261
Integration in Systems Engineering Context
the assumptions or initial conditions. Additionally, the analyst explores
alternatives in the scenarios based on “what if” situations that represent different courses of action (i.e., the result of different choices). Each adaptation
will drive a different system response. By examining the different responses
from these variations, one will observe (or in some cases, discover) the
stakeholders that interact with the system.
Finally, a master list of potential stakeholders is compiled from the results
of the brainstorming session, augmented with the lists generated from
examination of the scenarios.
Any stakeholder analysis will result in a degree of uncertainty with
regards to the problem that needs to be solved and the requirements for a
corresponding set of solutions. A possible defect is missing a stakeholder of
consequence. Furthermore, participation by a group of people and representatives of organizations or entities brings with it a set of unique and dynamic
characteristics. As a result, personalities and agendas are complicating factors that must be endured, although they sometimes impose difficult limitations and constraints.
After the stakeholder analysis is completed, it is useful to evaluate the specific methods and their consequences through which the system can be
thought of and analyzed. The comprehensiveness and usefulness of the stakeholder analysis is revealed in discussions with stakeholders to explore the
earlier-stated requirements to ascertain if those requirements are certain in
the minds of the stakeholders, reflect the needs of the stakeholders, and may
be indicative of other requirements that have as yet been unsaid (whether
missed or simply omitted). For example, changes in a policy may have very
visible impacts on the design of the system. If the stakeholder expects changes
in policies from time to time, then it may be important to consider desensitizing the system design to small changes in policy using the stakeholder sentience analysis as a feedback measure. Further, changes in policies do occur
whether they can be planned for in advance or not. Knowing which policies
the system design (or architecture) is most sensitive to allows the systems engineer to consider defining back-up options should key policies change. These
back-up options would not become requirements, only discussion points from
which scenarios might be developed to investigate the sensitivities of planning
on the futurity of events. Rather than a prediction or a projection,* the futurity
* A prediction is a probabilistic statement that something will happen in the future based on
what is known today. A prediction generally assumes that future changes in related conditions will not have a significant influence. In this sense, a prediction is most influenced by the
“initial conditions”—the current situation from which we predict a change. In contrast to a
prediction, a projection specifically allows for significant changes in the set of “boundary
conditions” that might influence the prediction, creating “if this, then that” types of statements. Thus, a projection is a probabilistic statement that it is possible that something will
happen in the future if certain conditions develop. The set of boundary conditions that is
used in conjunction with making a projection is often called a scenario, and each scenario is
based on assumptions about how the future will develop.
Integration in Systems Engineering Context
the assumptions or initial conditions. Additionally, the analyst explores
alternatives in the scenarios based on “what if” situations that represent different courses of action (i.e., the result of different choices). Each adaptation
will drive a different system response. By examining the different responses
from these variations, one will observe (or in some cases, discover) the
stakeholders that interact with the system.
Finally, a master list of potential stakeholders is compiled from the results
of the brainstorming session, augmented with the lists generated from
examination of the scenarios.
Any stakeholder analysis will result in a degree of uncertainty with
regards to the problem that needs to be solved and the requirements for a
corresponding set of solutions. A possible defect is missing a stakeholder of
consequence. Furthermore, participation by a group of people and representatives of organizations or entities brings with it a set of unique and dynamic
characteristics. As a result, personalities and agendas are complicating factors that must be endured, although they sometimes impose difficult limitations and constraints.
After the stakeholder analysis is completed, it is useful to evaluate the specific methods and their consequences through which the system can be
thought of and analyzed. The comprehensiveness and usefulness of the stakeholder analysis is revealed in discussions with stakeholders to explore the
earlier-stated requirements to ascertain if those requirements are certain in
the minds of the stakeholders, reflect the needs of the stakeholders, and may
be indicative of other requirements that have as yet been unsaid (whether
missed or simply omitted). For example, changes in a policy may have very
visible impacts on the design of the system. If the stakeholder expects changes
in policies from time to time, then it may be important to consider desensitizing the system design to small changes in policy using the stakeholder sentience analysis as a feedback measure. Further, changes in policies do occur
whether they can be planned for in advance or not. Knowing which policies
the system design (or architecture) is most sensitive to allows the systems engineer to consider defining back-up options should key policies change. These
back-up options would not become requirements, only discussion points from
which scenarios might be developed to investigate the sensitivities of planning
on the futurity of events. Rather than a prediction or a projection,* the futurity
* A prediction is a probabilistic statement that something will happen in the future based on
what is known today. A prediction generally assumes that future changes in related conditions will not have a significant influence. In this sense, a prediction is most influenced by the
“initial conditions”—the current situation from which we predict a change. In contrast to a
prediction, a projection specifically allows for significant changes in the set of “boundary
conditions” that might influence the prediction, creating “if this, then that” types of statements. Thus, a projection is a probabilistic statement that it is possible that something will
happen in the future if certain conditions develop. The set of boundary conditions that is
used in conjunction with making a projection is often called a scenario, and each scenario is
based on assumptions about how the future will develop.