Value based Architecture of Digital Product‐Service Systems

Kumar, Anand; Lokku, Doji Samson; Zope, Nikhil R.; Reddypogu, Jose Kumar

doi:10.1002/j.2334-5837.2017.00405.x

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the context of NI projects, the term "value" refers hereafter to the quantified or qualified stakeholders' overall assessment of the level of utility, acceptability, or adequacy of a NI system based on perceptions of what is received and what is given. 11,10 Second, to avoid any misinterpretations or ambiguities it is necessary to grasp the complexity of the NI itself as a whole. Third, it is necessary to accurately define and manage the development project (activities, tasks, and operations) and to plan the resources to be engaged.…”

Section: Background and Problematicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model‐based architecting evaluation method for the delivery of complex nuclear projects

Bourdon

Couturier

Chapurlat

et al. 2023

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Facing the organizational and technological complexity of nuclear infrastructures (NI), the public reluctance in nuclear technology and the increasing restrictive regulatory environment, improving the conceptualization and evaluation of NI architecture is crucial for the successful completion of NI projects. Indeed, many technical engineering difficulties or delays in delivery can be avoided by deepening the design and evaluation of NI architectures. In a context where model‐based systems engineering (MBSE) is becoming more and more relevant, it is interesting to integrate evaluation into this process. Although the architecture evaluation (AE) process is rather well defined in the literature and linked to system analysis practices, it is quite difficult to deploy and pilot within complex NI projects. This article proposes a model‐based method, EVAluation for Critical Infrastructure Model Based System Engineering (EVA‐CIME), to facilitate the deployment of AE processes on a project. The components of this method are described and illustrated in a study of a NI design. The benefits and limitations of EVA‐CIME in its state of development are discussed and lead to the conclusion that the method should be extended to foster an AE culture within the company itself.

show abstract

Section: Background and Problematicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model‐based architecting evaluation method for the delivery of complex nuclear projects

Bourdon

Couturier

Chapurlat

et al. 2023

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared to previous research on service typologies and prod-uct service systems (Cook, Chon-Huat, and Chen 1999, Wild et al 2007, and SEBoK 2019, the proposed framework presents some distinctive characteristics: ■ Extending service typologies to encompass the different service and product dimensions developed by our company (from "pure" products and services to integrated Product-Service Product Lines); ■ Considering services as products and applying a product line approach to structure their development; ■ Applying Feature-Based Product Line Engineering (INCOSE 2019) to the Product-Service Product Line design and development (that is, to a Product-Services family), as opposed to applying service engineering to developing individual product-service systems as often described in literature (Tan and McAloone 2010, Polaine, Løvlie, and Reason 2014, Kumar et al 2017.…”

Section: A Product Line Systems Engineering Framework For Product-servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Product Line Engineering for Digital Product‐Services

Góngora¹,

Robic²,

Beuche³

2021

INSIGHT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digitizing the value chain brings along new business opportunities to organizations wishing to adopt a service‐oriented approach. This trend, referred to as digital transformation, has taken over the business world in recent years. Digital technologies allow a company to move towards outcome‐based commitments, pricing, and contracts with its customers. However, these technologies can also make product portfolio management more challenging. Whereas transforming a product offering into a product‐service offering through digitization does not in itself revolutionize product line systems engineering processes and methods, it is of the utmost importance to consider this transformation concerns more than a new culture or using new technology and requires, first and foremost, an alignment with an organization's global strategy and structure.In this paper, we present a conceptual framework that helps define a high‐level strategy to implement a product‐service offer in an organization. The distinctive framework aspects include the Product‐Service Product Line or PSPL concept (a product line of product‐services), the elements to define the PSPL business model (pricing model, pricing metrics, and commitment types), a product‐services typology, and a product line engineering method extension for architecting the PSPL (notably, a specific service building block type to support a composable design approach and a feature model including service‐related, socio‐technical features).

show abstract

“…• The second characteristic of the proposed framework consists of considering services as products and applying a product line approach to structure their development. • Finally, the third characteristic deals with the application of feature-based Product Line Engineering (INCOSE 2019) to the design and development of a Product-Service Product Line (that is, to a family of Product-Services), as opposed to the application of service engineering to the development of individual product-service systems as often described in literature (Tan and McAloone 2010, Polaine et al 2014, Kumar et al 2017).…”

Section: Product-service Plse Framework -Purpose and Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Product‐Service Systems meet Product Line Systems Engineering – The Cart before the Horse?

Chale-Gongora

Robic

Beuche

2020

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of digital technologies opens the door to new business opportunities for traditional product manufacturing companies thanks to the numerous services that these technologies make possible. This trend, referred to as digital transformation, has taken over the business world in recent years. In this new technology‐enabled opportunity space, the appropriateness of traditional Product Line Systems Engineering (PLSE) practices can be questioned. This paper addresses the different challenges facing the application of PLSE to product‐service systems, including those supported by digital technologies. To meet these challenges, a conceptual framework that extends current PLSE practices in order to define a structured approach for Product‐Service Product Lines (PSPL) is proposed. The fundamental concepts behind the framework include a typology of PSPL and specific methods for architecting and engineering the PSPL (more precisely, for managing the variability of the PSPL), and for aligning the business strategies of classical product lines (i.e. tangible, physical product lines) with those of their corresponding, and less classical, service product lines. The authors believe that the proposed framework can help evolve the practice of PLSE and enhance the foundations of Systems Engineering with useful concepts.

show abstract

Value based Architecture of Digital Product‐Service Systems

Cited by 7 publications

References 6 publications

Model‐based architecting evaluation method for the delivery of complex nuclear projects

Model‐based architecting evaluation method for the delivery of complex nuclear projects

Product Line Engineering for Digital Product‐Services

Digital Product‐Service Systems meet Product Line Systems Engineering – The Cart before the Horse?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About