Engineering method and tools for capability-based families of systems planning

• US 20060293933A1
• Filed: 05/09/2006
• Published: 12/28/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 06/22/2005
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: BAE Systems Information and Electronic Systems Integration Incorporated (BAE Systems Plc)
• Original Assignee: BAE Systems National Security Solutions Incorporated (BAE Systems Plc)
• Inventors: Kim, George, Lancaster, Jacqueline Owens, Shaw, Kevin Reed, Millhouse, Paul Tyson, Dickerson, Charles Everett
• Application Number:
  US11/430,176
• Publication Number:
  US 20060293933A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/7.27
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/063 Operations research, analysis or management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0633 Workflow analysis
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0635 Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06375 Prediction of business process outcome or impact based on a proposed change
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0639 Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
• CPC Class Codes: G09B 19/18 Book-keeping or economics

Abstract

A method of enhancing capabilities is provided. A family of systems capability and operational analysis is conducted to generate a set of operationally decomposed capability needs. Further, a family of systems functional analysis and allocation is conducted on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs to determine a set of deficiencies. In addition, a family of systems design synthesis is conducted on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs, a set of existing solutions, and a set of emerging solutions to identify and describe an optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions to satisfy the set of operationally decomposed capability needs. Further, the optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is generated from the family of systems design synthesis.

Claims

1. A method of enhancing capabilities, comprising:

conducting family of systems capability and operational analysis that generates a set of operationally decomposed capability needs;

conducting family of systems functional analysis and allocation on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs to determine a set of deficiencies;

conducting family of systems design synthesis on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs, a set of existing solutions, and a set of emerging solutions to identify and describe an optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions to satisfy the set of operationally decomposed capability needs; and

generating the optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions from the family of systems design synthesis.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein each of the operationally decomposed capability needs in the set of operationally decomposed capability needs includes an activity sequence.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the activity sequence includes a plurality of activities.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein the activity sequence includes information that is exchanged between activities in the plurality of activities.

5. The method of claim 3, wherein each of the activities includes a function sequence.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein the function sequence includes a plurality of functions.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the function sequence includes information that is exchanged between functions in the plurality of functions.

8. The method of claim 6, wherein the family of systems functional analysis and allocation includes an assessment of each of the functions to determine which, if any, of the existing solutions can provide the function.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein the family of systems functional analysis and allocation includes an assessment of interoperability for each of the existing solutions with the remaining existing solutions in the set of existing solutions.

10. The method of claim 8, wherein for each of the functions the family of systems design synthesis determines which, if any, of the emerging solutions can provide the function.

11. The method of claim 8, wherein the family of systems design synthesis includes an assessment of interoperability of each of the emerging solutions with the remaining solutions in the set of emerging solutions and with the existing solutions in the set of existing solutions.

12. The method of claim 11, further comprising composing a plurality of integrated solution sets, wherein each of the plurality of integrated solutions sets includes, for each function, one of the emerging solutions or one of the existing solutions that can each respectively provide the function.

13. The method of claim 12, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the plurality of integrated solutions sets based on a set of criteria.

14. The method of claim 13, wherein the criteria is based on a level of performance that is measured according to a capability metric.

15. The method of claim 13, wherein the criteria is based on a cost.

16. The method of claim 13, wherein the criteria is based on a risk assessment.

17. The method of claim 13, wherein the criteria is based on an implementation schedule.

18. The method of claim 11, further comprising composing a plurality of integrated solution sets, wherein each of the plurality of integrated solutions sets includes, for each function, at least one of the emerging solutions or at least one of the existing solutions that can each respectively provide the function.

19. The method of claim 18, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the plurality of integrated solutions sets based on a set of criteria.

20. The method of claim 19, wherein the criteria is based on a level of performance that is measured according to a capability metric.

21. The method of claim 19, wherein the criteria is based on a cost.

22. The method of claim 19, wherein the criteria is based on a risk assessment.

23. The method of claim 19, wherein the criteria is based on an implementation schedule.

24. The method of claim 11, further comprising composing a plurality of integrated solution sets, wherein each of the plurality of integrated solutions sets includes, for each function, at least one of the emerging solutions, at least one of the existing solutions, or at least one of the emerging solutions and at least one of the existing solutions that can each respectively provide the function.

25. The method of claim 24, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the plurality of integrated solutions sets based on a set of criteria.

26. The method of claim 25, wherein the criteria is based on a level of performance that is measured according to a capability metric.

27. The method of claim 25, wherein the criteria is based on a cost.

28. The method of claim 25, wherein the criteria is based on a risk assessment.

29. The method of claim 25, wherein the criteria is based on an implementation schedule.

30. The method of claim 24, further comprising selecting a subset of the plurality of integrated solutions sets according to a first order analysis.

31. The method of claim 30, wherein the first order analysis includes a performance determination, for each integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solutions sets, of whether each of a plurality of functionality thresholds is met by at least one solution in the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets.

