All Innovation Is Innovation of Systems: An Integrated 3-D Model of Innovation Competencies
All Innovation Is Innovation of Systems: An Integrated 3-D Model of Innovation Competencies
复制标题
所有创新都是系统创新：创新能力的集成 3D 模型
DOI：
10.18260/1-2--17435
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Samuel N. Peffers
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
William D. Schindel;Samuel N. Peffers
未来几代创新者的发展是工程教育工作者的核心兴趣。什么是创新能力，我们如何开发它们？有相当数量的学术、商业和流行文献关注创新人员和组织的特征，其中注意力经常集中在个人创造力和其他个性特征、组织文化和其他非技术能力上。在这里，我们认为，创新能力的典型描述是正确的，但不完整，缺乏关键的维度，是必不可少的规划教育课程和评估其内的进展，我们的创新能力模型的基础取决于我们对创新的定义：开发新的解决问题的能力，导致显着提高利益相关者的满意度。作为工程教育工作者，我们认为，只有当创新包括整个周期，从而改善利益相关者的成果时，创新才是有效的，这就带来了超越最初创造性思维飞跃的挑战。我们承认：（1）传统上由工程教育项目解决的某些特定学科的技术能力对创新很重要;（2）我们同样承认，非技术特征的集合对成功的创新者也至关重要。然而，在本文中，我们认为（1）学科特定的技术技能和（2）非技术能力的组合是缺少一个完整的维度。第三个维度是技术性的，但并不特定于某个学科：它是一组系统能力。由此产生的三维模型提供了创新能力的综合视图，教育工作者可以据此计划，教育和衡量成就。通过分离但耦合这个模型的三个维度，我们有一个跨越不同工程项目的工具，为我们的专业对话提供一个集成框架。我们确定了用于显示这些能力实现情况的评估指标。沿着系统维度的这些演示的一个新颖方面是它们对基于模型的系统工程（MBSE）工件的明确使用。MBSE方法的出现不仅对工程系统方面的表现产生了变革性的影响，而且对这些方法的教育也产生了变革性的影响。MBSE将需要数十年学习的“技巧袋”和“知识体系”工程转化为基于科学的系统技能，这些技能可以由本科生学习和明确展示。本文基于一个暑期创新研究所开展的工作，建立在机构学习成果、工业系统工程方法和创新者特征全球研究的历史工作基础上。作为我们机构对P ge 22154.2创新的重视的一部分，我们现在正在特定学科中试点相关方法，其中两个在本文中进行了说明。引言创新已成为企业、学术和公共组织日益重要的概念，也是衡量国家竞争力的标准。在一项对公司和企业高管的调查中，有72%的人将创新列为“三大”战略重点。因此，它已成为至关重要的工程教育计划，以确保他们的毕业生进入劳动力的技能，使他们成为有效的创新者，并能够在创新组织中发挥作用。我们对这份文件有两个主要目标。首先是帮助定义一套程序水平的能力，这是必不可少的学生准备进入现代创新环境。第二个目标是提供一些工具，以帮助说明创新教育可以通过课堂活动的例子，可以帮助学生发展创新技能，并通过定义一套程序级的目标，以帮助程序评估其课程中的创新教育实施的方式。虽然我们的讨论和我们的例子主要集中在灌输创新技能在工程专业，任何技术本科课程，包括工程，数学和科学，应该能够提供适当的技能在他们的课程。虽然很明显，成功的创新团队需要作为一个群体拥有强大的创新能力，但我们认为，对于创新团队中的个人来说，拥有所有这些能力的工作知识也很重要。正是在这种情况下，我们认为这是由教育计划，以确保所有学生在这些领域的能力发展。对文献的研究表明，创新有许多不同的定义。这些定义大多集中在创新思维的各个方面，包括创造性地解决问题和创造一个促进创新的环境。重要的是要注意，技术教育计划不仅应该灌输创造性地解决问题的能力（我们称之为发明），而且还应该能够将这些新颖的想法纳入现实世界的解决方案，从而改善现状，正如利益相关者所经历的那样。基于这一推理，就本文件而言，创新被定义为开发新的问题解决方案的能力，从而大大提高利益相关者的满意度。
The development of the future generations of innovators is of central interest to engineering educators. What are the competencies of innovation and how do we develop them? There is a considerable body of scholarly, business, and popular literature concerned with the characteristics of innovative people and organizations, in which attention is frequently focused on individual creativity and other personality traits, organizational cultures, and other nontechnical capabilities. We argue here that the typical descriptions of innovation competencies are correct but incomplete, lacking critical dimensions that are essential for planning an educational curriculum and assessing progress within it. The foundation of our model of innovation competencies rests on our definition of innovation: The ability to develop novel solutions to problems that result in significantly enhanced stakeholder satisfaction. As engineering educators, we believe that innovation is only effective when it includes the full cycle leading to delivery of improved stakeholder outcomes, and this introduces challenges beyond an initial creative mental leap. We accept that (1) certain discipline-specific technical competencies traditionally addressed by engineering educational programs can be important to innovation, and (2) we likewise accept that a collection of nontechnical traits are also vital to successful innovators. However, in this paper we argue that the combination of (1) discipline-specific technical skills and (2) non-technical competencies is missing an entire dimension. This third dimension is a technical one, but not specific to a discipline: it is the set of systems competencies. The resulting three-dimensional model provides an integrated view of the competencies of innovation, against which educators can plan, educate, and measure accomplishment. By separating