Model Based Enterprises MBE WhitePaper US
AeroGman
1,473 views
17 slides
Nov 07, 2015
Slide 1 of 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
About This Presentation
No description available for this slideshow.
Slide Content
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Business Leaders in the Aerospace and Defense (A&D) industry are facing a defining business execution challenge.
1,2
With the
increase of market opportunities and increasingly demanding requirements, in response to operational rate increases and as a means
to make better use of existing resources, three major factors have been identified:
• Significant growth in program complexity
• Missed program development targets (in cost, schedule or capability)
• The push of sub-assembly operations (design and manufacturing) into the supply chain
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE
A HOLISTIC APPROACH FOR REALIZING
MODEL BASED ENTERPRISES (MBE)
AUTHORS:
Brian Christensen
Garrett Thurston
Business Leaders in the Aerospace and Defense (A&D) industry are facing a defining business execution challenge.
1,2
With the
increase of market opportunities and increasingly demanding requirements, in response to operational rate increases and as a means
to make better use of existing resources, three major factors have been identified:
• Significant growth in program complexity
• Missed program development targets (in cost, schedule or capability)
• The push of sub-assembly operations (design and manufacturing) into the supply chain
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE
A HOLISTIC APPROACH FOR REALIZING
MODEL BASED ENTERPRISES (MBE)
AUTHORS:
Brian Christensen
Garrett Thurston
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 2
Business execution in the A&D market is intimately tied to program execution—either externally
contracted or internally authorized efforts—in the development of products and systems
(e.g., aircraft or weapons systems). The objective of a Model Based Enterprise is to elevate
business execution throughout the enterprise, which by necessity includes program and
project management, configuration and change management and the implementation of system
engineering and detailed design, manufacturing, and support processes.
Leaders accountable for execution need to be able to manage information efficiently—including
the tasks to collect, interpret, control, find, share, and maintain information.
3
Successful,
decision-makers (executives, program managers, architects, etc.) need to constantly track the
performance of their enterprise and how its products fare in the commercial and government
marketplaces. Effective product development feeds into this execution awareness and there are
well-documented methods
4
enabled by tools and processes to achieve such outcomes—in process
models, functional decompositions, allocated requirements specifications and numerous other
model artifacts.
Varying by domain, descriptive and computational models capture aspects of a system and
its intended deployed mission, usage, and operating environments, which enable improved
confidence in the completeness and correctness of the product specification, the validity of
which is supported by a number of model-based and traditional methods including architecture,
simulations, and analysis, trace, test, engineering reviews, and similarity.
5
Positive business
execution outcomes are the result of the use of models and improved methods and infrastructure
reducing volatility and churn associated with text or documentation-only approaches.
A Model Based Enterprise (MBE) approach provides the opportunity for stepwise improvements
in program execution, performance and integrity. In order to reap the benefits of an MBE across
the enterprise value chains, it is critical to efficiently align a company’s extended enterprise—its
people, suppliers, methods, processes, and technology.
MBE is an approach, for the people and disciplines of an extended organization, using enterprise
infrastructure and applications to leverage lifecycle-managed, connected, descriptive and
computational models throughout the program lifecycle to achieve organizational business
objectives for process efficiency for user and organizational productivity. MBE includes PLM-
grade program governance, guided, facilitated and enforced business processes and rich
systems engineering enforced development processes to deliver validated, execution-enabled
business models for architecture and detailed design definition, process control and performance
evaluation. An MBE is used as the basis for creating the program plan and integrated master
schedule. These execution models are built upon a supporting open, secure, configuration-
enabled, standards-based platform. Product, environment and execution models evolve in their
maturity, fidelity, and validity throughout the program. Product and environment models that
serve a particular utility at one stage in the lifecycle will be transformed and translated into other
models or views in subsequent stages in the program life cycle.
MBE is a holistic approach that assists stakeholders across the entire enterprise in exploring and
qualifying better options. By taking into account the rich connectedness of model information,
decision-makers have a powerful instrument to explore options and make actionable real-time
decisions. In this paper we explore the continuing need for improving organizational execution
including program improvement in the context of the historical initiatives, which leads to an
1 Lisa Brownsword, Cecilia Albert, David Carney, Patrick Place, “Results in Relating Quality Attributes to Acquisition Strategies” SEI Technical Note: CMU/
SEI-2013-TN-026 February 2014.
2 Lisa Brownsword, Cecilia Albert, David Carney, Patrick Place, “A Method for Aligning Acquisition Strategies and Software Architectures” SEI Technical Note:
CMU/SEI-2014-TN-019 October 2014.
3 Information is elicited from data, in “Code Halos: How the Digital Lives of People, Things, and Organizations are Changing the Rules of Business” by Malcom
Frank 2014 there are three types of data individuals, collectors, explorers, and sense-makers. These types of individuals convert data, to information, to
knowledge and intelligence.
4 Department of Defense Systems Engineering Fundamentals, Supplementary Text Prepared by the Defense Acquisition University Press, Fort Belvoir, VA
22060-5565, January 2001.
5 SEI Presentation: Making DARPA META Goals Come True, “How do we revolutionize Verification and Validation for Complex Systems?”, Dr. Kirstie L. Bellman
Computers and software Division (AISIC); The Aerospace Corporation, June 17, 2010, S5 2010, WP AFB
Business execution in the A&D market is intimately tied to program execution—either externally
contracted or internally authorized efforts—in the development of products and systems
(e.g., aircraft or weapons systems). The objective of a Model Based Enterprise is to elevate
business execution throughout the enterprise, which by necessity includes program and
project management, configuration and change management and the implementation of system
engineering and detailed design, manufacturing, and support processes.
Leaders accountable for execution need to be able to manage information efficiently—including
the tasks to collect, interpret, control, find, share, and maintain information.
3
Successful,
decision-makers (executives, program managers, architects, etc.) need to constantly track the
performance of their enterprise and how its products fare in the commercial and government
marketplaces. Effective product development feeds into this execution awareness and there are
well-documented methods
4
enabled by tools and processes to achieve such outcomes—in process
models, functional decompositions, allocated requirements specifications and numerous other
model artifacts.
Varying by domain, descriptive and computational models capture aspects of a system and
its intended deployed mission, usage, and operating environments, which enable improved
confidence in the completeness and correctness of the product specification, the validity of
which is supported by a number of model-based and traditional methods including architecture,
simulations, and analysis, trace, test, engineering reviews, and similarity.
5
Positive business
execution outcomes are the result of the use of models and improved methods and infrastructure
reducing volatility and churn associated with text or documentation-only approaches.
A Model Based Enterprise (MBE) approach provides the opportunity for stepwise improvements
in program execution, performance and integrity. In order to reap the benefits of an MBE across
the enterprise value chains, it is critical to efficiently align a company’s extended enterprise—its
people, suppliers, methods, processes, and technology.
MBE is an approach, for the people and disciplines of an extended organization, using enterprise
infrastructure and applications to leverage lifecycle-managed, connected, descriptive and
computational models throughout the program lifecycle to achieve organizational business
objectives for process efficiency for user and organizational productivity. MBE includes PLM-
grade program governance, guided, facilitated and enforced business processes and rich
systems engineering enforced development processes to deliver validated, execution-enabled
business models for architecture and detailed design definition, process control and performance
evaluation. An MBE is used as the basis for creating the program plan and integrated master
schedule. These execution models are built upon a supporting open, secure, configuration-
enabled, standards-based platform. Product, environment and execution models evolve in their
maturity, fidelity, and validity throughout the program. Product and environment models that
serve a particular utility at one stage in the lifecycle will be transformed and translated into other
models or views in subsequent stages in the program life cycle.
MBE is a holistic approach that assists stakeholders across the entire enterprise in exploring and
qualifying better options. By taking into account the rich connectedness of model information,
decision-makers have a powerful instrument to explore options and make actionable real-time
decisions. In this paper we explore the continuing need for improving organizational execution
including program improvement in the context of the historical initiatives, which leads to an
1 Lisa Brownsword, Cecilia Albert, David Carney, Patrick Place, “Results in Relating Quality Attributes to Acquisition Strategies” SEI Technical Note: CMU/
SEI-2013-TN-026 February 2014.
2 Lisa Brownsword, Cecilia Albert, David Carney, Patrick Place, “A Method for Aligning Acquisition Strategies and Software Architectures” SEI Technical Note:
CMU/SEI-2014-TN-019 October 2014.
3 Information is elicited from data, in “Code Halos: How the Digital Lives of People, Things, and Organizations are Changing the Rules of Business” by Malcom
Frank 2014 there are three types of data individuals, collectors, explorers, and sense-makers. These types of individuals convert data, to information, to
knowledge and intelligence.
4 Department of Defense Systems Engineering Fundamentals, Supplementary Text Prepared by the Defense Acquisition University Press, Fort Belvoir, VA
22060-5565, January 2001.
5 SEI Presentation: Making DARPA META Goals Come True, “How do we revolutionize Verification and Validation for Complex Systems?”, Dr. Kirstie L. Bellman
Computers and software Division (AISIC); The Aerospace Corporation, June 17, 2010, S5 2010, WP AFB
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 3
MBE. In addition, we identify the key building blocks of an MBE and the advantages of applying
a holistic approach to program execution and the many associated development efforts.
MOTIVATING FACTORS FOR CHANGE
Lessons learned from completed and ongoing programs uncover three important factors driving
the Aerospace and Defense industry to improve program performance.
First, Aerospace and Defense programs are frequently challenged with increased development
times and rising costs. In contrast, faced with similar though not identical constraints, the
Automotive and Integrated Circuit industries have achieved significant program time and cost
savings. Bellman suggests, “A major cause of these phenomena is the industry’s failure to update
a 1960s-vintage systems engineering, integration and test process.”
