IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v21y2018i5p455-465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Software obsolescence risk assessment approach using multicriteria decision‐making

Author

Listed:
  • Ted F. Bowlds
  • John M. Fossaceca
  • Ronald Iammartino

Abstract

System obsolescence issues are a routine occurrence, especially for systems with a high utilization of commercial electronic components or software applications with a long operational life. The extended length of a system's development can often result in obsolescence well before system production and fielding begins. Obsolescence affects individual electronic components and availability of materials, as well as access to experienced personnel, processes, and software. Legacy application software obsolescence is influenced by multiple factors. Included in these factors are hardware obsolescence, increased software maintenance, commercial off‐the‐shelf software obsolescence, growth in technical debt, growth in complexity, and a lack of embedded business rule documentation. These criteria influence subjective management decisions in the remediation of current or future obsolescence risk. A multicriteria decision‐making (MCDM) approach is proposed to evaluate the impact of multiple obsolescence elements over the life cycle of a software application with consideration for the knowledge, preference, and subjectivity of experts to better inform the risk assessment and timing of future mitigation strategies. The resulting MCDM score provides a break point for a quantifiable increase in obsolescence risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Ted F. Bowlds & John M. Fossaceca & Ronald Iammartino, 2018. "Software obsolescence risk assessment approach using multicriteria decision‐making," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 455-465, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:21:y:2018:i:5:p:455-465
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21446
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21446
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21446?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernest H. Forman & Saul I. Gass, 2001. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---An Exposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 469-486, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    2. Sandra E. Strasser & Ceyhun Ozgur & David L. Schroeder, 2002. "Selecting a Business College Major: An Analysis of Criteria and Choice Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 17(2), pages 47-56.
    3. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Pei Li, 2016. "The New Product Online Evaluation by Expert Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process Method," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 265-265, August.
    5. Khameis Al Abdouli & Khalid Hussein & Dawit Ghebreyesus & Hatim O. Sharif, 2019. "Coastal Runoff in the United Arab Emirates—The Hazard and Opportunity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Joaquín Pérez, José L. Jimeno, Ethel Mokotoff, 2001. "Another potential strong shortcoming of AHP," Doctorado en Economía- documentos de trabajo 8/02, Programa de doctorado en Economía. Universidad de Alcalá., revised 01 Jun 2002.
    7. Tomasz Witold Trojanowski & Pawel Tadeusz Kazibudzki, 2021. "Prospects and Constraints of Sustainable Marketing Mix Development for Poland’s High-Energy Consumer Goods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Koray Altintas & Ozalp Vayvay & Sinan Apak & Emine Cobanoglu, 2020. "An Extended GRA Method Integrated with Fuzzy AHP to Construct a Multidimensional Index for Ranking Overall Energy Sustainability Performances," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Shengyuan Liu & Fangbin Ye & Zhenzhi Lin & Jia Yang & Haigang Liu & Yinghe Lin & Haiwei Xie, 2019. "Comprehensive Quality Assessment Algorithm for Smart Meters," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Mansour Momeni & Behnaz Samimi & Mohammad Ali Afshari & Mohammad Hasan Maleki & Javad Mohammadi, 2011. "Selection Process of Supervisor for Doctoral Dissertation Using Analytical Network Process (ANP): An Iranian Study," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(2), pages 63-71, June.
    11. Vivek Sharma & Sandeep Grover & S. K. Sharma, 2020. "An integrated AHP-GTA approach for measuring effectiveness of quality tools and techniques," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 11(1), pages 54-63, February.
    12. Zsuzsanna Katalin Szabo & Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Gabriela C. Stănciulescu & Dalma Szabo, 2021. "An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach for Prioritisation of Strategic Objectives of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    13. Xue Ding & Mengling Qin & Linsen Yin & Dayong Lv & Yao Bai, 2023. "Research on FinTech Talent Evaluation Index System and Recruitment Strategy: Evidence From Shanghai in China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    14. Jifei Zhang & Shuai Zhang, 2022. "Assessing Integrated Effectiveness of Rural Socio-Economic Development and Environmental Protection of Wenchuan County in Southwestern China: An Approach Using Game Theory and VIKOR," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Ho, Hui-Ping & Chang, Ching-Ter & Ku, Cheng-Yuan, 2015. "House selection via the internet by considering homebuyers’ risk attitudes with S-shaped utility functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(1), pages 188-201.
    16. Jun Hu & Xuecai Xie & Xueming Shu & Shifei Shen & Xiaoyong Ni & Lei Zhang, 2022. "Fire Risk Assessments of Informal Settlements Based on Fire Risk Index and Bayesian Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-18, November.
    17. Fatima Lambarraa-Lehnhardt & Rico Ihle & Hajar Elyoubi, 2021. "How Successful Is Origin Labeling in a Developing Country Context? Moroccan Consumers’ Preferences toward Local Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-17, July.
    18. Moreno-Miranda, Carlos & Dries, Liesbeth, 2022. "Integrating coordination mechanisms in the sustainability assessment of agri-food chains: From a structured literature review to a comprehensive framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    20. Devesh Kumar & Gunjan Soni & Rohit Joshi & Vipul Jain & Amrik Sohal, 2022. "Modelling supply chain viability during COVID-19 disruption: A case of an Indian automobile manufacturing supply chain," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1224-1240, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:21:y:2018:i:5:p:455-465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.