Patent Grant
8655711
Not Applicable.
Computer systems and related technology affect many aspects of society. Indeed, the computer system's ability to process information has transformed the way we live and work. Computer systems now commonly perform a host of tasks (e.g., word processing, scheduling, accounting, etc.) that prior to the advent of the computer system were performed manually. More recently, computer systems have been coupled to one another and to other electronic devices to form both wired and wireless computer networks over which the computer systems and other electronic devices can transfer electronic data. Accordingly, the performance of many computing tasks are distributed across a number of different computer systems and/or a number of different computing environments.
Many businesses use enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) to coordinate all resources, information, and activities needed to complete business processes such as order fulfillment and billing. An ERP system typically supports most of the business system and maintains tables and other entities in a common database. For example, all the data for manufacturing, supply chain management, financials, projects, human resources, etc., can be maintained in a common database. Through the common database different business units can store and retrieve information in real-time. ERP systems are advantageous for a number of reasons, including standardization, lower maintenance, providing a common interface for accessing data, and greater and more efficient reporting capabilities.
For example, businesses are typically required to report data for inclusion in Standard Industrial Classification (“SIC”) or North American Industry Classification System (“NAICS”). Many businesses also report data to regulatory bodies, such as, for example, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), Securities and Exchange Commison (“SEC”), and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”). For example, publicly held corporations can report financial data including off-balance sheet transactions, pro-forma figures, stock transactions for corporate officers, and auditing information to the SEC for compliance with federal law.
As such, ERP data is typically formulated for generic use in reporting and compliance. For example, ERP data can be formatted for generating statistics for broad economic analysis (e.g., NAICS reporting), for statutory compliance (e.g., Sarbanes-Oxley), etc., in accordance with generic externally defined formats. Thus, ERP data typically lacks any industry-specific structure.
This is problematic since the ability of an organization to understand the underlying basis for generated ERP data in these and other reports is important to staying competitive in a given field. For example, such understanding can be useful when evaluating potential vertical industry strategies, such as, for example, introducing a new product, changing customer service procedures, that might impact performance. Further, in many organizations, there is no defined link between ERP data and business components that drive potential vertical industry strategies. Thus, the usefulness of ERP data in making decisions with respect to vertical-industry strategies is limited. For example, it is difficult for an organization to tell from ERP data what business components correspond more or less strongly to the ERP data.
The present invention extends to methods, systems, and computer program products for linking enterprise resource planning data to business capabilities. A computer architecture accesses a schema-based model for the organization. The schema-based model models a plurality of interrelated business capabilities for the organization at a specified level of detail. Each business capability represents a portion of what work the organization does.
The computer architecture accesses a schema-based representation of a portion of enterprise resource planning data for the organization. The portion of enterprise resource planning data is formatted for purposes of report generation. The computer architecture identifies an express schema-based link between the portion of enterprise resource planning data and each of the plurality of interrelated business capabilities. Each schema based-link links the portion of enterprise resource data to a corresponding business capability
Each schema-based link includes property values indicative of a corresponding business capability's contribution to the portion of enterprise resource planning data. The computer architecture utilizes the property values to identify what business capabilities specifically contribute to the portion of enterprise resource data. A business related decision is made with respect to the specified portion of enterprise resource planning data based on the identified business capabilities and the property values.
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 to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.
Additional features and advantages of the invention will be set forth in the description which follows, and in part will be obvious from the description, or may be learned by the practice of the invention. The features and advantages of the invention may be realized and obtained by means of the instruments and combinations particularly pointed out in the appended claims. These and other features of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, or may be learned by the practice of the invention as set forth hereinafter.
In order to describe the manner in which the above-recited and other advantages and features of the invention can be obtained, a more particular description of the invention briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings in which:
The present invention extends to methods, systems, and computer program products for linking enterprise resource planning data to business capabilities. A computer architecture accesses a schema-based model for the organization. The schema-based model models a plurality of interrelated business capabilities for the organization at a specified level of detail. Each business capability represents a portion of what work the organization does.
