A number of case applications of tradespace exploration have further extended the types of analyses and knowledge insights that can be gained about tradeoffs between design choices and perceived utility and cost of alternatives. These extensions include application beyond its heritage aerospace domain to the transportation domain, comparing distinct concepts on a common tradespace, considering the impact of changing needs and contexts over time, evaluation of alternatives in a “light effort ” manner. In parallel with these case applications, a formalization of the tradespace exploration process has emerged, using a question-driven approach to ensure the knowledge generated is practical and useful to decision makers. These questions are introduced and applied to three example space systems in order to illustrate insights gained in answering the questions. The insights include identifying “good ” designs, the strengths and weakness of selected alternatives across a tradespace, limiting constraints and requirements that could allow for less expensive solutions. Additionally, advanced insights include understanding the sensitivities of designs to changes in contexts and needs, and consideration of the differential impact of uncertainty across a set of alternatives with potential opportunities for risk mitigation. I.

Government agencies characteristically face dynamic policy and investment environments yet frequently rely on ad-hoc decision-making methods in response to complexities inherent in their operating landscape. Additionally, standard decision making methods typically undervalue projects by ignoring difficult to value, non-monetary benefits. This presents a problem for public institutions, such as the Department of Energy (DOE), where goals relating to the environment and national security are difficult to quantify. As a result, it is especially challenging to accurately optimize the use of public funds. The Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for making significant investment decisions under extreme uncertainty with respect to the nation’s public energy portfolio. Recently, leaders internal and external to the government have called for a comprehensive and structured approach