Revisiting future-proofing for large-scale acquisitions

References

• Andre, J. 2020. “Structural robustness: A revisit [Article].” Structural Engineering and Mechanics 76 (2): 193–205. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2020.76.2.193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashby, W. R. 1991. “Requisite Variety and Its Implications for the Control of Complex Systems.” In Facets of Systems Science, edited by G. J. Klir, 405–417. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Barbato, A., A. Bonvicini, and G. Cetena. 2015. “Predicting Life Cycle Cost of a Modular Frigates Fleet.” In NAV 2015 18th International Conference on Ships and Shipping Research, Lecco, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Beer, S. 1984. “The Viable System Model: Its Provenance, Development, Methodology and Pathology.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 35 (1): 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.1984.2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beesemyer, J. C. 2012. Empirically Characterizing Evolvability and Changeability in Engineering Systems. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Accessed April 13, 2022. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/76092.
   Google Scholar
• Bertoni, A., and M. Bertoni. 2019. “Modeling ‘Ilities’ in Early Product-Service Systems Design.” Procedia CIRP 83:230–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.03.091.
   Google Scholar
• Bhamra, R., S. Dani, and K. Burnard. 2011. “Resilience: The Concept, a Literature Review and Future Directions [Article].” International Journal of Production Research 49 (18): 5375–5393. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2011.563826.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boehm, B. 2019 System Qualities Ontology, Tradespace, and Affordability (SQOTA) Phase 6. SERC-2018-TR-108. Stevens Institute of Technology: Systems Engineering Research Center. Accessed July 7, 2022. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1056639.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cardin, M.-A., R. de Neufville, and J. Dahlgren. 2007. “Extracting Value from Uncertainty: Proposed Methodology for Engineering Systems Design.” Conference on Systems Engineering Research, Hoboken, New Jersey.
   Google Scholar
• Charisi, N. D., H. Hopman, and A. Kana. 2022. “Early-Stage Design of Novel Vessels: How Can We Take a Step Forward?” SNAME 14th International Marine Design Conference, Vancouver, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Chaves, O. S., M. L. Nickelsen, and H. M. Gaspar. 2015. “Enhancing Virtual Prototype In Ship Design Using Modular Techniques.” In 29th European Conference on Modelling and Simulation, Sofia, Bulgaria. ECMS. https://www.scs-europe.net/dlib/2015/ecms2015acceptedpapers/0185-svt_ECMS2015_0090.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, T. Y., K. J. Dooley, and M. Rungtusanatham. 2001. “Supply Networks and Complex Adaptive Systems: Control versus Emergence.” Journal of Operations Management 19 (3): 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(00)00068-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, R. 2006. “The Changing Role of Requirements and Architecture in Systems Engineering.” 2006 IEEE/SMC International Conference on System of Systems Engineering, Los Angeles, Calafornia.
   Google Scholar
• Collopy, P. D. 2018. “Tradespace Exploration: Promise and Limits.” In Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research, edited by A. M. Madni, B. Boehm, R. G. Ghanem, D. Erwin and M. J. Wheaton. Springer, Cham.
   Google Scholar
• Doerry, N., and P. Koenig. 2017. “Modularity and Adaptability in Future US Navy Ship Designs.” In MECON 2017, Hamburg Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Dove, R., J. Dzielski, P. Grogan, S. Hoffenson, E. Hole, R. D. Jones, B. Kruse, K. Pochiraju, C. Snyder, and R. Cloutier. 2018. “Transforming Systems Engineering through Model-Centric Engineering.” SERC-2017-TR-111. Stevens Institute of Technology: Systems Engineering Research Center. Accessed June 10, 2022. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1058354.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, D. M. 2020. Toward Changeability Analysis for New and Existing Systems: A Foundational Definition and Comparison of Methods. Canberra, Australia: Defence Science and Technology Group.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, D. M., and M. Efatmaneshnik. 2020. “Changeability Analysis for Existing Systems.” Australian Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Engineering 16 (1): 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14488388.2020.1781345.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, D. M., and M. Efatmaneshnik. 2022. Using Epoch-Era Networks to Assess Changeability for Lifecycle Value Sustainment of Complex Engineered Systems. Unpublished work.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, D., and B. A. Morris. 2017. “A Ship Performance Modelling and Simulation Framework to Support Requirements Setting.” In Pacific 2017 International Maritime Conference, Sydney, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, D. M., and B. A. Morris. 2019. A Ship Performance Modelling and Simulation Framework to Support Design Decisions Throughout the Capability Life Cycle: Part 2–Acquisition and in Service. Fishermans Bend, VIC: Defence Science and Technology Group.
