IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v14y2011i3p279-293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A probabilistic approach to system maturity assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Weiping Tan
  • Jose Ramirez‐Marquez
  • Brian Sauser

Abstract

Prescriptive metrics have been widely accepted and used in engineering management to assess the progress and success of engineering efforts. However, these types of metrics have two major challenges: human subjectivity and confidence in data estimates. In this paper we use a system‐focused prescriptive metric entitled System Readiness Level (SRL) [a function of Technology and Integration Readiness Levels (TRL/IRL)], to propose a probabilistic approach to estimating the development maturity of a system of interest. In order to reduce the subjective impact, we propose a probabilistic method by assigning probability distributions to the estimated TRLs and IRLs to reflect the reality of evaluators' subjective estimates. Based on these probability distributions of TRLs and IRLs, a Monte‐Carlo simulation methodology is used to assess the maturity status of the whole system and its components. An illustrative example is examined to show the proposed methodology and to investigate its implication to engineering management. The paper concludes with a discussion of the added value of this new methodology, its limitation, and future work. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 14

Suggested Citation

  • Weiping Tan & Jose Ramirez‐Marquez & Brian Sauser, 2011. "A probabilistic approach to system maturity assessment," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 279-293, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:14:y:2011:i:3:p:279-293
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.20179
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20179
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.20179?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. Roland W. Scholz & Ralf Hansmann, 2007. "Combining Experts' Risk Judgments on Technology Performance of Phytoremediation: Self‐Confidence Ratings, Averaging Procedures, and Formative Consensus Building," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 225-240, February.
    2. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael J. Pennock, 2015. "Defense Acquisition: A Tragedy of the Commons," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 349-364, July.
    2. Klessova, Svetlana & Engell, Sebastian & Thomas, Catherine, 2022. "Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    3. Wanda Peters & Steven Doskey & James Moreland, 2017. "Technology Maturity Assessments and Confidence Intervals," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 188-204, March.
    4. Svetlana Klessova & Sebastian Engell & Catherine Thomas, 2022. "Assessment of the advancement of market-upstream innovations and of the performance of research and innovation projects," Post-Print hal-03636260, HAL.

    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. Marcos Singer & Patricio Donoso & Natalia Jadue, 2004. "Evaluacion De Las Oportunidades De Mejoramiento De La Logistica Directa De Emergencia," Abante, Escuela de Administracion. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 7(2), pages 179-209.
    2. Wang, Xiaojun & Chan, Hing Kai & Li, Dong, 2015. "A case study of an integrated fuzzy methodology for green product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(1), pages 212-223.
    3. Han Bleichrodt & Jose Maria Abellan-Perpiñan & Jose Luis Pinto-Prades & Ildefonso Mendez-Martinez, 2007. "Resolving Inconsistencies in Utility Measurement Under Risk: Tests of Generalizations of Expected Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 469-482, March.
    4. Steven M. Shugan, 2005. "Comments on Competitive Responsiveness," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 3-7.
    5. Luiz E. Brandão & James S. Dyer & Warren J. Hahn, 2005. "Using Binomial Decision Trees to Solve Real-Option Valuation Problems," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 69-88, June.
    6. Kevin Kam Fung Yuen, 2022. "Decision models for information systems planning using primitive cognitive network process: comparisons with analytic hierarchy process," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1759-1785, July.
    7. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    8. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    9. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Tonoli, Fabio, 2014. "Decision-network polynomials and the sensitivity of decision-support models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 490-503.
    10. Kułakowski, Konrad, 2015. "Notes on order preservation and consistency in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(1), pages 333-337.
    11. Enrico Diecidue & Dolchai La-ornual, 2009. "Reconciling support theory and the book-making principle," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 173-190, June.
    12. James S. Dyer & James E. Smith, 2021. "Innovations in the Science and Practice of Decision Analysis: The Role of Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5364-5378, September.
    13. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, 2015. "Overcoming Learning Aversion in Evaluating and Managing Uncertain Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1892-1910, October.
    14. Christoph Werner & Tim Bedford & John Quigley, 2018. "Sequential Refined Partitioning for Probabilistic Dependence Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2683-2702, December.
    15. Akamatsu, Takashi & Nagae, Takeshi, 2011. "A network of options: Evaluating complex interdependent decisions under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 714-729, May.
    16. Michele Bernasconi & Christine Choirat & Raffaello Seri, 2010. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Theory of Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 699-711, April.
    17. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    18. Merigó, José M. & Yang, Jian-Bo, 2017. "A bibliometric analysis of operations research and management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-48.
    19. Beccacece, Francesca & Borgonovo, Emanuele & Buzzard, Greg & Cillo, Alessandra & Zionts, Stanley, 2015. "Elicitation of multiattribute value functions through high dimensional model representations: Monotonicity and interactions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 517-527.
    20. Wisse, Bram & Bedford, Tim & Quigley, John, 2008. "Expert judgement combination using moment methods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(5), pages 675-686.

    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:14:y:2011:i:3:p:279-293. 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.