Vanguard Magazine

28 FEBRUARY/MARCH 2020 www.vanguardcanada.com defence systeMs to move quickly) and sclerosis (resistance to change). Reengineering and realizing DES capabilities and ITSs takes time, and reacting too fast to apparent contextual changes can lead to confusion and chaos. Moreover, imposed antecedents (regula- tions, standards, budgets, labor agree- ments, legacy systems, etc.) limit freedom of action, and actors often display behav- iors impairing foresight and resolve. In this context, lead times tend to be long, and at a given point in time, there is always a gap between what is needed to cope perfectly with incoming events and the designed (To-Be) or implemented (As-Is) capabili- ties of a DES. Also, because of the lags in- volved, a DES/ITS engineered for today's requirements is likely to be inadequate and misaligned when implemented, which perpetuates large gaps instead of eliminat- ing them. Adaptive DESs can avoid these mishaps and keep lead times and capability gaps relatively small. Robust Value-Creating Designs Engineering choices can be made to elude complexity while preserving sustained value creation. A good DES/ITS design can cope efficiently with temporary disruptions and even with some evolutionary shifts with- out alterations, and if required, it can be changed easily and rapidly. Engineering is mainly about finding (analysis) and specify- ing (design) patterns: discernable contextu- al factor and business practice regularities. Rooted patterns are discovered by looking at DES to detect recurring behaviors, re- peating structures and causal relationships. Design patterns are archetypal building blocs specified to solve recurring DES or ITS engineering problems. They are of- ten based on observed patterns and best prac-tices, but they may also be original inno-vations. They can take the form of a reference architecture (RA), an applica-tion component, etc. Note, however, that bad habits are also patterns. It is not be-cause something was always done one way that it adds value! Hence, before adopting a de- sign pattern, engineers must prove that it adds value in its application context. Engineering for mission assurance re- quires the generalization and optimiza- tion of design patterns and their compli- ance with interoperability standards so that they can be easily attuned to varied contexts and conditions, as well as custom- ized for special needs, often unpredictable at the design time. This is the secret of robust long-lasting designs. When gen- eralizing, one typically replaces particular constructs with personalization data (or particular settings) within more generic constructs. For example, the mathemati- cal function is a particular case of the general function with n=2, a1=2, b1=1, a2=4 and b2=3. Im-plementing the latter allows a great varie-ty of functions to be used without chang-ing the design. To be reusable, generic patterns are documented and memorized in a Building Blocks Re- pository (BBR). Setting-up and managing this repository is an important function of the DMA. Generalization and reuse help greatly, but in a fast-changing world, if develop- ment lags are substantial, it may not be sufficient to ensure that capability gaps remain small. To achieve this, lead times must be shortened, and it must be pos- sible to postpone the adoption of a final design as far as possible in the develop- ment cycle. Delays can be reduced by as- signing activities related to the engineer- ing and transition of service value chains to agile multifunctional teams, and through strong leadership to grow a collaborative team attitude. Design decisions can be postponed by defining real options (i.e. EAs embedding services, components or technologies) that are desirable but that could eventually be dropped, deferred, ex- panded or altered, depending on how the future unfolds. The lifecycle of a DES/ ITS contains gestation periods (see Figure 2) fol-lowed by much longer operation periods. Since the life of a DES can span several decades, during the steering and design phases of reengineering initiatives, it is not possible to anticipate needs reli- ably for faraway years. The best that can be done is to elaborate plausible future sce- narios for a foreseeable moving planning horizon (say 5-10 years). To postpone de- sign decisions as far as possible and base them on fresh information, the scenarios and real options elaborated are revisited as new data becomes available, and final deci- sions are made at the last minute to ensure that capability gaps are small. At the limit, all the design is optional and EA elements are revised as new information becomes available. Adaptive Enterprise Development Knowing how to describe successive DES/ITS designs with EAs is important, but determining how to evolve DES/ ITS designs to adapt to environmental changes and keep capability gaps small is essen-tial. Depending on which aspect of a DES one concentrates (its organizational struc-ture, material structures, service de- livery, business processes, or ITSs), several Figure 3: Agile Enterprise Development Wheel

• Cover