   Google Scholar
• Dzielski, J., and M. Blackburn. 2018. “Implementing a Decision Framework in SysML Integrating MDAO Tools.” Insight (British Journal of NDT) 21 (4): 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/inst.12221.
   Google Scholar
• Engel, A., and T. R. Browning. 2008. “Designing Systems for Adaptability by Means of Architecture Options [Article].” Systems Engineering 11 (2): 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enos, J. R. 2017. “A Tale of Two Aircraft: How Non-Functional Attributes Impact a system’s Lifecycle.” Proceedings of the International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, Huntsville, Alabama, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Enos, J. R. 2022. “Applying Real System Age to DoD Systems.” Systems Engineering 25 (3): 242–253. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enos, J. R., J. V. Farr, and R. R. Nilchiani. 2021. “Identifying How Nonfunctional Attributes Affect a system’s Lifecycle.” Engineering Management Journal 33 (1): 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2020.1772948.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ensor, C. 1967. “The “—ilities” of Fastener Technology.” 0148–7191.
   Google Scholar
• Ferris, T. L. 2019. “A Resilience Measure to Guide System Design and Management.” IEEE Systems Journal 13 (4): 3708–3715. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2019.2901174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald, M. E. 2012. Managing Uncertainty in Systems with a Valuation Approach for Strategic Changeability. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Fricke, E., B. Gebhard, H. Negele, and E. Igenbergs. 2000. “Coping with Changes: Causes, Findings, and Strategies.” Systems Engineering 3 (4): 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6858(2000)3:4<169:AID-SYS1>3.0.CO;2-W.
   Google Scholar
• Fricke, E., and A. P. Schulz. 2005. “Design for Changeability (DfC): Principles to Enable Changes in Systems Throughout Their Entire Lifecycle.” Systems Engineering 8 (4): 342–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20039.
   Google Scholar
• Gil, N., and B. S. Tether. 2011. “Project Risk Management and Design Flexibility: Analysing a Case and Conditions of Complementarity [Article].” Research Policy 40 (3): 415–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, J., and M.-A. Cardin. 2015. “Generating Flexibility in the Design of Engineering Systems to Enable Better Sustainability and Lifecycle Performance.” Research in Engineering Design 26 (2): 121–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-015-0189-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, J., and K.-L. Poh. 2012. “Designing Flexible Engineering System Using a Sensitivity-Based Method.” Engineering Letters 20 (1).
   Google Scholar
• Keane, R. G., T. Mierzwicki, and G. Grogan. 2017. “Designing Out Complexity Early: A Path to Affordable Flexible Warships.” Naval Engineers Journal 129 (1): 25–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keane, R., and B. Tibbitts. 2022. “The Fallacy of Using a Parent Design: The Design Is Mature [Reprint].” Naval Engineers Journal 134 (3): 30–64. (SNAME Transactions, 121, pp.91–122.).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr, J. 2012. “Future-Proof Design: Must All Good Things Come to an End.” ME Des University of Calgary (Canada), 2011. Library and Archives Canada. https://central.bac-lac.gc.ca/.item?id=MR79652&op=pdf&app=Library&oclc_number=806535896.
   Google Scholar
• Knight, J. T., and D. J. Singer. 2012. “A Real Options Approach to Evaluating Flexible Architectures in Ship Design.” In Proceedings of the 11th International Marine Design Conference, Glasgow, Scotland.
   Google Scholar
• Krystallis, I., G. Locatelli, and N. Murtagh. 2020a. “Futureproofing Complex Infrastructure Projects Using Real Options.” IEEE Engineering Management Review 49 (1): 127–132. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMR.2020.3036446.