The computer architecture accesses a schema-based representation of a portion of enterprise resource planning data for the organization. The portion of enterprise resource planning data is formatted in a format for purposes of report generation. The computer architecture identifies an express schema-based link between the portion of enterprise resource planning data and each of the plurality of interrelated business capabilities. Each schema based-link links the portion of enterprise resource data to a corresponding business capability
Each schema-based link includes property values indicative of a corresponding business capability's contribution to the portion of enterprise resource planning data. The computer architecture utilizes the property values to identify what business capabilities specifically contribute to the portion of enterprise resource data. A business related decision is made with respect to the specified portion of enterprise resource planning data based on the identified business capabilities and the property values.
Embodiments of the present invention may comprise or utilize a special purpose or general-purpose computer including computer hardware, as discussed in greater detail below. Embodiments within the scope of the present invention also include physical and other computer-readable media for carrying or storing computer-executable instructions and/or data structures. Such computer-readable media can be any available media that can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer system. Computer-readable media that store computer-executable instructions are physical storage media. Computer-readable media that carry computer-executable instructions are transmission media. Thus, by way of example, and not limitation, embodiments of the invention can comprise at least two distinctly different kinds of computer-readable media: physical storage media and transmission media.
Physical storage media includes RAM, ROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM or other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store desired program code means in the form of computer-executable instructions or data structures and which can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer.
A “network” is defined as one or more data links that enable the transport of electronic data between computer systems and/or modules and/or other electronic devices. When information is transferred or provided over a network or another communications connection (either hardwired, wireless, or a combination of hardwired or wireless) to a computer, the computer properly views the connection as a transmission medium. Transmissions media can include a network and/or data links which can be used to carry or desired program code means in the form of computer-executable instructions or data structures and which can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer. Combinations of the above should also be included within the scope of computer-readable media.
Further, upon reaching various computer system components, program code means in the form of computer-executable instructions or data structures can be transferred automatically from transmission media to physical storage media (or vice versa). For example, computer-executable instructions or data structures received over a network or data link can be buffered in RAM within a network interface module (e.g., a “NIC”), and then eventually transferred to computer system RAM and/or to less volatile physical storage media at a computer system. Thus, it should be understood that physical storage media can be included in computer system components that also (or even primarily) utilize transmission media.
Computer-executable instructions comprise, for example, instructions and data which cause a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or special purpose processing device to perform a certain function or group of functions. The computer executable instructions may be, for example, binaries, intermediate format instructions such as assembly language, or even source code. 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 described features or acts described above. Rather, the described features and acts are disclosed as example forms of implementing the claims.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the invention may be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including, personal computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, message processors, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, mobile telephones, PDAs, pagers, routers, switches, and the like. The invention may also be practiced in distributed system environments where local and remote computer systems, which are linked (either by hardwired data links, wireless data links, or by a combination of hardwired and wireless data links) through a network, both perform tasks. In a distributed system environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.
Generally, a business capability indicates “what” work is performed, such as, for example, “Purchase Goods”. Entities that contribute to the performance of a capability indicate “how” work is performed, such as, for example, an employee uses an software application to generate a request for proposal (“RFP”) and sends the RFP to prospective sellers, a Web service receives bids from prospective sellers, employees and automated analysis tools interact to evaluate received bids and identify a small subset of the best bids, a management committee then conducts a review process over small subset, a final selected bid is approved by the CEO, the final selected bid is then forwarded to purchasing, purchasing uses a Web service to purchase goods from the winning organization.
Multiple different implementations of “how” work is performed can each contribute to “what” work is performed. For example, for an airline, a first combination of entities from various business layers can be blended together to represent online check in, a second different combination of entities from various business layers can be blended kiosk check in, and a third different combination of entities from various business layers can be blended counter check in, for airline flights. Each of online check in, kiosk check in, and counter check in can contribute to a business capability for checking in passengers.
Referring to
Data aggregation and reporting module 157 can access data from database 162 and generating reporting and other types of data. For example, data aggregation and reporting module 157 can generate enterprises resource planning data 101. Enterprises resource planning data 101 can include a variety of different types of data, such as, for example, master data (related to customers, vendors, etc.), transaction data (related to orders, receipts, etc), and lookup values. ERP data can for formatted for a variety of different purposes.
For example, NAICS reporting data 102 can be formatted for submission to the United States census bureau and/or for submission to other private entities that track industry-wide dat. SEC reporting data 103 can be formatted for submission to Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) for compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley act. Other financial data 104 (e.g., spending data by business unit) and other data 105 can be formatted for specific use by organization 190. As such, organization 109 can use enterprises resource planning data 101 (along with other data), when making business related decisions.
