Read monthly Project Performance International's Systems Engineering Newsjournal, named "PPI SyEN". PPI SyEN presents for the engineering professional 30-60 pages of valuable technical articles on topical subjects, shorter technical pieces, in-depth coverage of the month's news in systems engineering and directly related fields, pointers to useful resources and relevant industry events, plus limited information on PPI's activities.

Welcome to PPI SyEN 18


A Quotation to Open On

Feature Articles

  • The Role of Values in Identifying Systems Engineering Competencies
  • The Use of Morphological Analysis and Bayesian Networks as Decision Support Methods for Strategic Problem Spaces

Systems Engineering News

  • IIBA Business Analysis Competency Model Now available
  • INCOSE eNote: News and Notes from the INCOSE Network
  • INCOSE Working Group Award for Collaboration
  • Getting Close – A Systems-Oriented Architecture Framework to be released as Open Source
  • Call for Participation: INCOSE Systems Engineering and Architecting Doctoral Student Network (SEANET) 2010 Workshop
  • Upcoming INCOSE Webinar on Lean Enablers for Systems Engineering

Featured Societies – TBD

INCOSE Technical Operations – Process Improvement Working Group

Systems Engineering Software Tools News

  • 3SL® Inc. Releases Cradle®-6.2 Requirements Management and Systems Engineering Software
  • Cradle® March 2010 Newsletter

Systems Engineering Books, Reports, Articles and Papers

  • Systems of Systems
  • Systems Research Forum (SRF) Volume: 3, Issue: 2 (December 2009)
  • Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide Version 2.0 Now Available

Conferences and Meetings

Education and Academia

  • MIT Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative
  • Adjunct Faculty Position – Systems Engineering
  • Arizona Western College (AWC) Builds Up Engineering Program

Some Systems Engineering-Relevant Websites

Standards and Guides

  • ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 Plenary meeting
  • IEEE Reaffirms Five Software and Systems Engineering Standards

A Definition to Close on – TBD

PPI News

PPI Events

A Quotation to Open On


Feature Articles

The Role of Values in Identifying Systems Engineering Competencies

Duarte Gonçalves

+27 12 841 3963


Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)

P.O Box 395

Pretoria, South Africa


Internationally, there appears to be a shortage of Systems Engineering (SE) skills as predicted by Professor Peter Lindsay of the University of Queensland (Australia)[1]: “The existing international shortage of systems engineers is likely to double in the next few years”. This is a problem, specifically in South Africa, where organizations such as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research[2] (CSIR), have a great demand for these skills. The Defence, Peace, Safety and Security (DPSS) unit of the CSIR provides defence science and technology support to the South African National Defence Force and various international customers. This unit has experienced growth of 30% in some business areas for a number of years leading to significant demand for SE skills.

The business value of screening to identify systems engineering potential lies in the cost currently incurred because of the shortage of SE’s and the lead-time in developing SE’s. These costs include opportunity costs resulting from not being able to access new projects, and project risks, a consequence of not having the adequate skills on current projects.

For systems engineers, an interview would identify whether the person has the requisite knowledge and skills. The situation is more complicated for candidate SE’s, however, as they would not yet have fully developed knowledge and skills. We can only look at candidate potential in terms of the psychological attributes. These attributes include personality, cognition, values, interests, and attitudes. While some personality characteristics and cognitive abilities (Marais 2004, Toshima 1993, Kobori 1991, Capretz 2003 and Frank 2006) have been understood to be important for identifying systems engineering and related potential, values appear not to have received any attention. However, recent research (Goncalves and Britz, 2009 and Goncalves and Britz, 2010) has identified values as potentially important in identifying systems engineering potential.

Comparing values, interests and attitudes, values are the most stable over time (George and Jones 1997): “work attitudes, as knowledge structures, should exhibit a certain degree of stability, but not as much stability as values because one of the functions of attitudes is to help the individual adjust to changing conditions over time and stay attuned to the social context”. In the remainder of this article the focus is on values.

A value system is defined as “…a generalized knowledge structure or framework about what is good or desirable which develops over time through an individual’s involvement in the world. A value system guides behaviour by providing criteria that an individual can use to evaluate and define actions and events in the world surrounding him or her. An individual’s personal set of values determine which types of actions and events are desirable or undesirable” (George and Jones, 1997).

For the assessment of values, the Value Orientations (VO), from Cognadev International, was used. This model is drawn from Graves’ Spiral Dynamics Theory (amongst other theories). The VO measures seven broad value systems, which can be combined in a variety of ways to reveal the individual’s value orientation (the value systems accepted and rejected) and are represented in terms of different colours, in order to avoid ranking (Beck and Cowan, 2002). Each person may accept or reject different proportions of each of these value systems. The following value systems focus on individual needs:

  • RED: The need to control, to enforce dominance and power. The type of thinking here can be characterised as egocentric.
  • ORANGE: The need to perform, to achieve and be self-reliant. This value system depicts a strategic type of thinking.
  • YELLOW: The need to learn, to increase knowledge and experience.

The following value systems are more sacrificial and depict interdependent values:

  • PURPLE: The need to protect and be protected, to belong.
  • BLUE: The need for order and structure, to conform and be righteous.
  • GREEN: The need for spiritual growth and harmony, relationships. Feelings are more important than achievement.
  • TURQUOISE: The need to experience. Everything is interconnected. This value system depicts a holistic type of thinking.

