for you?

KY: In large corporations it is very difficult for engineers to getexposure to different aspects of an entire system. Most positionsare not highly interactive but rather require a lot of individual time

spent in front of a computer. I decided that I wanted more out ofmy career than a computer screen.

AC: I wanted to combine my interest and experience in tech-nology with relevant business foundation and managementskills. I considered regular MBA programs but preferred a cur-riculum more rooted in technology. I was also attracted to the"D" in SDM, because I have observed the increasing impor-tance of design and holistic thinking.

LN: SDM is a great balance between the two worlds. A tech-nical leader needs to understand the business side and beable to communicate in business terms. SDM provides ameans to evolve existing engineering skills into systems think-ing as well as develop the business mental models that engi-neers with traditional academic backgrounds often lack.

Q: What strengths (technical or business) do you bringto the SDM cohort or the teams on which you partici-pate? What strengths have you seen that others bringthat impress you?

LN: I bring more than eight years of product development andmanufacturing experience, as well as team management andorganizational skills. Maintaining balance is a critical part of mylife, so I like to work hard but play hard as well; I try to sharethis philosophy with my teams to encourage having fun whilegrinding away under the workload.

AC: My background in Internet infrastructure services andexperience in a start-up environment helps me bring myunique point of view to classroom discussions and projects,particularly in technology strategy and innovation.

Working with people from a variety of industries has helped meunderstand the commonalities and differences among differentindustry structures. From a commander who served in Iraq toan aspiring entrepreneur building solar generators in Africa, theSDM cohort is full of diverse individuals who have enriched mylearning.

KY: I am always thinking of all of the pieces of the system,rather than of any single one. Often I find myself being moreaggressive than ever before in challenging other people'sideas. But, I always listen closely to people's answers and tryto help them develop their thoughts and concepts. Knowinghow you get the answer is just as important as knowing whatthe answer is.

Q: Tell us about your best SDM experience so far.

LN: As grueling as it was, the monthlong January “boot camp”was extraordinary. Because most of us have been out ofschool for quite some time, the immersion was critical to 4

5

getting us back into student/learning mentality. I had forgottenhow much fun—and how much work—being a student couldbe! Nothing beats playing with Legos!

KY: I think some of my best experiences have come during“crunch time,” when I'm working with a group and must getthings done quickly. I remember knocking out most of a 10-page paper only hours before it was due, and having a yelling(but good-spirited) debate on an important section of thepaper with one of my teammates five minutes before turning itin. The fun part was not so much the yelling but that we eachimproved our own thinking and knowledge by challenging theother. This openness will help me help my colleagues at work.

AC: One of my best SDM experiences was the January bootcamp. The team-building workshops and the design challengecompetitions helped me forge a strong bond with my class-mates.

Another learning experience for me was my entrepreneurshipcourse. I worked with bright and motivated students acrosscampus to develop a business plan to commercialize researchfrom an MIT lab. This helped me learn about technology risks,market opportunity and raising capital. And, our business planwon an MIT $1K Award in the run-up to the annual MIT $100KEntrepreneurship Competition.

Q: What have you found within the SDM program thatyou would like to share with others?

AC: Professor David Simchi-Levi's class on operations man-agement was very stimulating and helped me understand thecomplex interaction between design, manufacturing, logisticsand distribution. And, Professor Tom Allen's class exposed meto some fascinating research on how organizational structureand architecture can affect innovation.

LN: The diversity of our cohort has impressed me the most:backgrounds, country of origin, as well as industries. I havelearned so much from my classmates, in and out of the class-room. SDM is truly a global environment.

KY: I wish everyone could take courses that teach, as SDMdoes, the value of looking forward. I want my company's atti-tude, and the attitude of those around me, to always be think-ing about the future and how to be better, rather than how tobe just good enough.

Q: How do you anticipate the SDM program will helpyou meet the challenges you will face in your career?

