There are two significant "players" in development projects: the project manager and the systems engineer. They work together with the aim of meeting the technical (execution/performance, quality) and managerial (schedule, costs, and customer satisfaction) goals of the project. The purposes of the current study (Kordova S, Katz E, Frank M, Syst Eng 22(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21474) are to identify the management processes shared by project managers and systems engineers in the defense industry; to understand which factors influence the ways in which joint project management is accomplished and how it impacts meeting project goals; and to provide recommendations for joint project management that will lead to project success. The research method was qualitative, based on 16 semi-structured interviews with project managers and systems engineers in defense companies that deal with the development of technological systems. The main recommendations for joint project management are: Set a clear distribution of responsibility and delegation of authority between the both parties before starting the project; choose a project manager who was once a systems engineer or who possesses knowledge of engineering; insist on ongoing dialogue between the two professionals; solve/prevent conflicts through discussion and persuasion; and expand the common ground between the project manager and systems engineer's areas of responsibility.

There are two significant “players” in development projects: the project manager and the systems engineer, both working together in cooperation with the aim of carrying out technical (execution/performance, quality) and managerial (schedule, costs, and customer satisfaction) project goals. The goal of the current study is to identify the management processes shared by project managers and systems engineers in the defense industry, understand which factors influence how joint project management is accomplished and how it impacts meeting project goals, and provide recommendations for joint project management that will lead to project success. The research method was qualitative, based on 16 semistructured interviews with project managers and systems engineers in defense companies that deal with the development of technological systems. The main recommendations for joint project management are: clear distribution of responsibility and delegation of authority between the two professionals before starting the project; choosing a project manager who was once a systems engineer or who possesses engineering knowledge; insistence on an ongoing dialog between the two professionals and solving/preventing conflicts through discussion and persuasion; as well as expanding common ground between the project manager and systems engineers’ areas of responsibility.

Systems-thinking, a holistic approach that puts the study of wholes before that of parts, is an efficient way of dealing with real-world situations. By emphasizing the interrelationships between the system's components rather than the components themselves, systems thinking allows us to increase our personal and professional effectiveness, and transform our organizations. Specifically, systems thinkers can conceptually analyze the system without knowing all the details, recognizing the forest through the trees. They can see beyond the surface to the deeper patterns that are responsible for creating behavior [23]. The current study deals with the development of systems thinking among students and graduates of technology management. The goals of the study are to identify the factors that influence the development of systems thinking and to find ways to encourage this development [17]. We used a variety of research tools: A questionnaire for assessing the capacity for systems thinking, The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality type test and supervisor evaluations. In conclusion, the current study findings show that graduates with certain personality traits can gradually acquire or improve their capacity for systems thinking by receiving appropriate training and through a wide range of work experience, and by holding different job positions over time. Having a broad range of professional experience and holding different job positions can help graduates gain knowledge and become familiar with diverse systems and technologies.

Systems thinking is as a general description for a wide range of phenomena rather than a specific concept. In the business arena, for example, managers and engineers at all levels need strategic and holistic vision. Systems thinking is useful on all levels of the organization. Recently, we are witnessing a new system thinking research area-research approaches to identify the capabilities of systems thinking professionals, including their cognitive characteristics, and personal abilities. The study defined the aspects that impact the reinforcement of systems thinking among students and graduates of technology management [17]. Quantitative and qualitative methods are implemented: A survey for evaluating the systems thinking competence, The MBTI questionnaire and managers estimate. The study shows that systems thinking is a blending of acquired and innate skills. It can be developed through learning, training, and experience. Systems thinking is a measurable and consistent personality trait which may be used to distinguish between individuals.

To successfully perform systems engineering tasks, systems engineers need a systems view or, in other words, a high capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST). A tool for assessing systems thinking of engineers, once validated, may be used for systems engineering workforce selection and development, developing systems engineering curriculum, and education and training programs and a standard tool for assessing systems engineers' competencies. Since there is no known way for directly 'measuring' systems thinking in general and CEST in particular, an indirect way is needed. This paper proposes an idea for developing an indirect means, i.e. a questionnaire for assessing the CEST of systems engineers. The idea is composed of four logic layers.

