Systems and methods for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10956845
  • Patent Number
    10,956,845
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, December 6, 2018
    7 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, March 23, 2021
    4 years ago
Abstract
Systems and methods for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations are disclosed. Exemplary implementations may: manage environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment; effectuate presentation of a series of questions via a first client computing platform associated with the first user; receive user input from the first client computing platform; generate a first prioritization model based on the response information; and determine one or more priorities for the first user based on the first prioritization model such that a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work is determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work.
Description
FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE

The present disclosure relates to systems and methods for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations.


BACKGROUND

Collaboration environments enable users to assign projects, tasks, or other assignments to assignees to complete. Such collaboration environments enable users to work in a more organized and efficient manner. However, determining how to prioritize units of work is one common area where efficiency may be lost.


SUMMARY

Users utilizing the work management platform often have several units of work they are associated with or responsible for at any given time. Deciding which units of work to prioritize can be difficult and/or cause user to lose efficiency. Some users may choose to prioritize the wrong units of work. Determining what users should prioritize based on prioritization models generated based on their answers to a series of questions may solve these problems. In some implementations, machine learning may be used to automatically determine the prioritization of tasks.


One aspect of the present disclosure relates to a system configured for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations. The system may include one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions. The processor(s) may be configured to manage environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment. The environment state information may include values of user parameters and values of work unit parameters. The values of the user parameters may be organized in user records corresponding to users interacting with and viewing the collaboration environment and the values of the work unit parameters are organized in work unit records corresponding to units of work managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment. The units of work may include a first set of units of work associated with a first user.


The processor(s) may be configured to effectuate presentation of a series of questions via a first client computing platform associated with the first user. The processor(s) may be configured to receive user input from the first client computing platform. The user input may include response information in response to the series of questions. The processor(s) may be configured to generate a first prioritization model based on the response information. The processor(s) may be configured to determine one or more priorities for the first user based on the first prioritization model such that a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work is determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work. Effectuate presentation of a graphical user interface may display an indication of the one or more priorities determined for the first user. The graphical user interface may include an indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work.


In some implementations, a system configured for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, may include one or more of: one or more servers, one or more client computing platforms, and/or other components. The one or more servers may be configured to communicate with one or more client computing platforms according to a client/server architecture and/or other architecture. The one or more servers and/or client computing platforms may include one or more physical processors configured to execute one or more computer program components. The computer program components may include one or more of an environment state component, a question component, a user input component, a prioritization model component, a priority component, a graphical user interface component, and/or other components.


The environment state component may be configured to manage environment state information. The environment state information may maintain a collaboration environment. The environment state information may include values of user parameters, values of work unit parameters, and/or values of other parameters. The values of the user parameters may be organized in user records corresponding to users interacting with and viewing the collaboration environment. The values of the work unit parameters may be organized in work unit records corresponding to units of work managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment. The units of work may include a first set of units of work associated with a first user.


The question component may be configured to effectuate presentation of a series of questions. The series of questions may be presented to the first user via a first client computing platform associated with the first user. In some implementations, the series of questions may include one or more predetermined questions, comparisons of units of work associated with the given user, and/or other questions. The user input component may be configured to receive user input from the first client computing platform. The user input may include response information in response to the series of questions. By way of non-limiting example, if the series of questions includes one or more comparisons of units of work, the user may select the higher priority unit of work from the two or more units of work compared. As such, the user input received from the first client computing platform may include one or more selections of individual ones of the units of work associated with the first user from the one or more comparisons.


The prioritization model component may be configured to generate a first prioritization model based on the response information. The first prioritization model may be used to determine one or more priorities for the first user. In some implementations, the prioritization model component may be configured to obtain values for the user parameters associated with the first user, values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user, and/or other information. The prioritization model may be determined based on the response information, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user, the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user, and/or other information.


In some implementations, the prioritization component may use neural networks to determine the prioritization models corresponding to individual users. The first prioritization model may be generated using a neural network based on the response information, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user, the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user, and/or other information. In some implementations, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user and/or the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user indicate previous actions of the first user within the collaboration environment.


