Definition and instantiation of metric based business logic reports

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 7840896
  • Patent Number
    7,840,896
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, March 30, 2006
    18 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 23, 2010
    13 years ago
Abstract
Groups of subordinate report definitions are determined for selected scorecard metrics based on suitable report type and layout features. A list comprising the available reports is assigned to each source metric enabling association of the groups across metrics. A context of the scorecard is passed to a physical instantiation of the group of reports to affect their behavior. Report presentation, queries, and the like may be performed using the assigned definition list(s).
Description
BACKGROUND

Key Performance Indicators, also known as KPI or Key Success Indicators (KSI), help an organization define and measure progress toward organizational goals. Once an organization has analyzed its mission, identified all its stakeholders, and defined its goals, it needs a way to measure progress toward those goals. Key Performance Indicators are used to provide those measurements.


Scorecards are used to provide detailed and summary analysis of KPIs and aggregated KPIs such as KPI groups, objectives, and the like. Scorecard calculations are typically specific to a defined hierarchy of the above mentioned elements, selected targets, and status indicator schemes. Business logic applications that generate, author, and analyze scorecards are typically enterprise applications with multiple users (subscribers), designers, and administrators. It is not uncommon, for organizations to provide their raw performance data to a third party and receive scorecard representations, analysis results, and similar reports.


In scorecard applications, being able to pass the context of a user's selection in a scorecard to a subordinate report provides increased efficiency and improved user experience. This feature can be seamless when the metrics and data are homogenous. However, it can be extremely difficult to have a single subordinate report updated appropriately when the metrics are heterogeneous.


It is with respect to these and other considerations that the present invention has been made.


SUMMARY

This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in the Detailed Description. This summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.


Aspects are directed to determining suitable reports for selected scorecard metrics based on report type and associated layout. Groups of reports may be related across metrics, and assigned a list of available report definitions to the metrics based on the determination. Default report type suggestions may be modified by a subscriber in an editing mode. The list of available report definitions may be employed to generate report views, perform queries, and the like.


These and other features and advantages will be apparent from a reading of the following detailed description and a review of the associated drawings. It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are explanatory only and are not restrictive of aspects as claimed.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an exemplary computing operating environment;



FIG. 2 illustrates a system where example embodiments may be implemented;



FIG. 3 illustrates an example scorecard architecture according to embodiments;



FIG. 4 illustrates a screenshot of an example scorecard;



FIG. 5 illustrates a conceptual report view outline where different types of reports may be presented for heterogeneous metrics according to embodiments;



FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating interactions between different components of a scorecard system for report generation purposes;



FIG. 7 illustrates a screenshot of an example report view inspector User Interface (UI) in a scorecard application;



FIG. 8 illustrates a screenshot of an example report view editor UI in a scorecard application; and



FIG. 9 illustrates logic flow diagram for a process of using report definition lists assigned to scorecard metrics.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

As briefly described above, determining suitable reports for selected scorecard metrics based on report type and associated layout and associating their definitions with the selected metrics enables scorecard configuration independent processing of heterogeneous metrics for report views. In the following detailed description, references are made to the accompanying drawings that form a part hereof, and in which are shown by way of illustrations specific embodiments or examples. These aspects may be combined, other aspects may be utilized, and structural changes may be made without departing from the spirit or scope of the present disclosure. The following detailed description is therefore not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope of the present invention is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.


Referring now to the drawings, aspects and an exemplary operating environment will be described. FIG. 1 and the following discussion are intended to provide a brief, general description of a suitable computing environment in which the invention may be implemented. While the embodiments will be described in the general context of program modules that execute in conjunction with an application program that runs on an operating system on a personal computer, those skilled in the art will recognize that aspects may also be implemented in combination with other program modules.


Generally, program modules include routines, programs, components, data structures, and other types of structures that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Moreover, those skilled in the art will appreciate that embodiments may be practiced with other computer system configurations, including hand-held devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. Embodiments may also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.


Embodiments may be implemented as a computer process (method), a computing system, or as an article of manufacture, such as a computer program product or computer readable media. The computer program product may be a computer storage media readable by a computer system and encoding a computer program of instructions for executing a computer process. The computer program product may also be a propagated signal on a carrier readable by a computing system and encoding a computer program of instructions for executing a computer process.


With reference to FIG. 1, one exemplary system for implementing the embodiments includes a computing device, such as computing device 100. In a basic configuration, the computing device 100 typically includes at least one processing unit 102 and system memory 104. Depending on the exact configuration and type of computing device, the system memory 104 may be volatile (such as RAM), non-volatile (such as ROM, flash memory, etc.) or some combination of the two. System memory 104 typically includes an operating system 105 suitable for controlling the operation of a networked personal computer, such as the WINDOWS® operating systems from MICROSOFT CORPORATION of Redmond, Wash. The system memory 104 may also include one or more software applications such as program modules 106, scorecard application 120, grouping module 122, and reporting application 124. Scorecard application 120 manages business evaluation methods, computes KPIs, and provides scorecard data to reporting applications. In some embodiments, scorecard application 120 may itself generate reports based on metric data.


