Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide E-Book
107,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
Systems Engineering Compilation of 37 competencies needed for systems engineering, with information for individuals and organizations on how to identify and assess competence This book provides guidance on how to evaluate proficiency in the competencies defined in the systems engineering competency framework and how to differentiate between proficiency at each of the five levels of proficiency defined within that document. Readers will learn how to create a benchmark standard for each level of proficiency within each competence area, define a set of standardized terminology for competency indicators to promote like-for-like comparison, and provide typical non-domain-specific indicators of evidence which may be used to confirm experience in each competency area. Sample topics covered by the three highly qualified authors include: * The five proficiency levels: awareness, supervised practitioner, practitioner, lead practitioner, and expert * The numerous knowledge, skills, abilities, and behavior indicators of each proficiency level * What an individual needs to know and be able to do in order to behave as an effective systems engineer * How to develop training courses, education curricula, job advertisements, job descriptions, and job performance evaluation criteria for system engineering positions For organizations, companies, and individual practitioners of systems engineering, this book is a one-stop resource for considering the competencies defined in the systems engineering competency framework and judging individuals based off them.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 1311
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright Page
DISCLAIMER
LIST OF SECF TABLES
LIST OF SECF FIGURES
LIST OF SECAG TABLES
LIST OF SECAG FIGURES
INCOSE NOTICES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
SCOPE
PART I: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
SECF INTRODUCTION
SECF SCOPE
SECF PURPOSE
SECF CONTEXT
SECF OBJECTIVE
SECF DOCUMENT OVERVIEW
INCOSE SE COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK DEFINITION
COMPETENCY OVERVIEW
FRAMEWORK STRUCTURE
COMPETENCE PROFICIENCY LEVELS
LANGUAGE STANDARDIZATION WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK
COMPETENCY AREA TABLE FORMAT
USING THE COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
TYPICAL USAGE SCENARIOS
TAILORING THE FRAMEWORK
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ROLES, JOB DESCRIPTIONS, AND COMPETENCIES
SECF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
SECF GLOSSARY
SECF BIBLIOGRAPHY
SECF ANNEX A: SUMMARY AND RATIONALE FOR CHANGES IN THE SECF SECOND EDITION
SECF STRUCTURAL CHANGES
PRIMARY TECHNICAL CHANGES
SECF ANNEX B: ALIGNMENT WITH INCOSE AND OTHER INITIATIVES
INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
FOURTH EDITION
INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL (SEP) CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
INCOSE VISION 2035 ROLES AND COMPETENCIES
INCOSE MODEL‐BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (MBSE) INITIATIVE
ATLAS PROFICIENCY MODEL
SECF ANNEX C: DEFINING ROLES USING THE FRAMEWORK
DEFINING ROLES ‐ INTRODUCTION
CONSIDERATIONS WHEN DEFINING ROLE STATEMENTS
ROLE STATEMENT STRUCTURE
ASSIGNING COMPETENCIES TO A ROLE STATEMENT
ROLE TAILORING AND ORGANIZATION
ACTIVITY PRIORITIZATION AND ROLE TAILORING
SECF ANNEX D: INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
SECF ANNEX E: SECF COMMENT FORM
PART II: SECAG ‐ SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT GUIDE
SECAG INTRODUCTION
SECAG SCOPE
SECAG PURPOSE
SECAG CONTEXT
SECAG OBJECTIVE
LINK TO COMPETENCY‐BASED CERTIFICATION WITHIN THE INCOSE SEP PROGRAM
SECAG DOCUMENT OVERVIEW
TAILORING THE ASSESSMENT GUIDE
TERMINOLOGY TAILORING
“LEAD PRACTITIONER” VS “LEAD ROLE” ASSESSMENT
“EXPERT” PRACTITIONER VS “EXPERT ROLE”
GENERAL GUIDANCE FOR TAILORING ASSESSMENT OF PROFICIENCY LEVELS – ACCUMULATED EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE INDICATOR TAILORING