A summary of correlations between the 21 systems engineering competencies on the INCOSE UK Competence Framework (INCOSE UK 2006) and the value systems found in the study (Goncalves and Britz 2010) is presented below:


Correlated with

Enterprise and Technology environment

not accepting Turquoise (We experience)

Determining and Managing Requirements

reject Green value system (We relate)

Concept Generation

accept Orange (I perform) but not Turquoise (We experience)

“Design for …”

not accepting Red (I control) while accepting Turquoise

Modelling and Simulation

not rejecting Yellow (I learn), Green (We relate) or Turquoise (We experience) and not accepting Red (I control)

Selecting the Preferred Solution

Yellow (I learn) accept and not rejecting Yellow

Integration and Verification

accepting Red

Enterprise Integration

not Red reject (I control), not Green Accept, not Turquoise accept

Integration of Specialities

Turquoise (We experience) reject

Lifecycle Process Definition

Red accept (I control) and Turquoise reject

Planning, Monitoring and Controlling

not rejecting Red (I control) and not accepting Turquoise

Values, as assessed by the Value Orientations assessment contribute to predicting high competence on at least 11 SE competencies. It appears that values have not been considered in the literature on SE screening. For many of the SE competencies, it is about what value systems are not rejected rather than what is accepted. It is also clear that the values are different for different competencies. From these results it appears that a better strategy to addressing the shortage of systems engineers is not to look for the super-systems engineer, but to form a team of people that will bring various value systems (along with other characteristics) and SE competencies.


Capretz, Luiz Fernando. 2003. Personality types in software engineering. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58, (2): 207-214. Science Direct, via Elsevier Science Ltd, http://www.sciencedirect.com

Frank, Moti. 2006. Knowledge, abilities, cognitive characteristics and behavioural competences of engineers with high Capacity for Engineering Systems Thinking (CEST). Systems Engineering 9, (2): 91-103. Wiley Periodicals, via Wiley InterScience, http://www.interscience.wiley.com

George, M. and G.R. Jones. 1997. Experiencing Work: Values, Attitudes and Moods. Human Relations 50, (4): 393-414.

Goncalves, D.P. and Britz, J. 2009. Screening Candidate Systems Engineers: A Research Design. Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual International Symposium of INCOSE, Singapore.

Gonçalves, D.P. and J. Britz. 2010. Screening Candidate Systems Engineers: Exploratory results. To appear.

INCOSE, UK. 2006, Systems Engineering Core Competencies Framework, Technical report, INCOSE UK, Issue 2. Available from World Wide Web http://www. incose. org. uk/Downloads. Last accessed 06 March 2008.

Kobori, Yuzo. 1991. Development of a software engineer aptitude test. Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research Institute, September, in Tokyo, Japan.

Marais, J. F. 2004. The Characteristics of a Great Systems Engineer. Proceedings of the Second Annual SA Chapter conference of the INCOSE, August 30 – September 1, South Africa.

Toshima, Yutaka. 1993. Standardization of an integrated aptitude test for system engineers: intellectual abilities and personality factors. Japanese psychological research 35: 182-92.

Cognadev International (2008), ‘Value Orientations’. http://www.cognadev.com

The Use of Morphological Analysis and Bayesian Networks as Decision Support Methods for Strategic Problem Spaces

Dr Alta de Waal


Meraka Institute

P.O Box 395

Pretoria, South Africa, 0001

Wicked Problems

Strategic decision support often involves the development of scenarios and complex strategy models. Many of the critical factors in the model may be non-quantifiable, since they contain strong socio-political dimensions. Furthermore, the uncertainties inheret in such problem complexes are in principle irreducible and often cannot be described fully. Associating quantitative measures to these uncertainties then becomes a superficial task.

The type of problems associated in the field of strategic decision support can often be described as wicked problems. The term ‘wicked problem’ was introduced by Rittel and Weber (1973) to describe complex problems that are mutlidimensional and nonquantifiable. The multidimensional aspect makes it difficult to solve one part of the problem without affecting another part of the problem. The nonquantitative aspect makes it difficult to solve with traditional quantitative methods (Plauché, 2010). Rittel and Weber defined wicked problems with the following characteristics (p. 161):

    1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem.
    2. Wicked problems have no stopping rule, because the solution to a wicked problem is not unique.
    3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but better or worse.
    4. There is no immediate or ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.
    5. Wicked problems provide little opportunity for trial and error because of their uniqueness, and therefore every attempt counts significantly.
    6. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.

Modelling methods

Nonquantified problem structuring methods addresses the shortcomings of traditional quantitative methods: Complex problem spaces such as wicked problems are approach by facilitating group interaction and providing a transparent framework for finding consensus on the problem definition.

Morphological Analysis (MA) is a problem structuring method that allows small groups of subject specialists to define, link and internally evaluate the parameters of complex problem spaces easily. This way, a solution space for the research question is created, as well as a flexible inference model.

A Bayesian network (BN) is not a nonquantified problem structuring method, but rather a probabilistic causal model. Therefore it allows for causal and hierarchical relationships between variables in the research question.

In De Waal & Ritchey (2007) we suggest the combination of these methods as two phases of a modelling process and thereby gaining the benefits of both methods when addressing wicked problems. A systems view of the problem is then obtained on two different levels:

  1. The MA provides a typological or morphological view, structuring the problem space according to logical relationships.
  2. The BN provides a causal or hierarchical view, structuring the problem space according to causal relationships.

We briefly discuss both methods and present a simple case study involving the use of both methods in sequence.

