By Topic

Analyzing Component Importance in Multifunction Multicapability Systems Developmental Maturity Assessment

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Weiping Tan ; Systems Development and Maturity Laboratory, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, USA ; Brian J. Sauser ; Jose Emmanuel Ramirez-Marquez

Recently, a system maturity scale, i.e., system readiness level (SRL), was proposed to measure the maturity that a system achieves during development. However, this SRL assesses maturity for systems from only a single function and capability perspective, and is unable to assess maturity for multifunction multicapability (MFMC) systems. With ever increasing systems that provide multiple functions and capabilities, it is challenging for managers to properly allocate resources to ensure the achievement of critical capabilities and functions. In order to prioritize the allocation of resources for component development, it is common to perform importance analysis during system development and maintenance. Therefore, this paper first enhances the original SRL definition for maturity assessment at the capability, function, and system levels, and then, proposes the use of component importance analysis for the identification of the most important components for system development. This paper approaches component importance by introducing three important measures with respects to three main factors: technology readiness level/integration readiness level, developing cost, and developing effort. The paper uses an illustrative example of a MFMC system to show the proposed methodology and enhanced definitions and concludes with a discussion of the added value and future work.

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management  (Volume:58 ,  Issue: 2 )