Difference between revisions of "Analysis and Selection between Alternative Solutions"

From SEBoK
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Text replacement - "SEBoK v. 2.9, released 13 November 2023" to "SEBoK v. 2.9, released 20 November 2023")
 
(88 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
According to the Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles (1973), analysis is “the resolution of anything complex into its simple elements. This article briefly discusses the nature of systems analysis using a systems approach. Any of the activities described below may need to be considered [[Concurrent (glossary)|concurrently (glossary)]] through the systems' life, as discussed in the [[Applying the Systems Approach]] article. Systems analysis assumes that the [[Identify and Understand a Problem or Opportunity|problem or opportunity]] that the system is intended to address has previously been identified and understood or, more likely for any non-trivial system, is being identified and understood concurrently with system analysis activities.
+
----
 +
'''''Lead Author:''''' ''Rick Adcock'', '''''Contributing Authors:''''' ''Brian Wells, Scott Jackson, Janet Singer, Duane Hybertson''
 +
----
 +
[[File:PPI.png|thumb|250px|right|<center>The "Systems Approach Applied to Engineered Systems" knowledge area is graciously sponsored by PPI.<center>]]
 +
This topic is part of the [[Systems Approach Applied to Engineered Systems]] knowledge area (KA).  It describes knowledge related to the analysis and selection of a preferred {{Term|Solution (glossary)|solution}} from the possible options, which may have been proposed by [[Synthesizing Possible Solutions]]Selected solution options may form the starting point for [[Implementing and Proving a Solution]]. Any of the activities described below may also need to be considered {{Term|Concurrently (glossary)|concurrently}} with other activities in the {{Term|Systems Approach (glossary)|systems approach}} at a particular point in the life of a {{Term|System-of-Interest (glossary)|system-of-interest}} (SoI).  
  
The elements of system analysis discussed below are: Identification of the Elements of a System, Division of Elements into Smaller Elements, Grouping of Elements, Identification of the Boundary of a System, Identification of the Function of Each Element, and Identification of the Interactions Among the Elements.  
+
The activities described below should be considered in the {{Term|Context (glossary)|context}} of the [[Overview of the Systems Approach]] topic at the start of this KA.  The final topic in this KA, [[Applying the Systems Approach]], considers the dynamic aspects of how these activities are used as part of the systems approach and how this relates in detail to {{Term|Element (glossary)|elements}} of {{Term|Systems Engineering (glossary)|systems engineering}} (SE).
  
===Identification of the Elements of a System===
+
==System Analysis==
 +
{{Term|System Analysis (glossary)|System analysis}} is an activity in the systems approach that evaluates one or more {{Term|System (glossary)|system}} artifacts created during the activities involved in [[Synthesizing Possible Solutions]], such as:
 +
* Defining {{Term|Assessment Criterion (glossary)|assessment criteria}} based on the required properties and behavior of an identified {{Term|Problem (glossary)|problem}} or {{Term|Opportunity (glossary)|opportunity}} system situation.
 +
* Accessing the properties and behavior of each candidate solution in comparison to the criteria.
 +
* Comparing the assessments of the candidate solutions and identification of any that could resolve the problem or exploit the opportunities, along with the selection of candidates that should be further explored.
  
The systems approach calls for the identification of the elements of a system. (Jackson et al. 2010, pp. 41-42) identify the kinds of elements that make up a system.  Typical elements treated within Systems Engineering (SE) may be hardware, software, humans, processes, conceptual ideas, or any combination of these. SE defines the properties of these elements, verifies their capability, and validates the capability of the entire system. According to (Page 2009), in complex systems the individual elements of the system are characterized by their adaptability.
+
As discussed in [[Synthesizing Possible Solutions]] topic, the problem context for an {{Term|Engineered System (glossary)|engineered system}} will include a logical or ideal system solution description. It is assumed that the solution that “best” matches the ideal one will be the most acceptable solution to the {{Term|Stakeholder (glossary)|stakeholders}}. Note, as discussed below, the “best” solution should include an understanding of {{Term|Cost (glossary)|cost}} and {{Term|Risk (glossary)|risk}}, as well as {{Term|Effectiveness (glossary)|effectiveness}}. The problem context may include a {{Term|Soft System (glossary)|soft system}} {{Term|Concept (glossary)|conceptual}} {{Term|Model (glossary)|model}} describing the logical elements of a system to resolve the problem situation and how these are perceived by different stakeholders (Checkland 1999). This soft context view will provide additional criteria for the analysis {{Term|Process (glossary)|process}}, which may become the critical issue in selecting between two equally effective solution alternatives.  
  