Morphological Analysis

In a logical approach, as is the case with MA, the coexistence or consistency between each factor needs to be described. MA begins by identifying and defining the variables of the problem complex to be investigated. Then, each variable is assigned a range of possible values. For example, the variable ‘colour’ may have the values ‘red’, ‘green’, ‘blue’, etc. As a logical approach, the possibility of coexistence of all values between variables is investigated. It makes sense that a field with 8-10 variables, each having 4 or more values, have millions of possible configurations. The number of configurations is reduced by only allowing consistent configurations (see De Waal & Ritchey, 2007) for a more detailed description).

The MA process goes through cycles of analysis and synthesis. These steps are (Ritchey and Stenström, 2002):

Analysis phase: Define the problem complex in terms of variables and variable values.

  1. Identify the dimensions or variables that best define the problem complex or scenario. Each variable is represented in a column of the morphological field.
  2. For each variable, define the range of relevant possible values. The values are represented in the rows of the morphological field. This step also concludes the analysis phase.

Synthesis phase: Link variables and synthesize an outcome space.

  1. Use a cross-consistency matrix to assess the internal consistency by considering only pairs of variable values that are internally consistent. (Internal consistency evaluates the logical, rather than causal relationship between two variables.)
  2. Synthesize an internally consistent outcome space. (MA software assists here by automatically “reducing” the solution space to contain only those solutions whose outcomes do not contain internal contradictions.)

At any stage in the process, revisit particular steps to adjust variables, values, and consistency measures.

The focus of MA lies in its focus on problem formulation, parameterisation and the establishment of an internal structure. This is achieved in a systematic, traceable manner.

Bayesian networks:

BNs are causal networks that establish causal relationships between variables. A causal network consists of nodes (variables) and arcs (directed links) between them. Each variable may have a range of (mutually exclusive) values. The strengths of the links between variables are defined by probabilities. The major modelling tasks can be captured by the following 3 questions:

  1. What are the variables and variable values?
  2. What does the graphical (causal) structure look like – i.e. between which variables are there dependencies and what are their causal directions?
  3. What are the strengths of these dependencies?


Both MA and BNs allow the user to ask what-if questions. In practise this means that if a value of a variable is given as an input, the output (answer) of the model is the values of other variables that can be associated with the input. The difference between the two modelling methods is that MA answers the question with possibilities and BN answer the question with probabilities. This will become clear in the following case study.

Case Study

The example that we present is a small model that involve the development of a decision support model for assessing the environmental impact of different fire-fighting methods under different conditions (see De Waal & Ritchey, 2007 for more detail). The objective of the model is to provide decision makers with the best fire-fighting method under different circumstances. The primary intension of the model is for planning, education and training.

Morphological Analysis

The following figure illustrates the MA model for this problem complex. The columns represent the variables, with each cell depicting a possible value for the variable. This specific example can be interpreted as follows:

If the fire-fighting method ‘water, no control’ is used under the circumstances specified in the first four columns, it is consistent with the outcomes ‘long and short term’ environmental consequences.

Figure 1: Morphological model of case study

Bayesian network

The next step is to develop a causal structure of the variables defined in the MA field. The BN graphical structure for this is illustrated in the following figure.

Figure 2: Bayesian network of case study

Once the strength of the links between variables is established, the following ‘what-if’ questions can be asked: The first and most natural mode is synthetic and “predictive”, i.e. given a set of circumstances and a selected fire-fighting method, what is the likelihood of substances spreading, leading to negative consequence for the environment.

Figure 3: Example of Predictive mode. What if we use ‘Water with no control’ on a particular instance?

Another mode is analytic and ‘diagnostic’, i.e. given a degree of environmental impact, what are the circumstances and fire-fighting methods that can lead to this?

Figure 4: Example of Diagnostic mode: Under what circumstances can irreversible environmental damage be done?


Morphological analysis and Bayesian networks were presented as two modelling methods in a two-phased modelling process. Both methods depict a problem complex in a systematic view. MA focuses on the logical relationships between variables and BNs depicts the causal relationships between variables.

Both methods enable the user to systematically evaluate decisions under different circumstances by asking what-if questions. Although the models cannot truly predict outcomes under circumstances, it provides, it aids the understanding of relationships between variables and how variables influence each other. These methods prove to be very valuable in decision support of wicked problems.


De Waal, A & Ritchey, T. Combining morphological analysis and Bayesian networks for strategic decision support, OriON, Volume 23(2), pp 105-121, 2007.

Plauché, M., De Waal, A., Grover, A., and Gumede, T. Morpological Analysis: A method for selecting ICT applications in South African government service delivery, Information Technologies and International Development, Volume 6(1), pp 1-20, 2010.

Ritchey, T., & Stenström, M. (2002). Using morphological analysis to evaluate preparedness for accidents involving hazardous materials. Study the Swedish Rescue Services Board presented at the 4th International Conference for Local Authorities, Shanghai. Retrieved July 2007, from http://www.swemorph.com/downloads.html

Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Science, Volume 4(2), pp 155–169., 1973

Systems Engineering News

IIBA Business Analysis Competency Model Now available

IIBA® announced the release of the new Business Analysis Competency Model, a tool for assessing the ability of business analysts to work in the role. It includes 53 competencies and indicators/behaviors of the competency, and describes the qualities that can make a Senior BA successful in performing the activities outlined in the BABOK® Guide.

The Competency Model is beneficial to organizations and business analysis professionals for a wide range of uses such as assessing performance, identifying areas for professional development, conducting job reviews, assessing training programs, and more. To learn about the Competency Model and Licenses, visit the IIBA website.

More information

INCOSE eNote: News and Notes from the INCOSE Network

Vol 7 Issue 2, February 2010

INCOSE Working Group Award for Collaboration

The INCOSE Working Group Award for Collaboration was presented to the Model Driven System Design WG (MDSD WG) Co-Chairs: Phil Spiby from Eurostep and Roger Burkhart from John Deere.

