<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
<channel rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/1773">
<title>MIT Sociotechnical Systems Research Center (SSRC)</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/1773</link>
<description/>
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70495"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/60023"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/59958"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/55358"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
<dc:date>2013-06-08T13:48:36Z</dc:date>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70495">
<title>The Guide to Lean Enablers for Managing Engineering Programs</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70495</link>
<description>The Guide to Lean Enablers for Managing Engineering Programs
Oehmen, Josef; Oppenheim, Bohdan W.; Secor, Deborah; Norman, Eric; Rebentisch, Eric; Sopko, Joseph A.; Steuber, Marc; Dove, Rick; Moghaddam, Kambiz; McNeal, Steve; Bowie, Mark; Ben-Daya, Mohamed; Altman, Wolf; Driessnack, John
This document provides the findings of the Joint MIT‐PMI‐INCOSE Lean in Program Management Community of Practice that are based on a 1‐year project executed during 2011 and 2012. The community was made up of selected subject matter experts from industry, government, and academia. The findings reported in this guide are based on known best practices from the literature, program experience of the subject matter experts, and input from an extensive community of professionals.&#13;
 &#13;
The findings of the Joint Community of Practice were extensively validated through community and practitioner feedback, multiple workshops at INCOSE and PMI conferences, LAI‐hosted web‐based meetings, and surveys of the extended professional community. The survey results clearly show that programs that use the Lean Enablers show a significantly stronger performance in all dimensions—from cost, to schedule and quality, as well as stakeholder satisfaction.&#13;
 &#13;
The core of this document contains (1) the 10 themes for major engineering program management challenges, and (2) the 43 Lean Enablers with 286 subenablers to overcome these challenges, better integrate program management and systems engineering, and lead engineering programs to excellence.&#13;
 &#13;
The main engineering program management challenges that were identified and addressed By Lean Enablers in this guide are: 1. Firefighting—Reactive program execution; 2. Unstable, unclear, and incomplete requirements; 3. Insufficient alignment and coordination of the extended enterprise; 4. Processes are locally optimized and not integrated for the entire enterprise; 5. Unclear roles, responsibilities, and accountability; 6. Mismanagement of program culture, team competency, and knowledge; 7. Insufficient program planning; 8. Improper metrics, metric systems, and KPIs; 9. Lack of proactive program risk management; and 10. Poor program acquisition and contracting practices&#13;
 &#13;
The 43 Lean Enablers (LE) and 286 subenablers for Managing Engineering Programs—actionable best practices— are summarized in six categories that represent the six Lean Principles (LP): LE 1.x: Respect the people in your program (LP6); LE 2.x: Capture the value defined by the key customer stakeholders (LP1); LE 3.x: Map the value stream and eliminate waste (LP2); LE 4.x: Flow the work through planned and streamlined processes (LP3); LE 5.x: Let customer stakeholders pull value (LP4); and LE 6.x: Pursue perfection in all processes.
</description>
<dc:date>2012-05-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/60023">
<title>MAJOR CHALLENGES TO EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: CAN THE CURRENT NATURE OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION HOPE TO EDUCATE THE CHANGE AGENTS NEEDED FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ?</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/60023</link>
<description>MAJOR CHALLENGES TO EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: CAN THE CURRENT NATURE OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION HOPE TO EDUCATE THE CHANGE AGENTS NEEDED FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ?
Ashford, Nicholas
Scholars and professionals committed to fostering sustainable development have urged a re-examination of the curriculum and restructuring of research and teaching in institutions of higher learning.  This paper begins by discussing an expansive definition of sustainable development that includes economic, environmental, and employment concerns important to both developed and developing nations; then distinguishes inter-disciplinary, multi-disciplinary, and trans-disciplinary problem solving; and finally argues that the policy sciences are different from policy engineering.  The paper then addresses the following themes and questions: (1) How can multi- and trans-disciplinary research and teaching coexist in a meaningful way in today’s university structures? (2) Does education relevant to sustainable development require its own protected incubating environment to survive, or will it otherwise be gobbled up and marginalized by attempting to instill it throughout the traditional curriculum and traditional disciplines? (3) How can difficulties in linking the needed teaching and research be overcome? (4) Even if there exist technical options to do so, how can it be made safe for courageous students to take educational paths different from traditional tracks and find adequate financial support for their studies? (5) What roles can national and EU governments have in accelerating the needed changes? and (6) What can we learn from comparative analysis of universities in different nations and environments?
</description>
<dc:date>2010-11-22T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/59958">
<title>SCIENCE, SOCIETY, AND SUSTAINABILITY: Challenges for Research and Policy in the 21st Century</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/59958</link>
<description>SCIENCE, SOCIETY, AND SUSTAINABILITY: Challenges for Research and Policy in the 21st Century
Ashford, Nicholas Askounes
</description>
<dc:date>2010-11-10T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/55358">
<title>Government Regulation of Environmental and Occupational Health in the Environment in the United States and the European Union</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/55358</link>
<description>Government Regulation of Environmental and Occupational Health in the Environment in the United States and the European Union
Caldart, Charles; Ashford, Nicholas
The manufacturing, processing, and use of chemicals, materials, tools, machinery, and equipment in industrial, construction, mining, and agricultural workplaces often cause environmental, health, and safety hazards and risks. Occupational and environmental factors cause or exacerbate a wide variety of adverse health effects, placing heavy economic and social burdens on workers, employers, community residents, and taxpayers.  In addition, consumer products, pharmaceuticals, and contaminated food present health risks to consumers. &#13;
&#13;
Because voluntary efforts in the unregulated market have not succeeded in reducing the incidence of many of these health effects, the public has demanded government intervention into the activities of the private sector. This intervention takes many regulatory forms, including standard-setting, government-imposed liability, pollution-reduction markets, and mandatory disclosure of information. This chapter addresses the major regulatory systems (regimes) designed to protect public health and worker health from chemicals discharged from sources that pollute the air, water, ground, and workplace.
</description>
<dc:date>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>
