Advertisement

Support: The WAVES Strategy

  • Hubert Anton MoserEmail author
Chapter
  • 3.5k Downloads
Part of the Understanding Complex Systems book series (UCS)

Abstract

As outlined in Section 7.4, the second part of the main research question - how can the evolution of systems thinking be improved in practice - is discussed in this chapter. The answers from the three refined research questions of the first part of the main research question show the direction to influence work activity towards a better learning environment particularly for systems thinking (see Figure 90). The developed intervention is a strategy, labelled WAVES (Work Activity for a Versatile Evolution of Systems engineering and thinking). Selected parts of the WAVES strategy, its implementation, and evaluation have been published in Moser (2013a) and Moser (2013b).

Keywords

Knowledge Management European Space Agency Object Management Group Knowledge Management System Design Structure Matrix 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahmed, S.: Understanding the use and reuse of experience in engineering design (Doctoral dissertation). Cambridge University, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  2. Avnet, M.S., Weigel, A.L.: An application of the Design Structure Matrix to Integrated Concurrent Engineering. Acta Astronautica 66(5-6), 937–949 (2010), doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.09.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baize, L.: The technical competence centers: from innovation to knowledge management. In: International Astronautical Federation (ed.) 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown (2011)Google Scholar
  4. Blessing, L.T.M., Chakrabarti, A.: DRM, a Design Research Methodology, 1st edn. Springer, Guildford (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, F., Bapuji, H., Dyck, B., Wang, X.: I learned more than I taught: the hidden dimension of learning in intercultural knowledge transfer. The Learning Organization 19(2), 109–120 (2012), doi:10.1108/09696471211201470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clot, Y.: Clinic of activity: the dialogue as instrument. In: Sannino, A., Daniels, H., Gutiérrez, K.D. (eds.) Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory, pp. 286–302. Cambridge University Press, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davenport, T.H., Prusak, L.: Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Delp, C.L.: FireSAT: Model vs Documents Alone. In: INCOSE (ed.) Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Workshop. INCOSE, Phoenix (2010)Google Scholar
  9. Eigner, M., Gilz, T., Zafirov, R.: Proposal for functional product description as part of a PLM solution in interdisciplinary product development. In: Marjanovic, D., Storga, M., Pavkovic, N., Bojcetic, N. (eds.) 12th International Design Conference (DESIGN), pp. 1667–1676. University of Zagreb, Zagreb (2012)Google Scholar
  10. Eisenbart, B., Blessing, L.T.M., Gericke, K.: Functional modelling perspectives across disciplines: a literature review. In: Marjanovic, D., Storga, M., Pavkovic, N., Bojcetic, N. (eds.) 12th International Design Conference (DESIGN), pp. 847–858. University of Zagreb, Zagreb (2012)Google Scholar
  11. Engeström, Y., Virkkunen, J., Helle, M., Pihlaja, J., Poikela, R.: Change laboratory as a tool for transforming work. Lifelong Learning in Europe 1(2), 10–17 (1996)Google Scholar
  12. ESA/ESTEC. Modelling ’Space Blocks’ now available in the CDF (2009), http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/CDF/SEMDKCCUE1G_0.html (retrieved on August 20, 2012)
  13. Estefan, J.A.: Survey of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Methodologies (2007), http://www.omgsysml.org/MBSE_Methodology_Survey_RevA.pdf (retrieved on January 09, 2013)
  14. Filip, B.: Mapping to support organizational learning: Integrating multiple KM practices. In: European Space Agency (ed.) 3rd International Conference on Managing Knowledge for Space Missions, Knowledge Management at ESA - Knowledge for Mission Success, Darmstadt (2010)Google Scholar
  15. Gopsill, J.A., McAlpine, H.C., Hicks, B.J.: Partbook - a social media approach for capturing informal product knowledge. In: Marjanovic, D., Storga, M., Pavkovic, N., Bojcetic, N. (eds.) 12th International Design Conference (DESIGN), pp. 1435–1444. University of Zagreb, Zagreb (2012)Google Scholar
  16. Headquarters Department of the US Army. A leader’s guide to after-action reviews (1993)Google Scholar
  17. Holm, J., Olla, P., Moura, D., Warhaut, M.: Creating architectural approaches to knowledge management: an example from the space industry: The role of knowledge management in the space industry: important or superfluous? Journal of Knowledge Management 10(2), 36–51 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Imai, M.: Kaizen: The key to Japan’s competitive success. McGraw-Hill, New York (1986)Google Scholar
  19. INCOSE Technical Operations. Systems Engineering Vision 2020 (No. INCOSE-TP-2004-04-02 version 2.03) (2007)Google Scholar
  20. Standard DIN EN ISO 9001:2008-12. International Organization for Standardization, Bruxelles (December 2008)Google Scholar
  21. Kleinsmann, M.: Understanding collaborative design (Doctoral dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft (2006)Google Scholar
  22. Kleinsmann, M., Valkenburg, R.: Learning from collaborative new product development projects. Journal of Workplace Learning 17(3), 146–156 (2005), doi:10.1108/13665620510588671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kraaijenbrink, J., Faran, D., Hauptman, A.: Knowledge integration by SMEs - framework. In: Jetter, A., Kraaijenbrink, J., Schröder, H.-H., Wijnhoven, F. (eds.) The Practice of Knowledge Management in Small and Medium Enterprises. Physica, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  24. Lawson, B., Dorst, K.: Design expertise. Architectural Press, Oxford (2009)Google Scholar
