Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009 Problem Solving Leadership in Systems Engineering Kathryn...
-
Upload
sydney-mccann -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009 Problem Solving Leadership in Systems Engineering Kathryn...
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Problem Solving Leadership Problem Solving Leadership in Systems Engineeringin Systems Engineering
Kathryn Jablokow, Ph.D.Kathryn Jablokow, Ph.D.The Pennsylvania State UniversityThe Pennsylvania State UniversityMechanical Engineering and STSMechanical Engineering and STS
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Engineers and SystemsEngineers and Systems
“Engineering is about systems…. Frontiers of engineering today are in tiny systems on the one hand and macro systems on the other.”
- Charles Vest, President, National Acad. of Engineering
“Activities at both extreme scales call for teams of people who will bring knowledge from different disciplines, and their contributions must be integrated into the final result.”
- H. Hutchinson, Mechanical Engineering Magazine
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Systems Engineering = Complex Problem SolvingSystems Engineering = Complex Problem Solving
Systems and problems: diverse, complex, challenging
Diverse problem solvers(Problem B)
Problem AProblem A
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Problem solving is more than a process. Problem solving is more than a process.
Process
Environment
People Product
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Problem Solving LeadershipProblem Solving Leadership
We need systems engineers who:We need systems engineers who:
• Understand the Understand the problemsproblems they face (including the they face (including the desired desired productsproducts))
• Know how to Know how to collaboratecollaborate with other problem solvers with other problem solvers
• Can facilitate the problem solving Can facilitate the problem solving processprocess
• Create Create environmentsenvironments conducive to effective conducive to effective problem solvingproblem solving
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
The Path to Problem Solving LeadershipThe Path to Problem Solving Leadership
Individual Individual problem solversproblem solvers
ProblemProblemsolving teamssolving teamsProblem solvingProblem solving
leadershipleadership
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
A Cognitive Approach to Problem SolvingA Cognitive Approach to Problem Solving
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Four Key Variables of Problem SolvingFour Key Variables of Problem Solving
• KirtonKirton (2003): – Key variables that
describe individual problem solvers
OpportunityOpportunity
MotiveMotive
LevelLevel
StyleStyle
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
LevelLevel: With whatWith what, how muchhow much, and how well how well I solve problems
StyleStyle: The wayThe way in which I preferprefer
to solve problems
The Level-Style DistinctionThe Level-Style Distinction
They areindependent
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
We tend to We tend to misinterpretmisinterpret
differences indifferences in stylestyle as as differences indifferences in level level
(and their owners as (and their owners as inferiorinferior).).
The result: We write off their contributions – which may be critical for success.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
StructureStructure: A Key Concept: A Key Concept
• StructureStructure is …
– a key concept in problem solvingproblem solving and in understanding cognitivecognitive stylestyle
– a prerequisite for predictionprediction
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
StructureStructure (cont’d)(cont’d)
Tight structure: High predictability, Less flexibility
Loose structure: High flexibility, Less predictability
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
StructureStructure (cont’d) (cont’d)
• We need both predictabilitypredictability and flexibilityflexibility in order to succeed:
– Too muchmuch structure => too few options => no problem solvingno problem solving
– Too littlelittle structure => too many options => no problem solvingno problem solving
• The exact balancebalance neededneeded depends on what the problemproblem requiresrequires, not on what any one person prefers.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
The Paradox Of StructureThe Paradox Of Structure
EnablingEnabling LimitingLimiting
AnyAny structurestructure is both enablingenabling and limitinglimiting at the same time.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
StyleStyle and and StructureStructure
Cognitive style Cognitive style (Adaption-Innovation)(Adaption-Innovation)
defines a person’s defines a person’s stable preferred way stable preferred way
of managing of managing structure structure
when solving problems. when solving problems.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Kirton’s Kirton’s Adaption-Innovation Adaption-Innovation ContinuumContinuum
More InnovativeInnovative
Prefer lesslessstructurestructure
More AdaptiveAdaptive
Prefer moremorestructurestructure
Problem Solving (Cognitive) StyleProblem Solving (Cognitive) Style
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
• Targeted ideasTargeted ideas• Change agents – improve the systemChange agents – improve the system• More prudent risk takersMore prudent risk takers
• Reliable, methodical, disciplined, Reliable, methodical, disciplined, consistentconsistent
• Masters of detailMasters of detail
• Prefer well-defined problem statementsPrefer well-defined problem statements
• Use rules to solve problemsUse rules to solve problems
• Seek consensus, value group cohesionSeek consensus, value group cohesion
AdaptionAdaption: Common Descriptions: Common Descriptions
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Famous Famous AdaptorsAdaptors
Thomas Edison Alfred Butts
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
CAUTION:CAUTION: The sterling qualities of the The sterling qualities of the AdaptorAdaptor are are
often often overlookedoverlooked and and undervaluedundervalued!!
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
InnovationInnovation: Common Descriptions: Common Descriptions
• Overflowing ideasOverflowing ideas
• Change agents – replace the system Change agents – replace the system
• More daring risk takersMore daring risk takers
• Think in tangential, unexpected waysThink in tangential, unexpected ways
• Less constrained by past customsLess constrained by past customs
• Trade off details for overviewTrade off details for overview
• Often disregard rules, challenge Often disregard rules, challenge assumptionsassumptions
• May disturb settled groupsMay disturb settled groups
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
FamousFamous Innovators Innovators
Nikolai TeslaAkio Morita
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
CAUTION:CAUTION: The “blue sky” ideas of the The “blue sky” ideas of the InnovatorInnovator may may
be be misunderstood misunderstood and dismissed dismissed!!