“For their professional contributions, personal efforts and over a decade of effort to bring ISO10303-AP233 to fruition as the enabler for information exchange in an integrated Model Based Systems Engineering environment.”

More information

Getting Close – A Systems-Oriented Architecture Framework to be released as Open Source

Over the last year London Underground Ltd has been working on an architecture framework, TRAK. The original idea was very much centred on the rail domain. It is based on MODAF and in the process of distilling the bare bones we’ve ended up with something that is

a) domain free

b) centred on the ‘System’ stereotype

c) captures physical, organisation membership, responsibility extent (for solution parts) and human competence as well as the inevitable computer-computer interfaces

d) based around ISO 42010 / IEEE 1471 wrt specification of views, consistency rules etc.

More information

Call for Participation

INCOSE Systems Engineering and Architecting Doctoral Student Network (SEANET) 2010 Workshop

March 16, 2010

INCOSE seeks to foster and accelerate doctoral research in the field of systems engineering, and one means to do this is by connecting graduate student researchers through a network. The purpose of SEANET is to advance systems engineering research by providing a collegial support network, research resources, and industry contacts that will enable the completion of doctoral dissertations related to systems engineering. The INCOSE SEANET invites current and soon-to-begin doctoral students to participate in a 1-day workshop at Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ. This event will precede the CSER 2010.

More information

Upcoming INCOSE Webinar on Lean Enablers for Systems Engineering

INCOSE Webinar: Lean Enablers for Systems Engineering

Date: 17 March 2010

Time: 15:00 UTC

Presenter(s): Bo Oppenheim

General Webinar Details: 


Featured Society – TBD


More information

INCOSE Technical Operations

Process Improvement Working Group



The PIWG Charter is to:

  • Facilitate improvement of SE Process thru expansion of current practices to include new issues
  • Coordinate improvement mechanisms throughout INCOSE to expand current practices
  • Provide to INCOSE Membership


The vision of the Process Improvement WG is to be the acknowledged leader in advancing the overall continual improvement of the Systems Engineering Processes throughout the systems engineering community.


The mission of the Process Improvement WG is to take stakeholders needs, real world constraints, and capture the direction for potential continual improvement for the systems engineering processes for the future. This captured direction should provide value added to systems engineering practitioners in the future.


The objectives of the Process Improvement WG are to:

  • Capture the purpose, output and description of systems engineering processes as identified in ISO 15288 and INCOSE SE Handbook
  • Identify, develop and coordinate any proposed improvements for the future systems engineering process.
  • Recommend standardized approaches for systems engineering process definition.
  • Enhance the working group members’ knowledge of process improvement methods.
  • Develop an integrated approach for corporate level strategy for process improvement that would encompass the concept and application of continual improvement for systems engineering tailored to the organization.
  • Provide support for INCOSE Quick Review Process for applications such as maturity models.
  • Provide INCOSE representation in CMMI administration activities to provide consistent Systems Engineering Process application.


Microsoft Powerpoint  2008 International Workshop SE Process Improvement Summary Presentation Size: 200K


Co-Chair: Karen Bausman, Air Force Center for Systems Engineering

Chair: Karen Richter

Contact SE Process Improvement and Capability Evaluation Working Group for additional information or to join this group.

Accomplishments and Products

Members of the Process Improvement WG meet twice yearly at the International Workshop and the International Symposium. They also hold teleconferences as needed and if an INCOSE Quick Review is required may interact through e-mail. There are several ways to participate including:

  • Working Member: Participates in most meetings and teleconferences as well as any Quick Reviews.
  • Reviewing Member: Participates in all Quick Reviews.
  • Informational Member: Receives information via e-mail and participates in as many meeting, teleconferences and reviews as possible.

Current Projects

  • Review draft of ISO 29110 Life Cycle for Very Small Enterprise.
  • Investigate background for Technology Insertion, Front End SE and Reverse Engineering plus others
  • Set up communication chain through email and Bi-monthly telecons.

Systems Engineering Software Tools News

3SL® Inc. Releases Cradle®-6.2 Requirements Management and Systems Engineering Software

3SL announced the release of Cradle-6.2. Cradle-6.2 implements the first of many planned steps to ensure interoperability, supporting both current and up and coming data formats. The newly added support for XML and RIF 1.1a highlights this commitment. XML allows for consistent and predictable mapping of data between Cradle and other data sources, while RIF 1.1a builds on the XML functionality, extending Cradle data schema to match the Requirements Interchange Format heavily used in European auto manufacturing.

More information

Cradle® March 2010 Newsletter


Systems Engineering Books, Reports, Articles and Papers

Systems of Systems

By Dominique Luzeaux and Jean-René Ruault

Publisher: Wiley, Publication Date: January 2010

ISBN-13: 9781848211643

Small thumbnailSummary:

In recent decades, the systems designed in the fields of banking, health, transportation, space, aeronautics, defense, etc. have been becoming increasingly larger. With the growing maturity of information and communication technologies, systems have been interconnected within growing networks, yielding new services through the combination of the system functionalities. This has led to an increasing complexity that has to be managed in order to take advantage of these system integrations.

Part 1 “Systems of systems: concepts and practical illustrations” is a multidisciplinary work on the concept of the “systems of systems” that is discussed extensively in current literature. After a critical comparison of the different definitions and a range of various practical illustrations, it provides key answers as to what a system of systems is and how its complexity can be mastered.

