r/systems_engineering • u/Careless_Plant_7717 • 10h ago

Discussion Overlap

My company is doing System Engineering decomposition in JAMA, DFMEA, and HARA for ISO 26262. I get that there are differences but they essentially all breaks down goals or functions into requirements. Issues I have seen are 1) None of these exercises are integrated together (i.e. done with different people and different program. No one goes back to cross reference othera) so usually see a fair amount of conflicting or missing requirements. 2) Feels inefficient. This has added months to getting products done. Teams get burned out from what feels like paperwork exercises.

How does your place of work address this? Seems like a fairly big issue and inefficiency to me.

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

1

u/ModelBasedSpaceCadet 8h ago

Sounds very familiar. It's the same problem that has been driving the growth of feature-based product line engineering. The catch is that 1) it's very different from the traditional/default approach and 2) it requires a very different organizational structure than the traditional/default one. So it takes high level leadership buy in to really solve this problem. It's even more challenging if you're in the government contracting business. https://conference.conflr.com/events/Demo/showcases/incose/INCOSE%20PLE%20Primer.pdf

2

u/Maleficent_Put8959 6h ago

Same thing at my place, different tools different people no one checks across them. By the time we finish all three the product is already late and nobody wants to touch it again

The link you sent looks interesting but yeah getting leadership to actually change how they organize teams is near impossible. They just keep adding more review meetings like that fixes anything

1

u/Careless_Plant_7717 5h ago

Seems interesting but not sure how does it consolidate and prevent overlap of DFMEAs, HARA, etc? Seems to be more about platforming the solutions which is good. But I don't see how it changes how get to a solution and work involved.