Divergent Thinking in Systems Engineering

Practice: Is There a Shortfall?

Jim Armstrong
July 20, 2009

1
 The Issue
• SE course with complex system problem exercises – first
is CONOPS
• One class completes very fast, with several
undiscovered elements of the problem
• Behavior continues throughout 2 week course
• MBTI lesson reveals class has only convergent thinkers,
no divergent thinkers
• Subsequent classes reveal similar tendency for
convergent thinking – over 90%
 The Difference
• Convergent thinking – narrowing the alternatives in
problem and solution space to an answer

• Divergent thinking – expanding problem and solution

space to increase the possible problem definition and
number of solution alternatives

© 2008 Stevens Institute of Technology 1-3

 Need for Balance
Front -enddesignwork

• Good engineering uses a PDS

combination of convergent Concept generation

and divergent thinking to Initial numberof

conceptsbased
onPDS
reach better conclusions Applycontrolled
convergence(CC)

Initial numberreduced
Applyconcept
generation(CC) Newonesadded

• Balance helps (Legal case)

CC

– Converger ready to go Further reduction

(FR)

finish analysis (after 6 CG Further addition

(FA)

months) CC

– Diverger wants to re- CG

FR
FA

read requirements
– “Smoking gun” found!
CC

Pugh, 1991 Concept selected

© 2008 Stevens Institute of Technology 1-4

 Personality Concepts
• Kolb Learning Styles
• Herrman Brain Dominance
• Personality Assessment Inventory
• The Big Five
• Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
• MBTI
• Kiersey Temperaments
 Kolb Learning Styles
• Convergers are characterized by abstract conceptualization and
active experimentation. They are good at making practical
applications of ideas and using deductive reasoning to solve
problems.
• Divergers tend toward concrete experience and reflective
observation. They are imaginative and are good at coming up with
ideas and seeing things from different perspectives.
• Assimilators are characterized by abstract conceptualization and
reflective observation. They are capable of creating theoretical
models by means of inductive reasoning.
• Accommodators use concrete experience and active
experimentation. They are good at actively engaging with the
world and actually doing things instead of merely reading about
and studying them.

– Smith (2008)
Herrmann Brain Dominance

- Herrmann, 1999
 Personality Assessment Inventory
This widely used self-report inventory assesses psychopathological syndromes in
adults, providing information relevant to diagnosis and treatment planning. It is
composed of 344 items on 22 nonoverlapping scales:
•  ClinicalScales • Treatment Scales
• Somatic Complaints • Aggression
• Anxiety • Suicidal Ideation
• Anxiety-Related Disorders • Stress
• Depression • Nonsupport
• Mania • Treatment Rejection
• Paranoia
 
• Schizophrenia
• Validity Scales
• Borderline Features
• Infrequency
• Antisocial Features
• Alcohol Problems • Negative Impression
• Drug Problems • Positive Impression
  • Inconsistency 
• Interpersonal Scales
•  Dominance
•  Warmth
 Others
• The Big Five (Goldberg)
– Openness,
– Conscientiousness,
– Extraversion,
– Agreeableness, and
– Neuroticism
• Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
 Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
• Based on Carl Jung’s theories
• Developed by Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs
• Intended to explain why people behave differently
• Principal architecture – four preferences
• Supported by MBTI instrument
• Information sources:
– Center for Application of Psychological Types
– Otto Kroeger Associates

5-10
 Energy Flow Preference

50% 50%

Introversion Extraversion
• Interaction • Interaction
consumes generates
energy energy

5-11
 Input Preference

30% 70%

iNtuitive Sensing
• Abstract • Specific
• Connections • Concrete
• Interrelationships • Practical
• Possibilities • Detailed
• Big picture • Factual
5-12
 Processing/Decision Preference

M-35% M-65%
F-65% F-35%
Feeling Thinking
• Values • Logical
• Emotion • Objective
• Subjective • Clarity
• Harmony • Justice
• Mercy
5-13
 Input/Output Preference

45% 55%

Perceiving Judging
• Flexible • Decisive
• Adaptable • Organized
• Open-ended • Definite
• Spontaneous • Closure
• Diverger • Converger
5-14
 Eight Preferences

E N F P

I S T J

5-15
 Sixteen Types
ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ

ISTP ISFP INFP INTP

ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ

Clues, not pigeonholes!

5-16
 Percentage of Population

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ

11.6% 13.8% 1.5% 2.1%

ISTP ISFP INFP INTP

5.4% 8.8% 4.4% 3.3%

ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP

4.3% 8.5% 8.1% 3.2%

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ

8.7% 12.3% 2.4% 1.8%

- Student distribution in one SE course

5-17
 SE Course MBTI data
• E (50) 53 I (50) 46
• N (30) 66 S (70) 43
• F (*) 37 T (*) 72
• P (45) 13 J (55) 96
Key: Preference (General Population %) Number in Sample

• F/T has gender bias. Data is consistent with a male

dominated class.

• Instrument:
• 20% MBTI
• 80% web test at humanmetrics.com
 Impact on SE?
An excess of convergence can lead to:
• Assumption that given problem or requirements is
complete and correct
• Drive to a single solution alternative
• Generally missing best practices
– Standards identify need for consideration of alternatives,
trades
• 499B, 1220, 632, 15288, CMMI
– Competency models address topics like thinking about what’s
missing
• NAPA for FAA, SSCI, INCOSE
 Solutions
• Determine if this situation exists
• Seek missing personality types
• Avoid cookie cutter hiring
• Include divergence in training and processes

© 2008 Stevens Institute of Technology 1-20