Interview with David Endler on technology and methods at GfSE

The Society for Systems Engineering is a voluntary association that would not be what it is today without a dedicated board. Dr. David Endler has been involved with the GfSE for many years and is head of the "Technology and Methods" division.

David is a self-employed systems engineering expert with many years of experience in the field of system safety. He also regularly gives SE-Zert training courses.

You are Head of Technology and Methods at GfSE. What are the current developments and activities here that might interest my readers?

The GfSE strategy meeting is taking place this week, at which we will be discussing many exciting topics. One current topic is the establishment of new working groups, which I am personally extremely pleased about. This is because they offer a great opportunity for members to actively participate, raise new topics and meet and discuss with like-minded people. The working groups are of course sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less active, as the whole thing is done on a voluntary basis.

We currently have six working groups on very diverse topics, and hopefully a few more soon.

At the GfSE workshop in Hanover, it is often the working groups that propose projects and then take the opportunity to continue working on their topics. For me, this is part of the added value that GfSE offers its members.

Is there a working group on the subject of tools?

Jain; there is PLM and the integration of MBSE to enable traceability over the entire product life cycle. This is also one of the very active groups. Otherwise, the topic of tools is always touched on by various groups in the margins. For example, the Functional Architectures of Systems (FAS) group will be releasing a new plug-in for its method.

Is there a group on the subject of security?

Unfortunately not. There is a group on the topic of safety that was founded about two years ago and was the largest in terms of numbers at the last GfSE workshop. However, this has declined somewhat recently - it's all voluntary work and the project management is currently deeply involved in other projects. Once again on the subject of security, unfortunately there is no group. I think this topic will inevitably keep us busy over the next few years.

Although the approach to security is methodically familiar, the threat scenario changes more or less daily.

You do a lot in the area of safety yourself. How do you see the relationship between safety and security?

As I see it with many of these cross-cutting issues, everything goes hand in hand. The big challenge with security is that, unlike safety, you can't get to grips with it using familiar procedures and methods. In terms of methodology, the approach to security is familiar, but the threat scenario changes more or less daily. With safety, the whole thing is at least halfway known: An airplane can crash, a ship can sink, you can have an accident with your car. Security is different: of course, there are always attacks from outside that are undesirable, but that's where it ends. Then you have to take a very close look at the details of what you're doing: the doors of entry for hackers change daily due to the various updates and new technologies that sprout up on the market. This makes it a very difficult field where there is a need for action. All companies are struggling with this.

The other day I was talking to a company that builds control systems for large plants and had invited a few hackers. They had made an effort to take the security aspect into account and were very frustrated that after seven minutes the guys had pulled all the passwords out of the system and had complete control of the system.

Although the company had taken great care with security, the hackers had complete control of the system in seven minutes.

Back to the topic of technology and methods: What's in store for us in the next few years?

I believe that the Systems Engineering Vision 2025 provides a good framework. The topic of networking, which has already begun in large parts, will keep us busy for a long time to come. This also includes offshore engineering, which is becoming very fashionable, but only a few companies have implemented it efficiently. New approaches are needed to be able to use the entire globe for development. One thing in particular that has not yet been fully thought through is sustainability: most of the companies I have spoken to are not sure whether they can actually use what they get back from offshore and don't have to rework everything again.

Most companies do not realize whether they can actually use what they get back from offshore.

Globalization will be one of the big issues. For these reasons, I believe that the softer aspects of training, such as social skills, will become more important. There are strong indications that the GfSE is on the right track here by placing a certain emphasis on this in the SE certificate. These efforts are also being increasingly recognized and taken up by INCOSE.

This goes in the direction of Education. I have already written a lot about this.

I am currently being approached more frequently about this, including by younger people who have taken their first steps in the SE and are looking for a Master's degree course, for example. And these are extremely difficult to find in Germany at the moment. I think the international competition is still far ahead of us here. However, I have already been approached by a university to think something like this through with them. The difficulty is that a certain amount of experience is required for systems engineering. With an approach like the SE-Zert course, students would run away from us in droves. It is far too little practice-oriented and has too little to do with trying things out and using tools. Pure mental constructs and models are not so attractive to young people.

The question is to what extent you can use such training at all if you haven't already gained a bit of practical experience.

SE knowledge comes to 10% through training, 20% through coaching and 70% through application. (Morgan McKall)

Definitely. I always tell my training participants that you can learn 10% through training, 20% through coaching, and the remaining 70% through application, which is a concept from the Center for Creative Leadership. It's like riding a bike, nobody can do it for you. You need to have your finger on the pulse and experience it for yourself, and then draw your own conclusions.

In conclusion: What are your plans for the near future, at GfSE and personally?

We have a huge project this year that is taking up a lot of my time, but I'm not allowed to talk about it publicly at the moment.

My planning goes in three directions: In order to really make progress with methods, there must be a certain focus on the topics of standards and standardization. We are represented by two members at DIN and can therefore influence all DIN and ISO standards relating to systems engineering, which we do very actively.

Future GfSE activities will revolve around (1) the co-design of norms and standards, (2) an SE Quick Check for the industry and (3) a solid knowledge base for our members.

The other is to offer the industry added value. We have been trying for some time to provide the industry with a kind of "quick check" for companies. The UK chapter and INCOSE have done preliminary work on this. Something like this is certainly necessary, because many companies ask themselves a lot of questions, for example: "SE - what does that even mean?"; "Where do I stand today?"; "What do I need to do to get ahead?"; "What is the benchmark in my industry?" A quick check like this would be of great benefit to our cooperative members. So far, there hasn't been enough time to tackle this. But the topic has been on the list for two years with different priorities.

The third topic is for the members themselves. This involves things such as the translation of the INCOSE handbook, as well as the creation of our own GfSE handbook as a further knowledge base for reference, learning and publicizing the topic of SE among members.

In addition to these three areas of focus, there are also a few smaller topics related to SE.