1 / 32

CESUN University Questionnaire Results Daniel Roos MIT Engineering Systems Division April 2008

CESUN University Questionnaire Results Daniel Roos MIT Engineering Systems Division April 2008 CESUN Annual Meeting University of Southern California. Ahmadu Bello University Zaria Nigeria Arizona State Cambridge Carnegie Mellon University Cornell University

kiayada-madden
Télécharger la présentation

CESUN University Questionnaire Results Daniel Roos MIT Engineering Systems Division April 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CESUN University Questionnaire Results Daniel Roos MIT Engineering Systems Division April 2008 CESUN Annual Meeting University of Southern California

  2. Ahmadu Bello University Zaria Nigeria Arizona State Cambridge Carnegie Mellon University Cornell University Ecole Polytechnique - France University of Arkansas, Little Rock George Mason University Georgia Tech Missouri University of Science and Technology (Formerly University of Missouri-Rolla) MIT National University of Singapore Naval Postgraduate School Purdue University Stanford RPI Stevens Institute of Technology The Queensland University of Technology University of Alabama, Huntsville The University of Arizona United States Military Academy University of Gronigen University of Illinois University of Southern California Virginia Tech Yonsei University Survey Respondents

  3. Names of Units 1. Management Science and Engineering 2. Systems- 2 3. Systems Engineering- 3 4. Manufacturing and Management 5. System of Systems- 2 6. Industrial and Information Engineering 7. Engineering Systems- 2 8. Systems Architecting & Engrg, 9. Engineering and Public Policy 10. Industrial Engineering

  4. Names of Units 11. Engineering & Technology Management 12. Systems Engineering and Operations Research 13. Industrial and Systems Engineering and Engineering Management 14. Systems and Industrial Engineering 15. Systems and Enterprises 16. Decision Science and Engineering Systems 17. Engineering Management and Systems Engineering 18. Engineering of Complex Systems 19. Industrial and Enterprise Systems Engineering 20. Industrial and Systems Engineering- 2

  5. Unit Characteristics • Does Unit Name Describe Current Activities? Yes- 93% No- 7% • How Long Has The Unit Existed? Less than 1 year - 7% 2-5 Years - 28% 6-10 Years - 28% 11-20 Years - 22% More than 20 Years - 15% • Did It Form From A Merger of Other Units? Yes- 21% No- 79% • Do You Use The Term Engineering Systems At Your Distribution? Yes- 48% No- 52%

  6. Unit Characteristics • What Is The Structure of Your Unit? School 20% Center of Laboratory 5% Program 25% Track 10% Division 20% Department 20%

  7. Faculty • Full Professors 0-4% 1-5 64%, 6-10 15%, 11-15 12%, 16-20 4% • Associate Professors 0-4% 1-5 64%, 6-10 24%, 11-15 0%, 16-20 8% • Assistant Professors 0-0%, 1-5 68%, 6-10 20%, 11-15 4%, 16-20 4% • Research Professors 0-21%, 1-5 79% • Professor of Practice 0-31%, 1-5 54%, More than 5 15%

  8. Faculty • Faculty Appointments Entirely In Unit 52% Dual (50/50) 23% Joint (Primary/Secondary) 25% • Dual and Joint Appointments Other Engineering 36% Management 60% Social Science 4% • New Faculty In Next Five Year 1-4 56% 5-9 36% 10 8%

  9. Research Staff and Post Docs • Research Staff 0 9% 1-5 63% 6-10 9% 11-20 5% 20-40 13% • Post Docs 0 9% 1-5 63%

  10. Students • Undergrad 0-50 13% 50-100 20% 100-150 38% More Than 150 38% • Masters 0-50 13% 1-50 40% 50-100 0% 100-120 20% 120-150 10% More Than 150 35% • PhD 0-50 13% 1-25 46% 25-50 11% 50-100 30% More than 100 6%

  11. Where Do Students Go • PhD 40-70% Academic Careers 0-20% National Labs 20-50% Private Companies • Masters Most Go To Large Private Companies Significant Variation By School Significant Variation By Country

  12. Research Funding Industry International None 7% None 13% Up to 20% 56% Up to 10% 63% 20 to 50% 30% 11-35% 24% 100% 7% Domestic GovernmentFoundation None 5% None 11% Up to 20% 10% 1-5% 60% 20-50 15% 0-20% 11% 50-75 30% 60% 11% 75-90 25% Other 100 15 % Alumni Funds Internal University Grants

  13. Research Areas

  14. Research Areas Control 3.04 Operations Research 3.73 Manufacturing 3.43 Information Systems 3.81 System Architecture 3.87 Systems Analysis 4.19 Entrepreneurship/Innovation 3.62 Management Of Technology 3.62 Socio-Technical Systems 3.00 Systems Engineering 4.50 Social Science Research 2.20