Part 2 “Systems of systems engineering: methods and tools”’ focuses on both engineering and modeling, and standardization issues which are critical in order to deal with the key steps of systems-of-systems engineering: elicitation of stakeholders’ needs, architecture optimization, integration of constituent systems, qualification and utilization.

More information

Systems Research Forum (SRF)
Volume: 3, Issue: 2 (December 2009)


  1. The Art and Science of Systems Engineering by Michael Ryschkewitsch, Dawn Schaible and Wiley Larson
  2. Smart Systems Architecting: Computational Intelligence Applied To Trade Space Exploration And System Design by Cihan H. Dagli, Atmika Singh, Jason P. Dauby And Renzhong Wang
  3. Model-Based Technical Planning: An Evaluation Of Description Techniques by Jonas Andersson And Tomas Huldt


  1. System and Context Modeling — The Role of Time-Boxing and Multi-View Iteration by Gerrit Muller

More information

Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide Version 2.0 Now Available

The Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide editorial team is pleased to announce the release of Version 2.0. Version 2.0 supersedes Version 1.0, which was released in July 2007 and was the result of a project initiated by the Lean Advancement Initiative (LAI) at MIT in cooperation with:

  • the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE),
  • Practical Software and Systems Measurement (PSM), and
  • the Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEAri) at MIT.

icon Systems Engineering Leading Indicators Guide Version 2.0

More information

Conferences and Meetings

Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering and Architecture Design:

Early Aspects and Climate Change (Early Aspects at AOSD 2010)

March 15, 2010


DoD Architectures: System of Systems Engineering Forum

March 15 – 17, 2010, Washington, DC, United States


Automatic Verification and Analysis of Complex Systems

1st AVACS Spring School

March, 15-19 2010, Oldenburg, Germany


NDIA Systems Engineering “Top Systems Engineering Issues” Workshop

March 17-18, 2010, National Defense Industrial Association, 2111 Wilson Blvd, Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22201


Systems Engineering “Top Systems Engineering Issues” Workshop

March 17-18, 2010, NDIA


CSER 2010 8th Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research

March 17-19, Hoboken, NJ, USA


Sixth Workshop on Model-Based Testing (MBT 2010)

Satellite workshop of ETAPS 2010

March 21, 2010, Paphos, Cyprus



March 21 – 26, 2010, Sierre, Switzerland


7th Workshop on System Testing and Validation (STV10)

In conjunction with IEEE ECBS 2010, Oxford, UK

March 22-26, 2010


The Third Edition of the Requirements Engineering Track (RE-Track’10)

Part of the 25th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. (SAC 2010)

March 22 – 26, 2010, Sierre, Switzerland


Systems Engineering Lean Enablers and Leading Indicators

March 23, 2010, Laguna Cliffs Resort, Marriott Hotel – Dana Point


Systems Research Showcase, INCOSE UK, Bristol Local Group

March 24, 2010, University of Bristol, exact location MVB/KES


2010 IEEE International Systems Conference

April 5-8, 2010, Hyatt Regency Mission Bay Spa and Marina, San Diego, CA


10th Annual Cornell University Systems Engineering Forum 2010

April 7-8, 2010, Statler Hotel Amphitheater


Introduction to Dynamic Modeling with STELLA and iThink

April 7-9, 2010, Buena Vista Palace Hotel & Spa, Orlando, FL


Quality of Model-Based Testing (QuoMBaT 2010)

Paris, France

April 10, 2010


CHI 2010 Workshop: Context-Adaptive Interaction for Collaborative Work

April 10, 2010, Atlanta, GA, USA


INCOSE-Crossroads of America 2010 Spring Mini-Conference

April 10, 2010 from 8:30 AM – 4:00 PM (ET), West Lafayette, IN


CHI 2010 (ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems)

April 10 – 15, 2010, Atlanta, GA, USA


5th International Workshop on Model-Driven Development of Advanced User Experience and UI Engineering

Organised at CHI 2010

April 10 – 15, 2010, Atlanta, GA, USA


2010 Spring Simulation Multiconference (SpringSim’10)

April 11 – 15, 2010, Florida Hotel and Conference Center; Orlando, FL, USA


Symposium on Theory of Modeling and Simulation – DEVS Integrative M&S Symposium (DEVS’10)

April 11 – 15, as part of the 2010 Spring Simulation Multiconference at the Florida Mall Hotel and Conference Center in Orlando, FL, USA

First Workshop on Green and Smart Embedded System Technology: Infrastructures, Methods and Tools – GREEMBED 2010

In conjunction with CPSWEEK 2010

April 12th, 2010, Stockholm, Sweden


WER’10: 13th Workshop on Requirements Engineering

April 12-13, 2010 – Cuenca, Ecuador


Agent-Directed Simulation Symposium (ADS’10)

Part of the 2010 Spring Simulation Multiconference (SpringSim’10)

April 12-15, 2010, Orlando, Florida, USA


Second NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM 2010)

April 13 – 15, 2010, USA


The Ergonomics Society Annual Conference 2010

April 13-15, 2010, Keele University, Staffordshire


COFES: Congress on the Future of Engineering Software (COFES) 2010

April 15-18, 2010, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA – The Scottsdale Plaza Resort


Overcoming Complexity Seminar 1

April 21, 2010, NDIA, Arlington, VA


Lean Software & Systems Conference 2010

April 21-23, 2010, Atlanta


2010 The 2nd IEEE International Conference on Systems Engineering and Modeling (ICSEM 2010)

April 23 to 25, 2010, Bangkok, Thailand


22nd Annual Systems & Software Technology Conference (SSTC)

April 26-29, 2010, Salt Lake City, Utah


The Second International Conference on Complexity, Systems Thinking, and Social Entrepreneurship

April 30 – May 2, 2010, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York


Fifth Workshop on SHAring and Reusing architectural Knowledge – SHARK 2010

32nd Int. Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE 2010)

May 2-8, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa


Systems Engineering and Test & Evaluation (SETE) 2010

May 3-6, 2010, Stamford Grand, Adelaide, Australia


Model-Based Engineering of Real-time and Embedded Systems

(MoBE-RTES 2010)

(organized in conjunction with ISORC 2010)

May 4th, 2010, Carmona (close to Sevilla), Spain


ISORC 2010 Symposium – 13th IEEE Computer Society symposium dealing with the rapidly expanding field of object/component/service-oriented real-time distributed computing (ORC) technology.

