Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
sdmpulse
The newsletter of the Massachusetts Institute of TechnologySystem Design & Management program
vol. 10, no. 2 fall 2015
in this issue
Welcome 2
Enhancing Intelligence and 3Improving Mission Performance in the US Army
Energy-Water Nexus and 8Sustainability in Chile
Measuring the Impact of 12Enterprise Social Software
Advancing Human-Computer 16Communication to Maximize Sales
SDM Silicon Valley 19Tech Trek Report
Snapshot: New SDM 22and IDM Cohorts
SDM Leadership Award 24
Employment Report 25
Crawley, Cameron Publish 25New Book
MacInnis Named IDM Instructor 26
Systems Thinking Conference 27
Calendar 28
see page 19
Tech Trek Report©2015 Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
on the web
> Virtual Information Sessionssdm.mit.edu & idm.mit.edu
> MIT SDM Systems ThinkingWebinar Seriessdm.mit.edu
Welcome
2 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
The 2015 fall edition of the SDM Pulse highlights the application of systems thinking byalumni of MIT’s System Design & Management (SDM) program and by others in a widerange of domains. This issue also highlights the myriad opportunities available for youand your company to engage with SDM, as well as with SDM and Integrated Design &Management (IDM) fellows—among the best and brightest students at MIT!
Specifically, you will find:• A report on how the US Army is using systems analysis to enhance the performance
of tactical personnel;
• An article on measuring and improving business processes, applicable to any company;
• A look at how Chile’s Ministry of Energy is tackling sustainability in the energy-waternexus;
• Details on an advancement in human-computer communication that can helpmaximize sales;
• Reports on how companies are engaging with SDM, including a spotlight on thespring 2015 Tech Trek in the San Francisco Bay Area—and information on how yourcompany can get involved;
• Snapshots of the newly matriculated cohorts for SDM and the inaugural class in its IDM track (the diversity of cultures, industries, and educational backgroundsrepresented is truly remarkable);
• News of a new book by SDM faculty members Ed Crawley and Bruce Cameron and the appointment of Andy MacInnis as IDM’s technical instructor; and
• Information on upcoming SDM events, such as this year’s annual systems thinkingconference and back-to-the-classroom sessions, our alumni-student networkingevening, live and virtual information events for prospective applicants and companiesinterested in sponsoring students, webinars on applying systems thinking to variouscomplex challenges, and more.
We hope you enjoy this edition of the Pulse. As always, we welcome your feedbackand suggestions.
Sincerely,
Joan S. RubinIndustry CodirectorMIT System Design & [email protected]
Publisher: Joan S. Rubin, MIT SDMIndustry Codirector
Editor: Lois Slavin, MIT SDMCommunications Director
Contributors: Donny Holaschutz, Matt Kressy, Suzanne Livingston, Jorge Moreno, Bryan Pirtle, JillianWisniewski
Photography: Heath Marvin, John Parrillo, Dave Schultz
Layout: Janice Hall
Copy editor: Kathryn O’Neill
Printer: Puritan Press
MIT System Design & Management andits Integrated Design & Managementtrack are jointly offered by the MITSchool of Engineering and the MITSloan School of Management.
For further information, visitsdm.mit.edu and idm.mit.edu.
On the cover: The da Vinci Si SurgicalSystem made by Intuitive Surgical isshown in action in an operating room.SDM fellows visited Intuitive Surgicaland several other companies during the2015 spring Tech Trek. (See article onpage 19.)
Vol. 10, No. 2 Fall 2015Copyright MIT, all rights reserved.
sdmpulse
3
Jillian Wisniewski is an Army
captain and system dynamics
instructor at the US Military Academy
(USMA) in West Point, NY. She holds
a BS in operations research from
USMA and an SM in engineering
and management from MIT.
A Systems Approach to EnhancingIntelligence and Improving MissionPerformance in the US ArmyThe challenge: Modern Army analysts must generate and direct intelligence that supports
the pace of tactical operations for a modular force with decentralized decision-making.
Digital collection platforms, information systems, analytical software, and connectivity at
the tactical level are useful, but insufficient. Analysts need training in data analysis
fundamentals to understand the trajectory from raw data to decision-making.
The approach: Using a systems-based analysis to enhance intelligence can help Army
units at the tactical level improve mission performance. This type of analysis uses systems
design tools to:
• examine and model the design of military operations;
• define the analyst’s required capability in the context of tactical operations;
• explore, revise, and assess components of intelligence competency;
• assess the relative costs of competency gaps; and
• recommend improvements.
The tools: Five systems-based approaches were used to address this challenge.
They were:
• system architecture
• system dynamics
• design structure matrix
• multi-domain mapping matrices
• system dynamics shortcut model
System architecture. The first step was to assess the architecture of the military’s
intelligence system. This revealed that the decentralized decision-making that now
characterizes the Army’s mission command requires precise tactical intelligence.
Objectives for tactical operations are nested within those at the operational level, so the
outcome of each mission affects the next one down the line. To propagate change in a
desired direction, the unit must understand the current operational conditions and threat,
which are characterized by a fair degree of uncertainty. Effective decision-making depends
on the unit’s ability to reduce this uncertainty and move toward a desired end state.
System dynamics. The next step was to develop a model for mission performance based
on the principles of system dynamics. This model stresses the significance of personnel
considerations to the unit’s ability to successfully accomplish missions: operations in
environments with greater uncertainty are more demanding of personnel resources.
About the Author
continued on page 4
4 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Missions toDo
Missionsto Rework
missionrequests
retaskrate
successes
desiredproduction
operationalcapacityutilization
operationalcapacity
-
+
time available toachieve higher level
objective
-
+
<Time>-
<FINAL TIME> +
likelihood ofattempt
task arrival
<initial waiting>
<likelihood ofsuccess>
retaskcapacity
+time toretask -
<operationalcapacity utilization>
-
+
<servicetime>
+
failure
attempts
+
<servicetime>
+
Missionsin
Progress completed+
-
-
+
+
allowablemissionattempts
++
+
+
initialtasks
deploymenttime
+
<deploymenttime>
campaignplan
OPTEMPO
+
-OPTEMPO
GAP
+-
<Time>
+
+
B
Depletion II
B
MissionPlanning
B
Depletion I
R
Rework
filterabilityrisk
+
uncertainty
discard
+
-
B
Prioritization
B
OperationalTempo
minimumrequired intelproduction
intelcapacityutilization
intelproducts
intelcapacity-
+
B
Intel Cycle mission
complexity
+
+
intelreadiness
factor
+
+ -
-
intel�cyletime
intel supportto mission
-
+
desired intelproduction
+
+
+
Intel Gapsgap
discoveryfilled
+
<intel�cyletime>
+
time�toidentify
planningcycle�time
filtertime
missionexecution�time
R
Intel CycleCurrent Ops
<Tasks�in�HigherLevel�Objective>
<Tasks�in�HigherLevel�Objective>
+
<Input>contingency
missionscontingencyOPTEMPO+
+
+
<StepTime>
+
Tasks inHigher Level
Objective
Figure 1. System dynamics model for tactical mission performance. The decision mechanisms within the model arefounded on US operations and intelligence doctrine.
The model enables simulation of the system under a variety of scenarios and highlights the relative impacts of
operational or intelligence capacity variables on mission performance. These outcomes include:
• Mission fails as a result of operational capacity exceeding the unit’s intelligence capacity; and
• Mission succeeds, but the unit must put in extra effort to compensate for limited intelligence.
Note that additional unit effort means additional exposure to risk for troops in the operational environment. This
demonstrates that intelligence capacity is more than a force multiplier: It is a force preserver.
continued from page 3
5
Design structure matrix (DSM). The formal mapping of a unit’s staff using the design structure matrix made it possible to see that some
transfers of information occur as lateral exchanges while others occur hierarchically. Structural and organizational designs inherent to military
culture and hierarchy, including potential disparities in rank and experience, can unfortunately create artificial barriers to communication.
For example, it is not atypical for an intelligence officer to rank one or two levels below an operations officer. This means the operations officer
could have many more years of experience than the intelligence officer. To work well together, the intelligence officer must spend significant
effort building knowledge of the unit’s operations, specific standards, and tactics just to be conversant with the person on whom all of his
tasks depend. The communication barriers are significantly greater when an analyst perceptibly lacks competency in his field.