1960 1990 2010 2030TODAY
META
GOAL
INTEGRATED
CIRCUITS
AUTOMOBILES
AEROSPACE
SYSTEMS
HISTORICAL COST GROWTH
AEROSPACE SYSTEMS (1960-PRESENT)8-12% / YR
*
AUTOMOBILES (1960-PRESENT) 4% / YR
INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
(1970-PRESENT)~0% / YR * NOT ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
01 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10
DESIGN, INTEGRATION AND TESTING
(MONTHS)
COMPLEXITY OVER TIME (PART COUNT + SOURCE LINES OF CODE)
In the past, manual, document-based development methods that relied on decomposing a
problem into independent disciplines, generally delivered systems of moderate complexity. A
manual approach not only includes decomposing the problem into increasingly smaller and
tractable problems, but at the same time fine-grained problems are disconnected because they
are assigned to separate expert domains to be addressed. Once complete, the system elements
would be brought together with the expectation that the desired outcome would be achieved.
As systems grew more complex—many things, talking to many other things, in many different
ways—the frailty of this approach became obvious as product and program failures became
increasingly prevalent. Such siloed approaches not only suffered the failure of disconnected-
ness but also the Tragedy of the Commons
6
where organizational competition for resources led
to inefficiencies and execution failures. By both decomposing the problem and disconnecting
it (using best available document-centric technologies) the approach did not scale to the needs
of modern complex systems. Historically, despite this vulnerability, aerospace and defense
companies had some success (even on relatively complicated systems) increasing recognition
of the challenge. Evidence of this frailty lurked in the shadows producing occasional spectacular
failures with more frequent symptomatic evidence, in terms of costs, schedule, and functionality
failures as system complexity has increased.
7
The evidence suggests that program success is more
likely when the challenges of contextual and system complexities are addressed.
6 Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons”, Science Vol 162, 13 December 1968 pp 1243-1248.
7 Sheard, Sarah A., “Principles of Complex Systems for Systemes Engineering,” Published in Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Symposium of the
International Council on Systems Engineering, San Diego, CA, June 23-28. Copyright © Third Millennium Systems LLC.
Figure 1: Contrast Automotive
and Electronics Industries vs. the
Aerospace Industry in tackling
program complexity.
MBE. In addition, we identify the key building blocks of an MBE and the advantages of applying
a holistic approach to program execution and the many associated development efforts.
MOTIVATING FACTORS FOR CHANGE
Lessons learned from completed and ongoing programs uncover three important factors driving
the Aerospace and Defense industry to improve program performance.
First, Aerospace and Defense programs are frequently challenged with increased development
times and rising costs. In contrast, faced with similar though not identical constraints, the
Automotive and Integrated Circuit industries have achieved significant program time and cost
savings. Bellman suggests, “A major cause of these phenomena is the industry’s failure to update
a 1960s-vintage systems engineering, integration and test process.”
1960 1990 2010 2030TODAY
META
GOAL
INTEGRATED
CIRCUITS
AUTOMOBILES
AEROSPACE
SYSTEMS
HISTORICAL COST GROWTH
AEROSPACE SYSTEMS (1960-PRESENT)8-12% / YR
*
AUTOMOBILES (1960-PRESENT) 4% / YR
INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
(1970-PRESENT)~0% / YR * NOT ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
01 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10
DESIGN, INTEGRATION AND TESTING
(MONTHS)
COMPLEXITY OVER TIME (PART COUNT + SOURCE LINES OF CODE)
In the past, manual, document-based development methods that relied on decomposing a
problem into independent disciplines, generally delivered systems of moderate complexity. A
manual approach not only includes decomposing the problem into increasingly smaller and
tractable problems, but at the same time fine-grained problems are disconnected because they
are assigned to separate expert domains to be addressed. Once complete, the system elements
would be brought together with the expectation that the desired outcome would be achieved.
As systems grew more complex—many things, talking to many other things, in many different
ways—the frailty of this approach became obvious as product and program failures became
increasingly prevalent. Such siloed approaches not only suffered the failure of disconnected-
ness but also the Tragedy of the Commons
6
where organizational competition for resources led
to inefficiencies and execution failures. By both decomposing the problem and disconnecting
it (using best available document-centric technologies) the approach did not scale to the needs
of modern complex systems. Historically, despite this vulnerability, aerospace and defense
companies had some success (even on relatively complicated systems) increasing recognition
of the challenge. Evidence of this frailty lurked in the shadows producing occasional spectacular
failures with more frequent symptomatic evidence, in terms of costs, schedule, and functionality
failures as system complexity has increased.
7
The evidence suggests that program success is more
likely when the challenges of contextual and system complexities are addressed.
6 Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons”, Science Vol 162, 13 December 1968 pp 1243-1248.
7 Sheard, Sarah A., “Principles of Complex Systems for Systemes Engineering,” Published in Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Symposium of the
International Council on Systems Engineering, San Diego, CA, June 23-28. Copyright © Third Millennium Systems LLC.
Figure 1: Contrast Automotive
and Electronics Industries vs. the
Aerospace Industry in tackling
program complexity.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 4
Second, program development plans are often not achieved. Program plans are frequently
derailed due to budget and schedule overruns and failure to achieve key technical performance
metrics. According to a 2015 U.S. Government Accountability Office report on Pentagon major
weapon systems, 47 of the 78 programs within the portfolio experienced cost increases over the
past year. The average delay in delivering initial capabilities (from the first full estimate of cost
and schedule) increased from 1.4 months to 30.3 months.
8
Dr. Bob Neches notes in an Engineered Resilient Systems review that contributing factors include:
• Rapid necking down of alternatives
• Decisions made without information
• Sequential and slow process where information is lost at every step
• Ad hoc requirements refinements.
Neches states that these factors contribute to 50 years of process reforms that have failed to
control delivery time, delivered cost and program execution performance.
9
Increased pressured to speed the pace of production and use existing resources more effectively
resulted in companies striving to increase rate by driving sub-assembly operations into the supply
chain. Aerospace business models are shifting from being OEM dominated supply chains to risk
sharing supply chains. Risk sharing supply chains are decentralized across the buyers and suppliers.
They jointly share increased pre-integration responsibility and models across the full development
and support lifecycle. Examples of this value chain evolution include the Airbus 380 and Boeing 787
aircraft. OEM’s and their suppliers jointly share increased pre-integration responsibility and models
across the full development, certification, manufacturing, and support lifecycle.
10
8 United States Government Accountability Office, DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs, March 2015, http://www.gao.gov/
assets/670/668986.pdf
9 ERS Overview and status 20 December 2011 public release version, Dr. Robert Neches, Director, Advanced Engineering Initiatives, ODASD SE, 20 November 2011
10 Herbert A. Simon, “The Architecture of Complexity” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 106, No. 6. (Dec. 12, 1962), pp. 467-482. (See
Figure Reference
Figure 2: Current assessment of
DOD Programs
2014 Programs ‘by the numbers’
• 78 active acquisition defense programs
• 40 programs lost buying power resulting in $2.2 billion in cost over runs*
• 30 months – average delay in delivering to schedule*
*Source: Government Accountability Office
Second, program development plans are often not achieved. Program plans are frequently
derailed due to budget and schedule overruns and failure to achieve key technical performance
metrics. According to a 2015 U.S. Government Accountability Office report on Pentagon major
weapon systems, 47 of the 78 programs within the portfolio experienced cost increases over the
past year. The average delay in delivering initial capabilities (from the first full estimate of cost
and schedule) increased from 1.4 months to 30.3 months.
8
Dr. Bob Neches notes in an Engineered Resilient Systems review that contributing factors include:
• Rapid necking down of alternatives
• Decisions made without information
• Sequential and slow process where information is lost at every step
• Ad hoc requirements refinements.
Neches states that these factors contribute to 50 years of process reforms that have failed to
control delivery time, delivered cost and program execution performance.
9
Increased pressured to speed the pace of production and use existing resources more effectively
resulted in companies striving to increase rate by driving sub-assembly operations into the supply
chain. Aerospace business models are shifting from being OEM dominated supply chains to risk
sharing supply chains. Risk sharing supply chains are decentralized across the buyers and suppliers.
They jointly share increased pre-integration responsibility and models across the full development
and support lifecycle. Examples of this value chain evolution include the Airbus 380 and Boeing 787
aircraft. OEM’s and their suppliers jointly share increased pre-integration responsibility and models
across the full development, certification, manufacturing, and support lifecycle.
10
8 United States Government Accountability Office, DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs, March 2015, http://www.gao.gov/
assets/670/668986.pdf
9 ERS Overview and status 20 December 2011 public release version, Dr. Robert Neches, Director, Advanced Engineering Initiatives, ODASD SE, 20 November 2011
10 Herbert A. Simon, “The Architecture of Complexity” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 106, No. 6. (Dec. 12, 1962), pp. 467-482. (See
Figure Reference
Figure 2: Current assessment of
DOD Programs
2014 Programs ‘by the numbers’
• 78 active acquisition defense programs
• 40 programs lost buying power resulting in $2.2 billion in cost over runs*
• 30 months – average delay in delivering to schedule*
*Source: Government Accountability Office
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 5
Value chain evolution is a value predictor of this shift as evidenced by the Airbus 380 and
Boeing 787 aircraft
11
which shifted the Aerospace industry business model context from OEM-
dominated supply chains to increasing reliance upon risk sharing with suppliers. These key
suppliers are decentralized and have become an integral part of the OEMs critical supply chain,
12
which profoundly affects the OEMs ability to develop and manufacture within program objectives
across the buyers and suppliers. Suppliers now bear an increased burden for modeling their
subsystems and pre-integration across the full development, certification, manufacturing, and
support lifecycle.