Systems thinking is an indispensable tool in comprehending and analyzing real-world phenomena. Observed processes are naturally composed of many interconnected components which ought to be studied jointly rather than individually. Engineering systems thinking is a very valuable skill, which helps to successfully execute multi-disciplinary projects. In high-tech companies that deal with complex and dynamic systems projects, the need for engineers with high systems thinking skills is growing. Engineers with high systems thinking skills are able to understand the big picture and the project in its entirety, both functionally and conceptually, without necessarily knowing all of the small details. Systems thinking enables understanding the entire system beyond its components, and clarifies the importance of the isolated component as part of the system as a whole. Systems thinking helps understand how sub-systems connect to one whole system, and provides solutions for the client's specifications and requirements. In addition, systems thinking enables perceiving the inter-relationships and mutual influence among the system's components and other systems. The current study examined the development of systems thinking among engineers and engineering students. In addition, the personality traits of engineers with high systems thinking skills were examined by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality type test. This article also presents the initial results of the development of a new systems thinking study course, taught as a pilot course to industrial and management engineering students. It seems that engineers with certain personality traits can acquire or improve their systems thinking capabilities through a gradual, long-term learning process and by acquiring the necessary tools. Additionally, the study includes recommendations for the continuation of ongoing research on developing systems thinking.

This paper deals with the integration process in multidisciplinary technical systems projects. The paper reviews the objectives of the integration process, planning and managing principles, as well as the pitfalls and difficulties associated with this process. Various integration approaches are described and analyzed. A method for comparing integration approaches in systems projects is suggested. The paper then introduces the Model‐Based methods for virtual integration and examines how initial steps in that direction impact the conventional integration practices.

To perform successfully interdisciplinary engineering tasks, engineers need a systems view, in other words, a high capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST). Systems thinking is a major high-order thinking skill that enables individuals to successfully perform systems engineering tasks. Industrial engineers who work in complex, multi-dimensional and multi-disciplinary reality need to view systems in a holistic manner or in another words need to implement systems thinking. In the current study we identified the factors that influence the development of systems thinking among engineers and found ways to encourage this development. Moreover, we presented specific personality types that tend to naturally use the Systems Thinking approach. According to the study findings, Systems Thinking is most likely a combination of innate talent and acquired experience.

The current study deals with the development of systems thinking among systems engineers. The goals of the study are to identify the factors that influence the development of systems thinking among systems engineers and to find ways to encourage this development. This study is part of the effort of a full range of studies, which combine different disciplines, are being conducted among a number of populations, and use a variety of research tools.

Purpose: This paper deals with four layers approach for developing a tool for assessing engineering systems thinking. Every engineer and, in particular, industrial and systems engineer needs a systems view that enable to perform systems engineering tasks successfully. The paper’s purpose is to present a tool for assessing systems thinking of industrial and systems engineers. The tool may be used for industrial and systems engineering workplace selection and development, developing industrial and systems engineering curriculum, education, and training programs, as well as a standard tool for assessing industrial and systems engineers’ competencies. Design/methodology/approach: We have to find a way to evaluate a systems view or in other words, a high capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST) Since there is no known way of directly ‘measuring’ systems thinking in general and CEST, in particular, an indirect method is needed. This paper proposes an idea for developing an indirect means, i.e. a questionnaire for assessing the CEST of industrial and systems engineers. The idea is composed of four logic layers that will be presented in the paper. Findings and originality/value: Eighty-three, which later aggregated to thirty-four competencies, of successful industrial and systems engineers were identified in a previous study. They can be classified into four categories – ten cognitive competencies, eleven abilities, ten individual traits and three dealing with multidisciplinary knowledge and experience. Thus, the content validity of the proposed tool can be achieved by basing its items on the finding in the latter study. Additional studies were done on systems thinking among industrial and systems engineers and among engineers from various disciplines. One of the findings of a previous study is that in order to be a successful industrial and systems engineer, one must have both a will and interest in being an industrial and systems engineer. The three components discussed here – success in an industrial and systems engineering position, interest in industrial and systems engineering positions and CEST – are all interrelated. The will and interest to be an industrial and systems engineer means basically the desire and interest to be involved in job positions that require CEST. In other words, we may hypothesize that there is a high positive correlation between the engineering systems thinking extent (CEST) of an individual and his/her interest in what is required from successful industrial and systems engineers. Research limitations/implications: Owing to time constraints, the research only included a limited sample of industrial and systems engineers. In order to enlarge the external validity of this research, we should ask more subjects from different engineering disciplines and use additional tools such as interviews and observations. Originality/value: The framework of this research is unique in term of its new approach and evaluation processes

This paper deals with the integration process in technological systems projects. The paper reviews the objectives of the integration process, planning and managing principles, as well as the pitfalls and difficulties associated with this process. The following integration approaches are described and analyzed: hardware-assisted versus software only, bottom-up versus top-down, and hierarchial versus functional approaches. Then, a case study that focuses on the third group-the hierarchial and functional approaches-is presented. Four projects that were conducted at the same firm have been examined. The case study attempts to determine whether there is a relation between these two integration approaches and project success. The findings of the case study show that-particularly when customer satisfaction is determined as a major goal-the hierarchial integration approach is preferable to the functional approach, with respect to project success.