A business capability can have a link to each portion of enterprise resource data to which it contributes. Through links, each business capability can contribute to zero or more different portions of enterprise resource planning data. For example, business capability 112 can contribute to NAICS reporting data 102 and other data 105. Thus, links 107 can include links from business capability 112 to each of NAICS reporting data 102 and other data 105. Business capability 113 can contribute to NAICS reporting data 102, SEC reporting data 103, and other financial data 104. Thus, links 107 can include links from business capability 113 to each of NAICS reporting data 102, SEC reporting data 103, and other financial data 104. Business capability 114 may contribute to other types and/or formats of ERP data (not shown) in enterprise resource planning data 101. Thus, links 107 can include links from business capability 114 to each of other types and/or formats of ERP data.
Values on links 107 indicate a level of contribution from a business capability to a portion of ERP data. Virtually any mechanism for determining one contribution relative to another can be used. In some embodiments, numerical values are used. In these embodiments, higher numerical values correlate to higher contributions and lower number values correlate to lower contributions.
In some embodiments, business models and data format definitions for business capabilities are generally described as indicated in Table 1.
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
Depicted in
It should be understood that schema 200 is merely one example of a business capability modeling schema. It would be apparent to one skilled in the art, after having reviewed this description, that embodiments of the present invention can be used with a wide variety of other business capability modeling schemas, in addition to schema 200. Further, modeling business capabilities does not require that capability attributes for all the data formats in schema 200 be accessible. For example, a capability and connecter can be used to model a business capability based on capability data format 214 and connector data format 223, without accessing capability attributes corresponding to other data formats. Thus, schema 200 defines data formats for business capability attributes that are accessed, but does not require that all data formats be populated to generate a business capability model.
Accordingly, in some embodiments, the business capabilities for an organization are included together in a collection of business capabilities (e.g., a business architecture). A collection of business capabilities can be represented as a (e.g., structured or schematized) business capability model. An organization can formulate business capability attributes representing current performance of their collection of business capabilities. A modeling application (not shown) can receive the business capability attributes (e.g., from a business capability business layer) and model the business capability attributes into a business capability model. A business capability model can be represented in a variety of different ways depicting various levels of detail (e.g., up to the level of detail of the business capability attributes). A business capability model can be configured visually for output at a user-interface and/or can be retained as data for further processing.
Levels of detail can be used to represent (potentially interconnected) sub-capabilities that contribute to the performance other capabilities.
Turning now to
Procurement 301.3C is further detailed to include source and supplier contract management 301.3C1, purchasing 301.3C2, and receiving of indirect/capital goods and services 301.3C3. Thus, contract management 301.3C1, purchasing 301.3C2, and receiving of indirect/capital goods and services 301.3C3 contribute to the performance of procurement 301.3C (and as a result also contribute to the performance of fulfill demand 301.3 and performance of enterprise 301).
Purchasing 301.3C2 is further detailed to include request resources 301.3C2A, acquire/purchase resources 301.3C2B, and manage supplies 301.3C2C. Thus, request resources 301.3C2A, acquire/purchase resources 301.3C2B, and manage supplies 301.3C2C contribute to the performance of purchasing 301.3C2 (and as a result also contribute to the performance of procurement 301.3C, fulfill demand 301.3, and performance of enterprise 301). Requisition processing 380 is a further sub-capability of request resources request resources 301.3C2A.
Business capability models can also represent data that flows into and data that flows out of the modeled business capabilities. For example,
Purchase order request capability 311 includes ports 373 and 374 (e.g., modeled based on the structured port data format) that can send purchase order requisition 313A and direct order purchase order 314 respectively (e.g., to other business capabilities). Purchase order request capability 501 can include logic that determines, based on one or more of receive employee data 312, product data 316 and produce request 317, whether purchase order requisition 513A and/or direct order purchase order 314 is to be sent.
Thus, embodiments of the present invention can also utilize models of a network of business capabilities. A first business capability is modeled based upon formatted business capability attributes. A second business capability is modeled based upon the formatted business capability attributes. A connection between the first business capability and the second capability is modeled based upon the formatted business capability attributes.
Requisition 323 receives purchase order requisition 313A at port 312. Requisition 323 sends purchase order requisition 313A out of port 322 to purchase order submission capability 333. Thus, requisition 323 transfers purchase order requisition 313A from purchase order request capability 311 to purchase order submission capability 333. Accordingly, a connector can be viewed as a business capability wherein the capability of the connector is to transfer data between other capabilities.
