This is an expensive attitude. An attitude the "Duck Boat" victims wish their Captain had implemented in Branson, MO, recently.
The Federal Government used to require a Defense Contractor to prepare a System Engineering Plan (SEP). Like Religion and Law, System Engineering is afflicted by Myths.
One myth is that systems engineering only works for large scale complex aerospace and defense systems. This myth is partially true in that Systems Engineering does work for large scale complex systems and goes a long way to enable success. The myth part is that it only works for these large systems. This myth is also emboldened because the Department of Defense requires their contractors to implement Systems Engineering methods and techniques and to spell out exactly how they plan to do that in a Systems Engineering Plan (SEP). The SEP is a required deliverable on every major defense acquisition program. This can easily lead some to believe that Systems Engineering is a rigorous and robust set of processes only applicable to large complex systems.
The fact is Systems Engineering can tailored to support development of smaller systems across a wide range of industry domains. Some examples include companies that produce medical devices, digital storage devices, laboratory diagnostic equipment and organizations that seek to increase reliability of the power grid.
Another myth is that Systems Engineering costs too much to implement. If you implement Systems Engineering for large complex systems, then it could cost a lot of money to implement, no question; however, it is possible to scale and tailor Systems Engineering methods and techniques for developing smaller systems so it does not cost too much to implement.
The "out of an abundance of caution" approach is expensive. A good consultant can make it very expensive. If you tailor the System Engineering approach, you MIGHT not get the reliability.
No comments:
Post a Comment