13
EVOLUTION
VALUE CHAIN
CHAOTIC TRANSITIONAL LINEAR
Genesis Custom Built Product Commodity
11 Z. Tang, O. J. Pinon and D. N. Mavris, “Identification of Key Factors in Integrating Aircraft and the Associated Supply Chains during Early Design Phases”,
AVIATION 2014, Atlanta, GA, 16-20 June 2014.
12 Eliyahu M. Goldratt, “Critical Chain”, North River Press, 2002
13 Z. Tang, O. J. Pinon and D. N. Mavris, “Identification of Key Factors in Integrating Aircraft and the Associated Supply Chains during Early Design Phases”, to be
presented at AVIATION 2014, Atlanta, GA, 16-20 June 2014.
14 Simon Wardley, “Bits or pieces?” blog. http://blog.gardeviance.org/2013/01/evolution-begets-genesis-begets.html
Figure 3: Copyright © 2014
Boeing. All rights reserved.
Figure 4: Value Chain evolution drive and implications.
14
Value chain evolution is a value predictor of this shift as evidenced by the Airbus 380 and
Boeing 787 aircraft
11
which shifted the Aerospace industry business model context from OEM-
dominated supply chains to increasing reliance upon risk sharing with suppliers. These key
suppliers are decentralized and have become an integral part of the OEMs critical supply chain,
12
which profoundly affects the OEMs ability to develop and manufacture within program objectives
across the buyers and suppliers. Suppliers now bear an increased burden for modeling their
subsystems and pre-integration across the full development, certification, manufacturing, and
support lifecycle.
13
EVOLUTION
VALUE CHAIN
CHAOTIC TRANSITIONAL LINEAR
Genesis Custom Built Product Commodity
11 Z. Tang, O. J. Pinon and D. N. Mavris, “Identification of Key Factors in Integrating Aircraft and the Associated Supply Chains during Early Design Phases”,
AVIATION 2014, Atlanta, GA, 16-20 June 2014.
12 Eliyahu M. Goldratt, “Critical Chain”, North River Press, 2002
13 Z. Tang, O. J. Pinon and D. N. Mavris, “Identification of Key Factors in Integrating Aircraft and the Associated Supply Chains during Early Design Phases”, to be
presented at AVIATION 2014, Atlanta, GA, 16-20 June 2014.
14 Simon Wardley, “Bits or pieces?” blog. http://blog.gardeviance.org/2013/01/evolution-begets-genesis-begets.html
Figure 3: Copyright © 2014
Boeing. All rights reserved.
Figure 4: Value Chain evolution drive and implications.
14
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 6
PRECURSORS TO MODEL BASED ENTERPRISE
Innovations focused on improving program performance and integrity have yielded improvements
but have not proven a remedy for all program difficulties. Some notable approaches include:
1) Model Based Design (MBD)
15
Replacing a traditional drawing, MBD is defined as an annotated 3D CAD Model that contains
all the information (engineering and manufacturing) needed to define a product. A traditional
drawing would only be used by exception, not as a standard process.
2) Model Based Engineering (MBEng)
16
Model-based Engineering (as defined by an NDIA subcommittee) is an approach to engineering in which models are an integral part of the technical baseline throughout the acquisition life
cycle. MBE models are both:
• Integrated across all program disciplines (e.g., systems engineering, operations analysis,
software engineering, hardware engineering, manufacturing, logistics, etc.)
• Shared or reused across acquisition programs (including government and industry
stakeholders).
3) Model Based System Engineering (MBSE)
17
A formalized application of modeling, Model Based Systems Engineering supports:
• System requirements
• Analysis
• Design
• Verification and validation
Model Based Systems Engineering begins in the conceptual design phase and continues through
development and later lifecycle phases.
Model Based System Engineering focuses on models across the full life cycle. Encompassing
multi discipline collaboration, INCOSE’s definition of MBSE brings a strong focus to formalizing
the architecture definition process with the requirements and at all levels implementing validation
and verification activities.
15 http://model-based-enterprise.org/model-based-definition.html
16 NDIA Final Report of the Model Based Engineering Subcommittee of the Modelling and Simulation Committee 10 February 2011.
17 https://incoseonline.org.uk/Documents/zGuides/Z9_model_based_WEB.pdf
Figure 5 : An annotated 3D CAD
Model Based Design (MBD)
created using CATIA.
PRECURSORS TO MODEL BASED ENTERPRISE
Innovations focused on improving program performance and integrity have yielded improvements
but have not proven a remedy for all program difficulties. Some notable approaches include:
1) Model Based Design (MBD)
15
Replacing a traditional drawing, MBD is defined as an annotated 3D CAD Model that contains
all the information (engineering and manufacturing) needed to define a product. A traditional
drawing would only be used by exception, not as a standard process.
2) Model Based Engineering (MBEng)
16
Model-based Engineering (as defined by an NDIA subcommittee) is an approach to engineering in which models are an integral part of the technical baseline throughout the acquisition life
cycle. MBE models are both:
• Integrated across all program disciplines (e.g., systems engineering, operations analysis,
software engineering, hardware engineering, manufacturing, logistics, etc.)
• Shared or reused across acquisition programs (including government and industry
stakeholders).
3) Model Based System Engineering (MBSE)
17
A formalized application of modeling, Model Based Systems Engineering supports:
• System requirements
• Analysis
• Design
• Verification and validation
Model Based Systems Engineering begins in the conceptual design phase and continues through
development and later lifecycle phases.
Model Based System Engineering focuses on models across the full life cycle. Encompassing
multi discipline collaboration, INCOSE’s definition of MBSE brings a strong focus to formalizing
the architecture definition process with the requirements and at all levels implementing validation
and verification activities.
15 http://model-based-enterprise.org/model-based-definition.html
16 NDIA Final Report of the Model Based Engineering Subcommittee of the Modelling and Simulation Committee 10 February 2011.
17 https://incoseonline.org.uk/Documents/zGuides/Z9_model_based_WEB.pdf
Figure 5 : An annotated 3D CAD
Model Based Design (MBD)
created using CATIA.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 7
SPECIFY ACCEPT
In addition to initiatives focused on improving program integrity, industry leaders, searching
for root causes to common program execution challenges, have found that the program office
program planning and control activities must be tightly linked with product development.
An IBM research paper found that “advances in systems engineering and its improved
coordination with program management will produce better program results.”
18
In addition, a
Gantry Research paper reported a similar finding, highlighting the value of embedding program
management with product life cycle management.
19
A recent paper by the members of the GfSE/INCOSE working group PLM4MBSE states that one
limitation of current approaches is that they manage pieces of information from mechanical,
electrical and software engineering, etc. without any notion of its logical interdependencies,
concluding that complex products must be considered as multidisciplinary systems made of
integrated and interconnected work artifacts of various disciplines.
20
THE WAY FORWARD
Enterprises can transform by taking a holistic path to improve competitiveness and ability to
execute. Dassault Systèmes terms the way forward as a “Model Based Enterprise” (MBE) which
integrates the historical approaches of Model Based Engineering (MBe), Model Based System
Engineering (MBSE), & Model Based Design (MBD), and on a platform enabling integrated Product
Lifecycle Management (PLM), Program Management and Product Line Engineering (PLE).
18 Aviation Week/IBM Systems Engineering Survey, “The Impact of Systems Engineering on A&D Industry Program Results”, November 2010.
19 June 2012, Gantry White Paper: Embedding Program Management into PLM – Assessing Added Value.
20 10 theses about MBSE and PLM Challenges and Benefits of Model Based Engineering (MBe) German Chapter of INCOSE PLM4MBSE Working Group Position
Paper Version 1 15 June 2015. http://gfse.de/arbeitsgruppen-mainmenu-85/plm4mbse.html
Figure 6: System Engineering
“V” as defined by INCOSE.
SPECIFY ACCEPT
In addition to initiatives focused on improving program integrity, industry leaders, searching
for root causes to common program execution challenges, have found that the program office
program planning and control activities must be tightly linked with product development.
An IBM research paper found that “advances in systems engineering and its improved
coordination with program management will produce better program results.”
18
In addition, a
Gantry Research paper reported a similar finding, highlighting the value of embedding program
management with product life cycle management.
19
A recent paper by the members of the GfSE/INCOSE working group PLM4MBSE states that one
limitation of current approaches is that they manage pieces of information from mechanical,
electrical and software engineering, etc. without any notion of its logical interdependencies,
concluding that complex products must be considered as multidisciplinary systems made of
integrated and interconnected work artifacts of various disciplines.
20
THE WAY FORWARD
Enterprises can transform by taking a holistic path to improve competitiveness and ability to
execute. Dassault Systèmes terms the way forward as a “Model Based Enterprise” (MBE) which
integrates the historical approaches of Model Based Engineering (MBe), Model Based System
Engineering (MBSE), & Model Based Design (MBD), and on a platform enabling integrated Product
Lifecycle Management (PLM), Program Management and Product Line Engineering (PLE).
18 Aviation Week/IBM Systems Engineering Survey, “The Impact of Systems Engineering on A&D Industry Program Results”, November 2010.
