US 7,680,682 B2 · Method, system and program product for assessing a product development project employing a computer-implemented evaluation tool

Abstract

A product development project assessment approach is provided which includes identifying multiple possible root causes of trouble for a product development project, identifying question sets related to the multiple possible root causes of trouble, and providing a computer-implemented tool to evaluate answers to the question sets and provide guidance regarding existence of one or more root causes of trouble for the product development project. The assessment approach further includes evaluating project management processes employed for the product development project by comparison thereof to identified, standard project management processes, and provide guidance regarding effectiveness of implementation of the project management processes employed. Product management work product is also evaluated as further evidence of the existence of one or more root causes of trouble or the effectiveness of implementation of the project management processes. The product development project can comprise a software or hardware development project.

Drawings

Drawings are temporarily unavailable. Open the PDF at USPTO

Drawings

Claims14

Dependent claims

A method of assessing a product development management effort comprising:

identifying multiple possible root causes of trouble for a product development management effort, the product development management effort being undertaken to produce a tangible product;
identifying (1) multiple questions sets for diagnosing the multiple possible root causes of trouble, each question set being a comprehensive set of questions directed to diagnosing a respective root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble;
and (2) one or more specific project roles to provide responses to questions of one of the multiple question sets, the responses from the one or more specific project roles;
diagnosing, based at least in part on the responses, the respective root cause of trouble and thus assessing the product development management effort to produce the tangible product, wherein different specific project roles are identified to provide responses to questions of different questions sets of the multiple question sets;
wherein the diagnosing comprises:
evaluating, using a computer-implemented tool, responses to the question sets, wherein the evaluating comprises:
automatically counting, using an automated scoring mechanism, the number of responses in required fields of a question set of the multiple question sets;
and
scoring, using the automated scoring mechanism, the question set against a total number of required fields in the question set, wherein the scoring depends on a percentage of required fields present in the question set;
thereby producing a numeric value which is an indication of the strength of responses for the question set, the strength of responses indication being an indication of the strength of evidence of the respective root cause of trouble;
and
producing a numeric value representing the impact of the respective root cause of trouble on the project development management effort based on at least one of impact to schedule or impact to project cost;
wherein evaluating provides guidance regarding an existence of one or more root causes of trouble for the product development effort from the identified multiple possible root causes of trouble;
plotting, using the computer-implemented tool, each root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble using the produced numeric values in a graph with a first axis representing strength of evidence for the respective root causes of trouble and a second axis representing negative impact of the respective root causes on the product development management effort, wherein the graph is a matrix representing a mix of high and/or low negative impact and strength of evidence;
and
assessing, based at least in part on the graph, the product development management effort by identifying a possible root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble in a particular region of the matrix representing a high negative impact on the product development management effort and a high strength of evidence in support of the presence of the root cause of trouble;
wherein diagnosing provides guidance regarding effectiveness of implementation of project management processes employed for the product development management effort.

14 more elements

A system for assessing management of a product development project comprising:

a processor comprising a computer-implemented tool, the computer-implemented tool:
identifying multiple common root causes of trouble for a product development management effort undertaken to produce a tangible product, and further identifying (1) multiple question sets for diagnosing the multiple common root causes of trouble, each question set being a comprehensive set of questions directed to diagnosing a respective root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble;
and (2) one or more specific project roles to provide responses to questions of one of the multiple question sets, the responses from the one or more specific product roles;
the computer-implemented too further diagnosing, based at least in part on the responses, the respective root cause of trouble and thus assessing the product development management effort to produce the tangible product, wherein different specific project roles are identified to provide responses to questions of different questions sets of the multiple question sets, the diagnosing comprising:
evaluating responses to the question sets, the evaluating comprising:
automatically counting using an automated scoring mechanism, the number of responses in required fields of a question set of the multiple question sets;
scoring, using the automated scoring mechanism, the question set against a total number of required fields in the question set, wherein the scoring depends on a percentage of required fields present in the question set, thereby producing a numeric value which is an indication of the strength of responses for the question set, the strength of responses indication being an indication of the strength of evidence of the respective root cause of trouble, and
producing a numeric value representing the impact of the respective root cause of trouble on the project development management effort based on at least one of impact to schedule or impact to project cost,
wherein the evaluating provides guidance regarding an existence of one or more root causes of trouble for the product development effort from the identified multiple possible root causes of trouble,
the diagnosing further comprising plotting each root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble using the produced numeric values in a graph with a first axis representing strength of evidence for the respective root causes of trouble and a second axis representing negative impact of the respective root causes on the product development management effort, wherein the graph is a matrix representing a mix of high and/or low negative impact and strength of evidence, and
the diagnosing further comprising assessing, based at least in part on the graph, the product development management effort by identifying a possible root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble in a particular region of the matrix representing a high negative impact on the product development management effort and a high strength of evidence in support of the presence of the root cause of trouble,
wherein diagnosing provides guidance regarding effectiveness of implementation of project management processes employed for the product development management effort.

