Mapping Space-Based Systems Engineering Curriculum to Government-Industry Vetted Competencies for Improved Organizational Performance
Alice Squires, Wiley Larson, and Brian Sauser ABSTRACT This paper demonstrates a method that can be used to analyze the degree to which an organization’s systems engineering capabilities meet government-industry defined systems engineering needs. To demonstrate this process using universities as the case study, we summarize secondary research completed for nine institutions from various countries that offer systems engineering graduate level programs in the space domain. Next, we select a Masters degree from three universities, one from each country, and map their space-based systems engineering courses to the 37 systems engineering capabilities within the ten systems engineering competencies. These capabilities represent the knowledge, skills, and behaviors that systems engineers are expected to possess and perform as a part of their job. We then review a process for a more detailed mapping of the curriculum to one of four levels of proficiency within each capability, using the Stevens Institute of Technology as the example. The result is a systems engineering competency-based approach that can be used by universities or companies to compare the ‘as is’ state of their systems engineering capabilities development against a government-industry defined set of needs to identify and address gaps or opportunities in the curriculum, training, or experience of their students and/or employees. Keywords: space systems engineering, systems engineering competency framework ______________________________________________ *E-mails of authors, in order listed, are:
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected] +An initial version of this paper was presented at the 59th IAC Congress, Glasgow, Scotland, 2008.
1. INTRODUCTION The importance of systems engineering in the space industry is well known. In a study of space systems, Newman [2001] analyzed 50 space system failures from 1960 to 2000 and concluded: “Anything less than the full measure of systems engineering rigor will expose the project to failure.” [p. 526] However, the space industry, along with industries across the board, continues to be faced with shortages in critical skill sets in the science and engineering fields, including systems engineering. According to The Space Report 2008: The Authoritative Guide to Global Space Activity, global revenues in the space industry experienced an 11% growth and topped a quarter of a trillion dollars in 2007 [Space Foundation, 2008]. In that same year, Building a Better NASA Workforce: Meeting the Workforce Needs for the National Vision for Space Exploration reported that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had 572 employees with competency in systems engineering [p. 60]; however, there was shortfall, in NASA alone, of 100 to 150 employees that were needed to fulfill a vital need for systems engineering and integration competency [p. 33]. This same shortfall in systems engineering competency follows for other institutions in the space industry, and across many other industries where systems engineering is a vital skill set.
1
This paper outlines a method that can be used to help address the gap between education and training, and the government-industry based need for systems engineering. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate a competency-based approach for curriculum development to close this gap. After validating the specific competencies with their government and industry clients, an institution can apply the demonstrated process to identify potential areas for improvement in curriculum and training, with the goal of achieving a higher level of capability in the student and/or employee. Step one entails the mapping of the current state of system engineering expertise to 37 government-industry defined systems engineering capabilities (adding or deleting capabilities as required). Step two is a more detailed mapping by capability to one of four levels of proficiency within each capability. Step three involves identifying the gap between the desired state of system engineering competencies, capabilities, and proficiency levels, and the current state; and putting a forward action plan in place to address the gap. 2. RELATED RESEARCH The systems engineering competency-based approach reviewed in this paper is based on two previous research efforts: 1) a thorough review of systems engineering non-domain specific graduate level systems engineering curriculum, and 2) the identification, development, and vetting of systems engineering competencies important to government and industry. Squires [2007] developed a systems engineering curriculum framework to both support existing, and serve as a guideline for new, systems engineering focused graduate degree programs. The effort began with a list of universities originally identified by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) [ERTC, 2008; Fabrycky, 2005] as offering degrees related to systems engineering. To develop the framework, over two hundred systems engineering related course descriptions from thirty-two United States based universities offering Systems Engineering (SE) Masters degrees were collected and reviewed. Through an iterative review process each of the 203 courses was assigned to one of sixteen primary topic areas. These sixteen topic areas were then grouped into one of four course categories: foundation, introductory, core, and specialization. Table 1 summarizes the systems engineering curriculum framework that resulted from this effort [Squires, 2007]. Squires [2007] correlated this framework to a set of systems engineering competencies developed through the efforts of the members of the INCOSE Academic Council [Cowper, 2005] and this framework and mapping led to follow-on work presented to the INCOSE Academic Council and summarized by Jain et. al. [2007]. In a similar timeframe, work was being finalized on a system engineering taxonomy contributed to by a team of 27 individuals over a period of two years. A set of ten systems engineering competency areas and 37 associated capabilities were defined through a series of three Design-A-CUrriculuM (DACUM) activities spread over a year. The design team led by Mr. Mark Goldman, of the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, was comprised of practicing systems engineers from nine NASA Centers, Air Force Space Program Offices, Federal Aviation Administration, The Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin and Ball Aerospace. The group’s mission was to determine exactly what’s expected of space systems engineers. First, the DACUM groups described their system engineer jobs in terms of activities. Next, the group organized the activities in two ways: first by lifecycle phases and then by competency area. These results were then vetted with the organizations involved, modified per discussion and have survived several years of use by the contributing organizations [Menrad, 2008].
2
Table 1: Systems Engineering (SE) Curriculum Framework [Squires, 2007] Foundation: Pre-SE Courses
General Mathematics Probability and Statistics
Introductory: Fundamental SE Courses
Fundamentals of Systems Engineering Introduction to Systems Engineering Management
Core: Required SE Courses
Systems Design/Architecture Systems Integration and Test Quality, Safety and Systems Suitability Modeling, Simulation and Optimization Decisions, Risks and Uncertainty Software Systems Engineering
Specialization: Advanced or Specialty Courses
General Project Management Finance, Economics, and Cost Estimation Manufacturing, Production, and Operations Organizational Leadership Engineering Ethics and Legal Considerations Masters Project or Seminar
The resulting 37 government-industry defined systems engineering capabilities in use today are organized into ten systems engineering competency areas as shown in Tables 2a and 2b [Menrad, 2008], and defined in more detail in Appendix A. Two more recent additions to the previous work on systems engineering competencies are worthy of note. First, four proficiency or performance levels were defined to make the competency areas and associated capabilities useful to aspiring and practicing systems engineers. Using these four levels, one could determine what level of proficiency or performance a particular individual or group has achieved in each systems engineering capability. In simple terms the performance levels progress from levels I to IV: participate, apply, manage and guide, respectively [Menrad, 2008]. The table in Appendix B provides a more rigorous definition of these performance levels. Second, the most critical areas of industry need for systems engineering competencies were identified based on an effort completed over the last three years by the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA). The IAA worked with government, industry and civilian organizations globally to determine which of the capabilities are most critical to their organization’s systems engineering success. The IAA team sat with 4 to 6 senior systems engineers from 17 organizations (as of July 2008) including NASA and several NASA field centers, European Space Agency, Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES), Agenzia Spaziale Italiana (ASI), The Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin, Ball Aerospace, Alliant Techsystems (ATK), European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), Telespazio, Nokia, Verizon, Volvo, International Business Machines (IBM), and a host of others, to determine which capabilities were either Critical, Necessary but not critical, and Optional, for the development of systems engineers in their organizations. Critical areas were defined according to those systems engineering capabilities that the organizations deemed as critical to achieving their business objectives. Necessary but not critical, and Optional, were applied in a similar manner.