but coupling the three dimensions of this model, we have a tool spanning different engineering programs, providing an integrating framework for conversation across our specialties. We have identified assessment indicators used in demonstrating the attainment of these competencies. A novel aspect of these demonstrations along the systems dimension is their explicit use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) artifacts. The emergence of MBSE methods has a transformative impact on not only performance of systemic aspects of engineering, but also education in these methods. MBSE transforms “bag of tricks” and “body of knowledge” engineering requiring decades to learn into scientifically-based systemic skills that can be learned and explicitly demonstrated by undergraduates. This paper is based upon work carried out by a summer institute on innovation, building on historical work on institutional learning outcomes, industrial systems engineering methodology, and global research in characteristics of innovators. As a part of our institution’s emphasis on P ge 22154.2 innovation, we are now piloting the related methods in specific disciplines, two of which are illustrated in the paper. Introduction Innovation has become an increasingly important concept to corporate, academic, and public organizations and as a measure of national competitiveness . In a survey of companies and business executives, it is reported that 72% of them rank innovation as a ‘top three’ strategic priority. Therefore it has become essential to Engineering Educational programs to ensure that their graduates enter the workforce with skills that will allow them to be effective innovators and to be able to function well in innovative organizations. We have two main goals for this document. The first is to help define the set of program level competencies that are essential for a student to be prepared to enter the modern innovative environment. The second goal is to provide some tools to help illustrate ways in which innovation education can be implemented by giving examples of in-class activities that can help students develop innovation skills, and by defining a set of program-level objectives to help programs assess innovation education within their curricula. While our discussion and our examples largely center on instilling innovation skills in Engineering majors, any technical undergraduate program, including Engineering, Mathematics, and the Sciences, should be able to provide the appropriate skills within their curricula. While it is clear that successful innovative teams need to have strong innovation competencies as a group, we feel that it is also important for an individual working on an innovation team to have a working knowledge of all of these competencies as well. It is in this light that we feel it is up to educational programs to ensure that all students develop competence in these areas. A definition of innovation An examination of the literature shows that there are many different definitions of innovation. Most of these definitions center on aspects of innovative thought, including creative problem solving and creating an environment that fosters innovation. It is important to note that technical educational programs not only should instill the ability to creatively solve problems (which we would call invention), but also the ability take these novel ideas and incorporate them into realworld solutions that result in an improvement over the status quo, as experienced by stakeholders. Based on this reasoning, for the purposes of this document, innovation is defined as the ability to develop novel solutions to problems that result in significantly enhanced stakeholder satisfaction.