In some implementations, the first prioritization model may be determined at least partially based on the prioritization information. The prioritization component may be configured to receive secondary user input including the prioritization information. The prioritization information may characterize units of work that should be prioritized by a given user (e.g., the first user for the first prioritization model). By way of example, a manager, boss, and/or other superior may provide the secondary input.


In some implementations, the prioritization model component may be configured to export the first prioritization model. The first prioritization model may be exported responsive to the prioritization model component receiving a request to export the first prioritization model.


The priority component may be configured to determine one or more priorities for the first user. The one or more priorities for the first user may be determined based on the first prioritization model. As such, a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work may be determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work. A given unit of work having a high priority than another unit of work may indicate the given unit of work should be completed prior to the other unit of work. Such a determination may be based on other units of work dependent on and/or associated with the given unit of work, the assigning or managing user associated with the given unit of work, the length of the given unit of work, the level of involvement of the given unit of work, the followers for a given unit of work, the due date and/or start date information for a given unit of work, and/or other information.


The graphical user interface component may be configured to effectuate presentation of a graphical user interface displaying an indication of the one or more priorities determined for the first user. For example, the graphical user interface may include an indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work. In some implementations, the indication of the one or more priorities may include a recommendation of an individual unit of work for the first user to prioritize, a list of the first units of work in the first set of tasks ranked according to the priorities determined, a visual indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work, an auditory indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work, and/or other indications.


These and other features, and characteristics of the present technology, as well as the methods of operation and functions of the related elements of structure and the combination of parts and economies of manufacture, will become more apparent upon consideration of the following description and the appended claims with reference to the accompanying drawings, all of which form a part of this specification, wherein like reference numerals designate corresponding parts in the various figures. It is to be expressly understood, however, that the drawings are for the purpose of illustration and description only and are not intended as a definition of the limits of the invention. As used in the specification and in the claims, the singular form of “a”, “an”, and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 shows a system configured for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, in accordance with one or more implementations.



FIG. 2 illustrates a graphical user interface for presenting a series of questions to a user, in accordance with one or more implementations.



FIG. 3 illustrated a graphical user interface for displaying one or more priorities for a user, in accordance with one or more implementations.



FIG. 4 includes a flow chart of a method for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, in accordance with one or more implementations.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION


FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 configured for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, in accordance with one or more implementations. In some implementations, system 100 may include one or more servers 102. Server(s) 102 may be configured to communicate with one or more client computing platforms 104 according to a client/server architecture and/or other architectures. Client computing platform(s) 104 may be configured to communicate with other client computing platforms via server(s) 102 and/or according to a peer-to-peer architecture and/or other architectures. Users may access system 100 via client computing platform(s) 104.


Server(s) 102 may be configured by machine-readable instructions 106. Machine-readable instructions 106 may include one or more instruction components. The instruction components may include computer program components. The instruction components may include one or more of an environment state component 108, a question component 110, a user input component 112, a prioritization model component 114, a priority component 116, a graphical user interface component 118, and/or other instruction components.


Environment state component 108 may be configured to manage environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment. The environment state information may include values of user parameters and values of work unit parameters. By way of non-limiting example, the values of the user parameters may be organized in user records corresponding to users interacting with and viewing the collaboration environment and the values of the work unit parameters are organized in work unit records corresponding to units of work managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment. The units of work may include a first set of units of work associated with a first user.


The work unit parameters for work units managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment may include parameters describing one or more work units managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment and/or via the collaboration work management platform, and/or the metadata associated with the one or more work units. Individual ones of the work units may be associated with individual ones of the work unit records. A work unit record may define values of the work unit parameters associated with a given work unit managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment and/or via the collaboration work management platform. A given work unit may have one or more owners and/or one or more team members working on the given work unit. Work units may include one or more to-do items, action items, objectives, and/or other units of work one or more users should accomplish and/or plan on accomplishing. Units of work may be created by a given user for the given user and/or created by the given user and assigned to one or more other users. A given work unit may include one or more projects, tasks, sub-tasks, and/or other units of work possibly assigned to and/or associated with one or more users.