3
When organizations reviewed the competencies, some organizations translated these ratings into numbers: critical = 10, necessary = 5, and optional = 1, for example, so they could capture the results numerically. This allowed competency managers to distinguish which capabilities were most important to the development of their systems engineers. Based on the responses, each organization had its own systems engineering footprint, which is proprietary for each organization. However, a composite result of this effort is shown in Tables 2a and 2b for the second proficiency level: Apply [Menrad, 2008]. Pay particular attention to the items marked Critical and Necessary, as they form the basis of professional development activities for systems engineers. Table 2a: Government-Industry Defined Critical Capabilities for ‘Apply’ Proficiency Level [Menrad, 2008] 1.0 Concepts and Architecture 1.1 Form Mission Needs Statement Critical 1.2 Describe System Environments Critical 1.3 Perform Trade Studies Critical 1.4 Create System Architectures Critical 2.0 System Design 2.1 Define/Manage Stakeholder ExpectationsP Critical 2.2 Define Technical RequirementsP Critical P 2.3 Logically Decompose System Critical P 2.4 Define System Design Solution Critical 3.0 Production, Product Transition and Operations 3.1 Implement the ProductP Optional 3.2 Integrate SystemP Critical P 3.3 Verify the System Critical P 3.4 Validate the System Necessary 3.5 Transition the SystemP Optional 3.6 Conduct Operations Necessary 4.0 Technical Management 4.1 Plan Technical EffortP Critical 4.2 Manage RequirementsP Critical P 4.3 Manage Interfaces Critical 4.4 Manage Technical RiskP Critical P 4.5 Manage Configuration Necessary P 4.6 Manage Technical Data Optional 4.7 Assess Technical Product and ProcessP Critical P 4.8 Manage Technical Decision Analysis Process Critical P Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
4
Table 2b: Government-Industry Defined Critical Capabilities for ‘Apply’ Proficiency Level [Menrad, 2008] 5.0 Project Management and Control 5.1 Oversee Technical Acquisition 5.2 Manage ResourcesP 5.3 Manage Contracts 5.4 Manage/Implement Systems EngineeringP 6.0 Organizational Environments 6.1 Understand Organizational Structure, Mission, Goals 6.2 Apply PM/SE Procedures and Guidelines 6.3 Manage External Relationships 7.0 Human Capital Management 7.1 Manage Technical Staff Organization and Performance 7.2 Manage Team Dynamics 8.0 Security, Safety and Mission Assurance 8.1 Organize Security 8.2 Organize Safety and Mission Assurance 9.0 Professional and Leadership Development 9.1 Coach and Mentor Proteges 9.2 Communicate Highly Effectively 9.3 Lead Teams and Organizations 10.0 Knowledge Management 10.1 Capture, Organize and Distribute Knowledge P
Optional Optional Optional Necessary Optional Optional Optional Optional Critical Optional Necessary Optional Critical Necessary Optional
Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
This paper represents the merging of the previous work completed on systems engineering curriculum development with the government-industry defined system engineering competency areas and capabilities. First, the initial analysis of systems engineering graduate level programs is narrowed to focus on systems engineering programs in the space domain, yet also expanded to include universities around the globe. The systems engineering curriculum analysis is also updated to include the most recent course offerings for each institution offering a systems engineering degree in the space domain (see Appendix C). Next, as examples of step one of the mapping process, the graduate courses or course content required for a Masters in three universities (one from each country) are mapped, by institution and graduate degree, to the government-industry developed set of system engineering capabilities and competencies. Course information is obtained through secondary research. The final mapping is completed based on the institution’s course descriptions if available, or alternatively by using a list of course topics within each area of competence. For Step Two of the mapping process, mapping the course content for the required graduate curriculum to one of the four levels of proficiency for each capability, we use our most familiar example to demonstrate the technique, the Stevens Institute of Technology Space Systems Engineering Master of Engineering degree. By going through these steps, we show how a complete systems engineering taxonomy can be used by universities or companies to identify and address gaps or opportunities in the curriculum, training, or experience of their students and/or employees. And finally, we review the last step in the process, the development of a forward plan for addressing these gaps for improved organizational performance.
5
3. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING EDUCATION IN THE SPACE DOMAIN Space based engineering education is offered at the graduate level by universities located around the world; however, the number of systems engineering graduate degrees focused in the space domain, using the definition of domain-centric systems engineering as defined by Fabrycky (2005, 2007), are much fewer in number. Starting with list of universities originally identified by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) (ERTC, [2008]) as offering degrees related to systems engineering, and supplementing the list through secondary Internet research, nine universities offering graduate level systems engineering degrees specific to the space domain were identified. These universities are listed in Table 3, by name and location. The space based program offerings from these universities include both Masters degrees and graduate certificates and are summarized for the nine universities, in Table 4. These universities were further analyzed as to the type of courses offered. Courses within the curriculum were categorized into core, required, specialty, thesis/project, or other, as defined in Appendix C. A summary of the analysis as well as a short description of each university and their space based graduate systems engineering curriculum is also included in Appendix C.
Table 3: Universities Offering Graduate Level Space Based Programs Abbreviation Used AFIT
Dayton, OH, US
TU Delft
Delft, The Netherlands
ERAU
Daytona Beach, FL, US
FIT/UC
Spaceport, KSC/Rockledge, Melbourne, FL, US
International Space University
ISU
Illkirch, Graffenstanden, France
Stevens Institute of Technology University of Colorado at Colorado Springs University of North Dakota
SIT
Hoboken, NJ, US
UCCS
Colorado Springs, CO, US
UND
Grand Forks, ND, US
Webster University
WU
Colorado Springs, Denver, Peterson AFB, CO, US
Institution or University Air Force Institute of Technology Delft University of Technology, SpaceTech Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Florida Institute of Technology, University College
6
Location
Table 4: Summary of Space Based Systems Engineering Graduate Education Institution/ University
Field
#Credits Req
Based
Distance Learning
Space Systems
48
Quarter
No
AFIT
Master of Science (MS)
Systems Engineering with Space Track
48
Quarter
Yes
AFIT
Graduate Certificate
Space Systems
16
Quarter
Yes
TU Delft (SpaceTech)
Master
30
Semester
No
ERAU
Master of Science (MS)
30
Semester
No
Space Systems
33
Semester
No
Space Systems Management
36
Semester
No
Space Studies
37
Space Management
37
Space Systems Engineering
30
Semester
No
Space Systems Engineering
16
Semester
No
Space Operations
30
Semester
Yes (only)
Space Studies
33
Semester
Yes
Space Systems Operations Management
39
Semester
No
AFIT
FIT/UC FIT/UC ISU ISU SIT SIT UCCS UND WU
Program Type Master of Science (MS)
Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS) Master of Engineering (ME) Graduate Certificate Master of Engineering (ME) Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS)
Space Systems Engineering Engineering Physics (Space Science)
*as defined by ISU
7
US equivalent* US equivalent*
No No