Organizational Design Challenges • Experience Differential
• Organizational Culture
Co
mm
an
de
r
XO
Ex
ec
Offi
cer
S3
Op
era
tio
ns
S2
Inte
llig
en
ce
S6
Co
mm
un
ica
tio
ns
S1
Pe
rso
nn
el
S4
Lo
gis
tics
Op
era
tors
Commander 18 17 17 16 10 6 6 8
XO Exec Officer 17 29 28 27 16 8 8 10
S3 Operations 17 28 45 39 17 8 8 13
S2 Intelligence 16 27 39 39 17 8 8 10
S6 Communications 10 16 17 17 17 8 8 10
S1 Personnel 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 4
S4 Logistics 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 4
Operators 8 10 13 10 10 4 4 13
Enduring Challenges in Tactical Intel
continued on page 6
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Co
mm
an
d, S
taff
, an
d O
pe
rato
r R
ole
s in
MD
MP
Tasks in the Military Decision-Making Process
Co
mm
an
de
r
XO
Ex
ec
Offi
cer
S3
Op
era
tio
ns
S2
Inte
llig
en
ce
S6
Co
mm
un
ica
tio
ns
S1
Pe
rso
nn
el
S4
Lo
gis
tics
Op
era
tors
1
Rece
ipt o
fM
issio
n
3
COA
Dev
elop
men
t
4
5
6
7
COA
Anal
ysis
2
Miss
ion
Anal
ysis
Alert key staff and participants.
Gather tools.
Update running estimates.
Conduct initial assessment.
Issue the initial warning order.
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Analyze higher HQ plan or order.
Perform initial Intelligence Preparation of Battlefield.
Determine specified, implied, and essential tasks.
Review available assets.
Determine constraints.
Identify critical facts and develop assumptions.
Begin composite risk management.
Develop initial commander’s critical information requirements
and essential elements of friendly information.
Develop initial recon and surveillance (R&S) synchronization tools.
Develop initial R&S plan.
Update plan for use of available time.
Develop initial themes and messages.
Develop proposed problem statement.
Develop proposed mission statement.
Present the mission analysis briefing.
Develop and issue initial commander’s intent.
Develop and issue initial planning guidance.
Develop course of action (COA) evaluation criteria.
Issue a warning order.
COA
Com
paris
onCO
AAp
prov
al
OrdersProduction Deliver/ brief order to subordinate unit.
Assess relative combat power.
Generate options.
Array forces.
Develop a broad concept.
Assign headquarters.
Prepare COA statements and sketches.
Conduct COA briefing.
Select or modify COAs for continued analysis.
Gather the tools.
List all friendly forces.
List assumptions.
List known critical events and decision points.
Select the war-gaming method.
Select a technique to record and display results.
War-game the operation and assess the results.
Conduct a war-game briefing (optional).
Conduct advantages and disadvantages analysis.
Compare COAs.
Conduct a COA decision briefing.
Commander selects COA.
Commander issues the final planning guidance.
Issue warning order #3.
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Figure 2. The domain mapping matrix (DMM) on the left matches tasks in the military decision-making process (MDMP) to individual roles. Squaring the DMM creates the design structure matrix on the right, which shows the interdependent roles within MDMP.
6 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Multi-domain mapping matrix (MDD). Using a multi-domain mapping matrix to scrutinize the analyst’s role in unit operations
reveals four major components of competency imperative to analysts’ abilities: intelligence methodology, integration with unit
operations, communication, and information processing. The MDM illuminates the relationship of these components across 132
competency specifications. It also highlights the significance of each component and exposes design challenges.
Since the MDM contains DSMs that map components to specifications and vice versa, it also generates a DSM (Figure 3), which
lends insight into the significance of each competency. Most notably, the new DSM reveals that competence in information
processing is extremely important in the early phases of intelligence analysis and endures through decision-making. Thus, the
capability of the analyst is the lynchpin for the unit’s intelligence capacity.
System dynamics shortcut model.* The Army is still largely reactive when it comes to determining which human-to-digital
interfaces maximize information transfer for combat operations. However, leaders are discovering that the tools are only as good
Info
rmat
ion
Net
wor
k M
appi
ng
Ope
ratio
ns D
octr
ine
Pla
nnin
g an
d D
irect
ion
Dat
a B
uild
ing
Col
lect
ion
Dat
a M
inin
g
Dat
a V
alid
atio
n
Pro
cess
ing
& E
xplo
itatio
n
Ana
lysi
s an
d P
rodu
ctio
n
Uni
t-S
peci
fic M
issi
on, T
actic
s, P
roce
dure
s
Dis
sem
inat
ion
and
Inte
grat
ion
Cla
rity/
Art
icul
atio
n (I
n A
naly
sis)
Uni
t's D
ecis
ion
Pro
cess
es
Del
iver
y (U
nit's
Com
mun
icat
ion
Net
wor
k/P
roto
cols
) E
valu
atio
n an
d F
eedb
ack
Coh
esio
n (O
pera
tiona
l Con
text
, War
Gam
ing)
Inte
rpre
tatio
n (L
ogic
al/Q
uant
itativ
e R
easo
ning
)
Crit
ique
(S
ourc
es o
f Unc
erta
inty
)
Information Network Mapping 100 41 42 46 39 50 45 44 42 40 42 29 27 23 18 38 50 53
Operations Doctrine 41 100 43 33 23 24 23 29 35 74 47 50 50 40 31 60 56 56
Planning and Direction 42 43 100 42 39 30 31 26 19 40 30 31 30 23 18 38 35 36
Data Building 46 33 42 100 36 38 40 33 26 31 29 27 22 20 17 28 35 37
Collection 39 23 39 36 100 33 31 30 22 21 21 21 18 17 15 22 28 30
Data Mining 50 24 30 38 33 100 40 36 35 23 26 19 15 14 15 24 39 40
Data Validation 45 23 31 40 31 40 100 34 29 22 24 17 17 15 14 24 35 40
Processing & Exploitation 44 29 26 33 30 36 34 100 38 27 27 18 18 15 15 26 39 40
Analysis and Production 42 35 19 26 22 35 29 38 100 34 32 23 22 22 23 33 48 47
Unit-Specific Mission, Tactics, Procedures 40 74 40 31 21 23 22 27 34 100 47 51 51 42 32 62 56 56
Dissemination and Integration 42 47 30 29 21 26 24 27 32 47 100 39 35 33 31 42 46 47
Clarity/Articulation (In Analysis) 29 50 31 27 21 19 17 18 23 51 39 100 42 42 30 53 48 45
Unit's Decision Processes 27 50 30 22 18 15 17 18 22 51 35 42 100 38 29 48 40 41
Delivery (Unit’s Communication Network/Protocols) 23 40 23 20 17 14 15 15 22 42 33 42 38 100 28 44 38 37
Evaluation and Feedback 18 31 18 17 15 15 14 15 23 32 31 30 29 28 100 32 36 35
Cohesion (Operational Context, War Gaming) 38 60 38 28 22 24 24 26 33 62 42 53 48 44 32 100 60 58
Interpretation (Logical/Quantitative Reasoning) 50 56 35 35 28 39 35 39 48 56 46 48 40 38 36 60 100 76
Critique (Sources of Uncertainty) 53 56 36 37 30 40 40 40 47 56 47 45 41 37 35 58 76 100
Modified DSM
41
42
46
38
40
27 34
27 32
39
23
35
29
42
33
Enabling Knowledge
A Context and Architecture
B Information Processing
C Unit-Specific Context
Sequential Functions
1 Planning and Collection
2 Processing and Analysis
3 Decision-Making
Original DSM
Pla
nnin
g an
d D
irect
ion
Col
lect
ion
Pro
cess
ing
& E
xplo
itatio
n
Ana
lysi
s an
d P
rodu
ctio
n
Dis
sem
inat
ion
and
Inte
grat
ion
Eva
luat
ion
and
Feed
back
Ope
ratio
ns D
octri
ne
Uni
t-Spe
cific
Mis
sion
, Tac
tics,
Pro
cedu
res
Uni
t's D
ecis
ion
Pro
cess
es
Cla
rity/
Arti
cula
tion
(In A
naly
sis)
Coh
esio
n (O
pera
tiona
l Con
text
, War
Gam
ing)
Del
iver
y (U
nit’s
Com
mun
icat
ion
Net
wor
k/Pr
otoc
ols)
Dat
a B
uild
ing
Dat
a M
inin
g
Dat
a Va
lidat
ion
Info
rmat
ion
Net
wor
k M
appi
ng
Inte
rpre
tatio
n (L
ogic
al/Q
uani
titat
ive
Rea
soni
ng)
Crit
ique
(Sou
rces
of U
ncer
tain
ty)
Planning and Direction 62 39 26 19 30 18 43 40 30 31 38 23 42 30 31 42 35 36
Collection 39 45 30 22 21 15 23 21 18 21 22 17 36 33 31 39 28 30
Processing & Exploitation 26 30 49 38 27 15 29 27 18 18 26 15 33 36 34 44 39 40
Analysis and Production 19 22 38 56 32 23 35 34 22 23 33 22 26 35 29 42 48 47
Dissemination and Integration 30 21 27 32 62 31 47 47 35 39 42 33 29 26 24 42 46 47
Evaluation and Feedback 18 15 15 23 31 38 31 32 29 30 32 28 17 15 14 18 36 35
Operations Doctrine 43 23 29 35 47 31 77 74 50 50 60 40 33 24 23 41 56 56
Unit-Specific Mission, Tactics, Procedures 40 21 27 34 47 32 74 76 51 51 62 42 31 23 22 40 56 56
Unit's Decision Processes 30 18 18 22 35 29 50 51 53 42 48 38 22 15 17 27 40 41
Clarity/Articulation (In Analysis) 31 21 18 23 39 30 50 51 42 57 53 42 27 19 17 29 48 45
