INCOSE 1 st reactions

One other area that struck me has the sheer number of levels of proficiency—in ours we are going with 5 and the first one is limited to just knowing SE exists. So really 4 from a proficiency standpoint recommend taking another step back and first defining the EA Processes… not unlike the SE Handbook defines/ bounds the SE process areas. I’m not sure how we advise people on the EA career path when no one has defined The What; what they are expected to do as EAs concerns me about this document is that there is little to no reference to a skill/competency base of Systems Engineering blended into the competency needs for the various architects that have been defined. In some cases, as you describe in the document, I believe a strong SE with certain competencies could perform the team tasks with an Enterprise Architect instead of defining various different types of architects. I see architecture skills as building upon SE skills and not separated from SE skills.

Many of the same skills are relevant – there should be some synergy between the efforts and for INCOSE to consider adopting or endorsing this work, the tie to SE skills that builds on the SE and Solution Architect skill sets should be evident. The terminology and concepts applied in the document are also not well aligned with the Systems Engineering and Architecture standards and references; e.g. ISO/IEC/IEEE (Architecture Description), ISO/IEC/IEEE (System Life Cycle Processes), SE Body of Knowledge, INCOSE SE Handbook, etc. It seems to be very lacking in the Architecture (technical), SE, and technical management skills; e.g., it ignores key skills for the EA, such as Business or Mission Analysis, Stakeholder Needs and Requirements Definition, System Requirements Definition, System Analysis, Capability Engineering, Risk Management, Knowledge Management, etc. In fact, under the Architecture Category, it does not include any actual architecture-specific skills that would develop an architecture for which a design can then be established. The EA would likely need to address System-of-Systems situations, yet nothing is included. I think the skill framework needs to be re-examined with a significant amount of consideration for the comprehensive work in Architecture, SE, Business Processes/Strategic Planning etc.

Version 0.5 of the Proposed INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework The roles and activities framework table provides: Role Title Role Description Why it matters List of Activities Activity Description Category Competency Recommended Proficiency Level

Each competency table provides: Competency Area Description Why it matters Effective indicators of knowledge, skills, abilities and experience  Awareness  Supervised Practitioner  Practitioner  Senior Practitioner  Expert

Technical Processes Category System Requirements Definition Architecture Definition Implementation Integration Verification Validation Transition

Technical Management Category Technical Risk Management Configuration Management Interface Management Information Management Decision Management Technical Planning Technical Assessment and Control Concurrent Engineering Enterprise Integration Integration of Specialisms Lifecycle Process Definition

Analytical Category Modelling and Simulation Mathematics/Logic/Quantitative Analysis Engineering and Scientific Fundamentals Design Considerations/Specialty Engineering Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability Analysis Safety Analysis

Professional Category Leadership Communications Critical Thinking Team Dynamics Negotiation Ethics