Patent Application
20160026951
In general, embodiments of the invention relate to business management and, more particularly, assessing the maturity of a technology-based business practice.
In the business environment, specifically the technology area, there are many platforms for implementing change. Many of these change platforms are computer-based systems which provide for requirements and solutions to evolve through collaboration amongst change-implementing team members. These change platforms, otherwise referred to as change types, promote adaptive planning, evolutionary development and project delivery through an iterative approach that encourages rapid and flexible response to the change being implemented.
Within a given change platform many different practices exist, such as development practices, testing practices, maintenance practices, production support practices and the like. However, while each different change platform may have a means for assessing such practices, currently no framework exists that provides for assessing such practices across all changes platform.
Therefore, a need exists to develop systems, apparatus, methods, computer program products and the like that provide for assessing a technology project regardless of the change platform, i.e., change type, implemented. The assessment should implement both quantitative (i.e., objective analysis) and qualitative (i.e., subjective analysis) measures to gauge the maturity level of a technology project. In this regard the desired assessment framework should assess the practices implemented within each change platform based on industry best practices, as well as the best practices of the business/enterprise that is undergoing change. In addition the desired methodology should identify opportunities to drive efficiency (i.e., improve project maturity) through planning for future actions and the like. Moreover, the desired systems and the like should identify what practices are industry and/or internal leaders, such that these practices can be leveraged across the industry or business/enterprise.
The following presents a simplified summary of one or more embodiments in order to provide a basic understanding of such embodiments. This summary is not an extensive overview of all contemplated embodiments, and is intended to neither identify key or critical elements of all embodiments, nor delineate the scope of any or all embodiments. Its sole purpose is to present some concepts of one or more embodiments in a simplified form as a prelude to the more detailed description that is presented later.
Embodiments of the present invention address the above needs and/or achieve other advantages by providing apparatus, systems, methods, computer program products or the like for assessing technological project maturity across various change platforms, otherwise referred to as change types. Embodiments of the invention herein disclosed take into account both qualitative and quantitative analysis of practices within each change platform to result in a current state assessment of the project's maturity level. In this regard, embodiments of the invention leverage both industry best practices and internal (i.e., business/enterprise) as a means of assessing project maturity. In addition, embodiments of the invention, identify opportunities for improving maturity and/or driving project efficiency and also identify those practices that are exemplary.
In specific embodiments of the invention, the methods herein disclosed provide for a maturity assessment framework that calculates a maturity level (e.g., basic, intermediate, advanced) for each of the practices within a change platform and, additionally, calculates metrics performance for each of the practices. As a result of the maturity level calculation for each practice, embodiments of the invention, provide for an overall maturity level/score, which assesses the current maturity of the technology-based change project.
An apparatus for assessing the maturity of a technology-related project defines first embodiments of the invention. The apparatus includes a computing platform having a memory and at least one processor in communication with the memory. In addition, the apparatus includes a project maturity assessment module that is stored in the memory, executable by the processor and configured to receive a first user-input that selects one of a plurality of project types for a project undergoing maturity assessment and, in response to receiving the first user-input, provide display of (i) a plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type and (ii) a plurality of quantitative practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type. In addition, the module is configured to receive a plurality of second user-inputs that select an assessment level for a corresponding one of the qualitative practice assessment parameters and a plurality of third user-inputs that indicate a quantitative response to a corresponding one of the quantitative practice assessment parameters. The module is further configured to determine quantitative performance metrics for the project based on the quantitative responses to the quantitative practice assessment parameters, and determine a project maturity score based on the quantitative performance metrics and the assessment levels for the qualitative practice assessment parameters.
In accordance with specific embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module is further configured to provide display of the plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters, wherein each qualitative practice assessment parameter is assigned to one of a plurality of qualitative maturity categories including a basic category (i.e., parameters that are required by the project), an intermediate category (i.e., parameters that are a goal of the project) and an advanced category (i.e., parameters that may optionally be adopted by the project).
In further specific embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module is further configured to receive the plurality of second user-inputs that select the assessment level as one of (i) fully-implemented, (ii) not fully-implemented or (iii) not applicable to the project. In such embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module may be further configured to determine a percentage of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each of the qualitative maturity categories. Moreover, in such embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module may be further configured to determine a quantitative maturity category for each of the performance metrics, such as a basic category, an intermediate category and an advanced category, with each category being defined by thresholds applicable to the corresponding performance metric. In such embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module may be further configured to determine a percentage of performance metrics currently determined to be residing in each of the maturity categories. In additional specific embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module is further configured to determine the project maturity score based on (1) the percentage of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each of the qualitative maturity categories, and (2) a percentage of performance metrics currently determined to be residing in each of the quantitative maturity categories.
