Integration Readiness Research Articles

Readiness Assessment Tool: Strengthening Implementation of Integrated Care

Introduction: Optimity Advisors has developed an evidence-based Readiness Assessment tool to inform the implementation of an integrated health and care system and enable rapid system-wide sense-making in the context of high degrees of complexity. This tool was presented at ICIC 2016 and empirical data on application as a baseline assessment was provided. Delivering a sustainable integrated care system (ICS) is complex and challenging. The Readiness Assessment tool can support the initial phase of creating an ICS and assess the readiness of all provider partners to become an ICS. This tool identifies levels of integration by assessing the system against evidence-based criteria categorised into domains: Purpose and understanding: Partnerships Scope Population and patient focus Governance Finance & contracting Professional practice Care coordination Workforce Health Information Development of the tool: Last year we identified next steps for the tool including refining the risk scale, validating the domains, defining the metrics and expanding the tool. Building on the previous evidence reviews, over several months in 2016 our team of researchers have worked to refine the risk scale and validate the domains. Refined Risk Scale: When using the tool, the qualitative and quantitative data collected for each domain is reviewed and scored based on a risk scale. The risk scale has been reduced from 6 levels to 4 as testing it with clients showed 6 was making an artificial distinction resulting in unnecessary complexity. The scale of 1 – 4 is used to summarise the result of assessment. High scores reflect high levels of integration readiness. With this in mind, the progress descriptions have been reviewed and updated to reflect each domain’s specifics. Based on these changes to the risk scale, we now have a platform from which we are currently defining the metrics – this work will be ready for presentation in May 2017. Validating the Domains: We recognised in 2015/16 there was a potential for overlap between domains that may impact important interdependencies or duplications. The two domains that have been removed include Resilience and Cultural Readiness. Resilience was removed as it is an outcome of integration rather than a critical success factor. Cultural readiness was found to be assessed by other domains. Case Study: In 2016 Optimity Advisors used the Readiness Assessment toolkit when supporting the development of one of the Sustainability and Transformation Plans (STP) in South East England. This was the first time 15+ organisations in this footprint had worked together. The readiness assessment tool was used to do a rapid system assessment of the state of readiness across the footprint and to inform the implementation planning required by NHS England. The readiness assessment was conducted over 8 weeks with input from key stakeholders, using qualitative and quantitative data collection including participant observation, document review, population data analysis and stakeholder co-production. The outcome was shared with the STP delivery team and formed the basis of an actionable and prioritised programme of work to deliver the triple aim for the health and care economy. One of the areas that was identified as high risk and requiring significant investment in implementation was the in the domain of patient and population focus. Engagement with the local population and current health and care users was very limited. Without considerable effort in this area, the partners risk designing integrated services without reference to the patient and service user other than on paper. We will share the early implementation lessons of this programme of work and how the readiness tool has informed this at the conference in May 2017.

Human Readiness Assessment: A Multivariate Approach

Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) are a framework, originally created by NASA and later adopted and tailored by the US Department of Defense (Graettinger, Garcia, Siviy, Schenk, Van Syckle, 2002) to track the progress and maturity of a given technology. There are a number of derivative readiness level frameworks that have spun off the original TRL framework such as System Readiness Levels, Software Readiness Levels, Integration Readiness Levels, and Manufacturing Readiness Levels, just to name a few. Most of the time, these frameworks have an associated readiness assessment used to identify or assess the precise readiness level status. Human Readiness Levels (HRLs) are a framework used to identify the level of readiness or maturity of a given technology as it relates to its usability and its refinement to be used by a human(s) (Phillips, 2010). There are a number of HRL frameworks or similar (e.g. Human Factors Readiness Levels), yet little attention has been paid to Human Readiness Assessments (HRAs). The purpose of this paper is to review the literature of Human Readiness Levels and introduce a new multivariate Human Readiness Assessment that emphasizes workload, situation awareness (SA), and usability.