4. THE MAPPING PROCESS 4.1 Step One: Mapping to Capabilities Based on the initial analysis of graduate level space-based programs offered around the world, we chose three universities from the nine researched universities to demonstrate various ways of mapping course curriculum to the government-industry developed systems engineering capabilities and competencies. These three universities, Delft University of Technology, International Space University and Stevens Institute of Technology, are located in three different countries and represent varied approaches to educating our global citizens in the area of space systems engineering. The mappings of the universities’ space based Masters degree curriculum to the government-industry developed capabilities listed in Tables 2a and 2b are shown in Tables 5a through 7b. Note that the capabilities match those listed in Tables 2a and 2b. More detail on the process applied, follows. The first step of our systems engineering taxonomy is to map the Master degree course content to the government-industry defined capabilities, for each university. In our case we use the capabilities as listed; however, the capabilities should be validated with the organization’s customer set before proceeding. The more detailed knowledge of course content, the better the ability to map the content to the capabilities according to the definitions provided in Appendix A. For our examples, course content is mapped according to course descriptions, competency descriptions and module course topics, depending on the information available through secondary research, and the authors’ first hand experience in the course content, where applicable. For this exercise, we include the core courses and specialty courses in the mapping. General electives and other courses that provide breadth to the degree (outside the space, systems, and engineering areas) are not included in the list of courses or course topics. The actual thesis/project courses are not included due to the fact that the content of these courses could cover any area of capability. In cases where the requirements were different for a thesis student versus a non-thesis student, the course requirements for the thesis student are used for the courses listed. Each of the Tables 5a through 7b shows a mapping of the core and specialty areas of the university’s Masters program to the government-industry defined capabilities within each competency area shown. For Tables 5a and 5b, the Delft University of Technology’s SpaceTech program mapping is based on detailed competence descriptions provided in the ‘Detailed Programme Content SpaceTech 10 - 2007/2008’ Program outline [Spacetech, 2008]. The SpaceTech Masters Program provides hands-on learning of space systems engineering with a focus on projects, leadership and communication. Business engineering is a key ingredient of SpaceTech’s success. Interpersonal skills are covered in four one-day sessions throughout the program, as part of the personal skills development. The mapping is grounded in the experience of Wiley Larson, previously cofounder, professor and program director for TU Delft's SpaceTech masters Program for 12 years. Tables 6a and 6b show a mapping of the course topics for the one core and two specialty modules for the International Space University (ISU) program based on the program’s 2008-2009 corporate brochure [ISU, 2009]. Because ISU provided course topics rather than detailed course description, the mapping process was applied using the available course topics. Based on the information in the corporate brochure, only those core course topics specific to space system engineering are listed in Tables 6a and 6b. For example, ‘Principles of report writing’, although listed as a course topic under the core module, was not included in the analysis. Also, because of the extensive number of core and specialty topics listed in the brochure, a subset of the topics was included in the analysis. Wiley Larson, leveraging his first hand knowledge of these courses in his previous role as Professor of Engineering for ISU for several years, reviewed this mapping. Tables 7a and 7b show a mapping of the course content for core and specialty courses for the Stevens Institute of Technology’s Master of Engineering in Space Systems Engineering based
8
on the course descriptions in the 2008-2009 catalog [SIT, 2008] and our first hand knowledge of these courses. As shown in Table C.1 in Appendix C, the six core courses listed in Tables 7a and 7b are required for Masters students; however, only two of the seven specialty courses listed in Tables 7a and 7b are required. These two specialty courses can be chosen to optimize the capabilities desired over the entire program. For example, if the desired capability is ‘1.4 Create System Architectures’ one would select the ‘Crew Exploration and Vehicle Design’ and ‘Design for Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability’ specialty courses.
9
Core 1.0 Concepts and Architecture 1.1 Form Mission Needs Statement 1.2 Describe System Environments 1.3 Perform Trade Studies 1.4 Create System Architectures 2.0 System Design 2.1 Define/Manage Stakeholder ExpectationsP 2.2 Define Technical RequirementsP 2.3 Logically Decompose SystemP 2.4 Define System Design SolutionP 3.0 Production, Product Transition and Operations 3.1 Implement the ProductP 3.2 Integrate SystemP 3.3 Verify the SystemP 3.4 Validate the SystemP 3.5 Transition the SystemP 3.6 Conduct Operations 4.0 Technical Management 4.1 Plan Technical EffortP 4.2 Manage RequirementsP 4.3 Manage InterfacesP 4.4 Manage Technical RiskP 4.5 Manage ConfigurationP 4.6 Manage Technical DataP 4.7 Assess Technical Product and ProcessP 4.8 Manage Technical Decision Analysis ProcessP P
Personal Skills Development
System Operational Effectiveness & Life Cycle Analysis
Navigation Systems
Telecommunications Systems Earth Observation Systems
Business Engineering
Delft University of Technology: SpaceTech, Master in Space Systems Engineering
Space Mission Analysis and Design
Table 5a: Delft University of Technology (SpaceTech)
Specialty X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
10
Core 5.0 Project Management and Control 5.1 Oversee Technical Acquisition 5.2 Manage ResourcesP 5.3 Manage Contracts 5.4 Manage/Implement Systems EngineeringP 6.0 Organizational Environments 6.1 Understand Organizational Structure, Mission, Goals 6.2 Apply PM/SE Procedures and Guidelines 6.3 Manage External Relationships 7.0 Human Capital Management 7.1 Manage Technical Staff Organization and Performance 7.2 Manage Team Dynamics 8.0 Security, Safety and Mission Assurance 8.1 Organize Security 8.2 Organize Safety and Mission Assurance 9.0 Professional and Leadership Development 9.1 Coach and Mentor Proteges 9.2 Communicate Highly Effectively 9.3 Lead Teams and Organizations 10.0 Knowledge Management 10.1 Capture, Organize and Distribute Knowledge P
X
X
X
X
Personal Skills Development
System Operational Effectiveness & Life Cycle Analysis
Navigation Systems
Telecommunications Systems Earth Observation Systems
Business Engineering
Delft University of Technology: SpaceTech, Master in Space Systems Engineering
Space Mission Analysis and Design
Table 5b: Delft University of Technology (SpaceTech)
Specialty
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
11
Access to space: engineering fundamentals Systems engineering Space mission design and management Principles of space applications Humans and biology in space Principles of space business and economics Basics of IT and knowledge management Space stations and tourism Design of space transportation systems Design of robotic and human spacecraft Hands-on small satellite design and testing Architecture of space habitats Advanced space medicine and biology Space debris mitigation
Table 6a: International Space University
International Space University: Master of Science Space Studies
Core 1.0 Concepts and Architecture 1.1 Form Mission Needs Statement 1.2 Describe System Environments 1.3 Perform Trade Studies 1.4 Create System Architectures 2.0 System Design 2.1 Define/Manage Stakeholder ExpectationsP 2.2 Define Technical RequirementsP 2.3 Logically Decompose SystemP 2.4 Define System Design SolutionP 3.0 Production, Product Transition and Operations 3.1 Implement the ProductP 3.2 Integrate SystemP 3.3 Verify the SystemP 3.4 Validate the SystemP 3.5 Transition the SystemP 3.6 Conduct Operations 4.0 Technical Management 4.1 Plan Technical EffortP 4.2 Manage RequirementsP 4.3 Manage InterfacesP 4.4 Manage Technical RiskP 4.5 Manage ConfigurationP 4.6 Manage Technical DataP 4.7 Assess Technical Product and ProcessP 4.8 Manage Technical Decision Analysis ProcessP P
X
Special Topics X
X X X
X
X X
X X X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X X X
X X X
X X X X
X X X
X X X X
X
X X
X
X X X
X
X
X X X X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X X
X X X X X
X X X X
X
X X
X X
X
X X
X X
X X X X
X X X
X X
X X