In still further specific embodiments of the apparatus, the project maturity assessment module is further configured to generate and provide a dashboard display that includes a plurality of (1) performance metric results, (2) a percentage of performance metrics currently determined to be residing in each of the quantitative maturity categories, (3) a percentage of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each of the qualitative maturity categories, (4) a maturity score for each overall maturity category, (5) an overall maturity score, and (6) a graphical representation of the current maturity score for each overall maturity category and a targeted maturity score for each overall maturity category.
A method for assessing the maturity of a technology-related project defines second embodiments of the invention. The method includes, receiving, by a computing device processor, a first user-input that selects one of a plurality of project types for a project undergoing maturity assessment and, in response to receiving the first user-input, providing, by a computing device processor, display of (a) a plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type and (b) a plurality of quantitative practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type. The method further includes receiving, by a computing device processor, (a) a plurality of second user-inputs that select an assessment level for a corresponding one of the qualitative practice assessment parameters and (b) a plurality of third user-inputs that indicate a quantitative response to a corresponding one of the quantitative practice assessment parameters. Additionally, the method includes determining, by a computing device processor, quantitative performance metrics for the project based on the quantitative responses to the quantitative practice assessment parameters and determining, by a computing device processor, a project maturity score based on the quantitative performance metrics and the assessment levels for the qualitative practice assessment parameters.
In specific embodiments of the method, providing display of the plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters further includes providing display of the plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters, wherein each qualitative practice assessment parameter is assigned to one of a plurality of qualitative maturity categories including a basic category (i.e., parameters that are required by the project), an intermediate category (i.e., parameters that are a goal of the project) and an advanced category (i.e., parameters that may optionally be adopted by the project).
In further specific embodiments of the method, receiving the plurality of second user-inputs that select the assessment level further includes receiving, by the computing device processor, the plurality of second user-inputs that select the assessment level as one of (i) fully-implemented, (ii) not fully-implemented or (iii) not applicable to the project. In such embodiments of the method, determining the project maturity score further includes determining, by a computing device processor, a percentage of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each of the qualitative maturity categories. Moreover, in such embodiments of the method, determining the project maturity score may further include determining, by a computing device processor, a quantitative maturity category for each of the performance metrics, such that the quantitative maturity categories include a basic category, intermediate category and advanced category, with each category being defined by thresholds applicable to the corresponding performance metric. Additionally, in such embodiments of the method, determining the project maturity score may further include determining, by a computing device processor, a percentage of performance metrics currently determined to be residing in each of the maturity categories and determining the project maturity score may further include determining, by a computing device processor, the project maturity score based on (1) the percentage of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each of the qualitative maturity categories, and (2) a percentage of performance metrics currently determined to be residing in each of the quantitative maturity categories.
In still other specific embodiments the method includes generating and providing, by a computing device processor, a dashboard display that includes a plurality of (1) performance metric results, (2) a percentage of performance metrics currently determined to be residing in each of the quantitative maturity categories, (3) a percentage of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each of the qualitative maturity categories, (4) a maturity score for each overall maturity category, (5) an overall maturity score and (6) a graphical representation of the current maturity score for each overall maturity category and a targeted maturity score for each overall maturity category.
A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium defines third embodiments of the invention. The computer-readable medium includes a first set of codes for causing a computer to receive a first user-input that selects one of a plurality of project types for a project undergoing maturity assessment and a second set of codes for causing a computer to, in response to receiving the first user-input, provide display of (1) a plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type and (2) a plurality of quantitative practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type. Additionally, the computer-readable medium includes a third set of codes for causing a computer to receive (1) a plurality of second user-inputs that select an assessment level for a corresponding one of the qualitative practice assessment parameters and (2) a plurality of third user-inputs that indicate a quantitative response to a corresponding one of the quantitative practice assessment parameters. Moreover, the computer-readable medium includes a fourth set of codes for causing a computer to determine quantitative performance metrics for the project based on the quantitative responses to the quantitative practice assessment parameters, and a fifth set of codes for causing a computer to determine a project maturity score based on the quantitative performance metrics and the assessment levels for the qualitative practice assessment parameters.