The work unit parameters may, by way of non-limiting example, include one or more of: one or more units of work, one or more user comment parameters (e.g., a creator, a recipient, one or more followers, one or more other interested parties, content, one or more times, up-votes, other hard-coded responses, etc.), a work unit name, a work unit description, one or more work unit dates (e.g., a start date, a due date, a completion date, and/or other work unit dates), one or more members associated with a unit of work (e.g., an owner, one or more other project/task members, member access information, and/or other work unit members and/or member information), a status and/or progress (e.g., an update, a hardcoded status update, a measured status, quantity of work units remaining in a given project, completed work units in a given project, and/or other status parameter), one or more attachments, notification settings, privacy, an associated URL, one or more interaction parameters (e.g., sources of the interactions, context of the interactions, content of the interactions, time for the interactions, and/or other interaction parameters), updates, ordering of units of work within a given unit of work (e.g., tasks within a project, sub-tasks within a task, etc.), state of a workspace for a given unit of work (e.g., application state parameters, application status, application interactions, user information, and/or other parameters related to the state of the workspace for a unit of work), dependencies between one or more work units, one or more custom fields (e.g., priority, cost, stage, and/or other custom fields), other work unit parameters for the given work units, and/or other work unit parameters, and/or user parameters for one or more users and/or work units the given project is associated with.


The user parameters associated with the users interacting with and/or viewing the collaboration environment may include parameters describing the users, their actions within the collaboration environment, their settings, and/or other user information; and/or metadata associated with the users, their actions within the environment, their settings, and/or other user information. Individual ones of the users may be associated with individual ones of the user records. A user record may define values of the user parameters associated with a given user interacting with and/or viewing the collaboration environment.


The user parameters may, by way of non-limiting example, include one or more of: a user name, a group parameter, a subset parameter, a user account, a user role, a user department, descriptive user content, a to-email, a from-email, a photo, an organization, a workspace, one or more projects (which may include project parameters defined by one or more work unit records), one or more items of work (which may include one or more unit of work parameters defined by one or more unit of work records), one or more user comments, one or more teams the user belongs to, one or more of the user display settings (e.g., colors, size, project order, task order, other work unit order, etc.), one or more authorized applications, one or more presence/interaction parameters (e.g., indicating presence and/or interaction level at an environment level, work unit level, project level, task level, application level, etc.), one or more notification settings, one or more progress parameters, status information for one or more work units the user is associated with, one or more statistics related to a given user (e.g., how many units of work the user has completed, how quickly the user completed the units of work, how quickly the user completes certain types of work units, the efficiency of the user, bandwidth of the user, activity level of the user, etc.), application access information (e.g., username/password for one or more third-party applications), one or more favorites and/or priorities, workload information, schedule information, historical information, other user parameters for the given user, and/or other user parameters and/or work unit parameters, for one or more work units the given user is associated with.


Question component 110 may be configured to effectuate presentation of a series of questions from which the prioritization models are determined. Question component 110 may be configured to effectuate presentation of a series of questions via a first client computing platform associated with the first user. The series of questions may include one or more predetermined questions. For example, the series of questions may include questions related to how the user typically completes units of work, how the user selects units of work to work on, when the user prefers to work, what types of units of work the user prefers to work on, the user's experience, the user's qualifications, the user's expertise, the user's supervisor or superior, the importance of a given unit of work (e.g., task, project, sub-task, and/or other units of work), and/or anything related to a user and/or how the user works or prioritizes work.


In some implementations, the series of questions may include one or more comparisons of units of work associated with the first user. The comparisons may include a comparison of two or more units of work, wherein the series of questions asks the user to select the highest priority unit of work and/or the lowest priority unit of work, and/or to rank the priority of the units of work presented. The user's selections of the units of work from the comparisons may be used to train the prioritization model for a given user.


