Examples of Mental Mistakes Made by Systems Engineers While Creating Tradeoff Studies

Problem statement: Humans often make poor decisions. To help them make better decisions, engineers are taught to create tradeoff studies. However, these engineers are usually unaware of mental mistakes that they make while creating their tradeoff studies. We need to increase awareness of a dozen specific mental mistakes that engineers commonly make while creating tradeoff studies. Aims of the research: To prove that engineers actually do make mental mistakes while creating tradeoff studies. To identify which mental mistakes can be detected in tradeoff study documentation. Methodology: Over the past two decades, teams of students and practicing engineers in Bahill’s Systems Engineering courses wrote the system design documents for an assigned system. On average, each of these document sets took 100 man-hours to create and comprised 75 pages. We used 110 of these projects, two dozen government contractor tradeoff studies and three publicly accessible tradeoff studies. We scoured these document sets looking for examples of 28 specific mental mistakes that might affect a tradeoff study. We found instances of a dozen of these mental mistakes. Results: Often evidence of some of these mistakes cannot be found in the final documentation. To find evidence for such mistakes, the experimenters would have had to be a part of the data collection and decision making process. That is why, in this paper, we present only 12 of the original 28 mental mistakes. We found hundreds of examples of such mistakes. We provide suggestions to help people avoid making these mental mistakes while doing tradeoff studies. Conclusions: This paper shows evidence of a dozen common mental mistakes that are continually being repeated by engineers while creating tradeoff studies. When engineers are taught about these mistakes, they can minimize their occurrence in the future

Computational Tradespace Exploration, Analysis, and Decision-Making: A Proposed Framework for Organizational Self-Assessment

The ability to assess technical feasibility, project risk, technical readiness, and realistic performance expectations in early-phase conceptual design is a challenging mission-critical task for large procurement projects. At present, there is not a well-defined framework for evaluating current practices of organizations performing computational trade studies. One such organization is the US Army Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC). When defining requirements and priorities for the next-generation autonomy-enabled ground vehicle system, GVSC is faced with the challenge of an increasingly complex programmatic tradespace due to emerging complexities of ground vehicle systems. This thesis aims to document and evaluate tradespace processes, methods, and tools within GVSC. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to investigate existing gaps, limitations, and potential growth opportunities related to tradespace activities reflecting the greater body of knowledge observed in the literature. Following this review, an interview-based study was developed through which a series of interviews with GVSC personnel was conducted and subsequently benchmarked against the baseline established in the literature. In addition to characterizing the current practices of tradespace exploration and analysis within GVSC, the analysis of the collected interview data revealed current capability gaps, areas of excellence, and potential avenues for improvement within GVSC. Through this thesis, other organizations can perform similar self-assessments to improve internal capabilities with respect to tradespace studies

Behavioral Public Economics: Welfare and Policy Analysis with Non-Standard Decision-Makers

This paper has two goals. First, we discuss several emerging approaches to applied welfare analysis under non-standard ("behavioral") assumptions concerning consumer choice. This provides a foundation for Behavioral Public Economics. Second, we illustrate applications of these approaches by surveying behavioral studies of policy problems involving saving, addiction, and public goods. We argue that the literature on behavioral public economics, though in its infancy, has already fundamentally changed our understanding of public policy in each of these domains.

A Theory of Rule Development

This article develops a model with endogenously coarse rules. A principal hires an agent to take an action. The principal knows the optimal state-contingent action, but cannot communicate it perfectly due to communication constraints. The principal can use previously realized states as examples to define rules of varying breadth. We analyze how rules are chosen under several assumptions about how rules can be amended. We explore the inefficiencies that arise and how they depend on the ability to refine rules, the principal’s time horizon and patience, and other factors. Our model exhibits path dependence in that the efficacy of rule development depends on the sequence of realizations of the state. We interpret this as providing a foundation for persistent performance differences between similar organizations and explore the role of different delegation structures in ameliorating the effects of bounded communication.Sloan School of Management (Program on Innovation in Markets and Organizations)National Science Foundation (U.S.) (SES-0550897

Model-based systems engineering applied to trade-off analysis of wireless power transfer technologies for implanted biomedical microdevices

Decision-making is an important part of human life and particularly in any engineering process related to a complex product. New sensors and actuators based on MEMS technologies are increasingly complex and quickly evolving into products. New biomedical implanted devices may benefit from system engineering approaches, previously reserved to very large projects, and it is expected that this need will increase in the future. Here, we propose the application of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) to systematize and optimize the trade-off analysis process. The criteria, their utility functions and the weighting factors are applied in a systematic way for the selection of the best alternative. Combining trade-off with MBSE allow us to identify the more suitable technology to be implemented to transfer energy to an implanted biomedical micro device.European Commissio

PSYCHOLOGY AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY

Key Words error and bias, tradeoff reasoning, prospect theory, accountability pressures, internalization s Abstract Organized around several major theoretical traditions in international relations, this essay suggests which literature in psychology should be of greatest interest to different kinds of international relations scholars. New work in cognitive social psychology and behavioral decision theory simultaneously expands on and qualifies earlier error-and-bias portraits of the foreign policy maker, thereby enriching our understanding of internal divisions within the realist camp. Work on bounded rationality in competitive markets and mixed-motive games, as well as the literature on the power of human emotions to shape judgments of what represents an equitable allocation of scarce resources or a just resolution of conflicts of interest, can inform neo-institutionalist and constructivist theories. Developments in cross-cultural social psychology shed light on constructivist arguments about the creation and maintenance of international social order that typically rest on assumptions about decision making that are qualitatively different from realist and institutionalist approaches to world politics

Dude, Where\u27s My Car Title?: The Law, Behavior, and Economics of Title Lending Markets

Millions of credit-constrained borrowers turn to title loans to meet their liquidity needs. Legislatures and regulators have debated how to best regulate these transactions, but surprisingly, we still know very little about the customers who use title loans. This Article reports findings from the first large-scale academic study of title lending customers. We surveyed over 400 title lending customers across three states and obtained information about customers’ demographic and behavioral characteristics. Based on the results of our survey and guided by insights from behavioral economics, this Article seeks to reframe the title lending debate. Instead of focusing on the risks and consequences of borrowers’ cars being repossessed, as the vast bulk of the literature does, we argue that the primary problem that most borrowers face is underestimating the true cost of taking out a title loan. Borrowers’ survey responses demonstrate that many borrowers are overly optimistic and experience self-control problems that affect their ability to make timely loan payments. We argue that these deviations from the assumptions of classical economics do not warrant an outright ban of title lending, but they do provide room for policy interventions. Policymakers can improve efficiency in title lending markets by requiring lenders to disclose to consumers the likely experiences they will have with their title loans rather than merely requiring lenders to communicate pricing information

Cognitive biases in risk management

This thesis contends that most Risk Management/Mitigation programs fail to be as effective as they could be due to a number of mostly overlooked drivers, such as motivation and cognitive biases. The issue of cognitive biases is very seldom addressed. When questioned, most engineers purport to not have any biases. They insist that they use only logic, reasoning, and math to make decisions. A set of data was collected and reviewed for this thesis. The data presented shows that cognitive biases do affect the risk management/mitigation process. Knowledge of these biases and their potential impact on a project will lead to better risk management --Abstract, page iii