Thus, systems, apparatus, methods, and computer program products herein described in detail below provide for assessing technological project maturity across various change platforms, otherwise referred to as change types. Embodiments of the invention herein disclosed take into account both qualitative and quantitative analysis of practices within each change platform to result in a current state assessment of the project's maturity level. In this regard, embodiments of the invention leverage both industry best practices and internal (i.e., business/enterprise) as a means of assessing project maturity.
To the accomplishment of the foregoing and related ends, the one or more embodiments comprise the features hereinafter fully described and particularly pointed out in the claims. The following description and the annexed drawings set forth in detail certain illustrative features of the one or more embodiments. These features are indicative, however, of but a few of the various ways in which the principles of various embodiments may be employed, and this description is intended to include all such embodiments and their equivalents.
Having thus described embodiments of the invention in general terms, reference will now be made to the accompanying drawings, which are not necessarily drawn to scale, and wherein:
Embodiments of the present invention will now be described more fully hereinafter with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which some, but not all, embodiments of the invention are shown. Indeed, the invention may be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will satisfy applicable legal requirements. Like numbers refer to like elements throughout. Although some embodiments of the invention described herein are generally described as involving a “financial institution,” one of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the invention may be utilized by other businesses that take the place of or work in conjunction with financial institutions to perform one or more of the processes or steps described herein as being performed by a financial institution.
As will be appreciated by one of skill in the art in view of this disclosure, the present invention may be embodied as an apparatus (e.g., a system, computer program product, and/or other device), a method, or a combination of the foregoing. Accordingly, embodiments of the present invention may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.), or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may generally be referred to herein as a “system.” Furthermore, embodiments of the present invention may take the form of a computer program product comprising a computer-usable storage medium having computer-usable program code/computer-readable instructions embodied in the medium.
Any suitable computer-usable or computer-readable medium may be utilized. The computer usable or computer readable medium may be, for example but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device. More specific examples (e.g., a non-exhaustive list) of the computer-readable medium would include the following: an electrical connection having one or more wires; a tangible medium such as a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a time-dependent access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), a compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), or other tangible optical or magnetic storage device.
Computer program code/computer-readable instructions for carrying out operations of embodiments of the present invention may be written in an object oriented, scripted or unscripted programming language such as Java, Perl, Smalltalk, C++ or the like. However, the computer program code/computer-readable instructions for carrying out operations of the invention may also be written in conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similar programming languages.
Embodiments of the present invention are described below with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods or apparatuses (the term “apparatus” including systems and computer program products). It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a particular machine, such that the instructions, which execute by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create mechanisms for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readable memory produce an article of manufacture including instructions, which implement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions, which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus, provide steps for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks. Alternatively, computer program implemented steps or acts may be combined with operator or human implemented steps or acts in order to carry out an embodiment of the invention.
According to embodiments of the invention described herein, various systems, apparatus, methods, and computer program products are herein described for assessing technology-related project maturity across any and all change platforms, otherwise referred to as change types. Embodiments of the invention herein disclosed take into account both qualitative and quantitative analysis of practices within each change platform to result in a current state assessment of the project's maturity level. In this regard, embodiments of the invention leverage both industry best practices and internal (i.e., business/enterprise) as a means of assessing project maturity. In addition, embodiments of the invention, identify opportunities for improving maturity and/or driving project efficiency and also identify those practices that are exemplary.
In specific embodiments of the invention, the methods herein disclosed provide for a maturity assessment framework that calculates a maturity level (e.g., basic, intermediate, advanced) for each of the practices within a change platform and, additionally, calculates metrics performance for each of the practices. As a result of the maturity level calculation for each practice, embodiments of the invention, provide for an overall maturity level/score, which assesses the current maturity of the technology-based change project.
Referring to
As such, project maturity assessment module 18 is configured receive a first user-input 20 that selects a project type 22, which may be a change platform, change type or the like. Examples of project types include, but are not limited to, incremental software development (e.g., agile software development), sequential design process (e.g., waterfall model), testing, production support, application security and the like. See
In response to receiving the first-user input 20, the project maturity assessment module 18 is further configured to provide a user-interface/display 24 that includes a plurality qualitative (i.e., subjective) practice assessment parameters 26 associated with the selected project type 22 and a plurality of quantitative (i.e., objective) practice assessment parameters 28 associated with the selected project type 22. In specific embodiments of the invention the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 may be grouped according to maturity categories, such as a basic category (defined as parameters that required by the project), an intermediate category (defined as parameters that a goal of the project) and an advanced category (defined as parameters that may be optionally adopted by a project). See
The project maturity assessment module 18 is further configured to receive second user-inputs 30 that select an assessment level 32 for each of the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 displayed in user-interface 24. In specific examples of the invention, the assessment levels may include, but may not be limited to, (i) fully implemented, (ii) not fully-implemented, or (iii) not applicable to the project.