LN: I have always been a systems person at heart, needing tosee the bigger picture to put context around the engineeringdetails. SDM will develop my systems mind, providing mewith the skills and mental frameworks to manage more andmore complex projects throughout my career. The networking

and relationships established from SDM will be invaluable aswell.

AC: Going forward, I see three major trends. One, the role oftechnology in almost every industry is increasingly central. Thiswill require future leaders to apply business skills not in a vac-uum but within the context of technology. Two, the complexityof systems is only going to grow. It’s critical that we applyholistic thinking and understand all the factors (regulatory, envi-ronmental, cultural, technological and business) to solve prob-lems. Finally, organizations are increasingly global. We asfuture leaders need to be able to build strong teams and col-laborate effectively across countries, cultures and companies.

The SDM program and my experience at MIT helped me honemy skills along all these dimensions and I look forward toapplying this in my career!

KY: In the future I think the lessons learned in SDM will allowme to stay one step ahead of the competition, and keep thecompany that I work with at the forefront of technology.System design refers not just to a physical system, but also totechnology ecosystems, organizational structure, technologyevolution and much more. Having a thorough knowledge ofhow to analyze a system will allow me to lead a company todevelop systems that are often first to market, but more impor-tantly will dominate their market.

The Women of SDM> 16 women are currently enrolled in SDM, out of a total

enrollment (cohorts 2006 and 2007) of 118.

> 5 already have advanced degrees.

> 6 come from foreign countries.

> They come from as close as Greater Boston and from asfar as India and Nigeria.

> They have earned degrees in the following disciplines:Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering,Computer Science, Aerospace Engineering, Electronicsand Communication, Astronautical Engineering,Manufacturing Engineering, Applied Physics/Optics

> Their titles include:Systems Engineer, Product Architect and TechnicalLeader, Principal Systems Engineer, Space SystemsDesign, Senior Project Manager, Driveline Design &Release Engineer, Company Commander

6

The Core of SDM: Systems engineering at work at Cummins

The challengeCummins Inc. is a global power leader comprising comple-

mentary business units that design, manufacture, distribute

and service engines and related technologies, including fuel

systems, controls, air handling, filtration, emission solutions

and electrical power generation systems.

In this case, Cummins was challenged to

develop a new turbocharged diesel engine

for the heavy-duty Dodge Ram pickup

truck. The engine had to be capable of

meeting strict 2010 emissions standards in

all 50 states. And, they had to work within

the context of maintaining and building the

Ram’s excellent reputation among Dodge’s

diesel customers.

Improvements in power, torque, low levels of audible noise and

imperceptible catalyst regeneration were also specified. These

goals were to be attained while providing the same or better

fuel economy as its current diesels while cutting emissions of

nitrogen oxide (NOx) and particulate matter dramatically.

The approachCummins not only built on its longstanding expertise but also

introduced a systems perspective into its development concepts.

The engineering team relied on Cummins’ intense interaction

with the customer throughout the project to define and refine

system requirements.

The team also developed a framework and architecture for the

entire engine system. This allowed the engineers to develop

the engine system concept and to identify significant suppliers

for critical subsystem development.

To meet the 2007 emissions regulations, Cummins employed

the following engine subsystems: cooled exhaust gas recircu-

lation (used for the first time in a pickup); new air handling con-

cepts, including a Cummins Variable Geometry Turbocharger;

and a diesel oxidation catalyst, diesel particulate filter and a

NOx trap for emissions control.

Understanding the interdependence of the various systems

and subsystems, Cummins engineers worked hand in hand

with the catalyst experts at supplier JMI to

specify the wash coat for the catalyst and

the NOx trap.

In addition, Cummins developed all of the

algorithms and software needed to control

the complex subsystems and their inter-

faces. This feature of their system develop-

ment program led to a significant

competitive advantage, which will be

emphasized in the case study discussion.

The resultsThe new 6.7L turbo diesel system for the Dodge Ram pickup

has enhanced combustion performance designed through

simulation and modeling of combustion kinetics and injection

pulse profiles. And, it utilizes a third-generation, high-pressure,

1,800 bar (26,000 psi) common rail fuel system from Bosch.

