Search

Global crises have forced the healthcare sector to advance the way they practise. Patient empowerment has emerged as one of the solutions to face these challenges. Nevertheless, patient empowerment is still lacking for accepted conditions, making it difficult to effectively promote within the healthcare system. This study aims to systemically map the concept of patient empowerment using principles of systems thinking with the Boardman Soft Systems Methodology that enables a graphical visualization (i.e., Systemigrams). This includes levels of patient empowerment and their relationship with other concepts such as health literacy, health providers, self‐management, patient characteristics and healthcare outcomes. This study contributes to the literature by (a) articulating a set of conditions to enable patient empowerment, (b) identifying the key concept that might influence the level of patient empowerment and (c) providing guidance and propositions for future research that can promote and further study patient empowerment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, a system maturity scale, i.e., system readiness level (SRL), was proposed to measure the maturity that a system achieves during development. However, this SRL assesses maturity for systems from only a single function and capability perspective, and is unable to assess maturity for multifunction multicapability (MFMC) systems. With ever increasing systems that provide multiple functions and capabilities, it is challenging for managers to properly allocate resources to ensure the achievement of critical capabilities and functions. In order to prioritize the allocation of resources for component development, it is common to perform importance analysis during system development and maintenance. Therefore, this paper first enhances the original SRL definition for maturity assessment at the capability, function, and system levels, and then, proposes the use of component importance analysis for the identification of the most important components for system development. This paper approaches component importance by introducing three important measures with respects to three main factors: technology readiness level/integration readiness level, developing cost, and developing effort. The paper uses an illustrative example of a MFMC system to show the proposed methodology and enhanced definitions and concludes with a discussion of the added value and future work. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The purpose of this paper is to describe a methodology that enables systems engineers or program managers to formulate a system-wide optimal development plan in order to facilitate monitoring and evaluation of the development process in terms of the actual readiness of the system. It proposes the use of the System Readiness Level (SRL) scale to measure the maturity of a system composed of technological elements, which are being developed based on cost-driven strategies (as opposed to time-to-market-driven strategies). A constrained optimization model is used to identify which critical technology elements and integration links can be matured to which levels at a particular time such that the development costs are minimized while a targeted SRL value is attained on schedule. While the algorithm does not necessarily reduce the total cost of development, it is able to find the minimal amount of expenditures which will achieve the desired maturity level during the earlier part of the development process. Essentially, it shifts the rest of the expenditures towards the latter part of the development during which model-based integration and testing procedures which have been suggested by others can be applied to reduce costs and time further. This can be a useful option to have when there is substantial uncertainty with the system due to its high novelty and technological content. As a value added approach, the model gives the systems engineer the information needed to understand what a delay may mean to development, so a more informed decision can be made. The paper concludes by discussing the possible use of the optimal development plan to monitor and control the progress of systems under development. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to optimize the process of complex system integration, it is necessary to first improve the management of the process. This can be accomplished through the use of a generally understood metric. One such metric is Technology Readiness Level (TRL), which is used to determine technology maturity, but does not address integration maturity. Integration Maturity Metric (IMM) requirements are developed through review of aerospace and defense related literature. These requirements are applied to currently existing integration maturity metrics, and the proposed Integration Readiness Level (IRL). IRL is then refined to fully meet these requirements, and applied to three aerospace case studies, along with the other identified metrics, to compare and contrast the results obtained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many U.S. government agencies and their contractors have subscribed to using the prescriptive metric of technology readiness level (TRL) as a measure of maturity of an individual technology, with a view toward operational use in a system context. A comprehensive set of concerns becomes relevant when this metric is abstracted from an individual technology to a system context, which may involve interplay among multiple technologies that are integrated through a system development life cycle. This paper proposes a system-focused approach for managing system development and making effective and efficient decisions during this life cycle. A system readiness level (SRL) index that incorporates both the current TRL scale and the concept of an integration readiness level is presented with methods for determining current and future readiness of a system. Using techniques in evolutionary algorithms, the SRL index is optimized based on resource allocation to provide a decision support approach that enhances managerial capabilities in the system's development life cycle. The optimization model for the SRL is then executed with a case example and resource constraints of 75%, 60%, 45%, 30%, and 15% to demonstrate how it can be used to make strategic planning decisions in the system's development life cycle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge for managing projects, for the development of systems, has not kept pace with the increasing complexity and integration of the projects themselves. This increased complexity has permitted some to reason distinctions between systems projects and propose a form of system called a "system of system" (SoS). Faced with this situation, we argue that a single point solution cannot be the answer to how to manage these systems. We suggest the remedy is a form of project management predicated on four principles that underline SoS thinking: problem demystification, legacy assessment, state-space solutioning, and integration framework. Using these principles as a foundation, we provide a set of characteristics (i.e. autonomy, belonging, connectivity, diversity, and emergence) that can be applied as fundamental building blocks to actualize the management of an SoS, or any system. More importantly, we present an architecture predicated on the paradoxes that exist in realizing and formalizing these characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]