ASSESSMENT APPROACH TAILORING
ATLAS 1.1 PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT
USING THE ASSESSMENT GUIDE
ASSESSING THE ASSESSORS
FRAMEWORK AND ASSESSMENT USE CASE EXAMPLES
EXPLANATION OF ASSESSMENT GUIDE TABLES
ASSESSMENT GUIDE LANGUAGE USAGE
SUB‐INDICATOR CLASSIFICATIONS (“K”, “A,” AND “P”)
ASSESSING EVIDENCE SUB‐INDICATOR TYPES (“K”, “A,” AND “P”)
SECAG ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
SECAG GLOSSARY
SECAG BIBLIOGRAPHY
SECAG ANNEX A: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT GUIDE TABLES
PART 1
PART 2
SECAG ANNEX B: FRAMEWORK IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLES
SECAG ANNEX B1 – USING THE SECF/SECAG FOR CANDIDATE RECRUITMENT AND ASSESSMENT
SECAG ANNEX B2 – USING THE SECF/SECAG FOR CAREER AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SECAG ANNEX B3 – ORGANIZATIONAL ROLE DEFINITION
SECAG ANNEX B4 – USING THE SECF/SECAG FOR EDUCATIONAL COURSE DEFINITION
ANNEX B5 – USING THE SECF/SECAG FOR “ROUND TRIP” COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT
ANNEX B6 –TAILORING A JOB DESCRIPTION TO ADD SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCIES AND SKILLS
ANNEX B7 – USING THE SECF/SECAG FOR TAILORING A JOB DESCRIPTION TO ADD MODEL‐BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCIES AND SKILLS
SECAG ANNEX C: SECAG COMMENT FORM
INDEX
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 2
SECF TABLE 1 Key vocabulary used to define SECF and SECAG indicators
Chapter 2a
SECF TABLE 2 Typical usage scenarios for the INCOSE SE Competency Framework...
Chapter 3
SECF TABLE 3 INCOSE SE Competency Framework acronyms and abbreviations
c04
SECF TABLE 4 INCOSE SECF glossary
Chapter 12
SECAG TABLE 1 Comparison between competency assessment régimes
Chapter 12b
SECAG TABLE 2 Assessment guide table structure
SECAG TABLE 3 Indicator language definitions
SECAG TABLE 4 Assessment mechanisms for the different indicator types
Chapter 13
SECAG TABLE 5 Acronyms and abbreviations
Chapter 17
SECAG TABLE B1‐1 Competencies desired for example job announcement
SECAG TABLE B1‐2 Desired skills for example job announcement
SECAG TABLE B1‐3 System architect job announcement in the company template...
SECAG TABLE B1‐4 Questions to ask a job candidate
SECAG TABLE B1‐5 Example competency assessment statements for performance e...
SECAG TABLE B1‐6 Practitioner competency assessment
SECAG TABLE B2‐1 System engineer role progression example
SECAG TABLE B4‐1 Systems integration course development example
SECAG TABLE B4‐2 Systems integration course development example
SECAG TABLE B6‐1 Example of existing materials engineer job description
SECAG TABLE B6‐2 Systems engineering tasks for the job
SECAG TABLE B6‐3 SECF/SECAG information to be used to tailor the original j...
SECAG TABLE B6‐4 Updated materials engineer position description
SECAG TABLE B7‐1 Current System Architect Job Description
SECAG TABLE B7‐2 Competency groups from the DECF used as the basis for the ...
SECAG TABLE B7‐3 Competency subgroups of the respective competency groups f...
SECAG TABLE B7‐4 Example of updated system architect description including ...
List of Illustrations
Chapter 2
SECF FIGURE 1 Complete listing of competencies in the Systems Engineering Co...
SECF FIGURE 2 Codes used in competency indicator index creation.
Chapter 7
SECF FIGURE 3 Mapping of SE Handbook processes to framework competencies.
SECF FIGURE 4 Comparison of SEP Technical Areas to SECF framework competenci...
Chapter 8
SECF FIGURE 5 ARCIFE levels mapped to competency levels.
SECF FIGURE 6 Steps required to create organization generic role profile usi...
Chapter 17
SECAG FIGURE B2‐1 Example simple SE career path.
SECAG FIGURE B3‐1 Organizational competence framework model.
SECAG FIGURE B3‐2 Example of the structure of a competence area within the T...
SECAG FIGURE B3‐3 Example of Roles and Role Profile. A Role Profile is the r...
SECAG FIGURE B3‐4 Example of an individual profile and comparison with Role ...