This subsystem is capable of up to five injection pulses during

a single combustion cycle in a cylinder.

Ultimately, Cummins was able to build a diesel engine consid-

ered the strongest, cleanest, quietest and best in class. The

new Dodge Ram pickup engine is the first to satisfy the strict

environmental requirements not only of 2007, but of 2010—

three years ahead of its time.

ConclusionAs the Cummins case study shows, significant technical

understanding is critical to the development of complex

Editor’s note: The core courses for the MIT System Design and Management Program are:> System architecture, which focuses on artifacts themselves and includes concept, form, function and decomposition> Systems engineering, which targets the processes that enable successful implementation of the architecture, and includes

QFD, Pugh Concept Selection and Robust Design> System and project management, which involves managing tasks to best utilize resources and employs tools such as

CPM, DSM and System Dynamics

This article, the first in a series on the SDM core, introduces one aspect of the systems engineering 2007 summer course: industrycase studies. These studies are chosen to show the applications of system engineering principles discussed in class. TheCummins Inc. case outlined below shows the type of creative and integrative system thinking that these studies highlight.

> continued on page 11

“Significant technical

understanding is critical to

the development of

complex systems.”

7

Applying systems theory to produce better medicines

Editor’s note: This is the first in a series of articles that will follow Ragu Bharadwaj’s progress through the System Design andManagement Program. In this piece, Bharadwaj introduces the problems inherent to the drug development activities of today’s

pharmaceutical industry. He hopes to find ways to improve these processes through the strategies and techniques taught in SDM.Current and alumni SDM fellows are invited to contribute their thoughts on how best to address these issues by writing SDMIndustry Codirector John M. Grace, jmgrace@mit.edu. Suggestions may be featured in a future issue of the SDM Pulse@MIT.

By Ragu Bharadwaj, SDM ’07

As a computational chemist who works in the pharmaceuticalindustry, I joined the 2007 SDM cohort to find ways to improvethe industry through systems thinking.

Drug discovery and development are long processes—it typi-cally takes 10 to 15 years and well over a billion dollars to bringa new drug to market. Much of the industry’s knowledge andexpertise is tacit, so knowledge capture is difficult and not wellimplemented. And, the stakes are high—only about one in10,000-15,000 compounds synthesized makes it to clinical trials—and that makes pharmaceutical companies secretive.

I am interested in introducing efficiencies to drug discoveryand development—which today is apoorly understood, continually evolv-ing system of processes, with poorlyintegrated supply chains and veryhigh failure rates.

There are three main steps to bringinga drug to market: drug discovery, drugdevelopment and commercialization.

Drug discovery begins with evaluatingthe benefits of developing a drug for aparticular disease or condition. Issuesto be considered include cost, intellec-tual property rights, biological targetvalidation and assay development.Drugs that get past this stage proceedto lab testing on animals and, with luck, to clinical trials.

During drug development, candidate molecules are tested inhuman trials. Drug materials and placebos must be available inthe right doses at the right time, which makes it important tounderstand the supply chain. The supply chain takes on furthersignificance when elements in the design and developmentprocess are globally distributed. Clinical trials usually cost$100 million to $200 million per year and involve simulationand statistics experts as well as doctors.

During commercialization, the FDA-approved drug is marketed

to doctors and sometimes to patientswho can influence their doctors.

How can systems theory, analysis and

design improve these processes?

Drug discovery and development

involve iterative cycles with feedback

loops and decisions, currently

addressed mainly by aggregated

domain expertise.

The drug discovery process often starts with chemists evalu-

ating literature, patents and assay

results from compound libraries

(assortments of diverse compounds)

to identify promising "hits." New

compounds are synthesized using

input from medicinal chemists, com-

putational chemists, pharmacokinetic

experts and toxicologists. Variable

cycle times for chemistry and assays

introduce time delays in the informa-

tion feedback cycles. System effects

work in devious ways to slow down

and reduce useful information

obtained from each cycle.