Beyond Integration Readiness Level (IRL): A Multidimensional Framework to Facilitate the Integration of System of Systems

Beyond Integration Readiness Level (IRL): A Multidimensional Framework to Facilitate the Integration of System of Systems

Beyond Integration Readiness Level (IRL): A Multidimensional Framework to Facilitate the Integration of System of Systems

Beyond Integration Readiness Level (IRL): A Multidimensional Framework to Facilitate the Integration of System of Systems

Beyond Integration Readiness Level (IRL): A Multidimensional Framework to Facilitate the Integration of System of Systems

Beyond Integration Readiness Level (IRL): A Multidimensional Framework to Facilitate the Integration of System of Systems

A State of the Art of Power Transmission Line Maintenance Robots

This paper dealt with a state-of-the-art maintenance robots for power transmission lines (PTL). The paper summarized the PTL maintenance robots that have been developed by eight major research institutions. The main features of the robot navigation were derived and classified through analysis of researches conducted by those institutions. The derived six main features were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively through readiness level assessment. For this, system readiness level (SRL) was used to evaluate the readiness level of overall system. The SRL was obtained using technology readiness level (TRL) and integration readiness level (IRL). In addition, the readiness level for each feature was reviewed through statistical analysis using box and whisker plot. In conclusion, we confirmed the status and direction of research and development on PTL maintenance robots by analyzing conventional robots with respect to six main features.

Extending System Readiness Levels to Assess and Communicate Human Readiness

ABSTRACTProgram managers need to understand the maturity of all aspects of their system to make intelligent investment decisions during product development. Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) are regularly applied to classify and communicate the state of technology development and to guide investment during technology and system development. This concept has recently been extended to include integration readiness to understand the maturity of the interfaces between technology components in a system. However, these methods do not consider whether human interfaces to the system have been fully matured. The current research extends the TRL and Integration Readiness Level (IRL) concepts to include the human elements of the system. The method proposes two concepts: the Human Capability Level and the Human IRL. The Human Capability Level refers to the capability of a system to reliably provide well equipped personnel with sufficient skills and the ability to perform successfully with the system. The Human Integration Readiness Level refers to the demonstration of effective human integration with system technologies. Each of these concepts are then combined with previous work to demonstrate the development of a System Readiness Level, which includes technology and human elements. We show that these Human Capability and Integration Level concepts can be used in conjunction with the existing TRL and IRL concepts to compare the relative maturity of components of the system for supporting each class of human users as well as performing its technical functions.

Application of Systems Readiness Level Methods in Advanced Fossil Energy Applications

The Department of Energy's Fossil Energy Program (FE), through the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), has been tasked with developing fossil energy technologies to meet U.S. greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals for over a decade. NETL has adopted Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) for the last five years to estimate progress in technology development under its research portfolio. Advanced fossil energy systems need to be tested at full-scale in an integrated facility before they can be considered ready for commercial deployment. Commercial-scale demonstrations of energy technology present numerous challenges associated with first-of-a-kind facilities, one in particular being the need to integrate multiple emerging technologies that were previously demonstrated in pilot-scale applications into a design that can be constructed and operated under commercial plant operating conditions.Systems Readiness Level (SRL) methodology is an analysis approach developed by the Department of Defense (DoD) as a metric for assessing progress in developing major military systems. SRL methodology builds on Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) widely used in government agencies to assess the maturity of emerging technologies under development. To estimate the level of readiness of a system comprising multiple emerging technologies in their current state, SRL methodology unites the TRL for each technology with Integration Readiness Levels that express the need for each of these technologies to be integrated with other technologies in the system. A matrix algebra approach is then used to estimate an overall level of systems readiness for the intended system.NETL tested SRL methodology in a pilot application with the objective of developing better analysis tools to support major decisions regarding advanced fossil energy technologies. NETL applied SRL methodology to estimate the readiness of two advanced fossil energy technology projects using data that was available at the time they were initiated. This paper describes the successful pilot application, the lessons learned and the potential for SRL methodology to support technology development.