SECAG FIGURE B5‐1 Competency “Requirement” vs local role title.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐2 First cohort “Raw” competency assessment data.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐3 First cohort “Deficit” Heat Map.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐4 Individual Best fit example.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐5 Second cohort “Raw” competency assessment data.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐6 Cohort 2 Deficit Heat Map.
Guide
SECF INTRODUCTION
INCOSE SE COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK DEFINITION
USING THE COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
SECF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
SECF GLOSSARY
SECF BIBLIOGRAPHY
SECAG INTRODUCTION
TAILORING THE ASSESSMENT GUIDE
USING THE ASSESSMENT GUIDE
EXPLANATION OF ASSESSMENT GUIDE TABLES
SECAG ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
SECAG GLOSSARY
SECAG BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cover Page
Title page
Copyright Page
Dedication Page
LIST OF SECF TABLES
LIST OF SECF FIGURES
LIST OF SECAG TABLES
LIST OF SECAG FIGURES
INCOSE NOTICES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
SCOPE
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Index
SECF ANNEX A: SUMMARY AND RATIONALE FOR CHANGES IN THE SECF SECOND EDITION
SECF ANNEX B: ALIGNMENT WITH INCOSE AND OTHER INITIATIVES
SECF ANNEX C: DEFINING ROLES USING THE FRAMEWORK
SECF ANNEX D: INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
SECF ANNEX E: SECF COMMENT FORM
SECAG ANNEX B: FRAMEWORK IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLES
SECAG ANNEX C: SECAG COMMENT FORM
WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Pages
iii
v
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT GUIDE
A combined INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework (SECF) and associated Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide (SECAG) document
INCOSE
Compiled and Edited by:
Ian Presland CEng, FIET, ESEP (Primary Editor)
Clifford Whitcomb, Ph.D., INCOSE Fellow
Lori Zipes, ESEP
This edition first published 2023© 2023 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of INCOSE to be identified as the author of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyIn view of ongoing research, equipment modifications, changes in governmental regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to the use of experimental reagents, equipment, and devices, the reader is urged to review and evaluate the information provided in the package insert or instructions for each chemical, piece of equipment, reagent, or device for, among other things, any changes in the instructions or indication of usage and for added warnings and precautions. While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data Applied for:ISBN: 9781119862550 (hardback)
Cover Design: WileyCover Image: © metamorworks/Shutterstock
DISCLAIMER
Reasonable endeavors have been used throughout its preparation to ensure that the Systems Engineering Competency Framework is as complete and correct as is practical. INCOSE, its officers, and members shall not be held liable for the consequences of decisions based on any information contained in or excluded from this framework. Inclusion or exclusion of references to any organization, individual, or service shall not be construed as endorsement or the converse. Where value judgements are expressed, these are the consensus view of expert and experienced members of INCOSE.
LIST OF SECF TABLES
SECF TABLE 1 Key vocabulary used to define SECF and SECAG indicators
SECF TABLE 2 Typical usage scenarios for the INCOSE SE Competency Framework
SECF TABLE 3 INCOSE SE Competency Framework acronyms and abbreviations
SECF TABLE 4 INCOSE SE Competency Framework glossary
LIST OF SECF FIGURES
SECF FIGURE 1 Complete listing of competencies in the Systems Engineering Competency.
SECF FIGURE 2 Codes used in competency indicator index creation.
SECF FIGURE 3 Mapping of SE Handbook processes to framework competencies.
SECF FIGURE 4 Comparison of SEP Technical Areas to SECF framework competencies.
SECF FIGURE 5 ARCIFE levels mapped to competency levels.
SECF FIGURE 6 Steps required to create organization generic role profile using the SECF.