X X
X X X
X X
X X
X X X X
Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
12
X
X
Access to space: engineering fundamentals Systems engineering Space mission design and management Principles of space applications Humans and biology in space Principles of space business and economics Basics of IT and knowledge management Space stations and tourism Design of space transportation systems Design of robotic and human spacecraft Hands-on small satellite design and testing Architecture of space habitats Advanced space medicine and biology Space debris mitigation
Table 6b: International Space University
International Space University: Master of Science Space Studies
Core 5.0 Project Management and Control 5.1 Oversee Technical Acquisition 5.2 Manage ResourcesP 5.3 Manage Contracts 5.4 Manage/Implement Systems EngineeringP 6.0 Organizational Environments 6.1 Understand Organizational Structure, Mission, Goals 6.2 Apply PM/SE Procedures and Guidelines 6.3 Manage External Relationships 7.0 Human Capital Management 7.1 Manage Technical Staff Organization and Performance 7.2 Manage Team Dynamics 8.0 Security, Safety and Mission Assurance 8.1 Organize Security 8.2 Organize Safety and Mission Assurance 9.0 Professional and Leadership Development 9.1 Coach and Mentor Proteges 9.2 Communicate Highly Effectively 9.3 Lead Teams and Organizations 10.0 Knowledge Management 10.1 Capture, Organize and Distribute Knowledge P
Special Topics
X X
X X X
X X X
X X X X
X
X
X X X X
X X X
X X
X
X
X X X
X X X X
X X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
13
Fundamentals of Systems Engineering System Architecture and Design Designing Space Missions and Systems Mission and System Design Verification & Validation Systems Integration Project Management of Complex Systems Human Spaceflight Space Launch and Transportation Systems Cost Effective Space Mission Operations Crew Exploration and Vehicle Design Modeling and Simulation Design for Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Decision and Risk Analysis
Table 7a: Stevens Institute of Technology
Stevens Institute of Technology: Master of Engineering in Space Systems Engineering
Core 1.0 Concepts and Architecture 1.1 Form Mission Needs Statement 1.2 Describe System Environments
X X X X
X
1.3 Perform Trade Studies
X X
X
1.4 Create System Architectures 2.0 System Design 2.1 Define/Manage Stakeholder ExpectationsP 2.2 Define Technical RequirementsP 2.3 Logically Decompose SystemP 2.4 Define System Design SolutionP 3.0 Production, Product Transition and Operations 3.1 Implement the ProductP 3.2 Integrate SystemP 3.3 Verify the SystemP 3.4 Validate the SystemP 3.5 Transition the SystemP 3.6 Conduct Operations 4.0 Technical Management 4.1 Plan Technical EffortP 4.2 Manage RequirementsP 4.3 Manage InterfacesP 4.4 Manage Technical RiskP 4.5 Manage ConfigurationP 4.6 Manage Technical DataP 4.7 Assess Technical Product and ProcessP 4.8 Manage Technical Decision Analysis ProcessP P
Specialty
x * x * x *
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
x *
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X X X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
denote capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents. x* - for enabling systems
14
X
X
Fundamentals of Systems Engineering System Architecture and Design Designing Space Missions and Systems Mission and System Design Verification & Validation Systems Integration Project Management of Complex Systems Human Spaceflight Space Launch and Transportation Systems Cost Effective Space Mission Operations Crew Exploration and Vehicle Design Modeling and Simulation Design for Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Decision and Risk Analysis
Table 7b: Stevens Institute of Technology
Stevens Institute of Technology: Master of Engineering in Space Systems Engineering
Core 5.0 Project Management and Control 5.1 Oversee Technical Acquisition 5.2 Manage ResourcesP 5.3 Manage Contracts 5.4 Manage/Implement Systems EngineeringP 6.0 Organizational Environments 6.1 Understand Organizational Structure, Mission, Goals 6.2 Apply PM/SE Procedures and Guidelines 6.3 Manage External Relationships 7.0 Human Capital Management 7.1 Manage Technical Staff Organization and Performance 7.2 Manage Team Dynamics 8.0 Security, Safety and Mission Assurance 8.1 Organize Security 8.2 Organize Safety and Mission Assurance 9.0 Professional and Leadership Development 9.1 Coach and Mentor Proteges 9.2 Communicate Highly Effectively 9.3 Lead Teams and Organizations 10.0 Knowledge Management 10.1 Capture, Organize and Distribute Knowledge P
X X X
X
Specialty X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X X
X X X X
X
X X
X X X X
X
X
X X
X X X X
X
X
X X X
X X X
X
X X
X X X X
X
X
X X
X X X X
denote capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
15
X
4.2 Step Two: Assessing Proficiency Levels The second step of our systems engineering taxonomy is to add the detail of proficiency level to each capability for each program being assessed. Based on our detailed knowledge of the Stevens Institute of Technology’s space systems engineering course curriculum, Stevens was chosen to demonstrate this step in the process. While education cannot hope to duplicate real-life experience, there is also no substitute for hands-on learning. Any credible systems engineering education will provide a ‘hands-on’ component that introduces students to real life issues and the space systems engineering program is no different. For example, in an attempt to introduce students to the pitfalls and miracles that occur in hardware and software, Stevens’ supplies students with a functional spacecraft, test equipment and a set of requirements in their ‘Mission and System Design Verification & Validation’ course. Students are then asked to create a verification matrix and perform hardware/software related tests. The goal is to give students some real-life scars with hardware and software systems. For this step of the mapping process we focused on the ‘Apply’ proficiency level. Courses were then assessed as to whether the student potentially would or would not be able to ‘Apply’ the material in a real-life situation, or whether they might be able to do more. For example, in some areas, students could potentially learn the material and being able to ‘participate’ on a team effort to use the capability, but would not be able to ‘apply’ the capability without additional guidance. These were identified as Level I areas. Areas where the student could potentially ‘apply’ the capability in a real-life situation were identified as Level II areas. Areas where students might be able to lead others in the application of the capability were identified as Level III areas. The final outcome of the mapping for all six core courses offered as part of the Masters of Engineering in Space Systems Engineering program is summarized in Table 8. This mapping represents the ideal situation where the combination of course content, instructor experience and student engagement during hands-on activities combine to create ‘experience’ where ‘experience’ is defined as the ability to not only know the material but to apply the lessons learned in a reallife situation. 4.3 Step Three: Identifying and Addressing Gaps To develop a forward action plan, one must first identify the gap between the education provided and the critical capabilities to be met. The same thought process could be applied towards identifying gaps in employee training and performance in a company and the critical capabilities desired in the industry. In either case, the capabilities that are most critical can differ based on the organizational mission of the university or company. Gaps can be in either a missing emphasis on a capability or the inability to achieve the desired proficiency level of that capability. Weak areas can also be identified, not just gaps. Weak areas are those that do not go into enough detail in a particular capability or do not offer enough courses that address that capability. Once these gaps are identified, a forward action plan can be put in place to address the gaps. Changes in the program should be focused on replacing current curriculum with higher value add curriculum rather than simply adding to the current curriculum to address the gaps. A short list of suggested actions include: •
Review total curriculum for duplicate content and replace duplication with new, missing, content or extend current content beyond the present proficiency level.
