Patent Application
20090089216
Embodiments of the present invention pertain to the field of electronic commerce. More particularly, the present invention relates to a method and system for generating a negotiation in electronic commerce buying and selling operations.
Buyers and sellers use a variety of techniques to ensure goods and services meet their mutual expectations. However, traditional procurement systems have been proven to be error prone, labor intensive, and costly operations. For example, often times, when a buyer is looking to purchase a batch of articles, a buyer might negotiate terms for the purchase prior to making the purchasing decision. The negotiation allows the buyer and seller to ensure the articles and terms (e.g., price, quantity, delivery conditions, etc.) will meet any specific requirements. Traditional buying and selling mediums, such as auctions, catalog based purchasing, and selling, and the like, do not always facilitate the most efficient matching of requirements. The recent ascendancy of electronic commerce provides a means of avoiding, or at least reducing, the problems presented by the use of traditional buying and selling mediums.
In many respects, the Internet and the World Wide Web based network technologies have largely eliminated the most labor intensive and costly portions of the buying and selling type commerce operations (e.g., the use of mass mailings, printed specifications, catalogs, updating preprinted product information, etc.). To take advantage of advances in network technology, a variety of electronic commerce facilitating schemes have been developed. One such scheme involved the use of business-to-business buying and selling exchanges implemented on the Internet. The term “electronic commerce” or “e-commerce” originally evolved from remote forms of electronic shopping to mean all aspects of business and market processes enabled by wide area communications networks, namely, the Internet and the World Wide Web based network technologies. E-commerce is a rapidly growing field, and is generally understood to mean doing business on-line or selling and buying products and services through Web (e.g., Internet based) storefronts or through other similar distributed computer networks. In general, electronic commerce is substantially similar to the more traditional catalog based commerce schemes. The business-to-business e-commerce exchanges, or simply “B2B exchanges” have evolved to focus on the specific needs and requirements of buying and selling between businesses.
As the use of B2B exchanges has proliferated, the implementation of electronic commerce negotiations has become increasingly common. There are many different types of negotiations currently used in electronic commerce. Among the most widely utilized are a request for information (RFI), a request for a quote (RFQ), collectively referred to as RFXs, and an auction.
An RFI is often sent by a business looking to source components for a product. Typically, an RFI is sent at an early phase of a negotiation. For example, a car manufacturer requires tires for a newly designed car. The tires must meet certain specifications (e.g., cost, reliability, quality). The car manufacturer would send an RFI to a tire manufacturer inquiring as to whether a tire with the required specifications can be built.
An RFQ is a request for a detailed quote based on a specification. An RFQ is often sent upon receiving a response from an RFI. Continuing with the example above, an RFQ sent to a tire manufacture would include specific requests regarding the tires (e.g., price, delivery date, freight charges, tooling costs, research and development costs).
An auction generally aggregates buyers or sellers to purchase or sell items/services through the respective submission of competitive bids. An auction is typically performed at a later phase of a negotiation. Generally, the most competitive bid is designated the winner of the auction. For example, in an auction amongst multiple competing buyers, the most competitive bid is usually the bid offering the most money for the specified item or service. In an auction amongst multiple competing sellers, the most competitive bid is usually the bid offering the specified item or service for the lowest price. Thus, buyers and sellers participating in an auction compete with one another on the basis of the terms of their bids. Auctioneers have an interest in making the bidding process as competitive as possible to effect the most efficient matching of requirements between sellers and buyers (e.g., getting the best deal). Large numbers of buyers or sellers competitively trying to outbid one another usually leads to the most favorable terms.
Typical businesses and organizations perform a large number of electronic commerce negotiations. Furthermore, the negotiations are often of a different type, depending on the nature of the product or service and the current phase of the negotiation. Currently, a business requires a different management tool for each type of negotiation they perform. For example, where a business typically performs RFIs, RFQs and auctions, they would require three separate management tools, one for each negotiation type.
There are several drawbacks to having multiple negotiation management tools. First, as a typical negotiation includes multiple negotiation types, there is a large amount of redundant data entry. For example, once a business completes an RFQ for an item, a new management tool for an auction must be accessed, and all data from the RFQ necessary for the auction must be reentered. Furthermore, it is typically not possible to view information across the different types of negotiations for a product. In most cases, it is not possible to go back and forth between negotiation management tools. For example, if a business has multiple negotiations at different phases of the negotiations, they would have to switch negotiation management tools each time they want to switch to a different negotiation type.
Additionally, maintaining separate negotiation management tools for each negotiation is typically expensive. Having more tools requires more technical support, more training, more hardware, and more upgrade/patch costs. Furthermore, having multiple tools that support different data formats requires even more training and support costs.
Accordingly, a need exists for a method for generating a negotiation that requires only one negotiation management tool, regardless of the type of the negotiation. A need also exists that satisfies the above need, and allows for viewing of information across different types of negotiations. A need also exists that satisfies the above needs, and allows for switching between negotiation types without switching negotiation management tools. A need also exists that satisfies the above needs, and is less expensive than current negotiation management tools.
