EP1295214A2 - Capture et evaluation d'idees - Google Patents

Capture et evaluation d'idees

Info

Publication number
EP1295214A2
EP1295214A2 EP01939152A EP01939152A EP1295214A2 EP 1295214 A2 EP1295214 A2 EP 1295214A2 EP 01939152 A EP01939152 A EP 01939152A EP 01939152 A EP01939152 A EP 01939152A EP 1295214 A2 EP1295214 A2 EP 1295214A2
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
evaluation
idea
stage
data
evaluators
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Withdrawn
Application number
EP01939152A
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Inventor
Larry Hobbs
Anne Lise Mollerus
Stephanie Marie Ringo
Andrea L. Brockman
Sheila Louise Willhoite
Dale Edward Cox
James Manfred Pierce
William J. Burns
Gregory J. Brecht
Daniel Joseph Durkin
John Hughes
Melanie Graham
Mark Allen Bauer
Pamela Feller
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Cargill Inc
Original Assignee
Cargill Inc
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Cargill Inc filed Critical Cargill Inc
Publication of EP1295214A2 publication Critical patent/EP1295214A2/fr
Withdrawn legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to computer-implemented techniques for capturing and evaluating ideas in a distributed environment.
  • the invention is directed to systems and techniques for capturing and evaluating ideas in a widely distributed organization, such as a global corporation.
  • the invention allows the organization to define a hierarchical evaluation process for identifying ideas having the highest potential for success.
  • the organization can tailor the hierarchical evaluation process such that at each stage the proposed idea is examined from a different business perspective, such as technical feasibility, market opportunity, logistical, legal and regulatory.
  • the organization can define the evaluation process to reflect its current business evaluation procedures and strategies, thereby automating and facilitating the identification of innovative, transformational ideas that can generate value for the organization.
  • the invention is directed to an evaluation system that includes a database to store a description and a current stage for each idea.
  • the database stores configuration data that defines the number of evaluation stages and corresponding evaluation criteria for each stage.
  • a web server coupled to the database generates an evaluation screen, such as a web page, as a function of the current stage the idea. Evaluation executes in an operating environment of the web server and selects one or more evaluators at each stage as a function of each evaluator's area of expertise.
  • the evaluation software modifies the current stage of the idea based on evaluation data received from the selected evaluators.
  • the invention is directed to a method for capturing and evaluating ideas in which configuration data, defining a number of evaluation stages and corresponding evaluation criteria, is stored in a database. Input data describing an idea is received over a network such as a local area network, wide area network or even the Internet. Evaluation screens, such as web pages, are generated as a function of the evaluation stage of the idea under consideration. The evaluation screen provides an interface by which an evaluator enters evaluation data. The stage of the idea under consideration is modified as a function of the evaluation data.
  • the invention is directed to a computer- readable medium having data structures stored thereon.
  • the data structures include an idea data structure to store a description of an idea, an evaluator data structure to store identities of evaluators authorized to evaluate the idea and a configuration data structure to store configuration data defining a hierarchical evaluation process.
  • Figure 2 is a block diagram illustrating the idea evaluation system in further detail.
  • Figure 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example hierarchical evaluation process.
  • Figure 4 is a flow chart illustrating one example implementation of a process to capture and evaluate ideas according to the invention.
  • Figure 5 illustrates an exemplary idea capture screen.
  • Figure 6 illustrates an exemplary evaluation screen.
  • Figure 7 is a block diagram illustrating a computer suitable for implementing the various embodiments of the invention.
  • the invention is directed to systems and techniques for capturing and evaluating ideas in a widely distributed organization, such as a global corporation.
  • the invention provides a flexible tool by which the organization can easily define a hierarchical evaluation process for identifying ideas having the highest potential for success.
  • Figure 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system 2 for capturing and evaluating ideas.
  • a user within the organization such as an employee located in a regional office, interacts with submission computer 6 to describe and submit information describing an idea.
  • the user can propose an idea relating to a new product, a new technique for providing an existing service, a new product feature, a method for improving customer satisfaction or even a new business opportunity.
