Department of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, Stevens Institute of Technology © 2005 Stevens Institute of Technology, ISBN 0-615-12843-2 PROCEEDINGS CSER 2005, March 23-25, Hoboken, NJ, USA Reducing and Managing Complexity by Changing the Boundaries of the System Joseph E. Kasser DSc, CEng, CM Systems Engineering and Evaluation Centre University of South Australia Mawson Lakes, SA. 5095 Joseph.kasser@unisa.edu.au Kent D. Palmer, Ph.D. P.O. Box 1632 Orange CA 92856 USA 714-633-9508 palmer@exo.com Abstract The world is facing the problem of manag- ing complex systems, yet no practical solution is in sight. This paper suggests that the solu- tion to the problems of complexity will proba- bly be found by using “out-of-the-box” think- ing to change the paradigm and proposes a number of hypotheses to help initiate that thinking process. The paper considers that the various definitions of the term ‘system’ are problem statements, and hypothesizes that the problem may be solved, not by tackling com- plexity, but by bypassing it by changing the way it is viewed. The paper also proposes a semantically loaded definition of the term ‘system’ that incorporates the hypotheses of this paper and seems to apply to all five layers of system engineering (Hitchins, 2003). Introduction The world has been turning to systems en- gineering to help manage the problems of complexity for at least 28 years (Shinner, 1976) yet no practical solution is in sight. By recognising that “excessive complexity is a symptom of an underlying problem within the foundation of the current paradigm” (Kasser, 1996), this paper suggests that the solution to the problems of complexity will only be found by using “out-of-the-box” thinking to change the paradigm (Kuhn, 1970) and proposes a number of hypotheses, to help initiate that thinking process. The paper starts by pointing out that the definitions of the word “system” are numerous and different. This paper then hypothesises that these many definitions are formulations of problem statements and proposes a semanti- cally loaded definition of the term ‘system’ from an object-oriented perspective that in- corporates the hypotheses of this paper. The paper continues with a discussion of reasons for, and implications of, the new definition and proposes that Complexity can be dealt with, and managed by redrawing the internal and external system boundaries in the context of a Simplicity paradigm. The paper shares some perspectives on the consequences of the new definition and the insights it provides. A case study of a project success attributed to the Simplicity paradigm is discussed. The pa- per concludes with yet another definition of systems engineering, however this one does seem to cover all five layers of systems engi- neering (Hitchins, 2003) at all points within the two dimensional space defined by (Kasser and Massie, 2001). The various definitions of the word “system” The word “system” means different things to different people. For example, (Webster, 2004) contains 51 different entries for the word “system”. Consider the following repre-