I’m hoping that we can improve these

processes using ideas from systems

product development, systems dynamics, lean thinking and

decision analysis.

After three to five years and about 10,000 compounds, multi-

ple candidates are proposed to the development team, which

tests them in animals for toxicity and other properties. There is

a high chance of failure. Animal data takes a long time to

obtain and is highly variable. Hard decisions are made with

poor data during development.

Next, FDA permission is sought for clinical trials. Reliable data

Drug development challenges

Some issues pharmaceutical companiesface that require special consideration:

> Long development times (10-20years)

> A host of regulatory requirements

> Changes to those requirements during the development cycle

> The necessity of taking a risk-adverse approach

> Simulation is not well developed—resulting in trial and error methodologies

> continued on page 10

Ragu Bharadwaj

8

2007 INCOSE symposium features MIT presentations

June 23Systems Engineering and Architecting Doctoral StudentNetwork (SEANET) Workshop (This session precedes thesymposium)San Diego State University, 9 am-4 pmWorkshop leaders: Dr. Donna Rhodes, MIT ESD, SystemsEngineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEARI); Dr. Ricardo Valerdi, MIT ESD, Center for Technology, Policyand Industrial Development, Lean Aerospace Initiative

June 25Academic Forum, Systems Engineering Research

An Integrated Approach to Developing Systems ProfessionalsAuthor: Dr. Heidi Davidz, alumna, MIT Engineering SystemsDivision, the Aerospace CorporationCalifornia Room, 10-10:25 am

Time-Expanded Decision Networks: A Framework forDesigning Evolvable Complex SystemsAuthor: Olivier de Weck, Associate Professor of Aeronauticsand Astronautics and Engineering SystemsRoyal Palm Rooms 1 and 2, 11:30-11:55 am

A Research Agenda for Systems of Systems ArchitectingAuthor: Ricardo ValerdiSunrise Room, 2-2:15 pm

Incorporating Software Cost and Risk Assessment intoEarly System Development Trade StudiesAuthors: Kathryn Anne Weiss, Ph.D., Jet PropulsionLaboratory, MIT AA/ESD; Professor Nancy Leveson, MIT AA/ESDCalifornia Room, 2-2:25 pm

The ROI of Systems Engineering: Some Quantitative ResultsAuthor: Ricardo Valerdi California Room, 4-4:25 pm

Divergence: The Impact of Lifecycle Changes onCommonalityAuthor: Ryan Boas, ESD Ph.D. candidateSan Diego Room, 4:30-4:55 pm

June 26Full-day tutorialFrom Research to Reality: Making COSYSMO a TrustedEstimation Tool in Your OrganizationAuthor: Dr. Ricardo ValerdiSunset Room, 9:45 am-5:15 pm

Architecture Frameworks in System Design: Motivation,Theory, and ImplementationPresenters: Matthew Richards, ESD Ph.D. candidate; NiravShah, Professor Daniel Hastings, A/A and ESD, and Dr. Donna RhodesCalifornia Room, 4:30-4:55 pm

June 27From Research to Reality: Making COSYSMO a TrustedEstimation Tool in Your OrganizationAuthor: Dr. Ricardo ValerdiTowne Room, 1:45-1:55 pm

Standardized Process as a Tool for Higher Level SystemsThinkingAuthor: Caroline Lamb, MIT A/ASan Diego Room, 4:30-4:55 pm

Defining Changeability: Reconciling Flexibility, Adaptability,Scalability, and Robustness for Maintaining SystemLifecycle ValueAuthor: Dr. Adam Ross, alumnus, MIT ESDCalifornia Room, 4:30-4:55 pm

MIT’s Engineering Systems Division, its System Design and Management Program and the Systems Engineering AdvancementResearch Initiative will be actively involved in the 2007 symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE)to be held in San Diego, Calif., June 24-28. Visit our booth at the Town and Country Resort (No. A-58) or attend one of the fol-lowing workshops and presentations. Unless otherwise noted, all presenters listed are affiliated with ESD.

Congratulations to ...