LIST OF SECAG TABLES
SECAG TABLE 1 Comparison between competency assessment régimes
SECAG TABLE 2 Assessment guide table structure
SECAG TABLE 3 Indicator language definitions
SECAG TABLE 4 Assessment mechanisms for the different indicator types
SECAG TABLE 5 Acronyms and abbreviations
SECAG TABLE B1‐1 Competencies desired for example job announcement
SECAG TABLE B1‐2 Desired skills for example job announcement
SECAG TABLE B1‐3 System architect job announcement in the company template
SECAG TABLE B1‐4 Questions to ask a job candidate
SECAG TABLE B1‐5 Example competency assessment statements for performance evaluation
SECAG TABLE B1‐6 Practitioner competency assessment
SECAG TABLE B2‐1 System engineer role progression example
SECAG TABLE B4‐1 Systems integration course development example
SECAG TABLE B4‐2 Systems integration course development example
SECAG TABLE B6‐1 Example of existing materials engineer job description
SECAG TABLE B6‐2 Systems engineering tasks for the job
SECAG TABLE B6‐3 SECF/SECAG information to be used to tailor the original job description
SECAG TABLE B6‐4 Updated materials engineer position description
SECAG TABLE B7‐1 Current System Architect Job Description
SECAG TABLE B7‐2 Competency groups from the DECF used as the basis for the MBSE competencies
SECAG TABLE B7‐3 Competency subgroups of the respective competency groups from the DECF
SECAG TABLE B7‐4 Example of updated system architect description including MBSE SE tasks and competencies
LIST OF SECAG FIGURES
SECAG FIGURE B2‐1 Example simple SE career path.
SECAG FIGURE B3‐1 Organizational competence framework model.
SECAG FIGURE B3‐2 Example of the structure of a competence area within the TCF.
SECAG FIGURE B3‐3 Example of Roles and Role Profile. A Role Profile is the requirement to be able to act in a role with adequate quality.
SECAG FIGURE B3‐4 Example of an individual profile and comparison with Role Profiles.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐1 Competency “Requirement” vs local role title.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐2 First cohort “Raw” competency assessment data.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐3 First cohort “Deficit” Heat Map.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐4 Individual Best fit example.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐5 Second cohort “Raw” competency assessment data.
SECAG FIGURE B5‐6 Cohort 2 Deficit Heat Map.
INCOSE NOTICES
This product was prepared by the International Competency Working Group of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). It is approved by the INCOSE Technical Operations for release as an INCOSE Technical Product.
Copyright © 2022 by INCOSE, subject to the following restrictions:
Author use: Authors have full rights to use their contributions in a totally unfettered way with credit to the INCOSE Technical Product.
INCOSE use: Permission to reproduce this document and to prepare derivative works from this document for INCOSE use is granted provided this copyright notice is included with all reproductions and derivative works.
External Use: This document may NOT be shared or distributed to non‐INCOSE third parties without written permission of INCOSE.
Extracts for use in other works are permitted provided this copyright notice and INCOSE attribution are included with all reproductions; and, all uses including derivative works and commercial use, acquire additional permission for use of images unless indicated as a public image in the General Domain.
Requests for permission to prepare derivative works of this document or any for commercial use will be denied unless covered by other formal agreements with INCOSE. Contact INCOSE Administration Office, 7670 Opportunity Rd., Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92111‐2222, USA.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the contribution of INCOSE UK Advisory Board members who participated in the UK Working group that created the INCOSE UK Systems Engineering Competencies Framework (Issue 3, 2010) which was used as the original basis for the first edition of the INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework. A full list of contributing UK organizations and individuals is included in the main body of the INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework (First Edition 2018).
We would like to thank all other past and current members of the INCOSE Competency Working Group for their support, ideas, and comments.
INTRODUCTION
The goal of the INCOSE International Competency Working Group is to define a global standard for those competencies regarded as central to the practice and profession of Systems Engineering, together with a set of indicators which can be used to verify attainment of those competencies.
This document is an output from that working group.
This book comprises two self‐contained elements: (1) A definition of the framework itself (referred to as the “Systems Engineering Competency Framework”), and (2) an accompanying assessment guide (referred to as the “Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide”) which provides guidance in assessing each of the competencies defined within that framework.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to provide a set of competencies for Systems Engineering within a framework that provides guidance for both beneficiaries and practitioners to identify knowledge, skills, abilities and behaviors important to Systems Engineering effectiveness in the application domain (e.g. space, transportation, medical) for which the competency model is applied.
SCOPE
This document consists of two parts.
Part I is the Systems Engineering Competency Framework (SECF), a generic systems engineering framework. This framework can be applied in the context of any application, project, organization or enterprise for both individual and/or organizational assessment and/or development. The framework is expected to be tailored to suit the application domain in which it is applied, combining competencies identified herein with others taken from complimentary frameworks (e.g. Program Management, Human Resources, Aerospace, Medical), or generated organizationally, to define the required knowledge, skills and behaviors appropriate to an area or role.
Part II is the Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide (SECAG) designed to guide those assessing systems engineering competencies characterized within the SECF. The SECAG is a general document which is expected to be tailored to reflect organizational SECF tailoring, and further tailored to reflect local or organizational specifics as defined herein.
PART ISYSTEMS ENGINEERING COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
The INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework (Second Edition) is a collaborative product generated from a series of meetings of the INCOSE International Competency Working Group between 2018 and 2021. While it builds upon experience gained in applying the First Edition (originally published by INCOSE in July 2018), the primary changes made in this edition are due to the extensive work done by the group in developing the accompanying Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide (SECAG). The Competency Working Group is Chaired by Cliff Whitcomb and Co‐Chaired by Lori Zipes. The SECAG guide is published separately through an agreement between INCOSE and John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Compiled and Edited by:
Ian Presland, CEng, FIET, ESEP
Primary Contributing Authors (alphabetical order):
Juan P. Amenabar, ESEP
Jonas Hallqvist, ESEP
Ian Presland, CEng, FIET, ESEP
Clifford Whitcomb, Ph.D., INCOSE Fellow
Lori Zipes, ESEP
Reviewers and additional contributors (alphabetical order):
We would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following people in the development and review of this update to the framework:
Richard Beasley, ESEP
Ray Dellefave
Suja Joseph‐Malherbe, CSEP
Ruediger Kaffenberger, CSEP
Rabia Khan, ASEP
Kirk Michealson
Susan Plano‐Faber, ASEP
Philip Quan, CSEP
Sven‐Olaf Schulze, CSEP
Corina White, CSEP
SECF ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework is a new collaborative product based on several sources.
We would also like to acknowledge the INCOSE UK Advisory Board who participated in the UK Working group and created the INCOSE UK Systems Engineering Competency Framework Issue 3, used to create the INCOSE Framework first edition in 2018 (INCOSE 2018b).
We would like to thank all other members of the INCOSE International Competency Working Group for their contribution and support to the ideas and concepts within this framework.
DISCLAIMER
Reasonable endeavors have been used throughout its preparation to ensure that the Systems Engineering Competency Framework is as complete and correct as is practical. INCOSE, its officers, and members shall not be held liable for the consequences of decisions based on any information contained in or excluded from this framework. Inclusion or exclusion of references to any organization, individual, or service shall not be construed as endorsement or the converse. Where value judgements are expressed, these are the consensus view of expert and experienced members of INCOSE.
COPYRIGHT
This product was prepared by the Competency Working Group of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). It is approved by the INCOSE Technical Operations for release as an INCOSE Technical Product.
Copyright © 2022 by INCOSE, subject to the following restrictions:
Author use: Authors have full rights to use their contributions in a totally unfettered way with credit to the INCOSE Technical Product.
INCOSE use: Permission to reproduce this document and to prepare derivative works from this document for INCOSE use is granted provided this copyright notice is included with all reproductions and derivative works.
External Use: This document may be shared or distributed to non‐INCOSE third parties. Requests for permission to reproduce this document in whole are granted provided it is not altered in any way.
Extracts for use in other works are permitted provided this copyright notice and INCOSE attribution are included with all reproductions; and all uses including derivative works and commercial use, acquire additional permission for use of images unless indicated as a public image in the General Domain.
Requests for permission to prepare derivative works of this document or any for commercial use will be denied unless covered by other formal agreements with INCOSE. Contact INCOSE Administration Office, 7670 Opportunity Rd., Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92111‐2222, USA.
SECF INTRODUCTION
SECF SCOPE
This document is the second edition of the INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework (SECF). The SECF is designed to be a source of competencies for systems engineering. The SECF is a general document which is expected to be tailored to reflect organizational SECF tailoring, and further tailored to reflect local or organizational specifics as defined herein.
This second edition of the INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework (SECF) captures updates to the first edition which have resulted from three activities:
Work performed on the Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide (SECAG).
Deployment of the SECF by various organizations.
Reorganization of the original SECF to publish the SECAG as a companion document to the SECF.
