common language for systems practitioners: why not!? panel moderator: hillary sillitto 23rd annual...

Common Language for Systems Practitioners: Why not!?

Panel Moderator:

Hillary Sillitto

23rd Annual INCOSE International Symposium - Philadelphia, PA – 24-27 June, 2013

Panel Agenda and Cast•Hillary Sillitto, THALES, UK

Setting the stage frame the problem with Jack Ring’s slides

•Janet Singer, ISSSSystems Praxis Framework;

•James Martin, Aerospace Corp, USAFour universal thought patterns – this is all you need!

•Bud Lawson, Lawson Konsult, SwedenWe need multiple paradigms, not just a “language” based upon a sterile ontology

•Duane Hybertson, MITRE, USAUnderstand what is common and what is different – “models, patterns and views”

•Richard Martin, Tinwisle Corp, USAAs the problem space scales up, an increasing emphasis upon praxis derived from system sciences is needed to provide sufficient capability to effectively interoperate

•Joe Kasser, National University of SingaporeGet real, panelists – this is a waste of time and effort! Lessons learned from similar projects indicate that this effort will be about as effective as flogging a dead horse to get it to pull a cart.

•Janet Singer, ISSSInitial considerations – shared models to bridge multiple incommensurable worldviews


Panel Agenda

•Setting the context

•Debate

•Q&A

•CONCLUSIONS


Panel GoalsDiscuss the following dilemmas:

– the scope of “systems practice” is not agreed upon or even obvious– the many systems communities are “divided by a common

language”: same words --- different concepts

Present the “systems praxis framework” (SPF): a contribution to unification

Expand the community that can benefit from this work and take it forward.

NOTE: a paper on the Common Language for Systems Praxis project will be presented tomorrow: 10.00, Systems Thinking track


The chairman’s challenge

• (SPF): correct field of discourse?

• motivation to communicate > motivation to obfuscate?

• Is it feasible and useful to agree a finite set of terms to describe an infinitely complex set of subjects and situations?


Common Language(s) for Systems

Practitioners: Why not?

Jack RingIS2013 Panelist in absentia

Fellow, INCOSE

June 24, 2013

Why Bother?

2) Market Demand

Extent , Variety , Ambiguity

1) SE Capacity

Baby Boomers

3) 10X higher - level unified SE language - diversity of participants

4) # participants < Starkermann limit 5) Persistent system integrity

assessment.

6) Else – System of Systems?

NOW is the time.

Praxis Framework

• Rationalizes 15288, SEH, SEBoK

• Does not express a praxis

• Does not unify language(s)• Good start

Language(s)• Devised or adopted to express outcomes of thinking: i.e., linear,

relational, lateral, Janusian, Hegelian, quantum, etc.• Devised or adopted to convey presence of emotions.• Convey the dynamics of emergence.• Examples: music, kinesics, natural (> 173), algebra, plots, directed

graphs, video, pheromones.• Necessary, sufficient and efficient in Knowledge Exchange and Choice-

making across human activity systems that initialize User systems: .

Common Unified 4 factor schema, e.g., 50 kinds of process ≈ 200 item formal ontology

Quo Vadis?PRAXIS

System Engineering In Action

Multi-levelMeta-model

Continuously co-evolving knowledge exchange and choice-making

Execution Engine

The Systems Praxis Framework

The outcome of the collaboration that started at the Linz “Conversation”. Aims to: (1) map out the whole universe of discourse of systems

practice, systems thinking and systems science;

(2) show how theory could support practice and how practice can improve theory;

(3) provide a properly grounded basis for a unifying set of concepts;

(4) enable development of a common language for the systems community.


JANET SINGER INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR THE SYSTEMS SCIENCES

JAMES MARTINAEROSPACE CORPORATION, USA


Information Transfer


Signs (eg, Words &

Symbols)

Signs (eg, Words &

Symbols)

Concepts Concepts

Unified Glossary of Terms

?

Unification through Frameworks


Signs (eg, Words &

Symbols)

Concepts

Signs (eg, Words &

Symbols)

Concepts

Conceptual Frameworks

Conceptual Frameworks (i.e. Universal Thought Patterns)

• Better than a Universal “Language”…

– PICARD Theory

– 7 Samurai Framework

– PMTE Paradigm

– Knowledge Pyramid


PICARD Theory of Systems

Parts

Interactions

Context

Actions

Relationships

Destiny

Holistic Image ofSystem =

From the Point of View of an Observer

Context System (S1)

Realization System (S3)

Intervention System (S2)

Competing System (S7)

Modified Context System (S1’)

Deployed System (S4)

Sustainment System (S6)

Problem (P1)

Problem (P2)

may cause

Collaborating System (S5)

collaborates with

intended to address

becomes

may address

competes with

becomes

sustains

may need to develop or

modify

needs to understand

needs to understand

The 7 Samurai

PMTE Paradigm

PROCESS

METHODS

TOOLS

ENVIRONMENT

supported by

supported by

supported by

support

support

supports

Signals

Data …1001010011…

Information Meanings & Messages

Knowledge Beliefs & Convictions

The Knowledge Pyramid

Wisdom Ideals & Insights

BUD LAWSONLAWSON KONSULT, SWEDEN



Paradigms to UnifyThinking and Acting in Terms of Systems

• ”a scientific revolution is defined by the appearance of new conceptual schemes or “paradigms.” These bring to the fore aspects which previously were not seen or perceived, or even suppressed in “normal” science, i.e., science generally accepted and practiced at the time.” – T.S. Kuhn -1962

• “personal mastery, mental models, shared vision and team learning based upon systems thinking that are routes to improvement.” – Peter Senge – 1990

• “A Journey Through the Systems Landscape” provides paradigms in the form of models that can be and have been shared to improve thinking and acting.