Sorin Grama SDM ’07, whose

team, Promethean Power, was one

of two finalists in the MIT $100K

Entrepreneurship Competition. Pro-

methean Power is developing a solar

turbine made of easily available car

parts and plumbing supplies. Unlike

a solar photovoltaic panel, which only generates electricity, this

innovative microgenerator combines solar thermal concentra-

tion with a simple thermodynamic cycle to generate the entire

range of commercial and residential energy needs. Upon grad-

uating in June 2007, Sorin plans to devote all his efforts to

building the company. He promises to keep Pulse readers

posted on his progress.

Sorin Grama

9

SEARI research advances systems engineering

MIT ESD’s Systems Engineering Advancement Research

Initiative (SEARI) researches advanced systems engineering

topics to address the needs of individual sponsors and to

serve the global systems community. The recently launched

SEARI consortium serves as a neutral forum to bring experts

from academia, industry and government together for collabo-

rative learning and joint research.

According to SEARI Director Donna H. Rhodes, “Our research

program seeks to advance the theories, methods and effective

practice of systems engineering and to apply this work to com-

plex socio-technical systems through collaborative research.”

The SEARI research portfolio has four focus areas:

> socio-technical decision making

> designing for value robustness

> systems engineering economics

> systems engineering in the enterprise

Socio-technical decision making investigates how to make

effective decisions under highly complex and uncertain condi-

tions. SEARI’s research, which involves studying the effective-

ness of current decision processes, is leading to a better

understanding of how decisions are made today. Current proj-

ects explore strategies for evolving collaborative systems; visu-

alizing complex tradespaces and the saliency of information;

and understanding and mitigating cognitive biases in decision

processes. This research involves developing new constructs,

methods and tools to represent socio-technical systems in a

manner that allows impact analysis and complex decision

analysis.

Designing for value robustness seeks to develop methods for

concept exploration, architecting and design using a dynamic

perspective for the purpose of realizing systems, products and

services that deliver sustained value to stakeholders in a

changing world. Current projects center on developing meth-

ods for dynamic multi-attribute tradespace exploration; princi-

ples and strategies for designing survivable systems; and

techniques for the consideration of unarticulated and latent

stakeholder value. Recently, SEARI research has produced a

method and associated metrics for quantifying the changeabil-

ity of a system design as well as a change taxonomy for

enabling more effective stakeholder

dialogue on such qualities as flexibili-

ty, adaptability and modifiability.

Systems engineering economics aims

to develop an economics-centric view

of systems engineering to achieve

measurable and predictable out-

comes while delivering value to stake-

holders. Research topics include

measuring productivity and quantify-

ing the return on investment of systems engineering; advancing

methods for reuse, cost modeling and risk modeling; applying

real options in systems and enterprises; and developing sys-

tems engineering leading indicators.

Systems engineering in the enterprise uses empirical studies

to understand how to achieve more effective practice in

respect to the system being developed, its operational con-

text and the characteristics of the associated enterprise. A

project on collaborative, distributed systems engineering

practice is examining how organizations perform an engineer-

ing program with geographically distributed teams. Research

on the development of engineering systems thinking in the

workforce is examining the development of senior systems

engineers, the factors involved in the development of systems

thinking in individuals and in teams, and the relationship of

enterprise culture and engineering processes. A project

studying the social contexts of enterprise systems engineer-

ing is expected to lead to published socio-technical systems

studies and models, including teaching cases for systems

engineering education courses.

The SEARI research program involves engagement with spon-

sors and includes collaborative projects with other research

groups, other universities and professional societies such as

the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE).

SEARI will hold its 2007 research summit on Oct. 16, in con-

junction with the SDM partners meeting on Oct. 17 and the

annual SDM Conference on Oct.18-19, to showcase selected

research projects.

For further information on the research program and

consortium membership, visit seari.mit.edu or contact the

leadership team at seari@mit.edu.