In a SE context, according to (Blanchard and Fabrycky 2006, p. 7) elements may be physical, conceptual, or processes. Physical elements may be hardware, software, or humans. Conceptual elements may be ideas, plans, concepts, or hypotheses. Processes may be mental, mental-motor (writing, drawing, etc.), mechanical, or electronic.
+
Hence, analysis is often not a one-time process of solution selection; rather, it is used in combination with problem understanding and solution {{Term|Synthesis (glossary)|synthesis}} to progress towards a more complete understanding of problems and solutions over time (see [[Applying the Systems Approach]] topic for a more complete discussion of the dynamics of this aspect of the approach).
 
 
In addition to the operational elements of the system under consideration (i.e., a System of Interest, SOI), ISO/IEC 15288 (2008) also calls for the identification of the enabling systems. These are systems utilized at various stages in the life cycle; for example, maintenance and other systems that support the operational elements to solve problems or achieve opportunity.
 
  
Today's systems often include existing elements.  It is rare to find a true "greenfield" systems in which the developers can specify and implement all new elements from scratch.  "Brownfield" systems are much more typical, where legacy elements constrain the system architecture, capabilities, technology choices, and other aspects of implementation. (Boehm 2009)
+
==Effectiveness Analysis==
 +
Effectiveness studies use the problem or opportunity system context as a starting point.  
  
===Division of Elements into Smaller Elements===
+
The effectiveness of a synthesized system solution will include performance criteria associated with both the system’s primary and enabling {{Term|Function (glossary)|functions}}. These are derived from the system’s {{Term|Purpose (glossary)|purpose}}, in order to enable the realization of stakeholder needs in one or more, wider system contexts. 
  
The next aspect of the Systems Approach is that elements can be divided into smaller elements. The division of elements into smaller elements allows the systems to be grouped, and leads to the Systems Engineering concept of physical architecture as described by (Levin 2009, pp. 493-495).  Each layer of division leads to another layer of the hierarchical view of a system.  As Levin points out, there are many ways to depict the physical architecture including wiring diagrams, block diagrams, etc. All of these views depend on arranging the elements and dividing them into smaller elements.  According to the principle of recursion, these decomposed elements are either terminal elements or are further decomposable.
+
For a {{Term|Product System (glossary)|product system}}, there are a set of generic non-functional qualities that are associated with different types of solution patterns or technology, e.g., {{Term|Safety (glossary)|safety}}, {{Term|Security (glossary)|security}}, {{Term|Reliability (glossary)|reliability}}, {{Term|Maintainability (glossary)|maintainability}}, usability, etc. These criteria are often explicitly stated as parts of the {{Term|Domain (glossary)|domain}} knowledge of related technical disciplines in technology domains.
  
===Grouping of Elements===
+
For a {{Term|Service System (glossary)|service system}} or {{Term|Enterprise System (glossary)|enterprise system}}, the criteria will be more directly linked to the identified {{Term|User (glossary)|user}} needs or {{Term|Enterprise (glossary)|enterprise}} goals. Typical qualities for such systems include agility, {{Term|Resilience (glossary)|resilience}}, {{Term|Flexibility (glossary)|flexibility}}, upgradeability, etc.
  
The next aspect of the systems approach is that elements can be grouped.  This leads to the identification of the subsystems essential to the definition of a system. SE determines how a system may be partitioned and how each subsystem fits and functions within the whole system. The grouping of all the elements of a system is called the system of interest (SOI), also called the relevant system by (Checkland 1999, p. 166). The SOI is the focus of the SE effort. According to (Hitchins 2009, p. 61), some of the properties of an SOI are as follows: the SOI is open and dynamic; the SOI interacts with other systems, and; the SOI contains sub-systems. The SOI is brought together through the concept of synthesis.
+
In addition to assessments of the absolute effectiveness of a given solution system, {{Term|Systems Engineer (glossary)|systems engineers}} must also be able to combine effectiveness with the limitations of cost and timescales included in the problem context. In general, the role of system analysis is to identify the proposed solutions which can provide some effectiveness within the cost and time allocated to any given {{Term|Iteration (glossary)|iteration}} of the systems approach (see [[Applying the Systems Approach]] for details). If none of the solutions can deliver an effectiveness level that justifies the proposed investment, then it is necessary to return to the original framing of the problem. If at least one solution is assessed as sufficiently effective, then a choice between solutions can be proposed.
  
