IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v22y2019i1p80-94.html

Quantification of changeability level for engineering systems

Author

Listed:
  • Carl F. Rehn
  • Sigurd S. Pettersen
  • Jose J. Garcia
  • Per O. Brett
  • Stein O. Erikstad
  • Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett
  • Adam M. Ross
  • Donna H. Rhodes

Abstract

This paper outlines a generic method for quantifying changeability level, to support better decision making in the early stages of design of engineering systems. Changeability represents the ability of a system to change form, function, or operation, and is a collective term for characteristics such as flexibility, adaptability, and agility. Quantification of changeability level must not be confused with valuation of changeability. The level of changeability in a design is essentially under the control of the designer. Two aspects of changeability are discussed, the first being how to structure changeable design alternatives using the Design for Changeability (DFC) variable. The DFC variable represents combinations of path enablers built into a design. Path enablers are characteristics of systems enabling them to change more easily. The second aspect is to quantify the level of changeability for a given design alternative, based on change cost and time. For the latter, we propose two measures for quantification: (1) bottom‐up, measuring the reduction of cost and time enabled for each relevant change, and (2) top‐down, measuring the span of change opportunities at given cost and time thresholds. A case study of a ship is presented to demonstrate the proposed generic method.

Suggested Citation

  • Carl F. Rehn & Sigurd S. Pettersen & Jose J. Garcia & Per O. Brett & Stein O. Erikstad & Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett & Adam M. Ross & Donna H. Rhodes, 2019. "Quantification of changeability level for engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 80-94, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:22:y:2019:i:1:p:80-94
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21472
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21472
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21472?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. Eppinger, Steven D. & Browning, Tyson R., 2012. "Design Structure Matrix Methods and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262017520, December.
    2. Donald Gerwin, 1993. "Manufacturing Flexibility: A Strategic Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 395-410, April.
    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. Alfnes, Erlend & Gosling, Jonathan & Naim, Mohamed & Dreyer, Heidi C., 2023. "Rearticulating supply chain design and operation principles to mitigate uncertainty in the Norwegian engineer-to-order shipbuilding sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).

    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. Uwe Beyer & Oliver Ullrich, 2022. "Organizational Complexity as a Contributing Factor to Underperformance," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Malen, Joel, 2015. "Motivating And Enabling Firm Innovation Effort: Integrating Penrosian And Behavioral Theory Perspectives On Slack Resources," Hitotsubashi Journal of commerce and management, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 49(1), pages 37-54, October.
    3. Yang, L. & Ng, C.T. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2011. "Optimal production strategy under demand fluctuations: Technology versus capacity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 393-402, October.
    4. Astrid Jung, 2001. "Are Product Innovation and Flexible Technology Complements?," CIG Working Papers FS IV 01-07, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG), revised Feb 2003.
    5. Morgan Dwyer & Bruce Cameron & Zoe Szajnfarber, 2015. "A Framework for Studying Cost Growth on Complex Acquisition Programs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 568-583, November.
    6. Enrico Teich & Thorsten Claus, 2017. "Measurement of Load and Capacity Flexibility in Manufacturing," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 18(4), pages 291-302, December.
    7. Mohammad Hossein Azin & Hessam Zandhessami, 2025. "Strategic Alignment Patterns in National AI Policies," Papers 2507.05400, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2025.
    8. Pedota, Mattia & Cicala, Francesco & Basti, Alessio, 2025. "Human agents, generative AI, and innovation: A formal model of hybrid creative process," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    9. Moshfique Uddin & Anup Chowdhury & Geoffrey Wood, 2022. "The resilience of the British and European goods industry: Challenge of Brexit," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 934-954.
    10. Robert Schmidt & Kasper Sanchez Vibaek & Simon Austin, 2014. "Evaluating the adaptability of an industrialized building using dependency structure matrices," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1-2), pages 160-182, February.
    11. Kaushik Sinha & Seok‐Youn Han & Eun Suk Suh, 2020. "Design structure matrix‐based modularization approach for complex systems with multiple design constraints," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 211-220, March.
    12. Hallgren, Mattias & Olhager, Jan, 2009. "Flexibility configurations: Empirical analysis of volume and product mix flexibility," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 746-756, August.
    13. Thomé, Antonio Márcio T. & Scavarda, Luiz Felipe & Pires, Sílvio R.I. & Ceryno, Paula & Klingebiel, Katja, 2014. "A multi-tier study on supply chain flexibility in the automotive industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 91-105.
    14. Uras, R.B. & Wang, P., 2014. "Techniques Choice, Misallocation and Total Factor Productivity," Other publications TiSEM 5a3d8436-c929-49f3-a990-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Morad, Lemtaoui & Houssam, Rochdi Mohamed, 2019. "Supply Chain Flexibility and Financial Performance "Morocco Case Study"," 7th International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship: Embracing Diversity in Organisations (Dubrovnik, 2019), in: 7th International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship: Embracing Diversity in Organisations. April 5th - 6th, 2019, Dubrovn, pages 86-97, Governance Research and Development Centre (CIRU), Zagreb.
    16. Juntao Zhang & Cecilia Haskins & Yiliu Liu & Mary Ann Lundteigen, 2018. "A systems engineering–based approach for framing reliability, availability, and maintainability: A case study for subsea design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(6), pages 576-592, November.
    17. Nazarizadeh, Farzaneh & Alemtabriz, Akbar & Zandieh, Mostafa & Raad, Abbas, 2022. "An analytical model for reliability assessment of the rail system considering dependent failures (case study of Iranian railway)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    18. Khraisha, Tamer, 2020. "Complex economic problems and fitness landscapes: Assessment and methodological perspectives," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 390-407.
    19. Andreas Poller, 2020. "Exploring and managing the complexity of large infrastructure projects with network theory and model‐based systems engineering—The example of radioactive waste disposal," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 443-459, July.
    20. Lin, Jun & Qian, Yanjun & Cui, Wentian & Goh, Thong Ngee, 2015. "An effective approach for scheduling coupled activities in development projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 97-108.

    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:22:y:2019:i:1:p:80-94. 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.