The first two of these activities have resulted in generally minor technical changes. The third resulted in several document structural changes including updates to text and references throughout the document.
A summary and more detailed rationale of the changes made in this edition can be found in the SECF Annex A.
SECF PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to provide a resource on how to establish systems engineering competencies defined in the framework and how to differentiate between proficiency at each of the five levels defined within the document.
SECF CONTEXT
The context of this document is well represented in the definition of Systems Engineering as published by the International Council of Systems Engineering (INCOSE) and reflected in standards used across industry today. This Competency Framework specifically aligns with these standards in the areas of terminology and concepts to ensure using organizations have the ability to use these as complementary resources and to ensure the framework is consistent with industry standards.
In developing the Systems Engineering competencies in this document, the working group considered the following sources:
Atlas 1.1: An Update to the Theory of Effective Systems Engineers (Hutchison et al.
2018
).
ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2015 Systems and Software engineering – System life cycle processes (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 7 Software and Systems Engineering Technical Committee
2015
).
Capability Maturity Model Integration V1.3 (CMMI
®
Institute
2010
).
EIA731 (Electronic Industries Alliance
2002
).
INCOSE Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (INCOSE
2017
).
INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook
, Fourth Edition (INCOSE
2015
).
NASA Systems Engineering Handbook
, Rev 2 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
2016
).
EE/BCS Safety Competency Guidelines (Institution of Engineering and Technology
2013
).
US DoD's Better Buying Power 3.0 Implementation Plan (Kendall
2014
).
Defense Acquisition University Competency Model (Defense Acquisition University
2013
).
US Navy's Systems Engineering Competency Career Model (SECCM) (Whitcomb et al.
2014
).
INCOSE Systems Engineering Professional Certification Program (INCOSE 2018a).
SECF OBJECTIVE
The objective of the SECF is to leverage existing competency frameworks and competency models in order to:
Capitalize on feedback received on existing frameworks and models from a decade of practical use globally.
Improve alignment with other INCOSE initiatives.
Address content and language to widen its appeal, recognizing the growth of a systems approach within several new domains.
Reflect the latest collective intelligence of industry as reflected in the data, descriptions, and standards available as learning benchmarks globally.
SECF DOCUMENT OVERVIEW
The SECF Introduction summarizes the context and objective and provides a competency overview, explains the framework structure, describes the format of the competence proficiency levels recognized within the framework, explains the framework language standardization, and describes the competency area table format.
The Using the Competency Framework section provides introductory guidance as to how to use the framework, describes tailoring of assessments, and explains the relationship between roles, job descriptions, and competencies.
The SECF Acronyms and Abbreviations section provides a table for acronyms and abbreviations.
The SECF Glossary section provides definitions of the terminology used in the framework.
SECF Annex A contains a summary of the key changes made between the last formal release of this framework (July 2018) and this release.
SECF Annex B contains background information as to how the framework aligns with INCOSE and other initiatives.
SECF Annex C contains information on defining roles and how to describe the typical structure of a generic role statement within an organization.
SECF Annex D forms the main technical body of this document and contains the formal Competency Framework definition.
Guidance on how to perform competency assessment using this framework is addressed in the INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide (SECAG) Part II of this book.
The authors welcome feedback on this document. SECF Annex E is a comment form provided for this purpose.
USING THE COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK
TYPICAL USAGE SCENARIOS
Organizations and individuals have numerous ways in which they can use the INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Framework to their advantage.
Organizations use Competency Frameworks for human resource management, as described in the INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook Fourth Edition (INCOSE 2015). This may include using competence assessment in recruiting and selecting candidates for employment; for appraisals, promotions, and compensation decisions; for aligning organizational structures to maximize organizational capability; and to identify workforce training requirements that can be communicated to internal or external training providers who can develop and tailor content that will deliver the required competencies (Holt and Perry 2011; SFIA Foundation 2021).
Individuals may self‐assess their competence levels for career planning and identifying needs for personal and professional development; comparing self‐assessed competence levels against competency‐based vacancy announcements also helps individuals to identify opportunities which match their skills and experience (Holt and Perry 2011; SFIA Foundation 2021). SFIA notes that use of Competency Frameworks in job postings reduces risks both to the individual and the organization, reducing churn induced when individuals feel “the job is not what they thought it would be” and minimizing situations in which the organization discovers they do not have the right set of skills for effective mission execution.
