Premium
5.2.3 JUSTIFYING THE INVESTMENT IN SYSTEMS ENGINEERING TOOLS
Author(s) -
Sampson Mark E.
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
incose international symposium
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2334-5837
DOI - 10.1002/j.2334-5837.1995.tb01871.x
Subject(s) - automation , purchasing , argument (complex analysis) , plan (archaeology) , engineering , computer science , pyramid (geometry) , systems engineering , risk analysis (engineering) , engineering management , management science , operations management , business , mathematics , mechanical engineering , biochemistry , chemistry , geometry , archaeology , history
“Automation Tools for Systems Engineers are good and the right thing to do…” has never been a good enough justification in most companies for purchasing tools for Systems Engineers. Arguments such as “Systems Engineering has been successfully done without automation over the last thousands of years” (the pyramid builders were Systems Engineers or we landed a man on the moon with my slide rule) always took the wind out of our justification sails. Of course the basic response to that argument is that computerized tools are needed to handle the complexity, communication, control, and myriad other issues that Systems Engineers are called upon to design/manage; but we could never quite pin it down financially. This article attempts to gather the appropriate cost/benefit financial justification arguments in one place and presents a framework for dealing with management unbelief.