  • Evaluation system 8 allows an organization to define a hierarchical evaluation process having a number of evaluation stages and the criteria for evaluating the idea at each stage. For example, the organization can define the first stage so as to capture technical and feasibility information regarding the submitted idea. Progressively higher stages can be defined to capture marketing, financial, logistical and regulatory information.
  • Typical evaluation criteria requested by evaluation system 8 includes, for example, benefit to the organization, market size, market growth, competitors, barriers to entry, raw materials requirements and potential customers.
  • submission computers 6 and evaluation computers 10 represent computing devices suitable for accessing idea evaluation system 8 via network 18.
  • submission computers 6 and evaluation computers 10 can be a personal computer, laptop computer, or even a personal digital assistant (PDA) such as a PalmTM organizer from Palm Inc. of Santa Clara, California.
  • submission computers 6 and evaluation computers 10 execute communication software, typically a web browser such as Internet ExplorerTM from Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Washington, in order to communicate with idea evaluation system 8.
  • Network 18 represents any com-munication link suitable for communicating digital data, such as a wide-area network, local area network, or the Internet.
  • Figure 2 is a block diagram illustrating in further detail the evaluation system 8.
  • Process configuration modules 28 include software modules for defining the evaluation process, including the number of evaluation stages in the hierarchy, the information required at each stage, and the type of evaluators to be selected at each stage.
  • Capture and evaluation modules 24 include modules for capturing the required information from the submitter and presenting the information to the evaluators for review.
  • Software modules 20 interact with a number of databases 22 including idea database 34, evaluator database 26, configuration data 30 and archive 32. Although illustrated as separate databases, idea database 34, evaluator database 36, configuration data 30 and archive 32 may be implemented as a single database, such as a relational database management system (RDBMS), provided by one or more database servers.
  • RDBMS relational database management system
  • Idea database 34 stores all information relating to each submitted idea including general description, stage and evaluations.
  • Evaluator database 36 stores information for each evaluator defined by the organization including name, email address and area of expertise.
  • Configuration data 30 stores information that defines the evaluation process defined by the organization including the number of stages, the information to capture at each stage, and the type of evaluator necessary to review the information.
  • Archive 32 stores information for all ideas that were rejected by the evaluators.
  • process configuration modules 28 allow the organization to define a number of mechanisms for automating the evaluation process and ensuring that ideas move through the evaluation stages.
  • the process developer can define timers for triggering electronic mail messages (emails) to remind the evaluators to review a pending idea within the evaluation process or within archive 32.
  • Process configuration modules 28 further allow the process developer to define a number of idea categories such that capture and evaluation modules 24 require the submitter to identify a category for each idea upon submission. Process configuration modules 28 further allow the process developer to define different capture screens at the various stages for each category.
  • evaluator database 36 can be organized by idea category such that evaluators can be selected by idea type in addition to their area of expertise. For example, the process developer may configure evaluation system 8 such that evaluators at each stage are selected from appropriate business units, subsidiaries, or product lines.
  • Figure 3 is a block diagram providing a high-level illustration of an example hierarchical evaluation process 38 having four evaluation stages.
  • evaluators provide information and ultimately approve or reject the submitted idea.
  • Facilitator 39 is responsible for monitoring the progress of the idea through the evaluation process 40 and ensuring that the selected evaluators provide timely input.
  • stage 1 the idea is evaluated for technical feasibility.
  • Typical information captured at this example stage is raw material requirements, technical specifications, and required resources.
  • stage 2 the idea is evaluated according to the underlying business opportunity.
  • Typical information captured at this stage includes the size and growth of the potential market, competition and barriers to entry.
  • the idea is evaluated from a legal and regulator perspective. For example, information captured may include descriptions of patentable technologies, patents of other companies, and regulatory information.