Grouping module 122 manages determination of subordinate report definitions for selected scorecard metrics and assignment of available report lists (groups) to the metrics within scorecard application 120. Grouping module 122 may be an integrated part of scorecard application 120 or a separate application. Scorecard application 120, grouping module 122, and reporting application(s) 124 may communicate between themselves and with other applications running on computing device 100 or on other devices. Furthermore, any one of scorecard application 120, grouping module 122, and reporting application(s) 124 may be executed in an operating system other than operating system 105. This basic configuration is illustrated in FIG. 1 by those components within dashed line 108.


The computing device 100 may have additional features or functionality. For example, the computing device 100 may also include additional data storage devices (removable and/or non-removable) such as, for example, magnetic disks, optical disks, or tape. Such additional storage is illustrated in FIG. 1 by removable storage 109 and non-removable storage 110. Computer storage media may include volatile and nonvolatile, removable and non-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information, such as computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data. System memory 104, removable storage 109 and non-removable storage 110 are all examples of computer storage media. Computer storage media includes, but is not limited to, RAM, ROM, EEPROM, flash memory or other memory technology, CD-ROM, digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store the desired information and which can be accessed by computing device 100. Any such computer storage media may be part of device 100. Computing device 100 may also have input device(s) 112 such as keyboard, mouse, pen, voice input device, touch input device, etc. Output device(s) 114 such as a display, speakers, printer, etc. may also be included. These devices are well known in the art and need not be discussed at length here.


The computing device 100 may also contain communication connections 116 that allow the device to communicate with other computing devices 118, such as over a network in a distributed computing environment, for example, an intranet or the Internet. Communication connection 116 is one example of communication media. Communication media may typically be embodied by computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data in a modulated data signal, such as a carrier wave or other transport mechanism, and includes any information delivery media. The term “modulated data signal” means a signal that has one or more of its characteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encode information in the signal. By way of example, and not limitation, communication media includes wired media such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media such as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media. The term computer readable media as used herein includes both storage media and communication media.


Referring to FIG. 2, a system where example embodiments may be implemented, is illustrated. System 200 may comprise any topology of servers, clients, Internet service providers, and communication media. Also, system 200 may have a static or dynamic topology. The term “client” may refer to a client application or a client device employed by a user to perform business logic operations. Scorecard service 202, database server 204, and report server 206 may also be one or more programs or a server machine executing programs associated with the server tasks. Both clients and application servers may be embodied as single device (or program) or a number of devices (programs). Similarly, data sources may include one or more data stores, input devices, and the like.


A business logic application may be run centrally on scorecard service 202 or in a distributed manner over several servers and/or client devices. Scorecard service 202 may include implementation of a number of information systems such as performance measures, business scorecards, and exception reporting. A number of organization-specific applications including, but not limited to, financial reporting, analysis, marketing analysis, customer service, and manufacturing planning applications may also be configured, deployed, and shared in system 200. In addition, the business logic application may also be run in one or more client devices and information exchanged over network(s) 210.


Data sources 212, 214, and 216 are examples of a number of data sources that may provide input to scorecard service 202 through database server 204. Additional data sources may include SQL servers, databases, non multi-dimensional data sources such as text files or EXCEL® sheets, multi-dimensional data source such as data cubes, and the like. Database server 204 may manage the data sources, optimize queries, and the like.


Users may interact with scorecard service 202 running the business logic application from client devices 222, 224, and 226 over network(s) 210. In one embodiment, additional applications that consume scorecard-based data may reside on scorecard service 202 or client devices 222, 224, and 226. Examples of such applications and their relation to the scorecard application are provided below in conjunction with FIG. 3.


Report server 206 may include reporting applications, such as charting applications, alerting applications, analysis applications, and the like. These applications may receive scorecard data from scorecard service 202 and provide reports directly or through scorecard service 202 to clients.


Network(s) 210 may include a secure network such as an enterprise network, or an unsecure network such as a wireless open network. Network(s) 210 provide communication between the nodes described above. By way of example, and not limitation, network(s) 210 may include wired media such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media such as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media.


Many other configurations of computing devices, applications, data sources, data distribution and analysis systems may be employed to implement a business logic application automatically generating dashboards with scorecard metrics and subordinate reporting.


Now referring to FIG. 3, example scorecard architecture 300 is illustrated. Scorecard architecture 300 may comprise any topology of processing systems, storage systems, source systems, and configuration systems. Scorecard architecture 300 may also have a static or dynamic topology.


Scorecards are a simple method of evaluating organizational performance. The performance measures may vary from financial data such as sales growth to service information such as customer complaints. In a non-business environment, student performances and teacher assessments may be another example of performance measures that can employ scorecards for evaluating organizational performance. In the exemplary scorecard architecture 300, a core of the system is scorecard engine 308. Scorecard engine 308 may be an application that is arranged to evaluate performance metrics. Scorecard engine 308 may be loaded into a server, executed over a distributed network, executed in a client device, and the like.