9 more elements

At least one program storage device readable by a computer embodying at least one program of instructions executable by the computer to perform, when executing on the computer, a method of assessing a product development management effort, the method comprising:

identifying multiple possible root causes of trouble for a product development management effort, the product development management effort being undertaken to product a tangible product;
identifying (1) multiple question sets for diagnosing the multiple possible root causes of trouble, each question set being a set of comprehensive questions directed to diagnosing a respective root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble;
and (2) one or more specific project roles to provide responses to questions of one of the multiple question sets, the responses from the one or more specific project roles;
diagnosing, based at least in part on the responses, the respective root cause of trouble and thus assessing the product development management effort to produce the tangible product, wherein different specific project roles are identified to provide responses to questions of different questions sets of the multiple question sets, wherein the diagnosing comprises:
evaluating responses to the question sets, wherein the evaluating comprises:
automatically counting using an automated scoring mechanism, the number of responses in required fields of a question set of the multiple question sets;
scoring, using the automated scoring mechanism, the question set against a total number of required fields in the question set, wherein the scoring depends on a percentage of required fields present in the question set, thereby producing a numeric value which is an indication of the strength of responses for the question set, the strength of responses indication being an indication of the strength of evidence of the respective root cause of trouble;
and
producing a numeric value representing the impact of the respective root cause of trouble on the project development management effort based on at least one of impact to schedule or impact to project cost;
wherein evaluating provides guidance regarding an existence of one or more root causes of trouble for the product development effort from the identified multiple root cause of trouble;
plotting each root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble using the produced numeric values in a graph with a first axis representing strength of evidence for the respective root causes of trouble and a second axis representing negative impact of the respective root causes on the product development management effort, wherein the graph is a matrix representing a mix of high and/or low negative impact and strength of evidence;
and
assessing, based at least in part on the graph, the product development management effort by identifying a possible root cause of trouble of the multiple possible root causes of trouble in a particular region of the matrix representing a high negative impact on the product development management effort and a high strength of evidence in support of the presence of the root cause of trouble;
wherein diagnosing provides guidance regarding effectiveness of implementation of project management processes employed for the product development management effort.

11 more elements

Dependencies are inferred from the claim text.

Description5,818 words

Summary630 words

#The present invention relates in general to project evaluation tools, and more particularly, to methods, systems and program products employing a computer-implemented evaluation tool for assessing a product development project, such as an information technology application development project or hardware development project.

#Manual reviews of software application development projects are routinely performed to determine whether a project is on schedule, on budget and will deliver the promised function at the appropriate level of quality. Over the years, a number of researchers have shown that the failure rate of software development projects is exceptionally high and those studies also provide high level guidance on the typical or common root causes. The general categories of failure are known and are documented in many publications, including, for example, two publications authored by Steve McConnell entitled Code Complete, Microsoft Press (1993) and Rapid Development, Microsoft Press (1996), both of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. What is not as well understood is how to ascertain that a particular area of failure is present on a software development project. In addition, existing references do not include a logical approach to assess project management processes and their impact on the overall success or failure of a project.

#A typical software project reviewer manually focuses on the project management system and/or dives deep into the technical aspects of the project. By operating purely at the project management system level, the reviewer may miss an underlying cause of corruption in the best practices by not applying a disciplined, logical approach to assessing the evidence that is generated by the effective use of project management best practices, i.e., by not assessing the artifacts that are produced. For example, a reviewer may look to determine that an issues management system is in place, but fail to check to determine if an issues log has the correct and adequate data to allow the issues management system to work. At the other end of the spectrum, i.e., at the technical end, a reviewer may focus on the technology or product dimensions of software delivery and fail to assess or understand the people and process impact on the ability of the team to deliver the required application.