  • the organization implements a pilot project having specific goals and milestones. Based on the completion of these goals, the final evaluators, typically executives within the organization, approve or reject implementation of the proposed idea.
  • Figure 4 is a flow chart illustrating one implementation of a process 40 for capturing and evaluating ideas in a widely distributed organization.
  • the process developer interacts with process configuration 28 to develop and store configuration data 30 (42).
  • evaluation system 8 receives a description of an idea from a submission computer 6 (44). More specifically, a submitter interacts with submission computer 6 and enters data describing in detail a proposed idea.
  • submission computer 6 transmits the data over network 18. For example, the submitter may provide the data by accessing capture and evaluation modules 24 via web servers 26 using a web browser executing on submission computer 6.
  • Capture and evaluation modules 24 receive the data via web servers 26 and update idea database 34 by storing the data and initializing the stored idea to the first stage.
  • Capture and evaluation modules 24 analyze the data relating to the newly submitted idea and select one or more suitable evaluators (46). Capture and evaluation modules 24 select the evaluators as a function of (1) the stage of the idea, (2) the idea category selected by the submitter and (3) the area of expertise of the evaluators.
  • evaluation system 8 receives input from the selected evaluators (48). More specifically, each evaluator interacts with one or more capture and evaluation modules 24, such as a capture screen defined in HTML, and inputs a variety of information. Each evaluator interacts with evaluation computer 10 and enters data in response to the detailed questions defined by capture and evaluation modules 24. Evaluation computer 10 transmits the data over network 18. For example, the evaluator may provide the data by accessing capture and evaluation modules 24 via web servers 26 using a web browser executing on evaluation computer 6. Capture and evaluation modules 24 receive the data via web servers 26 and update idea database 34 by storing the evaluation data.
  • an evaluator may direct evaluation system 8 to select an additional evaluator having a particular expertise. For example, a current evaluator may determine that more information is needed and that an evaluator of a particular type is needed. Evaluation system 8 selects a new evaluator according to the suggested type and receives the additional evaluation data (49).
  • each evaluator Upon receiving evaluation data from all of the evaluators, each evaluator must specifically approve or reject an idea. If the evaluators rejected the idea, capture and evaluation modules 24 archive the idea data from idea database 34 to archive database 32. In order to facilitate future re-evaluation, all evaluation data is archived including the reason why the evaluators rejected the idea. Electronic mail messages are sent to facilitator 39 reminding him or her of the archived ideas. If the evaluators approve the idea, capture and evaluation modules 24 determine whether the idea has reached the final stage (52). If not, capture and evaluation modules 24 update idea database 34 to advance the idea to the next stage and select new evaluators for another round of evaluation (54). If the idea has reached the last stage, capture and evaluation modules 24 update idea database to reflect that the current idea has traversed the evaluation hierarchy and has been approved for implementation.
  • Figure 5 illustrates an exemplary idea capture screen 60 used by submitters to describe the details of their ideas.
  • Web servers 26 communicate idea capture screen 60 to submission computers 6 for data input.
  • idea capture screen 60 can be defined in hypertext markup language (HTML) for capturing data via a web browser.
  • HTML hypertext markup language
  • Idea capture screen 60 includes a number of input areas for objectively capturing information relating to the idea. For example, in input area 62, the submitter enters his or her name, manager' s initials and a brief description of the idea. In addition, the submitter provides a more detailed description, potential roadblocks and whether the idea relates to either a new product or an existing product. In input area 64, the submitter selects a business function and a business unit that the idea will most impact. Input area 66 indicates the stage and general status of the idea. Using configuration modules 28, the process developer can customize idea capture screen 60 to capture other data.
  • Evaluation screen 70 provides a summary 72 of the data entered by the submitter.
  • evaluation screen 70 includes a number of input areas in which the evaluator supplies relevant information. For example, a first evaluator may supply market information relating in input area 74. A second evaluator may supply technical information in input area 76.
  • configuration modules 28 the process developer can create similar evaluation screens for each stage of the evaluation hierarchy.
  • the inventive idea evaluation techniques and systems described herein can be implemented in digital electronic circuitry, or in computer hardware, firmware, software, or in combinations of them.