In addition to performing scorecard calculation, scorecard engine may also provide report parameters associated with a scorecard to other applications 318. The report parameters may be determined based on a subscriber request or a user interface configuration. The user interface configuration may include a subscriber credential or a subscriber permission attribute. The report parameter may include a scorecard identifier, a scorecard view identifier, a row identifier, a column identifier, a page filter, a performance measure group identifier, or a performance measure identifier. The performance measure may be a KPI, a KPI group, or an objective. The page filter determines a period and an organizational unit for application of the scorecard calculations.


Data for evaluating various measures may be provided by a data source. The data source may include source systems 312, which provide data to a scorecard cube 314. Source systems 312 may include multi-dimensional databases such as an Online Analytical Processing (OLAP) database, other databases, individual files, and the like, that provide raw data for generation of scorecards. Scorecard cube 314 is a multi-dimensional database for storing data to be used in determining Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) as well as generated scorecards themselves. As discussed above, the multi-dimensional nature of scorecard cube 314 enables storage, use, and presentation of data over multiple dimensions such as compound performance indicators for different geographic areas, organizational groups, or even for different time intervals. Scorecard cube 314 has a bi-directional interaction with scorecard engine 308 providing and receiving raw data as well as generated scorecards.


Scorecard database 316 is arranged to operate in a similar manner to scorecard cube 314. In one embodiment, scorecard database 316 may be an external database providing redundant back-up database service.


Scorecard builder 302 may be a separate application, a part of the performance evaluation application, and the like. Scorecard builder 302 is employed to configure various parameters of scorecard engine 308 such as scorecard elements, default values for actuals, targets, and the like. Scorecard builder 302 may include a user interface such as a web service, a Graphical User Interface (GUI), and the like.


Strategy map builder 304 is employed for a later stage in scorecard generation process. As explained below, scores for KPIs and parent nodes such as Objective and Perspective may be presented to a user in form of a strategy map. Strategy map builder 304 may include a user interface for selecting graphical formats, indicator elements, and other graphical parameters of the presentation.


Data Sources 306 may be another source for providing raw data to scorecard engine 308. Data sources may be comprised of a mix of several multi-dimensional and relational databases or other Open Database Connectivity (ODBC)-accessible data source systems (e.g. Excel, text files, etc.). Data sources 306 may also define KPI mappings and other associated data.


Scorecard architecture 300 may include scorecard presentation 310. This may be an application to deploy scorecards, customize views, coordinate distribution of scorecard data, and process web-specific applications associated with the performance evaluation process. For example, scorecard presentation 310 may include a web-based printing system, an email distribution system, and the like. A user interface for scorecard presentation 310 may also include an overview of available scorecards for a subscriber to select from. Scorecard presentation 310 may further include a matrix or a list presentation of the scorecard data. The scorecard presentation and one or more zones for other applications may be displayed in an integrated manner.


Grouping module 320 is configured to interact with scorecard engine 308, scorecard presentation 310, other applications 318, and manage determination of suitable reports for selected metrics, categorize the reports based on type and layout features, generate a list of available report definitions, and assign the list to the selected metrics. As mentioned previously, coordinating subordinate reports can be very difficult for heterogeneous metrics. Below are two examples of a scorecard with homogeneous and heterogeneous KPIs.


Homogeneous Scorecard with a Homogeneous Subordinate Report:


















KPI
Actual
Target
Status









Unit Sales in Korea
100
90
On Target



Unit Sales in Canada
100
99
On Target



Unit Sales in United States
100
29
On Target










In the scorecard application, selecting any row can send context to a subordinate report that might show line item detail of the dates when units are sold. As a parameterized report, complexity does not significantly vary if additional homogenous KPIs are added.


Heterogeneous Scorecard with a Heterogeneous Subordinate Report:















KPI
Actual
Target
Status







Sales in Korea
$100.3
$90.0
On Target


Product Defects Per Million
 32.3
20 
Off Target


Customer Support Utilization
 45%
 44%
On Target









Each KPI in this scorecard uses a different schema and data source and requires a different set of subordinate reports. Sales in Korea (in 1000's US Dollars) may require subordinate reports of sales in different currencies and potentially geo-spatial visualizations of the data. Product defects per million may need to show trends of defects over time and line-item detail with photographs and rich documentation of the issue reports. Thus, the heterogeneous scenarios can be geometrically more complex and problematic than the homogeneous scenarios in terms of report definition, parameterization, and layout.


Other applications 318 may include any application that receives data associated with a report parameter and consumes the data to provide a report, perform analysis, provide alerts, perform further calculations, and the like. The data associated with the report parameter includes content data and metadata. Other applications may be selected based on the report parameter, a subscriber request, or a user interface configuration. The user interface configuration may include a subscriber credential or a subscriber permission attribute. Other applications 318 may include a graphical representation application, a database application, a data analysis application, a communications application, an alerting application, or a word processing application.



FIG. 4 illustrates a screenshot of an example scorecard. As explained before, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are specific indicators of organizational performance that measure a current state in relation to meeting the targeted objectives. Decision makers may utilize these indicators to manage the organization more effectively.


