Pliability and Viable Systems: Maintaining Value Under Changing Conditions

As systems become more complex and have longer lifespans, they will likely encounter contextual variation or be themselves subject to change. Systems need to not only be feasible but viable as well. That is, they need to be able to continue to provide value in spite of any potential exogenous or endogenous changes. Viability has been defined for other domains, but it has not been defined for engineered systems. This paper defines what it means for an engineered system to be viable and shows that it is related to, but different from, other existing “-ilities” such as survivability and reliability. This paper also addresses the need to ensure that endogenous changes do not inadvertently cause unintended interactions that harm the system overall. A new -ility, i.e., pliability, is introduced, which specifies the limits on how a system can change, without “breaking” or violating an architecture that was intended and validated. Like changeability, pliability increases robustness by allowing systems to voluntarily change in response to dynamic contexts and increases survivability by increasing the likelihood that unintentional changes are still within the set of allowable architecture-defined instances. It also distinguishes allowable changes from those that would require additional validation, reducing the effort required to get those changes approved by a diverse set of stakeholders.

[1]  Paul Beynon-Davies,et al.  Human error and information systems failure: the case of the London ambulance service computer-aided despatch system project , 1999, Interact. Comput..

[2]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  Investigating Relationships and Semantic Sets amongst System Lifecycle Properties (Ilities) , 2012 .

[3]  Ron Westrum,et al.  A Typology of Resilience Situations , 2017 .

[4]  A. M. Ross,et al.  A taxonomy of perturbations: Determining the ways that systems lose value , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Systems Conference SysCon 2012.

[5]  D. Harrison,et al.  TIES, LEADERS, AND TIME IN TEAMS: STRONG INFERENCE ABOUT NETWORK STRUCTURE'S EFFECTS ON TEAM VIABILITY AND PERFORMANCE , 2006 .

[6]  Jay Clark Beesemyer Empirically characterizing evolvability and changeability in engineering systems , 2012 .

[7]  Nancy R. Mead,et al.  Survivable Network Systems: An Emerging Discipline , 1997 .

[8]  Arthur Dijkstra,et al.  Cybernetics and Resilience Engineering: Can Cybernetics and the Viable System Model Advance Resilience Engineering? , 2007 .

[9]  David Woods,et al.  Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts , 2006 .

[10]  L. Gerber,et al.  Population Viability Analysis: Origins and Contributions , 2010 .

[11]  Scott Jackson,et al.  Architecting Resilient Systems: Accident Avoidance and Survival and Recovery from Disruptions , 2008 .

[12]  Ronald E. McGaughey Internet technology: contributing to agility in the twenty‐first century , 1999 .

[13]  Richard de Neufville,et al.  Flexibility in Engineering Design , 2011 .

[14]  Sarah A. Sheard,et al.  11.2.2 A Framework for System Resilience Discussions , 2008 .

[15]  W. Ross Ashby,et al.  Principles of the Self-Organizing System , 1991 .

[16]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Defining changeability: Reconciling flexibility, adaptability, scalability, modifiability, and robustness for maintaining system lifecycle value , 2008 .

[17]  John Downer,et al.  When failure is an option: redundancy, reliability and regulation in complex technical systems , 2009 .

[18]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of System Changes to Frame Links between Design Decisions and Ilities , 2012, CSER.

[19]  姜哲,et al.  韧性(Resilience)的概念分析 , 2008 .

[20]  Julio M. Ottino,et al.  Cascading failure and robustness in metabolic networks , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  Mark Dowson,et al.  The Ariane 5 software failure , 1997, SOEN.

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

[23]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  7.1.1 Survivability Design Principles for Enhanced Concept Generation and Evaluation , 2009 .

[24]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Defining Survivability for Engineering Systems , 2007 .

[25]  Matthew T. Lee The Ford Pinto Case and the Development of Auto Safety Regulations, 1893-1978 , 1998 .

[26]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  Multi-attribute tradespace exploration for survivability , 2013 .

[27]  Brian Mekdeci,et al.  Managing the impact of change through survivability and pliability to achieve viable systems of systems , 2013 .

[28]  D.H. Rhodes,et al.  Architecting Systems for Value Robustness: Research Motivations and Progress , 2008, 2008 2nd Annual IEEE Systems Conference.

[29]  Stafford Beer,et al.  The Viable System Model : its provenance , development , methodology and pathology * Stafford Beer = President of the World Organization for Systems and Cybernetics , 2000 .

[30]  Jeffrey M. Alden,et al.  Agile manufacturing systems in the automotive industry , 2004 .

[31]  Yash P. Gupta,et al.  Flexibility of manufacturing systems: Concepts and measurements , 1989 .

[32]  Warren P. Seering,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF ARCHITECTURE IN ENGINEERING SYSTEMS , 2004 .

[33]  Genichi Taguchi,et al.  Taguchi on Robust Technology Development , 1992 .

[34]  Hugh McManus,et al.  A framework for understanding uncertainty and its mitigation and exploitation in complex systems , 2006, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[35]  Bashar Nuseibeh Ariane 5: Who Dunnit? , 1997, IEEE Software.

[36]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[37]  K. L. Moore,et al.  Clinically Oriented Anatomy , 1985 .

[38]  Adam Michael Ross,et al.  Managing unarticulated value : changeability in multi-attribute tradespace exploration , 2006 .

[39]  Sarah Sheard Stevens A Framework for System Resilience Discussions , 2008 .

[40]  L. Johnson,et al.  Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems , 2006 .