===Identification of the Boundary of a System===
+
==Trade-Off Studies==
Establishing the boundary of a system is essential to SE and the determination of the system's interaction with its environment and with other systems and the extent of the system of interest (SOI). (Buede 2009, p. 1102) provides a comprehensive discussion of the importance and methods of defining the boundary of a system in a SE context.
+
In the context of the definition of a system, a trade-off study consists of comparing the characteristics of each candidate system element to those of each candidate system {{Term|Architecture (glossary)|architecture}} in order to determine the solution that globally balances the assessment criteria in the best way. The various characteristics analyzed are gathered in cost analysis, technical risks analysis, and effectiveness analysis (NASA 2007). To accomplish a trade off study, there are a variety of methods, often supported by tooling. Each class of analysis is the subject of the following topics:
 +
* Assessment criteria are used to classify the various candidate solutions. They are either absolute or relative. For example, the maximum cost per unit produced is c$, cost reduction shall be x%, effectiveness improvement is y%, and risk mitigation is z%.
 +
* '''{{Term|Boundary (glossary)|Boundaries}}''' identify and limit the characteristics or criteria to be taken into account at the time of analysis (e.g., the kind of costs to be taken into account, acceptable technical risks, and the type and level of effectiveness).
 +
* '''Scales''' are used to quantify the characteristics, properties, and/or criteria and to make comparisons. Their definition requires knowledge of the highest and lowest limits, as well as the type of evolution of the characteristic (linear, logarithmic, etc.).
 +
* An {{Term|Assessment Score (glossary)|assessment score}} is assigned to a characteristic or criterion for each candidate solution. The goal of the trade-off study is to succeed in quantifying the three variables (and their decomposition in sub-variables) of cost, risk, and effectiveness for each candidate solution. This operation is generally complex and requires the use of models.
 +
* The '''optimization''' of the characteristics or properties improves the scoring of interesting solutions.
  
===Identification of the Function of Each Element===
+
A decision-making process is not an accurate science; ergo, trade-off studies have limits. The following concerns should be taken into account:
 +
*Subjective Criteria – personal bias of the analyst; for example, if the component has to be beautiful, what constitutes a “beautiful” component?
 +
*Uncertain Data – for example, inflation has to be taken into account to estimate the cost of maintenance during the complete {{Term|Life Cycle (glossary)|life cycle}} of a system; how can a systems engineer predict the evolution of inflation over the next five years?
 +
*Sensitivity Analysis – A global assessment score that is designated to every candidate solution is not absolute; thus, it is recommended that a robust selection is gathered by performing a sensitivity analysis that considers small variations of assessment criteria values (weights). The selection is robust if the variations do not change the order of scores.
  
The function of a system or of its elements is essential to SE and the determination of the purpose of the system or of its elements. (Buede 2009, pp. 1091-1126) provides a comprehensive description of functional analysis in a SE context.
+
A thorough trade-off study specifies the assumptions, variables, and confidence intervals of the results.
  
===Identification of the Interactions among the Elements===
+
==Systems Principles of System Analysis==
  
The next element of the systems approach is the identification of the interactions among the elements. These interactions lead to the SE process of interface analysis. Integral to this aspect is the principle of interactions. Interactions occur both with other system elements and also with external elements and the environment. In a SE context, interfaces have both a technical and managerial importance. (Browning 2009, pp. 1418-1419) provides a list of desirable characteristics of both technical and managerial interface characteristics.
+
From the discussions above, the following general {{Term|Principle (glossary)|principles}} of systems analysis can be defined:
  
==Linkages to other topics==
+
*Systems analysis is an iterative activity consisting of trade studies made between various solution options from the systems synthesis activity.
 +
*Systems analysis uses assessment criteria based upon a problem or opportunity system description.
 +
** These criteria will be based around an ideal system description that assumes a {{Term|Hard System (glossary)|hard system}} problem context can be defined.
 +
** The criteria must consider required system behavior and properties of the complete solution in all of the possible wider system contexts and environments.
 +
** Trade studies require equal consideration to the primary system and the enabling system working as a single system to address the user need.  These studies need to consider system requirements for Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), systems safety, security, and affordability across the entire life cycle.
  