When creating a KPI, the KPI definition may be used across several scorecards. This is useful when different scorecard managers might have a shared KPI in common. The shared use of KPI definition may ensure a standard definition is used for that KPI. Despite the shared definition, each individual scorecard may utilize a different data source and data mappings for the actual KPI.


Each KPI may include a number of attributes. Some of these attributes include frequency of data, unit of measure, trend type, weight, and other attributes. The frequency of data identifies how often the data is updated in the source database (cube). The frequency of data may include: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, and Annually.


The unit of measure provides an interpretation for the KPI. Some of the units of measure are: Integer, Decimal, Percent, Days, and Currency. These examples are not exhaustive, and other elements may be added without departing from the scope of the invention.


A trend type may be set according to whether an increasing trend is desirable or not. For example, increasing profit is a desirable trend, while increasing defect rates is not. The trend type may be used in determining the KPI status to display and in setting and interpreting the KPI banding boundary values. The trend arrows displayed in scorecard 400 indicate how the numbers are moving this period compared to last. If in this period the number is greater than last period, the trend is up regardless of the trend type. Possible trend types may include: Increasing Is Better, Decreasing Is Better, and On-Target Is Better.


Weight is a positive integer used to qualify the relative value of a KPI in relation to other KPIs. It is used to calculate the aggregated scorecard value. For example, if an Objective in a scorecard has two KPIs, the first KPI has a weight of 1, and the second has a weight of 3 the second KPI is essentially three times more important than the first, and this weighted relationship is part of the calculation when the KPIs' values are rolled up to derive the values of their parent Objective.


Other attributes may contain pointers to custom attributes that may be created for documentation purposes or used for various other aspects of the scorecard system such as creating different views in different graphical representations of the finished scorecard. Custom attributes may be created for any scorecard element and may be extended or customized by application developers or users for use in their own applications. They may be any of a number of types including text, numbers, percentages, dates, and hyperlinks.


One of the benefits of defining a scorecard is the ability to easily quantify and visualize performance in meeting organizational strategy. By providing a status at an overall scorecard level, and for each perspective, each objective or each KPI rollup, one may quickly identify where one might be off target. By utilizing the hierarchical scorecard definition along with KPI weightings, a status value is calculated at each level of the scorecard.


First column of scorecard 400 shows example elements perspective 420 “Manufacturing” with objectives 422 and 424 “Inventory” and “Assembly” (respectively) reporting to it. Second column 402 in scorecard 400 shows results for each measure from a previous measurement period. Third column 404 shows results for the same measures for the current measurement period. In one embodiment, the measurement period may include a month, a quarter, a tax year, a calendar year, and the like.


Fourth column 406 includes target values for specified KPIs on scorecard 400. Target values may be retrieved from a database, entered by a user, and the like. Column 408 of scorecard 400 shows status indicators.


Status indicators 430 convey the state of the KPI. An indicator may have a predetermined number of levels. A traffic light is one of the most commonly used indicators. It represents a KPI with three-levels of results—Good, Neutral, and Bad. Traffic light indicators may be colored red, yellow, or green. In addition, each colored indicator may have its own unique shape. A KPI may have one stoplight indicator visible at any given time. Indicators with more than three levels may appear as a bar divided into sections, or bands. Column 416 includes trend type arrows as explained above under KPI attributes. Column 418 shows another KPI attribute, frequency.



FIG. 5 illustrates a conceptual report view outline where different types of reports may be presented for heterogeneous metrics according to embodiments. While reports based on scorecard metrics may be presented in individual application UIs, multiple reports may also be presented in a combined UI along with a presentation of the scorecard itself. In diagram 500, scorecard application UI 502 includes scorecard 504 titled “Manufacturing Evaluation” for Q1 of 2005. Scorecard 504 includes hierarchically structured metrics (KPIs). Reports may be generated based on any one or a combination of the KPIs of scorecard 504. Where scorecard 504 includes heterogeneous KPIs, different types of reports may be generated for each KPI. Each type of report may also have its own layout features.


For example, report 1 in report view UI 506 may include a chart based on one of the KPIs, and therefore require a relatively proportional display area. Report 2 in report view UI 508 may be a transaction list requiring an elongated display as opposed to report 1. By assigning lists of available report definitions to the KPIs, report view layouts may be associated across metrics and physical layout of the scorecard.


Embodiments are not limited to the example scorecard layouts, report types, and views described above. Definition and instantiation of metric-based report grouping may be provided in many other ways using the principles described herein.



FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating interactions between different components of a scorecard system for report generation purposes. Core elements of a scorecard system include KPIs 602, Objectives 604, and scorecards 606. All three of these elements may have a multitude of report views 612 associated with them. In addition, KPIs 602 and scorecards 606 may have configured views 608 associated with them. It should be noted that these are views on scorecards showing different properties, e.g. one view might show owner and frequency of KPI update, another might show the name of the data source and the database administrator. The underlying definitions of the scorecards typically remain the same, the report is different in each case. KPIs 602 may also have virtual report views, which are employed to prevent repetitiveness for report views when multiple similar KPIs are used in a scorecard. Virtual report views may include all of the attribute information in their definition such that a single report view is created and updated for each one of the similar KPIs.


