Quote:
Originally Posted by Kims Robot
What 1538, 254, and any teams that seem to have that "Big Picture oversite team" have is a Systems Engineering Group. In Madison & Allen's case, they are the Systems Engineer for the team.
I posted a while back on the topic, and I think its perfectly relevant here.
Whether you have a team or a person, its incredibly important to have someone filling the Systems Engineering Role, and I guarantee that all of the teams that perform well and meet their goals have incorporated Systems Engineering, whether they call it that or not. |
Do you actually set up formal requirements or use some kind of DOORS-esque tracking tool? Some FRC robot are definitely complicated enough to warrant it. I have thought that writing up actual requirements on Day 1 and 2 would be a fun exercise, but I am not sure we could stick to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonRotolo
Yes. This IS it. What I will try to implement* is a systems engineering role, but comprised of a mentor and 2-3 talented students. Brainstorming still works, but the SE group makes the final decisions and irons out the details.
|
In my day job, the systems group does not make that decision. Systems tracks your compliance to requirements, but if you have a non-compliance then that is brought to the attention of other affected owners. If you can't agree on your own, then it is elevated up through the program management, who has the final say (and of course has to weigh the advice of all the affected owners). The equivalent of program management for FRC would be your wizard student or engineer that chooses to serve as Chief Designer/Engineer/Wizard/etc.