   Google Scholar
• Krystallis, I., G. Locatelli, and N. Murtagh. 2020b. “Talking About Futureproofing: Real Options Reasoning in Complex Infrastructure Projects.” IEEE transactions on engineering management 69 (6): 3009–3022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• le Poole, J., A. Kana, H. Hopman, and E. Duchateau. 2022. “On-The-Fly Design Rationale to Support Real-Time Collaborative Naval Ship Layout Design.” In SNAME 14th International Marine Design Conference, Vancouver, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Long, D., and S. Ferguson. 2017. “A Case Study of Evolvability and Excess on the B-52 Stratofortress and F/A-18 Hornet.” In International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Lundberg, J., and B. J. E. Johansson. 2015. “Systemic Resilience Model [Article].” Reliability Engineering & System Safety 141:22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundberg, J., and B. J. E. Johansson. 2019. “Resilience Is Not a Silver Bullet - Harnessing Resilience as Core Values and Resource Contexts in a Double Adaptive Process [Article].” Reliability Engineering & System Safety 188:110–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.03.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieson, J. T. 2021. Towards Polymorphic Systems Engineering. The George Washington University ProQuest Dissertation & Thesis. https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/towards-polymorphic-systems-engineering/docview/2468395820/se-2?accountid=14649.
   Google Scholar
• McCauley, P., S. Hannapel, C. Bassler, and J. Koleser. 2016. “An Agile Method for Flexible Ship Architectures in Early Stage Naval Ship Design.” Naval Engineers Journal 128 (3): 31–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McManus, H., and D. Hastings. 2005. 15th Annual International Symposium of the INCOSE, Rochester, New York, USA. INCOSE International Symposium.
   Google Scholar
• McManus, H., M. Richards, A. Ross, and D. Hastings. 2007. “A Framework for incorporating ‘ilities’ in Tradespace Studies.” In AIAA space 2007 Conference & Exposition, Long Beach, California, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Mekdeci, B., A. M. Ross, D. H. Rhodes, and D. E. Hastings. 2014. “Pliability and Viable Systems: Maintaining Value Under Changing Conditions.” IEEE Systems Journal 9 (4): 1173–1184. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2014.2314316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, B. A. 2019. “A Model-Based Systems Engineering Methodology to Support Early Phase Australian Off-The-Shelf Naval Ship Acquisitions. University of Adelaide. https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/handle/2440/119895.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, B. A., L. Webster, and D. M. Dwyer. 2019. An Impact Assessment Framework for the Integration of Equipment Onto Platforms. DST-Group-TR-3637. Fishermen’s Bend, Victoria, Australia: Maritime Division Defence Science and Technology Group.
   Google Scholar
• Mun, J. 2021. “Flexible Ships: Business Case Modeling by Applying Strategic Real Options and Monte Carlo Simulation Modeling.” Naval Engineers Journal 133 (1): 103–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mun, J., and T. Housel. 2016. Flexible and Adaptable Ship Options: Assessing the Future Value of Incorporating Flexible Ships Design Features into New Navy Ship Concepts. NPS-AM-17-013. Monterey, California, USA: Naval Postgraduate School.
   Google Scholar
• Mun, J., and T. Housel. 2017. Business Case Valuation of Strategic Flexibility in Shipbuilding: Justifying and Assessing the Value of Flexible Ships Design Features in New Navy Ship Concepts. NPS-FM-18-009. Monterey, California, USA: Naval Postgraduate School. https://dair.nps.edu/handle/123456789/2716.
   Google Scholar
• Neches, R., J. Carlini, R. Graybill, R. Hummel, and M. McGrath. 2012. “From Today’s Tools and Practices to Tomorrow’s Investments: New Directions in Systems Engineering.” In Ninth Annual Acquisition Research Symposium, Monterey, California, USA. Naval Postgraduate School.
   Google Scholar
• Nembhard, H. B., and M. Aktan. 2009. “Origins of Real Options in Engineering.” In Real Options in Engineering Design, Operations, and Management, edited byH. B Nembhard and M. Aktan. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nichols, T., R. Keane, R. Tibbitts, and P. Jaquith. 2021. “Changing Course to a 21st Century Acquisition Strategy: Navy-Industry Collaborative Design.” In Eighteenth Annual Acquisition Research Symposium, Monterey, California, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Nilchiani, R. 2005. Measuring Space Systems Flexibility: AComprehensive Six-Element Framework. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Nilchiani, R., and D. E. Hastings. 2007. “Measuring the Value of Flexibility in Space Systems: A Six‐Element Framework.” Systems Engineering 10 (1): 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20062.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olivier, J. P., and S. Balestrini-Robinson. 2014. “Capability-Based System-of-Systems Approach in Support of Complex Naval Ship Design.” In 2014 Complex Systems Design & Management International Conference, Paris, France, 59–70. CEUR-WS.org.