  25. Lipusz, C.S., Tróznai, G., Bogdány, J., Szalai, S.: The Hungarian space research knowledge management project: a focus on the Rosetta Mission. Journal of Knowledge Management 10(2), 76–89 (2006), doi:10.1108/13673270610656647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moser, H.A.: Towards an enhancement of novice engineers’ systems thinking in small teams in space industry. In: European Space Agency (ed.) 3rd International Conference on Managing Knowledge for Space Missions. Knowledge Management at ESA - Knowledge for Mission Success, Darmstadt (2010b)Google Scholar
  27. Moser, H.A.: Fostering the evolution of systems thinking in space systems engineering teams. In: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Luft- und Raumfahrt – Lilienthal- Oberth e.V (ed.), vol. 62, Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress Stuttgart (2013a)Google Scholar
  28. Moser, H.A.: Fostering the evolution of systems thinking in space industry with the WAVES strategy. In: Council of European Aerospace Societies (ed.) 4th CEAS Air & Space Conference, Linköping (2013)Google Scholar
  29. Mugellesi Dow, R., Emma, F., Talevi, M., Guerrucci, D., Argamasilla, R.C., Pallaschke, S.: Towards an ESA corporate knowledge management. In: International Astronautical Federation (ed.) 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown (2011)Google Scholar
  30. Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H.: The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford Univ. Press, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  31. North, K.: Knowledge management approaches and practices - an overview. In: European Space Agency (ed.) 3rd International Conference on Managing Knowledge for Space Missions. Knowledge Management at ESA - Knowledge for Mission Success, Darmstadt (2010)Google Scholar
  32. Object Management Group (OMG). OMG Systems Modeling Language: The Official OMG SysML site (2012), http://www.omgsysml.org (retrieved on January 09, 2013)
  33. Olla, P., Holm, J.: The role of knowledge management in the space industry: important or superfluous? Journal of Knowledge Management 10(2), 3–7 (2006), doi:10.1108/13673270610656584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pallaschke, S., Mugellesi Dow, R., Armuzzi, G., Argamasilla, R.C.: Implementation aspects for a knowledge management system. In: International Astronautical Federation (ed.) 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown (2011)Google Scholar
  35. Philipps, A., Rogers, E.W.: Selected NASA Case Studies: A product of the NASA safety center & Office of the Chief Knowledge Officer. GSFC (2009)Google Scholar
  36. Preece, A., Flett, A., Sleeman, D., Curry, D., Meany, N., Perry, P.: Better Knowledge Management through Knowledge Engineering. IEEE Intelligent Systems (2001)Google Scholar
  37. Rogers, E.W.: Introducing the Pause and Learn (PaL) process: Adapting the Army After Action Review Process to the NASA Project World at the Goddard Space Flight Center (2004)Google Scholar
  38. Rogers, E.W.: NASA case study methodology document (2008)Google Scholar
  39. Rogers, E.W., Milam, J.: Pausing for Learning: Applying the After Action Review process at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. In: IEEE Aerospace Conference (2005)Google Scholar
  40. Russell, S.J., Norvig, P., Davis, E.: Artificial intelligence: A modern approach, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2010)Google Scholar
  41. Schreiber, G., Akkermans, H., Anjewierden, A., Hoog, R., de, S.N.R., van de Welde, W., Wielinga, B.J.: Knowledge engineering and management: The CommonKADS methodology. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  42. Schubert, D., Romberg, O., Kurowski, S., Gurtuna, O., Prévot, A., Savedra-Criado, G.: A new knowledge management system for concurrent engineering facilities. In: European Space Agency (ed.) 4th International Workshop on System & Concurrent Engineering for Space Applications (SECESA 2010) (2010)Google Scholar
  43. Shadrick, S.B., Lussier, J.W.: Training complex cognitive skills: a theme-based approach to the development of battlefield skills. In: Ericsson, K.A. (ed.) Development of Professional Expertise. Toward Measurement of Expert Performance and Design of Optimal Learning Environments, pp. 286–311. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Simon, H.A.: The sciences of the artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  45. Stach, R., Bernd, B., Weber, F., Peters, O., Müller, D.H.: Applying CE-methods in small and medium sized enterprises. In: 7th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising, Bremen (2001)Google Scholar
  46. Stetter, R., Seemüller, H., Chami, M., Voos, H.: Interdisciplinary system model for agent-supported mechatronic design. In: Marjanovic, D., Storga, M., Pavkovic, N., Bojcetic, N. (eds.) 12th International Design Conference (DESIGN), University of Zagreb, Zagreb (2012)Google Scholar
  47. Toiviainen, H.: Learning across levels. Challenges of collaboration in a small-firm network (Doctoral dissertation). University of Helsinki, Helsinki (2003)Google Scholar
  48. Topousis, D.E., Dennehy, C.J., Lebsock, K.L.: Enabling the capture and sharing of NASA technical expertise through communities of practice. In: International Astronautical Federation (ed.) 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown (2011)Google Scholar
  49. Valkenburg, A.C.: The reflective practice in product design teams (Doctoral dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft (2000)Google Scholar
  50. Wallace, K.M., Ahmed, S., Bracewell, R.: Engineering knowledge management. In: Clarkson, J., Eckert, C. (eds.) Design Process Improvement. A Review of Current Practice. Springer, London (2005)Google Scholar
  51. Wijnhoven, F.: Knowledge management: more than a buzzword. In: Jetter, A., Kraaijenbrink, J., Schröder, H.-H., Wijnhoven, F. (eds.) Knowledge Integration. The Practice of Knowledge Management in Small and Medium Enterprises, pp. 1–16. Physica, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  52. Zender, J., Schwehm, G., Wilke, M.: The Rosetta video approach: an overview and lessons learned so far. Journal (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LuxSpace Sárl BetzdorfLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations