Systems thinking is an indispensable tool in comprehending and analyzing real-world phenomena. Observed processes are naturally composed of many interconnected components which ought to be studied jointly rather than individually. Engineering systems thinking is a very valuable skill, which helps to successfully execute multi-disciplinary projects. In high-tech companies that deal with complex and dynamic systems projects, the need for engineers with high systems thinking skills is growing. Engineers with high systems thinking skills are able to understand the big picture and the project in its entirety, both functionally and conceptually, without necessarily knowing all of the small details. Systems thinking enables understanding the entire system beyond its components, and clarifies the importance of the isolated component as part of the system as a whole. Systems thinking helps understand how sub-systems connect to one whole system, and provides solutions for the client’s specifications and requirements. In addition, systems thinking enables perceiving the inter-relationships and mutual influence among the system’s components and other systems. The current study examined the development of systems thinking among engineers and engineering students. In addition, the personality traits of engineers with high systems thinking skills were examined by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality type test. This article also presents the initial results of the development of a new systems thinking study course, taught as a pilot course to industrial and management engineering students. It seems that engineers with certain personality traits can acquire or improve their systems thinking capabilities through a gradual, long-term learning process and by acquiring the necessary tools. Additionally, the study includes recommendations for the continuation of ongoing research on developing systems thinking.

A global approach towards quality management highlights the need for constructing a new body of knowledge that views the field of global quality from a systems perspective.

The COVID-19 pandemic social distancing forced a shift from Face-to-Face (F2F) to virtual work sessions, applying innovative digital tools. These tools have previously been neglected, mainly due to a conservative approach or prioritization. Consequently, their effectiveness was never tested in depth. While applying these innovative digital tools during the COVID-19 pandemic was clearly preferable to shutting down organizational activity, managers and workers recognized the advantages of these alternatives and tended to apply them in the post-COVID-19 period. However, in this post-pandemic period, which is free from social distancing limitations, a relatively full space of choices was introduced again, which raised the question whether these alternatives should be kept. Therefore, this study examines whether digital communication tools can adequately substitute F2F sessions in project management. We conducted an experiment with participants $\left(n=269\right),\text{asking}\text{them}$ to perform project-oriented tasks on four platforms: as individuals, in an F2F group meeting, on Zoom, or using WhatsApp. The results indicate that while an F2F meeting is more effective than individual work, Zoom and WhatsApp are not. These findings appear surprising and may contradict the concept of group empowerment. The use of digital sharing platforms did not affect the tasks’ performances nor create synergy. This raises the issue of whether these digital means are here to stay, should be discarded, or must be upgraded.

The present study is innovative in its integration of several novel and quickly developing disciplines of QMS, SoS, Globalization and Systems approaches including Systems Thinking. We inaugurate G-QMS in global SoS organizations as a new field of research. This is an exploratory study that uses the Grounded Theory combined with an analytical review and professional experience to provide a framework for identifying of new key variables in the multidimensional environment of global management. The purpose of this study is to create a theoretical foundation for this field, and introduce logical deductions regarding G-QMS in global SoS organizations that can be used as foundational principles for defining and modeling of G-QMS. The methodology of the study includes a paradigm that combines analytical review, which integrates the four main disciplines into a structured qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews, and used Grounded Theory. The findings show that G-QMS is a necessary condition for these organizations, while the management of G-QMS is inseparable from the management of the SoS. The final results reveal 18 aspects to be considered in any definition determined for G-QMS in global SoS organizations, and any model to be developed. From these, 8 base anchors for the model were analyzed and mapped, as well as its main factors. In conclusions, each of these base anchors makes its own contribution to any further development in this area. However, considering them all together creates an initial model of G-QMS in global SoS organizations.

Using the three criteria known as the “Iron Triangle,” this study examines and analyzes the ramifications and effects of offset constraints on defense projects. Such projects, managed vis-à-vis governments and international authorities, contend with a constraint that does not exist in other domains: offset, an obligation and condition for the sale of defense products to a purchasing government. The study combines qualitative tools, ten semi-structured interviews conducted with academics and professionals, with quantitative tools, surveys sent to project managers and other people employed in leading Israeli defense manufacturing companies. In-depth analysis of the responses and findings of the qualitative study reveals that offset risk must be managed as any other project risk. Its influence is evident in the failure to meet project budgets. This finding points to a factor to be considered when preparing for and managing a project, and even more during the early stages of examining a transaction, prior to acceptance. The present study examined three hypotheses, using chi-square tests of independence, goodness-of-fit tests, loglinear Poisson regression analyses and fluctuation charts. We found that low offset percentage levels are associated with low levels of project budget exception and with low levels of perception of project budget exception. No association was found between offset percentage and schedule, and between offset percentage and performance.