System Coupling Diagram

• A collectively guided, disciplined inquiry • exploring issues of social significance,• engaged by scholarly practitioners in self-organized teams,• who select a theme for their conversation,• initiated in the course of a preparation phase,• that leads to an intensive learning phase. • (Banathy, 1997)


OODA – PDCA –Foundation of Change



Generic Life Cycle Transformations



Common Data/Information Structure

Life Cycle of x

Defintion

User Needs

Stakeholder

Requirments

Validation

Requirments

SpecificationsVerification

Requirements

Architecural

Design

Viewpoint Models

Views

Production

Implementation Suppliers

Integration Configurations

Utilization

Transition Training

Operation Log

Maintenance

Trouble Reports

Preventive Maintenance

Retirement Disposal

Disassembly

Lessons Learned

DUANE HYBERTSON, MITRE


Basic Position (Duane Hybertson, MITRE)

Is language unification possible in the systems community?• If unification = a common language: No.

– Systems praxis is fundamentally multi-language and multi-discipline

• If unification = shared understanding of systems: ~Yes.– A substantial degree of shared understanding about systems

can be achieved across the entire systems community, which is useful to the systems approaches to practice such as SE, and is based on foundations, theories, and representations of integrative systems science.


How to work toward shared understanding?

• What are the most useful aspects to understand?– Characteristics of processes of systems praxis? (e.g.,

steps to engineer a new system, or to conduct integrative systems science)

– Characteristics of systems? (e.g., system categories, types, properties, performance, reliability, structure, behavior, functions)

• Based on examination of other disciplines, it is more useful to understand characteristics of systems than processes of systems praxis


How to share understanding of systems?

• Focus on what is common among systems, and distinguish what varies across systems– Integrative Systems Science helps identify what is

common, and dimensions or factors of variability– Commonality can be observed at the level of all

systems, and within identified categories of systems

• How do we express and share commonality and variability?– System models, patterns, views: Discovered and

formulated by Integrative SS, applied/tailored by SE


Example: System Composition Hierarchy

• IEEE 1220 focuses on differences at each composition level• Holarchy model focuses on similarities across all levels• SE needs combination of both


RICHARD MARTIN TINWISLE CORPORATION


a SYSTEM for everyone


synset links from WordNet Search 3.1

Princeton University "About WordNet." WordNet. Princeton University. 2010. <http://wordnet.princeton.edu>

physical entity

object relation

state

attribute

part of

unitsituation

environment

abstract entity

entity

context

discourse

system

matter

group

part

artifact

regularity

thing

whole

bodypart

naturalobject

instrumentation

body

livebody

quality cognition(noesis)

orderliness

ability

structure

know-how

psychologicalfeature

methodplan

idea

content

location

region

geographicarea

environment

SS SYSTEM for many




physical entity

object relation

state

attribute

part of

unitsituation

environment

abstract entity

entity

context

discourse

system

matter

group

part

artifact

regularity

thing

whole

bodypart

naturalobject

instrumentation

body

livebody


orderliness

ability

structure

know-how


methodplan

idea

content

location

region

geographicarea

environment

SE SYSTEM for many




physical entity

object relation

state

attribute

part of

unitsituation

environment

abstract entity

entity

context

discourse

system

matter

group

part

artifact

regularity

thing

whole

bodypart

naturalobject

instrumentation

body

livebody


orderliness

ability

structure

know-how


methodplan

idea

content

location

region

geographicarea

environment

SE SYSTEM for everyone




physical entity

object relation

state

attribute

part of

unitsituation

environment

abstract entity

entity

context

discourse

system

matter

group

part

artifact

regularity

thing

whole

bodypart

naturalobject

instrumentation

body

livebody


orderliness

ability

structure

know-how


methodplan

idea

content

location

region

geographicarea

environment

SS SYSTEM for everyone




physical entity

object relation

state

attribute

part of

unitsituation

environment

abstract entity

entity

context

discourse

system

matter

group

part

artifact

regularity

thing

whole

bodypart

naturalobject

instrumentation

body

livebody


orderliness

ability

structure

know-how


methodplan

idea

content

location

region

geographicarea

environment

Interoperation mechanisms


Integration – common model for information exchange• Formally correct by construction• Established protocols, e.g. STEP, IEEE 802.x• Same syntax and semantics for each party• Strict controls and model adherence in implementation – i’s dotted, t’s

crossed, commas, quotes and brackets correctly placed Unification – common meta-model (language)

• Reference for mapping existing model syntax and semantics• Depends upon notions of semantic equivalence• Often use heuristics rather than formality• Information loss resulting from different extensions or instantiations

Federation – no common model or meta-model• Different terminology and methodology• Use a priori knowledge and negotiating agents• Inconsistencies resolved by manual intervention• Business as usual – try it, break it, fix it

Scaling up interoperation


simple complicated complexproblematic situation

federation

unification

integration

inte

rope

ratio

n ap

proa

ch

Common model &

terms

Common meta-model - mapping of syntax & semantics

Little in common a priori -agent discovery, manual intervention, error prone

limit of integration

limit of unification

limit of ??