32. The method of claim 31, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is filtered out if each of the plurality of functionality thresholds is not met by at least one solution in the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets.

33. The method of claim 31, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for a composite functionality score analysis if each of the plurality of functionality thresholds is met by at least one solution in the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets.

34. The method of claim 33, wherein the composite functionality score analysis includes a calculation of a plurality of function scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets that are retained for the composite functionality score analysis, wherein each of the function scores in the plurality of function scores is determined according to one or more solutions in the integrated solution set that best satisfy the function associated with the function score.

35. The method of claim 34, wherein the calculation of the plurality of function scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is a sum of the plurality of function scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets.

36. The method of claim 34, wherein the calculation of the plurality of function scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is a ratio of a sum of the plurality of function scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets to a sum of a plurality of maximum function scores.

37. The method of claim 34, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for a composite interoperability score analysis if an outcome of the calculation of the plurality of function scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is above a composite functionality score threshold.

38. The method of claim 37, wherein the composite interoperability score analysis is performed for each integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets that are retained for the composite interoperability score analysis.

39. The method of claim 38, wherein the composite interoperability score analysis includes a determination of function interactions between the plurality of functions in each function sequence in the plurality of activities in each activity sequence in each capability need from the set of operationally decomposed capability needs.

40. The method of claim of 39, wherein the composite interoperability score analysis includes a calculation of a plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets that are retained for the composite interoperability score analysis, wherein each of the interoperability scores in the plurality of interoperability scores is determined according to a measure of the ability of the one or more solutions that best satisfies the function corresponding to the function score to interoperate with each of one or more solutions that best satisfies the function corresponding to the function score for one or more functions for which there is a function interaction.

41. The method of claim 40, wherein the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is a sum of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets.

42. The method of claim 40, wherein the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is a ratio of a sum of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets to a sum of a plurality of maximum interoperability scores.

43. The method of claim 40, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for a cost analysis if an outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is above a composite interoperability score threshold.

44. The method of claim 43, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is selected for the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets according to a cost-benefit optimization analysis.

45. The method of claim 44, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores, the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores, and an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range.

46. The method of claim 44, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores and the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores.

47. The method of claim 44, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores and an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range.

48. The method of claim 44, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores and an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range.

49. The method of claim 44, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range.

50. The method of claim 40, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for a risk analysis if an outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is above a composite interoperability score threshold.

51. The method of claim 50, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is selected for the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets according to a risk-benefit optimization analysis.

52. The method of claim 51, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores, the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores, and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

53. The method of claim 51, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

54. The method of claim 51, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

55. The method of claim 51, wherein the optimization analysis includes a determination of whether an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

56. The method of claim 40, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for a cost analysis and a risk analysis if an outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is above a composite interoperability score threshold.

57. The method of claim 56, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is selected for the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets according to a cost-risk-benefit optimization analysis.

58. The method of claim 57, wherein the cost-risk-benefit optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores, the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores, an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range, and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

59. The method of claim 57, wherein the cost-risk-benefit optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of functionality scores, and an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range, and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

60. The method of claim 57, wherein the cost-risk-benefit optimization analysis includes a determination of whether the outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores is within a range of outcomes of calculations of the plurality of interoperability scores, an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range, and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

61. The method of claim 57, wherein the cost-risk-benefit optimization analysis includes a determination of whether an outcome of the cost analysis is within a cost range and an outcome of the risk analysis is within a risk range.

62. The method of claim 40, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for an interoperability analysis if an outcome of the calculation of the plurality of interoperability scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is above a composite interoperability score threshold.

63. The method of claim 62, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is selected for the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets according to an interoperability optimization analysis.

64. The method of claim 34, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is retained for a functionality analysis if an outcome of the calculation of the plurality of functionality scores for the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is above a composite functionality score threshold.

65. The method of claim 64, wherein the integrated solution set in the plurality of integrated solution sets is selected for the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets according to a functionality optimization analysis.

66. The method of claim 30, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets according to a second order optimization analysis.

67. The method of claim 66, wherein the second order optimization analysis includes a determination as to whether each of the integrated solution sets in the subset of the plurality of integrated solutions sets satisfies one or more ranges of second order criteria.

68. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics.

69. The method of claim 68, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

70. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics and a second order cost.

71. The method of claim 70, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one Or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

72. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics, a second order cost, and a second order risk.

73. The method of claim 72, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

74. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics, a second order cost, a second order risk, and an implementation schedule.

75. The method of claim 74, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

76. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics, a second order risk, and an implementation schedule.

77. The method of claim 76, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

78. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics, a second order cost, and an implementation schedule.

79. The method of claim 78, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

80. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics and an implementation schedule.

81. The method of claim 80, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

82. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a level of performance that is measured according to one or more capability metrics and a second order risk.

83. The method of claim 82, wherein the level of performance is determined by utilizing a simulation on each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets to estimate the one or more capability metrics for each integrated solution set in the subset of the plurality of integrated solution sets performing the function sequences and activity sequences in the operationally decomposed capability needs.

84. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a second order cost, a second order risk, and an implementation schedule.

85. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a second order cost and a second order risk.

86. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a second order cost and an implementation schedule.

87. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a second order cost.

88. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a second order risk and an implementation schedule.

89. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include a second order risk.

90. The method of claim 67, wherein the one or more ranges of second order criteria include an implementation schedule.

91. The method of claim 1, wherein each of the operationally decomposed capability needs in the set of operationally decomposed capability needs includes a plurality of potential activity sequences.

92. The method of claim 91, wherein each of the plurality of potential activity sequences includes a plurality of potential function sequences.

93. The method of claim 92, wherein the optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from a plurality of optimal integrated solution sets that best satisfy each of the plurality of potential function sequences in each of the plurality of potential activity sequences.

94. A method of enhancing capabilities, comprising:

conducting family of systems capability and operational analysis that generates a set of operationally decomposed capability needs;

conducting family of systems functional analysis and allocation on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs to determine a set of deficiencies;

conducting family of systems design synthesis on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs, a set of existing solutions, and a set of emerging solutions;

creating a plot from the family of systems design synthesis that illustrates one or more desirable integrated solution sets of existing solutions and emerging solutions; and

determining an optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions, from the plot, to satisfy the set of operationally decomposed capability needs.

95. (canceled)

96. (canceled)

97. (canceled)

98. (canceled)

99. (canceled)

100. (canceled)

101. (canceled)

103. The method of claim 101, wherein for each of the functions, the family of systems functional analysis and allocation determines which, if any, of the emerging solutions can provide the function.

102. (canceled)

104. (canceled)

105. The method of claim 104, further comprising composing a plurality of integrated solution sets, wherein each of the plurality of integrated solutions sets includes one of the emerging solutions or one of the existing solutions that can provide each function.

106. The method of claim 105, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the plurality of integrated solutions sets based on the plot.

107. The method of claim 105, wherein a subset of integrated solutions sets is selected from the plurality of integrate solutions set according to a first order analysis of the plot.

108. The method of claim 107, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the subset according to a second order optimization analysis.

109. A method of enhancing capabilities, comprising:

conducting family of systems capability and operational analysis that generates a set of operationally decomposed capability needs;

conducting family of systems functional analysis and allocation on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs to determine a set of deficiencies;

conducting family of systems design synthesis on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs, a set of existing solutions, and a set of emerging solutions;

creating a matrix from the family of systems design synthesis that illustrates one or more desirable integrated solution sets of existing solutions and emerging solutions; and

determining an optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions, from the matrix, to satisfy the set of operationally decomposed capability needs.

110. (canceled)

111. (canceled)

112. (canceled)

113. (canceled)

114. (canceled)

115. (canceled)

116. (canceled)

118. The method of claim 116, wherein for each of the functions, the family of systems design synthesis determines which, if any, of the emerging solutions can provide the function.

117. (canceled)

119. (canceled)

120. The method of claim 119, further comprising composing a plurality of integrated solution sets, wherein each of the plurality of integrated solutions sets includes one of the emerging solutions or one of the existing solutions that can provide each function.

121. The method of claim 120, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the plurality of integrated solutions sets based on the matrix.

122. The method of claim 120, wherein a subset of integrated solutions sets is selected from the plurality of integrate solutions set according to a first order analysis of the matrix.

123. The method of claim 122, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the subset according to a second order optimization analysis.

124. A method of enhancing capabilities, comprising:

creating an architecture model of an operating environment;

conducting family of systems capability and operational analysis on data from the architecture model using simulation and analysis to generate a set of operationally decomposed capability needs;

conducting family of systems functional analysis and allocation on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs and data from the architecture model using simulation and analysis to determine a set of deficiencies;

conducting family of systems design synthesis on the set of operationally decomposed capability needs, a set of existing solutions, a set of emerging solutions, and data from the architecture model using simulation and analysis to identify and describe an optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions to satisfy the set of operationally decomposed capability needs; and

generating the optimal integrated solution set of existing solutions and emerging solutions from the family of systems design synthesis.

125. (canceled)

126. (canceled)

127. (canceled)

128. (canceled)

129. (canceled)

130. (canceled)

131. (canceled)

133. The method of claim 131, wherein for each of the functions, the family of systems design synthesis determines which, if any, of the emerging solutions can provide the function.

132. (canceled)

134. (canceled)

135. The method of claim 134, further comprising composing a plurality of integrated solution sets, wherein each of the plurality of integrated solutions sets includes one of the emerging solutions or one of the existing solutions that can provide each function.

136. The method of claim 135, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the plurality of integrated solutions sets based on a set of criteria.

137. The method of claim 135, wherein a subset of integrated solutions sets is selected from the plurality of integrate solutions set according to a first order analysis.

138. The method of claim 137, wherein the optimal integrated solutions set of existing solutions and emerging solutions is selected from the subset according to a second order optimization analysis.