Brief description of the drawings17 figures

#The subject matter which is regarded as the invention is particularly pointed out and distinctly claimed in the claims at the conclusion of the specification. The foregoing and other objects, features, and advantages of the invention are apparent from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:

#FIG. 1 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a process for assessing a product development project, in accordance with an aspect of the present invention;

#FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one embodiment of the project interview process of FIG. 1, in accordance with an aspect of the present invention;

Detailed description4,560 words

#The project assessment tool and process disclosed herein allow an evaluator to quickly identify and prioritize the existence of one or more common root causes for trouble on an information technology software or hardware development project, and relate these to the adequacy of the implementation of project management best practices. The tool and the process to apply the tool to an assessment, establish discipline in organizing the review team, identifying the project participants to interview, and generating a focused question set. Answers to the question sets are scored and allow the tool to identify the significance of the evidence regarding the existence of a particular root cause of trouble. The questions to ask to determine whether a particular root cause exists and to whom to ask those questions form a core that the scoring mechanism is built around.

#In one aspect, the assessment process requires that the project management system also be evaluated. Using the standard project process structure advocated by the Project Management Institute as widely recognized best practices, the assessment tool and process provides the reviewer the means to score the application of best practices to the particular project. The tool and process recognize that individual project management artifacts should be considered to conclude whether a particular process has been effectively implemented. The tool/process includes an automated scoring mechanism that rolls up the quality assessment of the artifacts into the project management process area, supporting the reviewer's ability to judge the quality of implementation of each project management best practice area. The evaluation criteria to judge the fitness for purpose of a particular project management artifact and the linkage of that evaluation with the best practice area to allow assessment of the project management discipline forms a further aspect of the present invention.

#The combination of the two views—the root cause view computed based on scored questions and the process view computed based on the artifact ratings and the process scoring—provide a project assessor prioritized insight into what is wrong with a project and which processes contribute most to a failure. This allows the reviewer to quickly develop recommendations for corrective action, if needed.

Facts

Application

10/799,542Filed 11 Mar 2004

Published

US 2005/0203786 A115 Sep 2005

Granted

16 Mar 2010

Term ends

20 Feb 2028

Estimated · how

20 years from earliest known nonprovisional domestic filing plus recorded patent term adjustment, including 1,441 days of adjustment. Maintenance-fee lapses, terminal disclaimers and statutory extensions have not been checked. The continuity chain may be incomplete; this is not an enforceability determination.

Classification4 codes

G06Q 10/00
Administration
G06Q 10/063
Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling: operations research,…
G06Q 10/0639
Operations research, analysis or management: performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
G06Q
Information and communication technology [ict] specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial

Timeline

11 Mar 2004Application filedUS 10/799,542
29 Jun 2004Assigned to International Business Macnines Corporationassignment of assignor's interest
15 Sep 2005PublishedUS 2005/0203786 A1
16 Mar 2010GrantedUS 7,680,682 B2
16 Jan 2014Assigned to Twitter, Inc.assignment of assignor's interest
28 Oct 2022Assigned to Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc.security interest
28 Oct 2022Assigned to Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc.security interest
28 Oct 2022Assigned to Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc.security interest
27 Mar 2025Assigned to X Corp. (F/K/A Twitter, Inc.)release of security interest
30 Apr 2025Assigned to X Corp. (F/K/A Twitter, Inc.)release of security interest
3 Mar 2026Assigned to X Corp. (F/K/A Twitter, Inc.)termination and release of security interest in patent rights (reel 062079, frame 0677)
12 Oct 2026TodayWithin its term
20 Feb 2028Term endsEstimated, includes 1,441 days of adjustment

Method, system and program product for assessing a product development project employing a computer-implemented evaluation tool

Life of this patent

Method, system and program product for assessing a product development project employing a computer-implemented evaluation tool

Life of this patent

Life of this patent

Abstract

Drawings

Drawings

Claims14

Description5,818 words

Drawings

Classification4 codes

Life of this patent

Description5,818 words