WO2017205988A1

WO2017205988A1 - System for assessing & improving productivity of service provided

Info

Publication number: WO2017205988A1
Application number: PCT/CA2017/050683
Authority: WO
Inventors: Robert SALESAS; James Green
Original assignee: Salesas Robert
Priority date: 2016-05-31
Filing date: 2017-06-05
Publication date: 2017-12-07

Abstract

A system for assessing and improving the productivity of a client workforce including a subscriber module to generate a request for a worker from a service provider, the request includes one or more parameters defining a profile of the worker, and a service provider module to assign a worker to the subscriber by comparing attributes associated with one or more workers in a list of workers with the parameters in the request. The service provider selects a worker which best matches the worker profile based on feedback information received from a plurality of subscribers regarding the attributes associated with the parameters.

Description

SYSTEM FOR ASSESSING & IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY OF

SERVICE PROVIDED

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application

No. 62/343,135 filed 31 May 2016, which is hereby incorporated in its entirety by reference.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to the ability of consumers of services to assess and improve the quality of services provided.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

A service provider supplying workforce to a subscriber must be able to momtor the performance of each of its workers, so that the service provider may optimize the service being provided. Likewise, the subscriber or recipient of the service must be ^' able to monitor and report on the service being provided, so that the subscriber may ensure it receives the best service possible. What is required is a system for monitoring the performance of individual workers and optimizing the service by a combination of a) increasing the utilization of more productive workers, and b) replacing workers that underperform. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

When the claims are approved

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The invention is herein described, by way of example only, with reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein:

Figure 1 is a flow chart describing the sequence of events taking place subsequent to the placement of a workforce request, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Figure 2 is a task flow chart showing the flow of tasks between functional components of a system of the invention, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Figures 3 A and 3B are each simple tables showing schematically the structural features of the service knowledge base (S B), according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Figure 4 is a schematic drawing of an exemplary system for assessing and improving workforce productivity, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

In accordance with the present invention, a service provider (SP) specializing in providing workforce assigns individuals (workers) to a subscriber. The general aspects of the invention are portrayed schematically in a workflow diagram, Fig. 1. A subscriber sends a request for workers (RFW) at step 24 to the SP. The SP processes the request at step 26, wherein the SP interrogates its service knowledge base (SKB), finds a worker which best meets the requirements of the subscriber, and assigns the selected worker, at step 28. The selection not only has to comply with the parameters set forth by the subscriber in the definition of the worker, but also has to verify the availability of the worker for the timeframe set forth in the request at step 24. Once the worker has been assigned, the subscriber applies metering at step 30, to evaluate the performance of the assigned worker, in various aspects. Such metering commences within a period of time after the worker begins working. Such metering occurs either once or recurringly, Assessment s of the performance of the worker are made at step 32, wherein the metrics captured by the subscriber's metering are interpreted, component-wise and/or in its entirety, and sent back to the SP at step 34 for updating the SKB. Fig. 2 shows the flow of tasks between the functional components of a system of the invention. The process begins when a subscriber sends an RFW, triggering a request to a request processing application (RPA) as task 46. The processing application, as task 48, makes a best-fit match between attributes within the list of available workers on the one hand and the list of requirements of a request-issuing subscriber on the other hand. The selected worker is assigned as task 50 and, at the appropriate time after work has begun, metering starts as task 52, providing metrics, to be elaborated below. To assess the performance of the worker, the metrics provided by the subscriber are accepted and interpreted in a manner that can be applied to the service knowledge base (SKB), at task 54. The SKB, at task 56, uses the interpretation of the metrics associated with each worker to update each one of the relevant attributes table.

An important feature of the present invention is the way the metrics provided by the subscriber are interpreted, at task 54 and further incorporated into the SKB, at task 56. In accordance with the present invention, the interpretation has three possible outcomes regarding the future utilization of each worker,

1. If, using the metrics, the worker' s performance is interpreted as 'above average', the worker will be given increased priority for similar assignments with the same subscriber in the future.

2. If, using the metrics, the worker's performance is interpreted as 'sufficient', the worker will be given the same level of priority for similar assignments with the same subscriber in the future.

3. If, using the metrics, the worker's performance is interpreted as 'insufficient', the worker will not receive similar assignments with the same subscriber in the future.

The metrics may also be interpreted to help optimize each worker's suitability for similar assignments with other, similar subscribers.

The SKB

Knowledge bases have long been used as computerized tools for storing data dynamically, see for example US7533074. The data kept and manipulated by the SP in the SKB relates to workers as individuals. One of three employment scenarios may apply: a. the SP may be the worker's employer of record, b. the subscriber may be the worker's employer of record, or c. the workers may be independent contractors who perform their work without being integrated with the working establishment of either the SP or the subscriber. For the purposes of this invention, all three scenarios are treated the same. The S B keeps data relating to each worker in terms of both professional attributes and organizational attributes, maintaining an up-to-date assessment of each individual's suitability to carry out different types of work within different organizations. The performance assessment provided to the SP by the subscriber in steps 32 and 34 of Fig. 1 is used to update the data in the SKB. A specific algorithm may be applied to update the ranking of each attribute, based on the input received from the subscriber and from other subscribers. A simple description of the structural features of the SKB is portrayed in Fig, 3A and B. For each worker registered in the SKB, a list of skills exists which is required in order to store the relevant skill that a subscriber might be interested in, and for each one of which a rank is given which describes the match of the specific worker on a simplified quantitative scale. A subscriber, feeding to the service the list of skill he/she may be interested in, is subsequently able to retrieve from the knowledge base, a rank for each of the skills which are relevant. In Fig. 3A a list of professional skills is listed. For example: welding, Java software writing, electricity maintenance etc. Fig. 3B list social skills are associated with worker ability to perform different types of work for different types of subscribers. Each of these rankings is subject to alteration based on metering data supplied by the subscribers, who subsequently have experienced the results of the worker's contribution. The ranking, as explained above, is provided by each of the subscribers who supplied the requested rank (as a remark on a simple scale). Thus, in the end of a working day, the remark can be fed into the knowledge base or into some kind of intermediate data base of the SP. To get a fair rank of the associated skills of each worker, the ranks collected from the various subscribers who employed a certain worker are to be processed according to one or more statistical procedures. However, sometimes in exceptional cases, the various skills of a certain worker, for good or for bad, may be inferred very quickly from the ranks provided. Also, it should be noted that sometimes a specific worker may for some reason be very suitable for a specific employer and unacceptable for others. For this reason, a record for the suitability to a specific employer (subscriber) should be kept as well in addition to a statistically process rank.

Metering and metrics of worker productivity

This section relates to various methods for assessing the productivity and performance of a worker, typically by relating to an outcome, to a product, or to quality assessment of such products. Example: Automatic measurement of meals prepared / customers served using point-of-sale equipment.

Example: Automated measurement of time taken to fulfill an order sales order processing software. Example: Automatic measurement of waste created in the completion of a certain task, for example by measuring weight or volume, such as in food and drink preparation.

Example: Automatic measurement of customer satisfaction, customer survey, automated feedback system, 5. Example: Automatic measurement of tasks completed using task management software.

6. Example: Automatic measurement of radio transmissions completed using measurement of transmitted signals. 7. Example: Automatic measurement of work rate, using average time taken to complete a specific process, or set of processes.

8. Example: Automatic measurement of driving efficiency by measuring distance travelled and fuel consumption, using fuel gauge and navigation sensor. 9. Example: Automatic measurement of breakages by comparing stock levels and fulfilled orders. 0. Example: Automatic measurement of customer satisfaction by counting the number of complaints and positive citations received using customer feedback forms. 1. Example: Automatic measurement of customer satisfaction through measurement of the number to returning customers. 2. Example: Automated measurement of time taken to answer and conclude customer service calls, using call management systems Example: Automatic calculation of percentage of deliveries accomplished using logistics management software. Example: Automatic measurement and calculation of manufacturing integrity using comparisons of load, performance and component testing, Example: Automatic measurement of , workforce productivity by measuring viable output, by comparing number of units ordered, produced, fulfilled, shipped and returned, using accounting and inventory management systems. Example: Automatic measurement of efficiency of production by tracking stock levels and stock turn.

Example: Automatic measurement of productivity derived from inspections, tests and reports of nonconformance Example: Measurement of performance by personal observation. Example: Automatic measurement of quality of electronic systems maintained using voltage measurements and other electronic meters. Example: Measurement of integrity of manufactured components by weighing using an electronic balance, and or the error of weight from the expected weight. Example: Automatic detection of welding integrity by X-ray. Example: Automatic assessment of manufactured component integrity using vibration sensor. Example: Automatic assessment of product quality by image processing. Example: Automatic assessment of point of sale display quality using digital imaging systems.

Example: Automatic assessment of component manufacturing competence using flow meter/s.

Example: Automatic assessment of kitchen hygiene by chemical testing and sensors.

Example: Assessment of performance of a product manufacturing line by measuring product dimensions using a micrometer.

Example: Assessment of performance of a product manufacturing line by measuring resistance to temperature, such as by using a thermocouple.

Example: Assessment of performance of a product manufacturing line by measuring resistance to pressure, using stress and failure testing and pressure sensors. Fig. 4 shows an exemplary system 100 for assessing and improving workforce productivity according to the present invention. System 100 may be used in applications wherein a service provider specializing in providing workforce assigns individuals (workers) to a subscriber. System 100 may be implemented as hardware, software, and/or firmware, and, in some embodiments, may be implemented as part of a processor-based system which may include suitable means for data processing, data storage, data management, interfacing, and communication.

Shown in the figure is SP 102 including a SKB 104, and 5 subscribers, subscriber 1 105, subscriber 2 106, subscriber 3 108, subscriber 4, 110 and subscriber 5 112. SP 102 receives metrics information regarding each subscriber's workforce, as indicated by arrows 120, and updates SKB 104, as indicated by arrow 122. The metrics information may have been previously interpreted at each of the subscribers, or may alternatively be sent to the SP 102 for interpretation. SP 102 updates SKB 104 accordingly. System operation is as previously disclosed with reference to Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3A and 3B, and as indicated by arrows 24, 28, and 34 between subscriber 5 112 and SP 102.

Claims

What is claimed is: 1. A system for assessing and improving the productivity of a client workforce comprising:

a subscriber module to generate a request for a worker from a service provider, said request comprising one or more parameters defining a profile of said worker; and

a service provider module to assign a worker to said subscriber by comparing attributes associated with one or more workers in a list of workers with said parameters in said request, and selecting a worker which best matches said worker profile based on feedback information received from a plurahty of subscribers regarding said attributes associated with said parameters.

2. A system according to claim 1 wherein said service provider comprises a database for storing a plurality of attributes associated with each worker in said list of workers.

3. A system according to claim 1 wherein said database stores a ranking value for each attribute in said plurality of attributes.

4. A system according to claim 3 wherein said service provider module updates said ranking value based on said received feedback information.

5. A system according to claim 1 wherein said subscriber module collects metering information on said selected worker.

6. A system according to claim 5 wherein said subscriber module assesses a performance of said selected worker.

7. A system according to claim 6 wherein said performance assessment is based on interpretation of said collected metering information.

8. A method for assessing and improving the productivity of a client workforce, the method comprising:

generating at a subscriber a request for a worker from a service provider, said request comprising one or more parameters defining a profile of said worker; and assigning at a service provider a worker to said subscriber by comparing attributes associated with one or more workers in a list of workers with said parameters in said request, and selecting a worker which best matches said worker profile based on feedback information received from a plurality of subscribers regarding said attributes associated with said parameters.

9. A method according to claim 8 further comprising storing in a database of said service provider a plurality of attributes associated with each worker in said list of workers.

10. A method according to claim 8 further comprising storing in said database a ranking value for each attribute in said plurality of attributes.

1 1. A method according to claim 10 further comprising said service provider updating said ranking value based on said received feedback information.

12. A method according to claim 8 further comprising said subscriber collecting metering information on said selected worker.

13. A method according to claim 12 further comprising said subscriber assessing a performance of said selected worker.

14. A method according to claim 13 wherein said performance assessing is based on interpreting said collected metering information.

15. A method according to claim 11 further comprising said subscriber retrieving said updated ranking value.