  15. Sector Areas

  16. Energy 3.39 • Environment 3.58 • Transportation 3.90 • Communications 3.73 • Enterprise Engineering 3.62 • Health Care 3.35 • Service Science 3.35 • Logistics/Supply Chain 3.96

  17. Undergraduate Programs (15) • Management, Science, and Engineering • Systems Engineering- 5 • Manufacturing Engineering • Industrial Engineering- 4 • Industrial & Systems Engineering • Engineering - 2 • Engineering Management- 2 • Industrial and Management Engineering • Systems Management • General Engineering

  18. Masters Programs (21) • Management, Science and Engineering • Systems Engineering- 7 • Industrial Systems Manufacturing and Management • Industrial and Information Engineering • Logistics • Systems Architecting & Engineering, ISE, Product Development Engineering, Software Engineering • Industrial Engineering • Management of Technology • Technology and Policy • Defense Systems and Technology • Operations Research

  19. Masters Programs (21) Masters Program listing (continued) • Engineering • Industrial Engineering- 2 • Engineering Management- 2 • Software Engineering • Industrial Management and Engineering • Leaders for Manufacturing • Finance Engineering • Systems Design and Management • Systems and Entrepreneurial Engineering • Engineering of Complex Industrial Systems

  20. PhD Programs (17) • Management, Science and Engineering • Applied Science • Industrial and Information Engineering • Engineering Systems • Industrial and Systems Engineering • Economics and Business • Management of Technology • Information Technology • Engineering- 3 • Systems & Industrial Engineering • Industrial Engineering • Engineering Management • Decision Sciences and Engineering Systems • Systems Engineering- 2 • Systems and Entrepreneurial Engineering

  21. Expanding Research Areas • Service • Health Care- 5 • Supply Chain Management • Systems Engineering- 2 • Management of Innovation • Energy/ Environment- 8 • Infrastructure- 4 • Homeland Security- 3 • ”Megacities" • Information Technology- 3 • Financial Engineering • Transportation- 5 • Manufacturing • Defense • Systems Architecture- 2

  22. Research Areas Contracting • Manufacturing - 2 • Operations Research - 2 • Personal Management • Manufacturing • Defense • Service Systems • Retail

  23. Engineering Systems • Importance of Engineering Systems To The Future of Engineering 5-74% 4-26% • Level of Knowledge In Academia of ES 3-44% 2-40% 1-16% • Level of Knowledge In Practioner Community of ES 4-44% 3-26% 2-22% 1-8% • Level of Acceptance of ES By Senior Administration 5-17% 4-44% 3-39% • Level of Acceptance By Other Academic Units 4-17% 3-39% 2-39% 1-5%

  24. Engineering Systems • Driving Forces Behind Engineering Systems in Academia

  25. Greatest Challenges • Defining ES • Resource Development • Institutional Barriers, Funds, Faculty Expertise and Interests • Faculty Time for New Initiatives; Dean Level Understanding and Support; Space • Commitment of Engineering Leadership to Hire Tenured/tenure-track Faculty • Growth and Acceptance As an Academic Discipline • Getting the Conventional Departments to Support Us; Getting Senior Management of the University to Recognize the Importance of Engineering Systems. • Finding Time and Resources to Make Program Secure and Grow, • To Gain Acceptance of ES in the University's Promotion and Tenure Exercise. • Furthering Development and Acceptance of Systems Engineering and Operations Research • Limited Pool of Senior Faculty in Systems

  26. Greatest Challenges • Finding Young Faculty That Have Experience in Systems, Desire to Work in This Broad Area As Opposed to a Narrow Area, and Getting Other Academic Units to Appreciate the Contributions of These Young Faculty to Large Research Projects and Centers. Also, Finding Undergraduate Students That Know About Our Field and Have an Interest. • We Have Not Developed a Clear Academic Program Yet; Our Effort Is a Research Effort Driven by Problems of Common Interest Across Several Engineering Departments. Determining Our Best Approach Forward for Our Academic Program(s) Related to Engineering Systems / Systems Engineering Is Somewhat Unclear. • ES Vs. Traditional Approaches (Trad. Science-engineering Approach Has More Formal Theoretical Basis and Limited Case Study Investigation); Broad Understanding and Acceptance by Industry and Academics; Enlightening Prospective Students; Finding Qualified Academics • Sustaining Growth • Creating and Maintaining Common Ground Among a Range of Discipline That Includes Engineering, Computing, Management, Medicine, Policy, and Architecture • Creating the Interdisciplinary Environment for Research and Faculty Cooperation • Balancing the Quantitative and Qualitative Nature of ES. • Being Able to Promote Systems Thinking

  27. Is Engineering Systems New • It Is Evolving, but Not New. Taking Advantage of New Technology to Solve Problems of Increased Complexity. • Elements Not New but Integration Is • True to Some Extent, but Then Nothing Is. ES Is Building on Existing Disciplines and Expending the Role of Engineering. The Formalization and Extent of This Expansion Is New. Pockets of This Work Were Around for a Long Time. • ES Is Not New, but to Emphasize It As a Discipline or Organized Consortium Within a Research University Is New. • It Lost Momentum During the Last 20 Years. It Needs to Be Revitalized As the World Becomes More Global and More Complex. • Systems Engineering Has a Fifty Year History but the Explosion of Complexity of Technology Has Dramatically Increased Its Relevance. • It Is Not New. What Is New Under the Sun? However, There Has Not Been a Systematic Study on ES Before Even Everyone Is Using It and Practicing It Is "Experience". • This Is Not Fundamentally Untrue. • The Thought Process Is New.