Educational institutions and training providers use industry‐ and discipline‐specific Competency Frameworks to align their offerings to provide graduates the knowledge they need to develop their skills at the right level (SFIA Foundation 2021).
Several “standard” usage scenarios were developed in the Universal Competency Assessment Model (UCAM) (Holt and Perry 2011). These scenarios are not described in detail here. A detailed analysis can be found in the paper “Use Cases for the INCOSE Competency Frameworks” (Hahn and Whitcomb 2017).
However, in summary, the framework can be used to support any of the usage scenarios defined in SECF Table 2.
This document only defines a framework of systems engineering competencies. It does not define how competence can be assessed. The INCOSE Systems Engineering Competency Assessment Guide (SECAG) provides extensive information and guidelines for the assessment of the competencies defined in this framework.
SECF TABLE 2Typical usage scenarios for the INCOSE SE Competency Framework
Usage
Users
Description
To define required competence outcomes from educational courses
Educators, Employers
A company recruiter or capability manager interacts with a representative of an educational institution to define the competencies expected from those leaving the educational institution. This helps align program content to better prepare graduates for company employment.
To assure employers that students completing a course will have acquired specific knowledge and skills
Educators, Employers
A company recruiter or capability manager interacts with a representative of an educational institution to assess and recruit prequalified students against a set of competency needs for a company pipeline programs.
To align course curricula for external accreditation purposes
Educators, Accreditors
An educational curriculum provider interacts with curriculum sponsors and/or accreditation agencies to assess the effectiveness of an educational course/module in delivering stated outcomes against predefined accreditation objectives. This might be through assessment of learning objectives against competency needs, and outcomes against competence acquired or those attending the course.
To create (or maintain) role descriptions
Employers
An employer defines the needs for an organizational role in terms of competencies and their minimum required levels. This use case is elaborated further in the section on role definitions elsewhere in this document. A competency‐driven job definition can also help ensure that the requirements for a role are based upon ability rather than age and thus aligns with age‐discrimination legislation in areas such as the European Union (GOV.UK
2017
).
To create job vacancies
Employers
An employer publishes the requirements for an organizational role in terms of competencies and their minimum required levels – as defined above. Candidates and recruiting agencies can compare this against their own (or their candidates') competences to determine their suitability for the position. It also supports candidate preparation as it provides an insight into the evidence they may be asked to provide during their application and/or interview.
To support candidate recruitment
Employers
Having defined the requirements for a role in terms of competencies, an employer can assess candidate competence against the required competencies using the Competency Framework Assessment Guide. This helps to provide an objective (and repeatable) assessment of candidates at interview.
To support employee performance assessments and rating
Employers, Employees
An employer sets targets for individual competence attainment in one or more competencies, and provides opportunities for competency development to occur. The competence assessment activity can be used to formally gauge competence level attainment against the targets set, as an input to their overall performance rating.
To define career path models
Employers, Employees
An employer can link career paths within the organization to differing expected combinations of competencies and associated minimum competence levels. This can be used to provide insight to employees as to the competence needs for differing career development paths. This indicates the competencies and levels necessary to progress a selected career path – informing employee career development choices along the way.
To self‐assess supporting personal career development planning
Employees
An employee can “self‐assess” their skills against the Competency Framework, using the assessment guidance provided. This helps inform their career development choices – whether as part of a job application or more generally as part of a personal career path development.
To perform workforce risk analyses or mission/business case analysis
Organizations, Acquirers
An organization can use information gathered through individual employee competency assessment against the framework to analyze organizational capability within a specific application domain of Systems Engineering, or more generally. This could be driven by current or future business aspirations. Acquirers (i.e. organizations placing contracts) could mandate minimum organizational capability requirements for those supporting a contract/task as a risk reduction strategy – requesting capability data based upon competency assessments using the framework rather than traditional more generalized experiential statements from a business.
To target training investment
Organizations
An organization gathers enterprise‐wide data through individual employee competence assessment against the framework and uses this to assess organizational‐level strengths and weaknesses. This enables training investment to be focused on areas deemed organizationally (and individually) in areas where it is needed most.