User input component 112 may be configured to receive user input from the first client computing platform. The user input may include response information in response to the series of questions. The user input may include one or more selections, text input (e.g., answers), rankings, and/or other user input indicating answers to the individual questions in the series of questions. For example, the user input received from the first client computing platform may include one or more selections of individual ones of the units of work associated with the first user from the one or more comparisons.


In some implementations, user input component 112 may be configured to receive secondary user input including prioritization information. The prioritization information may characterize units of work that should be prioritized. By way of non-limiting example, the secondary user input may be input by a manager supervisor, team leader, project lead, a superior, and/or other managing users of the given user. By way of example, the prioritization information may indicate types, assigning users, and/or other characteristics of units of work the given user should prioritize.



FIG. 2 illustrates a graphical user interface for presenting a series of questions to a user, in accordance with one or more implementations. Graphical user interface 200 may include a series of questions 201. Series of questions 201 may include questions 204, 206, 208 including one or more user selectable options, comparison 210, and/or other questions. In some implementations, one or more questions in series of questions 201 may be predetermined. User 1202 may provide user input in response to the series of questions 201. The user input may include the response information for questions 1-3204, 206, 208 and comparison 4210, and/or other user input and/or response information. In some implementations, graphical user interface 200 may be presented via a first client computing platform associated with User 1202.


Returning to FIG. 1, prioritization model component 114 may be configured to generate a first prioritization model based on the response information. The response information may be used to train a prioritization model for determining one or more priorities for a given user. In some implementations, other information such as the prioritization information, values for the user parameters, values for the work unit parameters, and/or other information may be used at least partially as a basis for determining the first prioritization model. In some implementations, prioritization model component 114 may be configured to obtain values for the user parameters associated with the first user, values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user, and/or other information. The units of work associated with the first user may include units of work assigned to the first user, units of work assigned by the first user, units of work associated with units of work assigned to and/or by the first user (e.g., an overarching unit of work, a unit of work under the same overarching unit of work, one or more sub units of work, and/or other associated units of work), and/or other units of work. The values for the user parameters the values for the user parameters associated with the first user and/or the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user may indicate previous actions of the first user within the collaboration environment. By way of non-limiting example, the prioritization model may be determined based on the response information, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user, and the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user.


By way of non-limiting example, the first prioritization model may be generated using a neural network based on the response information, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user, the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work associated with the first user, and/or other information.


In some implementations, prioritization model component 114 may be configured to receive a request to export the first prioritization model. Prioritization model component 114 may be configured to export the first prioritization model. The first prioritization model my be used for one or more other users besides the first user. For example, if the first user is a very productive user, the first prioritization model may be used as a prioritization model and/or as part of the basis of a prioritization model for one or more other users.


Priority component 116 may be configured to determine one or more priorities for the first user based on the first prioritization model. The one or more priorities may indicate which units of work the first user should prioritize, work on next, focus on, and/or put their attention towards. In some implementations, the priorities may or may not indicate importance of the one or more units of work indicated by the priorities. As such, for example, a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work may be determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work by priority component 116.


Graphical user interface component 118 may be configured to effectuate presentation of a graphical user interface including the one or more priorities determined. The graphical user interface presented to the first user may display an indication of the one or more priorities determined for the first user. The graphical user interface may include an indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work. By way of non-limiting example, the indication of the one or more priorities may include a recommendation of an individual unit of work for the first user to prioritize, a list of the first units of work in the first set of tasks ranked according to the priorities determined, a visual indication (e.g., highlighting, value ranking, recommendation field, and/or other visual indication) that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work, an auditory indication, and/or other indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work.