19 June 2012, Gantry White Paper: Embedding Program Management into PLM – Assessing Added Value.
20 10 theses about MBSE and PLM Challenges and Benefits of Model Based Engineering (MBe) German Chapter of INCOSE PLM4MBSE Working Group Position
Paper Version 1 15 June 2015. http://gfse.de/arbeitsgruppen-mainmenu-85/plm4mbse.html
Figure 6: System Engineering
“V” as defined by INCOSE.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 8
BREADTH OF VALUE CHAIN IMPACT
CUSTOMER INTIMACY • CO-CREATION
Integrated Across Domains
Platforms
Trustworthy • Adaptive
Integrated Across Acquisition
Analysis Methods • Concepts Techiniques
Architecture Techniques • Design for X
Advanced Algorithms
Information Consistency • Data
Completeness • Transformation
Iteration • Unambiguous
Integrated Across Lifecycles and Domains
Trusted Data and Actions
Operational Agility • Execution Efficiency
• Characteristics
Features • Platforms • Portfolio
Governance and Execution Models • OBS • WBS • IMS
Environment and Product Models
• Means
Business Architecture • Process Organization
• Outcomes
MBSE
ERS
PLE
PLM
(REFERENCE)
ALM MBD
MBe
MBE
MBE is an approach, for the people and disciplines of an extended organization, using enterprise
infrastructure and applications to leverage lifecycle managed, connected, descriptive and computational
models throughout the program lifecycle to achieve organizational business objectives for user and
organizational productivity and processes efficiency. MBE includes PLM-grade program governance
capabilities, guided, facilitated, and enforced business processes and rich systems engineering
enforced development processes to deliver validated execution-enabled business models. Examples
of business models include: Organizational Breakdown Structure (OBS), Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS) and Product Breakdown Structure (PBS). Architecture and detailed design definition, process
control, and performance evaluation are the basis for creating the program plan and integrated master
schedules. These execution models are built upon a supporting open, secure, configuration-enabled,
standards-based platform. Product, environment, and execution models evolve in their maturity,
fidelity, and validity throughout the program. Product and environment models that serve a particular
utility at one stage in the lifecycle will be transformed and translated into other models or views in
subsequent stages in the program life cycle.
A holistic approach to deploying a MBE requires three perspectives:
• Understanding the value of the proposed methods, processes or tools;
• Estimating the level of effort required for implementing the proposed changes,
• Evaluating the impact of the people executing the MBE process, their understanding of the
value of the change, and in consequence their willingness to change.
It is important to evaluate the impact on the individuals executing the process, their understanding
of the value of the change and, perhaps the most importantly, willingness to change. The holistic
process focuses first on high business impact changes with low technical complexity and low
cultural complexity to yield the quickest and highest value results.
Figure 7: Modeling
methodologies strategic group
map.
BREADTH OF VALUE CHAIN IMPACT
CUSTOMER INTIMACY • CO-CREATION
Integrated Across Domains
Platforms
Trustworthy • Adaptive
Integrated Across Acquisition
Analysis Methods • Concepts Techiniques
Architecture Techniques • Design for X
Advanced Algorithms
Information Consistency • Data
Completeness • Transformation
Iteration • Unambiguous
Integrated Across Lifecycles and Domains
Trusted Data and Actions
Operational Agility • Execution Efficiency
• Characteristics
Features • Platforms • Portfolio
Governance and Execution Models • OBS • WBS • IMS
Environment and Product Models
• Means
Business Architecture • Process Organization
• Outcomes
MBSE
ERS
PLE
PLM
(REFERENCE)
ALM MBD
MBe
MBE
MBE is an approach, for the people and disciplines of an extended organization, using enterprise
infrastructure and applications to leverage lifecycle managed, connected, descriptive and computational
models throughout the program lifecycle to achieve organizational business objectives for user and
organizational productivity and processes efficiency. MBE includes PLM-grade program governance
capabilities, guided, facilitated, and enforced business processes and rich systems engineering
enforced development processes to deliver validated execution-enabled business models. Examples
of business models include: Organizational Breakdown Structure (OBS), Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS) and Product Breakdown Structure (PBS). Architecture and detailed design definition, process
control, and performance evaluation are the basis for creating the program plan and integrated master
schedules. These execution models are built upon a supporting open, secure, configuration-enabled,
standards-based platform. Product, environment, and execution models evolve in their maturity,
fidelity, and validity throughout the program. Product and environment models that serve a particular
utility at one stage in the lifecycle will be transformed and translated into other models or views in
subsequent stages in the program life cycle.
A holistic approach to deploying a MBE requires three perspectives:
• Understanding the value of the proposed methods, processes or tools;
• Estimating the level of effort required for implementing the proposed changes,
• Evaluating the impact of the people executing the MBE process, their understanding of the
value of the change, and in consequence their willingness to change.
It is important to evaluate the impact on the individuals executing the process, their understanding
of the value of the change and, perhaps the most importantly, willingness to change. The holistic
process focuses first on high business impact changes with low technical complexity and low
cultural complexity to yield the quickest and highest value results.
Figure 7: Modeling
methodologies strategic group
map.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 9
21
Success in deploying a Model Based Enterprise is centered on understanding and deploying key
MBE capabilities based upon an open standards based infrastructure with appropriate process
controls. This combination yields the desired outcomes of trust in data (information) and trust
in action and accountability. The architecture of the system needs to make the information and
assets sharable, which facilitates authoring, change and reusability in a configured context. Errors
are very costly both in terms of throughput and capital. For illustration, to achieve the same
throughput, additional human and facilities capital investments are necessary to overcome errors
in data or errors in execution. The system through its underlying architecture should help to avoid
both errors of commission as well as errors of omission.
The target of so much consideration is to reduce cost and improve efficiency. Also needed is a
system that supports innovation
22
in products and product development processes. Achieving
cost containment is the product of both cost reduction and cost avoidance.
21 http://ezinearticles.com/?Organizational-Change-Management---Four-Truths-Leaders-Should-Know-About-Organizational-Change&id=3712808, Robert
Tanner
22 Innovation is a complicated subject but considering what gets innovated is creating a new thing, or a new way of doing something or a new way of doing
something with something new.
3 MAIN AREAS OF IMPACT TO CONSIDER:
Business
• Can your business processes be re-evaluated?
• What KPIs best measure the outcome?
Technical
• What is your implementation plan?
• What budget?
Cultural
• What is your communication rollout?
• Will your team embrace change
Figure 8: Elements to consider to
effect positive organizational
change.
Figure 9: A Model Based Enterprise logical architecture. BUSINESS PROCESSES
PROGRAM
LIFECYCLE
DATA
MODELS
TOOLS
STANDARDS/
INTEGRATIONS
ORGANIZATION
BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE
WORK
BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE
INDUSTRY
BUSINESS PROCESSES
INFRASTRUCTURE
PLATFORM
3DEXPERIENCE
®
PLATFORM SERVICES
Low Cultural Complexity
Medium Cultural Complexity
High Cultural Complexity
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
TECHNICAL COMPLEXITY
CHALLENGE
OUTCOME
BUSINESS IMPACT
SOLUTIONS
MBSE
MBE
MBe
MBD
21
Success in deploying a Model Based Enterprise is centered on understanding and deploying key
MBE capabilities based upon an open standards based infrastructure with appropriate process
controls. This combination yields the desired outcomes of trust in data (information) and trust
in action and accountability. The architecture of the system needs to make the information and
assets sharable, which facilitates authoring, change and reusability in a configured context. Errors
are very costly both in terms of throughput and capital. For illustration, to achieve the same
throughput, additional human and facilities capital investments are necessary to overcome errors
in data or errors in execution. The system through its underlying architecture should help to avoid
both errors of commission as well as errors of omission.
The target of so much consideration is to reduce cost and improve efficiency. Also needed is a
system that supports innovation
22
in products and product development processes. Achieving
cost containment is the product of both cost reduction and cost avoidance.
21 http://ezinearticles.com/?Organizational-Change-Management---Four-Truths-Leaders-Should-Know-About-Organizational-Change&id=3712808, Robert
Tanner
22 Innovation is a complicated subject but considering what gets innovated is creating a new thing, or a new way of doing something or a new way of doing
something with something new.
3 MAIN AREAS OF IMPACT TO CONSIDER:
Business
• Can your business processes be re-evaluated?
• What KPIs best measure the outcome?
Technical
• What is your implementation plan?
• What budget?
Cultural
• What is your communication rollout?
• Will your team embrace change
Figure 8: Elements to consider to
effect positive organizational
change.
Figure 9: A Model Based Enterprise logical architecture. BUSINESS PROCESSES
PROGRAM
LIFECYCLE
DATA
MODELS
TOOLS
STANDARDS/
INTEGRATIONS
ORGANIZATION
BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE
WORK
BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE
INDUSTRY
BUSINESS PROCESSES
INFRASTRUCTURE
PLATFORM
3DEXPERIENCE
®
PLATFORM SERVICES
Low Cultural Complexity
Medium Cultural Complexity
High Cultural Complexity
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
TECHNICAL COMPLEXITY
CHALLENGE
OUTCOME
BUSINESS IMPACT
SOLUTIONS
MBSE
MBE
MBe
MBD
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 10
The final building blocks for a Model Based Enterprise road to execution excellence are based on
accurate decision-making. The system should be able to provide information collection, availability
and accessibility, exploration, sense-making and logical validation checks. These building blocks
lead to improved decision-making and help provide better options to the decision maker.
MBE BUILDING BLOCKS
Models are descriptive and analytical, and capture product, environment, and execution
information. Models must be captured and lifecycle managed. Multiple disciplines operate
concurrently on different facets of the system, architecture or product design models—the
impact of a change in one model is readily assessed in another model. Models developed by each
discipline evolve in maturity throughout the life cycle and are not thrown away (or neglected) or
redeveloped as the program transitions from one phase of development to the next. Such models
include:
• Up-front mission analysis models
• System requirements and architecture models
• Detailed CAD and software design models
• Detailed simulation models used to assess and verify all aspects of the system as it evolves.
• Schedules, resources, validation activities, assumptions, etc.
It is critical to realize and manage not just these assets as domains, but to understand the
relationships between them. In so doing (by ensuring that key connection points are maintained
change can be managed along with all associated implications.