May 5-6, 2010, Carmona (close to Sevilla), Spain


International Workshop on Advances and Applications of Problem Orientation (IWAAPO-2010) at ICSE

May 8th, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa


The First International Workshop on Dependable Services and Systems (IWODSS 2010)

May 17-18, 2010, Montreal, Quebec, Canada


The 2010 International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems (CTS 2010)

May 17-21, 2010, The Westin Lombard Yorktown Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA


Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination (SPICE) 2010

May 18-20, 2010 – Pisa, Italy


EuSEC 2010: Systems Engineering and Innovation

May 23-26 2010, Stockholm, Sweden


Siemens PLM Connection Americas 2010

Gaylord Opryland, Nashville, TN

May 24 – Thursday May 27, 2010


XP2010 Workshop: Dealing With Usability in an Agile Domain

June 1, 2010,Trondheim, Norway


3rd International Conference – From Research to Teaching Formal Methods: The B Method (TFM-B’10)

June 7, 2010, Nantes, France


The 22nd International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’10)

June 07-11, 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia



Exploring Modelling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD 2010)

In conjunction with CAiSE 2010

June 7-8, 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia


11th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (BPMDS’10)

In conjunction with CAiSE 2010

June 7-8, 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia


Fourth International i* Workshop – istar 2010

In conjunction with CAiSE 2010

June 7-8, 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia


6th International Workshop on Enterprise & Organizational Modeling and Simulation (EOMAS 2010)

In conjunction with CAiSE 2010

June 7-8, 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia


2nd International Workshop on Future Trends of Model-Driven Development

(FTMDD 2010)

In conjunction with the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2010)

June 8 – 12, 2010, Funchal, Madeira – Portugal


2nd International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Architecture and Repositories

(AER 2010)

June 8 – 12, 2010, Funchal, Madeira – Portugal


21st IEEE International Symposium on Rapid System Prototyping

June 8-11, 2010, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA


The Fourth IEEE International Conference on Secure Software Integration and Reliability Improvement (SSIRI 2010)

June 9-11, 2010, Singapore


Model-Based Verification & Validation from Research to Practice

2nd Workshop in conjunction with SSIRI 2010

June 9-11, 2010, Singapore


3rd Workshop on Model-based Testing in Practice

June 15/16 2010, Paris, France, in conjunction with ECMFA 2010


6th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications

(ECMFA 2010)

June 15-18, 2010, Paris, France


International Workshop on Formalization of Modeling Languages

Colocated with ECOOP 2010

June 21 or 22, 2010 – Maribor, Slovenia



June 21-25, 2010, Braga, Portugal



2nd International Workshop on Abstractions for Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency

a satellite event of Petri Nets 2010

June 21, 2010, Braga, Portugal


ACSD 2010: 10th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design

Collocated with Petri Nets 2010

June 21-25, 2010, Braga, Portugal


IEEE International Conference on Systems of Systems Engineering

June 22 to 24, 2010, Henry Ford College, Loughborough University, UK


ISARCS 2010 – 1st International Symposium on Architecting Critical Systems

Federated with CompArch 2010

June 23-25 2010 Prague, Czech Republic


1st International Workshop on Collaborative Modeling & Simulation – CoMetS’10

June 28 – 30, 2010, TEI of Larissa (Greece)


16th International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (RefsQ 2010)

June 30 July 2, 2010, Essen, Germany


2nd International Workshop on Model Transformation with ATL

In conjunction with Tools 2010 Federated Conferences.

June 30, 2010 – Malaga, Spain


IV Brazilian e-Science Workshop

(in conjunction with CSBC 2010)

July 2010, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil


Transformation Tool Contest 2010

Satellite workshop to TOOLS 2010

July 1-2, 2010, Malaga.


2010 International Conference on System Science and Engineering (ICSSE2010)

July 1-3, 2010, National Taipei University of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan


10th International Conference on Web Engineering

July 5 – 9, 2010 in Vienna, Austria


Summer Computer Simulation Conference (SCSC 2010)

July 11–14, 2010, Ottawa, Canada


4th ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems (DEBS 2010)

July 12-15, 2010, Cambridge, United Kingdom


20th Annual INCOSE International Symposium

July 11 – 15, 2010, Hyatt Regency O’Hare, Rosemont, IL, USA


4th IEEE International Workshop on Requirements Engineering For Services (REFS’10)

In conjunction with COMPSAC 2010

July 19 – 23, 2010, Seoul, Korea


1st International Workshop on Complexity and Real World Applications Using the Tools and Concepts from the Complexity Sciences to Support Real World Decision-making Activities

July 21-23, 2010, Southampton, England



System Dynamics Society 2010 Conference

July 25 – 29, 2010, Seoul, Korea


The 2nd International Workshop on Enterprise Architecture Challenges and Responses

