Ill-Structured Commercial Ship Design Problems: The Responsive System Comparison Method on an Offshore Vessel Case Sigurd S. Pettersen a , Carl F. Rehn a , Jose J. Garcia a,c , Stein O. Erikstad a , Per O. Brett a,c , Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett a , Adam M. Ross b , Donna H. Rhodes b a Department of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway b Systems Engineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEAri), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA, USA c Ulstein International AS, Ulsteinvik, Norway Abstract: In this paper, we address difficulties in ill-structured ship design problems. We focus on issues related to evaluation of commercial system performance, involving perceptions of value, risk and time, to better understand trade-offs at the early design stages. Further, this paper presents a two-stakeholder offshore ship design problem. The Responsive Systems Comparison (RSC) method is applied to the case to untangle complexity, and to address how one can structure the problem of handling future contextual uncertainty to ensure value robustness. Focus is on alignment of business strategies of the two stakeholders with design decisions through exploration and evaluation of the design space. Uncertainties potentially jeopardizing the value propositions are explicitly considered using epoch-era analysis. The case study demonstrates the usefulness of the RSC method for structuring ill-structured design problems. Key words: Systems Design, Naval Architecture, Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT), Uncertainty, Complexity 1. Introduction In a competitive maritime industry, there is a need to design, develop and deliver systems able to sustain value throughout a multi-decade lifetime. However, design of ocean engineering systems remains a difficult task, mainly due to the complexity and uncertainty governing these systems and their sociotechnical contexts. Even a clear definition of what is a better ship is ambiguous (Ulstein and Brett 2015) - it all depends. Understanding the relation between business strategies and corresponding marine design decisions, is not straight-forward, and the ship design task could be considered a wicked problem (Andrews 2012), or an ill-structured problem (Simon 1973). An ill- structured problem lacks a specified beginning and goal states, and the relation between these are unknown. More information must be gathered to enrich the problem definition and take informed decisions. A differentiation can hence be made between the problem of defining the problem to solve, and the problem of solving this problem. In this paper we stress the importance of understanding both of these aspects when it comes to design of complex systems. The driving forces behind ocean engineering systems are often commercially oriented, introducing risks due to high market volatility. High oil prices and large ultra-deepwater discoveries have spurred the development of offshore oil and gas fields. Offshore construction vessels (OCVs) have taken part in this arena, particularly in the development of marginally profitable fields. More recently, the oil price collapse has had significant impact on this industry, rendering recent large multi-functional, gold-plated design solutions unprofitable. However, there are multiple other sources of contextual uncertainty that can affect the initial value propositions, and hence need to be considered in ship design, including technical, regulatory and operational factors. Risk and uncertainty are usually associated with negative consequences, but it is also important to acknowledge the upside opportunities uncertainty can introduce (McManus and Hastings 2006). Actively considering uncertainty in the design process can result in solutions that reduce downside risk and increase upside exposure, hence increasing the expected system performance over its lifetime. Design solutions that continue to provide value in a variety of contexts are known as value robust solutions, which can be achieved by either active or passive value robustness strategies, relating to whether the system actively can change in response to uncertainty or not. Active change involves implementation of changeability, characterized by the ability of a system to alter its form and function for the future. This involves system properties such as robustness, flexibility, agility, scalability and upgradeability, often also referred to as ilities (Fricke and Schulz 2005; Ross, Rhodes, and Hastings 2008; Niese and Singer 2014; Chalupnik, Wynn, and Clarkson 2013). The current situation in the offshore industry serves as a perfect example of the importance of focusing on value robustness and flexibility as key factors for success in a volatile industry.