Cohesion (Operational Context, War Gaming) 38 22 26 33 42 32 60 62 48 53 73 44 28 24 24 38 60 58
Delivery (Unit’s Communication Network/Protocols) 23 17 15 22 33 28 40 42 38 42 44 46 20 14 15 23 38 37
Data Building 42 36 33 26 29 17 33 31 22 27 28 20 57 38 40 46 35 37
Data Mining 30 33 36 35 26 15 24 23 15 19 24 14 38 50 40 50 39 40
Data Validation 31 31 34 29 24 14 23 22 17 17 24 15 40 40 47 45 35 40
Information Network Mapping 42 39 44 42 42 18 41 40 27 29 38 23 46 50 45 77 50 53
Interpretation (Logical/Quanititative Reasoning) 35 28 39 48 46 36 56 56 40 48 60 38 35 39 35 50 82 76
Critique (Sources of Uncertainty) 36 30 40 47 47 35 56 56 41 45 58 37 37 40 40 53 76 82
Original DSM
Communication
Integration
Information Processing
Intel Doctrine
Figure 3. This design structure matrix shows the competency components an analyst needs. A lack of competency in informationprocessing degrades planning and collection, which in turn degrades processing, or at a minimum greatly delays it. When timely and relevant intelligence does not support the unit’s missions, missions are far less likely to succeed.
Update to Core CompetenciesEnduring + Newly Identified Set = Enabled Intelligence Production
continued from page 5
* This model, adapted from J.B. Morrison, reveals why well-intended shortcuts have detrimental effects on the analysts’ skill development and,consequently, the Army at large.
7
as the analyst’s ability to apply them to the operations context. Blind application of tools essentially prejudices the
organization against trusting its intelligence officers. Moreover, shortcuts reduce the number of tasks in the intel
cycle, leading to a decrease in learning that affects the analyst’s qualification for intelligence positions of greater
influence, propagating skill deterioration across the organization.
intelligenceproduction
requirementsnewrequirements
fulfillmentrate
timepressure
well-intentionedshortcuts analysis
proficiency
short-termproductivity
uncertainty
analyst’scapability
learning forgetting
missions
complexity
++
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
-
B
Work Faster
R
Skill Building
Figure 4. The effect of decreased competency across the organization negatively affects the warfighter in two ways: increasinglyhigher levels of the organization lack the requisite capabilities to perform intelligence functions effectively, and resources arereallocated to intelligence and away the immediate mission, meaning fewer resources for preparing the warfighter for combat.
Without Change, Analyst’s Capability Erodes
The results: As a team, the Army needs to revise training for tactical intelligence analysts to align their capabilities with
the current and future needs of tactical operations. In order to deliver valuable intelligence insights to the unit, analysts
must be competent in information processing and in communicating key intelligence insights to decision-makers.
There are currently myriad research efforts focused on how to extract value from large sources of data, leverage
tools to optimize their utility, and identify and understand sources of uncertainty. As an intelligence community, we
need to:
• unify these efforts and identify ways to enhance analyst training in both the near and long term;
• incorporate aspects of information processing, such as fundamentals of data analysis or statistical methods, into analysts’ initial entry and career development curricula;
• assess in depth the skills and teaching methods that provide the most value; and
• employ these findings to guide the development of a new curriculum and culture in military intelligence,providing the enduring foundation for intelligence capacity required for the modern operational environment.
time (years)
Analyst Competency
Senior
Analyst
Junior
Analyst
0 3 5 10
Rela
tive
Com
pete
ncy
Leve
l
ini�alentrytraining
intermediatelevel
educa�on
ini�al assignments
careercourse
ecareer developing
assignments
Ideal Ability
Shortcut Ability
Without Change, Analyst’s Capability Erodes Military Intelligence Capability
8 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Jorge Moreno, SDM alumnus and
inodú cofounder, has extensive
experience in the energy industry in
the United States and Latin America.
He holds a master’s degree in
engineering and management from
MIT and bachelor’s and master’s
degrees in electrical engineering
from the Pontificia Universidad
Católica de Chile.
Donny Holaschutz, SDM alumnus
and cofounder of the energy and
sustainability consultancy inodú, is
a seasoned entrepreneur with
experience in both for- and not-for-
profit ventures related to energy and
sustainability. He has consulted for
startups, Fortune 500 companies,
and government agencies in the
United States and Latin America.
He holds a master’s degree in
engineering and management from
MIT and bachelor’s and master’s
degrees in aerospace engineering
from the University of Texas at Austin.
Assessing Regulatory, Environmental,Economic, and Technical Componentsof Sustainable Energy and Water Usein Thermoelectric Facilities in Chile Editor’s note: The following is a summary of a study performed for the Chilean Energy Ministry withthe support of the Ministry of the Environment. The authors would like to thank the Chilean EnergyMinistry and Ministry of the Environment for supporting this project.
The challenge: Water use at thermoelectric facilities presents a complex systems problem for
several reasons:
• To operate safely and efficiently, the facilities need large amounts of water, yet watersupplies are limited;
• The social and environmental impacts of water use are becoming increasingly significantworldwide; and
• A complex set of relationships exists among the overall environmental, economic, andsocial impacts of water use; how water is withdrawn from its source; how it is used atfacilities; and how it is returned to the environment.
The most significant water use at a thermoelectric facility is associated with the cooling
process, which in turn is tightly coupled to the overall performance and reliability of the plant.
An adequate amount of water for the plant’s cooling system leads to a more energy-efficient
thermoelectric facility—one that produces less atmospheric emissions per unit of electricity
generated. This relationship creates an important tension in the design or upgrade of a plant’s
cooling system between water use and performance.
Any cooling system design must consider a variety of factors, including:
• local environmental conditions and geography, including access to and availability ofwater;
• the ecosystems of the source body of water;
• local social context; and
• how specific system byproducts—such as water flow at the intake and the temperatureof the water effluent—might stress the source body of water.
Inodú worked with the Chilean Energy Ministry and the Ministry of the Environment to identify
and address some of the challenges posed by water use at thermoelectric facilities in Chile by
conducting a preliminary assessment of the current regulatory, environmental, economic, and
technical situation. This assessment helped address the following goals presented in the
Chilean Energy Ministry’s Energy Agenda:
• supporting the sustainable development of thermoelectric generation projects;
About the Authors
9
• making progress toward overall territorial regulations focused on efficiency and sustainability; and
• promoting energy efficiency as a state policy.
The approach: Inodú used an integrated set of methodologies grounded in systems thinking to elaborate its analysis.
First, we conducted an extensive literature review to gather facts and gain an understanding of the research, analysis, and
regulation developed worldwide. Inodú found that in Chile most thermoelectric generation facilities are located by the coast,
while in the United States, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, only 3 percent of power plants use ocean water.
This indicated that solutions being developed for the United States might not necessarily apply to Chile.