In addition, the project maturity module 18 is further configured to receive third user-inputs 34 (or import from predetermined databases) that select a quantitative response 36 for each of the quantitative practice assessment parameters 26. In response to receiving the third user-inputs 34 that select the quantitative responses 36 to the quantitative practice assessment parameters 26, the project maturity assessment module is configured to determine a plurality of quantitative performance metrics 38 that are specific to the project type.
Moreover, in response to receiving the second and third user-inputs and determining the quantitative performance metrics, the project maturity assessment module is configured to determine an overall project maturity score 40 based on the quantitative performance metrics 38 and the qualitative assessment levels 32. The overall maturity score 40 may be configured to indicate a category of maturity (e.g., basic, intermediate, advanced or the like) based on thresholds preconfigured for the quantitative performance metrics 38 and the qualitative assessment levels 32.
Referring to
The apparatus 10 includes a computing platform 12 that can receive and execute routines and applications. The computing platform 12 includes memory 14, which may comprise volatile and nonvolatile memory such as read-only and/or random-access memory (RAM and ROM), EPROM, EEPROM, flash cards, or any memory common to computer platforms. Further, memory 14 may include one or more flash memory cells, or may be any secondary or tertiary storage device, such as magnetic media, optical media, tape, or soft or hard disk.
Further, the computing platform 12 also includes at least one processor 16, which may be an application-specific integrated circuit (“ASIC”), or other chipset, processor, logic circuit, or other data processing device. Processor 16 or other processor such as ASIC may execute an application programming interface (“API”) layer (not shown in
As previously noted in relation to
The project maturity assessment module 18 is further configured to receive second user-inputs 30 that select an assessment level 32 for each of the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 displayed in user-interface 24. In specific examples of the invention, the assessment levels may include, but may not be limited to, (i) fully implemented, (ii) not fully-implemented, or (iii) not applicable to the project.
In specific embodiments of the invention, the project maturity assessment module is configured to determine the percentage of the highest assessment level qualitative parameters 26 for each maturity category 42. For example, in the illustrated embodiment of
In addition, the project maturity module 18 is further configured to receive third user-inputs 34 that select a quantitative response 36 for each of the quantitative practice assessment parameters 26. In response to receiving the third user-inputs 34 that select the quantitative responses 36 to the quantitative practice assessment parameters 26, the project maturity assessment module is configured to determine a plurality of quantitative performance metrics 38 that are specific to the project type. In specific embodiments of the invention, the project maturity assessment module 18 is further configured to determine a quantitative maturity category 52 for each resulting quantitative performance metric 38 based on predetermined thresholds. In specific embodiments the quantitative maturity categories 52 are aligned with the qualitative maturity categories 42, such as basic category 54, intermediate category 56 and advanced category 58. In such embodiments of the invention, the project maturity assessment module 18 may be further configured to determine the percentage 60 of quantitative performance metrics in each of the quantitative maturity categories,
Moreover, in response to receiving the second and third user-inputs 30, 34 and determining the quantitative performance metrics 38, the percentage 50 of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 for each qualitative maturity category 42 and the percentage 60 of quantitative performance metrics 38 in each quantitative maturity category 52, the project maturity assessment module 18 is configured to determine an overall project maturity score 40 based on the percentage 50 of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 for each qualitative maturity category 42 and the percentage 60 of quantitative performance metrics 38 in each quantitative maturity category 52. In such embodiments, the project maturity assessment module 18 may further determine a maturity score/percentage for each of the categories (i.e., basic, intermediate and advanced). As previously noted, the overall maturity score 40 may be configured to indicate a category of maturity (e.g., basic, intermediate, advanced or the like) based on preconfigured thresholds, which may be based on averaging the maturity score/percentage for each of the categories (i.e., basic, intermediate and advanced).