To be held in conjunction with ICIS 2010

August 18 – 20, 2010, Yamagata University, Yonezawa, Japan


The Second International Conference on Advances in System Testing and Validation Lifecycle (VALID 2010)

August 22-27, 2010 – Nice, France


2nd International Workshop on Model-Driven User-Centric Design & Engineering (MDUCDE’10)

September 1st & 2nd, 2010, Valenciennes/France


European Systems & Software Process Improvement and Innovation

1-3 September 2010, Grenoble Institute of Technology, France


1st International Workshop on Reuse in Business Process Management (rBPM 2010)

September 13, 2010, Hoboken, New Jersey – USA


Modeling Business Information Systems (MoBIS 2010)

September 15-17, 2010, Dresden, Germany


7th International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of SysTems (QEST) 2010

September 15 – 18, 2010, Williamsburg, Virginia, USA at the College of William & Mary, Computer Science Department,


First International Workshop on Evolution Support for Model-Based Development and Testing (EMDT2010)

Co-located with the International Scientific Colloquium (IWK2010)

September 16, 2010, Ilmenau, Germany


15th International Workshop on Formal Methods for Industrial Critical Systems

(FMICS 2010)

September 20-21, 2010, Antwerp, Belgium


8th International Symposium on Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis (ATVA 2010)

September 21-24, 2010, Singapore


EPEW 2010: 7th European Performance Engineering Workshop

University Residential Center of Bertinoro, Italy

September 23-24, 2010


ACM International Conference on Design of Communication (SIGDOC’10)

September 26-29, 2010, São Carlos – São Paulo – Brazil


54th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

September 27-October 1, 2010, San Francisco


The 18th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2010)

September 27, 2010 – Oct 1, 2010, Sydney, Australia


Fourth IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO 2010)

September 27-October 1, 2010, Budapest, Hungary


Model-based Testing and Test Automation – From Research into Practice (MoTes2010)

September 27 – October 2, Leipzig


9th International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Methods in verifiCation

joint with 2nd International Workshop on High Performance Computational Systems Biology (HiBi 2010)

September 30 – October 1, 2010, Twente, The Netherlands

Co-locating with

5th International Conference on Graph Transformation (ICGT 2010)

September 29 – October 1, 2010

17th Annual workshop on Software Model Checking (SPIN 2010)

September 27 – 29, 2010


Fifth International Conference on Graph Transformation

University Of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

September 27 – October 2, 2010


ACM/IEEE 13th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

October 3-8, 2010, Oslo, Norway;


Fourth Asia-Pacific Conference on Systems Engineering (APCOSE 2010)

October 4-6, 2010, Keelung, Taiwan


2010 isee User Conference

October 4-6, 2010, The Westin Providence, Providence, Rhode Island


IFM 2010: Integrated Formal Methods 8th International Conference

October 11 – 14, 2010, Nancy, France


Sixth Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (NordiCHI 2010)

October 16 – 20, Reykjavik Iceland


FMCAD 2010 – Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design

October 20 – 23, 2010, Lugano, Switzerland


NDIA 13th Annual Systems Engineering Conference

October 25-28, 2010, Hyatt Regency Mission Bay, San Diego, CA


Requirements Days 2010

October 26 – 28, 2010, Mϋnchen


Complex Systems Design & Management 2010

October 27-29, 2010, Paris, France



29th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling

November 1-4, 2010, Vancouver, BC, Canada


2010 IITA International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems Engineering (CASE 2010)

November 7-8, 2010

Taipei, Taiwan


ICISE 2010: International Conference on Intelligent Systems Engineering

December 18, 2010, Bangkok, Thailand


ICECSE 2011 “International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering”

January 25-27, 2011, Dubai, United Arab Emirates


Education and Academia

MIT Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative

The Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEAri) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology conducts collaborative research to advance the theories, methods, and effective practice of systems engineering applied to complex socio-technical systems. The group actively shares its research with the systems community through events and publications, and maintains a web-based repository with information, presentations, downloadable publications, and upcoming courses to provide timely access to ongoing and recently completed research. Current research sponsors include US government agencies, Singapore DSTA/DSO, MIT-Portugal Program, AF Human Systems Integration Office, and selected corporations.

The group’s research portfolio includes socio-technical decision making, designing for value robustness, systems engineering economics, and systems engineering in the enterprises. Targeted domains include defense, transportation, critical infrastructure, and energy. Research outcomes are prescriptive approaches developed through a combination of practice-based research and theory-based research. Highly collaborative efforts with project sponsors are designed to ensure research has impact on the real-world engineering organizations. The outcomes of research are also shared with the engineering community though an annual research summit, and through MIT’s Professional Short Course summer program. Evidence of the value of the work as perceived by the systems community is seen in recent recognitions including the 2009 Outstanding INCOSE Journal Paper, IEEE Systems Conference Best Paper Awards in 2008 and 2009, and the two INCOSE Best Paper Awards of 2008.

SEAri research is disseminated through various written forms, including publications, theses, presentations, and working papers.

Visit the SEAri website at http://seari.mit.edu or contact the leadership team at seari@mit.edu

Adjunct Faculty Position – Systems Engineering

Institution: University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Location: Baltimore, MD

Category: Faculty – Engineering – Other Engineering

Posted: 02/19/2010

Application Due: Open Until Filled

Type: Part-Time/Adjunct

UMBC is currently recruiting for part-time, adjunct faculty as they are expanding their professional master’s, graduate certificate, special session and non-credit training programs.

Core areas of need include:

  • Systems Engineering
  • Legal Issues in Engineering

More information

Arizona Western College (AWC) Builds Up Engineering Program

AWC and University of Arizona announced a partnership aimed to smooth the path to a bachelor of science in systems engineering that will be available starting in the fall of 2010.

