310
Engineering Systems Integration
their strategy and execution of project integration be made part of their
annual performance appraisals. The Under Secretary for Management in the
Department of Homeland Security stated that the integration plan will be
tied to such performance for the fiscal year 2010 performance cycle (GAO
2009). Integration is a top priority for acquiring systems.
Systems Integration Model
As the process for integration is summarized briefly as bringing the right
objects together at the right time, there is a strong basis for developing a
model for integration that is represented in an integration plan: Integration
plans are often (inadvertently) said to characterize integration as an iterative
process. Integration is anything but iterative. And sometimes it is stated that
a complex project may (added for emphasis) need a written plan for integration. Systems integration (i.e., integration that will lead to a system) requires
an integration plan. Integration planning would then focus on the objects
that when integrated resulted in some bit of functionality that is integral to
the final system. Further, it is often indicated that planning includes the
sequence in which components are to be integrated. It is desirable to demonstrate links of functionality (i.e., small sequential subfunctions) that when
brought together in an end-to-end fashion, reveal a system function. In carrying out this notion of links of functionalities, integration has a sequence
where the sequence is focused on the end-to-end result, not necessarily any
particular link comprised of subfunctions. There is an important distinction
between providing links of functionality and attempting to demonstrate a
particular set of subfunction in a particular order. If the system design is
modularized by functions, then should a subfunction fail to be demonstrable, a “substitute” replicate function could be provided as a backup (referred
to as plan B). Providing requisite functionality in such a modular form would
most likely result in lesser performance than indicated at the onset of the
work, but the system could be delivered with proven functionality, with an
upgraded capability provided at a later time. The progression of demonstrating functionality is tracked typically by schedule and amount expended to
achieve that functionality. Each demonstration of functionality is a verification of the specifications, the system design, the architecture, and the requirements of the stakeholders. Specifics of the objects that when combined result
in the observed functionality is verification of the system architecture.
During the aftermath of integrating components, lessons learned are often
discussed. For integration planning, the integration plan is more often than
not a composite of sections from the systems engineering management plan,
the development plan, the systems engineering plan, and the testing plan
(other plans may also be included). The integration plan usually includes
Engineering Systems Integration
their strategy and execution of project integration be made part of their
annual performance appraisals. The Under Secretary for Management in the
Department of Homeland Security stated that the integration plan will be
tied to such performance for the fiscal year 2010 performance cycle (GAO
2009). Integration is a top priority for acquiring systems.
Systems Integration Model
As the process for integration is summarized briefly as bringing the right
objects together at the right time, there is a strong basis for developing a
model for integration that is represented in an integration plan: Integration
plans are often (inadvertently) said to characterize integration as an iterative
process. Integration is anything but iterative. And sometimes it is stated that
a complex project may (added for emphasis) need a written plan for integration. Systems integration (i.e., integration that will lead to a system) requires
an integration plan. Integration planning would then focus on the objects
that when integrated resulted in some bit of functionality that is integral to
the final system. Further, it is often indicated that planning includes the
sequence in which components are to be integrated. It is desirable to demonstrate links of functionality (i.e., small sequential subfunctions) that when
brought together in an end-to-end fashion, reveal a system function. In carrying out this notion of links of functionalities, integration has a sequence
where the sequence is focused on the end-to-end result, not necessarily any
particular link comprised of subfunctions. There is an important distinction
between providing links of functionality and attempting to demonstrate a
particular set of subfunction in a particular order. If the system design is
modularized by functions, then should a subfunction fail to be demonstrable, a “substitute” replicate function could be provided as a backup (referred
to as plan B). Providing requisite functionality in such a modular form would
most likely result in lesser performance than indicated at the onset of the
work, but the system could be delivered with proven functionality, with an
upgraded capability provided at a later time. The progression of demonstrating functionality is tracked typically by schedule and amount expended to
achieve that functionality. Each demonstration of functionality is a verification of the specifications, the system design, the architecture, and the requirements of the stakeholders. Specifics of the objects that when combined result
in the observed functionality is verification of the system architecture.
During the aftermath of integrating components, lessons learned are often
discussed. For integration planning, the integration plan is more often than
not a composite of sections from the systems engineering management plan,
the development plan, the systems engineering plan, and the testing plan
(other plans may also be included). The integration plan usually includes