The Ultimate Guide to the SDLC

The Complete and Ready-To-Adapt System Development Life Cycle

  • Home
  • SDLC Principles
  • Articles
  • Table of Contents
  • Downloads
You are here: Home / SDLC / US Vee Model

US Vee Model

By Victor M Font Jr 2 Comments

US Vee System Realization
Forsberg & Mooz System Realization – Used with Permission
The US Vee-Model was first discussed at a joint conference sponsored by the National Council on Systems Engineering (NCOSE) and American Society for Engineering Management (ASEM) in Chattanooga, TN on October 21–23, 1991. A paper named “The Relationship of System Engineering to the Project Cycle” written by Dr. Kevin Forsberg and Harold Mooz, Co-Principals for the Center for Systems Management, formerly of Cupertino, California, now located in Vienna, Virginia. The paper was also presented at The 12th INTERNET World Congress on Project Management held in Oslo, Norway on June 9–11, 1994.

Both Forsberg and Mooz are involved in the aerospace industry. At the time of the document, Forsberg had 27 years of experience in Applied Research, System Engineering, Program, and Proposal Management, followed by seven years of successful consulting to both government and industry. He received the NASA Public Service Medal for his contributions to the Space Shuttle program. Mooz had 22 years of experience in System Engineering and Program Management, followed by ten years of successful consulting to government and industry. Mooz has won and successfully managed highly reliable, sophisticated satellite programs from inception to operations. It’s a fascinating coincidence that both the German and US V-Models were parented by the aerospace industry.

Forsberg and Mooz believe their Vee-Model addresses the system engineering deficiencies of Linear Waterfall, Modified Waterfall and DOD-STD-2167A, the immediate successor to DOD-STD-2167. They mention Boehm’s Spiral Model in their paper and say, “While Boehm’s spiral representation (Exhibit 4) achieves his objective, the system engineering role is still obscured.” The “(Exhibit 4)” in the quote refers to an image of Boehm’s model reproduced in their document.

As all the other models we’ve discussed thus far, the Vee-Model is Waterfall based with notable exceptions. They said, “In our approach, the technical aspect of the project cycle is envisioned as a “Vee,” starting with User needs on the upper left and ending with a User-validated system on the upper right.” Notice the deliberate use of the word “user” implying end users are involved in all aspects of the development cycle.

The model recognizes the changeability of requirements and provides for the establishment of six baselines: User Requirements Baseline, Concept Baseline, System Performance Baseline, “Design-To” Baseline, “Build-To” Baseline and “As-Built” Baseline. The process is iterative and allows for incremental development and concurrent engineering within any phase until that phase’s stage review. After a stage review successfully completes, a new phase is initiated and the old phase is not revisited as in the Waterfall design. Major emphasis is placed on Verification and Validation activities, risk identification and risk reduction modeling. Verification and validation mean that all requirements are testable and agreed to by the stakeholders. We’ll discuss verification and validation in detail in the requirements chapters.

The Forsberg and Mooz Vee-Model consists of nine phases:

  • Understand user requirements, develop system concept and validation plan
  • Develop system performance specification and system verification plan
  • Expand system performance specification into CI “Design-to” specifications and CI verification plan
  • Evolve “Design-to” specifications into “Build-to” documentation and inspection plan
  • Fabricate, assemble and code to “Build-to” documentation
  • Inspect to “Build-to” documentation
  • Assemble CIs and perform CI verification to CI “Design-to” specifications
  • Integrate system and perform system verification to performance specification
  • Demonstrate and validate system to user validation plan

Much of the risk analysis and concurrent systems engineering occur in “off-core” activities. Forsberg and Mooz said, “While technical feasibility decisions are made in the off-core activities only decisions at the core-level are put under Configuration Management at the various Control Gates. Off-core activities, analyses, and models are performed to substantiate the core decisions and to ensure that risks have been mitigated or determined to be acceptable.”

UltimateSDLC.com runs on the Genesis Framework

The Genesis Framework empowers you to quickly and easily build incredible websites with WordPress. Genesis provides the secure and search-engine-optimized foundation that takes WordPress to places you never thought it could go.

Check out the incredible features and the selection of designs. It's that simple—start using Genesis now!

Click here to download The Genesis Guide for Absolute Beginners (PDF - 1.4 MB)

Comments

  1. Jessica Tattersall says

    June 26, 2021 at 1:07 pm

    Genesis link doesn’t work

    Reply
    • Victor M Font Jr says

      June 27, 2021 at 8:27 am

      Thanks for pointing this out, Jessica! Studio Press recently changed ownership and the links changed. I’ve updated them to the new pages.

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Jessica Tattersall Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Buy Now, Instant Download

The Ultimate Guide to the SDLC front cover
PDF eBook

$49.99

Free Download

Download Free Preview

$0.00Free Download

UltimateSDLC.Com is Hosted on SiteGround

SiteGround Web Hosting

Testimonials

Thank You for Your Testimonial

“…The author has truly “hit the nail on the head.” Whether you are an academic student who is aspiring to be an IT professional one day, a trainee that has just started career, a business & quality analyst and manager that has years of IT SDLC project experience—a must read for an IT professional at all levels of IT journey.” —Sekhar Bommana PMP, ITIL, VP – … Read More

Consulting Services

I have the prescription for your IT ailments

Implementing a SDLC is not an easy task. In fact, it can take months or even years to develop the policies, processes, procedures, metrics and training to bring you the kind of results that lead to repeatable project successes, reduced rework and deliverables that meet or exceed stakeholder expectations. There are a number of factors that … Read More

Connect with the Author

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Copyright Notice

Copyright © 2010–2025 Victor M. Font Jr.
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this website’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Victor M. Font Jr. with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Recent Posts

  • Managing Scope Creep
  • Agile Manifesto
  • Adaptive Software Development
  • Incremental Commitment Model
  • Legend of the Chicken and Pig

Recent Comments

  • Dawlat Waziri on The Project Management Method and the SDLC
  • Kuliah Terbaik on The 3-Legged Stool of IT Business Value
  • Victor M Font Jr on The Spiral Model
  • Victor M Font Jr on Incremental Commitment Model
  • Kuliah Terbaik on Incremental Commitment Model

Tags

Affiliates Agile Best Practice Business Analysis Checklist Commission Elicitation Good Requirements Hybrid Hyrid IT Governance Model Organizational Change Outsourcing Project Management Quality Assurance Requirements Elicitation Risk Management SDLC Thought Provoking Waterfall Waterfall Variant

Return to top of page

Copyright © 2010–2025 Victor M. Font Jr.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Author | Report Erratum | Sitemap