Much activity to develop systems engineering competency models has been done in recent years. This paper focuses on SE cognitive competencies. First, twelve SE competency models are presented, chronology sorted according to the published year. Then, only the cognitive competencies are extracted from each model and finally an integrated list of cognitive competencies is presented. The integrated list contains twenty cognitive competencies all related to systems thinking. This list is one dimension of a 4‐D SE Cognitive Competency Model. The other three dimensions are role, proficiency level and competency level. The model once validated may be used for systems engineering workforce selection and development, developing systems engineering curriculum and education programs and developing a tool for assessing systems engineering cognitive competencies.

In recent years, government and prime contractors have been expressing a growing demand, requesting that their defense R&D contractors shorten the Time To Market TTM. This paper presents a study aimed at investigating whether developing systems using fast approaches is always preferable to traditional approaches. Does working according to a fast development approach ultimately shorten TTM? And if so, what are the implications of achieving this goal in relation to meeting the requirements and the planned budget? Two groups of projects, three projects in each group, were examined. The traditional, step-by-step, development strategy was chosen for the projects in the first group while for the other three projects, fast development strategies were chosen. The findings of the study show that fast development approach is not always preferable to the traditional approach. Pushing for a shorter TTM eventually caused serious budget and time overrun problems.

Systems thinking is a concept of thinking about an issue as a whole, emphasizing the interrelationships among its components rather than the components themselves. The main goal of this study is to examine whether the ability for systems thinking can be developed through experience, education, courses, and training.We present graduate and undergraduate courses in management of engineering and technology, aimed at developing a capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST) in students. The undergraduate course is based on executing projects in teams. The graduate course is based on systems engineering principles. At the start and at the end of the courses, CEST is evaluated by addressing and measuring four components: cognitive characteristics, abilities, personal traits, and knowledge. The data collected in the current study was used to analyze the four above-mentioned components of CEST.The study findings allow us to conclude that systems thinking can develop by participation in courses and other appropriate educational programs. Better understanding of the ways in which system thinking is developed can provide a better foundation for systems thinking educational programs.

Purpose: This paper deals with the undergraduate “Industrial Engineering and Management” curriculum. The research’s purpose was to examine the in-depth coverage of teaching/learning in the combined field of industrial engineering and management, as opposed to the extent of widthwise multidisciplinary teaching/learning in this field (T-Shape dilemma). According to this purpose, the following research question was derived: With respect to widthwise multidisciplinary teaching and the depth extent of teaching in industrial engineering and management, what is the desired situation as opposed to the actual situation? Design/methodology/approach: In order to examine the T-shape dilemma, 16 in-depth interviews were conducted with senior-level managers in industry, and with leading academics in the fields of industrial engineering and management. The interviewees were asked questions regarding the planning and design of the curriculum in these fields. An analysis of the interviews was carried out by dividing the interviews into categories, and presenting the categories with the highest frequency occurring in all of the interviews. Findings and Originality/value: One of the most significant results was the great variability between the answers of senior-level managers in industry and those of the academics. While individuals in the business field (senior-level managers) place great importance on focusing studies on the management-business aspect, and acquiring multidisciplinary knowledge, academics emphasized the great importance of understanding the theories and rationale behind the learned material, acquiring a strong theoretical basis, and studying the basic principles, whose implementation is then expressed in a wide diversity of applications. Research limitations/implications: Owing to time limitations, the research only included 16 in-depth interviews. In order to enlarge the external validity of this research more interviews should be executed. Originality/value: The framework of this research is unique in term of its topic and analysis processes.

The larger, more complex, more dynamic, and more multidisciplinary technological projects get, the higher is the need for project managers and engineers with a systems view of the project to ensure project success. This study examined the potential contribution of being engaged in a multidisciplinary project on developing capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST) in project team members. The subjects were senior students conducting capstone projects in their 4th year of studies. Their CEST was assessed twice – at the beginning and end of the academic year. A significant difference was found between the mean CEST score at the end of the academic year, after completing the project, and the mean CEST score at the beginning of the academic year (p < 0.01). These results imply that CEST may be developed and/or improved while working as a member of a multidisciplinary project team.