Next, we engaged key Chilean stakeholders to gain a better understanding of how water is currently used and what solutions
might be available. The stakeholders included:
• cooling system technology providers;
• thermoelectric facility technology providers;
• construction companies; and
• local generation companies.
Inodú also conducted a survey to calculate the potential for water withdrawal by the thermoelectric generation base.
In Chile in 2013, the potential for water withdrawal from the Pacific Ocean was 530,400 cubic meters per hour (m3/hr)
by thermoelectric facilities, the equivalent of withdrawing approximately 212 Olympic-size pools every hour* (see Figure 1).
The potential for water withdrawal from water wells was 3,080 m3/hr.
Groundwater3,080
Coastline35,000
Water Wells3,080
PacificOcean
530,434Siphon495,434
Consumption3%
Other Uses5%
DischargedWater97%
CoolingWater95%
m3/hr m3/hr
Water Intake Type
Water Uses in the Power Plant
Discharge
Water Source Open System (m /hr)3
ClosedSystem(m /hr)3
420
2,600
96,800
103,800
59,400
6,000246,500
17,909
Chile
Figure 1. The water cycle is shown at left for Chile’s thermoelectric facilities, marked on the map at right.
* 2,500 m3 is a value commonly quoted for the volume of an Olympic-size pool.
continued on page 10
10 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Chile typically withdraws water from the Pacific
using an overhead siphon, a method that
differs from that used in many other countries.
The potential for water withdrawal using an
overhead siphon was 495,434 m3/hr in 2013
(see Figure 1). Mitigating the environmental
impact created by withdrawing water with an
overhead siphon requires a different approach
than that used for some of the common intake
structures found in the United States, such as
the intake channel or submerged intake
structure flush with shoreline. Engaging local
construction companies allowed inodú to
understand the unique Chilean coastal
conditions that made the overhead siphon the
preferred water intake system.
Several cooling system configurations unique
to Chile have developed over time as shown in Figure 2. The withdrawal and return of water generates the following relevant environmental
impacts:
• impingement and entrainment of water organisms;
• chemicals released into the water (chemicals are mostly used to keep cooling systems clean);
• increases in water temperatures; and
• water loss.
The environmental impacts caused by withdrawing and returning water can be affected by the selection of the cooling system and the use
of proper safeguards applied to the water intake and discharge systems. The velocity at the intake, the water volume, the location of the
intake and discharge systems and the types of safeguards used (screens, racks, biomass handling systems, etc.) also affect the overall
environmental impact of the cooling system. Environmental safeguards installed in water intake systems in Chile are shown in Figure 3.
The environmental impact of water use can be greatly influenced by the type of cooling system selected. For example, once-through
cooling systems use the most water but only consume small amounts of that water. Cooling towers and cooling ponds require less water,
but they lose more water to evaporation. Finally, air-cooled condensers (dry-cooling) require no water, but they are significantly more
energy inefficient than the other types of cooling systems. In addition, the topography of the coastline in Chile can play a significant role in
the amount of energy needed to pump water from the coast to the location of the thermoelectric facility—a factor that affects the overall
efficiency and environmental impact of the system.
We found that 95 percent of the water employed by thermoelectric facilities is used for cooling and that, in the whole water cycle,
approximately 3 percent of the water is consumed. Most of the water is used by once-through cooling systems. Currently, the northern
region of Chile demands more cooling water than the central region as shown in Figure 1. Both regions have significant inland water
constraints, especially the far north, home to some of the country’s important mining operations as well as to the Atacama Desert, one of
the driest deserts in the world.
Once we had an understanding of worldwide best practices, what was possible in Chile, and the current state of water use at
thermoelectric facilities, we began exploring:
• what important tradeoffs would have to be considered to generate recommendations and future work; and
continued from page 9
Figure 2. Cooling system configurations in Chile.
Types of Water Intakeand Discharge Systems
PumpingDepends
on Topography
Types of CoolingComponents
Coastline System
Underwater System
Inverted Siphon
WaterWells Cooling Pond
Once-Through Cooling
Cooling Tower
Condenser
CondenserPumping
Pumping
Pumping
Pumping
Pumping
11
DoubleEntry/SingleExit Traveling
3
SingleEntry/ExitTraveling
1
Trash Rackson the Siphon
2
Trash Racks13
Trash Rackswith Rake
12
Traveling Screens = 24 Trash Racks = 27
RotatoryTravelingScreens
9
TravelingScreens
11
Fish Handling and/orReturn Systems = 3
Others0
FishConveyance
System(Troughs or
Pipes)3
Passive Intake Systems = 1Others
0
Wedge-WireScreen
1Fish Net
14
Rack on SiphonIntake to Avoid
Large Organisms4
Fish Net +Air Bubble
Barrier2
Fish Diversion or Avoidance Systems = 18
Figure 3. Environmental safeguards installed in water intake systems in Chile.
• the techno-economic performance of different types of cooling systems at the four locations where thermoelectric generationis currently centered in Chile (Mejillones, Quintero, Quillota, and Coronel).
To assess the techno-economic performance across locations, inodú developed cases for comparison. The effectiveness of cooling
systems depends on local environmental conditions such as local air and water temperatures and humidity. The cases were developed
by determining representative local environmental conditions at the four locations, then using the same thermoelectric facility for all
cases as well as comparable design criteria.
In addition, to evaluate environmental and system performance, we explored:
• how changes in system configurations could reduce important environmental impacts associated with the withdrawal andreturn of water such as impingement and entrainment of water organisms, the use of chemicals in water, increases in watertemperatures, and water consumption (loss); and
• how changes in system configurations could produce other environmental side effects such as changes in atmosphericemissions, noise, and plume.
The results: For a thermoelectric plant located by the coast, the analysis led to the conclusion that, in Chile, a once-through
cooling system with the proper environmental safeguards tends to be the most adequate. In addition, cooling towers or other
closed-loop cooling systems tend to be the most appropriate where the water intake elevation exceeds the elevation at which it
is environmentally sustainable and economically efficient to pump the water volume required by a once-through cooling system.
Dry-cooling systems should only be used when water usage concerns do not permit the use
of a once-through cooling system or cooling towers. While dry-cooling systems decrease
water use, they increase atmospheric emissions per unit of net-energy produced.
Ultimately, we found that clearer guidelines are needed to help stakeholders choose
adequate cooling system configurations and safeguards that are socially, environmentally,
and economically friendly. Inodú presented a set of next steps for creating such guidelines
so that power plant developers and operators can reduce the environmental and social
impacts of their power plants.
ht
tp
://
>The report that includesthe analysis conducted,the recommendations,and next steps can bedownloaded at
sdm.mit.edu/holaschutz-moreno
12 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
SDM alumna Suzanne Livingston
is a senior product manager for
IBM Connections and a product
management teaching fellow at
Harvard Business School. She
holds an SM in engineering and
management from MIT, an MBA
with a concentration in human
factors in information design from
Bentley University, and a BS in
management information systems
from the University of Connecticut.
Understanding and Measuring theImpact of Enterprise Social Softwareon Business Practices The challenge: Organizations are increasingly investing in enterprise social software, which
provides networking and collaboration tools such as communities and people profiles, to support
their business goals. However, many struggle to understand the practical impact of such
technologies. The two major challenges are:
• insufficient user adoption, resulting in insufficient usage to demonstrate meaningfulimpact; and
• insufficient data for comparing performance with social technology to performancewithout.
To tackle these challenges, businesses must address the following questions:
• Has the technology investment been worthwhile?
• Which areas of my company have gained value from it? and
• Which areas of my company have seen no improvement?
The approach: For my SDM master’s thesis,* I developed research-based guidelines that can
help companies understand and measure the impact of socially focused business processes—
those that involve collaboration and coordination among people. These guidelines can help
organizations to:
• understand the overarching challenges of user adoption;
• determine how to address adoption issues to improve impact; and
• identify business metrics they can use to compare performance before and after adoptingsocial technology.
I developed these guidelines by examining five organizations that have adopted social
technologies and measuring the impact on business processes. Each case study looked at:
• what was measured and when;
• the approaches used to foster adoption of social technologies; and
• the business impact.
The five companies were selected because all were utilizing social technology with their
employees. In some cases, social technology was used with external contacts as well. All the
companies were interested in understanding enterprise social software usage and impact.