  • the invention can be implemented in a computer program tangibly embodied in a machine-readable storage device for execution by a programmable processor within an operating environment of a programmable system.
  • system 100 represents any server, personal computer, laptop or even a battery-powered, pocket-sized, mobile computer known as a hand-held PC or personal digital assistant (PDA).
  • PDA personal digital assistant
  • System 100 includes system memory 113, including read only memory (ROM) 114 and random access memory (RAM) 115, which is connected to the processor 112 by a system data/address bus 116.
  • ROM 114 represents any device that is primarily read-only including electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory, etc.
  • RAM 115 represents any random access memory such as Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory.
  • input/output bus 118 is connected to the data/address bus 116 via bus controller 119.
  • input/output bus 118 is implemented as a standard Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) bus.
  • PCI Peripheral Component Interconnect
  • the bus controller 119 examines all signals from the processor 112 to route the signals to the appropriate bus. Signals between the processor 112 and the system memory 113 are merely passed through the bus controller 119. However, signals from the processor 112 intended for devices other than system memory 113 are routed onto the input/output bus 118
  • Various devices are connected to the input/output bus 118 including hard disk drive 120, floppy drive 121 that is used to read floppy disk 151, and optical drive 122, such as a CD-ROM drive that is used to read an optical disk 152.
  • the video display 124 or other kind of display device is connected to the input/output bus 118 via a video adapter 125.
  • keyboard 140 and/or pointing device such as a mouse 142
  • bus 118 Users enter commands and information into the system 100 by using a keyboard 140 and/or pointing device, such as a mouse 142, which are connected to bus 118 via input/output ports 128.
  • pointing devices include track pads, track balls, joysticks, data gloves, head trackers, and other devices suitable for positioning a cursor on the video display 124.
  • System 100 also includes a modem 129. Although illustrated as external to the system 100, those of ordinary skill in the art will quickly recognize that the modem 129 may also be internal to the system 100.
  • Network interface 153 or modem 129 are typically used to communicate over a network (not shown), such as the global Internet, using either a wired or wireless connection.
  • Software applications 136 and data are typically stored via one of the memory storage devices, which may include the hard disk 120, floppy disk 151, CD-ROM 152 and are copied to RAM 115 for execution. In one embodiment, however, software applications 136 are stored in ROM 114 and are copied to RAM 115 for execution or are executed directly from ROM 114.
  • the operating system 135 executes software applications 136 and carries out instructions issued by the user. For example, when the user wants to load a software application 136, the operating system 135 interprets the instruction and causes the processor 112 to load software application 136 into RAM 115 from either the hard disk 120 or the optical disk 152. Once one of the software applications 136 is loaded into the RAM 115, it can be used by the processor 112. In case of large software applications 136, processor 112 loads various portions of program modules into RAM 115 as needed.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Educational Administration (AREA)
  • Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
  • Development Economics (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne des systèmes et des techniques de capture et d'évaluation d'idées dans un organisme étendu, tel qu'une entreprise plurinationale. L'invention permet à l'organisme de définir un processus d'évaluation hiérarchique en vue d'identifier des idées ayant le plus haut potentiel de succès. Le système d'évaluation comprend une base de données mémorisant une description et une étape courante pour chaque idée. En outre, la base de données mémorise des données de configuration définissant le nombre de stades d'évaluation et les critères d'évaluation correspondants pour chaque stade. Durant l'évaluation, un serveur Web génère un écran d'évaluation en fonction du stade courant de l'idée. Un logiciel d'évaluation fonctionne dans un environnement opérationnel du serveur Web et sélectionne un ou plusieurs évaluateurs à chaque stade, en fonction de l'aire d'évaluation de l'expertise. Les idées se propagent au travers de divers stades d'évaluation en se basant sur la question de savoir si l'évaluateur approuve ou rejette l'idée.
EP01939152A 2000-06-14 2001-05-18 Capture et evaluation d'idees Withdrawn EP1295214A2 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US59336300A 2000-06-14 2000-06-14
US593363 2000-06-14
PCT/US2001/016240 WO2001097067A2 (fr) 2000-06-14 2001-05-18 Capture et evaluation d'idees