•
Add in class group activities to enhance hands-on ability to apply content.
16
Table 8: Stevens Institute of Technology – Step Two Proficiency or Performance Level I II III IV Participate Apply Manage Guide
Stevens Institute of Technology: Master of Engineering in Space Systems Engineering 1.0 Concepts and Architecture 1.1 Form Mission Needs Statement 1.2 Describe System Environments 1.3 Perform Trade Studies 1.4 Create System Architectures 2.0 System Design 2.1 Define/Manage Stakeholder ExpectationsP 2.2 Define Technical RequirementsP 2.3 Logically Decompose SystemP 2.4 Define System Design SolutionP 3.0 Production, Product Transition and Operations 3.1 Implement the ProductP 3.2 Integrate SystemP 3.3 Verify the SystemP 3.4 Validate the SystemP 3.5 Transition the SystemP 3.6 Conduct Operations 4.0 Technical Management 4.1 Plan Technical EffortP 4.2 Manage RequirementsP 4.3 Manage InterfacesP 4.4 Manage Technical RiskP 4.5 Manage ConfigurationP 4.6 Manage Technical DataP 4.7 Assess Technical Product and ProcessP 4.8 Manage Technical Decision Analysis ProcessP 5.0 Project Management and Control 5.1 Oversee Technical Acquisition 5.2 Manage ResourcesP 5.3 Manage Contracts 5.4 Manage/Implement Systems EngineeringP 6.0 Organizational Environments 6.1 Understand Org Structure, Mission, Goals 6.2 Apply PM/SE Procedures and Guidelines 6.3 Manage External Relationships 7.0 Human Capital Management 7.1 Manage Technical Staff Org and Performance 7.2 Manage Team Dynamics 8.0 Security, Safety and Mission Assurance 8.1 Organize Security 8.2 Organize Safety and Mission Assurance 9.0 Professional and Leadership Development 9.1 Coach and Mentor Proteges 9.2 Communicate Highly Effectively 9.3 Lead Teams and Organizations 10.0 Knowledge Management 10.1 Capture, Organize and Distribute Knowledge P
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X
X
X X
Denotes capabilities for which there is a documented prescribed process in NASA and DOD Governance documents.
17
•
Extend course topics and exercises well beyond the capability and comfort level of the students.
•
Expose students to present day space and systems design related challenges and global issues.
•
Add guest faculty involved in strategic policy development and advanced system design techniques.
•
Design exercises that force students to make mistakes in order to provide them the opportunity to learn from their mistakes.
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The government-industry defined competencies presented in this paper, originally developed through the space program, go far beyond NASA. The paper demonstrates that a competency-based approach for curriculum development is useful for academia, government, and industry. That is, using the systems engineering mapping process reviewed in this paper, an institution can identify potential areas for improvement in curriculum and training, with the goal of achieving a higher level of capability in the student and/or employee. Step one entails the mapping of the current state of system engineering expertise to 37 government-industry defined systems engineering capabilities once the capabilities have been validated with the customer set. These capabilities represent the knowledge, skills, and behaviors that systems engineers are expected to possess and perform as a part of their job. Step two is a more detailed mapping by capability to one of four levels of proficiency within each capability. Step three involves identifying the gap between the desired state of system engineering competencies, capabilities, and proficiency levels, and the current state; and putting a forward action plan in place to address the gap. While the process reviewed in this paper uses universities as the case study, any institution can be taken through a similar process. For example, a business can apply this process to determine the organization’s gaps in meeting the desired proficiency level in each area of systems engineering competency most critical to their needs. In this way, the company can tailor employee training and challenging projects with the goal of closing that gap. Institutions should validate the results in this paper with their government and industry clients to determine the specific competencies to apply. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank the JSE reviewers for providing insightful and detailed comments on their review; comments that were instrumental in bringing this paper up to the level of quality that it is today. REFERENCES AFIT Online, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics. AFIT Online 2007-2008 Graduate Catalog. Retrieved 07/25/2008 from http://www.afit.edu/en/ener/catalog.cfm Cowper, D., et. al., Systems Engineering Core Competencies Framework. Retrieved 02/28/2009, from http://www.incose.org.uk/Downloads/Core%20Competencies%2021-July-05.pdf Education & Research Technical Committee (ERTC), Directory of Systems Engineering Academic Programs. Retrieved 07/22/2008, from http://www.incose.org/educationcareers/academicprogramdirectory.aspx
18
ERAU, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Master of Science in Engineering Physics. Retrieved 02/26/2009 from http://www.erau.edu/db/degrees/ms-engineeringphysics.html W. Fabrycky, W. and E. McCrae, E., Systems Engineering Degree Programs in the United States. Proceedings of the 15th Annual INCOSE International Symposium, July 2005. W. Fabrycky, Understanding and Influencing Systems Engineering in Academia. INCOSE Insight, July 2007. FIT, Florida Institute of Technology, University College, 2008-2009 Extended Studies and Distance Learning Catalog. Retrieved 2/26/2009 from http://uc.fit.edu/es/catalog/ ISU, International Space University, ISU’s Masters Programs. Retrieved 02/26/2009 from http://www.isunet.edu/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=40&Itemid=144 R. Jain, A. Squires, D. Verma and A. Chandrasekaran, A., A Reference Curriculum for a Graduate Program in Systems Engineering. INCOSE Insight, July 2007. R. Menrad and W. Larson, Development of a NASA Integrated Technical Workforce Career Development Model--The ROCK. Proceedings of the 59th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) 2008, September 29 – October 3, Glasgow, Scotland. National Research Council, Building a Better NASA Workforce: Meeting the Workforce Needs for the National Vision for Space Exploration. National Academies Press. 80 pages. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11916.html J. S. Newman, Failure-Space: A Systems Engineering Look at 50 Space System Failures, Acta Astronautica, vol. 48, pp. 517-527, 2001. SIT (2008). Stevens Institute of Technology, School of Systems and Enterprises. Space Systems Engineering. Retrieved 07/15/2008 from http://www.stevens.edu/sse/academics/graduate/Space_SysEng.html Space Foundation, The Space Report 2008: The Authoritative Guide to Global Space Activity: Executive Summary. Retrieved 03/04/2009 from http://www.thespacereport.org/08executivesummary.pdf Spacetech. Department of Earth Observation & Space Systems. Introduction to SpaceTech. Retrieved 08/21/2008 from http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=30e8e544-0cbc-47cf-97a3fa91c6828afd&lang=en A. Squires, Developing a System Engineering Curriculum Framework. School of Systems and Enterprises White Paper. Stevens Institute of Technology. Hoboken, NJ. UCCS, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, College of Engineering and Applied Science. MESO Program Information. Retrieved 08/28/2008 from http://eas.uccs.edu/meso_program_info.shtml UND, University of North Dakota, John D. Odegard School Of Aerospace Sciences, Department of Space Studies. Masters – Program Requirements, SpSt Degree Requirements, Master of Science. Retrieved 2/26/2009 from http://www.space.edu/Academic%20Programs/ProgramRequirements.aspx Webster University, School of Business and Technology. Graduate Catalog. Retrieved 08/29/2008 from http://www.webster.edu/gradcatalog/degrees/space.shtml
19
APPENDIX A: COMPETENCY AREAS AND CAPABILITIES There are ten systems engineering competency areas that describe, in broad terms, what is expected of systems engineers in terms of particular components or functions of the job. Under each competency area, specific competency capabilities (hereafter referred to as ‘capabilities’) are listed. These capabilities express the overall knowledge, skills, and/or behaviors that systems engineers are expected to possess and/or perform as a part of their job. Capabilities can be measured against established standards, can be improved via training and development activities, and correlate to performance on the job. The ten competency areas and their respective capabilities are defined in more detail in the following sections. To determine one’s level of proficiency in or performance of a specific capability, the following four proficiency (performance) levels are used to assess the level of proficiency in a particular capability: • • • •
SE Proficiency Level I: Participate SE Proficiency Level II: Apply SE Proficiency Level III: Manage SE Proficiency Level IV: Guide
Proficiency levels are defined in more detail in Appendix B. 1.0 Concepts and Architecture: The first area covers competency in understanding the mission need, the concept of operations, and the system environment and applying this understanding to the development of a viable and complete system architecture. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 1.1 Form Mission Needs Statement: This capability addresses the ability to accurately identify the mission need and the basis for that need. This includes understanding what works and does not work in the current environment. The end product is the formulation of a mission needs statement that will result in desired customer approved outcomes based on defined and agreed upon success criteria. 1.2 Describe System Environments: This capability includes a full understanding of the system environment and the inherent constraints and the ability to establish design guidance for the expected environment. 1.3 Perform Trade Studies: Trade studies are important for comparing and contrasting the identified viable system level technical solutions. This capability begins with the development of the operations concept, and includes creating, validating, operating and correlating (with operational data) the system model. The end product of this capability is the identification and selection of a well balanced (cost, schedule, technical, quality) system level technical solution. 1.4 Create System Architectures: Developing the various system architectural views begins with establishing the proper bounds of the system and defining the external interfaces. Other tasks within this capability include functional decomposition, performance analysis, identification of subsystem relationships and internal interfaces and documentation of the various (operational, functional, physical and data) architectural views.