By Donna H. Rhodes, PhD, director of SEARI

Donna H. Rhodes

Fellows from MIT’s SDM program are

experienced professionals representing

a wide range of industries. Their expe-

rience, coupled with extraordinary aca-

demic preparation in leadership,

systems thinking and managing com-

plex systems, makes them ideal

employees who can work across

organizational boundaries to solve

enterprise-wide challenges.

Unlike other academic programs, SDM has a flexible recruit-

ment cycle. Our self-funded candidates can be interviewed and

hired year-round simply by requesting resumes or visiting the

MIT campus. It is advantageous for employers, however, to

attend the major, weeklong, recruitment event held each year,

since many SDM fellows can be interviewed at one time during

that event. This year’s SDM Recruitment Week will be Nov. 6-9.

The best news is that there are no preconditions for compa-

nies to participate in SDM recruitment activities, and it is very

economical. Career development professionals estimate that

the cost of a search at key technical leadership levels, such as

manager or director, is easily $40,000, or 20 percent to 30

percent of annual salary. Compare that to airfare from your city

plus lodging and food costs for one to two days in Cambridge

(approximately $325 per day at a first-rate hotel) and the sav-

ings are impressive.

Agus Sudjianto, SDM ’99, senior vice president and globalquantitative risk management executive at Bank of America,says, “SDM recruiting events give the bank the opportunity tointeract with the candidates and hire top talent. Our SDMassociates bring valuable skills and perspectives to the organ-ization, enabling them to immediately and significantly con-tribute to solving complex issues. I look forward toparticipating in this fall's SDM event on behalf of Bank ofAmerica.”

From the student perspective, Dhiman Bhattacharjee, whowill graduate in September 2007, says, “Attending the SDMRecruitment Week and interviewing with a number of compa-nies resulted in an internship with Cisco and broadened my per-spective on a career path, which led to my decision to joinOracle as a senior product strategy manager.”

For more information on SDM recruitment activities andattending Recruitment Week Nov. 6-9, contact Helen Trimbleat htrimble@mit.edu or 617.258.8256.

10

Hiring SDM graduates brings added value to companiesIndustry Representatives invited to Recruitment Week, Nov. 6-9

By Helen M. Trimble, director of SDM Career Development

Applying systems theory to produce better medicines (cont'd from page 7)

capture and statistical analysis are critical at this stage, yet tri-

als are often carried out in multiple, remotely located hospitals.

The documentation submitted to gain final FDA approval for a

drug can easily exceed a million pages. Managing all this

information requires precise coordination and control.

When a new drug is finally approved, there is still the hurdle of

selling it to recoup costs and make a profit. What efficiencies

can be introduced to this part of the system? Convincing a

risk-averse doctor to adopt a new treatment is a costly exer-

cise requiring a knowledgeable salesforce.

I’m hoping we can apply ideas from Systems Theory and

Systems Dynamics to identify and change the slowest and

least efficient parts of the system. Perhaps we can leverage

ideas developed in other industries such as manufacturing.

Certainly, the challenges posed by this complex system are

well worth tackling. After all, solving the problems of the phar-

maceutical industry holds out the promise of better medicines

for everyone.

Helen M. Trimble

11

Team wins Soldier Design Prize (cont'd from page 1)

technology. The architecture allows the system to be portable,

affordable, communication capable and quick to assemble

and disassemble.

The initial design called for an 8-foot-diameter spherical screen

to provide a 360-degree panoramic experience. In order to

create a truly realistic battlefield environment, we used a com-

puter with high performance graphics cards and relied on pro-

jectors to display the large imagery on the curved screen.

Multiple projectors were required, so we needed to split the

imagery signal from the computer into each projector to form

one coherent image.

As the core of our technology offering, the display medium

went through more than 10 physical iterations in terms of

shape, size, material and support structure. Its form varied

from an eggshell-like plaster constructed using an 8-foot inflat-

able balloon to an inflatable parachute. The final form is a cylin-

drical display built of metal frames and translucent plastic

sheets, which can be assembled and disassembled within

minutes.

