An Instrument to Assess Individual Capacity for System Thinking

The purpose of this research was to develop and deploy a new systems thinking instrument to assess individual capacity for systems thinking using an inductive research design. While technology has been increasing exponentially, the corresponding methods to harness those technological advances, and the problems they have spawned, is lagging. While there is a broad collection of systems based methods, techniques, technologies, and tools that can be used in dealing with complex problems, these are predicated on an individual\u27s capacity for engaging a level of systems thinking commensurate with their effective, deployment. Research based methods to determine individual capacity for systems thinking were not found in the literature. This research addressed the literature gap by developing an instrument to determine the individual capacity for systems thinking. To establish the characteristics for systems thinking, over 1000 systems based articles were analyzed and coded. Following grounded theory, as articulated by Strauss and Corbin (1990), a rigorous methodology was executed to inductively build the framework for systems thinking characteristics. Specialized software to support grounded theory, Nvivo (QRS International, version 10, 2014) was used to navigate and manage the large amount of qualitative and quantitative data for the research. A mixed method approach was used to collect and analyze qualitative and quantitative data in the initial instrument development. After deriving the set of systems thinking characteristics, a non-domain specific systems thinking (Sc) instrument was constructed to capture and measure the state of systems thinking at the individual level. The instrument consists of 39 binary questions with fourteen scored scales to measure seven main systems skills preferences. Following a pilot study for application of the instrument, it was administered to 242 participants. To establish validity, multiple validity checks including face validity, internal validity, conclusion validity and content validity were performed. Reliability testing was also conducted, including Cronbach\u27s Alpha Test and Parallel Test, with excellent results. The results of the research show significant promise for the instrument to capture the capacity of individuals to engage in systems thinking. The document concludes with directions for future research and implications for practitioners related to the capacity of individuals for systems thinking

Development of a Framework to Evaluate Human Risk Towards Sustainable Risk Management

Risk managers are constantly faced with the challenge of making decisions at various levels of their organizations. One of the challenges, which often times is unavoidable, lies in assigning a monetary value to human risks. Such challenge necessitates engineering managers to make educated decisions on the level of risk that the organizations and businesses should accept when it comes to human. The purpose of this study is to suggest a suitable framework that captures this aspect of engineering Risk Management in order to make rational and sustainable decisions about such assessed risk. This will be accomplished by exploring the tools, techniques, and methods implemented to evaluate the human risk in the decision making process by risk managers. The study attempts to address a fundamental question that risk managers strive to seek a clear and definite answer to the question are the benefits gained from assigning a monetary value to human life worth taking the risks, efforts, costs required to achieve such benefits?

Framework For Improving Complex System Performance

This paper introduces a framework for improvement of complex system performance. Complex systems are besieged with conditions marked by increasing uncertainty, emergence, and ambiguity. Additionally, demands for increased productivity, resource efficiencies, and performance improvement make new approaches paramount for modern systems engineers. In response, a framework to improve complex system performance is developed. Following an introduction, the paper pursues four objectives: (1) introduction of Complex System Governance (CSG) as a foundation to describe essential system functions, (2) suggest system `pathologies\u27 as an explanation for deep system performance issues, (3) exploration of system performance improvement as a function of `requisite variety\u27 to compensate for deep system issues, and (4) introduce a framework for complex system performance improvement using system pathologies as `unab-sorbed variety\u27. The paper closes with some challenges for further development of the framework for deployment and application guidance for practitioners