20
2.0 System Design: System Design starts with defining the stakeholder expectations, translating these expectations to technical requirements, decomposing the technical requirements into derived specification requirements, and generating and selecting the system design solution. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 2.1 Define/Manage Stakeholder Expectations: This capability covers the ability to identify all relevant stakeholders, obtain their expectations, and translate, validate, baseline and manage those expectations throughout the project lifecycle. 2.2 Define Technical Requirements: This capability includes defining the technical problem scope and the related design and product constraints; converting functional and behavioral expectations to technical requirements; defining Technical Performance Measures (TPMs); and validating and baselining the technical requirements. 2.3 Logically Decompose System: Under this capability, derived requirements are identified, allocated, validated and baselined. Derived requirement conflicts are identified and resolved and the baseline specifications are developed. 2.4 Define System Design Solution: The system design solution is developed by first defining, analyzing and selecting the best system design alternative; and then generating, verifying and baselining a full design description for the selected design solution. 3.0 Production, System Transition and Operations: The third competency area begins with implementing the enabling products and integrating the products into the system. Next, the system is verified, validated and then transitioned to the operational environment. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 3.1 Implement the Product: Implementing the product begins with acquiring or developing the essential building blocks of the system – the enabling products. Purchasing or reusing products involves reviewing the product’s technical and support documentation, preparing vendor or government requests for the product and inspecting and validating the acquired product. Producing products involves evaluating production readiness, monitoring product fabrication and preparing product support documentation. 3.2 Integrate System: Integrating the system includes preparing the system integration strategy and plan; obtaining and validating the lower level products; preparing the system integration environment; and finally, assembling and integrating the products and documenting the process and support required. 3.3 Verify the System: Verifying the system was built right begins with preparing the verification environment. This capability includes verifying the system against technical requirements, analyzing the system verification outcomes and documenting the system verification activities. 3.4 Validate the System: Validating the right system was built requires baselining the final system against the stakeholder expectations. This capability includes preparing to conduct the system validation, validating the system, analyzing the system validation outcomes and documenting the system validation activities. 3.5 Transition the System: This capability includes planning how the system will be transitioned; identifying special transition procedures; overseeing packaging, storing and moving of the system
21
and system documentation; preparing the receiving site for acceptance of the system; and documenting system transition activities. 3.6 Conduct Operations: This capability covers developing the operations plan and participating in and managing the operation of the system. 4.0 Technical Management: Technical management begins with planning the technical work and includes managing and assessing the requirements, the interfaces, the technical risk, the configuration, the technical data, the technical product, and the technical decision analysis process. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 4.1 Plan Technical Effort: Planning the technical effort includes scheduling, organizing and costing the technical work; preparing the Systems Engineering Management Plan, the validation plan, the verification plan, and other technical plans and obtaining stakeholder buy-in to these plans; issuing authorized technical work directives and documenting technical planning activities. 4.2 Manage Requirements: Managing requirements starts with developing a strategy for requirements management. This capability includes documenting requirements in their proper format, ensuring the requirements baseline is validated, and identifying and addressing out-oftolerance requirements; developing and maintaining requirements compliance matrices; reviewing Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs), implementing formal change control and disseminating approved changes; and documenting requirements management activities. 4.3 Manage Interfaces: This capability includes preparing the procedures for interface management, managing interfaces during system design and system integration, managing interface changes and documenting interface management activities. 4.4 Manage Technical Risk: This capability includes developing a set of strategies for technical risk management; identifying the technical risks, assessing the risks for severity of consequences and likelihood of occurrence, developing the risk mitigation and contingency action plan, monitoring the risks, and implementing the technical risk mitigation and contingency action plans as triggered; and documenting the technical risk management activities. 4.5 Manage Configuration: This capability includes developing a set of strategies for configuration management; identifying and baselining the configuration control items; establishing and implementing a configuration change process; documenting configuration descriptions, and maintaining change records and differences between configuration baselines; auditing baselines and tracking actions to address identified anomalies; and documenting configuration management activities. 4.6 Manage Technical Data: This capability includes developing a set of strategies for managing technical data which include collecting and storing the data, performing integrity checks on the data, maintaining and protecting the data, making the data accessible at the right levels to the right users, and recording and distributing lessons learned. 4.7 Assess Technical Product and Process: This capability includes developing a set of strategies for conducting technical assessments; identifying, collecting and analyzing process measures to assess work productivity and product quality; identifying, conducting, and performing follow-up actions for technical reviews; and documenting assessment activities.