More information

Some Systems Engineering-Relevant Websites

Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEAri) Community

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

MIT Engineering Systems Division  Image  

ESD has a mission to transform engineering education, research, and practice through the emerging field of engineering systems; and prepare engineers to think systemically, lead strategically, and address the complex challenges of today’s world, for the benefit of humankind.

MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics 

MIT AeroAstro prepares engineers for success and leadership in the conception, design, implementation, and operation of aerospace and related engineering systems. We achieve this through our commitment to: educational excellence; creation, development, and application of technologies critical to aerospace vehicle and information engineering; and to the architecture and engineering of complex high-performance systems.

MIT Lean Advancement Initiative  Image  

LAI is an evolving learning and research community that brings together key aerospace stakeholders from industry, government, and academia.

System Design and Management Program  Image  

Created in 1996 in response to industry’s need to develop the next generation of leaders, SDM is at the forefront of graduate education at MIT. Not an MBA, SDM combines cutting-edge courses from the MIT Sloan School of Management and MIT’s School of Engineering, enriching the experience with innovative distance learning, flexible matriculation options and an interdisciplinary perspective.

MIT Strategic Engineering  Image

Strategic Engineering is the process of architecting and designing complex systems and products in a way that deliberately accounts for future uncertainty and context in order to minimize the effects of lock-in while maximizing lifecycle value.

Humans and Automation Laboratory  Image

Research in the Humans and Automation Lab (HAL) focuses on the multifaceted interactions of human and computer decision-making in complex sociotechnical systems.

Education & Research Networks

Council of Engineering Systems Universities

CESUN was established in 2004 by universities offering educational and research programs in engineering systems. Membership includes over 30 universities in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. The Council provides a mechanism for the member universities to work together developing engineering systems as a new field of study

SEANET Doctoral Student Research Network 

SEANET is an INCOSE sponsored network of doctoral student researchers working in the field of systems engineering and architecting. 

Professional Societies

International Council on Systems Engineering

INCOSE is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1990 with a mission is to advance the state of the art and practice of systems engineering in industry, academia, and government by promoting interdisciplinary, scaleable approaches to produce technologically appropriate solutions that meet societal needs.

IEEE Systems Council The IEEE Systems Council integrates activities of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers regarding aspects of multiple disciplines and specialty areas associated with the engineering of systems.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

AIAA is the principal voice and technical society devoted to global leadership in the aerospace community.

University Collaboration Partners

USC Center for Systems and Software Engineering

CSSE is a research center at the University of Southern California aimed at evolving and unifying theories and practices of systems and software engineering. 

Standards and Guides

ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 Plenary meeting

23–28, May 2010, Niigata, Japan


Information Processing Society of Japan /Information Technology Standards Commission of Japan(IPSJ /ITSCJ)



Organizer contact: Jacky Takahashi at: inq-sc7niigata@itscj.ipsj.or.jp

Meeting location

Toki Messe Niigata Convention Center

Address: 6-1, Bandai-jima, Niigata-city, 950-0078, Japan

Web: http://www.tokimesse.com/english/

More Informartion

IEEE Reaffirms Five Software and Systems Engineering Standards

The IEEE announced that it has reaffirmed five standards related to software and systems engineering.

They are:

  • IEEE 830™, “IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specification”
  • IEEE 1008™, “IEEE Standard for Software Unit Testing”
  • IEEE 1061™, “IEEE Standard for a Software Quality Metrics Methodology”
  • IEEE 2001™, “IEEE Recommended Practice for the Internet – Web Site Engineering, Web Site Management, and Web Site Life Cycle”
  • IEEE 1233™, “IEEE Guide for Developing System Requirements Specifications”
  • The standards are all sponsored by the Systems & Software Engineering Committee of the IEEE Computer Society.

More information

A Definition to Close on



PPI News




PPI Events (see www.ppi-int.com)

Systems Engineering Public 5-Day Courses (2010)

{Julie to plug in list by location to end of December 2010}

Requirements Analysis and Specification Writing Public Courses (2010)

{ Julie to plug in list by location to end of December 2010 }

Software Engineering Public 5-Day Courses (2010)

{ Julie to plug in list by location to end of December 2010 }

OCD/CONOPS Public Courses (2010)

{ Julie to plug in list by location to end of December 2010 }

Cognitive Systems Engineering Courses (2010)

{ Julie to plug in list by location to end of December 2010 }

PPI Upcoming Participation in Professional Conferences

{Julie to plug in – cover the rest of 2009 and to July 2010}

Kind regards from the SyEN team:

Robert Halligan, Managing Editor, email: rhalligan@ppi-int.com

Alwyn Smit, Editor, email: asmit@ppi-int.com

Luke Simpson, Production, email: lsimpson@ppi-int.com

Project Performance International

2 Parkgate Drive, Ringwood, Vic 3004 Australia

Tel: +61 3 9876 7345

Fax: +61 3 9876 2664

Tel Brasil:

Tel UK:

Tel USA:

Web: www.ppi-int.com

Email: contact@ppi-int.com

Copyright 2009 Project Performance (Australia) Pty Ltd, trading as Project Performance International

Tell us what you think of SyEN: email to contact@ppi-int.com

If you do not wish to receive a copy monthly of SyEN in future, please reply to this e-mail with “Remove” in the subject line. All removals are acknowledged; you may wish to contact PPI if acknowledgement is not received within 7 days.

  1. http://www.uq.edu.au/news/?article=4949

  2. http://www.csir.co.za/

Scroll to Top