Mission shifts can be rapidly explored for their impact on downstream elements, discovering
impact and the need for revalidation all the way throughout implementation verification,
qualification, acceptance testing, installation, operation and maintenance.
The need for and the role of verification and validation should be emphasized as defined in
INCOSE’s MBSE initiatives. When requirements models are validated early in the process –
including those for manufacturing, installation, and support– significant accuracy improvements
are realized in the development process, through improved realistic estimates for resources, costs,
and schedules that pave the way for realistic planning activities and reduced risks.
The MBE collaborative platform foundation provides a means to share information from the
model registry across the extended enterprise of customers, teammates and suppliers. The MBE
platform includes modeling standards that enable information exchange. The model registry
allows ready access to the different models of known pedigree or provenance. The MBE platform
foundation supports a trusted environment that enforces protection of intellectual property and
provides secure access to sensitive and classified data. The collaborative environment provides the
infrastructure to facilitate deliberate reuse from one program to another, while enabling sharing
across a family of products and system-of-systems.
The MBE ‘to-be’ state leverages MBE across the acquisition life cycle to enhance affordability,
shorten delivery time, and reduce risk. This is superior to the current state where errors leading
to schedule delays and cost overruns are attributable to gaps between domain silos and life
cycle phase hand-offs. The future state of MBE seeks to reduce these errors though seamless
integration of model data across domains and across the life cycle by aligning shared model
properties and assumptions. Engineering and program knowledge is shared through a common
technical and execution platform. The MBE ‘to-be’ state includes a workforce skilled in the use
of integrated system engineering and program management modeling methods and tools. The
MBE to-be’ builds upon an infrastructure that supports this ability and the policies that enable,
facilitate, and enforce it.
23
23 Adapted from NDIA Final Report of the Model Based Engineering Subcommittee of the Modelling and Simulation Committee 10 February 2011.
The final building blocks for a Model Based Enterprise road to execution excellence are based on
accurate decision-making. The system should be able to provide information collection, availability
and accessibility, exploration, sense-making and logical validation checks. These building blocks
lead to improved decision-making and help provide better options to the decision maker.
MBE BUILDING BLOCKS
Models are descriptive and analytical, and capture product, environment, and execution
information. Models must be captured and lifecycle managed. Multiple disciplines operate
concurrently on different facets of the system, architecture or product design models—the
impact of a change in one model is readily assessed in another model. Models developed by each
discipline evolve in maturity throughout the life cycle and are not thrown away (or neglected) or
redeveloped as the program transitions from one phase of development to the next. Such models
include:
• Up-front mission analysis models
• System requirements and architecture models
• Detailed CAD and software design models
• Detailed simulation models used to assess and verify all aspects of the system as it evolves.
• Schedules, resources, validation activities, assumptions, etc.
It is critical to realize and manage not just these assets as domains, but to understand the
relationships between them. In so doing (by ensuring that key connection points are maintained
change can be managed along with all associated implications.
Mission shifts can be rapidly explored for their impact on downstream elements, discovering
impact and the need for revalidation all the way throughout implementation verification,
qualification, acceptance testing, installation, operation and maintenance.
The need for and the role of verification and validation should be emphasized as defined in
INCOSE’s MBSE initiatives. When requirements models are validated early in the process –
including those for manufacturing, installation, and support– significant accuracy improvements
are realized in the development process, through improved realistic estimates for resources, costs,
and schedules that pave the way for realistic planning activities and reduced risks.
The MBE collaborative platform foundation provides a means to share information from the
model registry across the extended enterprise of customers, teammates and suppliers. The MBE
platform includes modeling standards that enable information exchange. The model registry
allows ready access to the different models of known pedigree or provenance. The MBE platform
foundation supports a trusted environment that enforces protection of intellectual property and
provides secure access to sensitive and classified data. The collaborative environment provides the
infrastructure to facilitate deliberate reuse from one program to another, while enabling sharing
across a family of products and system-of-systems.
The MBE ‘to-be’ state leverages MBE across the acquisition life cycle to enhance affordability,
shorten delivery time, and reduce risk. This is superior to the current state where errors leading
to schedule delays and cost overruns are attributable to gaps between domain silos and life
cycle phase hand-offs. The future state of MBE seeks to reduce these errors though seamless
integration of model data across domains and across the life cycle by aligning shared model
properties and assumptions. Engineering and program knowledge is shared through a common
technical and execution platform. The MBE ‘to-be’ state includes a workforce skilled in the use
of integrated system engineering and program management modeling methods and tools. The
MBE to-be’ builds upon an infrastructure that supports this ability and the policies that enable,
facilitate, and enforce it.
23
23 Adapted from NDIA Final Report of the Model Based Engineering Subcommittee of the Modelling and Simulation Committee 10 February 2011.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 11
ENTERPRISE MBE CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
MBE
MBE
MBE
MODELING PRODUCTS
SILOS
ENABLING COLLABORATION
ON AN ONLINE, CLOUD ENABLED,
SINGLE-SOURCE INNOVATION PLATFORM
APPLIED TO FULL PROGRAM LIFECYCLE
DATA AND PROCESSES
ADOPTING STRUCTURED MODEL-BASED
SYSTEM ENGINEERING PROCESSES
DATA LOSS
LOOSELY
CONTROLLED
PROCESSES
CREATING EXPERIENCES
A MBE approach to achieve needle-moving outcomes must holistically address people and
culture, methods, processes, organization and infrastructure. The enterprise cannot meet
its business objectives as long as older methods of working (including the use of siloed
organizations and data) continue to be used.
Eight critical factors for successful MBE deployments are:
1. A secure platform enabling collaboration on a single-source innovation platform
2. Approach applied to Full Program Lifecycle data and execution processes
3. Adoption of structured Model-Based System and domain engineering processes
4. Models of all types (descriptive/analytical/simulation/execution, etc.) that are captured,
related, and lifecycle managed
5. Use of a PLM process and infrastructure backbone of configuration/change/release
management
6. Guidance of all work by program or project management capabilities
7. Full ability to model and evaluate form, fit, and function, and execution
8. Knowledge capture, management, accessibility, and process for deliberate reuse
Secure, single-source innovation platform for collaboration
To achieve program performance improvements, the key issues of trust in data or information
and trust in action is critical. Without proper management of data and access to that data, the
result is missing data or reliance on data that is out of date. Data errors of commission occur
when an organization or individual makes a wrong decision based upon incorrect data. Data
errors of omission occur when an organization or individual fails to respond (or act) as a result
of missing data.
There are several ways to prevent these errors:
• The program must provide a single authoritative information source by integrating or
capturing required data.
• The data should be secured and protected by strong Intellectual Property controls.
• Versions and changes over time should be tracked and available for review.
• As many disciplines as possible should be involved in the collaboration—building a system
with information and a means of segregation that facilitates security of intellectual
property and export data. In addition to traditional engineering and manufacturing
disciplines, marketing, sales, contracts, legal, quality, support, etc. are also included in
the process.
Figure 10: Transitioning from
modeling products to executing a
Model Based Enterprise
ENTERPRISE MBE CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
MBE
MBE
MBE
MODELING PRODUCTS
SILOS
ENABLING COLLABORATION
ON AN ONLINE, CLOUD ENABLED,
SINGLE-SOURCE INNOVATION PLATFORM
APPLIED TO FULL PROGRAM LIFECYCLE
DATA AND PROCESSES
ADOPTING STRUCTURED MODEL-BASED
SYSTEM ENGINEERING PROCESSES
DATA LOSS
LOOSELY
CONTROLLED
PROCESSES
CREATING EXPERIENCES
A MBE approach to achieve needle-moving outcomes must holistically address people and
culture, methods, processes, organization and infrastructure. The enterprise cannot meet
its business objectives as long as older methods of working (including the use of siloed
organizations and data) continue to be used.
Eight critical factors for successful MBE deployments are:
1. A secure platform enabling collaboration on a single-source innovation platform
2. Approach applied to Full Program Lifecycle data and execution processes
3. Adoption of structured Model-Based System and domain engineering processes
4. Models of all types (descriptive/analytical/simulation/execution, etc.) that are captured,
related, and lifecycle managed
5. Use of a PLM process and infrastructure backbone of configuration/change/release
management
6. Guidance of all work by program or project management capabilities
7. Full ability to model and evaluate form, fit, and function, and execution
8. Knowledge capture, management, accessibility, and process for deliberate reuse
Secure, single-source innovation platform for collaboration
To achieve program performance improvements, the key issues of trust in data or information
and trust in action is critical. Without proper management of data and access to that data, the
result is missing data or reliance on data that is out of date. Data errors of commission occur
when an organization or individual makes a wrong decision based upon incorrect data. Data
errors of omission occur when an organization or individual fails to respond (or act) as a result
of missing data.
There are several ways to prevent these errors:
• The program must provide a single authoritative information source by integrating or
capturing required data.
• The data should be secured and protected by strong Intellectual Property controls.
• Versions and changes over time should be tracked and available for review.
• As many disciplines as possible should be involved in the collaboration—building a system
with information and a means of segregation that facilitates security of intellectual
property and export data. In addition to traditional engineering and manufacturing
disciplines, marketing, sales, contracts, legal, quality, support, etc. are also included in
the process.
Figure 10: Transitioning from
modeling products to executing a
Model Based Enterprise
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 12
Apply approach to full program lifecycle data and execution processes
Traditionally, improvement efforts have focused on engineering first, then manufacturing. This
approach limits the potential for improvement and creates chasms between major program
phases. Early, mission planning and business development activities can be conceptualized on
one side of the model; support and service activities can be included on the other side. In this
way, data and models can be efficiently shared, especially when reused between program phases.
