Bohdan W. Oppenheim

Abstract A general holistic framework, also called a process—named “Lean Product Development Flow (LPDF)”—for organizing the engineering work of Product Development (PD), has been proposed as a contribution to the emerging field of Lean Systems Engineering. The framework is based on Lean Principles, with emphasis on PD value‐pulling workflow pulsed by takt periods. The value is defined as (1) mission assurance/product quality, (the traditional goals of Systems Engineering) and (2) reduced program cost and schedule achieved by a radical reduction of waste. LPDF is recommended for smaller design programs based on a high degree of legacy knowledge, with technologies mature enough so that the program feasibility is not in question. LPDF may involve limited‐scope research, provided that it can be identified early in the program, and carried out separate from the main workflow. The paper is focused on aerospace and defense programs, which are presently burdened with as much as 60–90% of waste, but the process is also applicable to commercial programs. LPDF can be applied to the entire PD, to one or more milestones, and to a multilevel program. LPDF requires both detailed preparations and disciplined execution. The preparations include detailed Value Stream Mapping, separation of research from the main workflow, parsing of the Value Stream map into Takt Periods, architecting the LPDF team using dynamic allocation of resources, and team training. LPDF execution is organized as a flow through a series of short and equal work Takt Periods, each followed by an Integrative Event for structured, comprehensive coordination. Strategic and flexible tactical mitigations of uncertainties must be applied during the flow. LPDF also requires excellent leadership of a Chief Engineer, modeled after Toyota and Honda, who is a dedicated program “owner,” an expert systems designer, a strong leader focused on the program and product integrity, and skilled in consensus‐building. The Chief Engineer is responsible for the entire program, with Assistant Chiefs assisting in selected technical areas, and a Project Manager assisting with program administration. An industrial pilot program is currently being undertaken to validate the method. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 7: 352–376, 2004

In many manufacturing operations, profitable energy efficiency opportunities remain unexploited. Although previous studies have tried to explain the underinvestment, we focus on how the way in which a portfolio of opportunities is presented in a list affects adoption decisions. We use information on over 100,000 energy-saving recommendations made to more than 13,000 small and medium-sized manufacturing firms under the Industrial Assessment Centers program of the U.S. Department of Energy. We find that adoption rates are higher for initiatives appearing early in a list of recommendations. This sequence effect is consistent and large: simply moving a recommendation one position lower has the same effect on average as increasing up-front implementation cost by at least 17% from the average value. Given this impact of sequence on adoption of individual recommendations, we utilize variations within our data to examine how various sequencing approaches affect adoption at the portfolio level. Sequences in which recommendations are listed from best to worst payback achieve higher potential energy savings given the investments in energy efficiency made by the firms. We also observe a choice overload effect at the portfolio level, but the magnitude of this effect is small.

Covers advancements in spacecraft and tactical and strategic missile systems, including subsystem design and application, mission design and analysis, materials and structures, developments in space sciences, space processing and manufacturing, space operations, and applications of space technologies to other fields.

Abstract Systems Engineering (SE) is regarded as a sound practice but not always delivered effectively, as documented in recent NASA, GAO, and DoD studies. Lean Thinking is the holistic work system credited for the extraordinary rise of Toyota to the most profitable and the largest auto company in the world. Lean Thinking has been successfully applied in other work fields such as general manufacturing, aerospace, healthcare, and service industries. The emerging field of Lean Systems Engineering (LSE) is the application of Lean principles, practices, and tools to SE and to the related aspects of enterprise management (EM) in order to enhance the delivery of value (which is defined as flawless delivery of product or mission with satisfaction of all stakeholders) while reducing waste. This paper contains four parts: (1) historical background of the new field of LSE and a review of the fundamental concepts of Lean Thinking; (2) the development process of a new product called “Lean Enablers for Systems Engineering”; (3) a list of the Enablers organized into six Lean principles; (4) summary and conclusions. The Lean Enablers for Systems Engineering is a comprehensive checklist of nonmandatory practices and recommendations formulated as “do's” and “don't's” of SE, and containing tacit knowledge (collective wisdom) on how to prepare for, plan, execute, and practice SE and EM using Lean Thinking. Each enabler has the potential to enhance program value and reduce waste. The Enablers are formulated as a web‐based addendum to the current SE Handbook published by the International Council for Systems Engineering (INCOSE), and do not repeat the practices made therein, which are regarded as sound. They should be an equally valuable addendum to other SE handbooks such as NASA, DoD, or company manuals. The enablers' development followed a classical process: Concept, Alpha, Beta, Prototype, and Version 1.0. This paper reports on Version 1.0 of the enablers, which are regarded as mature enough for dissemination, but which are intended to be a living online document to be continuously improved by interested practitioners as new knowledge and experience are acquired. The enablers were evaluated by surveys in the Beta and Prototype phases. The Prototype version has also been benchmarked with recent NASA and GAO studies. This project has been carried out by two core teams involving 14 volunteers from the LSE Working Group of INCOSE. The teams included representatives from industry, academia, and governments from United States, Israel, and the United Kingdom, with cooperation from the LSE Working Group membership at large. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 14: 29–55, 2011