There’s a misconception about what engineering consultants do. They seemingly come in, run a few workshops, throw a report at you, and exit stage left. But for large-scale programs, those that have multiple contractors, system interdependencies, oversight requirements, etc., that’s not the case. Systems engineering consulting requires an intimately engaged approach that, for certain programs, keeps them from falling apart as they near completion.
Consulting Is Everything It’s Not Supposed to Be
First, it’s important to understand consulting’s role at the program level. Often, programs with technically challenging efforts turn to digital engineering services as a first step, not just tooling opportunities, but the kind of structured engineering thought that keeps complex programs from falling apart from the get-go. This is a nice distinction to make. They’re not turning to consultants for nice-to-have technology; they’re looking for a structural foundation that can bear the weight of a large, dynamic program.
Systems engineering consultants aren’t just there to advise and attend kick-off meetings. They delve into the technical components down to requirements review, where they assess the architecture and what is and isn’t being built for gaps before they get too expensive downstream as integration risks. It’s a continued effort that’s more than just a singular engagement with expected outcomes.
Creep Where You Least Expect It
One of the largest threats to successful program execution is requirements creep. Regardless of the skills acquired in a program’s requirements discussion, approvals, and kickoff, requirements inevitably change. Stakeholders add scope, market conditions dictate alternative decisions, and technical parameters present unforeseen problems; whatever the case, by the time the program reaches fruition, the requirements document that was approved is rarely the same one with which the team is working.
This is where consulting’s structured effort pays off. A good systems engineering consultant provides a means of traceability, where every part of the design, requirement, component, and test plan can be traced back to an actual need for something to exist. This should be easy in theory across dozens of teams and thousands of moving components; unfortunately, without additional support, even the most skilled internal teams find it hard to keep it up without assistance.
Furthermore, this means that it’s not just about documentation for documentation’s sake; it’s about keeping a disciplined effort through a program so that when something changes, program managers know exactly how it impacts downstream work. If something changes, what’s the downstream impact? Without visibility into what’s been driven from decisions made, everything is guesswork.
Inter-Facility Communication is Key
Inherently large-scale programs employ multiple teams, internal personnel, subcontractors, partner entities, and government stakeholders. Getting everyone on the same page concerning their understanding of a system isn’t as easy as one might think. Different teams have different jargon, different modeling platforms and tools, and different understandings of how everything fits together (and how it does not). Left unchecked over time, these differences only exacerbate one another.
Systems engineering consultants act as the technical middle ground. They establish standards through frameworks andexplain how information gets communicated across teams. They provide a translation of sorts between domains; for example, an electrical engineer and a software lead (component team members with no reason to communicate otherwise) may not share vocabulary when discussing system behavior, but a competent systems engineer ensures they don’t have to figure it out on their own.
This kind of integration work is often undervalued; it rarely translates into flashier project milestones down the road. However, programs that do this well inherently sidestep failed coordination issues that deem other projects unsuccessful; those who forego this effort often learn the hard way how much time is wasted figuring out misalignments that could have been recognized months earlier.
Support for Decisions That Stick
Another area where consulting gives value is decision support, especially in the early days of a program when everything is less certain, but complications are still high. Early-stage decisions become nearly impossible to change downstream later. If a decision is made in the first year of a multiyear project, chances are that the alignment of cost, technical parameters, and architecture will be set in stone despite any conflict that arises down the line.
Systems engineering consultants bring structure to these early-stage decisions through various means, such as trade studies, risk assessments, and modeling assessments. While these are not hypothetical academic workshops, they are ways for engineering teams to steer clear of decisions that lend themselves well on paper but ultimately create problem children later during integration or testing. Getting it right early on almost always is cheaper than finding out it wasn’t right later on.
Sustained Support is the Differentiator
What makes consulting for large programs different from short-duration programs is time. These aren’t short-term endeavors spanning weeks or months; instead, they’re often annual or decades-long investments where change occurs incrementally year-on-year. Thusly, consulting must come to appreciate the sustained effort as an educated venture, an embedded engagement that keeps intimately connected, more than just an adjacent vendor relationship.
Effective rapport acts more like an internal extension of a consulting entity’s support over time, where team members know the ins and outs of a program, the history it has come with, and why, so that top-down conversations can easily focus on risk areas before delving into troubleshooting discussions.
This sustained embedded support is ultimately what’s learned and effective beyond surface-level consulting for programs where failing isn’t an option. It’s sustained efforts like this that make tangible contributions.