[[Applying the Systems Approach]]
+
** This ideal system description may be supported by {{Term|Soft System (glossary)|soft system}} descriptions from which additional “soft” criteria may be defined (e.g., a stakeholder preference for or against certain kinds of solutions and relevant social, political, or cultural conventions to be considered in the likely solution environment, etc.).
 +
* At a minimum, the assessment criteria should include the constraints on cost and time scales acceptable to stakeholders.
 +
* Trade studies provide a mechanism for conducting analysis of alternative solutions.
 +
** A trade study should consider a “system of assessment criteria,” designating special attention to the limitations and dependencies between individual criteria.
 +
** Trade studies need to deal with both objective and subjective criteria. Care must be taken to assess the sensitivity of the overall assessment to particular criteria.
  
 
==References==  
 
==References==  
  
===Citations===
+
===Works Cited===
 
+
Checkland, P.B. 1999. ''Systems Thinking, Systems Practice''. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Blanchard, B. and W.J. Fabrcky. 2006. ''Systems Engineering and Analysis''. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
 
 
 
Boehm, B. 2009. "Applying the Incremental Commitment Model to Brownfield System Development". Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research (CSER),  Loughborough, UK.
 
 
 
Browning, T.R. 2009. "Using the Design Structure Matrix to Design Program Organizations". In Sage, A.P. and W.B. Rouse (eds.). ''Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management," 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
 
 
 
Buede, D.M. 2009. "Functional Analysis". In Sage, A.P. and W.B. Rouse (eds.). ''Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management," 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
 
 
 
Checkand, P. 1999. ''Systems Thinking, Systems Practice.'' New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.  
 
 
 
Jackson, S., D. Hitchins and H. Eisner. 2010. "What is the Systems Approach?". INCOSE ''Insight''.  13(1) (April 2010): 41-43.
 
 
 
Levin, A.H. 2009. "System Architectures". In Sage, A.P. and W.B. Rouse (eds.). ''Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management," 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
 
 
 
Page, S.E. 2009. ''Understanding Complexity''. The Great Courses. Chantilly, VA, USA: The Teaching Company.
 
  
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, 3rd ed. s.v. "Analysis."  Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 1973.
+
NASA. 2007. ''Systems Engineering Handbook'', Revision 1. Washington, D.C., USA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). NASA/SP-2007-6105.
  
 
===Primary References===
 
===Primary References===
  
ISO/IEC 2008. ''[[ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288|Systems and software engineering -- System life cycle processes]]''. Geneva,
+
ISO/IEC/IEEE. 2015. ''[[ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288|Systems and Software Engineering -- System Life Cycle Processes]]''. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation/International Electrotechnical Commissions/Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer. [[ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288]]:2015.
Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation / International Electrotechnical Commissions. [[ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288]]:2008.
 
  
Jackson, S., D. Hitchins and H. Eisner. 2010. "[[What is the Systems Approach?]]" INCOSE ''Insight.'' 13(1) (April 2010): 41-43.
+
Jackson, S., D. Hitchins and H. Eisner. 2010. "[[What is the Systems Approach?|What is the systems approach?]]" INCOSE ''Insight,'' vol. 13, no. 1, April, pp. 41-43.
  
 
===Additional References===
 
===Additional References===
 +
None.
  
Blanchard, B. and W.J. Fabrcky. 2006. ''Systems Engineering and Analysis''. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
+
----
 +
<center>[[Synthesizing Possible Solutions|< Previous Article]] | [[Systems Approach Applied to Engineered Systems|Parent Article]] | [[Implementing and Proving a Solution|Next Article >]]</center>
  
Browning, T.R. 2009. "Using the Design Structure Matrix to Design Program Organizations". In A.P. Sage and W.B. Rouse, W.B. (eds.) ''Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management,'' 2nd Ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
+
<center>'''SEBoK v. 2.9, released 20 November 2023'''</center>
 
 
Buede, D.M. 2009. "Functional Analysis." In A.P. Sage and W.B. Rouse, W.B. (eds.). ''Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management,'' 2nd Ed.. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
 
 
 
Levin, A.H. 2009. "System Architectures." In A.P. Sage and W.B. Rouse, W.B. (eds.). ''Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management,'' 2nd Ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
 
 
 
Page, S.E. 2009. ''Understanding Complexity''. The Great Courses. Chantilly, VA, USA: The Teaching Company.
 