Referring to
Referring to
At Event 104, in response to receiving the first-user input, a user-interface/display is provided/presented that includes a plurality qualitative (i.e., subjective) practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type and a plurality of quantitative (i.e., objective) practice assessment parameters associated with the selected project type. In specific embodiments of the invention, the qualitative practice assessment parameters may be grouped according to maturity categories, such as a basic category (defined as parameters that required by the project), an intermediate category (defined as parameters that a goal of the project) and an advanced category (defined as parameters that may be optionally adopted by a project). In addition, the qualitative practice assessment parameters may list the process area associated with the parameter and provide for the user to identify a parameter as a best practice.
At Event 106, receive second user-inputs are received that select an assessment level for each of the qualitative practice assessment parameters and third user-inputs (or import from predetermined databases) are received that indicate a quantitative response for each of a corresponding quantitative practice assessment parameter. In specific embodiments of the invention, the assessment levels may include, but may not be limited to, (i) fully implemented, (ii) not fully-implemented, or (iii) not applicable to the project.
At Event 108, in response to receiving the third user-inputs that indicate the quantitative responses to the quantitative practice assessment parameters (or in response to importing the data from a predetermined performance database), a plurality of quantitative performance metrics are determined based on the quantitative responses/data to quantitative practice assessment parameters. The performance metrics, not unlike the quantitative practice assessment parameters, are specific to the select project type/change format.
At Event 110, in response to receiving the second and third user-inputs and determining the quantitative performance metrics, an overall (i.e., qualitative and quantitative analysis) project maturity score is determined, which is based on the quantitative performance metrics and the qualitative assessment levels. As previously noted, the overall maturity score may be configured to indicate a category of maturity (e.g., basic, intermediate, advanced or the like) based on thresholds preconfigured for the quantitative performance metrics and the qualitative assessment levels.
Referring to
Referring to
The user-interface 300 displays a plurality of qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 and quantitative practice assessment parameters 28. The qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 are grouped according to their respective qualitative maturity category: a basic category 44 (i.e., parameters that are required by the project), an intermediate category 46 (i.e., parameters that are a goal of the project) and an advanced category 48 (i.e., parameters that may optionally be adopted by the project). Moreover, the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 provide for process area column 302 that lists a corresponding process area associated for each qualitative practice assessment parameter 26.
Additionally, the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 provide assessment column 304 which is configured for allow a user to select or input an assessment level for each of the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26. In the illustrated embodiment of
The quantitative practice assessment parameters 28 provide for a quantitative response column 312 that allows for data imported from a predetermined performance database to be displayed or otherwise inputted (or updated/changed) by user-input.
The user-interface 300 additionally includes “submit” key 314 that is activated by the user once the assessment levels have been selected for the qualitative practice assessment parameters 26 and the quantitative responses have been inputted/changed or verified for the quantitative practice assessment parameters 28. In response to activating the “submit” key, the quantitative performance metrics are determined, the percentages of quantitative performance metrics currently residing in each quantitative maturity category are determined and the percentages of fully-implemented qualitative practice assessment parameters for each qualitative maturity category are determined. Additionally, user-interface 300 includes “home” key 316, which is activated by the user to return to the “home” page (i.e., user-interface 200 of
Referring to
User-interface 400 also includes a graphical representation 74 that compares the current maturity score/percentage 76 for each overall maturity category to the targeted maturity score/percentage 78 for each overall maturity category.
Additionally, user-interface 400 includes “back” key 402, which when activated by the user returns to the display of user-interface 300 (
Referring to
Referring to
Thus, systems, apparatus, methods, and computer program products described above provide for assessing technology-related business project maturity across various change platforms, otherwise referred to as change types. Embodiments of the invention herein disclosed take into account both qualitative and quantitative analysis of practices within each business practice to result in a current state assessment of the project's maturity level. In this regard, embodiments of the invention leverage both industry best practices and internal (i.e., business/enterprise) as a means of assessing project maturity. Additionally opportunities for improving maturity and/or driving project efficiency are identified and exemplary practices may also be identified.
While certain exemplary embodiments have been described and shown in the accompanying drawings, it is to be understood that such embodiments are merely illustrative of and not restrictive on the broad invention, and that this invention not be limited to the specific constructions and arrangements shown and described, since various other changes, combinations, omissions, modifications and substitutions, in addition to those set forth in the above paragraphs, are possible.
Those skilled in the art may appreciate that various adaptations and modifications of the just described embodiments can be configured without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. Therefore, it is to be understood that, within the scope of the appended claims, the invention may be practiced other than as specifically described herein.