   Google Scholar
• Papanikolaou, A., M. Flikkema, S. Harries, J. Marzi, R. Néna, S. Torben, and A. Yrjänäinen. 2020. “Tools and Applications for the Holistic Ship Design.” In Proceedings of the 8th Transport Research Arena, Helsinki, Finland. Finland: Traficom Research Reports.
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, M. A., M. Y. Kara, K. M. Robinson, N. T. Stinson, and A. J. Brown. 2021. “Early-Stage Naval Ship Distributed System Design Using Architecture Flow Optimization.” Journal of Ship Production and Design 37 (2): 78–96. https://doi.org/10.5957/JSPD.10190058.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons, M. A., K. M. Robinson, M. Y. Kara, N. T. Stinson, D. J. Snyder, D. C. Woodward, and A. J. Brown. 2020. “Application of a Distributed System Architectural Framework to Naval Ship Concept and Requirements Exploration.” Naval Engineers Journal 132 (4): 105–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehman, O. U., and M. Ryan. 2016. “A Framework for Life-Cycle Cost Analysis for Future-Proof Systems.” INCOSE International Symposium 26 (1): 2272–2286. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2016.00294.x.
   Google Scholar
• Rehman, O. U., and M. J. Ryan. 2018. “A Framework for Design for Sustainable Future-Proofing.” Journal of Cleaner Production 170:715–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehman, O. U., M. J. Ryan, and M. Efatmaneshnik. 2017. “Future Proofing Process.” In INCOSE International Symposium, Adelaide, Australia, 921–934. Wiley Online Library.
   Google Scholar
• Rehn, C. F. 2018. “Ship Design Under Uncertainty.” NTNU Open, Norwegian University of Science and Technology. https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/2563319.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, D. H., and A. M. Ross. 2023. “Properties of Engineering Systems.” In Handbook of Engineering Systems Design, edited byA. Maier, J. Oehmen and P. E Vermaas, 1–30. Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81159-4.
   Google Scholar
• Ricci, N., M. E. Fitzgerald, A. M. Ross, and D. H. Rhodes. 2014. “Architecting Systems of Systems with Ilities: An Overview of the SAI Method.” Procedia Computer Science 28:322–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.03.040.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, A. M., D. E. Hastings, J. M. Warmkessel, and N. P. Diller. 2004. “Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration As Front End for Effective Space System Design.” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 41 (1): 20–28. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.9204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, A., H. McManus, D. Rhodes, M. Richards, D. Hastings, and A. Long. 2008. “Responsive Systems Comparison Method: Case Study in Assessing Future Designs in the Presence of Change.” In AIAA SPACE 2008 Conference & Exposition, San Diego, California, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, A. M. and D. H. Rhodes. 2008. “Using Natural Value‐Centric Time Scales for Conceptualizing System Timelines Through Epoch‐Era Analysis.“ In 18th Annual International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering, Utrecht, The Netherlands. INCOSE International Symposium.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, A. M., and D. H. Rhodes. 2019. “Ilities Semantic Basis: Research Progress and Future Directions.” Procedia Computer Science 153:126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.05.063.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, A. M., D. H. Rhodes, and D. E. Hastings. 2008. “Defining Changeability: Reconciling Flexibility, Adaptability, Scalability, Modifiability, and Robustness for Maintaining System Lifecycle Value.” Systems Engineering 11 (3): 246–262. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20098.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, E. T., D. R. Jacques, and J. M. Colombi. 2013. “An Ontological Framework for Clarifying Flexibility-Related Terminology via Literature Survey [Article].” Systems Engineering 16 (1): 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, E., D. Jacques, J. Colombi, and C. Schubert. 2012. “A Proposed Methodology to Characterize the Accuracy of Life Cycle Cost Estimates for DoD Programs.” Procedia Computer Science 8:361–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2012.01.073.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, M. J., and O. U. Rehman. 2015. “On the Nature of Future-Proofing.” In Systems Engineering and Test & Evaluation Conference, Canberra, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Salado, A. 2022. “An Experimentation Framework for Validating Architectural Properties As Proxies for the Ilities.” Systems Engineering 25 (4): 342–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21618.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saleh, J. H., D. E. Hastings, and D. J. Newman. 2003. “Flexibility in System Design and Implications for Aerospace Systems.” Acta Astronautica 53 (12): 927–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-5765(02)00241-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saleh, J. H., G. Mark, and N. C. Jordan. 2009. “Flexibility: A Multi-Disciplinary Literature Review and a Research Agenda for Designing Flexible Engineering Systems.” Journal of Engineering Design 20 (3): 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820701870813.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samset, K., and G. H. Volden. 2016. “Front-End Definition of Projects: Ten Paradoxes and Some Reflections Regarding Project Management and Project Governance.” International Journal of Project Management 34 (2): 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaffner, M. A. 2014. “Designing Systems for Many Possible Futures: The Rsc-Based Method for Affordable Concept Selection (Rmacs), with Multi-Era Analysis.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/90796.