Incidence matrix approach for calculating readiness levels

Contemporary system maturity assessment approaches have failed to provide robust quantitative system evaluations resulting in increased program costs and developmental risks. Standard assessment metrics, such as Technology Readiness Levels (TRL), do not sufficiently evaluate increasingly complex systems. The System Readiness Level (SRL) is a newly developed system development metric that is a mathematical function of TRL and Integration Readiness Level (IRL) values for the components and connections of a particular system. SRL acceptance has been hindered because of concerns over SRL mathematical operations that may lead to inaccurate system readiness assessments. These inaccurate system readiness assessments are called readiness reversals. A new SRL calculation method using incidence matrices is proposed to alleviate these mathematical concerns. The presence of SRL readiness reversal is modeled for four SRL calculation methods across several system configurations. Logistic regression analysis demonstrates that the proposed Incidence Matrix SRL (IMSRL) method has a decreased presence of readiness reversal than other approaches suggested in the literature. Viable SRL methods will foster greater SRL adoption by systems engineering professionals and will support system development risk reduction goals.

Safety Innovations : Best Practice Recommendations For Infusion Pump-Information Network Integration

<i>Safety Innovations</i> : Best Practice Recommendations For Infusion Pump-Information Network Integration

고품질 무기체계 획득을 위한 성숙도평가 방안 소개

Abstract Purpose: Technology readiness assessment(TRA) used as a standard readiness assessment tool in the acquis-ition program of weapon system has some limitations in the comprehensive understanding of the complex system. Therefore, this research is intended to suggest a holistic maturity assessment method for the acquis-ition of high quality weapon system. Methods: Technology readiness level(TRL), manufacturing readiness level(MRL), integration readiness lev-el(IRL) and system readiness level(SRL) developed to assess system maturities in the various aspects are compared and analyzed to draw an improvement avenue for the current readiness assessment method.Results: TRL, MRL, IRL and SRL have large differences in their maturity targets during the acquisition life cycle: technological performance, manufacturing capability, interface between components and total system, respectively. They complement one another’s shortcomingsConclusion: To achieve a successful acquisition of high quality weapon system, multi-dimensional readiness assessment is required. Therefore, comprehensive readiness assessment using TRL, MRL, IRL and SRL will contribute to the acquisition of high quality weapon system through the accurate maturity information of overall system.Key Words: Technology Readiness, Manufacturing Readiness, Integration Readiness, System Readiness

Subsea system readiness level assessment

Both the American Petroleum Institute (API) 17N: 2009 and Det Norske Veritas (DNV) RP-A203 (2011) recommend that the technologies inserted into subsea installations should be assessed during design and manufacturing using a technology readiness level (TRL) scale. This should be used as a measure of maturity of all the individual technologies, for qualification and readiness assurance. This paper proposes the creation of a system-based approach for managing the development of subsea systems and making effective decisions to ensure the efficient progress of the project. It recommends complementing TRL with an integration readiness level (IRL) scale, to address IRL between the inserted technologies, along with a system readiness level (SRL) scale to assess the overall project status. It also presents a method for combining the current TRL scale and the proposed new IRL scale to determine an estimate of SRL at all stages of a subsea system development. This provides a composite metric for determining the system readiness level for project delivery. The application of the new proposed scales is demonstrated using a case example.

NASA Environmentally Responsible Aviation Project Develops Next-Generation Low-Emissions Combustor Technologies (Phase I)

NASA’s Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project is working with industry to develop the fuel flexible combustor technologies for a new generation of low-emissions engine targeted for the 2020 timeframe. These new combustors will reduce Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions to half of current state-of-the-art (SOA) combustors, while simultaneously reducing noise and fuel burn. The purpose of the low NOx fuel-flexible combustor research is to advance the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Integration Readiness Level (IRL) of a low NOx, fuel flexible combustor to the point where it can be integrated in the next generation of aircraft. To reduce project risk and optimize research benefit NASA chose to found two Phase 1 contracts. The first Phase 1 contracts went to engine manufactures and were awarded to: General Electric Company, and Pratt & Whitney Company. The second Phase 1 contracts went to fuel injector manufactures Goodrich Corporation, Parker Hannifin Corporation, and Woodward Fuel System Technology. In 2012, two sector combustors were tested at NASA’s ASCR. The results indicated 75% NOx emission reduction below the 2004 CAEP/6 regulation level.

Mathematical properties of System Readiness Levels

AbstractSystems engineers need quantifiable metrics for measuring the readiness of a system. The recently developed System Readiness Level (SRL) is such a metric. SRL is a function of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Integration Readiness Level (IRL). The mathematical operations used to define this function have some inherent properties. Four desired mathematical properties of SRL models are developed from these inherent properties and other properties suggested from a review of the literature. Matrix algebra and tropical algebra are discussed in the literature as possible mathematical operations. These mathematical operations are reviewed to determine if they meet the desired properties. Tropical Algebra (TA) is found to inherently meet these desired properties. Future research will be conducted to determine if an SRL model using TA is a viable option. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 16:

Temporal integration depends on increased prestimulus beta band power

Temporal integration was examined using a missing element task, in which task performance depends on the ability to integrate brief successive stimulus displays. Previous studies have suggested that temporal integration is under endogenous control and that integration is more likely when stimuli match the observer's temporal expectancies. Beta oscillations have previously been related to such cognitive (and attentional) control, as well as to audiovisual integration. We thus hypothesized that prestimulus power in the beta frequency band might reflect "integration readiness" and distinguish trials in which stimuli were successfully integrated from unsuccessful ones. The results showed increased upper beta power (21-30 Hz) prior to successful integration over central and parietal electrodes. This finding supported the idea that increased prestimulus beta power might reflect general control processes that can facilitate integration.

The response to the changing landscape of tomorrow: Reconfigurable organizations

This paper presents a synthesis of different theoretical concepts and empirical surveys examining the nature of contemporary organizations that are able to survive and thrive in the long run within the conditions of discontinuous environment. It expands the model of reconfigurable organization presented by Galbraith et al. (2002) by providing in-depth understanding of its basic characteristics: Active leadership, knowledge management, learning, flexibility, integration, employee commitment and change readiness. These characteristics are presented as enablers for designing reconfigurable organizational structure, which is depicted in this paper. Reconfigurable organizations rest on the on-going redesign of its processes and structure by redeploying its resources in the manner that is most suitable for the current situation. Key words: Organization, reconfigurability, environment, discontinuity.

A probabilistic approach to system maturity assessment

AbstractPrescriptive metrics have been widely accepted and used in engineering management to assess the progress and success of engineering efforts. However, these types of metrics have two major challenges: human subjectivity and confidence in data estimates. In this paper we use a system‐focused prescriptive metric entitled System Readiness Level (SRL) [a function of Technology and Integration Readiness Levels (TRL/IRL)], to propose a probabilistic approach to estimating the development maturity of a system of interest. In order to reduce the subjective impact, we propose a probabilistic method by assigning probability distributions to the estimated TRLs and IRLs to reflect the reality of evaluators' subjective estimates. Based on these probability distributions of TRLs and IRLs, a Monte‐Carlo simulation methodology is used to assess the maturity status of the whole system and its components. An illustrative example is examined to show the proposed methodology and to investigate its implication to engineering management. The paper concludes with a discussion of the added value of this new methodology, its limitation, and future work. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 14

Integration maturity metrics: Development of an integration readiness level

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.

System Development Planning via System Maturity Optimization

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.

7.3.2 Monte‐Carlo Simulation Approach for System Readiness Level Estimation

AbstractA system‐focused prescriptive metric, called System Readiness Level (SRL), which incorporates both the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale and the concept of an Integration Readiness Level (IRL) has recently been established to measure current and future readiness status of a system under development. In previous research, deterministic values for components' TRLs and IRLs estimation were assumed, which involves much human subjectivity. Moreover, only point estimation from calculation was proposed in previous research. In order to reduce the subjective influence, we propose a probabilistic method here to combine all evaluators' estimation towards a system's components and integration points. Based on the probabilistic form of TRLs and IRLs, a Monte‐Carlo simulation methodology is followed herein to assess the maturity status (SRL) of a system. An illustrative example is examined to show how to employ the proposed methodology. The paper concludes with the discussion of the gained value of the new methodology as well as its limitation.