 
 
----
 
<center>[[Synthesizing Possible Solutions|<- Previous Article]] | [[Systems Approach|Parent Article]] | [[Implementing and Proving a Solution|Next Article ->]]</center>
 
  
 
[[Category:Part 2]][[Category:Topic]]
 
[[Category:Part 2]][[Category:Topic]]
 
+
[[Category:Systems Approach Applied to Engineered Systems]]
 
 
{{5comments}}
 

Latest revision as of 21:56, 18 November 2023


Lead Author: Rick Adcock, Contributing Authors: Brian Wells, Scott Jackson, Janet Singer, Duane Hybertson


The "Systems Approach Applied to Engineered Systems" knowledge area is graciously sponsored by PPI.

This topic is part of the Systems Approach Applied to Engineered Systems knowledge area (KA). It describes knowledge related to the analysis and selection of a preferred solutionsolution from the possible options, which may have been proposed by Synthesizing Possible Solutions. Selected solution options may form the starting point for Implementing and Proving a Solution. Any of the activities described below may also need to be considered concurrentlyconcurrently with other activities in the systems approachsystems approach at a particular point in the life of a system-of-interestsystem-of-interest (SoI).

The activities described below should be considered in the contextcontext of the Overview of the Systems Approach topic at the start of this KA. The final topic in this KA, Applying the Systems Approach, considers the dynamic aspects of how these activities are used as part of the systems approach and how this relates in detail to elementselements of systems engineeringsystems engineering (SE).

System Analysis

System analysisSystem analysis is an activity in the systems approach that evaluates one or more systemsystem artifacts created during the activities involved in Synthesizing Possible Solutions, such as:

  • Defining assessment criteriaassessment criteria based on the required properties and behavior of an identified problemproblem or opportunityopportunity system situation.
  • Accessing the properties and behavior of each candidate solution in comparison to the criteria.
  • Comparing the assessments of the candidate solutions and identification of any that could resolve the problem or exploit the opportunities, along with the selection of candidates that should be further explored.

As discussed in Synthesizing Possible Solutions topic, the problem context for an engineered systemengineered system will include a logical or ideal system solution description. It is assumed that the solution that “best” matches the ideal one will be the most acceptable solution to the stakeholdersstakeholders. Note, as discussed below, the “best” solution should include an understanding of costcost and riskrisk, as well as effectivenesseffectiveness. The problem context may include a soft systemsoft system conceptualconceptual modelmodel describing the logical elements of a system to resolve the problem situation and how these are perceived by different stakeholders (Checkland 1999). This soft context view will provide additional criteria for the analysis processprocess, which may become the critical issue in selecting between two equally effective solution alternatives.

Hence, analysis is often not a one-time process of solution selection; rather, it is used in combination with problem understanding and solution synthesissynthesis to progress towards a more complete understanding of problems and solutions over time (see Applying the Systems Approach topic for a more complete discussion of the dynamics of this aspect of the approach).

Effectiveness Analysis

Effectiveness studies use the problem or opportunity system context as a starting point.

The effectiveness of a synthesized system solution will include performance criteria associated with both the system’s primary and enabling functionsfunctions. These are derived from the system’s purposepurpose, in order to enable the realization of stakeholder needs in one or more, wider system contexts.

For a product systemproduct system, there are a set of generic non-functional qualities that are associated with different types of solution patterns or technology, e.g., safetysafety, securitysecurity, reliabilityreliability, maintainabilitymaintainability, usability, etc. These criteria are often explicitly stated as parts of the domaindomain knowledge of related technical disciplines in technology domains.

For a service systemservice system or enterprise systementerprise system, the criteria will be more directly linked to the identified useruser needs or enterpriseenterprise goals. Typical qualities for such systems include agility, resilienceresilience, flexibilityflexibility, upgradeability, etc.

In addition to assessments of the absolute effectiveness of a given solution system, systems engineerssystems engineers must also be able to combine effectiveness with the limitations of cost and timescales included in the problem context. In general, the role of system analysis is to identify the proposed solutions which can provide some effectiveness within the cost and time allocated to any given iterationiteration of the systems approach (see Applying the Systems Approach for details). If none of the solutions can deliver an effectiveness level that justifies the proposed investment, then it is necessary to return to the original framing of the problem. If at least one solution is assessed as sufficiently effective, then a choice between solutions can be proposed.