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP1295214A2 true EP1295214A2 (fr) 2003-03-26

Family

ID=24374419

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP01939152A Withdrawn EP1295214A2 (fr) 2000-06-14 2001-05-18 Capture et evaluation d'idees

Country Status (4)

Country Link
EP (1) EP1295214A2 (fr)
AU (1) AU2001264701A1 (fr)
CA (1) CA2412939A1 (fr)
WO (1) WO2001097067A2 (fr)

Families Citing this family (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR102256353B1 (ko) 2013-03-15 2021-05-27 부셸 스탑, 인코포레이티드 제품 설계 방법 및 시스템

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See references of WO0197067A2 *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2001097067A2 (fr) 2001-12-20
WO2001097067A8 (fr) 2002-05-23
AU2001264701A1 (en) 2001-12-24
CA2412939A1 (fr) 2001-12-20

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US7130822B1 (en) Budget planning
US10068190B2 (en) Component based interface to handle tasks during claim processing
El Emam et al. A field study of requirements engineering practices in information systems development
EP1250667B1 (fr) Article destine a la gestion de taches basee sur des composantes au cours d'une demande de reglement
US8224859B2 (en) Component based information linking during claim processing
US7930201B1 (en) EDP portal cross-process integrated view
AU2001280986A1 (en) Budget planning
JP2008517385A (ja) プロセスのオートメーションおよび実施のためのシステムおよび方法
US20040186758A1 (en) System for bringing a business process into compliance with statutory regulations
WO2000067186A2 (fr) Dispositif a composantes visant a favoriser les negociations lors du traitement d'une demande d'indemnisation
Gotterbam Reducing software failures: Addressing the ethical risks of the software development lifecycle
Kalman Process mapping: Tools, techniques, & critical success factors
Fisher User Satisfaction and System Success: considering the development team
WO2001097067A2 (fr) Capture et evaluation d'idees
Gotterbarn Enhancing risk analysis using software development impact statements
Madni Thriving on change through process support: the evolution of the ProcessEdge Enterprise suite and TeamEdge
Quirchmayr et al. An architectural concept for knowledge integration in inter-administration computing
Malik et al. Implementation of Human Resource Information System in Pakistani Organizations
Sofroniou The Management of Projects, Systems, Internet and Risks
IBBS et al. Knowledge engineering for a construction scheduling analysis
Bui et al. Business re-engineering: lessons learned from the US Army Corps of Engineers modernization program
Iamruttanawong A web ordering system for aluminum-based products
Bui et al. AD-A259 233 iMEll Hl I IHI MIli IEl II
Kelly et al. Business Case for Integrated Technical Information for the Air Logistics Centers (ITI-ALC)
Adequately DOD BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION Key Navy Programs’ Compliance with

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20030114

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LI LU MC NL PT SE TR

Designated state(s): AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LI LU MC NL PT SE TR

AX Request for extension of the european patent

Extension state: AL LT LV MK RO SI

RIN1 Information on inventor provided before grant (corrected)

Inventor name: FELLER, PAMELA

Inventor name: BAUER, MARK, ALLEN

Inventor name: GRAHAM, MELANIE

Inventor name: HUGHES, JOHN

Inventor name: DURKIN, DANIEL, JOSEPH

Inventor name: BRECHT, GREGORY, J.

Inventor name: BURNS, WILLIAM, J.

Inventor name: PIERCE, JAMES, MANFRED

Inventor name: COX, DALE, EDWARD

Inventor name: WILLHOITE, SHEILA, LOUISE

Inventor name: BROCKMAN, ANDREA, L.

Inventor name: RINGO, STEPHANIE, MARIE

Inventor name: MOLLERUS, ANNE, LISE

Inventor name: HOBBS, LARRY

RBV Designated contracting states (corrected)

Designated state(s): BE DE FR GB NL

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: THE APPLICATION IS DEEMED TO BE WITHDRAWN

18D Application deemed to be withdrawn

Effective date: 20041201