> Merkliste Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
Medientyp: E-Artikel Titel: Theoretical framework for the continuous early validation (CEaVa) method Beteiligte: Larsen, Robert F.; Buede, Dennis M. Erschienen: Wiley, 2002 Erschienen in: Systems Engineering Sprache: Englisch DOI: 10.1002/sys.10022 ISSN: 1098-1241; 1520-6858 Schlagwörter: Computer Networks and Communications ; Hardware and Architecture Entstehung: Anmerkungen: Beschreibung: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Systems being developed today make extensive and complex use of advanced technology. Many, if not most, of these systems are being produced but are not used or useful on delivery because the wrong problem was solved. A major cause for this shortfall in system development is due to changes in the operational environment of the intended system while the development process is ongoing. Significant sections of the literature discuss the need to get stakeholders involved earlier in the development process to correct this problem. However, no one has developed a detailed framework that accomplishes this intent. This paper defines a method involving a four‐step sequence that validates the entire system design process early and continuously to ensure that the right problem is being solved. The method is called Continuous Early Validation (CEaVa). It is a method that increases the likelihood of producing the correct system. The method develops visibility of potential disconnects among stakeholders' needs, original written requirements, organizational policy, and derived requirements. The CEaVa method validates the external and internal consistency of the problem statement. Additionally, CEaVa facilitates consensus on trade offs and priorities, resolving the potential disconnects with decision analytical reasoning for trade‐off analysis. The CEaVa method improves the development process and ultimately the system itself by increasing the likelihood of building the right system within budget and schedule. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 5: 223–241, 2002</jats:p>