Report views 612 may include attribute displays 614, reporting services reports 616 (e.g. transaction lists), web components 618 (e.g. pivot charts), URLs 620, and the like. Each report view includes information associated with its components in its definition. By grouping the report views based on their types (components) and assigning them to a selected core component, heterogeneous metrics can be handled by the scorecard system in a seamless fashion.



FIG. 7 illustrates a screenshot of an example report view inspector UI in a scorecard application. Workspace browser portion 706 of the UI includes a listing of KPIs and scorecards available to a subscriber in the scorecard application. The KPIs and scorecards (as well as other elements such as Objectives) may be presented in a listing tree format, a simple listing format, and any other format known in the art.


Upon selection of one of the items (e.g. Customer Satisfaction) in the workspace browser portion 706, information associated with the selected item is presented in the adjacent portion of the UI. The editor UI may provide information such as details of the selected item, actuals and targets included in the selected KPI or scorecard, configured views of the KPI or scorecard, and report views associated with the selected KPI or scorecard. Listing of report views 702 is an example showing available reports associated with the selected item. As shown in the example screenshot, four reports are available for the selected KPI. Attributes of each report view such as report type, appearance, name, owner, last modification date, and the like, may be listed. More details for each report view may be provided in details portion 704.


The selected KPI is assigned the listed report views and their attributes. Accordingly, the report views of this particular KPI are independent of the scorecard configuration and may be transferred to another scorecard along with the KPI, updated without having to recreate each of the reports when data is updated, and so on.



FIG. 8 illustrates a screenshot of an example report view editor UI in a scorecard application. According to some embodiments, a scorecard application with metric-assigned report view definition capability may provide a number of default report views for a selected metric. Once the default report view have been proposed, the subscriber may be provided with an option to modify those report views, add new ones, or remove some of them.


Example report view editor UI includes a bar chart style report as shown in preview window 802. Another portion (804) of the report view editor UI includes a listing of attributes associated with the selected report view such as documents and links, comments, permissions, configuration, parameters, and the like. Each of these attributes may be modified depending on the permission level of the subscriber.


The example implementations of report views, scorecards, and UIs in FIGS. 4 through 8 are intended for illustration purposes only and should not be construed as a limitation on embodiments. Other embodiments may be implemented using the principles described herein.



FIG. 9 illustrates logic flow diagram for a process of using report definition lists assigned to scorecard metrics. Process 900 may be implemented in a business logic application.


Process 900 begins with operation 902, where available reports are determined. Available reports are determined based on an evaluation of suitable reports for selected scorecard elements such as KPIs, Objectives, and the like. Report type for the data included in the element, features of a report presentation layout associated with the report, and the like, are taken into consideration when determining the available reports. Processing advances from operation 902 to operation 904.


At operation 904, the reports are categorized based on report view type(s). As mentioned previously, different report types may be generated based on the same scorecard element. For example, a scorecard element representing manufacturing defects may be associated with various charts, manufacturing records, or even images of product defects. Each category of reports may include a number of reports based on the data (different time periods, organizational units, etc.). Processing moves from operation 904 to operation 906.


At operation 906, group indicators are assigned to the report definitions. Group indicators may be used to identify types of available reports for a selected scorecard element. For example, ordered numbers or letters may be assigned to report types such as charts, transaction lists, URLs, and the like. If multiple reports are to be generated under one or more categories, the reports for that category can be identified by the same group indicator. Processing then proceeds to operation 908.


At operation 908, a report definition list is generated. The report definition list includes available report definitions for the selected scorecard element by category. The report list may be made part of the selected scorecard element allowing association of reports across metrics and physical layouts of the scorecard. Processing advances from operation 908 to optional operation 910.


At optional operation 910, the report definition list is made available for consumption by the scorecard application or another application for report presentation, query-based searches, and similar purposes. After operation 910, processing moves to a calling process for further actions.


The operations included in process 900 are for illustration purposes. Providing coordinated reports for heterogeneous metrics by assigning report definition lists to the metrics may be implemented by similar processes with fewer or additional steps, as well as in different order of operations using the principles described herein.


The above specification, examples and data provide a complete description of the manufacture and use of the composition of the embodiments. Although the subject matter has been described in language specific to structural features and/or methodological acts, it is to be understood that the subject matter defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited to the specific features or acts described above. Rather, the specific features and acts described above are disclosed as example forms of implementing the claims and embodiments.