  28. Is Engineering Systems New • 50 years ago our dean recognized the importance and started our department, but through the years more funding and emphasis has been given to Industrial Engineering and now Engineering Management - which are fields that I believe SE encompasses, but traditions and names support barriers. SE is becoming more widely recognized and hence there is a new push for what some have been doing for a long time. Hence, it is not necessarily new, but there is new activity, energy, and opportunities. • I would agree that ES as a notion is not fundamentally new. Taking a big-picture, whole-life-cycle view has been rather common. But, as needs and demands of engineered "things" have increased, the complexity of engineered systems has increased so that a structured approach and concomitant set of tools is needed to obtain desired results from limited resources. This has made the practice of systems engineering (or engineering systems) more important as a standalone entity over the past few decades. • The concept/thinking is new, the components are not. ES tends to be implicit to many practicing engineers; however many cannot distinguish between "Engineering Systems" and "Systems Engineering". Systems Engineering is one part of the components that make up Engineering Systems • Irrelevant - it is needed now in industry

  29. Is Engineering Systems New • If you do not think it is new, then you are not really doing it! Those who argue that we have long been doing this tend to have quite reductionist views of science and technology. True ES does not scale down problems to fit the methods, but instead scales up the methods to address the real problems. • It is not new, we rediscovered it • The concepts are not new, but the size and complexity of our ES is new, which calls for more sophisticated approaches. Also, some academic disciplines have become so highly specialized and theoretical that they have forgotten what they once knew.

  30. CESUN Value • Sharing of Experiences and Materials • Community Willing to Share Experiences and Validate Need in Engineering Community Relative to Other Areas That CESUN Participants Also Have the Opportunity to Observe From Their Own University Vantage Point. • International Joint Research Programs • CESUN Should Create Formal Student Placement Market for PhD Students Interested in Academic Careers. More Event and Conferences Giving Exposure to Students and Ideas • Hearing What Other Research Universities Are Doing to Calibrate Our Own Activities. • Creating Acceptance and Visibility, Great Discussion Board • Peer Recognition; Learning From Peers; Mutual Encouragement. • Creating a Community of Academics Who Value SE/ES. • Making It a Movement for Everyone, Including the Faculty and University Administrator, to Take Notice and Recognize and Importance of ES.

  31. CESUN Value • Provide a Forum for Academic Institutions to Share Visions, Issues, Approaches, and to Build Partnerships and Alliances. Help Raise Awareness at Funding Agencies (Such As NSF) and in the Programs That Rank Institutions (Such As US News and World Reports). Issues Such the Names That Programs Are Ranked Under Significantly Affects the Administrations View of the Profession. • It Has Provided Visibility for Our Effort. Other Member Schools Provide Some Examples of Academic Programs in the Area. Perhaps Some "Best Practices" or "Lessons Learned" From Other CESUN Members Would Be Valuable As We Try to Chart Our Path Forward. • CESUN Provides Global Direction and a Community of Practice (Peer Support, Sharing of Experiences and Resources). These Are Necessary to Promote the Concept in a Global Context. • CESUN Needs Much More Visibility to Facilitate the Impact We Need. It Needs to Move Beyond Being the "Systems Support Group." • It Is Creating a Forum to Share Ideas, Cooperate in Research Projects, Exchange Faculty and Provide a Foundation in Educating Next Generation of Systems Engineering Researchers and Faculty. • It Has Added Legitimacy to Our ES Research, Teaching and Degree Program. A More Traditional Professional Venue (Technical Society, Conferences and Peer-reviewed Journal Outlet) Would Help.

  32. Summary • Programs Are Relatively New and Growing • The Need For Legitimacy and Acceptance Within the Universities, Conflict At the Departmental Level • A Branding Problem Due To Different Program Names • Engineering Systems Is Critical To The Future Of Engineering • Industry Is Leading Academia In Acceptance Of Engineering Systems • Engineering Systems Represents a Different Way Of Thinking Due To Increased Complexity, Scale and Scope Of Problems • The Need To Develop Engineering Systems as A Discipline/Field Of Study • CESUN Provides a Community Of Practice For Sharing And Joint Development

More Related