Conceptual Models for Infrastructure Leadership
Publication: Journal of Management in Engineering
Volume 30, Issue 3
Abstract
In policy and aspirational documents both the American Society of Civil Engineers and the National Academy of Engineering have called for engineers of the 21st century to take a leading role in infrastructure discussions about and decisions. These discussions and decisions routinely involve stakeholders, constituencies, and organizations that are unfamiliar with traditional engineering modeling and analysis techniques; removing communication barriers is essential, but many find our engineering tools, methods, and explanations difficult to comprehend. Assuming a leadership role in these conversations requires engineers to adopt new conceptual models that enhance communication between people with dissimilar backgrounds and promote shared understanding. The West Point infrastructure models introduced in this paper provide engineers, decision makers, and members of society with a universal framework for understanding, visualizing, assessing, and describing complex infrastructure systems in a manner that facilitates communication, fosters participation in infrastructure decisions, and allows broad-based engagement with design processes. The Conceptual Model provides a basis for identifying, visualizing, and understanding the elements of an infrastructure, the functions they perform, and their relationships to each other. The Assessment Model consists of six prompts, which guide the formulation of focused assessment questions that consider the performance of systems and components, identified in the Conceptual Model, under both normal and adverse circumstances. The Resilience Model provides a framework for the design of resilient infrastructures that incorporates risk management, engineering design, emergency response, and rationally sequenced recovery. Conceptual models are essential tools for leaders seeking to effectively engage stakeholders in complex decision-making processes by building toward advancing a shared understanding; the models proposed in this paper are an effective tool in that role, and their adoption and use would facilitate deeper engagement by the public, and, ultimately, wiser societal decisions about infrastructure.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
ASCE. (2007). The vision for civil engineering in 2025, Reston, VA.
ASCE. (2008). Civil engineering body of knowledge for the 21st century, 2nd Ed., Reston, VA.
ASCE. (2009a). 2009 report card for America’s infrastructure, Reston, VA.
FEMA. (2008a). “National incident management system.” Dept. of Homeland Security, Washington, DC.
FEMA. (2008b). “National response framework.” Dept. of Homeland Security, Washington, DC.
FEMA. (2011). “National disaster recovery framework.” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
Hart, S. (2010). “A practical guide for designing resilient civil infrastructures.” Proc., Infrastructure Security Partnership Annual Infrastructure and Regional Resilience Conf., TISP, Grapevine, TX.
Hart, S. (2012). “Infrastructure education at West Point.” Proc., Joint Engineer Training Conf., SAME, St. Louis.
Hart, S., Klosky, J. L., Hanus, J., Meyer, K. F., Toth, J., and Reese, M. (2011). “An introduction to infrastructure for all disciplines.” American Society for Engineering Education National Conf., ASEE, Washington, DC.
Hart, S. D. (2011). “Infrastructure education seminar.” The Critical Infrastructure Symp., The Infrastructure Security Partnership, Elizabeth, NJ.
Klosky, J. L. (2012). “Grizzly bears don’t use water closets.” The Critical Infrastructure Symp., TISP, Arlington, VA.
Klosky, J. L., Katalenich, S., and Hart, S. (2012). “Requiring a course in infrastructure for all graduates.” American Society for Engineering Education 2012 National Conf., ASEE, Washington, DC.
Macal, C. M. (2005). “Model verification and validation.” Workshop on threat anticipation: Social science methods and models, Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago.
MCEER. (2006). “Multidisciplinary center for earthquake engineering research.” 〈http://mceer.buffalo.edu/research/resilience/Resilience_10-24-06.pdf〉 (Sep. 19, 2012).
Meyer, K., Hart, S., Klosky, J. L., and Hanus, J. (2010). “A global curriculum to support civil engineering in developing nations: The final result.” American Society for Engineering Education National Conf., ASEE, Washington, DC.
Modeling and Simulation Information Analysis Center (MSIAC). (2013). “A modeling and simulation primer.” 〈http://education.dod-msiac.org/ms_primer.htm〉 (Feb. 16, 2013).
National Academy of Engineering. (2008). “Grand challenges for engineering.” 〈http://www.engineeringchallenges.org〉 (Nov. 1, 2012).
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2004). “The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century.” National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
Regional Plan Association. (2008). “America 2050: An infrastructure vision for 21st century America.” Regional Plan Association, New York.
Sussman, J. (2012). “Complex sociotechnical systems: The case for a new field of study.” 〈http://video.mit.edu/watch/complex-sociotechnical-systems-the-case-for-a-new-field-of-study-11174/〉 (Nov. 1, 2012).
The Infrastructure Security Partnership (TISP). (2010). “White paper: Infrastructure and regional resilience.” The Infrastructure Security Partnership, Washington, DC.
World Economic Forum. (2011). “The global competitiveness report, 2011-2012.” Geneva.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 16, 2012
Accepted: May 13, 2013
Published online: May 15, 2013
Published in print: May 1, 2014
Discussion open until: Jul 6, 2014
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.