Claims
  • 1. A method to be executed at least in part in a computing device for using parameterized subordinate reports in a scorecard system, the method comprising: determining a plurality of report definitions associated with a scorecard element based on an attribute of the scorecard element, the scorecard element being associated with an actual value, a target value, and a status indicator;determining layout features for each report definition of the plurality of report definitions, wherein determining the layout features comprises determining which configuration views are associated with each report definition, the configuration views being configured to show different properties of the scorecard element, the properties comprising owner information, data source information, and scorecard update frequency information;categorizing the plurality of report definitions based on a report type and the layout features for each report definition; andassigning selected report definitions to the scorecard element by category.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a listing document that includes a list of the selected report definitions.
  • 3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: providing the listing document to another application for one of generating a report presentation and executing a query.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein assigning selected report definitions comprises assigning selected report definitions that are determined based on one of a default selection criterion and a user selection.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein categorizing the plurality of report definitions based on the report type and the layout features for each report definition comprises categorizing the plurality of report definitions based on the report type that includes at least one from a set of a document, a chart, a transaction list, a spreadsheet, and a link.
  • 6. The method of claim 5, further comprising: determining the layout features for a report definition based on the report type of the same report definition.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the plurality of report definitions associated with the scorecard element comprises determining the plurality of report definitions associated with the scorecard element that includes one of a Key Performance Indicator (KPI), an Objective, and a scorecard.
  • 8. The method of claim 7, further comprising generating the report definitions dynamically when the scorecard is modified.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: storing the assigned report definitions with scorecard information.
  • 10. A computer-readable storage medium having computer executable instructions which when executed perform a method for using report definitions capable of handling heterogeneous metrics in a scorecard system, the method executed by the computer executable instructions comprising: determining a first group of available report definitions for a scorecard metric based on an attribute of the metric, the scorecard metric being associated with an actual value, a target value, and a status indicator;categorizing the first group of report definitions based on a report type and a layout feature associated with each report definition, the layout feature being associated with configuration views associated with the scorecard metric, the configuration views being configured to show different properties of the scorecard metric, the properties comprising owner information, data source information, and scorecard update frequency information;selecting a second group of report definitions from the first group;generating a list of the second group of report definitions, wherein the list is assigned to the scorecard metric; andproviding the list of the second group of report definitions to another application for report presentation, the other application being configured to compute scorecard metrics and provide a scorecard presentation based on the computed scorecard metrics.
  • 11. The computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein selecting the second group of report definitions comprises selecting the second group of report definitions based on a set of default criteria.
  • 12. The computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein determining the first group of available report definitions for the scorecard metric based on the attribute of the metric comprises determining the first group of available report definitions for the scorecard metric based on the attribute of the metric including a data type for the metric.
  • 13. The computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, providing the list to the application for report presentation comprises providing the list to a scorecard application.
  • 14. The computer-readable storage medium of claim 10, wherein determining the first group of available report definitions for the scorecard metric based on the attribute of the metric comprises determining the first group of available report definitions wherein each report definition includes at least one from a set of: a report type, a permission level, a report layout, a link to source data, and a configuration.
  • 15. A system for assigning report definitions to scorecard elements, the system comprising: a memory storage comprising a report definition module; anda processing unit coupled to the memory storage, wherein the processing unit is configured to: determine a group of available report definitions for a scorecard element based on a type of data associated with the scorecard element, the scorecard element being associated with an actual value, a target value, and a status indicator;categorize the report definitions based on a report view presentation format, the report view presentation format being associated with various configuration views corresponding to the scorecard element, the configuration views being configured to show different properties of the scorecard metric, the properties comprising owner information, data source information, database information, and scorecard update frequency information; andassign the categorized report definitions to the scorecard element such that a correlation between the scorecard element and the group of report definitions is independent from a scorecard configuration.
  • 16. The system of claim 15, wherein the report definition module is further configured to select a subset of the group of available report definitions based on one of a user input and a default selection.
  • 17. The system of claim 15, wherein the report definition module is further configured to enable a subscriber to modify at least one attribute of each of the report definitions.
  • 18. The system of claim 15, further comprising a scorecard application is configured to: compute scorecard metrics and provide a scorecard presentation based on the computed scorecard metrics; andgenerate a report view layout based on selected ones of the report definitions.
  • 19. The system of claim 15, wherein the report view presentation format includes a size and a shape of the report view area.
  • 20. The system of claim 15, wherein the report definition module is integrated with a scorecard application.
US Referenced Citations (258)
Number Name Date Kind
5018077 Healey May 1991 A
5233552 Brittan Aug 1993 A
5253362 Nolan Oct 1993 A
5404295 Katz et al. Apr 1995 A
5473747 Bird Dec 1995 A
5675553 O'Brien, Jr. et al. Oct 1997 A
5680636 Levine Oct 1997 A
5758351 Gibson et al. May 1998 A
5779566 Wilens Jul 1998 A
5797136 Boyer et al. Aug 1998 A
5832504 Tripathi et al. Nov 1998 A
5845270 Schatz Dec 1998 A
5926794 Fethe Jul 1999 A
5943666 Kleewein et al. Aug 1999 A
5956691 Powers Sep 1999 A
6012044 Maggioncalda et al. Jan 2000 A
6023714 Hill et al. Feb 2000 A
6115705 Larson Sep 2000 A
6119137 Smith et al. Sep 2000 A
6141655 Johnson Oct 2000 A
6163779 Mantha Dec 2000 A
6182022 Mayle et al. Jan 2001 B1
6216066 Goebel et al. Apr 2001 B1
6230310 Arrouye et al. May 2001 B1
6233573 Bair May 2001 B1
6249784 Macke Jun 2001 B1
6308206 Singh Oct 2001 B1
6321206 Honarvar Nov 2001 B1
6341277 Coden et al. Jan 2002 B1
6345279 Li et al. Feb 2002 B1
6389434 Rivette May 2002 B1
6393406 Eder May 2002 B1
6421670 Fourman Jul 2002 B1
6493733 Pollack Dec 2002 B1
6516324 Jones Feb 2003 B1
6519603 Bays Feb 2003 B1
6529215 Golovchinsky et al. Mar 2003 B2
6563514 Samar May 2003 B1
6578004 Cimral Jun 2003 B1
6601233 Underwood Jul 2003 B1
6628312 Rao Sep 2003 B1
6633889 Dessloch et al. Oct 2003 B2
6658432 Alavi et al. Dec 2003 B1
6665577 Onyshkevych et al. Dec 2003 B2
6677963 Mani et al. Jan 2004 B1
6687878 Eintracht Feb 2004 B1
6763134 Cooper et al. Jul 2004 B2
6772137 Hurwood et al. Aug 2004 B1
6775675 Nwabueze Aug 2004 B1
6831575 Wu et al. Dec 2004 B2
6831668 Cras Dec 2004 B2
6842176 Sang'udi Jan 2005 B2
6850891 Forman Feb 2005 B1
6854091 Beaudoin Feb 2005 B1
6859798 Bedell et al. Feb 2005 B1
6867764 Ludtke Mar 2005 B2
6874126 Lapidous Mar 2005 B1
6898603 Petculescu May 2005 B1
6900808 Lassiter May 2005 B2
6959306 Nwabueze Oct 2005 B2
6963826 Hanaman et al. Nov 2005 B2
6968312 Jordan Nov 2005 B1
6973616 Cottrille Dec 2005 B1
6976086 Sadeghi et al. Dec 2005 B2
6988076 Ouimet Jan 2006 B2
6995768 Jou Feb 2006 B2
7013285 Rebane Mar 2006 B1
7015911 Shaughnessy et al. Mar 2006 B2
7027051 Alford et al. Apr 2006 B2
7043524 Shah et al. May 2006 B2
7058638 Singh Jun 2006 B2
7181417 Langseth et al. Feb 2007 B1
7302431 Apollonsky et al. Nov 2007 B1
7340448 Santosuosso Mar 2008 B2
7349862 Palmer et al. Mar 2008 B2
7383247 Li et al. Jun 2008 B2
7412398 Bailey Aug 2008 B1
7433876 Spivack et al. Oct 2008 B2
7440976 Chan et al. Oct 2008 B2
7496852 Eichorn et al. Feb 2009 B2
7509343 Washburn et al. Mar 2009 B1
7548912 Gideoni et al. Jun 2009 B2
7587665 Crow et al. Sep 2009 B2
7599848 Wefers et al. Oct 2009 B2
7613625 Heinrich Nov 2009 B2
7702779 Gupta et al. Apr 2010 B1
7716571 Tien et al. May 2010 B2
7716592 Tien et al. May 2010 B2
7752301 Maiocco et al. Jul 2010 B1
20010004256 Iwata et al. Jun 2001 A1
20010051835 Cline Dec 2001 A1
20010054046 Mikhailov et al. Dec 2001 A1
20020038217 Young Mar 2002 A1
20020049621 Bruce Apr 2002 A1
20020052740 Charlesworth May 2002 A1
20020052862 Scott et al. May 2002 A1
20020059267 Shah May 2002 A1
20020078175 Wallace Jun 2002 A1
20020087272 Mackie Jul 2002 A1
20020091737 Markel Jul 2002 A1
20020099578 Eicher et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020112171 Ginter et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020133368 Strutt et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020147803 Dodd et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020169658 Adler Nov 2002 A1
20020169799 Voshell Nov 2002 A1
20020177784 Shekhar Nov 2002 A1
20020194042 Sands Dec 2002 A1
20020194090 Gagnon et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020194329 Alling Dec 2002 A1
20030004742 Palmer et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030014290 McLean et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030014488 Dalal et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030028419 Monaghan Feb 2003 A1
20030040936 Nader et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030055731 Fouraker et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030061132 Yu et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030069773 Hladik et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030069824 Menninger Apr 2003 A1
20030078830 Wagner et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030093423 Larason et al. May 2003 A1
20030110249 Buus et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030144868 MacIntyre et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030146937 Lee Aug 2003 A1
20030182181 Kirkwood Sep 2003 A1
20030187675 Hack Oct 2003 A1
20030204430 Kalmick et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030204487 Sssv Oct 2003 A1
20030212960 Shaughnessy et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030225604 Casati et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030226107 Pelegri-Llopart Dec 2003 A1
20030236732 Cimral et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040030741 Wolton et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040030795 Hesmer et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040033475 Mizuma et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040044678 Kalia et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040059518 Rothschild Mar 2004 A1
20040064293 Hamilton et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040066782 Nassar Apr 2004 A1
20040068429 MacDonald Apr 2004 A1
20040083246 Kahlouche et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040093296 Phelan et al. May 2004 A1
20040102926 Adendorff May 2004 A1
20040117731 Blyashov Jun 2004 A1
20040119752 Beringer et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040128150 Lundegren Jul 2004 A1
