Modularity as an enabler for evolutionary acquisition

The end of the cold war witnessed several significant changes in the defense acquisition environment. Budgets declined and the scope of missions expanded. At first, the DoD did not respond well to these pressures resulting in cost overruns and schedule delays becoming the norm. In an effort to change this situation, national security officials decided to fundamentally change the way systems were acquired, shifting the focus to systems that could evolve/adapt to changing resources and needs. To operationalize this shift they recommended implementing an evolutionary acquisition strategy using a spiral development process. The fundamental characteristic of the evolutionary acquisition strategy is a focus on delivering a minimum capability early and then building upon that capability as risks are resolved. This imposes requirements on the acquisition process and the system architecture. From a process perspective, since needs and resources are changing over time, involving all relevant stakeholders is key to successful evolutionary acquisition. Since the objective was to prevent cost overruns and schedule slips, understanding and mitigating key risks is central. From an architectural perspective, the ability to update the system to allow for enhanced capability is important. The MATE-CON process can be used to satisfy the process related requirements of evolutionary acquisition. MATE-CON uses a multi-attribute utility theory to capture the diverse and changing needs of decision makers. Then tradespace exploration is used fully reveal the impact of design decision on decision maker perceived value. By representing both value and expense in terms of metrics that all stakeholders can understand, MATE-CON facilitates effective collaboration between stakeholders. A modular architecture provides the architectural flexibility required when using evolutionary acquisition. By separating system components into a few decoupled

[1]  Darian W. Unger Product development process design : improving development response to market, technical, and regulatory risks , 2003 .

[2]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Design Rules: The Power of Modularity , 2000 .

[3]  Nathan P. Diller,et al.  Utilizing Multiple Attribute Tradespace Exploration with Concurrent Design for creating aerospace systems requirements , 2002 .

[4]  Daniel E. Whitney,et al.  PHYSICAL LIMITS TO MODULARITY , 2002 .

[5]  E. Rechtin,et al.  The art of systems architecting , 1996, IEEE Spectrum.

[6]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[7]  Richard de Neufville,et al.  Applied systems analysis , 1990 .

[8]  Hans Peters,et al.  The Zero-Condition: a Simplifying Assumption in Qaly Measurement and Multiattribute Utility , 1998 .

[9]  Christopher J. Roberts,et al.  Architecting Evolutionary Strategies Using Spiral Development for Space Based Radar , 2004 .

[10]  Jason Edward Derleth,et al.  Multi-attribute tradespace exploration and its application to evolutionary acquisition , 2003 .

[11]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Catching the Wave: A Unique Opportunity for the Development of an On-Orbit Satellite Servicing Infrastructure , 2004 .

[12]  Jan-Albert Koekemoer,et al.  THE SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING PAYLOADS AND EXPERIMENTS ON SUNSAT , 1997 .

[13]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[14]  Timothy J. Spaulding,et al.  Tools for evolutionary acquisition : a study of Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration (MATE) applied to the Space Based Radar (SBR) , 2003 .

[15]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Spiral Development: Experience, Principles, and Refinements , 2000 .

[16]  Adam Michael Ross,et al.  Multi-attribute tradespace exploration with concurrent design as a value-centric framework for space system architecture and design , 2003 .

[17]  Bobak Ferdowsi Product Development Strategies in Evolutionary Acquisition , 2003 .

[18]  Amar Gupta,et al.  A Knowledge Based Approach to Facilitate Enginering Design , 2004 .