Each identified a business process that the software was intended to improve. Three also
About the Author
* The author wishes to thank her thesis advisor, Professor Wanda Orlikowski, for her support.
13
provided access to users and managers of the social technology for the purpose of assessing performance against a business
objective before and after software implementation.
The tools: Interviews were performed to identify and understand practices that enable adoption of social technologies in the
workplace. Interview data was analyzed for common themes, and case studies were created, then reviewed and approved by
each participating company. Survey data was aggregated and summarized to highlight metrics in business performance before
and after social software implementation.
The results: The research identified six key practices organizations can use to significantly improve the adoption of new social
software and to maximize the benefits of the technology.
1. Describe existing business process(es) or initiative(s).
Before implementing or using social software, the organization should identify collaborative business processes or initiatives that
require improvement with a goal of enhancing performance, then:
• interview the most important stakeholders to understand their needs;
• document the steps needed to complete each process, the key stakeholders involved in these various steps, and therelevant dependencies; and
• identify various aspects of the process, such as where time delays occur and why, to help clarify metrics that would bevaluable in the next step of this framework. An example from the case studies is the requirement for stakeholderapproval resulting in especially long delays. In addition, factors such as quality of output, access to people orinformation, and costs can provide information about the as-is process.
2. Before making any changes, measure performance of current business process(es) or initiative(s).
Identify work patterns, technology, or behaviors that describe how the process or initiative is performing in its current state. The
analysis from the first step of this framework can aid in identifying the metrics for process improvement. This information can be
collected through interviews, surveys, access to key performance metrics, and observational studies.
3. Remodel process(es) or initiative(s) with supporting technology.
Identify an expert process modeler to determine how the process can be remodeled to reduce or eliminate time delays, improve
quality, or otherwise produce favorable outcomes. This knowledge can be acquired through training or partnering with a
technology expert such as an assigned mentor or advocate.
4. Educate users and set expectations.
Organizations that integrate social technology to work within a process need to educate and inform all involved—both those
who manage the process and those who implement it. Some organizations studied chose to focus on user education alone,
while others also trained those responsible for oversight and execution. In some cases, management set expectations. In
others, a team that had identified a better work process shared its knowledge with colleagues.
Regardless of who is spearheading the adoption of social technology, organizations need to clarify:
• the nature of each anticipated change;
• when changes will be implemented; and
• which tools will be used and which will be retired.
The above can avert the adoption issues that can arise when more than one tool or approach is in use at the same time.
continued on page 14
14 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
5. Measure performance at regular intervals.
Once a new process has been instituted, the organization should revisit the metrics identified earlier to determine what effect, if
any, the social technology has had. In some cases, such as customer support satisfaction, there may not be any noticeable
change immediately. However, it is important to note any metrics that do show changes, such as length of time to complete the
process or number of people involved, because they may provide insight over both the short and long term.
Figure 1 shows the effect of implementing social technology on the key metrics identified by the five organizations studied.
Organizations should compare metrics such as these before and after social software is implemented to highlight areas where the
process improved significantly and areas where more improvement might be achieved. Each organization studied had a different
set of metrics, different goals, and used the revised process for a different length of time—yet in all cases comparing the
company’s key metrics before and after social technology implementation was imperative to assessing the success of the process.
The goal of the organization’s process analysis should be to identify metrics that improved, those that remained unchanged, and
those that performed poorly. For each category, the organization should identify contributing factors, such as stakeholders, process
contributors, training, and technology, as discussed in Step 4.
continued from page13
Metric Before After
Case 1: Supporting Alternative Fuels Global Innovation Initiative
• Percent of alternative fuels used in production 5%-7% 25%-27%
• Savings associated with the alternative fuels $0 $140M
initiative
• Rank of alternative fuels adoption compared to Too low 1*
competitors to rank
Case 2: Handling Customer Localization Requests
• Length of time to respond to customer request 4-8 weeks 6 days
• Number of emails involved in process 61 0
Case 3: Inspecting Packages for Customs
• Number of inspections per day 8.62 9.09
• Number of experts contacted per day 1.90 2.47
• Number of packages inspected per day 13.54 14.66
Case 4: Planning an International Conference
• Length of time to plan the conference 6 months 3 months
• Number of emails to plan conference details 200 25
• Number of planning meetings 23 13
Case 5: Addressing Customer Complaints
• Hours spent resolving issues 29.86 14.50
• Number of emails sent and received regarding 27.86 15.33
issues
• Number of meetings required to resolve issues 5.71 3.00
* According to the Global CemFuels Award, 2014
Figure 1. Key metrics for five case studies are shown before and after process improvements.
15
6. Improve the process(es) or initiative(s) based on feedback and performance.
Step 5 will help organizations zero in on the metrics that are changing as a result of
process modifications as well as the factors contributing to those changes.
Understanding these developments can help organizations see where further
improvements can be made to the process or to contributing factors. In some cases,
additional feedback may be required, such as data on changing levels of customer
satisfaction. Data not readily available can be collected through interviews, surveys, and a
variety of other feedback collection techniques.
At this stage, the organization should make appropriate adjustments to the process.
Organizations should return to Step 3 to remodel and describe the changes. The
organizations should continue to Step 4 to re-educate users and participants and continue
through the measurement and refinement of Steps 5 and 6.
The results: The research indicated that using the above guidelines made it possible
to assess the impact of social enterprise software implementation on a company’s
key metrics.
For example, in one case study, the analysis revealed that within six years, the company
had significantly improved its rate of substituting fossil fuels with alternative fuels relative to
its competitors. This substitution initiative generated about $140 million in savings per year
and reduced the release of some 1.5 million tons of CO2 to the atmosphere annually.
In another case, instituting social technology significantly improved request coordination,
boosting a number of key metrics measured by the company. Email, which had been the
primary mechanism for information exchange, was removed from the process, and process
time decreased from up to 40 days to six days. In addition, customer response time was
reduced by weeks.
In a third case involving package inspections, participants reported:
• an increase in the number of inspections performed, packages inspected, andexperts contacted;
• a reduction of approximately 15 minutes per day in the time spent on inspections;and
• an improvement in the quality of information available to inspectors, access toexpertise, and mobile access.
These results show that following the framework described above can provide organizations
with a clearer understanding of the impact of social software on their businesses. However,
social software adoption is not an organizational state that can simply be achieved and then
ignored. User needs are constantly changing, user-generated content begins aging the
moment it is shared, and many facets of organizations—departments, processes, metrics,
products, services, etc.—are as dynamic as the people within them. It is therefore important
for companies to recognize that making the best use of social enterprise software requires
ongoing evaluation and adaptation.
16 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Bryan Pirtle, SDM ’13, is chief
technology officer of Nova Labs, Inc.
He employed techniques from MIT’s
System Design & Management
program to help shape the core of
Nova Labs’ technology strategy and
roadmap.
Advancing Human-ComputerCommunication to Maximize Sales The challenge: In today’s fast-moving, dynamic business environment, it is tougher than
ever for businesses to reach the right clients in a meaningful way and achieve results. Sales
and marketing professionals need highly specialized and effective technology to source
clients, engage them, and close deals.
This is especially true for top-of-funnel outreach. Even if a sales/marketing professional has
carefully selected targets, “cold call” emails are almost always deleted immediately. How
can prospective customers be incentivized to engage with the material for mutual benefit?
The approach: Nova Labs was formed to address this challenge using an integrative,
systems-based approach—coupled with deep knowledge of typical top-of-funnel
challenges—to develop hyper-personalized email outreach technology that surpasses what
is currently available to sales and marketing professionals.
First we conducted a massive information-gathering mission by interviewing dozens of lead
users in companies across the globe. The goal was to understand how potential users in
the sales/marketing field spend each day on the job. Findings produced a clear view of
common and best practices and typical products already in use.
Next, we researched the market landscape to gain insight into what gaps exist at the
leading edge of sales automation technology.
Finally, we created a software-as-a-service, business-to-business product designed to
meet the new-customer acquisition needs of medium and large companies. The goal of
this initial product, Nova, is to optimize email outreach for clients. Nova’s underpinning is a
scalable personalization technology that can be extended into other domains and ultimately
become a platform for future products. This technology will enable our customers to
personalize not just email, but ads, engagement/re-engagement communications, upsell
opportunities, and more.