Trade-Off Studies

In the context of the definition of a system, a trade-off study consists of comparing the characteristics of each candidate system element to those of each candidate system architecturearchitecture in order to determine the solution that globally balances the assessment criteria in the best way. The various characteristics analyzed are gathered in cost analysis, technical risks analysis, and effectiveness analysis (NASA 2007). To accomplish a trade off study, there are a variety of methods, often supported by tooling. Each class of analysis is the subject of the following topics:

  • Assessment criteria are used to classify the various candidate solutions. They are either absolute or relative. For example, the maximum cost per unit produced is c$, cost reduction shall be x%, effectiveness improvement is y%, and risk mitigation is z%.
  • BoundariesBoundaries identify and limit the characteristics or criteria to be taken into account at the time of analysis (e.g., the kind of costs to be taken into account, acceptable technical risks, and the type and level of effectiveness).
  • Scales are used to quantify the characteristics, properties, and/or criteria and to make comparisons. Their definition requires knowledge of the highest and lowest limits, as well as the type of evolution of the characteristic (linear, logarithmic, etc.).
  • An assessment scoreassessment score is assigned to a characteristic or criterion for each candidate solution. The goal of the trade-off study is to succeed in quantifying the three variables (and their decomposition in sub-variables) of cost, risk, and effectiveness for each candidate solution. This operation is generally complex and requires the use of models.
  • The optimization of the characteristics or properties improves the scoring of interesting solutions.

A decision-making process is not an accurate science; ergo, trade-off studies have limits. The following concerns should be taken into account:

  • Subjective Criteria – personal bias of the analyst; for example, if the component has to be beautiful, what constitutes a “beautiful” component?
  • Uncertain Data – for example, inflation has to be taken into account to estimate the cost of maintenance during the complete life cyclelife cycle of a system; how can a systems engineer predict the evolution of inflation over the next five years?
  • Sensitivity Analysis – A global assessment score that is designated to every candidate solution is not absolute; thus, it is recommended that a robust selection is gathered by performing a sensitivity analysis that considers small variations of assessment criteria values (weights). The selection is robust if the variations do not change the order of scores.

A thorough trade-off study specifies the assumptions, variables, and confidence intervals of the results.

Systems Principles of System Analysis

From the discussions above, the following general principlesprinciples of systems analysis can be defined:

  • Systems analysis is an iterative activity consisting of trade studies made between various solution options from the systems synthesis activity.
  • Systems analysis uses assessment criteria based upon a problem or opportunity system description.
    • These criteria will be based around an ideal system description that assumes a hard systemhard system problem context can be defined.
    • The criteria must consider required system behavior and properties of the complete solution in all of the possible wider system contexts and environments.
    • Trade studies require equal consideration to the primary system and the enabling system working as a single system to address the user need. These studies need to consider system requirements for Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), systems safety, security, and affordability across the entire life cycle.
    • This ideal system description may be supported by soft systemsoft system descriptions from which additional “soft” criteria may be defined (e.g., a stakeholder preference for or against certain kinds of solutions and relevant social, political, or cultural conventions to be considered in the likely solution environment, etc.).
  • At a minimum, the assessment criteria should include the constraints on cost and time scales acceptable to stakeholders.
  • Trade studies provide a mechanism for conducting analysis of alternative solutions.
    • A trade study should consider a “system of assessment criteria,” designating special attention to the limitations and dependencies between individual criteria.
    • Trade studies need to deal with both objective and subjective criteria. Care must be taken to assess the sensitivity of the overall assessment to particular criteria.

References

Works Cited

Checkland, P.B. 1999. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

NASA. 2007. Systems Engineering Handbook, Revision 1. Washington, D.C., USA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). NASA/SP-2007-6105.

Primary References

ISO/IEC/IEEE. 2015. Systems and Software Engineering -- System Life Cycle Processes. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation/International Electrotechnical Commissions/Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2015.

Jackson, S., D. Hitchins and H. Eisner. 2010. "What is the systems approach?" INCOSE Insight, vol. 13, no. 1, April, pp. 41-43.

Additional References

None.


< Previous Article | Parent Article | Next Article >
SEBoK v. 2.9, released 20 November 2023