FIG. 3 illustrated a graphical user interface for displaying one or more priorities for a user, in accordance with one or more implementations. Graphical user interface 300 may include one or more indications of priorities for User 1302. Recommendation 304 may indicate a Primary First Unit of Work is a priority for User 1302. Ranked listing 308 may indicate the priorities of the Primary First Unit of Work, the Secondary First Unit of Work, X First Unit of Work, Y First Unit of Work, and Z First Unit of Work for User 1302. Ranked listing 308 may indicate that the Primary First Unit of Work is a higher priority than the Secondary First Unit of Work for User 1302, the Secondary First Unit of Work is higher priority than the X First Unit of Work for User 1302, and/or the Y First Unit of Work is higher priority than the Z First Unit of Work for User 1302.


Returning to FIG. 1, in some implementations, server(s) 102, client computing platform(s) 104, and/or external resources 124 may be operatively linked via one or more electronic communication links. For example, such electronic communication links may be established, at least in part, via a network such as the Internet and/or other networks. It will be appreciated that this is not intended to be limiting, and that the scope of this disclosure includes implementations in which server(s) 102, client computing platform(s) 104, and/or external resources 124 may be operatively linked via some other communication media.


A given client computing platform 104 may include one or more processors configured to execute computer program components. The computer program components may be configured to enable an expert or user associated with the given client computing platform 104 to interface with system 100 and/or external resources 124, and/or provide other functionality attributed herein to client computing platform(s) 104. By way of non-limiting example, the given client computing platform 104 may include one or more of a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a handheld computer, a tablet computing platform, a NetBook, a Smartphone, a gaming console, and/or other computing platforms.


External resources 124 may include sources of information outside of system 100, external entities participating with system 100, and/or other resources. In some implementations, some or all of the functionality attributed herein to external resources 124 may be provided by resources included in system 100.


Server(s) 102 may include electronic storage 120, one or more processors 122, and/or other components. Server(s) 102 may include communication lines, or ports to enable the exchange of information with a network and/or other computing platforms. Illustration of server(s) 102 in FIG. 1 is not intended to be limiting. Server(s) 102 may include a plurality of hardware, software, and/or firmware components operating together to provide the functionality attributed herein to server(s) 102. For example, server(s) 102 may be implemented by a cloud of computing platforms operating together as server(s) 102.


Electronic storage 120 may comprise non-transitory storage media that electronically stores information. The electronic storage media of electronic storage 120 may include one or both of system storage that is provided integrally (i.e., substantially non-removable) with server(s) 102 and/or removable storage that is removably connectable to server(s) 102 via, for example, a port (e.g., a USB port, a firewire port, etc.) or a drive (e.g., a disk drive, etc.). Electronic storage 120 may include one or more of optically readable storage media (e.g., optical disks, etc.), magnetically readable storage media (e.g., magnetic tape, magnetic hard drive, floppy drive, etc.), electrical charge-based storage media (e.g., EEPROM, RAM, etc.), solid-state storage media (e.g., flash drive, etc.), and/or other electronically readable storage media. Electronic storage 120 may include one or more virtual storage resources (e.g., cloud storage, a virtual private network, and/or other virtual storage resources). Electronic storage 120 may store software algorithms, information determined by processor(s) 122, information received from server(s) 102, information received from client computing platform(s) 104, and/or other information that enables server(s) 102 to function as described herein.


Processor(s) 122 may be configured to provide information processing capabilities in server(s) 102. As such, processor(s) 122 may include one or more of a digital processor, an analog processor, a digital circuit designed to process information, an analog circuit designed to process information, a state machine, and/or other mechanisms for electronically processing information. Although processor(s) 122 is shown in FIG. 1 as a single entity, this is for illustrative purposes only. In some implementations, processor(s) 122 may include a plurality of processing units. These processing units may be physically located within the same device, or processor(s) 122 may represent processing functionality of a plurality of devices operating in coordination. Processor(s) 122 may be configured to execute components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118, and/or other components. Processor(s) 122 may be configured to execute components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 and/or other components by software; hardware; firmware; some combination of software, hardware, and/or firmware; and/or other mechanisms for configuring processing capabilities on processor(s) 122. As used herein, the term “component” may refer to any component or set of components that perform the functionality attributed to the component. This may include one or more physical processors during execution of processor readable instructions, the processor readable instructions, circuitry, hardware, storage media, or any other components.