Scaling up interoperation


simple complicated complexproblematic situation

federation

unification

integration

inte

rope

ratio

n ap

proa

ch

Common model &

terms

Common meta-model - mapping of syntax & semantics

Little in common a priori -agent discovery, manual intervention, error prone

Standardization, no way!Are you sure?

Joseph Kasser

National University of Singapore

Problem-solving: Temporal perspective

Undesirable situation (t0)

Future conceptual feasible desirable

situation (t0)

Problem

Remedial action

(problem solving)

SolutionActual situation

(t1)

Still undesirable?

No

Yes or partial

End

Undesirable situation (t2)

5-47

Situation

• Undesirable situation– Terminology exists but is ignored– New terms invented for almost identical

existing terms• Humpty Dumpty

– Partitioning is different in different publications

• Desirable situation– A common language using well defined terms

The Hitchins-Kasser-Massie Framework (HKMF) for understanding systems

engineering*

* Kasser and Massie, 2001

Implementation strategy

• Who has similar problems of defining new words– Hebrew, French, etc.– IEEE-610 software standard for terminology

• Solution– Build on Systems Engineering Glossary

project (SECOE) at UniSA – Create INCOSE Terminology of Systems

Engineering Rationalization working group

Problem classification matrix*

ComplexWicked

Here be dragons(there are no solutions)Ill-structured

Well-structured Simple Complicated

Easy Medium Ugly Hard

Non-complex Level of difficulty

Learning and experience

* Kasser J.E. , Complex solutions for complex problems, Third International Engineering Systems Symposium (CESUN), Delft, Holland, 2012

5-51

Problem solving methodologies

• Many in the literature• Which one to use?• Flood and Jackson suggested TSI• Going beyond systems thinking to holistic

thinking– Developing a methodology for selecting

problem solving methodologies based on HKMF

Implementation• Create dictionary (ISO/INCOSE 2014-04-01) by

IW 2014– Select meanings from standards– Post in INCOSE public web site for wide access

• Negotiate agreement with non-native English language organizations to comply with dictionary as of IS 2014

• Submissions to Systems Engineering Journal, Insight, IS and all INCOSE web sites will be required to comply with dictionary as of IS 2015

JANET SINGER INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR THE SYSTEMS SCIENCES

Language unification cannot be achieved from within any one systems worldview:

• there are fundamental incommensurabilities that mean one cannot “get to” elements of one from another.

• collapsing dimensions to achieve commonality – yields a degenerate or trivial result, – does not do justice to the depth and breadth of concerns present

in the incommensurable originals.

This is why previous language unification efforts have not been successful.


Technologies

Enterprise processes

Institutions and cultural

norms

Self-interested

agenttransactions

How many aspects of complex socio-technical systems?

Organizationaldynamics Hermeneutics

and sense-making

Population dynamics

Resourceflows, etc., …

INCOMMENSURABILITIES

Shared models are key

The use of language within pragmatic systems modeling activities is the common context the actors share,

• no matter which systems communities are present.

Standardization of the entire systems praxis context • may seem like the “great circle route” to understanding

the features of systems models and systems language• but it is an approach that will eventually pay off

Simplifications and partial solutions will continue to fail.


Example:

Integrate models for anti-pandemic system design – not necessarily commensurable!

H. Deguchi, 2010

Integrating social science models?

“Social science commensurability gaps

are becomingmore serious

for drawingour intellectual map

for the global society.”Prof. H. Deguchi, 2010

Tokyo Institute of TechnologyDirector of Center for Agent Based

Social Systems Sciences)

If it is possible, it is inevitable?

Need a pragmatic meta-perspective that appreciates both • what the various systems worldviews have in common • the full scope of what is unique to each.

If common language approached from a pragmatic meta-perspective is possible

• it is only a matter of time before it will occur!


SO WHAT DO YOU THINK?COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS PLEASE

Has the “systems praxis framework” (SPF) mapped out the correct field of discourse?

In that field of discourse, does motivation to communicate exceed motivation to obfuscate?

Is it feasible and useful to agree a finite set of terms to describe an infinitely complex set of subjects and situations?


Survey

Please take the time to rate this presentation by submitting the web survey found at:

www.incose.org/symp2013/survey


common language for systems practitioners: why not!? panel moderator: hillary sillitto 23rd annual...

Documents

system of systems

systems practitioners

systems communities

systems praxis project

systems praxis framework

scope of systems practice

common languages

system sciences