Purchase order submission capability 333 receives purchase order requisition 313A at port 332. Purchase order submission capability 333 includes other ports, including ports 336, 338, 339, and 341. Each of the ports 336, 338, 339, and 341 can be used to send data to and/or receive data from other capabilities or connectors. More specifically, purchase order submission capability 332 sends purchase order 313B out of port 341 to requisition 343 (a connector). Although similar to purchase order requisition 313A, purchase order requisition 313B can differ from purchase order 313A as a result of processing at purchase order submission capability 332.
Requisition 343 receives purchase order requisition 313B at port 342. Requisition 343 sends purchase order requisition 313B out of port 344 to purchase order review capability 363. Purchase order review capability 563 receives purchase order requisition 313B at port 361. Purchase order review capability 363 includes other ports, including ports 362, 364, and 366. Each of the ports 362, 364, and 366 can be used to send data to and/or receive data from other capabilities or connectors.
Although one-way ports and connectors have been depicted in
A network of business capabilities can also be represented in a manner that abstracts the data exchanged between various business capabilities and connectors in the business capability network. Further, in some embodiments and as previously described, a network of more granular business capabilities (or those at higher levels of detail) can be used to model a more coarse business capability (or those at lower levels of detail).
The network of business capabilities in
Although particular models have been described with respect to FIG. 3A3E, embodiments of the invention are not so limited. Embodiments of the invention can be practiced with virtually any type of model that represents business capabilities and/or business processes.
It should be understood that schemas for ERP data and/or schemas for links between business capabilities and ERP data can include data definitions indicating how the business capabilities contribute to ERP data. Thus, a business capability schema can include data definitions for representing links between business capabilities and different portions of ERP data. For example, ERP and/or link schema definitions can define contributions from business capabilities to one or more of NAICS reporting data, SEC reporting data, Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) reporting data, as well as defining contributions from business capabilities to other types of financial data and other data.
Aggregator 503 is configured to receive one or more links (e.g., 512, 513, and 514) from business capabilities (522, 523, and 524 respectively) and aggregate the links into link 511 indicating the total contribution of business capabilities in model 504 to ERP data 502. Business capabilities 522, 523, and 524 can also include links to other portions or ERP data. Thus, aggregator 503 can facilitate a many-to-many relationship between ERP data and business capabilities (and vice versa).
Accordingly, aggregator 503 can include one or more components to transform, normalize, regulate, etc., received links relative to one another to properly evaluate the contribution of each received link to a corresponding portion of ERP data For example, aggregator 503 can transform, normalize, regulate, etc., links 512, 513, and 514 relative to one another to properly evaluate the contribution of each of the links 512, 513, and 514 to ERP data 502. Aggregator 503 can also be used to calculate the contribution of a subset of business capabilities to ERP data. For example, aggregator 503 can calculate the contribution of just links 512 and 513 into link 511 indicating the contribution of business capabilities 522 and 523 to ERP data 502.
Computer system 541 can generate a contribution mapping that maps contribution to a portion of ERP data on per business capability basis. Organization 590 can use the contribution mapping to make business related decisions, such as, for example, decisions with respect to vertical industry strategies. Accordingly, embodiments of the invention essentially provide a pre-defined common vocabulary to uniformly consider how business capabilities contribute to different portions of ERP data.
Method 600 includes an act of accessing a schema-based model for the organization, the schema-based model modeling a plurality of interrelated business capabilities for the organization at a specified level of detail, each business capability representing a portion of what work the organization does (act 601). For example, computer system 541 can access model 504. Business capabilities 522, 523, 524, etc., can model a portion of what an organization 590 does.
Method 600 includes an act of accessing a schema-based representation of a portion of enterprise resource planning data for the organization, the portion of enterprise resource planning data formatted in a format for purposes of report generation (act 602). For example, computer system 541 can access ERP data 502. ERP data 502 can be a portion of ERP data for organization 590. ERP data 502 can formatted in accordance with an ERP schema (e.g., 401), such as, for example, for inclusion in a report to a government agency.