On the software side, Minami’s advice ensured that our appli-

cation met the military customer’s needs. We created a simple

yet powerful set of mission coordination tools and used a 3D

interactive device to allow users to “fly” through a realistic bat-

tlefield scenario to coordinate missions.

Unfortunately, when we integrated the system, interfaces

became problematic—the short distance between the projec-

tor and the curved screen created distortions. We chose to fix

this through optical and physical adjustments to the focus and

concentrate the computer processor on generating high-reso-

lution graphics.

Our most daunting challenges involved developing the sys-

tem’s core technology in just a few months. We had to cre-

ate complicated applications in an unfamiliar military domain

and integrate the system components to generate a virtual

application. I frequently found myself relying on my SDM edu-

cation. Learnings from the Product Design Process class

helped our team understand and utilize the lead user

process. The System Architecture course formed the back-

bone of our system innovation and helped us to file a strong

patent application. Coursework in Technology Strategy guid-

ed us in making rational choices throughout the development

of our technology.

We also benefited from a core value of the program, the will-

ingness of SDM students (like Minami, who patiently educated

us about his military experience) to share their unique skills.

We learned many important systems engineering lessons dur-

ing the process. The human operator, for example, is often a

system’s most neglected component. In our case, safety con-

cerns about air ventilation inside the display system forced us

to open up the enclosed sphere design and use a cylinder

instead.

On April 10, we exhibited our display to almost 30 Army judges

at the SDC Final. Our team placed third, winning the $3,000

Lockheed Martin Award. The monetary prize is not nearly as

important to us as the Army experts’ stamp of approval on our

product feasibility.

Subsequently, we exhibited our first commercial prototype

during MIT’s Science Showcase on April 28. Team

Atmosphere is continuing to develop its virtual mission planner

and had plans to incorporate in June.

The Core of SDM: Systems engineering (cont'd from page 6)

systems. Software development is also becoming an ever

more important component of complex system design. In the

end, deep technical understanding combined with evolving

systems engineering competence has led to a product with

significant competitive advantages.

This case study and others will be presented in full during this

summer’s SDM course in systems engineering. If you would

like to sample the course, please contact John M. Grace, SDM

industry codirector, jmgrace@mit.edu, 617.253.2081. The

course meets Tuesdays and Thursdays, 8:30-10:30 a.m. from

June 12 to August 21, 2007.

SDM Calendar Summer 2007–Spring 2008

If you or your colleagues are interested in attending any of the events listed, please contact SDM IndustryCodirector John M. Grace at jmgrace@mit.edu or 617.253.2081.

July 16–20, 2007

SDM Business Trip

Location: MIT

August 14, 2007

SDM Information Evening

Location: MIT Faculty Club

Time: 6:30 pm

September 11, 2007

SDM Information Evening

Location: Burlington Marriott

Time: 6:30 pm

September 17, 2007

SDM-LFM Midstream Review

Location: MIT

October 15–19, 2007

SDM Business Trip

Location: MIT

October 16, 2007

SDM Information Evening

Location: MIT Faculty Club

Time: 6:30 pm

October 16, 2007

SEARI Annual Meeting

Location: MIT Faculty Club

October 17, 2007

SDM Partners Meeting

Location: MIT Faculty Club

October 18–19, 2007

SDM Conference

Location: MIT Broad Auditorium

Details: sdm.mit.edu/conf07/

November 8, 2007

Industry-Faculty Research Forum

Location: MIT Faculty Club

Sponsored by: MIT System Design andManagement Program and MIT Leaders forManufacturing Program

January 31, 2007–February 1, 2008

SDM-LFM Knowledge Review

Location: MIT

March 11–12, 2008

2008 MIT Conference on RiskManagement

Sponsored by: MIT Industrial Liaison Program(ilp-www.mit.edu), MIT System Design andManagement Program (sdm.mit.edu), MITLeaders for Manufacturing Program(lfm.mit.edu), MIT Forum for Supply ChainInnovation, (supplychain.mit.edu)

Event information includes all details available at press time.

For more current event information, go to sdm.mit.edu and esd.mit.edu.