Abstract not found

Regular Paper This paper provides a foundation for modeling the set of activities and their relationships by which systems are engineered, or, more broadly, by which products and services are developed. It provides background, motivations, and formal definitions for process modeling in this specialized environment. We treat the process itself as a kind of system that can be engineered. However, while product systems must be created, the process systems for developing complex products must, to a greater extent, be discovered and induced. Then, they tend to be reused, either formally as standard processes, or informally by the workforce. We distinguish and clarify several important concepts in modeling processes, including: product development versus repetitive business processes, descriptive versus prescriptive processes, activities as actions versus deliverables as interactions, standard versus deployed processes, centralized versus decentralized process modeling, “as is ” versus “to be ” process modeling, and multiple phases in product development. We also present a basically simple yet highly extendable and generalized framework for modeling product development processes. The framework enables building a single model to support a variety of purposes, including project planning (scheduling, budgeting, resource loading, and risk management) and control, and it provides the scaffolding for knowledge management and organizational

In prior literature, it has been generally seen that there is no explicit theory of project management. We contend that it is possible to precisely point out the underlying theoretical foundation of project management as espoused in the PMBOK Guide by PMI and mostly applied in practice. This foundation can be divided into a theory of project and a theory of management. We link theories to the body of knowledge by comparing prescriptions derived from theory to prescriptions presented in the PMBOK. Secondly, we show, by a comparison to competing theories and by an analysis of anomalies (deviations from assumptions or outcomes as implied in the body of knowledge) observed in project management practice, that this foundation is obsolete and has to be substituted by a wider and more powerful theoretical foundation.

This presentation opened the USC-SEI Workshop on Spiral Development*

Certified by

The presence of space situational awareness is one approach to mitigating the long-term risks associated with space debris in low Earth orbit (LEO). As the U.S. and other nations continue to develop the space situational awareness mission area, questions arise as to how stakeholders should act to mitigate the effects of resident space objects and how our understanding of the physics of LEO inform the evolution of ground- and space-based sensors. To characterize interactions among international stakeholders, space situational awareness is modeled as a system of systems with technical and social elements. Through the use of game-theoretic cooperation archetypes and System Dynamics modeling, possible futures are explored. Extensions in space situational awareness capabilities are modeled as mechanisms to improve satellite survivability. Finally, general implications for system architecture and systems of systems are elucidated. I.