|
Daniel
Roos
In
December 1998, the School of Engineering established a second
new division, the Engineering Systems Division (ESD),
which focuses on the engineering of complex systems. The
creation of ESD responds to a need for the development of
new approaches, frameworks, and theories to better understand
engineering systems behavior and design, as well as a need
within the School for the development and support of educational
programs on complex systems and design synthesis that will
prepare students for leadership positions. ESD is an integrative
effort that cuts across the School of Engineering departments.
In addition to the engineering departments, ESD works with
the Sloan School of Management, the School of Humanities
and Social Sciences, and the School of Architecture and
Planning to develop an integrative approach to engineering
systems problems. Overall,
the Division provides an institutional framework and intellectual
home for engineering systems faculty to develop educational
and research programs, facilitate the admission of students
to various interdisciplinary academic programs, and provide
governance on key issues such as faculty hires, promotion,
and tenure. ESD also explores the changing roles and relationships
among universities, industry, and government in all phases
of engineering systems development. What follows is a discussion
of the rationale for establishing ESD, its history, and
its progress to-date.
The
field of engineering is changing rapidly. Systems and product
complexity are increasing at an accelerating pace, as are
the complexities of operating in an environment where technical,
natural, and social systems increasingly intersect. In addition,
the world faces unprecedented social concerns in an expanding
global marketplace. Systems and products today must be environmentally
benign and health-protective, and in some cases must even
meet baseline aesthetic standards in order to avoid legal,
political, and other barriers to success in the marketplace.
This requires an integrative approach in which engineering
professionals view the technological components as part
of a larger engineering system.
In
response to the changing design environment, some universities
have developed systems-based programs. MIT has been in the
vanguard of this effort with a wide range of systems-related
initiatives in education and research. Five master's-level
interdisciplinary educational programs at the Institute
are serving over 400 students today. These educational programs
include Leaders for Manufacturing (LFM), System Design and
Management (SDM), Technology and Policy Program (TPP), Master
of Science in Transportation (MST), and Master of Engineering
in Logistics (MLOG)).
Several
research centers have also been active in focusing on engineering
systems problems. They are the Center for Innovation in
Product Development (CIPD), Center for Technology, Policy
and Industrial Development (CTPID), Center for Transportation
Studies (CTS), and Industrial Performance Center (IPC)).
These centers are interdisciplinary, involving faculty from
engineering, management, and the social sciences.
The
Engineering Systems Division (ESD), created in December
1998, brings together these academic programs and research
centers to facilitate cooperation among the participating
faculty. ESD provides an intellectual home and institutional
framework for the faculty to "go the next step,"
building upon the successful programs already developed.
ESD’s
mission is to establish engineering systems as a field of
study focusing on complex systems and products, where these
systems and products are viewed in their broad social and
industrial context, and to use the new knowledge gained
to improve engineering education and practice.
Motivation
for the Division
Industry
has recognized the need to respond to the aforementioned
new design and competitive factors and to have all of them
considered in achieving design solutions. It is useful to
look at these factors more closely in order to fully understand
and appreciate the need for a more integrative approach
in which engineering professionals view the technological
components as part of a larger engineering system.
As
an example of the broadened perspective of engineering systems,
consider how changes in automotive design have motivated
new educational and research initiatives at MIT. The automobile,
once considered a technologically mature product, is now
influenced by new technology, including lightweight materials;
"smart" electronic components, and alternative
propulsion systems to the internal combustion engine. The
globalization of the automobile industry has caused locational
shifts of both design and manufacturing facilities from
a national to international context. Concerns such as quality,
management of human resources, and time-to-market have motivated
fundamental changes in automotive product development, manufacturing,
and supply-chain design. And new approaches—such as just-in-time
inventory control, integrated product development teams,
and lean production techniques—have reshaped companies'
automobile production processes, while social concerns such
as air pollution, recycling of materials, global warming,
and safety also have had a major impact on auto design and
production.
Furthermore,
design and manufacturing are only part of the automotive
system. Government policies determine the role of automobiles
in providing personal mobility, ensure automotive safety,
and affect the impact of automobiles on the environment
and urban development. The formation of these policies requires
not only technical expertise but also an understanding of
institutions, human behavioral responses and other non-technical
considerations.
These
changes in automotive systems have served as an impetus
for the development, over the years, of many new MIT educational
and research programs sponsored by automotive companies.
GM, Ford, and Chrysler are members of LFM and GM and Ford
are also sponsors of CIPD. Ford has the largest number of
students enrolled in SDM of any company. Volkswagen is a
sponsor of the CTS Supply Chain Management Program. All
the world’s auto companies participate in the International
Motor Vehicle Program at CTPID. TPP offers a proseminar
on the electric car as an automotive system. CTPID has a
global mobility program and CTS has an intelligent transportation
systems program and numerous other transportation research
projects.
Automotive
systems provide but one example of how MIT has developed
new educational and research programs that focus on complex
engineering system problems. Increasing complexity can also
be found in many other systems (e.g., telecommunications
systems, energy systems, and aeronautical systems), which
are the bases for similar programs.
These
programs educate engineering systems professionals who view
the technological system as part of a larger whole. For
them, the context in which the system operates is a design
variable rather than a constraint. Thus, they are
concerned with the design of the organization that has to
manufacture the product, the regulations and public policies
governing its use and disposition, the marketing of it,
and the relationship with suppliers, distributors and other
participants in the value chain. From this perspective,
the design process includes: the physical attributes which
are the domain of traditional engineering; the process attributes,
which are the domain of both engineers and managers; and
the context attributes which traditionally have been the
domain of managers, governments, and social scientists.
In
spite of numerous accomplishments over the past several
years, both industry and the academic community have been
moving incrementally, largely independently, and with no
widely accepted strategic vision of engineering systems
to guide them. In the early stages of a major change in
the practice of engineering, such incrementalism makes sense.
However, with the experience base developed to date, the
time is right for the first comprehensive effort to define
the nature of engineering systems, and to encourage both
industry and the university community to act on the resulting
vision. Indeed, given the pace of change, the need for such
an effort grows more urgent day-by-day.
Such
an initiative represents a massive challenge. In the post-World
War II era, MIT revolutionized engineering by developing
engineering science as a new and broadly applicable approach
in many engineering disciplines. The primary results of
this effort were the publication of a now classic engineering
science approach, and the impact of MIT graduates schooled
in the new approach on universities throughout the world.
The
move to engineering systems is expected to have similar
impact; yet it also represents a considerably more complex
undertaking. To be truly effective, engineering systems
requires leaders who are well-versed in a range of areas
beyond the elements of the core engineering disciplines;
these areas include management and the relevant social sciences.
These new educational and research programs require different
engineering approaches from those of the traditional engineering
science paradigm—which has served as the driving force in
the School of Engineering during the past several decades.
We need to develop an integrative approach to engineering
systems problems that considers the context in which the
systems are initiated, designed, manufactured, constructed,
implemented, and maintained.
What
is the Engineering Systems Division?
In
response to this need, ESD was first proposed by the Eagar
Committee, which was appointed by the Dean of Engineering
in 1995 and chaired by Tom Eagar, Head of the Department
of Material Science and Engineering. The Committee concluded
that to be a leader in engineering education and research
well into the next century, MIT required a mix of faculty,
staff and students involved in engineering systems. Moreover,
the Committee found that leadership in engineering education
and research requires that MIT have strengths in as well
as a balance between both the disciplinary aspects of engineering
science as well as the integrative aspects of engineering
systems.
A
survey of Engineering School department heads and center
directors conducted by the Committee found the School of
Engineering had only about half as many faculty spending
time on integrative activities in engineering systems as
was needed. These current engineering systems faculty were
too few and too dispersed among departments to form a critical
mass. Additional faculty members in engineering systems
were needed to work with the existing limited faculty resources.
Furthermore, these faculty members needed an intellectual
home for educational and research programs in engineering
systems. The Committee therefore recommended in its August
1996 report the creation of a Division of Engineering Systems
within the School of Engineering and the appointment of
an Associate Dean of Engineering to head the Division.
ESD
was described in the Eagar Report as "an organizational
unit with porous boundaries that would cut across, and interact
with, the eight engineering departments. An important function
of the division structure is preventing the isolation of
faculty in this area and the removal of valuable resources
from existing departments that might occur with a departmental
structure."
In
September 1997, Dean of Engineering Bob Brown appointed
Daniel Roos as Associate Dean of Engineering Systems and
established the Engineering Systems Council and the Extended
Engineering Systems Council. The Engineering Systems Council
consisted of the heads of the interdisciplinary engineering
systems academic programs and research centers in the School
of Engineering. The Extended Engineering Systems Council
was a group of approximately 30 faculty from organizations
throughout MIT who had an interest in engineering systems.
At
the request of Dean Brown, both Councils developed further
the concepts of engineering systems and an implementation
plan that served as the basis for the Division’s creation.
That plan was discussed by the Faculty Policy Committee
and Academic Council, as well as at the Institute Faculty
meeting. The Executive Committee of the Corporation subsequently
approved it and ESD began operations on December 1, 1998.
Schematically,
the interrelationships between the Division, the School
of Engineering Departments, and other schools and programs
are depicted in figure 1.
Figure1
Figure
2 depicts the organizations that are part of ESD. There
are six units, four of which administer five different educational
programs at the Master’s level. In addition, several discussions
have taken place with the Operations Research Center (ORC),
regarding potential cooperation with the ESD. Other units
at MIT may decide to affiliate with or join ESD in the future.
Figure
2
An integrative
approach to engineering problem solving requires a shared
commitment between ESD, the Engineering School departments,
and the participation of colleagues in the management and
social sciences. As Provost Bob Brown has stated "The
School of Engineering is placing growing emphasis on engineering
research and educational programs that integrate traditional
engineering expertise with management and social science."
The
School of Engineering departments have different degrees
of interest in engineering systems. The relationship of
the Division to each of the departments will vary depending
on the departmental need and desire. The goal of the Division
is to add value rather than simply duplicate what
can be done effectively by the departments, the Sloan School
of Management, the School of Architecture and Planning,
or the School of Humanities and Social Sciences.
ESD
Faculty
ESD
has a similar structure to the Division of Bioengineering
and Environmental Health, which began operations on July
1st 1998. ESD is composed primarily of "dual"
faculty. Such dual faculty will commit their time and efforts
about equally between a department and ESD. In most cases,
a formal 50/50 split of responsibility for academic salary,
promotion and tenure, teaching duties, a faculty member’s
and administrative responsibilities will characterize this.
In other cases, faculty may have a traditional joint appointment
with ESD. These faculty generally spend less than half time
in ESD activities and their tenure line remains with their
home department.
This
split of responsibility is a formality (such as for accounting
purposes) for ESD to be successful. The objective is for
ESD faculty to persue activities that benefit both
their home department and the Division and thereby add value
to both units via the synergism which ESD is designed to
promote. Furthermore, ESD faculty should be able to leverage
the work of their departmental colleagues thus adding further
value to the departments, the Division, the Schools and
the Institute.
That
dual or joint appoinments are shared with the departments
is a distinguishing feature of ESD relative to traditional
MIT department appointments. This is consistent with the
concept that the new entity is charged with bringing engineering
systems into the School of Engineering by interacting with
the departments as strongly as possible. Symbolic of that
commitment, two of the ESD faculty are current department
heads (Professor Tom Eagar of Material Science and Engineering
and Professor Ed Crawley of Aeronautics and Astronautics)
and four ESD faculty are former department heads (Professor
Joel Moses of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science,
Professor Earll Murman of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
and Professors David Marks and Joseph Sussman of Civil and
Environmental Engineering)).
MIT
faculty with ESD appointments are listed in table 1. These
faculty come from the Schools of Engineering and Management.
We also anticipate social science faculty joining ESD from
the School of Humanities and Social Sciences and the School
of Architecture and Planning.
Table
1
| Faculty
Member |
Affiliated
Unit |
| Thomas
Allen |
Sloan
School of Management |
| Joel
Clark |
Materials
Science and Engineering |
| Edward
Crawley |
Aeronautics
and Astronomics |
| Richard
deNeufville |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
| Thomas
Eagar |
Materials
Science and Engineering |
| Steven
Eppinger |
Sloan
School of Management |
| Stephen
Graves |
Sloan
School of Management |
| David
Hardt |
Mechanical
Engineering |
| Maurice
Holmes |
Sloan
School of Management |
| Thomas
Kochan |
Sloan
School of Management |
| Paul
Lagace |
Aeronautics
and Astronomics |
| Stuart
Madnick |
Sloan
School of Management |
| David
Marks |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
| Fred
Moavenzadeh |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
| Joel
Moses |
Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science |
| Earll
Murman |
Aeronautics
and Astronomics |
| Amedeo
Odoni |
Aeronautics
and Astronomics |
| Daniel
Roos |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
| Yossi
Sheffi |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
| Joseph
Sussman |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
| John
Williams |
Civil
and Environmental Engineering |
The
initial ESD appointments are all senior faculty members.
There were discussions about also having junior faculty
in the new division. Some felt that junior faculty should
not be appointed in ESD since their tenure process would
be more difficult; the junior faculty member would have
to be evaluated by two different units. Others argued, as
in any academic unit, the inclusion of junior faculty is
vital over the long term in order to provide renewed energy,
new ideas, and a constant evolution of the unit. In particular,
junior faculty with fresh ideas are critical to an emerging
field such as engineering systems and, therefore, they should
be included in ESD. We decided that junior faculty could
join ESD if a senior faculty member agrees to serve as a
mentor and the junior faculty member is aware of the potential
additional difficulties in the tenure process.
To respond
to the current shortfall of engineering systems faculty,
identified by the Eagar Committee, an ESD Faculty Search
Committee has been established. Members of the Committee
during the past academic year included: Professor Joseph
Sussman of Civil and Environmental Engineering (Chair),
Professor Tom Eagar of Material Science and Engineering,
Professor Stephen Graves of the Sloan School of Management,
Professor David Hardt of Mechanical Engineering, Professor
Greg McRae of Chemical Engineering, Professor Harvey Sapolsky
of Political Science, and Institute Professor Sheila Widnall.
Educational
Challenges and Opportunities
The
principal initial challenges and opportunities for ESD are
educational. A first mission for the Division is an examination
of the "systems" aspects of the five ongoing programs (i.e.,
what are their elements, what are their major interactions,
etc.). From this, improved efficiencies and new intellectual
pursuits will emerge. For example, LFM and SDM have recently
decided to consolidate their administrative functions.
The
key to defining and propagating the intellectual core of
ESD is a coherent curriculum targeted at students with interests
in engineering systems. Some basic elements of a divisional
curriculum are in place, as evidenced by the numerous common
topics among the programs included in ESD. However, most
of the specific subjects have not been designed by the programs
themselves, and thus were not intended to be part of any
particular degree. Conversely, some subjects have been developed
with a narrow view of supporting only a single program and
do not have a broader intellectual mission.
Accordingly,
ESD will support development of subjects directly tied to
the underlying concepts of engineering systems while continuing
to adapt and modify existing subjects through enhanced collaboration
among the existing ESD programs. Consistent with the mission
of ESD, all new subjects will be joint offerings, primarily
with the engineering departments, but also in many cases
with management and the social sciences departments.
The
Division has recently begun a new project to develop engineering
systems case studies to demonstrate the principle of engineering
systems in a real world context. These case studies could
be utilized not only by engineering systems subjects, but
also by subjects offered by engineering departments.
Working
with Industry
A common
characteristic of most ESD research and educational programs
is their deep involvement with industry, in ways that provide
more than funding for the programs and employment for our
students. These programs interact with industry and government
to define research and educational needs and address the
identified needs. ESD works with industry in a partnership
mode where industry serves as a real world laboratory to
test new concepts, provide data and facilities, and help
faculty and students better appreciate the context of their
research. Several ESD academic programs feature an internship
experience at an industrial site.
ESD
units have formal ties to multiple enterprises and novel
industry-academic relationships. Examples of industrial
relationships include LFM’s industry partners, CTPID’s International
Motor Vehicle Program and Lean Aerospace consortia, CTS’s
Corporate and Public Affiliates Programs and its Integrated
Supply Chain Management Consortium, SDM’s and CIPD’s corporate
partners, IPC’s industry studies, TPP's student government
and industry internships, and LFM's student industry internships.
These programs explore new ways to work with industry and
government thus providing a better understanding of the
changing relationships between universities, government
and industry, as well as better educational opportunities
and programs for our students.
Conclusion
The
establishment of ESD continues to keep MIT in the vanguard
of engineering research and education. ESD will help to
further the development of new approaches, frameworks, and
theories to better understand engineering systems behavior
and design. ESD faculty will develop and support educational
programs on complex systems and design synthesis that will
prepare students for leadership positions. And the Division
itself will set the pace for evolving roles and relationships
among universities, industry, and government in all phases
of engineering systems development.
|