Adopt structured model based system and domain engineering processes
Modern systems engineering tools and approaches are commonly believed to have developed
from the discipline of software engineering. However, these tools, methods and approaches
are applicable across all domains—including mechanical, electrical and electronics, etc. These
methodologies are used with increasing frequency to address silos and barrier issues that tend to
inhibit good communication and collaboration.
24
Dassault Systèmes has deployed a widely applicable systems engineering approach. The System
DMU (SDMU) approach uses a recursive requirement, functional, logical and physical structured
development process for system modeling that is integrated with the models for validation and
verification. Fully and uniquely integrated within this approach is the ability to extend the models
with embedded behavioral modeling capability. The System Engineering approach is mandatory
in order to manage the complexity of modern systems development.
Capture and lifecycle manage models of all types
At the core of MBE are the models. Models of many types and formats are managed as an
evolving set of data representations for key systems and execution elements definitions. Models
include information models that detail both product and process. The information takes on
different forms and importance depending on the domain and life cycle. This affects both up and
downstream data and action, as it is also being transformed and translated throughout the life
cycle. A data model that connects these evolving models and provides traceability and impact
analysis is the key to realizing full promised value for model based use and reuse.
Product Lifecycle Management processes andinfrastructure
The Dassault Systèmes approach to MBE leverages the company’s experience and history in
Product Lifecycle Management (PLM). The core ability to create, version, revision, formally
change and release process models is required to provide the controls needed to ensure data
integrity and provide for certifications processes.
Guide all work by program management capabilities
When product-centric (PLM) and program-centric (Program Management) solutions are embedded
(which goes beyond custom integration feeds), both solutions benefit. Contract-based program
manager for Dassault Systèmes is an example of seamless embedding within 3DEXPERIENCE
®
PLM environment. With full access to all current and historical product data and information
that resides within the PLM repository, program options can be explored—providing detailed
implications to the decision-maker faster, and with greater assurance. Relating program and
product data creates a valuable two-way information link between and across programs and
products. Moreover, by virtue of being embedded with Programs, PLM is elevated within the
organization because it allows better inform high-level decision-making.
An example of needed and valuable guidance is the management of contract-based artifacts in
relation to work breakdown structure (WBS).
25
There are two fundamental and interrelated types
of work breakdown structures—the Program WBS and the Contract WBS.
24 Aviation Week/IBM Systems Engineering Survey, “The impact of systems engineering on A&D industry program results”, November 2010.
25 Dassault Systèmes A&D Accelerator Application is part of the 3DEXPERIENCE Platform was developed in part to support the DOD 5000.2 Process including
guidance gleaned from Mil HDBK 881. The WBS is a key program information model building block of execution for visibility, into, and tracking of the various
execution elements.
Apply approach to full program lifecycle data and execution processes
Traditionally, improvement efforts have focused on engineering first, then manufacturing. This
approach limits the potential for improvement and creates chasms between major program
phases. Early, mission planning and business development activities can be conceptualized on
one side of the model; support and service activities can be included on the other side. In this
way, data and models can be efficiently shared, especially when reused between program phases.
Adopt structured model based system and domain engineering processes
Modern systems engineering tools and approaches are commonly believed to have developed
from the discipline of software engineering. However, these tools, methods and approaches
are applicable across all domains—including mechanical, electrical and electronics, etc. These
methodologies are used with increasing frequency to address silos and barrier issues that tend to
inhibit good communication and collaboration.
24
Dassault Systèmes has deployed a widely applicable systems engineering approach. The System
DMU (SDMU) approach uses a recursive requirement, functional, logical and physical structured
development process for system modeling that is integrated with the models for validation and
verification. Fully and uniquely integrated within this approach is the ability to extend the models
with embedded behavioral modeling capability. The System Engineering approach is mandatory
in order to manage the complexity of modern systems development.
Capture and lifecycle manage models of all types
At the core of MBE are the models. Models of many types and formats are managed as an
evolving set of data representations for key systems and execution elements definitions. Models
include information models that detail both product and process. The information takes on
different forms and importance depending on the domain and life cycle. This affects both up and
downstream data and action, as it is also being transformed and translated throughout the life
cycle. A data model that connects these evolving models and provides traceability and impact
analysis is the key to realizing full promised value for model based use and reuse.
Product Lifecycle Management processes andinfrastructure
The Dassault Systèmes approach to MBE leverages the company’s experience and history in
Product Lifecycle Management (PLM). The core ability to create, version, revision, formally
change and release process models is required to provide the controls needed to ensure data
integrity and provide for certifications processes.
Guide all work by program management capabilities
When product-centric (PLM) and program-centric (Program Management) solutions are embedded
(which goes beyond custom integration feeds), both solutions benefit. Contract-based program
manager for Dassault Systèmes is an example of seamless embedding within 3DEXPERIENCE
®
PLM environment. With full access to all current and historical product data and information
that resides within the PLM repository, program options can be explored—providing detailed
implications to the decision-maker faster, and with greater assurance. Relating program and
product data creates a valuable two-way information link between and across programs and
products. Moreover, by virtue of being embedded with Programs, PLM is elevated within the
organization because it allows better inform high-level decision-making.
An example of needed and valuable guidance is the management of contract-based artifacts in
relation to work breakdown structure (WBS).
25
There are two fundamental and interrelated types
of work breakdown structures—the Program WBS and the Contract WBS.
24 Aviation Week/IBM Systems Engineering Survey, “The impact of systems engineering on A&D industry program results”, November 2010.
25 Dassault Systèmes A&D Accelerator Application is part of the 3DEXPERIENCE Platform was developed in part to support the DOD 5000.2 Process including
guidance gleaned from Mil HDBK 881. The WBS is a key program information model building block of execution for visibility, into, and tracking of the various
execution elements.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 13
The Program WBS provides a framework for specifying the objectives of the program. It defines
the program in terms of hierarchically related product-oriented elements. Each element provides
logical summary points for assessing technical accomplishments and for measuring cost and
schedule performance.
The Contract WBS is the government or commercial-approved work breakdown structure for
reporting purposes, and its extension to lower levels at the discretion of the enterprise, or in
accordance with government or program direction and the contract work statement. It includes
all the product elements for the products (hardware, software, data, or services), which are the
responsibility of the contractor. The work packages associated with the system under development
are the result of decomposing into subsystems, and detailed sub-system architecture items,
which together constitute the Product Breakdown Structure (PBS). It is important for the MBE
enterprise and its practitioners to appreciate such relationships between the architecture data
model and the execution data model that are integral to the notion of MBE.
The Work Breakdown Structure serves as a coordinating medium. Through the Program WBS
and the Contract WBS, work is documented as resources from the Organizational Breakdown
Structure (OBS) are allocated at the task or work package level as it is related to the PBS of the
system under development. All of the tasks and work packages taken together for the Integrated
Master Schedule (IMS) and expended efforts are rolled up into associated Program WBS element.
Technical, schedule, and cost data are maintained and dash-boarded, and reported for the
awareness of interested parties. The Work Breakdown Structures summarize data for successive
levels of management and provide the appropriate information on the projected, actual, and
current status of the elements for which they are responsible. The WBS keeps the program’s
status constantly visible so that the program manager, in cooperation with the contractor, can
identify and implement changes necessary to assure desired performance.
The work breakdown structure provides the basis for communication throughout the acquisition
and development process. It is the common link that unifies the upfront planning, scheduling,
cost estimating, budgeting, contracting, configuration management—based upon historical data,
management and engineering judgment, and the execution performance reporting disciplines.
Through consistent communications, the WBS permits the government and industry managers
to evaluate progress in terms of contract performance.
The Work Breakdown Structure forms the basis for reporting structures used for contracts
requiring compliance with the Earned Value Management System (EVMS)
26
Dassault Systèmes’
EVMS has been developed following the Office of Performance Assessment and Root Cause
Analyses (PARCA), and Guidelines contained in the Electronic Industries Alliance Standard-748
EVMS (EIA-748). Criteria and reports placed on contract such as Contractor Cost Data Reporting
(CCDR), Cost Performance Reports (CPR), Contract Funds Status Reports (CFSR), and Cost/
Schedule Status Reports (C/SSR).
27
26 Dassault Systèmes’ EVMS has been developed following the Office of Performance Assessment and Root Cause Analyses (PARCA), and Guidelines contained in
the Electronic Industries Alliance Standard-748 EVMS (EIA-748).
27 Kranz, Gordon M., Gary R. Bliss, Department of Defense Earned Value Management System Interpretation Guide, OUSD AT&L (PARCA) 18 February 2015.
The Program WBS provides a framework for specifying the objectives of the program. It defines
the program in terms of hierarchically related product-oriented elements. Each element provides
logical summary points for assessing technical accomplishments and for measuring cost and
schedule performance.
The Contract WBS is the government or commercial-approved work breakdown structure for
reporting purposes, and its extension to lower levels at the discretion of the enterprise, or in
accordance with government or program direction and the contract work statement. It includes
all the product elements for the products (hardware, software, data, or services), which are the
responsibility of the contractor. The work packages associated with the system under development
are the result of decomposing into subsystems, and detailed sub-system architecture items,
which together constitute the Product Breakdown Structure (PBS). It is important for the MBE
enterprise and its practitioners to appreciate such relationships between the architecture data
model and the execution data model that are integral to the notion of MBE.
The Work Breakdown Structure serves as a coordinating medium. Through the Program WBS
and the Contract WBS, work is documented as resources from the Organizational Breakdown
Structure (OBS) are allocated at the task or work package level as it is related to the PBS of the
system under development. All of the tasks and work packages taken together for the Integrated
Master Schedule (IMS) and expended efforts are rolled up into associated Program WBS element.