The tools: The systems thinking mindset, technology strategy, and user-centered design—
as well as system architecture and dynamics methodologies—that form the foundation of
MIT’s System Design & Management program have provided many of the fundamental
concepts on which Nova Labs built its core technology.
The product design/synthesis/feedback process included:
• transforming all of our documented experiences plus the synthesized informationcollected from the sales/marketing professional interviews into baseline productrequirements;
• choosing and configuring the technology stack to be used;
• determining initial/future sources of information from the public Internet with whichto construct meta-profiles for each prospect;
About the Author
17
• creating a baseline scope for the personalization technology layer;
• designing the look and feel of user interfaces;
• designing the “glue layer” of how data flows to/from each interface, as well as usability/user experience;
• implementing all of the above in the chosen technology stack;
• sourcing beta clients and releasing the product to them; and
• feeding back client suggestions, concerns, and usability issues into the process to continue iterativedesign.
After analyzing and discussing the results of our data collection efforts at length, we were able to characterize
our target market as follows:
• The client: Sales development representatives, account executives, and personnel in inside sales roles.
• What the client does: Spends five or more hours each day researching individuals on prospect lists todetermine the right personal touch to add to an initial message to engage each person.
• What the client currently uses: Static, template-based, single-email, and mail-merge (multiple-email,campaign-based) platforms that convert comma-separated values documents into bland, spammy-looking emails.
• What the client wants: Dynamic, data-driven technology that allows for utilization of publicly availabledata and performance analytics to construct appropriate targeting language automatically and insert itinto emails to capture each recipient’s attention and/or establish a personal connection—at scale.
We thus determined that a
technology that combines the
successful elements of
existing products on the
market with an automated
personalization text-
generation layer would have
the potential to revolutionize
sales and marketing top-of-
funnel and save hours per day
per professional.
To deliver this product, we
created a robust and
sophisticated software stack
capable of asynchronously
compiling and delivering the
data needed for the
personalization process
and desired user experience.
Our current stack with
high-level relationships
between components is
shown in Figure 1.
Platform as a Service
Asynchronous Task
Queue/Engine
Puma
Webserver
Personalized
Email Sender
Postgres
SQL &
noSQL
Ruby on Rails
REST API
Personalization
Engine
Public Internet
Chrome Extension Application
AngularJS
JSON
Figure 1: Nova Labs’ technology stack.
continued on page 18
18 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
We decided to use contemporary open-source software built upon the Heroku platform as a service in order to achieve the
following goals with our stack:
1. Stability, gained by using robust, mature frameworks and software platforms;
2. Flexibility, attained by picking and choosing the correct open-source tools and libraries for each product need; and
3. Focus on application design rather than infrastructure design.
We built the primary user interface as a Google Chrome extension application. This design choice was primarily made to
make use of the Google Apps mail client that most lead users preferred. We chose AngularJS as the front-end Javascript
framework and “glue layer” to provide a more robust and streamlined real-time “desktop experience” in the web environment.
The asynchronous and real-time data needs of the application were also simplified by the use of AngularJS. Figure 2 shows
the real-time analytics in action in a campaign.
Once a client uploads a list of target
email addresses, the personalization
engine is employed on the back end
to search target sources on the
Internet. The engine then constructs
a meta-profile for each person using
his/her email as the key. We chose
several initial data sources, including
social media data aggregator APIs
as well as our own data scrapers
and search technology. Proprietary
algorithms are then used to
construct the meta-profile and
custom attributes—such as seniority,
influence, playfulness, and
international orientation—from the
collected raw data.
Once the meta-profiles are constructed, the personalization engine uses natural language processing and machine learning
as well as statistical analysis of past analytics data to determine the proper personalization snippets, including tone, to add
to the email for each recipient. The user may also customize correspondence from all available personalization types and
tones that the engine has previously created. The personalization engine learns from the choices users make to continually
adapt to recipient preferences.
The results:
• Nova Labs has started beta testing with two dozen companies.
• The pipeline increases daily with more than 200 companies expressing interest in the product.
• More than 5,000 emails per week go through the Nova system.
• Nova-personalized emails perform more than 500 percent better on average than control (non-personalized) emailsbased on numerous experiments using real-world campaigns for both prospect engagement and response rates.
Nova Labs is continuing to meet its own internal milestones and is aggressively pursuing new client growth using its
proprietary tools, product, and technology.
Figure 2: Screenshot of Nova’s “campaign view” with analytics data.
continued from page 17
19
Spring 2015 SDM Tech Trek ReportA Systems-Focused Tour of Eight Top Companies in Just Four DaysBy Joan S. Rubin, SDM Industry Codirector
High-flying startups grab attention for their innovative ways of conducting business, but the spring 2015 SDM Tech Trek
demonstrated that successful companies—large and small, established and new, in a broad variety of industries—use systems
thinking to achieve their strategic goals. Companies visited on the trek ranged from C3 Energy to SunEdison, Salesforce.com to
AppDynamics, and from Intuitive Surgical to E&J Gallo Winery, SanDisk, and Yelp.
The spring SDM trek is one of two held annually—a daylong trip each fall to businesses in Greater Boston and a weeklong visit
every March to companies in the San Francisco Bay/Silicon Valley area (see page 21). Over the years, fellows, faculty, and staff
have visited many companies to learn firsthand about their strategic, operational, and tactical challenges, discuss the application
and value derived from systems thinking, and examine how the use of systems thinking is increasing and evolving in industry.
Each trek is organized and led by SDM fellows, who target companies that will deepen their understanding of the diverse
approaches available for applying systems thinking. This year’s San Francisco Bay Area/Silicon Valley trek was led by SDM ’15s
Rany Polany and Deepa Fernades Prabhu. Organizational assistance was provided by all student participants as well as by
SDM Industry Codirector Joan S. Rubin and SDM Director of Recruitment and Career Development Jonathan Pratt.
Tech Trek goals:
• Expand students’ knowledge of complex challenges across severalindustries.
• Strengthen relationships between the companies and SDM.
Companies visited:
• SunEdison • Salesforce.com • AppDynamics
• Yelp • Intuitive Surgical • E&J Gallo Winery
• SanDisk • C3 Energy
Trip highlights:
• At SunEdison, Teresa Yang ’03, director of global design andengineering and Kevin Yates MBA ’13, manager of power origination,described the solar industry’s rapid evolution and discussedSunEdison’s vertical integration strategy for meeting the demands forclean, affordable energy. The visit concluded with a tour of thecompany’s control and logistics area, where students saw ademonstration of how uptime on the grid is planned and managed.
• Director of Academic Programs Lisa Tenorio welcomed the SDMgroup to Salesforce.com, and Vice President of PlatformDevelopment Marketing Adam Seligman provided a corporateoverview. Senior Director Sarah Franklin then presented a livedemonstration of the Salesforce platform. In addition, Reena BhatiaMBA ’09, strategic innovation executive, created an interactivedesign session to highlight the systems thinking challenges ofoperating in an environment that is sustaining 30 percent to 40
SunEdison
Salesforce.com
continued on page 20
20 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
percent annual growth rates. SDM fellows were divided into groups of four andgiven 30 minutes to come up with a solution to a design problem. Each teampresented a unique solution to an audience of Salesforce.com executives.
• SDM fellows gained a multifaceted understanding of AppDynamics’ businessthanks to presentations and interactions with several MIT alumni and companyexecutives. Peter Kacandes LFM ’97 discussed the basic challenge thecompany is working to address—managing applications’ performance andavailability across cloud computing environments as well as in its data center.Ariel Smoliar MBA ’13, principal product manager, talked about his journey toAppDynamics and the process of finding a career environment in which onecan succeed. Students also had an opportunity to interact directly with staffand learn more about what it’s like to work at AppDynamics.
• Fellows toured Yelp headquarters, focusing on the sales, product, andengineering areas. They learned about Yelp’s internal hackathon events, inwhich engineers are encouraged to work on nontraditional, fun, andinteresting projects, then saw some of the results. Vice President ofConsumer and Mobile Products Eric Singley provided an overview of productmanagement at Yelp, and then Product Manager Stephanie Teng discussedthe challenges of building global software and how Yelp addresses them. AQ&A followed.