Method 600 includes an act of identifying an express schema-based link between the portion of enterprise resource planning data and each of the plurality of interrelated business capabilities, each schema based-link linking the portion of enterprise resource data to a corresponding business capability, each schema-based link including property values indicative of a corresponding business capability's contribution to the portion of enterprise resource planning data (act 603). For example, computer system 541 can access links 506. From links 506, computer system 541 can identify links 512, 513, and 514 between business capabilities 522, 523, and 524 respectively and ERP data 502. Links 512, 513, and 514 can include a property value indicative of a contribution to ERP data 502. For example, link 512 can indicate a contribution of business capability 522 to ERP data 502.
Method 600 includes an act of utilizing the property values to identify what business capabilities specifically contribute to the portion of enterprise resource data (act 604). For example, from links 506, computer system 541 can identify what business capabilities in model 504 contribute to ERP data 502. Contributing business capabilities can have a positive/negative property value (e.g., number or percentage) on their corresponding link. Non-contributing business capabilities can have a zero or NULL property value on their corresponding link.
From the property values, computer system 541 can create contribution mapping 593. Contribution mapping 593 can map each business capability to its corresponding contribution to ERP data 502. For example, contribution mapping 593 maps business capability 522 to contribution 532 (e.g., a property value on link 512). Similarly, contribution mapping 593 maps business capability 523 to contribution 533 (e.g., a property value on link 513). Non-contributing business capabilities can be omitted from contribution mapping 593.
Method 600 includes an act of making a business related decision with respect to the specified portion of enterprise resource planning data based on the identified business capabilities and the property values (act 605). For example, organization 590 can utilize contribution mapping 593 to make decision 594. Decision 594 can be, for example, a decision to implement or not implement a vertical industry strategy a strategic direction based on how different business capabilities in model 504 contribute to ERP data 502. A strategic direction can viewed relative to a specified time frame. For example, a shorter term strategic direction can be one to two years in the future. A longer term strategic direction can be three to five years in the future.
Accordingly, embodiments of the invention provide a linkage between schematized ERP data and schematized business capabilities. The linkage provides a the ability to report against this model in a visual way that permits the linkage of such things as busines value, performance, maturity, interconnectedness, process standardization, compliance, etc. As such, businesses capabilities can be linked to specific spend amounts in ERP data.
In some embodiments, ERP financial data is aligned and enforced against business architecture. For example, a specific project to fund “Develop and Manager Provider Network”, could touch many business capabilities and spending can happened at different times. Through linkages between ERP data and business capabilities, spending per business capability can be captured and reconciled.
The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. The described embodiments are to be considered in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description. All changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be embraced within their scope.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5233513 | Doyle | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5799286 | Morgan | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5953707 | Huang | Sep 1999 | A |
| 6151582 | Huang | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6321205 | Eder | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6345239 | Bowman-Amuah | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6560569 | Abu El Ata | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6601233 | Underwood | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6609120 | Honarvar | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6772216 | Ankireddipally | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6778971 | Altschuler | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6873979 | Fishman | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6876993 | LaButte et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6898783 | Gupta | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6904449 | Quinones | Jun 2005 | B1 |
| 6961756 | Dilsaver | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6965886 | Govrin et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 7043454 | Powell | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7120896 | Budhiraja | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7162427 | Myrick | Jan 2007 | B1 |
| 7181302 | Bayne | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7243120 | Massey | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7246144 | Walsh | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7251613 | Flores | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7281235 | Datta | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7308414 | Parker | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7308417 | Nathan | Dec 2007 | B1 |
| 7461038 | Kropaczek et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7506302 | Bahrami | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7580913 | Chandra et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7703071 | Kuester | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 20010053991 | Bonabeau | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020013720 | Ozono | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020049573 | El Ata | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059093 | Barton | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059264 | Fleming | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095393 | McHaney | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020103869 | Goatly | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020133368 | Strutt et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138484 | Bialek | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184070 | Chen et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020186238 | Sylor | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198722 | Yuschik | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198727 | Ann | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198800 | Shamrakov | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030033182 | Stok | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030046123 | Chen | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065690 | Kelley | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030083912 | Covington | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084053 | Govrin | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097286 | Skeen | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030144858 | Jain et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030216955 | Miller | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040034496 | Correll | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040034615 | Thompson | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040054690 | Hillerbrand | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040068431 | Smith | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040107124 | Sharpe | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040138933 | LaComb | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143470 | Myrick | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153436 | Pope et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040172319 | Eder | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040177326 | Bibko | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040181538 | Lo | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040230404 | Messmer | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040236618 | Smith | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040243595 | Cui | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050021348 | Chan et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021433 | Hyler | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050027752 | Gelbard | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050033716 | Ambroz | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050033762 | Kasravi et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050043977 | Ahem | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050049882 | Sawka | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050065805 | Moharram | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071737 | Adendorff | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050086189 | Noble | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091093 | Bhaskaran | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108022 | Bhattacharya | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050119905 | Wong et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050149558 | Zhuk | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050197969 | McElroy | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050216320 | Hattaway | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050222893 | Kasravi | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050228688 | Visser | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20060005157 | Saxena | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060064335 | Goldszmidt | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060074833 | Gardner | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060111921 | Chang | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060116919 | Homann | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060116922 | Homann et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060149764 | Burchfield | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060155711 | Jackson | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060167665 | Ata | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060167704 | Nicholls et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060178928 | Carney | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060206374 | Asthana | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060224425 | Homann | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060229922 | Levy | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060229926 | Homann | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060235732 | Miller et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060241954 | Jeng | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060241956 | Levy | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060242176 | Tsyganskiy | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060247943 | Kapoor | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060259316 | Breslin | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060277156 | Merican | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060293911 | Wittmann et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070008884 | Tang | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070016886 | O'Neil | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070021992 | Konakalla | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070022404 | Zhang | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070043724 | Senan | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070067195 | Fahner | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070078702 | Tandon | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094288 | Enenkiel | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124184 | Schmidt | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070129981 | Jang et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070130191 | Dawson | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070143174 | Tien | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070162496 | Pulfer | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070174109 | Cohn et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070174840 | Sharma | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070203589 | Flinn | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070203718 | Merrifield | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070203766 | Adler et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070226163 | Robles | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070234277 | Lei | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250361 | Hazy | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20080004924 | Cao | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080120573 | Gilbert | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201195 | Cohn et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270448 | Brennan et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080313102 | Campo | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090112655 | Stuhec | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090158237 | Zhang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0042553 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| 0106352 | Jan 2001 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Mathiassen, “Business agility and diffusion of information technology,” 2006, European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 15, pp. 116-119. |
| Plachy, “Enterprise Solutions Structure,” 1999 IBM Systems Journal, vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 4-10. |
| Ing. M.G. (Rine) le Comte BSc., “Business Processes and Workflow Management in an Enterprise Resource Planning Content”, OOPSLA 1997, Atlanta, Business Object Workshop III, 5 pages. |
