Third, subsystems engineers are more attuned to how their specific product and technology areas are driven by external market forces and market dynamics than system engineers typically are. The reason is that subsystem engineers, both hardware and software, seek to understand how customer and market needs impact their existing and future designs. As both of these classes of subsystem engineers are more focused on how to create valuable contributions to their specific area of expertise, monitoring market and customer trends tends to be a passion for many of them. It is not unusual for example to see an engineering team know more about market trends, research, unmet customer needs and competitors than a marketing department for the same product (Hoberman, 2009). This is precisely why subsystem engineers in high technology companies often end up running product management, product marketing and corporate marketing because they have a better grasp of the many challenges users face and how the technologies they have expertise in solve them.
Subsystems engineers also are required to understand how the user's requirements will shift over time, and predict them within functional specifications that are translated into product designs. Where the systems engineers concentrates on the total integration of all components and the systemic integration of all systems, the subsystem engineer concentrates on how to translate unique customer requirements into a technically achievable product design. In this aspect of their role, the subsystems engineering teams, whether they are hardware, software or firmware focused, are all measured and evaluated on how well they manage the translation of customer requirements into product designs and platforms.
There are many examples of subsystem engineers being highly effective in translating the unmet needs of customers into requirements that eventually lead to exceptional commercial and technical success of products. The founding of Apple Computer by two young engineers from Hewlett-Packard is a case in point. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were originally training in typesetting and electrical engineering respectively. The combining of each talent led to the development of the first Apple II computer and from there a revolution in computing was founded. This and many more examples like them show how effectively the combining of individual subsystem engineering expertise can lead to significant innovation and new product concept development. The idea behind think tanks and business incubators is precisely designed using these approaches as well. In addition Microsoft uses this approach of combining subsystem engineering expertise in the design of new application software. The expertise of ergonomic engineers, top software developers, graphical interface experts, and system integration engineers are all pulled together on project teams to create exceptional new user experiences in Microsoft applications. Google also uses this combining of subsystem engineering expertise with their rule of 20%, which states that engineers have up to one day a week to work on any project of their choosing (Hof, 2008). Often these projects involve highly collaborative efforts and a strategy, which to date has resulted in 57% of total revenues (Hof, 2008). In other words, Google has found that when subsystem engineering expertise is combined with the freedom to pursue innovative ideas, significant new product ideas can be generated. The need for creating a continual stream of new products is critically important both for Google and Microsoft and while both take slightly different approaches to attaining this, both have the foresight to look to collaborative subsystem engineering to gain insights into new product development and innovation. A third example of this is the approach that of the processes and development practices within Ford Motor Company which has taken a more subsystems based approach to rapid prototyping. As a result the time to produce a new model design in Ford is down by over 60% (Harrison, Colombo, West, Lee, 2006). This approach to making more seamless collaboration between subsystems engineers in the Ford development organizations as led to the development of the...
This is especially important in the context of the Broker Front Office Tool (BFOT) strategies aimed at streamlining attracting, selling to, and servicing indirect channel partners and resellers. This aspect of bringing the Voice of the Customer (VoC) into the transformation of it initiatives into channel-based strategies is even more difficult than evolving change management programs within the four walls of any organization. Bringing change to agents and the
Social media involves online content that people use via highly accessible technologies. Basically, social media marks a change in the way people read, discover and share information, news and content. Therefore, social media fuses technology and sociology leading to a change in monologues into dialogues and also marks information democratization, making everyone an author instead of being a mere content reader. Social media has become very popular since it enables
Organization's Structure Organizational structure is defined as a framework that a company uses to distinguish roles and responsibilities, power and authority as well as the method information flows within the organization. A company may choose a structure that will assist in reacting to changes and uncertainties from both external and internal environments. A suitable organizational structure will assist a company to implement proper decision making and operating procedures, which will
, 2005). The framework centers strengthening the compatibility with existing values and practices to also ensure a high level of simplicity and observable results, two other factors crucial to creating an effective framework (Rogers, 2003). All of these elements must also be unified with a simplistic model to make sure the nurses can see the value of the system and their ability to manage it as a resource, not be
Problem Solving Systems Thinking, Technology, and Organizational Change Models of Problem Solving Different Approaches to Problem Solving Brainstorming Risk Assessment Flow Charts Mind Mapping Identification of Complex Problem Analyzing the Problem Identification of a Range of Potential Solutions Constraints Evaluation of Potential Solutions Phase IV Evaluating Progress Implementation Process Risk Assessment Accelerating Change Formative and Summative Evaluation Values and Ethical Issues Values Corporate Responsibility and Ethics Thinking and Decision Making Strategies Problem Solving Process Complex Problem Solving This section of the paper is focusing on the introduction of complex problem solving, which reflects the
Another factor in open source database vendors leading this area is the focus on multiple models for scalability as can be seen in Table 1: DBMS Features Analysis. The support of multiple models of scalability also concentrates on OLTP transaction integration specifically within roles as defined in the security model (Pereira, Muppavarapu, Chung, 2006). Security will be discussed later in this analysis. The second factor used to evaluate closed source
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now