   Google Scholar
• Schank, J. F., S. Savitz, K. Munson, B. Perkinson, J. McGee, and J. M. Sollinger. 2016. Designing Adaptable Ships: Modularity and Flexibility in Future Ship Designs. RR-696-NAVY. RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR696.
   Google Scholar
• Schulz, A. P., and E. Fricke. 1999. “Incorporating Flexibility, Agility, Robustness, and Adaptability within the Design of Integrated Systems-Key to Success? Gateway to the New Millennium.” In 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, N. B., L. Viscito, J. Wilds, A. M. Ross, and D. E. Hastings. 2008. “Quantifying Flexibility for Architecting Changeable Systems.” 6th Conference on Systems Engineering Research, Los Angeles, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Silver, M. R., and O. L. De Weck. 2007. “Time‐Expanded Decision Networks: A Framework for Designing Evolvable Complex Systems.” Systems Engineering 10 (2): 167–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snowden, D. 2002. “Complex Acts of Knowing: Paradox and Descriptive Self‐Awareness.” Journal of Knowledge Management 6 (2): 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270210424639.
   Google Scholar
• Snowden, D. 2011. “Naturalizing Sensemaking.” In Informed by Knowledge, edited byK. L. Mosier and U. M, Fischer, 237–248. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Specking, E. A., C. Whitcomb, G. S. Parnell, S. R. Goerger, E. Pohl, A. Kundeti, and N. Sai. 2018. “Literature Review: Exploring the Role of Set-Based Design in Trade-Off Analytics.” Naval Engineering Journal 130 (2): 51–62. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/asne/nej/2018/00000130/00000002/art00015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stacey, R. 2015. “Understanding Organizations as Complex Responsive Processes of Relating.” In Dialogic organization development: The theory and practice of transformational change, edited byGervase R. Bushe and Robert J. Marshak. Oakland: Berrett Koehler.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, C., T. Linden, and B. Filman. 1997. “Thoughts on OMA-NG: The Next Generation Object Management Architecture. OMG OMA-NG Green Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Tsolakis, S. 2005. “Econometric Analysis of Bulk Shipping: Implications for Investment Strategies and Financial Decision-Making.” Erasmus University, Rotterdam. https://hdl.handle.net/1765/6717.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, A. J., W. Monahan, and M. Cotter. 2018. “Quantifying the Ilities: A Literature Review of Robustness, Interoperability, and Agility.” In Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research, edited by A. M. Madni, B. Boehm, R. G. Ghanem, D. Erwin, and M. Wheaton. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_72.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, R., L. Yilmaz, J. Smith, D. Li, S. Chada, A. Smith, and A. Tregubov. 2016. “DATASEM: A Simulation Suite for SoSE Management Research.” In 2016 11th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), Kongsberg, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• U-Build. 2022. “U-Build Is a Revolutionary Self-Build System.” Accessed June 14, 2022. h ttps://u -build.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, T., and R. De Neufville. 2005. “Real Options ‘In’ Projects.” Real Options Conference, Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Wied, M., J. Oehmen, and T. Welo. 2020. “Conceptualizing Resilience in Engineering Systems: An Analysis of the Literature [Article].” Systems Engineering 23 (1): 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, A. T. 2020. “Acquisition Chief Calls for Disruptive Agility, New Digital Paradigm.” https://www.usafa.af.mil/News/Article/2350344/acquisition-chief-calls-for-disruptive-agility-new-digital-paradigm/.
   Google Scholar