1. Toward a Theory of System Fielding
Complex Systems Section
Toward a Theory of System Fielding
Sergey Tozik
Department of Education in Technology and Science,
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology

2. Research goals Develop capability integration theory
Assure theory that is rigorous, relevant and teachable
Design capability integrator instruction

3. Why bother?
Why should I care?

4. The Science Gap Engineering, Needs Artifacts
Physics, Chemistry, Computer Sciences, Mathematics
Systems Engineering
Clinical engineers
IT systems managers
ERP implementers
Business analysts
Needs
Artifacts
Business, Management, Politics, Warfare
Psychology, Sociology, Organizational Science

5. Integration Science: Socio-technology? Engineering Systems?
Physics, Chemistry, Computer Sciences, Mathematics
Integration Science:
Socio-technology?
Engineering Systems?
Business, Management, Politics, Warfare
Psychology, Sociology, Organizational Science

6. Engineering Deployment  Transition to Use Operational/Business Use
Engineered Artifacts – Hardware, Software, Systems, Symbolic
Deployment  Transition to Use
Perceived Artifacts – Devices, Applications, Connections
Operational/Business Use
Tasks
Communication
Collaboration

7. Customer
Engineering

8. Do you feel the confusion?
Verification
The purpose of the Verification Process is to confirm that the specified design requirements are fulfilled by the system.
This process provides the information required to effect the remedial actions that correct non‐conformances in the realized system or the processes that act on it.
Transition
The purpose of the Transition Process is to establish a capability to provide services specified by stakeholder requirements in the operational environment.
This process installs a verified system, together with relevant enabling systems as defined in agreements.
Validation
The purpose of the Validation Process is to provide objective evidence that the services provided by a system when in use comply with stakeholders’ requirements, achieving its intended use in its intended operational environment.
This process performs a comparative assessment and confirms that the stakeholders’ requirements are correctly defined. Where variances are identified, these are recorded and guide corrective actions. System validation is ratified by stakeholders
INCOSE SE Handbook

9. Systems are not validated… What is “capability to provide services?
The services are!
What is “capability to provide services?

10. Multiple perspectives Capability
Services
Capability Components
System-of-Systems
Harding, A., & Henshaw, M. (2012). Capability Engineering Ontology

11. Capability integration
Doctrine& Concepts
Information
Organization
Training
Equipment
Systems
Materiel
Supplies
Logistics
Personnel
Infrastructure Facilities

12. Capability integration
System fielding
Contractor
Capability integration
Customer

13. By-default customer integrators
What ‘s on their plate:
Emergent properties which are unacceptable to the user
User needs have changed since system analysis phase
System meets customer requirement but don’t serve user needs
System level bugs make the system unreliable
So the Integrators are:
challenged by the users (I can’t use it!)
underestimated by the developers and managers– “they create nothing”
could be saved by good systems engineering practices upstream but ... no systems engineer is around to share the blame.

14. System System Of Systems Development Verification Transition
Validation
Validation

15. Capability Integration
Theory
outline
Rising up to the
customer cloud

16. Actor-network theory
Both humans and non-human entities exhibit agency  actors
All actors are networks of other actors  actor-networks (AN)
Actors have no essence – only temporary “black-boxing” of ANs
Disintegration is always an option  stability is an attribute
Actors are motivated to join and stay in the AN– otherwise they leave
Obligatory passage points – network centers

17. Translation process
Obligatory passage points: emergence of network centers
Inter-definition of actors: emergence of actor dependencies
Interessment: emergence of actor motivation mechanisms
Enrollment: emergence of actor roles
Representation of actor-network as a single actor

18. Systems are stable heterogeneous actor-networks
Systems are partly designed, partly evolved
Services are temporary systems (actor-networks)
Capabilities are service templates (role-network)
Capability enactment (role performance)  service

19. Capability gradually matures from a vague idea to a stable service pattern
Capability matures in a chain of temporary actor-networks - integration events
Capability Integrators / CI documents serve as integration event centers
Maturing capability is carried by heterogeneous boundary actors as experience
SE may facilitate the process designing/governing integration event chains

20. Capability actor-network template
Actor role
Actor role
Actor role
Actor role
Actor role
Actor role
Boundary Actor Role

21. Service/mission actor-network

22. Integration event chain

23. Integration event examples
Evaluation missions
Combat missions
Mission preparation
Mission planning
Mission debrief
Training lessons
Training exercises
Customer Meetings
Design Reviews
Integration tests
Flight tests
Bug triage

24. What is next?

25. Research goals Elaborate and validate capability integration theory
Ground the theory in the practice
Assure theory that is rigorous, relevant and teachable
Design capability integrator instruction

26. Capability Integration Theory
Research plan
Post-instruction evaluation
Practice
Research
Instruction Design
Teach & Learn
Case studies
Validation
Capability Integration Theory
Making theory
accessible
to practitioners
Annual integrator course

27. Questions Are integration events discernible with clear boundaries?
Who do participate in the integration events?
What/Who are boundary actors / experience carriers?
How do boundary actors encode and carry the experience?
What do documents/models contribute? What do people?
How should we plan and execute integration events?
How do we make the theory rigor, relevant and teachable
How should we teach capability integrators?

28. Any answers?