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Assessing Cognitive StyleAssessing Cognitive Style
• Probably genetically determined Probably genetically determined (a component of personality)(a component of personality)
• Cannot choose or change your styleCannot choose or change your style
• Can be measured atCan be measured atan early agean early age
• Remains stable with Remains stable with age, experienceage, experience
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Style vs. BehaviorStyle vs. Behavior
Style is stableStyle is stable– I preferprefer to behave in accord
with my style– My “lowest cost” behavior
Behavior is flexibleBehavior is flexible– I can and docan and do behave away
from my preferred style– Coping behavior Coping behavior requires
extra energy and may be stressful
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Assessing Cognitive Style: Assessing Cognitive Style: KAIKAI
• Cognitive styleCognitive style can be safely and reliably measured using KAIKAI, a highly-validated style inventory.
• 33 items, administered by certificated practitionerscertificated practitioners
• KAIKAI was developed by Dr. M. J. KirtonDr. M. J. Kirton, a British industrial psychologist, in 19761976.
• Researchers and practitioners have been testing and using KAIKAI in industry for over 30 yearsover 30 years.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
General Population Sample 95
14516032
45
More Adaptive(prefer more structure)
More Innovative(prefer less structure)
Observed Mean = 95Standard deviation ≈ 17
Theoretical range: 32 - 160Observed range: 45 - 145
KAI Style DistributionKAI Style Distribution
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Style and Systems Engineers
More MoreAdaptive Innovative
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Diverse Diverse levelslevels andand stylesstyles are needed are needed to solve successfully to solve successfully
the vast the vast diversitydiversity of of problemsproblems with which we are currently faced.with which we are currently faced.
No “Best” Place on the Continuum
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Teams (of any size) face Teams (of any size) face thethe Paradox of StructureParadox of Structure, ,
just as individuals do!just as individuals do!
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
• Every difference (in levellevel, stylestyle, or motivemotive) is both enablingenabling and limitinglimiting in solving the currentcurrent problemproblem.
• A cognitive advantageadvantage in one situation (or at one time) may be a disadvantagedisadvantage in another.
Teams and the Paradox of StructureTeams and the Paradox of Structure
Current problem = Problem A
Managing team diversity = Problem B
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Successful teams spend Successful teams spend more time more time on on Problem AProblem A than on than on Problem BProblem B. .
The Economy of DiversityThe Economy of Diversity
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Matching People to Problems
Lower Level
Problem A3
Problem A1
Higher Level
More InnovativeMore Adaptive
Problem A2
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
There is There is muchmuch more … more …
• Cognitive gapCognitive gap
• BridgingBridging
• Coping behaviorCoping behavior
• Agents of changeAgents of change
• Characterizing Problem A Characterizing Problem A
• Pendulum of Change vs. Spiral of Change …Pendulum of Change vs. Spiral of Change …
… … but we have to wrap things up! but we have to wrap things up!
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
The The MythMyth of “ of “IdealIdeal” ” LeadersLeaders
• Past trendPast trend: searching for the “ideal leaderideal leader”– Outstanding knowledge of the problem area– Dominating the problem solving process
• ProblemsProblems with this approach: – No one personone person can know everything needed to solve
today’s complex problems.
– Expectations and demands continue to increaseincrease.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Problem Solving LeadershipProblem Solving Leadership
Problem solving leaders Problem solving leaders understand and understand and facilitate: facilitate:
1. The problem problem (know enough to hold his/her own)
2. The problem solving process problem solving process (through coping, bridging, etc.)
3. The problem solverproblem solver (alone and in teams)
And how they IMPACT each other!
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Practical ApplicationsPractical Applications
This problem solving framework problem solving framework is being used by:
• U.S. Military U.S. Military
• Defense contractors Defense contractors
• Research centers & labsResearch centers & labs
• Pharmaceutical industryPharmaceutical industry
• Manufacturing companiesManufacturing companies
• Leadership development orgs. Leadership development orgs.
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
PSU Problem Solving CurriculumPSU Problem Solving Curriculum
The Individual Problem Solver
(SYSEN 550)
Problem Solving Teams
(SYSEN 552)
Problem Solving Leadership (SYSEN 554)
Invention and Creative Design
(SYSEN 555)
Problem Solving Techniques
(proposed)
Problem Solving Ethics
(STS 589)
Foundation Courses
Supporting Courses & Special Topics
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Problem Solving Research GroupProblem Solving Research Group
• AimsAims: – Collaboration on complex problems of interest
– Core of a proposed Problem Solving Institute
• MembersMembers: faculty (PSU & other), students (past & present), corporate & military partners
• Activities/outcomesActivities/outcomes: – Sponsored projects
– Problem Solving Handbook
– Papers, proposals, and reports
– Training & education programs
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Questions and DiscussionQuestions and Discussion
Copyright 2009 K. W. JablokowINCOSE 2009
Contact Info
Kathryn W. Jablokow, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and STS
Penn State University – Great Valley
30 E. Swedesford Road
Malvern, PA 19355
Tel: 610.648.3372
Fax: 610.648.3377
Email: [email protected]