Technical, schedule, and cost data are maintained and dash-boarded, and reported for the
awareness of interested parties. The Work Breakdown Structures summarize data for successive
levels of management and provide the appropriate information on the projected, actual, and
current status of the elements for which they are responsible. The WBS keeps the program’s
status constantly visible so that the program manager, in cooperation with the contractor, can
identify and implement changes necessary to assure desired performance.
The work breakdown structure provides the basis for communication throughout the acquisition
and development process. It is the common link that unifies the upfront planning, scheduling,
cost estimating, budgeting, contracting, configuration management—based upon historical data,
management and engineering judgment, and the execution performance reporting disciplines.
Through consistent communications, the WBS permits the government and industry managers
to evaluate progress in terms of contract performance.
The Work Breakdown Structure forms the basis for reporting structures used for contracts
requiring compliance with the Earned Value Management System (EVMS)
26
Dassault Systèmes’
EVMS has been developed following the Office of Performance Assessment and Root Cause
Analyses (PARCA), and Guidelines contained in the Electronic Industries Alliance Standard-748
EVMS (EIA-748). Criteria and reports placed on contract such as Contractor Cost Data Reporting
(CCDR), Cost Performance Reports (CPR), Contract Funds Status Reports (CFSR), and Cost/
Schedule Status Reports (C/SSR).
27
26 Dassault Systèmes’ EVMS has been developed following the Office of Performance Assessment and Root Cause Analyses (PARCA), and Guidelines contained in
the Electronic Industries Alliance Standard-748 EVMS (EIA-748).
27 Kranz, Gordon M., Gary R. Bliss, Department of Defense Earned Value Management System Interpretation Guide, OUSD AT&L (PARCA) 18 February 2015.
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 14
fi
fi
fi
fi
Insert figure 11
28
Fully model and evaluate form, fit and function
Traditional DMU approaches have been limited to analyzing form and fit. With the integration
of dynamic modeling capability, Dassault Systèmes added the ability to model and analyze
function as well as form and fit. Integral this approach to MBE is a modeling and simulation
environment based on the open Modelica modeling language. Modelica features unique multi-
engineering capabilities that allows for models that can consist of components from many
engineering domains. Libraries in many different engineering domains contain components for
mechanical, electrical, control, thermal, pneumatic, hydraulic, power train, thermodynamics,
vehicle dynamics, air-conditioning, etc. In addition, through the FMI/FMU standard, external
models may be integrated and co-simulated.
Capture and reuse knowledge
Finally, a key opportunity to achieve program execution improvement is through process and
product reuse. By capturing both the enterprise models and the utilized business process,
company assets can be opportunistically captured, organized, managed, and made available for
reuse.
Product line engineering provides a structured, architecture-intensive means through domain
analysis to elicit product line value from the legacy product-centric models as a means of
enhanced program-driven product development.
Leveraging a product line capability maturity model drives the enterprise to rethink its approach
to product development. Through increasing alignment with its customer-facing origins, a
product line capability maturity model helps engineer products that reduce diversity in the assets
that must be maintained. Products then can be provided that completely satisfies the customer
need—with less effort, and with more rapid turn-around.
28 Department of Defense WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURES FOR DEFENSE MATERIEL ITEMS Mil-Std-881C 3 October 2011.
Figure 11: The Work Breakdown
Structure is the basis of
accountability
28
fi
fi
fi
fi
Insert figure 11
28
Fully model and evaluate form, fit and function
Traditional DMU approaches have been limited to analyzing form and fit. With the integration
of dynamic modeling capability, Dassault Systèmes added the ability to model and analyze
function as well as form and fit. Integral this approach to MBE is a modeling and simulation
environment based on the open Modelica modeling language. Modelica features unique multi-
engineering capabilities that allows for models that can consist of components from many
engineering domains. Libraries in many different engineering domains contain components for
mechanical, electrical, control, thermal, pneumatic, hydraulic, power train, thermodynamics,
vehicle dynamics, air-conditioning, etc. In addition, through the FMI/FMU standard, external
models may be integrated and co-simulated.
Capture and reuse knowledge
Finally, a key opportunity to achieve program execution improvement is through process and
product reuse. By capturing both the enterprise models and the utilized business process,
company assets can be opportunistically captured, organized, managed, and made available for
reuse.
Product line engineering provides a structured, architecture-intensive means through domain
analysis to elicit product line value from the legacy product-centric models as a means of
enhanced program-driven product development.
Leveraging a product line capability maturity model drives the enterprise to rethink its approach
to product development. Through increasing alignment with its customer-facing origins, a
product line capability maturity model helps engineer products that reduce diversity in the assets
that must be maintained. Products then can be provided that completely satisfies the customer
need—with less effort, and with more rapid turn-around.
28 Department of Defense WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURES FOR DEFENSE MATERIEL ITEMS Mil-Std-881C 3 October 2011.
Figure 11: The Work Breakdown
Structure is the basis of
accountability
28
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 15
Insert Figure 12
29
,
30
29 Frank van der Linden, “Family Evaluation Framework Overview & Introduction”, Eureka S! 2023 Programme, ITEA project ip02009, 5 December 2005
30 Michał Antkiewicz, Wenbin Ji, Thorsten Berger, Krzysztof Czarnecki University of Waterloo, Canada Thomas Schmorleiz, Ralf Lämmel Universität Koblenz-
Landau, Germany S, tefan Sta˘nciulescu, Andrzej Wasowski IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark, “Flexible Product Line Engineering with a Virtual Platform”,
ICSE ’14, May 31 – June 7, 2014, Hyderabad, India.
Figure 12: Two complementary
Product Line Capability Maturity
Models.
29,30
Insert Figure 12
29
,
30
29 Frank van der Linden, “Family Evaluation Framework Overview & Introduction”, Eureka S! 2023 Programme, ITEA project ip02009, 5 December 2005
30 Michał Antkiewicz, Wenbin Ji, Thorsten Berger, Krzysztof Czarnecki University of Waterloo, Canada Thomas Schmorleiz, Ralf Lämmel Universität Koblenz-
Landau, Germany S, tefan Sta˘nciulescu, Andrzej Wasowski IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark, “Flexible Product Line Engineering with a Virtual Platform”,
ICSE ’14, May 31 – June 7, 2014, Hyderabad, India.
Figure 12: Two complementary
Product Line Capability Maturity
Models.
29,30
A Holistic Approach For Realizing Model Based Enterprises (MBE) 16
This model has been used in the electronics and automotive industries with great success. Over
the last decade it has garnered attention in both aviation and defense sectors due to its potential
for increasing value delivery, building on the enablement brought by the model-based enterprise.
“The transition to a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach is generally viewed as essential for systems
engineering to meet increasing demands of system complexity, design cycles, productivity, and quality…to fully
leverage a model-based approach, the system model must be maintained as a fundamental part of the technical
baseline that is integrated with other engineering models and tools.”
Sandy Freidenthal and Roger Burkhart OMG Meeting 30 March 2015
SUMMARY
Using a Model Based Enterprise platform changes the standard for business and program execution.
With the accompanying enablement, facilitation, and enforcement of a holistic approach to MBE,
the entire enterprise makes better, actionable real-time decisions through immediate access to
complete information. For example, it is possible to tracking to program and engineering milestones,
engineering change orders, supplier status production status, usage and health of deployed systems
and more. Enterprise collaboration, and asset accessibility and characteristics such as readiness levels
help to lay the foundation for deliberate reuse. Execution models, an integral part to MBE, facilitate the
ability for an enterprise to gain critical situational awareness, the state of execution and how best to
meet customer commitments, collect and leverage historical knowledge and create credible winning
proposals to stand out from the competition.
ABOUT DASSAULT SYSTÈMES
Since its inception, Dassault Systèmes has partnered with large aerospace customers to lead
large complex program enterprise product development infrastructures. Industry has increasingly
adopted behaviorally-faithful 3D design for all components of complex products, such as
airplanes and cars, which drove the vision for transforming 3D part design process to a systematic
integrated product design. In the late 1980’s Dassault Systèmes collaborated with multiple A&D
companies and delivered full digital mock-up (DMU) capabilities to the marketplace. Digital mockup
capability enabled customers to reduce the number of physical prototypes and realize substantial
savings in product development cycle times, and in addition helped streamline manufacturing
assembly as well as maintenance, repair and overhaul efforts. Dassault Systèmes built upon the
Benefits of a Model Based Enterprise
• Provides access to current and accurate information across the entire enterprise
• Eliminates silos, and promotes communication and collaboration
• Offers a single authoritative source system of record - a key architecture building block
of the Model Based Enterprise.
• Provides a foundation with the granularity for effective configuration and change
management that enables all other elements of MBE accountability; trust-in-action,
trust-in-data.
• Allows decision-makers improved visibility to monitor program performance, contain
costs and improves the quality and number of viable options and opportunities.
• Improves the future value of existing assets and deliberate reuse of latent Intellectual
Property (IP) for use in product and programs yet to be developed.
• Maximizes resources (human, IP, capital) by deliberately reinforcing value-added
behaviors and cultures and squeezing out non-value added activities.
This model has been used in the electronics and automotive industries with great success. Over
the last decade it has garnered attention in both aviation and defense sectors due to its potential
for increasing value delivery, building on the enablement brought by the model-based enterprise.
“The transition to a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach is generally viewed as essential for systems
engineering to meet increasing demands of system complexity, design cycles, productivity, and quality…to fully
leverage a model-based approach, the system model must be maintained as a fundamental part of the technical
baseline that is integrated with other engineering models and tools.”
Sandy Freidenthal and Roger Burkhart OMG Meeting 30 March 2015
SUMMARY
Using a Model Based Enterprise platform changes the standard for business and program execution.