22
4.8 Manage Technical Decision Analysis Process: This capability includes establishing guidelines for when and how to use a formal decision making process; defining types of criteria, acceptable range and scale of criteria and importance or ranking of each criteria; selecting evaluation methods, tools and techniques, identifying and evaluation alternatives, and selecting and recommending a solution; and documenting the decision analysis process. 5.0 Project Management and Control: Project management and control includes overseeing technical acquisition, managing resources and contracts, and managing and implementing the systems engineering process according to documented plans. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 5.1 Oversee Technical Acquisition: Overseeing technical acquisition includes identifying the technical inputs to and developing acquisition strategies; writing, reviewing and evaluating technical proposals; and executing and managing acquisition instruments. 5.2 Manage Resources: Managing resources includes identifying resources to be allocated and tracked, providing resource estimates to include cost, schedule, and labor, defining acceptable resource margins and allocating resources among subsystems; resource tracking activities such as tracking earned value for systems engineering tasks, monitoring resources and margins and reallocating as required and providing status relative to cost, schedule, and technical progress. 5.3 Manage Contracts: This capability includes developing the technical penetration and insight required to monitor the technical performance of contractors and providing the technical inputs for project contract management including change control. 5.4 Manage/Implement Systems Engineering: This capability includes managing the implementation of technical plans such as the Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP), monitoring and reporting the status of systems engineering related activities, evaluating and improving the systems engineering process, prioritizing technical team activities, distributing information across the subsystems, managing the systems engineering deliverables and monitoring system build-up. 6.0 Organizational Environments: The sixth competency area addresses the organization, its structure mission and goals, its project management and systems engineering procedures and guidelines and its external relationships. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 6.1 Understand Organizational Structure, Mission, Goals: This capability includes aligning systems engineering activities with the organizational vision, mission, objectives, goals and plans and functioning within the organizational structure and culture. 6.2 Apply Project Management (PM) and Systems Engineering (SE) Procedures and Guidelines: This capability includes structuring technical activities to comply with relevant organizational Project Management (PM) and Systems Engineering (SE) processes and guidelines 6.3 Manage External Relationships: This capability includes structuring technical activities to conform to industry and professional standards, participating in professional organizations, and contributing to the profession. When engineering systems for or with international partners, this capability also includes understanding and complying with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), as well as developing international partnerships, agreements, and standards.
23
7.0 Human Capital Management: Human Capital Management includes managing the technical staff and team dynamics. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 7.1 Manage Technical Staff Organization and Performance: This capability includes defining roles and responsibilities of the technical workforce and staffing the technical team, monitoring performance of the technical workforce and assuring required levels of performance are met. 7.2 Manage Team Dynamics: Managing the technical team includes developing the team by motivating team members, rewarding high performance and managing relationships with the team; managing team processes by establishing and managing interfaces and relationships with technical team members, customers, stakeholders and partners, and facilitating brainstorming, conflict resolution, negotiation, problem solving, communication, collaboration and team member integration; and planning and facilitating effective technical team meetings. 8.0 Security, Safety and Mission Assurance: The eighth competency area includes organizing security and organizing safety and mission assurance. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 8.1 Organize Security: Organizing security includes identifying Information Technology (IT) and other security requirements and developing and implementing the requisite security plan. 8.2 Organize Safety and Mission Assurance: This capability starts with planning and managing system safety by identifying relevant safety regulations and procedures, assessing potential hazards, monitoring, controlling, eliminating or reducing hazards, performing system safety analysis, verifying system safety, and conducting failure resolution and reporting. This capability also includes identifying and managing test, operational and industrial safety; identifying mission assurance requirements and developing safety and mission assurance plans and implementation strategies; and preparing for and participating in the Safety and Mission Assurance Readiness Review (SMARR), the Program Audit and Review (PA&R) process and the Certificate of Flight Readiness (CoFR) process, or other applicable safety reviews and processes. 9.0 Professional and Leadership Development: Professional and leadership development includes coaching and mentoring protégés, communicating in a highly effective manner, and leading teams and organizations. Capabilities within this competency area are defined as follows: 9.1 Coach and Mentor Protégés: This capability includes serving as a mentor and coach and providing advice and guidance, teaching juniors, and receiving periodic personal coaching to improve identified weaknesses. 9.2 Communicate Highly Effectively: Communicating superbly requires writing and presenting technical information and communicating technical decisions effectively; writing and presenting technical and status reports effectively; and practicing strong interpersonal communication through effective speaking, writing, and listening. 9.3 Lead Teams and Organizations: Leadership capabilities include delegating to others including assigning technical work defining, tracking and managing success criteria for performance; influencing others including providing vision, direction, and guidance, motivating and inspiring individuals to perform technical work successfully, recognizing and rewarding accomplishments and establishing and maintaining a collaborative and open work environment; and strong decision making and problem solving including defining problems accurately, establishing solution
24
criteria, evaluating alternatives and determining solution(s) based on facts, evidence, criteria and risk. 10.0 Knowledge Management: Knowledge management includes capturing, organizing and distributing knowledge. The capability within this competency area is defined as follows: 10.1 Capture, Organize and Distribute Knowledge: This capability includes identifying, recording and evaluating lessons learned and best practices of system engineering activities and related significant studies; and capturing work products throughout the product life cycle and making these work products available to appropriate users and stakeholders.
25
APPENDIX B: SYSTEM ENGINEERING (SE) PROFICIENCY LEVLES The following table, adapted from NASA’s Academy of Program/Project and Engineering Leadership, is a guide for assessing proficiency levels for each capability listed under the ten SE competency areas. SE Proficiency SE Proficiency SE Proficiency SE Proficiency Level I: Level II: Level III: Level IV: Participate Apply Manage Guide Technical Engineer Subsystem Lead Project Systems Program Systems Engineering / Project Team Engineer Engineer or Organization Leadership Description of Role/ Responsibility
Level of Expertise (LEO)/ Competency to Attain Proficiency Level
Validation of Levels
Learning and Development emphasis
Member Performs fundamental and routine SE activities while supporting a Level II-IV systems engineer as a member of a project team
Practitioners have a working knowledge of technical integration, systems engineering (SE) and project management (PM) concepts and tools and performed tasks and activities to support and contribute to a project. They demonstrated an awareness and understanding of the organization’s SE and PM tools, techniques, and lexicon. They have sufficient experience and responsibility and are prepared to contribute to fundamental and routine SE activities. Practitioner’s immediate supervisor Knowledge and understanding of technical integration, SE and basic PM.
Chief Engineer Oversees SE activities for a program with several systems and/or establishes SE policies at top organizational level.
Performs SE activities for a subsystem or simple project (e.g. no more than two simple internal/external interfaces, simpler contracting processes, smaller team/budget, shorter duration) Practitioners participated in or led SE activities (e.g. requirements development, budget and schedule development, risk management). They demonstrated the application of SE/PM tools, techniques, and lexicon at the project subsystem level, including use of SE/PM best practices. They have sufficient experience and responsibility and are prepared to lead SE and technical integration activities for a subsystem or simple project.
Performs as a systems engineer for a complex project (e.g. several distinct subsystems or other defined services, capabilities, or products and their associated interfaces) Practitioners have taken a significant leadership role in multiple phases of a project life cycle managing both programmatic and technical aspects and/or managing all technical integration and SE functions for a subsystem or small project. They demonstrated the integration of SE/PM tools, techniques, and best practices across subsystems at the project level. They have sufficient experience and responsibility and are prepared for a technical leadership role in support of a major system or project
Practitioners will have contributed to organizational goals and be effective in managing programmatic, technical, and strategic interfaces both internal and external to the organization. They demonstrated superior competencies in all Systems Engineering formulation and implementation activities. They have sufficient experience and responsibility and are prepared for a technical leadership role at the program, top organizational or HQ level.
Division Peer Group and System Engineer Development Program (SEDP) panel Leadership application and participation in SE.
Division Peer Group and SEDP panel
Division Peer Group, SEDP and organizationwide panels
Directing, structuring, and integration activities of SE.
