IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v17y2014i1p26-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Simulation‐Based Approach in Support of Project Management Training for Systems Engineers

Author

Listed:
  • Izack Cohen
  • Michal Iluz
  • Avraham Shtub

Abstract

Project management is taught in most systems engineering graduate programs. Project management courses and training aids traditionally focus on aspects of project scope—for instance, scheduling and resource allocation methods—and tend to neglect product scope elements such as system performance. This article offers a simulation‐based approach for project management training that integrates project and product aspects within simulation training. The result is an integrated approach that guides the trainee through the initiation, conceptual design, planning and execution phases of the simulated project. The trainee explores the tradeoffs between project and product constraints and demands—just as if he or she were working on a real job. A pilot experiment that we conducted and the trainees' evaluations of the simulation provide an initial indication that the proposed approach is efficient, motivating us to suggest a framework for its use in systems engineering programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Izack Cohen & Michal Iluz & Avraham Shtub, 2014. "A Simulation‐Based Approach in Support of Project Management Training for Systems Engineers," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 26-36, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:17:y:2014:i:1:p:26-36
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21248
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21248?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alice Squires & Wiley Larson & Brian Sauser, 2010. "Mapping space‐based systems engineering curriculum to government‐industry vetted competencies for improved organizational performance," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 246-260, September.
    2. Herroelen, Willy & Leus, Roel, 2005. "Project scheduling under uncertainty: Survey and research potentials," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(2), pages 289-306, September.
    3. Amira Sharon & Olivier L. de Weck & Dov Dori, 2011. "Project management vs. systems engineering management: A practitioners' view on integrating the project and product domains," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 427-440, December.
    4. Alice Squires & Robert Cloutier, 2010. "Evolving the INCOSE reference curriculum for a graduate program in systems engineering," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 381-388, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Claudio Szwarcfiter & Yale T. Herer & Avraham Shtub, 2022. "Project scheduling in a lean environment to maximize value and minimize overruns," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 177-190, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2015. "Investment, financing and the role of ROA and WACC in value creation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 855-866.
    2. Altekin, F. Tevhide & Bukchin, Yossi, 2022. "A multi-objective optimization approach for exploring the cost and makespan trade-off in additive manufacturing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 301(1), pages 235-253.
    3. Xiong, Jian & Leus, Roel & Yang, Zhenyu & Abbass, Hussein A., 2016. "Evolutionary multi-objective resource allocation and scheduling in the Chinese navigation satellite system project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 662-675.
    4. Servranckx, Tom & Vanhoucke, Mario, 2019. "Strategies for project scheduling with alternative subgraphs under uncertainty: similar and dissimilar sets of schedules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(1), pages 38-53.
    5. Nicolas Zufferey & Olivier Labarthe & David Schindl, 2012. "Heuristics for a project management problem with incompatibility and assignment costs," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 1231-1252, April.
    6. Bruni, Maria Elena & Hazır, Öncü, 2024. "A risk-averse distributionally robust project scheduling model to address payment delays," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 398-407.
    7. Morteza Davari & Erik Demeulemeester, 2019. "The proactive and reactive resource-constrained project scheduling problem," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 211-237, April.
    8. Moukrim, Aziz & Quilliot, Alain & Toussaint, Hélène, 2015. "An effective branch-and-price algorithm for the Preemptive Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem based on minimal Interval Order Enumeration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(2), pages 360-368.
    9. Lamas, Patricio & Goycoolea, Marcos & Pagnoncelli, Bernardo & Newman, Alexandra, 2024. "A target-time-windows technique for project scheduling under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 314(2), pages 792-806.
    10. Ripon K. Chakrabortty & Ruhul A. Sarker & Daryl L. Essam, 2020. "Single mode resource constrained project scheduling with unreliable resources," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1369-1403, September.
    11. Hartmann, Sönke & Briskorn, Dirk, 2010. "A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Wang, Xiong & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Chang, Ching-Ter, 2022. "Multi-objective competency-based approach to project scheduling and staff assignment: Case study of an internal audit project," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    13. Amira Sharon & Dov Dori, 2017. "Model‐Based Project‐Product Lifecycle Management and Gantt Chart Models: A Comparative Study," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 447-466, September.
    14. Selcuk Goren & Ihsan Sabuncuoglu & Utku Koc, 2012. "Optimization of schedule stability and efficiency under processing time variability and random machine breakdowns in a job shop environment," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(1), pages 26-38, February.
    15. Mauricio Diéguez & Jaime Bustos & Carlos Cares, 2020. "Mapping the variations for implementing information security controls to their operational research solutions," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 157-186, June.
    16. Fang, Yi-Ping & Sansavini, Giovanni, 2019. "Optimum post-disruption restoration under uncertainty for enhancing critical infrastructure resilience," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 1-11.
    17. Jürgen Kuster & Dietmar Jannach & Gerhard Friedrich, 2010. "Applying Local Rescheduling in response to schedule disruptions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 265-282, November.
    18. Amira Sharon & Olivier L. de Weck & Dov Dori, 2013. "Improving Project–Product Lifecycle Management with Model–Based Design Structure Matrix: A joint project management and systems engineering approach," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 413-426, December.
    19. Colvin, Matthew & Maravelias, Christos T., 2011. "R&D pipeline management: Task interdependencies and risk management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(3), pages 616-628, December.
    20. Briand, Cyril & La, H. Trung & Erschler, Jacques, 2006. "A new sufficient condition of optimality for the two-machine flowshop problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(3), pages 712-722, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:17:y:2014:i:1:p:26-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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

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

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

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

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