With the accompanying enablement, facilitation, and enforcement of a holistic approach to MBE,
the entire enterprise makes better, actionable real-time decisions through immediate access to
complete information. For example, it is possible to tracking to program and engineering milestones,
engineering change orders, supplier status production status, usage and health of deployed systems
and more. Enterprise collaboration, and asset accessibility and characteristics such as readiness levels
help to lay the foundation for deliberate reuse. Execution models, an integral part to MBE, facilitate the
ability for an enterprise to gain critical situational awareness, the state of execution and how best to
meet customer commitments, collect and leverage historical knowledge and create credible winning
proposals to stand out from the competition.
ABOUT DASSAULT SYSTÈMES
Since its inception, Dassault Systèmes has partnered with large aerospace customers to lead
large complex program enterprise product development infrastructures. Industry has increasingly
adopted behaviorally-faithful 3D design for all components of complex products, such as
airplanes and cars, which drove the vision for transforming 3D part design process to a systematic
integrated product design. In the late 1980’s Dassault Systèmes collaborated with multiple A&D
companies and delivered full digital mock-up (DMU) capabilities to the marketplace. Digital mockup
capability enabled customers to reduce the number of physical prototypes and realize substantial
savings in product development cycle times, and in addition helped streamline manufacturing
assembly as well as maintenance, repair and overhaul efforts. Dassault Systèmes built upon the
Benefits of a Model Based Enterprise
• Provides access to current and accurate information across the entire enterprise
• Eliminates silos, and promotes communication and collaboration
• Offers a single authoritative source system of record - a key architecture building block
of the Model Based Enterprise.
• Provides a foundation with the granularity for effective configuration and change
management that enables all other elements of MBE accountability; trust-in-action,
trust-in-data.
• Allows decision-makers improved visibility to monitor program performance, contain
costs and improves the quality and number of viable options and opportunities.
• Improves the future value of existing assets and deliberate reuse of latent Intellectual
Property (IP) for use in product and programs yet to be developed.
• Maximizes resources (human, IP, capital) by deliberately reinforcing value-added
behaviors and cultures and squeezing out non-value added activities.
Our 3DEXPERIENCE platform powers our brand applications, serving 12 industries, and provides a
rich portfolio of industry solution experiences.
Dassault Systèmes, the 3DEXPERIENCE® Company, provides business and people with virtual universes to imagine sustainable innovations. Its
world-leading solutions transform the way products are designed, produced, and supported. Dassault Systèmes’ collaborative solutions foster social innovation,
expanding possibilities for the virtual world to improve the real world. The group brings value to over 190,000 customers of all sizes in all industries in more than
140 countries. For more information, visit www.3ds.com.
Europe/Middle East/Africa
Dassault Systèmes
10, rue Marcel Dassault
CS 40501
78946 Vélizy-Villacoublay Cedex
France
Americas
Dassault Systèmes
175 Wyman Street
Waltham, Massachusetts
02451-1223
USA
Asia-Pacific
Dassault Systèmes K.K.
ThinkPark Tower
2-1-1 Osaki, Shinagawa-ku,
Tokyo 141-6020
Japan
©2015 Dassault Systèmes. All rights reserved. 3DEXPERIENCE®
, the Compass icon and the 3DS logo, CATIA, SOLIDWORKS, ENOVIA, DELMIA, SIMULIA, GEOVIA, EXALEAD, 3D VIA, 3DSWYM, BIOVIA, NETVIBES, and 3DEXCITE are commercial trademarks
or registered trademarks of Dassault Systèmes or its subsidiaries in the U.S. and/or other countries. All other trademarks are owned by their respective owners. Use of any Dassault Systèmes or its subsidiaries trademarks is subject to their express written approval.
DMU concept and contributed to these organizations transition to global engineering, enabling
engineers to share and collaborate—through virtual means—their ongoing work across the globe.
Complexity has driven the enterprise to become increasingly architecture driven; recognizing
this factor as a key MBE enabler working with its customers Dassault Systèmes brought System
Digital Mockup (SDMU) to market. SDMU and authoring in configured context built upon an
object model that reaches into models of the system of interest, its deployment environments
and execution models are key innovations that facilitated Dassault Systèmes ability to realize
Model-Based Enterprise.
Decades as the Aerospace & Defense Industry design platform
For more than three decades, Dassault Systèmes has been the design platform for many of
the major players in the Aerospace & Defense sector. Our solutions have enabled Aerospace
companies to modernize their product development and manufacturing practice to be more
effective and competitive.
The Dassault Systèmes Model Based Enterprise background
Dassault Systèmes 3DEXPERIENCE platform is built on the concept of the legendary Harvard
marketing professor Theodore Levitt, who said, “People don’t want to buy a quarter-inch drill.
They want a quarter-inch hole!” The Dassault Systèmes 3DEXPERIENCE Solutions are designed
to enable an MBE approach to programs activities by shifting the institutional mindset from
historic norms of thinking, organizing, and operating to new executional possibilities. Our
Aerospace & Defense 3DEXPERIENCE platform is composed of archetype experiences targeted
to the logical parts of the business value chain (in contrast to the domains). Each experience has
a number of key elements including technology enablement: for engineering the key aspects of
the job to be done; a means of governance: changing the way the enterprise organizes, reasons,
and decides about solving problems; situational awareness: of risk and status, decision support, as
well as key stakeholder involvement. These experience archetypes incorporate industry-specific
content such as, industry best practices, contract or regulatory compliance, MBE, Product Line
Engineering (PLE) elements that are specifically intended to shorten the enterprise time to value.
rich portfolio of industry solution experiences.
Dassault Systèmes, the 3DEXPERIENCE® Company, provides business and people with virtual universes to imagine sustainable innovations. Its
world-leading solutions transform the way products are designed, produced, and supported. Dassault Systèmes’ collaborative solutions foster social innovation,
expanding possibilities for the virtual world to improve the real world. The group brings value to over 190,000 customers of all sizes in all industries in more than
140 countries. For more information, visit www.3ds.com.
Europe/Middle East/Africa
Dassault Systèmes
10, rue Marcel Dassault
CS 40501
78946 Vélizy-Villacoublay Cedex
France
Americas
Dassault Systèmes
175 Wyman Street
Waltham, Massachusetts
02451-1223
USA
Asia-Pacific
Dassault Systèmes K.K.
ThinkPark Tower
2-1-1 Osaki, Shinagawa-ku,
Tokyo 141-6020
Japan
©2015 Dassault Systèmes. All rights reserved. 3DEXPERIENCE®
, the Compass icon and the 3DS logo, CATIA, SOLIDWORKS, ENOVIA, DELMIA, SIMULIA, GEOVIA, EXALEAD, 3D VIA, 3DSWYM, BIOVIA, NETVIBES, and 3DEXCITE are commercial trademarks
or registered trademarks of Dassault Systèmes or its subsidiaries in the U.S. and/or other countries. All other trademarks are owned by their respective owners. Use of any Dassault Systèmes or its subsidiaries trademarks is subject to their express written approval.
DMU concept and contributed to these organizations transition to global engineering, enabling
engineers to share and collaborate—through virtual means—their ongoing work across the globe.
Complexity has driven the enterprise to become increasingly architecture driven; recognizing
this factor as a key MBE enabler working with its customers Dassault Systèmes brought System
Digital Mockup (SDMU) to market. SDMU and authoring in configured context built upon an
object model that reaches into models of the system of interest, its deployment environments
and execution models are key innovations that facilitated Dassault Systèmes ability to realize
Model-Based Enterprise.
Decades as the Aerospace & Defense Industry design platform
For more than three decades, Dassault Systèmes has been the design platform for many of
the major players in the Aerospace & Defense sector. Our solutions have enabled Aerospace
companies to modernize their product development and manufacturing practice to be more
effective and competitive.
The Dassault Systèmes Model Based Enterprise background
Dassault Systèmes 3DEXPERIENCE platform is built on the concept of the legendary Harvard
marketing professor Theodore Levitt, who said, “People don’t want to buy a quarter-inch drill.
They want a quarter-inch hole!” The Dassault Systèmes 3DEXPERIENCE Solutions are designed
to enable an MBE approach to programs activities by shifting the institutional mindset from
historic norms of thinking, organizing, and operating to new executional possibilities. Our
Aerospace & Defense 3DEXPERIENCE platform is composed of archetype experiences targeted
to the logical parts of the business value chain (in contrast to the domains). Each experience has
a number of key elements including technology enablement: for engineering the key aspects of
the job to be done; a means of governance: changing the way the enterprise organizes, reasons,
and decides about solving problems; situational awareness: of risk and status, decision support, as
well as key stakeholder involvement. These experience archetypes incorporate industry-specific
content such as, industry best practices, contract or regulatory compliance, MBE, Product Line
Engineering (PLE) elements that are specifically intended to shorten the enterprise time to value.
Tags
Categories
TechnologyDownload
Download Slideshow Get the original presentation fileQuick Actions
Statistics
- Views 1,473
- Slides 17
- Favorites 1
- Age 3681 days
Related Slideshows
11
8-top-ai-courses-for-customer-support-representatives-in-2025.pptx
JeroenErne2
49 views
10
7-essential-ai-courses-for-call-center-supervisors-in-2025.pptx
JeroenErne2
48 views
13
25-essential-ai-courses-for-user-support-specialists-in-2025.pptx
JeroenErne2
37 views
11
8-essential-ai-courses-for-insurance-customer-service-representatives-in-2025.pptx
JeroenErne2
35 views
21
Know for Certain
DaveSinNM
23 views
17
PPT OPD LES 3ertt4t4tqqqe23e3e3rq2qq232.pptx
novasedanayoga46
26 views