• Catherine Mohr ’90, SM ’92, an MD and vice president of clinical research atIntuitive Surgical, provided perspective on what is needed to build asuccessful technology. She noted that having a great idea is not enough andstressed the importance of understanding how a product can be used. Shegave an overview of the company’s innovative robotic surgery technology,which SDMs had the opportunity to operate, then provided a tour of thecompany’s growing manufacturing operations. Mohr left the group with fourkey suggestions:
– Keep focused on the big picture;
– Dive in and do the hard work;
– Be an opportunist; and
– Reinvent yourself continually.
• The group visited E&J Gallo Winery’s production facilities, where aleadership team from the engineering and production groups discussed theunique challenges of managing highly variable inputs (the grapes) to makea consistent and recognizable end product. The students heard fromsenior executives in charge of winemaking, Six Sigma, productionengineering, process technology, and applied technology. A groupdiscussion and winery tour were followed by a networking dinner with thecompany’s management team.
• A team of SanDisk senior executives—including Stan Chapski, corporateengineering chief of staff; Shiva Estori Sathganarayan, director of operationsmanagement; Nithya Ruff, director of marketing management; and SaclinPiplani, senior director of marketing management—participated in aninteractive discussion with the SDM group. The SanDisk team described theneed to innovate continually in a market whose capacity doubles every 12months and emphasized the need for strong cross-functional teamwork.Lunch and small group discussions followed.
AppDynamics
Yelp
Intuitive Surgical
continued from page 19
E&J Gallo Winery
21
Upcoming Tech TreksEach year, MIT SDM fellows, faculty, and staff visit leaders from best-in-class companies to learn about their global
business challenges and how they are using systems thinking to address them.
In the upcoming academic year, SDM will hold two treks:
Fall 2015 October: During this one-day trek, SDM fellows will visit top technology-based companies in the Greater Boston area.
Spring 2016March 21-25: This journey to companies in the San Francisco Bay/Silicon Valley area covers a wide variety of industries.
If your company would like to participate, please contact Joan S. Rubin, SDM industry codirector, at
[email protected], 617.253.2081, or Jonathan Pratt, director of SDM recruitment and career development,
at [email protected], 617.327.7106.
SanDisk
C3 Energy
• Jake Whitcomb SDM ’12 arranged a visit to C3 Energy.Leveraging enterprise application software, the companyfocuses on delivering a family of smart-grid analytic products toprovide end-to-end solutions—from energy grid capital assetallocation to transmission, distribution, and advanced metering.Joining Whitcomb was Ed Abbo, president and CTO, whodescribed the emerging need for smart grid analytics and howC3 Energy has approached offering value to users in thisgrowing market.
Key takeaways:
• Visiting companies in rapid succession provided valuable insightinto the different cultures, strategic approaches, and challengescompanies face, as well as a real-time opportunity to contrastand compare businesses.
• Interactive team-based design exercises developed by variouscompanies gave SDM fellows an opportunity to apply systemsthinking to specific challenges, demonstrate their high level oftechnical expertise, and rapidly develop prototype solutions. Italso provided company leaders with a chance to see systemsthinking in action and visualize how it can be applied within theirorganizations.
• Meeting and engaging with SDM fellows enabled companies toexperience firsthand the unique perspectives and skills studentsacquire at MIT SDM and to identify future graduates to recruit.
• SDM fellows acquired an expanded sense of the versatility andapplicability of their SDM education across industries.
22 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Snapshot: SDM and IDM Cohorts Entering in Fall 2015By Lois Slavin, SDM Communications Director
On August 24, 2015, MIT welcomed two new cohorts: 60 early to mid-career technical professionals who matriculated into System
Design & Management (SDM) and 18 early career design, engineering, and management professionals who comprise the inaugural
Integrated Design & Management (IDM) class. As in the past, fellows in the newest SDM cohort come from a wide range of industries,
among them energy, healthcare, software, information technology, consulting, robotics, and the US military. Students in IDM’s inaugural
class are equally diverse, hailing from the fields of high-tech, design, sustainability, engineering, and education.
Demographics* Average age• 51 men / 9 women • 33
Program• 36 on campus / 17 commuter / 7 distance
Citizenship• Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Venezuela
Vikas EntiManager, Data Interaction andVisualization Engineering,Amazon Robotics
“SDM will enable me to solidifymy systems engineering skillsand develop deep businessinsights so that I can help createrevolutionary products.”
Kate CantuSpace Acquisition ProgramManager, US Air Force
“I believe MIT’s reputation, andespecially SDM’s, will give me anadded level of credibility that canbe difficult to earn as a female ina technical, leadership role.”
Chris Garcia, MDClinical/Research Fellow,Pathology Informatics,Massachusetts General Hospital
“SDM will provide me with a newperspective and skill set forredesigning clinical systems andprocesses to help transform andimprove healthcare.”
Ashley WhitneySenior Mechanical Engineer,Medical Technologies Division,Cambridge Consultants
“SDM will give me the tools andperspective to tailor systemsengineering to projects atvarying levels of complexity.”
Eugene ThamSenior Lecturer, RepublicPolytechnic, Singapore
“SDM will enable me to bring amanagement perspective to my joband will help evolve and broadenengineering education at RepublicPolytechnic.”
MIT System Design & Management Class Entering in AY16
*Admissions numbers accurate as of press time.
23
Demographics• 9 men / 9 women
Average age• 26
Program• 18 two-year option
Citizenship• Canada, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, India,
Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, United States
Kevin YuenInnovation and StrategyConsulting Associate, Innosight
“IDM will help to expand myskills beyond strategic planningto include prototyping,experimenting, andimplementing initiatives.”
Sophia YangExperience Designer, DesignMap
“IDM’s emphasis on strategic andholistic thinking, interdisciplinarycollaboration, and entrepreneurshipcan greatly benefit employerslooking for hybrid professionalswho can see the big picture as wellas the concrete steps needed toachieve it.”
Ismail DeganiCofounder, SnapJet
“IDM is the ultimate startupincubator. Its emphasis ongreat design and large-scalecommercialization is perfectlyaligned with myentrepreneurial goals.”
MIT Integrated Design & Management Inaugural Cohort
Jacqueline “Chacha”DurazoSpecial Projects, Title IX Office,MIT
“I am going to change the world,and I believe IDM can help meprepare to do so.”
Huda JafferLead Designer, SELCO Foundation
“My IDM education will enable meto support the SELCO Foundationin designing an ecosystem for theworld’s underserved populationsthat integrates sustainability at alllevels: social, economic, andenvironmental.”
24 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Jillian Wisniewski Named 2014 SDMLeadership Award RecipientOn June 7, 2015, the MIT System Design & Management (SDM) community honored
SDM ’14 fellow Jillian Wisniewski with the annual MIT SDM Student Award for Leadership,
Innovation, and Systems Thinking. Wisniewski was honored at SDM’s post-
commencement celebration at the Liberty Hotel in Boston.
Created by the SDM staff in 2010, the award honors a first-year SDM student who
demonstrates the highest level of:
• strategic, sustainable contributions to fellow SDM students and the broader SDMand MIT communities;
• superior skills in leadership, innovation, and systems thinking; and
• effective collaboration with SDM staff, fellow students, and alumni.
Wisniewski, who received a monetary prize with the award, was acknowledged for
numerous contributions to her cohort, the SDM program, and the MIT community at large.
These include:
• serving as the SDM Leadership Committee’s curriculum chair;
• developing an optimization tool to assist fellows in SDM class scheduling;
• delivering a seminar at Lincoln Labs on her thesis research (for more on herresearch, see p. 3);
• serving as a teaching assistant in system dynamics courses and as a contentadvisor to an MFin student;
• being named a student fellow at Draper Laboratory;
• organizing and leading an SDM orientation for cadets at the US Military Academy,West Point; and
• coaching the SDM-Operations Research Center Frisbee team.
In addition to Wisniewski, this year’s nominees included James Barkley, SDM ’14, and
Gaurav Khanna, SDM ’14. Barkley was recognized specifically for his roles as chair of the
SDM Leadership Committee’s speaker series and social committee, as well as for broad
and diverse outreach efforts within the SDM, MIT Sloan, and overall MIT communities.
Khanna was cited for multiple contributions to the product management community within
MIT and in the Greater Boston area.
All nominees and the winner were selected by the SDM staff, with input from the first-year
SDM community.