A method and system for generating a negotiation is presented. A request to generate a negotiation is received, wherein the request comprises a negotiation type. In one embodiment, the negotiation type is an auction. In another embodiment, the negotiation type is a request for information (RFI). In another embodiment, the negotiation type is a request for a quote (RFQ). In another embodiment, the negotiation type is an offer/counteroffer negotiation.
Common data and meta-data are accessed, wherein the meta-data is associated with the negotiation type and comprises at least one rule describing the negotiation type. In one embodiment, the rule describes terminology specific to said negotiation type. A first user interface is rendered based on the common data and the meta-data, wherein the first user interface is rendered specific to the negotiation type and prompts for a user response defining a term of the negotiation. In response to the user response, the negotiation is generated based on the user response and the meta-data.
In one embodiment, the negotiation is published to at least one participant. A second user interface is rendered based on the negotiation, wherein the second user interface prompts for a second user response characterizing the term of the negotiation.
In one embodiment, in response to the second user response, a third user interface is rendered based on the second user response and the meta-data. The third user interface presents the second user response specific to the negotiation type.
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and form a part of this specification, illustrate embodiments of the invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention:
Reference will now be made in detail to the preferred embodiments of the invention, examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings. While the invention will be described in conjunction with the preferred embodiments, it will be understood that they are not intended to limit the invention to these embodiments. On the contrary, the invention is intended to cover alternatives, modifications and equivalents, which may be included within the spirit and the scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. Furthermore, in the following detailed description of the present invention, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. However, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that the present invention may be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, well-known methods, procedures, components, structures and devices have not been described in detail so as to avoid unnecessarily obscuring aspects of the present invention.
The present invention provides a method and system for generating a negotiation. Embodiments of the present invention provide a method and system for generating a negotiation that requires only one negotiation management tool, regardless of the type of the negotiation. Additionally, embodiments of the present invention provide a method and system that allows for viewing of information across different types of negotiations and for switching between negotiation types without switching negotiation management tools. Additionally, embodiments of the present invention provide a method and system that is less expensive than current negotiation management tools.
It should be appreciated that embodiments of the present invention may generate a negotiation. For purposes of the present application, the term “item” is understood to refer to both items and/or services. Furthermore, embodiments of the present invention also apply to requests for information (RFIs), requests for proposals (RFPs), and requests for quotes (RFQs), as well as auctions. For purposes of the present application, the term “negotiation” is understood to collectively refer to RFIs, RFPs and RFQs (collectively RFXs), auctions, offer/counteroffer negotiations, and any other type of negotiation.
Embodiments of the present invention may be directed towards private and public exchanges, wherein private exchanges are scenarios having one negotiator and many participants, and wherein public exchanges have many negotiators and many participants. For purposes of simplicity, the present application refers to private exchanges.
Some portions of the detailed descriptions that follow are presented in terms of procedures, logic blocks, processing, and other symbolic representations of operations on data bits within a computer or digital system memory. These descriptions and representations are the means used by those skilled in the data processing arts to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. A procedure, logic block, process, etc., is herein, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps or instructions leading to a desired result. The steps are those requiring physical manipulations of physical quantities. Usually, though not necessarily, these physical manipulations take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared, and otherwise manipulated in a computer system or similar electronic computing device. For reasons of convenience, and with reference to common usage, these signals are referred to as bits, values, elements, symbols, characters, terms, numbers, or the like with reference to the present invention.
It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these terms are to be interpreted as referencing physical manipulations and quantities and are merely convenient labels and are to be interpreted further in view of terms commonly used in the art. Unless specifically stated otherwise as apparent from the following discussions, it is understood that throughout discussions of the present invention, discussions utilizing terms such as “receiving” or “rendering” or “accessing” or “generating” or “publishing” or “prompting” or the like, may refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data. The data is represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories and is transformed into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission, or display devices.
Referring now to
The exchange server host 140 functions as the central communications point for the negotiation operations, by conducting data collection and management of item information (e.g., items, services, or the like) and the negotiation characteristics and terms provided by buyer clients, such as buyer client 110, and negotiation bid or quote information provided by the seller clients 120a-d. In one embodiment, exchange server host 140 comprises negotiation builder 150. In one embodiment, negotiation builder 150 performs a method for generating a negotiation (e.g., process 300 of
Buyer client 110 and seller clients 120a-d communicate with exchange server host 140 via the communications protocols of distributed computer network 130, hereafter simply network 130. Negotiation builder 150 conducts the negotiation operations on the basis of responses received from buyer client 110 and seller clients 120a-d.
A typical negotiation operation comprises negotiation builder 150 generating a negotiation based on responses received from buyer client 110. In one embodiment, the negotiation is published to seller clients 120a-d, who then submit responses characterizing the terms of the negotiation. The responses are transmitted from seller clients 120a-d to negotiation builder 150 via network 130. Upon the completion of the negotiation, in one embodiment of the present invention, negotiation builder 150 transmits a negotiation summary to buyer client 110.
