IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v19y2016i5p422-435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Complexity in a Systems Engineering Organization: An Empirical Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Dawn Gilbert
  • Mike Yearworth

Abstract

Systems Engineering development projects often fail to meet delivery expectations in terms of timescales and cost. Project plans, which set cost and deadline expectations, are produced and monitored within a reductionist paradigm, incorporating a deterministic view of cause and effect. This assumes that the cumulative activities and their corresponding durations that comprise the developed solution can be known in advance, and that monitoring and management intervention can ensure satisfactory delivery of an adequate solution, through implementation of this plan. This paper presents a case study that examines the Systems Engineering function within a Thales UK business line. The focus is the organization. The research is exploratory. It gathers evidence through participant‐observation, interviews, documentation, and archival records. It considers two perspectives, a ‘traditional’ predominantly reductionist perspective, and a novel Complex Adaptive System (CAS) perspective. Evidence is analyzed in light of both perspectives to consider how each is able to explain the observations. Research that considers an organization as a CAS is predominately theoretical, rather than empirical. This paper contributes by viewing a systems engineering development organisation as a CAS, and considering the novel insights this perspective brings to the issue of satisfactory project delivery.

Suggested Citation

  • Dawn Gilbert & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Complexity in a Systems Engineering Organization: An Empirical Case Study," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 422-435, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:19:y:2016:i:5:p:422-435
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21359
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21359
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21359?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah A Sheard & Ali Mostashari, 2009. "Principles of complex systems for systems engineering," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 295-311, December.
    2. Hobday, Mike, 2000. "The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 871-893, August.
    3. Mary C. Edson, 2012. "A Complex Adaptive Systems View of Resilience in a Project Team," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 499-516, September.
    4. George Friedman & Andrew P. Sage, 2004. "Case studies of systems engineering and management in systems acquisition," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 84-97.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manning, Stephan, 2017. "The rise of project network organizations: Building core teams and flexible partner pools for interorganizational projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1399-1415.
    2. Blindenbach-Driessen, Floortje & van den Ende, Jan, 2006. "Innovation in project-based firms: The context dependency of success factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 545-561, May.
    3. Casper, Steven & Whitley, Richard, 2004. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 89-106, January.
    4. Olivier Hueber, 2012. "The Top-Down Innovative Coordination Flows in Sophia Antipolis," Post-Print hal-00806571, HAL.
    5. Binz, Christian & Gosens, Jorrit & Hansen, Teis & Hansen, Ulrich Elmer, 2017. "Toward Technology-Sensitive Catching-Up Policies: Insights from Renewable Energy in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 418-437.
    6. Parker, Owen N. & Mui, Rachel & Bhawe, Nachiket & Semadeni, Matthew, 2022. "Insight or ignorance: How collaborative history in a workgroup fits with project type to shape performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 154-167.
    7. Biggiero, Lucio & Angelini, Pier Paolo, 2015. "Hunting scale-free properties in R&D collaboration networks: Self-organization, power-law and policy issues in the European aerospace research area," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 21-43.
    8. Prencipe, Andrea & Tell, Fredrik, 2001. "Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1373-1394, December.
    9. Pantic-Dragisic, Svjetlana & Söderlund, Jonas, 2020. "Swift transition and knowledge cycling: Key capabilities for successful technical and engineering consulting?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    10. Blake Roberts & Thomas Mazzuchi & Shahram Sarkani, 2016. "Engineered Resilience for Complex Systems as a Predictor for Cost Overruns," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 111-132, March.
    11. Hermano, Víctor & Martín-Cruz, Natalia, 2016. "The role of top management involvement in firms performing projects: A dynamic capabilities approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3447-3458.
    12. GRIMM, Nina, 2014. "The Need of Project Capabilities in Project Based Organizations," Romanian Distribution Committee Magazine, Romanian Distribution Committee, vol. 5(1), pages 24-29, March.
    13. Spanuth, Thomas & Wald, Andreas, 2017. "Understanding the antecedents of organizational commitment in the context of temporary organizations: An empirical study," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 129-138.
    14. Dedy Dewanto, 2022. "The characteristic of leader innovativeness, a case in Indonesian’s construction industry," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(8), pages 153-165, November.
    15. Renaud Bellais & Renelle Guichard, 2006. "Defense Innovation, Technology Transfers And Public Policy," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 273-286.
    16. Guillou, Sarah & Lazaric, Nathalie & Longhi, Christian & Rochhia, Sylvie, 2009. "The French defence industry in the knowledge management era: A historical overview and evidence from empirical data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 170-180, February.
    17. Gilberto SERAVALLI, 2011. "Conflict, Contract, Leadership and Innovation: An Interdisciplinary View," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 1(6), pages 1-48, October.
    18. Engwall, Mats, 2003. "No project is an island: linking projects to history and context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 789-808, May.
    19. Nuno Oliveira & Fabrice Lumineau, 2017. "How Coordination Trajectories Influence the Performance of Interorganizational Project Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 1029-1060, December.
    20. Burgers, J.H. & van den Bosch, F.A.J. & Volberda, H.W., 2007. "Why New Business Development Projects Fail: Coping with the Differences of Technological versus Market Knowledge," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-072-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:19:y:2016:i:5:p:422-435. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.