The strategy for SE of large complex initiatives and the strategy and management of organizational initiatives.
26
APPENDIX C: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING CURRICULUM IN THE SPACE DOMAIN For each of the nine universities or institutions that were identified as offering systems engineering graduate level programs in the space domain, the courses within the curriculum are categorized into core, required, specialty, thesis/project, or other, using the following guidelines: •
Core (C) courses are typically referred to in the curriculum as core courses. These are defined as those specific courses that all students must take to obtain the degree or certificate. In some cases there may be a choice between multiple courses; however, core courses are primarily individual courses, all of which must be taken to satisfy the core requirements.
•
Required (R) courses are non-core courses that are not referred to as electives yet are also not related to the technical depth in the core subject, but they are still required to complete the degree or certificate.
•
Specialty (S) or Special Topic courses are non-core courses that may be called required or elective courses, but are focused on space, systems, or engineering; provide content related technical depth; and are required to obtain the degree or certificate being analyzed. There are usually two or more courses to choose from to meet technical depth requirements. In cases where specialty courses are not specifically listed for the degree, the categories or topics of the specialty courses are substituted in the analysis.
•
Thesis/Project (TP) courses are typically the capstone courses that allow the student to complete individual or team research in an area of specialty. These courses typically range from one course to four courses worth of credit hours and are suggested for completion towards the end of the student’s degree.
•
Other (O) courses represent the remaining courses that do not fall into one of the above categories, but are still required to obtain the graduate degree or graduate certificate.
The result of this categorization is shown in Table C.1. A short description of each university and their space based graduate curriculum follows. A.1 Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) The Air Force Institute of Technology not only offers a Masters of Science in Space Systems, but a student can also pursue a Systems Engineering Masters with a Space Systems track as well as a graduate certificate in Space Systems. A complete Systems Engineering Masters with a Space Systems track and the graduate certificate in Space Systems can also be taken through distance learning. These programs are offered through the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics. There are also three different specialties associated with this Space Systems Masters program: Space Systems; General Space Operations; and Information Operations based Space Operations. Specialty courses are in the following departments: Aeronautics & Astronautics (ENY), Electrical & Computer Engineering (ENG), Operational Sciences (ENS), and Systems & Engineering Management (ENV) [AFIT Online, 2008]. A.2 Delft University of Technology (TU Delft) The Delft University of Technology offers an annual SpaceTech program, the eleventh program of which started in September of 2008. The curriculum for the tenth annual SpaceTech program that ran from 2007 to 2008 was used for the analysis shown in Table 6, in the body of
27
the paper. To complete a Masters, the student attends five two-week sessions which cover nine areas of competencies. The core and specialty competencies are listed in Table 6. The requirements to complete the SpaceTech program include passing (>60%) a written exam after each course. A Masters in Space Systems Engineering is awarded when the student has passed all courses and successfully completed a Central Case Project [Spacetech, 2008]. Table C.1: Summary of Space Based Systems Engineering Curriculum Categorization # Courses or Modules Institution/ University
Program Type Master of Science (MS)
Field
C
R
S
O
Space Systems
6
1
3
1
3
14
AFIT
Master of Science (MS)
Systems Engineering with Space Track
4
2
3
0
3
12
AFIT
Graduate Certificate
Space Systems
4
0
0
0
0
4
TU Delft (SpaceTech)
Master
7
0
1
0
2
10
ERAU
Master of Science (MS)
5
0
2
0
3
10
Space Systems
8
0
3
0
0
11
Space Systems Management
5
6
0
0
1
12
Space Studies
1
0
2
0
2
5
Space Management
1
0
2
0
2
5
Space Systems Engineering
6
0
2
0
2
10
Space Systems Engineering
4
0
0
0
0
4
Space Operations
6
0
4
0
0
10
Space Studies
3
2
2
2
3
12
Space Systems Operations Management
6
0
5
2
0
13
AFIT
FIT/UC FIT/UC ISU ISU SIT SIT UCCS UND WU
Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS) Master of Engineering (ME) Graduate Certificate Master of Engineering (ME) Master of Science (MS) Master of Science (MS)
Space Systems Engineering Engineering Physics (Space Science)
28
TP Total
A.3 Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU) Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University’s Master of Science in Engineering Physics (Space Science) degree program provides education and training in space science and space systems engineering. The graduate level Masters program is offered through the Physical Sciences Department and has a strong emphasis on the technical nature of space science. The thesis option requires 6 elective credits and 9 thesis credits. The non-thesis option requires 15 elective credits or 5 courses courses [ERAU, 2008]. A.4 Florida Institute of Technology, University College (FIT/UC) The Florida Institute of Technology, University College, offers two space systems related Masters, in Space Systems or Space Systems Management. Both of these Masters are offered on site at NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Rockledge in Florida. The Space Systems Management degree requires five of the eight core courses required by the Space Systems degree, plus an additional six courses in management. The Space Systems Management degree also requires an applied management project course to be completed, whereas the Space Systems degree includes a thesis course among a list of electives that the student can choose from to specialize in [FIT, 2008]. A.5 International Space University (ISU) The International Space University offers a Masters of Science in both Space Studies and Space Management. Each Masters is obtained through the completion of five modules of courses. The first module consists of multiple core course topics to be completed over a period of seven weeks. The second and third modules are specialty courses completed over a period of nine weeks each. The final two modules are an eight week team project, and a twelve week internship and individual project. Each Masters begins with the same core curriculum and can be completed in a year if taken full-time. Alternatively, modules can be completed on a part-time basis over a period of seven years starting with modules 1 and 2, and then completing the remaining modules in any order [ISU, 2009]. A.6 Stevens Institute of Technology (SIT) The Stevens Institute of Technology offers a four-course graduate certificate that can also be applied towards a ten-course Masters of Engineering degree in Space Systems Engineering. These two Space Systems Engineering programs are offered through the School of Systems and Enterprises. While a majority of the courses can be taken through distance learning, at least two of the required courses have to be taken on site (site locations vary). Students are required to take six core courses and then they can choose two specialty electives, one from a space concentration and one from a systems concentration. The final two courses can be either a two-course thesis or one space systems related special topic course with one additional elective course approved by their advisor [SIT, 2008]. A.7 University of Colorado at Colorado Springs The University of Colorado at Colorado Springs offers a Masters of Engineering in Space Operations through distance learning only. This Masters is offered through the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering in the College of Engineering & Applied Science [UCCS, 2008].
29
A.8 University of North Dakota The University of North Dakota offers three variations of its Masters of Science in Space Studies: a thesis option, an non-thesis option and a distance learning non-thesis option. The nonthesis option requires a comprehensive exam. The degree requires 33 credits, but 12 courses, due to a 1-credit course required as part of the core courses. This Masters is offered through the Space Studies Department of the John D. Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences [UND, 2008]. A.9 Webster University The Webster University Master of Science in Space Systems Operations Management is offered with an Engineering and Technical Management Track. This track focuses on the environment, technology, and complexities of space operations. Courses emphasize the application of quantitative and qualitative methods to planning, executing, and managing programs in the global space industry. This Masters program is offered through the School of Business and Technology and is offered at three different locations in Colorado: Colorado Springs, Denver and the Petersen Air Force Base [Webster University, 2008].
30
