Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing changeability under uncertain exogenous disturbance

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Research in Engineering Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper introduces metrics derived from application of a Markov decision process to evaluate a design’s changeability. Changeability is known to improve product performance if conscientious early-stage design decisions are matched with structured management of the system in response to exogenous disturbances—shifts which may be environmental, market, technological, and political in nature. Included in the paper is a brief discussion of changeability’s role in ensuring strategic product performance as well as a review of past metrics developed, highlighting the open design challenge to more fully capture the managerial and process dimensions inherent to changeability. The proposed metrics are featured in a case study related to the ballast water system of an ocean-going vessel. The result of such application is greater context for the value changeability offers and an improved understanding of the resources required to manage uncertainty over the product’s life cycle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bellman R (1957) Dynamic programming. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cardin M, Kolfschoten G, Frey D, Neufville R, de Weck O, Geltner D (2013) Empirical evaluation of procedures to generate flexibility in engineering systems and improve lifecycle performance. Res Eng Des 24(3):277–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper R, Edgett S, Kleinschmidt E (2004) New product portfolio management: practices and performance. J Prod Innov Manag 16:333–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CSLC (2010) Assessment of the efficacy, availability, and environmental impacts of ballast water treatment systems for use in California waters. California State Lands Commission, Sacramento

    Google Scholar 

  • De Neufville R, Scholtes S (2011) Flexibility in engineering design. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • De Weck O (2012) Life-cycle properties of engineering systems: the ilities. In: de Weck O, Roos D, Magee C (eds) Engineering systems: meeting human needs in a complex technological world. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 65–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert C, de Weck O, Keller R, Clarkson P (2009) Engineering change: drivers, sources, and approaches in industry. In: Proceedings of international conference on engineering design, Stanford, USA

  • Ferrell J, Klemperer P (2007) Coordination and lock-in: competition with switching costs and network effects. In: Armstrong M, Porter R (eds) Handbook of industrial organization, volume 3. North-Holland

  • Fitzgerald M, Ross A (2012) Mitigating contextual uncertainties with valuable changeability analysis in the multi-epoch domain. In: Proceedings of IEEE international system conference, Vancouver, Canada

  • Fitzgerald M, Ross A (2012) Sustaining lifecycle value: valuable changeability analysis with era simulation. In: Proceedings of IEEE international system conference, Vancouver, Canada

  • Fitzgerald M, Ross A, Rhodes D (2012) Assessing uncertain benefits: a valuation approach for strategic changeability (VASC). In: Proceedings of INCOSE international symposium, Rome, Italy

  • Frangopol D, Liu M (2007) Maintenance and management of civil infrastructure based on condition, safety, optimization, and life-cycle cost. Struct Infrastruct Eng 3(1):29–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fricke E, Schulz A (2005) Design for changeability: principles to enable changes in systems throughout their life cycle. Syst Eng 8:342–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson L, Holling C (2002) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopp W, Nair S (1991) Timing replacement decisions under discontinuous technological change. Nav Res Logist 38:203–220

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • LR (2007) Ballast water treatment technology. Lloyd’s Register, London

    Google Scholar 

  • LR (2010) Ballast water treatment technology. Lloyd’s Register, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Manola F (1999) Providing systemic properties (ilities) and quality of service in component-based systems. Object Services and Consulting, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin M, Ishii K (2002) Design for variety: developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures. Res Eng Des 13:213–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Melnyk S, Stewart D, Swink M (2004) Metrics and performance measurement in operations management: dealing with the metrics maze. J Op Manag 22:209–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg H (1990) The design school: reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strateg Manag J 11:171–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulcaster W (2009) Three strategic frameworks. Bus Strateg Series 10:68–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niese N (2012) Life cycle evaluation under uncertain environmental policies using a ship-centric Markov decision process framework. Dissertation, University of Michigan

  • Niese N, Singer D (2011) Life cycle decision-making under uncertain environmental policy using nonstationary Markov decision processes. In: Proceedings of international conference on computer applications in shipbuilding, Trieste, Italy

  • Payne J, Bettman J, Luce M (1996) When time is money: decision behavior under opportunity-cost time pressure. Org Behav Hum Decis Process 66:131–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puterman M (1994) Markov decision processes: discrete stochastic dynamic programming. Wiley, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts C, Richards M, Ross A, Rhodes D, Hastings D (2009) Scenario planning in dynamic multi-attribute tradespace exploration. In: Proceedings of IEEE system on conference, Vancouver, Canada

  • Ross A (2006) Managing unarticulated value: changeability in multi-attribute tradespace exploration. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  • Ross A, Hastings D (2006) Assessing changeability in aerospace systems architecting and design using dynamic multi-attribute tradespace exploration. In: Proceedings of AIAA Space, San Jose, CA

  • Ross A, Rhodes D (2008) Using natural value-centric time scales for conceptualizing system timelines through epoch–era analysis. INCOSE International symposium 2008, Utrecht, The Netherlands

  • Ross A, Rhodes D (2008) Architecting systems for value robustness: research motivations and progress. In: Proceedings of IEEE system on conference, Montreal, Canada

  • Ross A, Rhodes D, Hastings D (2008) Defining changeability: reconciling flexibility, adaptability, scalability, modifiability, and robustness for maintaining lifecycle value. Syst Eng 11:246–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz A, Fricke E, Igenbergs E (2000) Enabling changes in systems throughout the entire life cycle–key to success? In: Proceedings of INCOSE Conference, Minneapolis, MN

  • Silver M, de Weck O (2007) Time-expanded decision networks: a framework for designing evolvable complex systems. Syst Eng 10:167–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh A, Mourelatos Z, Li J (2010) Design for life cycle cost using time-dependent reliability. ASME J Mech Des 132:0910081–09100811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Son Y, Savage G (2005) Set theoretic formulation of performance reliability of multiple response time-variant systems due to degradations in system components. Qual Reliab Eng Int 23:171–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Styblinski M (1991) Formulation of the drift reliability optimization problem. Microelectron Reliab 31:159–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suh E, de Weck O, Chang D (2007) Flexible product platform: framework and case study. Res Eng Des 18:67–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan C, Hartman J (2011) Sensitivity analysis in Markov decision processes with uncertain reward parameters. J Appl Probab 4:954–967

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Trigeorgis L (1996) Real options: managerial flexibility and strategy in resource allocation. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiendahl H, Heger C (2004) Justifying changeability: a methodical approach to achieving cost effectiveness. J Manuf Sci Prod 6:33–40

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was made with Government support under and awarded by DoD, Office of Naval Research, National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship, 32 CFR 168a. The authors offer special thanks to Ms. Kelly Cooper, US Office of Naval Research, for her support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, 1075 Beal Avenue–Room 2274, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2112, USA

    Nathan D. Niese & David J. Singer

Authors
  1. Nathan D. Niese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David J. Singer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathan D. Niese.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Niese, N.D., Singer, D.J. Assessing changeability under uncertain exogenous disturbance. Res Eng Design 25, 241–258 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-014-0177-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-014-0177-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation