# US 2015/0149239 A1 · Technology Element Risk Analysis

> Agents: this data is available as JSON from the patentgrep API and MCP server — see https://patentgrep.com/llms.txt

- Number: US 2015/0149239 A1
- Document ID: US20150149239A1
- Status: Published application
- Kind: A1
- Application number: 14/087,097
- Filed: 2013-11-22
- Published: 2015-05-28
- Earliest claimed: 2013-11-22
- Assignees: International Business Machines Corporation
- Applicants: International Business Machines Corporation
- Inventors: Karl O. Casserly; Bohdan Demczar; James I. Paradies; John G. Torok
- Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US20150149239A1

## CPC

- G06Q 10/0635: Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
- 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

## Abstract

A quantitative approach to analytically assess technical elements within a system design. Numerical analysis and sorting is performed across the technical elements. Risk analysis is performed by evaluating criteria and ranking the evaluated criteria. The ranking criteria are placed into groups, with the groups identifying area that will be mitigated against risk.

## Claims

### Claim 1

A method comprising:
identifying one or more functional items that comprise an entity;
evaluating each of the functional items against a plurality of criteria;
assigning a numerical value to each of the criteria evaluated;
assessing a risk priority number to each of the functional items, the risk priority number based on a combination of the numerical value for each of the plurality of criteria for each functional item;
ranking each of the functional items based on the risk priority number, including sorting the functional items based on the ranking; and
providing an inclusive view of entity risk, including categorizing the elements into groups and identifying at least one area for risk mitigation.

### Claim 2 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, further comprising changing the numerical value of at least one of the criteria evaluated, and wherein the changed value includes reassessing the risk priority number.

### Claim 3 (depends on 2)

The method of claim 2, further comprising re-ranking the functional items that comprise the entity based on the changed numerical value of at least one of the evaluated criteria.

### Claim 4 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, wherein assigning the numerical value to each of the criteria includes independently assigning a separate risk value to each of the criteria.

### Claim 5 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of criteria are stored in a separate database, and wherein evaluating the functional elements against the criteria includes pulling disparate data from different databases.

### Claim 6 (depends on 5)

The method of claim 5, further comprising running a series of scripts to quantify one or more risks.

### Claim 7 (depends on 1)

The method of claim 1, wherein the inclusive view supports historical and comparative assessment of individual risks to the separate functional items.

### Claim 8

A computer program product to perform risk analysis, the computer program product comprising a computer-readable storage device having computer readable program code embodied therewith, the program code executable by a processor to:
identify one or more functional items that comprise an entity, and evaluate each of the functional items against a plurality of criteria;
assign a numerical value to each of the criteria evaluated;
assess a risk priority number to each of the functional items, the risk priority number based on a combination of the numerical value for each of the plurality of criteria for each functional item;
rank each of the functional items based on the risk priority number, including sorting the functional items based on the ranking; and
provide an inclusive view of entity risk, including categorizing the elements into groups and identifying at least one area for risk mitigation.

### Claim 9 (depends on 8)

The computer program product of claim 8, further comprising code to change the numerical value of at least one of the criteria evaluated, and wherein the changed value includes reassessing the risk priority number.

### Claim 10 (depends on 9)

The computer program product of claim 9, further comprising code to re-rank the functional items that comprise the entity based on the changed numerical value of at least one of the evaluated criteria.

### Claim 11 (depends on 8)

The computer program product of claim 8, wherein the code to assign the numerical value to each of the criteria includes independent assignment of a separate risk value to each of the criteria.

### Claim 12 (depends on 8)

The computer program product of claim 8, wherein each of the plurality of criteria are stored in a separate database, and wherein evaluating the functional elements against the criteria includes pulling disparate data from different databases.

### Claim 13 (depends on 12)

The computer program product of claim 12, further code to run a series of scripts to quantify one or more risks.

### Claim 14 (depends on 8)

The computer program product of claim 8, wherein the inclusive view supports historical and comparative assessment of individual risks to the separate functional items.

### Claim 15

A system comprising:
a processing unit in communication with memory;
one or more tools in communication with memory, the tools to perform element risk analysis, the tools comprising:
an identification manager to identify one or more functional items that comprise an entity, evaluate each of the functional items against a plurality of criteria, and assign a numerical value to each of the criteria evaluated;
an assessment manager to assess a risk priority number to each of the functional items, the risk priority number based on a combination of the numerical value for each of the plurality of criteria for each functional item, and to rank each of the functional items based on the risk priority number, including sorting the functional items based on the rank; and
an inclusive view of entity risk provided by the assessment manager, including a categorization of the elements into groups and identification of at least one area for risk mitigation.

### Claim 16 (depends on 15)

The system of claim 15, further comprising the assessment manager to change the numerical value of at least one of the criteria evaluated, and wherein the changed value includes reassessment of the risk priority number.

### Claim 17 (depends on 16)

The system of claim 16, further comprising the assessment manager to re-rank the functional items that comprise the entity based on the changed numerical value of at least one of the evaluated criteria.

### Claim 18 (depends on 15)

The system of claim 15, wherein assignment of the numerical value to each of the criteria includes independently assigning a separate risk value to each of the criteria.

### Claim 19 (depends on 15)

The system of claim 15, further comprising the assessment manager to run a series of scripts to quantify one or more risks.

### Claim 20 (depends on 15)

The system of claim 15, wherein the inclusive view supports historical and comparative assessment of individual risks to the separate functional items.