It should be appreciated that although components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 are illustrated in FIG. 1 as being implemented within a single processing unit, in implementations in which processor(s) 122 includes multiple processing units, one or more of components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 may be implemented remotely from the other components. The description of the functionality provided by the different components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 described below is for illustrative purposes, and is not intended to be limiting, as any of components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 may provide more or less functionality than is described. For example, one or more of components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 may be eliminated, and some or all of its functionality may be provided by other ones of components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118. As another example, processor(s) 122 may be configured to execute one or more additional components that may perform some or all of the functionality attributed below to one of components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118.



FIG. 4 illustrates a method 400 for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, in accordance with one or more implementations. The operations of method 400 presented below are intended to be illustrative. In some implementations, method 400 may be accomplished with one or more additional operations not described, and/or without one or more of the operations discussed. Additionally, the order in which the operations of method 400 are illustrated in FIG. 4 and described below is not intended to be limiting.


In some implementations, method 400 may be implemented in one or more processing devices (e.g., a digital processor, an analog processor, a digital circuit designed to process information, an analog circuit designed to process information, a state machine, and/or other mechanisms for electronically processing information). The one or more processing devices may include one or more devices executing some or all of the operations of method 400 in response to instructions stored electronically on an electronic storage medium. The one or more processing devices may include one or more devices configured through hardware, firmware, and/or software to be specifically designed for execution of one or more of the operations of method 400.


An operation 402 may include managing environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment. The environment state information may include values of user parameters and values of work unit parameters. The values of the user parameters may be organized in user records corresponding to users interacting with and viewing the collaboration environment and the values of the work unit parameters are organized in work unit records corresponding to units of work managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment. The units of work may include a first set of units of work associated with a first user. Operation 402 may be performed by one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions including a component that is the same as or similar to environment state component 108, in accordance with one or more implementations.


An operation 404 may include effectuating presentation of a series of questions via a first client computing platform associated with the first user. Operation 404 may be performed by one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions including a component that is the same as or similar to presentation effectuation component 110, in accordance with one or more implementations.


An operation 406 may include receiving user input from the first client computing platform. The user input may include response information in response to the series of questions. Operation 406 may be performed by one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions including a component that is the same as or similar to user input component 112, in accordance with one or more implementations.


An operation 408 may include generating a first prioritization model based on the response information. Operation 408 may be performed by one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions including a component that is the same as or similar to prioritization model generating component 114, in accordance with one or more implementations.


An operation 410 may include determining one or more priorities for the first user based on the first prioritization model. As such, a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work may be determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work. The graphical user interface may display an indication of the one or more priorities determined for the first user. The graphical user interface may include an indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work. Operation 410 may be performed by one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions including a component that is the same as or similar to priority component 116, in accordance with one or more implementations.


Although the present technology has been described in detail for the purpose of illustration based on what is currently considered to be the most practical and preferred implementations, it is to be understood that such detail is solely for that purpose and that the technology is not limited to the disclosed implementations, but, on the contrary, is intended to cover modifications and equivalent arrangements that are within the spirit and scope of the appended claims. For example, it is to be understood that the present technology contemplates that, to the extent possible, one or more features of any implementation can be combined with one or more features of any other implementation.

