Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research pp 617–634Cite as

System User Pathways to Change

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Abstract

This study was motivated by observations of user innovation within a study of functional gains to a complex system; the user changes introduced novel function with a seemingly minimal reliance on material change. To better understand how users were realizing these changes, empirical research of user change behaviors was accomplished. This present research unpacks user change behaviors through an inductive analysis of four cases of user design. Although material changes were observed, they were not a necessary condition for functional gain; rather, system users demonstrated a reliance upon the introduction of novel system configurations (operational change) and novel user task structures (human change). This paper presents this inductive study, considers the pathways for change employed by system users, and motivates future research for leveraging these pathways for change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. De Neufville R et al (2004) Engineering systems monograph. In: Engineering systems symposium. Citeseer

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fricke E, Schulz AP (2005) Design for changeability (DfC): principles to enable changes in systems throughout their entire lifecycle. Syst Eng 8

    Google Scholar 

  3. Saleh JH, Mark G, Jordan NC (2009) Flexibility: a multi-disciplinary literature review and a research agenda for designing flexible engineering systems. J Eng Des 20:307–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cox A, Szajnfarber Z (2016) Post-production change to complex systems

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pyles RA (2007) Aging aircraft: USAF workload and material consumption lifecycle patterns (Santa Monica: RAND, 2003), xix

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hill OJ (2006) Aircraft modifications: assessing the current state of air force aircraft modifications and the implications for future military capability

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kendall F, Gilmore J, Halvorsen T (2015) Department of defense instruction 5000.02, operation of the defense acquisition system

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kendall F (2015) Implementation directive for better buying power 3.0 - achieving dominant capabilities through technical excellence and innovation

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cardin M-A (2014) Enabling flexibility in engineering systems: a taxonomy of procedures and a design framework. J Mech Des 136:11005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ryan ET, Jacques DR, Colombi JM (2013) An ontological framework for clarifying flexibility-related terminology via literature survey. Syst Eng 16:99–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Steiner R (1998) Systems architecture and evolvability-definitions and perspective. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Symposium of the International Council on System Engineering

    Google Scholar 

  12. De Neufville R, Scholtes S, Wang T (2006) Real options by spreadsheet: parking garage case example. J Infrastruct Syst 12:107–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. de Neufville R (2002) Architecting/designing engineering systems using real options

    Google Scholar 

  14. Von Hippel E (2007) The sources of innovation. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  15. Shah SK, Tripsas M (2007) The accidental entrepreneur: the emergent and collective process of user entrepreneurship. Strateg Entrep J 1:123–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Shah SK, Mody C (2011) Innovation, social structure & the creation of new industries

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lüthje C, Herstatt C, Von Hippel E (2003) The dominant role of ‘local’ information in user innovation: the case of mountain biking

    Google Scholar 

  18. Von Hippel E (1994) ‘Sticky information’ and the locus of problem solving: implications for innovation. Manag Sci 40:429–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Von Hippel E, Katz R (2002) Shifting innovation to users via toolkits. Manag Sci 48:821–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Baldwin C, von Hippel E (2011) Modeling a paradigm shift: from producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organ Sci 22:1399–1417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  22. Riggs W, Von Hippel E (1994) Incentives to innovate and the sources of innovation: the case of scientific instruments. Res Policy 23:459–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dorst K, Cross N (2001) Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution. Des Stud 22:425–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Liikkanen LA, Perttula M (2009) Exploring problem decomposition in conceptual design among novice designers. Des Stud 30:38–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Suwa M, Gero J, Purcell T (2000) Unexpected discoveries and S-invention of design requirements: important vehicles for a design process. Des Stud 21:539–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cross N (2004) Creative thinking by expert designers. J Des Res 4

    Google Scholar 

  27. Purcell AT, Gero JS (1996) Design and other types of fixation. Des Stud 17:363–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  29. Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev 14:532–550

    Google Scholar 

  30. JCS Joint Contingency Task Group (1970) C. Report on the Son Tay Prisoner of War Operation

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gargus J (2010) The son tay raid: American POWs in Vietnam were not forgotten. Texas A&M University Press, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  32. Schemmer BF (2002) The raid: the son tay prison rescue mission. Ballantine Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grimes B (2014) The history of big safari. Archway Publishing, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  34. McRaven WH, McRaven WH (1996) Spec ops: case studies in special operations warfare: theory and practice. Ballantine Books, Random House Publishing Group

    Google Scholar 

  35. Thigpen JL (2001) The praetorian STARShip: the untold story of the Combat Talon. Air University Press, Maxwell Air Force Base

    Google Scholar 

  36. Whitcomb DD (2012) On a steel horse I ride: a history of the MH-53 pave low helicopters in war and peace. DTIC Document, Maxwell Air Force Base

    Google Scholar 

  37. Yin RK (2013) Case study research: design and methods. Sage publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  38. Corbin J, Strauss A (2014) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  39. Langley A (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. Acad Manag Rev 24:691–710

    Google Scholar 

  40. Cox A, Szajnfarber Z (2015) Case study research of user design methods. In: Proceedings of the International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management. 1

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ferguson S, Siddiqi A, Lewis K, de Weck OL (2007) Flexible and reconfigurable systems: Nomenclature and review. In: ASME 2007 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, pp 249–263

    Google Scholar 

  42. Siddiqi A, de Weck OL (2008) Modeling methods and conceptual design principles for reconfigurable systems. J Mech Des 130:101102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lambert M (1963) F-104G Starfighter, European production of systems. Flight Int 2818:375

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lindsay J et al (1988) Son tay raid panel discussion

    Google Scholar 

  45. Hannan J (1993) Aerial Refueling: An Army Requirement for the AH-64 Apache? US Army Aviat Dig 2:32–39

    Google Scholar 

  46. Eastman W Development of helicopter air refueling. USAF helicopter pilot association, interesting experiences

    Google Scholar 

  47. Norman DA (2013) The design of everyday things: revised and expanded edition. Basic books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  48. Wickens CD (1992) Engineering psychology and human performance

    Google Scholar 

  49. Cummings M, Sasangohar F, Thornburg K, Xing J, D’Agostino A (2010) Human-system interface complexity and opacity part i: literature review. Massachusettes Inst Technol Camb MA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. government or the Department of Defense.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, USA

    Lt Col Amy Cox PhD

  2. The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

    Zoe Szajnfarber PhD

Authors
  1. Lt Col Amy Cox PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zoe Szajnfarber PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lt Col Amy Cox PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Systems Architecting and Engineering Program, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Azad M. Madni

  2. Center for Systems and Software Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Barry Boehm

  3. Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Roger G. Ghanem

  4. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Daniel Erwin

  5. Systems Engineering Fellow, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California, USA

    Marilee J. Wheaton

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Cox, L.C.A., Szajnfarber, Z. (2018). System User Pathways to Change. In: Madni, A., Boehm, B., Ghanem, R., Erwin, D., Wheaton, M. (eds) Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62216-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62217-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation