All 3 entries tagged Peuss
View all 106 entries tagged Peuss on Warwick Blogs | View entries tagged Peuss at Technorati | There are no images tagged Peuss on this blog
January 11, 2013
Today we presented our findings concerning R&M Case to other teams and it was obvious that we should put more information about R&M Case and define it better. I think instead of trying to give lots of definitions we should tell about its purpose and, as Umud mentioned, show the process of R&M Case.
As I understood there is a certain situation when we can’t do without R&M Case. For example, when there is one big purchaser that has recently realized that he needs one specific product. After, he sets reliability and maintainability requirements to that product and identifies potential contractors who can fits into these requirements. The requirements are later translated into measurements so that the contractors could work on R&M Case which provides the evidence that company fits into R&M requirements. Later, the tender is organized to compare the contractors. The only way how they can be compared is by R&M CASE REPORT. (So to present this report contractor should follow the R&M Case). As a final stage, the purchaser chooses one of the contractors and sign a contract with him.
The R&M Case also can be defined through the simple line charter:
Purchaser => requirements => contractors => R&M Case => tender
May be this is not the best definition but this is how I understand the R&M Case.
January 10, 2013
As I mentioned in previous blog, we are now doing the fourth topic as our group project. It made me to draw an analogy with our previous CBE project (Comparison of EFQM and ISO:9000).
It seems to me that these two projects are quiet similar to each other. I mean, in case with our CBE project we were basically comparing the excellence framework with the standards, - the same is happening here, when we contrast DFSS (can be defined as methodology with different tools and techniques) and R&M Case (is about contractors who use the standard that allows them to provide evidence that they fits into R&M requirements).
Drawing on that parallel we can assume that DFSS and R&M Case can be different and similar in the same way as EFQM and ISO were. That means that we can assume the following things:
- In the same way as it happened with EFQM and ISO, the DFSS and R&M Case have different nature of motives. DFSS follows intrinsic motive while R&M Case put more emphasis on extrinsic motives such as winning a tender and getting the contract.
- The nature of DFSS and R&M Case is also differ as the former provides lots of tools that help to fit into customers’ requirements, whereas R&M Case is very descriptive and specify only what should be done (!!! But doesn’t suggest how to achieve this).
I know that EFQM vs ISO and DFSS vs R&M Case are different things, but the nature of its comparison seems to be quiet the same.
January 08, 2013
Our group is working on R&M Case and I have to say that we really stuck on defining the R&M Case. The problem is that in R&M Guide published by Ministry of Defence we found at least 3 definitions and all of them are vague. Moreover, the more we do research the more we getting confused. There are following definitions:
- The R&M Case is defined as: “A reasoned, auditable argument created to support the contention that a defined system will satisfy the R&M requirements”.
- The R&M Case is a progressively expanding body of evidence.
- The R&M Case is a living document, starting with the conception of a system, to meet a capability and continues to be developed through a number of stages of increasing detail throughout the project.
As can be seen, the R&M Case is defined as an argument, evidence and document. Therefore our group understood R&M Case as a qualitative and quantitative set of documents to ensure that system meets R&M requirements. However, it can be very controversial definition, as R&M Case has its life cycle (CADMID), which suggests that it can be also considered as a process. We still searching for the answer, I hope eventually we will get the answer.