20040135826 Pickering Jul 2004 A1
20040138944 Whitacre Jul 2004 A1
20040162772 Lewis Aug 2004 A1
20040164983 Khozai Aug 2004 A1
20040172323 Stamm Sep 2004 A1
20040183800 Peterson Sep 2004 A1
20040199541 Goldberg et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040204913 Mueller et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040210574 Aponte et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040215626 Colossi et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040225571 Urali Nov 2004 A1
20040225955 Ly Nov 2004 A1
20040230463 Boivin Nov 2004 A1
20040230471 Putnam Nov 2004 A1
20040249482 Abu El Ata et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040252134 Bhatt et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040254860 Wagner et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040260582 King Dec 2004 A1
20040260717 Albornoz et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040268228 Croney et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050012743 Kapler et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050039119 Parks et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050049894 Cantwell et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050055257 Senturk et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050060048 Pierre Mar 2005 A1
20050060325 Bakalash Mar 2005 A1
20050065967 Schuetze et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050071737 Adendorff Mar 2005 A1
20050091093 Bhaskaran Apr 2005 A1
20050091253 Cragun Apr 2005 A1
20050091263 Wallace Apr 2005 A1
20050097438 Jacobson May 2005 A1
20050097517 Goin et al. May 2005 A1
20050108271 Jacobson May 2005 A1
20050114241 Hirsch May 2005 A1
20050114801 Yang May 2005 A1
20050149558 Zhuk Jul 2005 A1
20050149852 Bleicher Jul 2005 A1
20050154628 Eckart et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050160356 Albornoz Jul 2005 A1
20050171835 Mook Aug 2005 A1
20050198042 Davis Sep 2005 A1
20050209948 Ballow et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050216831 Guzik et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050228880 Champlin Oct 2005 A1
20050240467 Eckart Oct 2005 A1
20050256825 Dettinger et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050262051 Dettinger et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050272022 Montz, Jr. et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050273762 Lesh Dec 2005 A1
20050289452 Kashi Dec 2005 A1
20060004555 Jones Jan 2006 A1
20060004731 Seibel et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060009990 McCormick Jan 2006 A1
20060010032 Eicher et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060010164 Netz et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020531 Veeneman et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060036455 Prasad Feb 2006 A1
20060059107 Elmore et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060074789 Capotosto et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060085444 Sarawgi et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060089868 Griller et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060089894 Balk et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060089939 Broda et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060095915 Clater May 2006 A1
20060111921 Chang et al. May 2006 A1
20060112123 Clark et al. May 2006 A1
20060112130 Lowson May 2006 A1
20060123022 Bird Jun 2006 A1
20060136830 Martlage et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060161471 Hulen et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060167704 Nicholls et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060178897 Fuchs Aug 2006 A1
20060178920 Muell Aug 2006 A1
20060195424 Wiest et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060206392 Rice, Jr. et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060229925 Chalasani et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060233348 Cooper Oct 2006 A1
20060235778 Razvi et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060253475 Stewart et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060265377 Raman et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060282819 Graham et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070021992 Konakalla Jan 2007 A1
20070033129 Coates Feb 2007 A1
20070038934 Fellman Feb 2007 A1
20070050237 Tien et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070055688 Blattner Mar 2007 A1
20070112607 Tien et al. May 2007 A1
20070143161 Tien et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143174 Tien et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143175 Tien et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070156680 Tien et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070174330 Fox et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070234198 Tien et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070239573 Tien et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070254740 Tien et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070255681 Tien et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070260625 Tien et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070265863 Tien et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070266042 Hsu et al. Nov 2007 A1
20080005064 Sarukkai Jan 2008 A1
20080059441 Gaug et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080172287 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080172348 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080172414 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080172629 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080183564 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080184099 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080184130 Tien et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080189632 Tien et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080189724 Tien et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080288889 Hunt et al. Nov 2008 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (13)
Number Date Country
1 128 299 Aug 2001 EP
1 050 829 Mar 2006 EP
WO 9731320 Aug 1997 WO
WO 0165349 Sep 2001 WO
WO 0169421 Sep 2001 WO
WO 0169421 Sep 2001 WO
WO 03037019 May 2003 WO
WO 0101206 Jan 2004 WO
WO 0101206 Jan 2004 WO
WO 2004114177 Dec 2004 WO
WO 2004114177 Dec 2004 WO
WO 2005062201 Jul 2005 WO
WO 2005101233 Oct 2005 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20070239660 A1 Oct 2007 US