Jillian Wisniewski, SDM ’14
James Barkley, SDM ’14
Gaurav Khanna, SDM ’14
25
SDM Faculty Members PublishSystem Architecture BookBruce Cameron, faculty member in MIT’s System Design & Management (SDM)
program and director of the System Architecture Lab, and Professor Ed Crawley,
SDM cofounder and president of the Skoltech Institute of Science and
Technology, have released a new book, System Architecture: Strategy and
Product Development for Complex Systems. Co-authored with Cornell Professor
Daniel Selva, the book builds on case studies from BMW, NASA, GE, and IBM
to illuminate early decision-making in complex systems.
The product of 20 years of research and teaching in the
System Architecture Lab and in SDM, the book includes
a foreword by Norm Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed
Martin, as well as contributions from a number of past
SDM guest speakers.
Employment Report: 2014 SDM Graduating ClassMIT System Design & Management (SDM) educates future technical leaders in architecting, engineering, and designing complex
products and systems, providing them with the leadership and management skills necessary to work successfully across
organizations. Graduates leave prepared to manage effectively and creatively by using systems thinking to solve large-scale,
complex challenges in product design, development, and innovation. Their unique and powerful combination of technical and
managerial skills equips them to effectively lead in positions throughout a wide range of industries, across all levels and functions.
SDM annually surveys members of its most recent graduating class about their career paths. The resulting report provides an
overview of the employment and compensation statistics gathered from self-sponsored students who graduated from the
program in February, June, and September 2014. Information on the companies that hired them is also provided.
Highlights of this year’s report include the following facts:
• 97 percent of SDM graduates who responded to the 2014 survey are employed orpursuing further educational studies;
• Graduates reported an average base salary of $122,667—an increase of 52 percentover their base salaries as reported prior to entering SDM; and
• The top job functions being performed by the 2014 graduates were productdevelopment/management and engineering.
Employers recruiting SDM graduates included Amazon, Analog Devices, Apple, AppDynamics,
Bank of America, Boston Scientific, Chrysler, C3 Energy, Google, Intel, McKinsey, Microsoft,
Tesla Motors, Salesforce.com, SanDisk, and Thomson Reuters.
co
nt
ac
t
>For the full employmentreport or further information,please contact JonathanPratt, SDM’s director ofcareer development andrecruiting
ht
tp
://
>A webinar on systemarchitecture from thebook launch isavailable at
sdm.mit.edu/cameron
26 sdmpulse fall 2015 sdm.mit.edu
Matt Kressy, director of Integrated Design & Management (IDM), has
announced the appointment of Andrew MacInnis as IDM’s materials and
methods instructor, effective July 1, 2015. In this role, MacInnis will teach
design and prototyping to the inaugural IDM class as well as oversee
operations in the new Integrated Design Lab, which is located in MIT’s
International Design Center.
MacInnis comes to MIT with more than 20 years of iterative research and
design expertise in the consumer, military, and sports industries. He also
brings valuable hands-on experience gained from early career positions that
evolved from shop hand to model maker, model shop manager, founder of
Monster Prototype, and production manager/process developer. He holds
a BFA in industrial design from the Rhode Island School of Design.
“Andy is one of the most accomplished creators I have ever met,” Kressy
said. “We are thrilled to have him as part of our teaching team and look
forward to watching our students marvel at what they are able to
accomplish under his guidance.”
Most recently, MacInnis worked as product implementation manager at
Revision Military, which designs and delivers protective equipment for
soldiers worldwide. He was responsible for designing and establishing
best practices in the composite and paint shops of the company’s
composite center of excellence. He was a major contributor to the
selection and refinement of materials and techniques for structural
elements of a cutting-edge anti-ballistic helmet. He also wrote technical
instructions and trained and managed staff.
“Our students are blessed to be coming of age in an era where options
abound for the creation and development of their ideas. I am excited to
guide each of them along their own paths to success,” MacInnis said.
Andrew MacInnis Named IDM Technical Instructor
SDM Conference Centers on Holistic ProductDesign and Development The MIT System Design & Management (SDM) program’s annual Conference on Systems Thinking for
Contemporary Challenges provides practical information for technical and business professionals on how
to apply systems thinking to their most complex and pressing challenges. The theme for the October 7, 2015,
conference is a whole systems approach to product design and development.
Speakers will include engineering, design, and management leaders (many of whom are SDM alumni and faculty)
from a wide range of sectors. Topics will include:
• the increasing competitive imperative for products with greater consumer appeal;
• why the walls separating design, engineering, and management must be torn down—and how to accomplish this;
• how to build a systematic process for creating great products from great ideas; and
• tools and techniques that can be pulled out of the box to help organizations develop a systems-basedapproach to integrating design, engineering, and management.
“Systems thinking is increasingly essential to competing successfully, no matter what products or services you
offer,” said Joan S. Rubin, SDM industry codirector and conference convener. “A whole systems approach to
integrating design, engineering, and management can enable a critical competitive edge in quality, time-to-market,
and overall success. At this conference, you will learn how leading-edge businesses are achieving this.”
Rubin added that this year’s conference has been designated one of MIT’s official “spoke
events” for Boston’s inaugural HUBweek. Informally referred to as Greater Boston’s answer to
SXSW, HUBweek is a weeklong celebration of the innovation and energy that thrives in Boston.
The SDM conference will include ample time for question-and-answer sessions at the end of each presentation as
well as for networking with fellow attendees at a special reception that will take place immediately following the
formal event. Attendees are also invited to the SDM Information Evening scheduled after the conference to learn
more about SDM and its new Integrated Design & Management track. Details can be found at sdm.mit.edu.
Co
nference
27
sdm
Back-to-the-Classroom Sessions Featured
This year, SDM will offer preconference back-to-the-classroom sessions with two of SDM’s best and brightest faculty
members. This event, slated for the afternoon of October 6, will include:
• “Transformation Through Constructive Change,” presented by Pat Hale, executive director of SDM and senior lecturer,MIT; and
• “Integrated Design Approach to Prototyping,” presented by Matt Kressy, director of Integrated Design & Managementand senior lecturer, MIT, and founder of Designturn.
For details, please visit sdm.mit.edu or contact Joan S. Rubin, SDM industry codirector, [email protected].
fall201528
>A V A I L A B L E
ondemand
sdm
.mit.
edu
sdm calendar
MIT SDM Systems Thinking Webinar SeriesThis series features research conducted by members of the SDM community.Except where noted, all webinars are held on Mondays from noon to 1 p.m. and are free and open to all. Details/registration: sdm.mit.edu.
October 19, 2015Using Systems Thinking to Design Healthcare Delivery for US Military VeteransAndrea Ippolito, Presidential Innovation Fellow, White House; PhD student, MIT; SDM alumna
November 2, 2015Understanding and Measuring the Impact of Enterprise Social Software on Business Practices Suzanne Livingston, senior product manager, IBM Connections; SDM alumna
November 16, 2015A Systems Analysis of Tactical IntelligenceJillian Wisniewski, captain, US Army; system dynamics instructor, US Military Academy at West Point; SDM alumna
November 30, 2015The Use of Hadoop-Based Analytics in the Healthcare Safety Net: Lessons LearnedDavid Hartzband, DSc, research affiliate, Sociotechnical Systems Research Center, MIT
Event listings contain all details available at press time. Final information is available at sdm.mit.edu two weeks prior to each event.
> Pulseonline
To read this editionof the SDM Pulse,as well as pastissues, visit: sdm.mit.edu/pulse
Annual MIT SDM Conference on Systems Thinking for ContemporaryChallenges and Related Events All events will take place in Wong Auditorium at MIT
October 6, 2015Preconference Back-to-the-Classroom SessionsAnnual Alumni-Student Networking Evening
October 7, 2015A Whole Systems Approach to Product Design and Development Details: See page 27
MIT SDM and IDM Information SessionsLearn about the MIT master’s of science degree in engineering and management, the new Integrated Design & Management track, and the MIT-SUTD dual master’s degree program. Discuss career opportunities and network with SDM and IDM alumni, faculty, students, and staff.
October 7, 2015, and December 12, 2015SDM Information Sessions (Recordings will be available on demand.)Details/registration: sdm.mit.edu
November 5, 2015, and December 9, 2015IDM Information Sessions (Recordings will be available on demand.)Details/registration: idm.mit.edu
Details for all events are at sdm.mit.edu.
Virtual SDMInformationSession:sdm.mit.edu/virtual-sdm-information-session/
Prerecordedwebinars:sdm.mit.edu/news-and-events/webinars/