TAILORING THE FRAMEWORK
The INCOSE Competency Framework should be tailored as part of its deployment.
The framework is structured so that organizations can tailor it to develop competency models ideally suited to their organizational needs and workforce. The framework contains the fundamental Systems Engineering competencies that can support almost any Systems Engineering role. Using organizations can tailor this Competency Framework to derive a bespoke competency model by:
Adding or deleting competencies as needed.
Revising or only using a subset of the competencies.
Adding, deleting, or revising the proficiency level indicators for any of the five levels for any of the competencies.
Developing a bespoke set of Systems Engineering roles associated with the necessary supporting competencies.
Developing their own unique set of use cases for the competency models they derive from the Competency Framework (Gelosh et al.
2017
).
Systems Engineering is a broad discipline that interacts with all other engineering disciplines and as such can be deployed in a variety of ways. To support this, the INCOSE Competency Framework can be tailored to make it relevant and appropriate to a specific use. The terminology used in this document for different levels of competence may be relabeled as needed (e.g. to remove any reference to specific roles). The range of competencies encompassed by the Systems Engineering framework is very large and it is not expected that an individual will be operating at the “Expert” or even “Lead Practitioner” level in more than a few of these competencies.
It is important therefore that this framework be used as the common starting point or baseline for tailoring the description of Systems Engineering relevant to an organization and individual. It is expected that an organization will have a set of roles, each with a profile against these competencies (or a tailored subset), with different levels of competence needed. These roles may well include requirements for expertise in other engineering skills and application domain‐specific knowledge/experience. An important check for the enterprise will be to ensure that the roles are balanced (expertise not diluted and all key competencies covered) and the means of communication and integration of the roles understood – so that the “team” is appropriately competent in Systems Engineering (Beasley 2013).
Individual Professional Development
Individuals may decide to tailor the framework based on the systems engineering requirements for specific or proposed future roles, and their current level of competence. This allows them to identify career progression exploiting their identified strengths and identification of personal development plans.
Enterprise Capability Development
To use the Competency Framework, an enterprise will need to review their requirements for the different competencies and competence levels and generate a scope for the skills required across the enterprise, in generic roles, within teams and at an individual level. These role specifications can then be mapped to existing and potential employees. These competencies provide a framework for career development and recruitment processes by describing the Systems Engineering skill requirements for a role.
This may require some specific tailoring of competencies to suit the needs of the enterprise. This tailoring can include:
Combining competencies into definitions relevant/appropriate to the enterprise.
Utilizing a subset of competencies depending on the specific activities of the organization.
An organization may wish to trace the tailoring back to this original framework, to enable benchmarking against other organizations, and to update in‐line with changes to this source framework.
This framework can be adapted and integrated with other frameworks to describe specific roles in the organization. It is important that roles are profiled to define requirements, and then individuals assessed against/matched to the role, rather than starting with the individual.
A general test for completeness of role definitions is to check whether the full scope of Systems Engineering competencies defined within this framework is covered somewhere within the set of enterprise role definitions.
Other Tailoring Approaches
The INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook Fourth Edition (INCOSE 2015), Chapter 8, “Tailoring Process and Application of Systems Engineering,” describes several methods whereby organizations can tailor SE processes.
These methods and approaches can also be used to help analyze and tailor this Competency Framework.
The technical report entitled Atlas 1.1: An Update to the Theory of Effective Systems Engineers (Hutchison et al. 2018), Section 5.2 Tailoring the Proficiency Framework, provides a general description and two examples of how a using organization can tailor the Atlas Proficiency Framework. These same tailoring approaches could be applied to this Competency Framework to derive a unique competency model to satisfy user needs.
Within INCOSE there have been several published papers and presentations relating to the tailoring and assessment of the framework for systems engineers which can be used to provide additional support and guidance. INCOSE members are able to download these directly from the INCOSE website.
Several organizations other than INCOSE have produced additional generic information which can support the tailoring and general application of frameworks within organizations. One specific example is the Skills Framework for the Information Age Foundation (SFIA) which has been defining information technology skills requirements for over 20 years. In 2021, they published the latest version (Version 8) of their information age skills framework (SFIA Foundation 2021). This provides some good general advice not only in the tailoring of frameworks, but also in their organizational application.