| Nayak, N., et al., IBM Systems Journal, “Core business architecture for a service-oriented enterprise”, Accepted for publication Jun. 12, 2007; Published online Sep. 27, 2007, 17 pages. |
| Deloitte, “Service-Enabled Enterprise Resource Planning: Challenging the boundaries of traditional packaged applications to deliver business value”, 2006, 11 pages. |
| Franke, Jochen, et al., “Bridging the Gap: Linking It—Infrastructure and Business Processes”, 2004, 8 pages. |
| Office Action dated May 28, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/094,926. |
| Office Action dated Jun. 25, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/112,777. |
| Office Action dated Sep. 17, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/230,206. |
| Office Action dated Oct. 2, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/094,988. |
| Wilmot, “Foreign Keys Decrease Adaptability of Database Designs,” Comm. ACM, Dec. 1984, vol. 27, No. 12, pp. 1237-1243. |
| Plachy, “Enterprise Solutions Structure,” 1999, IBM Systems Journal, vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 4-10. |
| Noble, “Agile Application-Aware Adaptation for Mobility,” Oct. 1997, Proc. 16th ACM Symposium, Op. Sys. Principles. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,430, mail date May 9, 2011, Office Action. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/187,257, mail date May 19, 2011, Office Action. |
| Office Action dated Nov. 18, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 10/999,852. |
| Office Action dated Nov. 17, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/076,142. |
| Office Action dated Jan. 13, 2010 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/361,199. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 11/361,199, mail date Oct. 12, 2010, Office Action. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/202,920, filed Sep. 2, 2008, Merrifield. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/206,589, filed Sep. 8, 2008, Merrifield. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/187,257, filed Aug. 6, 2008, Merrifield. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,430, filed Sep. 30, 2008, Merrifield. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,412, filed Sep. 30, 2008, Merrifield. |
| IBM, “Orchestrating Brilliance Managing Innovation in an On-Demand World”, Based on Information and belief available, at least as early as Nov. 2, 2007, 3 Pages. |
| Matheson, Lona, “Identifying the Strategic Opportunities of E-Business Innovation”, Aug. 2006, 3 Pages. |
| Business Victoria—Managing & Improving Your Business—Innovation, Based on Information and belief available, at least as early as Nov. 2, 2007, 3 Pages. |
| Shemi, Arvindra et al., “Service Oriented Modeling for Connected Systems”, Architecture Journal, 2006, Journal 7, 26 pages. |
| Malhotra, Yogesh, “Integrating Knowledge Management Technologies in Organizational Business Processes: Getting Real Time Enterprises to Deliver Real Business Performance”, vol. 9, No. 1, 2005, pp. 7-28, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Journal of Knowledge Management. |
| Garnder, Jay M., “Building Business Value Faster with Manage Services”, 2005 BMC Software Inc., 8 Pages. |
| IBM, “Impacting Business Agility with SOA: Highlights of IBM's Recent Announcements”, IBM Impact 2007, 4 Pages. |
| Taylor, James, “Is Business Agility an Oxymoron?” Oct. 4, 2004, 2 Pages. |
| Computacenter Services, “Outsourcing Enhances Business Agility”, 2007, 2 Pages. |
| Palmer, Mark, “Event Stream Processing & Business Agility”, Feb. 16, 2006, 4 Pages. |
| InfoSys Technologies Limited, “Enterprise Performance Management Solution”, 2007, 1 Page. |
| Navigation Views, “Key Performance Indicators View”, Based on Information and Belief Available, at least as early as Nov. 20, 2007, 1 page. |
| Medicke, John, et al., “Manage Business Performance, Part 2: Retail Scenarios and Business Performance Management Architecture”, Jun. 1, 2004, 9 Pages. |
| Homann, Ulrich, “A Business-Oriented Foundation for Service Orientation”, Feb. 2006, 9 Pages. |
| Merrifield, Ric and Tobey, Jon; “Motion Lite: A rapid Application of the Business Architecture Techniques Used by Microsoft Motion”, May 2006, 20 Pages. |
| Starta Development Inc. “The Tools You Need: Business Innovations” Printed from http://www.startadevelopment.com/r.sh?content=BusinessInnovations on Nov. 7, 2007; 5 Pages. |
| Nagumo, Toshida; “Innovative Business Models in the Era of Ubiquitous Networks” NPL Papers No. 49, Jun. 1, 2002, Copyright 2002 by Nomura Research Institute, Ltd. |
| Li, Hua Huang and Yu, Yang Cai; “Organization and Management Innovation”, (Dept. of Information Management and Information Systems, Research Center of E-Business, School of Management, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433) Printed Nov. 7, 2007. |
| Kotelnikov, Vadim; “Business Innovation: Reinventing Your Business and Competitive Rules” Printed from http://www.1000ventures.com/business—guide/innovation—business.html, Printed Nov. 7, 2007. |
| Office Action dated Nov. 10, 2008 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/094,926. |
| Office Action dated Feb. 3, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/230,206. |
| Office Action dated Mar. 5, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/076,142. |
| Office Action dated Mar. 5, 2009 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 10/999,852. |
| Office Action dated May 9, 2013 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/242/412. |
| Office Action dated Apr. 9, 2012 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,412. |
| Office Action dated Apr. 11, 2012 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/202,920. |
| Office Action dated Jun. 21, 2012 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/361,199. |
| Swafford, A framework for assessing value chain agility, Dec. 2006, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 26, p. 118-140. |
| Notice of Allowance dated May 23, 2012 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/187,257. |
| Office Action dated Sep. 1, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/202,920. |
| Office Action dated Sep. 6, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,412. |
| Notice of Allowance dated in Sep. 7, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,430. |
| Office Action dated Sep. 9, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/187,257. |
| Office Action dated Oct. 12, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 11/361,199. |
| Office Action dated Oct. 7, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/206,589. |
| Office Action dated Oct. 2, 2012 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,412. |
| Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 6, 2012 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/206,589. |
| Notice of Allowance dated in Dec. 1, 2011 cited in U.S. Appl. No. 12/242,430. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20100131330 A1 | May 2010 | US |
