Vol.4 No.3 2012

52/62

Round-table talks : Research and development of systems science and technology−184−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.4 No.3 (2012) Dr. Naoto Kobayashipowerful in theory and practice. When I was a student, the guys who were good in math were considered to be the big ones. There were many systems science departments in the universities, and I think it matched the spirit of the era. However, since the 80s, the emphasis shifted to the deep exploration of elemental technologies.KobayashiDoes that mean that the academia of the world headed in that direction?KimuraI think it was only Japan. The word monozukuri (manufacturing) appeared in the beginning of the 1990s, so it was around that time. Although my analysis is not complete, one factor is arrogance. The Japanese manufacturing industry dominated the world, and elemental technologies became prominent. I think there was a feeling that we won because of our excellence in elemental technologies. AkamatsuI guess we did not recognize that the real reason for the “win” was systems technology. If the criterion for the “win” is set to be exporting overseas, the reason would necessarily become elemental technologies.KimuraTaking the example of iron, the integrated ironworks with annual production of 10 million tons was built in Japan for the first time in the world in the middle of the 1960s. The United States Steel Corporation produced about 5 million tons, and Japan doubled that capacity. The reason why it was held at 5 million tons was because the system was so complex. Iron and steel are produced by order, so they are single production products. The production line had to be dedicated to individually ordered products, and this was managed by visual inspection. Complete computerization of this process not only raised the production scale but also dramatically improved the quality. However, the contribution of the systems technology was not acknowledged. This was reflected in personnel evaluations. The systems people never became board directors! They said that the Japanese iron conquered the world because of its excellent quality as a material and the iron industry Yoshikawa frequently mention “design science”. Does systems science and technology fall in that realm?KimuraI certainly think it is one of the design sciences. AkamatsuSo, it is “systems technology” first. You say the systems technology is needed for problem solving, the systems science is its base, and the system exists originally for problem solving. KobayashiSince problems cannot be solved with elemental technologies alone, we must have systems. It is said that Japan is weak in systems science and technology and systems thinking, but I think Japan had been doing well in the world for over hundred years since the Meiji Period. Why are we said to be weak in the field of systems? KimuraI think we are very strong in a certain phase, and once the Japanese systems science and technology shined brightly. For example, we successfully built the shinkansen (bullet train) system from 1960s to 1970s, the Dendenkosha Information Processing System (DIPS) of the former Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Public Corporation, and the integrated production management that enabled 10 million ton annual production of ironworks. These could not have been achieved without well-developed systems thinking. KobayashiTaking the example of my field of specialty, Japan became advanced relatively early in optical communication technology. That was because the R&D capabilities of the individual technologies such as fiber, semiconductor material, and optical device were high, and the performances of the products were excellent. That allowed us to create the network and system faster than anyone else in the world. It is very interesting that, from the 1960s to early 1980s, we were able to create the shinkansen and the optical network that were not catch-up technologies. KimuraBack in those days, the systems technology was indeed very Dr. Hidenori Kimura

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です