It should be noted that the embodiment of the present invention depicted in
Referring still to
The negotiation operation depicted in
At step 305 of process 300, a request to generate a negotiation (e.g., a business document) is received, wherein the request comprises a negotiation type. The negotiation type indicates which type of negotiation a negotiator desires to perform. In one embodiment, the negotiation type is an auction. In another embodiment, the negotiation type is a request for information (RFI). In another embodiment, the negotiation type is a request for a quote (RFQ). In another embodiment, the negotiation type is an offer/counteroffer negotiation. It should be appreciated that embodiments of the present invention may perform any form of negotiation desired by a negotiator, and is not intended to be limited to the above embodiments. In one embodiment, the negotiation type is a user-configured negotiation.
Embodiments of the present invention provide a method for generating an offer/counteroffer negotiation. In an offer/counteroffer negotiation, characteristics of an offer for an item are received, wherein the characteristics comprise at least one term defining the offer. The offer is published to a plurality of bidders. Among the potential responses to the offer, at least one counteroffer is received from a bidder. The counteroffer comprises at least one alternative term. Provided the counteroffer is acceptable, the counteroffer is accepted. Provided the counteroffer is not acceptable, a second counteroffer is transmitted to the bidder, wherein the second counteroffer comprising at least one alternative term with respect to the counteroffer. The offer/counteroffer negotiation allows a negotiator to negotiate terms with one or more bidders individually, outside the constraints of a traditional auction. For additional descriptions regarding an offer/counteroffer negotiation, refer to commonly assigned U.S. Patent, Serial Number______, Attorney Docket Number ORCL-2001-252-01, entitled “A METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IMPLEMENTING AN OFFER/COUNTEROFFER NEGOTIATION”, issued to Kareem Benjamin et al., with filing date______.
At step 310, common data and meta-data are accessed, wherein the meta-data is associated with the negotiation type is accessed. The meta-data comprises at least one rule describing the negotiation type. In one embodiment, the common data and meta-data are stored on a database (e.g., database 160 of
As described above, it should be appreciated that a user-configured negotiation may be requested. A user-configured negotiation comprises user-configured meta-data defining the rules of the negotiation. In one embodiment, user-configured meta-data is generated by altering the meta-data associated with another negotiation type. Embodiments of the present invention provide a flexible management tool by allowing for customizable negotiation types.
At step 315, a first user interface is rendered based on the common data and the meta-data. The first user interface is rendered specific to the negotiation type and prompts for a user response defining a term of the negotiation. In one embodiment, the meta-data defines the fields of and the terminology used within the first user interface, wherein the first user interface prompts for a first user response to the field.
It should be appreciated that, in one embodiment, the meta-data can establish a default value for a field. For example, an auction is typically open to public bidding while RFQ participation is typically by invitation only. As such, for a field determining whether a negotiation is open to the public, for an auction the field will default to “Yes” and for an RFQ the field will default to “No.” It should be appreciated that the negotiator may change the default value for a field.
Furthermore, it should be appreciated that, in one embodiment, the meta-data can determine whether a field is required for a negotiation. For example, in an auction, a price typically must be submitted. However, in an RFI, a price may not be required. As such, the meta-data dictates that an auction must have a price field while a price field is not required in an RFI.
With reference to
At step 330, a second user interface is rendered based on the negotiation. The second user interface is rendered specific to the negotiation type and prompts for a second user response characterizing the terms of the negotiation. It should be appreciated that in characterizing the terms of the negotiation, the second user response will provide requested information in the appropriate style. In one embodiment, the second user interface prompts for a second user response in response to the fields. For example, if the term prompts for a price, the second user response will be in numerical format. Similarly, if the term prompts for a delivery date, the second user response will be in the appropriate date format. In one embodiment, the meta-data defines the fields of and the terminology used within the second user interface, wherein the second user interface prompts for a second user response to the field.
With reference to
Portions of the present invention are comprised of computer-readable and computer executable instructions which reside, for example, in computer-usable media of a computer system.
In general, computer system 700 shows the basic components of a computer system used to implement “server” machines and “client” machines. Computer system 700 comprises an address/data bus 710 for communicating information, one or more central processors 701 coupled with the bus 710 for processing information and instructions, a computer readable volatile memory unit 702 (e.g., random access memory, static RAM, dynamic, RAM, etc.) coupled with the bus 710 for storing information and instructions for the central processor(s) 701, a computer readable non-volatile memory unit 703 (e.g., read only memory, programmable ROM, flash memory, EPROM, EEPROM, etc.) coupled with the bus 710 for storing static information and instructions for the processor(s) 701. System 700 also includes a computer readable data storage device 704 such as a magnetic or optical disk and disk drive coupled with the bus 710 for storing information and instructions. Optionally, system 700 can include a display device 705 coupled to the bus 710 for displaying information to the computer user, an alphanumeric input device 706 including alphanumeric and function keys coupled to the bus 710 for communicating information and command selections to the central processor(s) 701, a cursor control device 707 coupled to the bus for communicating user input information and command selections to the central processor(s) 701, and a signal generating device 708 coupled to the bus 710 for communicating command selections to the processor(s) 701.
The preferred embodiment of the present invention, a method and system for generating a negotiation, is thus described. While the present invention has been described in particular embodiments, it should be appreciated that the present invention should not be construed as limited by such embodiments, but rather construed according to the below claims.