Claims
  • 1. A system configured for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, the system comprising: one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions to: manage environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including values of user parameters and values of work unit parameters, wherein the values of the user parameters are organized in user records corresponding to users interacting with and viewing the collaboration environment and the values of the work unit parameters are organized in work unit records corresponding to units of work managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment, wherein the units of work include a first set of units of work associated with a first user;effectuate presentation of a series of questions from which a first prioritization model is determined via a first client computing platform associated with the first user, the series of questions being related to how the first user works or prioritizes work;receive user input from the first client computing platform, the user input including response information in response to the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined;generate the first prioritization model by training the first prioritization model based on the response information, such that the first prioritization model is trained in relation to how the first user works or prioritizes work;determine one or more priorities for the first user based on the first prioritization model such that a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work is determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work; andeffectuate presentation of a graphical user interface displaying an indication of the one or more priorities determined for the first user, the graphical user interface including an indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work.
  • 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined include predetermined questions.
  • 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined include one or more comparisons of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user, and wherein the user input received from the first client computing platform includes one or more selections of individual ones of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user from the one or more comparisons, and wherein the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined is presented via the first client computing platform in a dedicated model training graphical user interface which is separate from a graphical user interface through which the first user views the first set of units of work in the collaboration environment.
  • 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured by the machine-readable instructions to: obtain values for the user parameters associated with the first user and values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user, wherein the first prioritization model is trained based on the response information, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user, and the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user.
  • 5. The system of claim 4, wherein the first prioritization model is generated using a neural network.
  • 6. The system of claim 5, wherein the values for the user parameters associated with the first user and/or the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user indicate previous actions of the first user within the collaboration environment.
  • 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the indication of the one or more priorities includes one or more of a recommendation of an individual unit of work for the first user to prioritize, a list of the first units of work in the first set of tasks ranked according to the priorities determined, a visual indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work, or an auditory indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work.
  • 8. The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured by the machine-readable instructions to receive secondary user input including prioritization information, wherein the prioritization information characterizes the units of work that should be prioritized.
  • 9. The system of claim 8, wherein the first prioritization model is determined based on the prioritization information.
  • 10. The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured by the machine-readable instructions to: receive a request to export the first prioritization model; andexport the first prioritization model.
  • 11. A method for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations, the method comprising: managing environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including values of user parameters and values of work unit parameters, wherein the values of the user parameters are organized in user records corresponding to users interacting with and viewing the collaboration environment and the values of the work unit parameters are organized in work unit records corresponding to units of work managed, created, and/or assigned within the collaboration environment, wherein the units of work include a first set of units of work associated with a first user;effectuating presentation of a series of questions from which a first prioritization model is determined via a first client computing platform associated with the first user, the series of questions being related to how the first user works or prioritizes work;receiving user input from the first client computing platform, the user input including response information in response to the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined;generating the first prioritization model by training the first prioritization model based on the response information, such that the first prioritization model is trained in relation to how the first user works or prioritizes work;determining one or more priorities for the first user based on the first prioritization model such that a primary first unit of work within the first set of units of work is determined to be a higher priority than a secondary first unit of work within the first set of units of work; andeffectuating presentation of a graphical user interface displaying an indication of the one or more priorities determined for the first user, the graphical user interface including an indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work.
  • 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined include predetermined questions.
  • 13. The method of claim 11, wherein the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined include one or more comparisons of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user, and wherein the user input received from the first client computing platform includes one or more selections of individual ones of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user from the one or more comparisons, and wherein the series of questions from which the first prioritization model is determined is presented via the first client computing platform in a dedicated model training graphical user interface which is separate from a graphical user interface through which the first user views the first set of units of work in the collaboration environment.
  • 14. The method of claim 11, further comprising: obtaining values for the user parameters associated with the first user and values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user, wherein the first prioritization model is trained based on the response information, the values for the user parameters associated with the first user, and the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user.
  • 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the first prioritization model is generated using a neural network.
  • 16. The method of claim 15, wherein the values for the user parameters the values for the user parameters associated with the first user and/or the values for the work unit parameters associated with one or more of the units of work in the first set of units of work associated with the first user indicate previous actions of the first user within the collaboration environment.
  • 17. The method of claim 11, wherein the indication of the one or more priorities includes one or more of a recommendation of an individual unit of work for the first user to prioritize, a list of the first units of work in the first set of tasks ranked according to the priorities determined, a visual indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work, or an auditory indication that the primary first unit of work is a higher priority than the secondary first unit of work.
  • 18. The method of claim 11, further comprising receiving secondary user input including prioritization information, wherein the prioritization information characterizes the units of work that should be prioritized.
  • 19. The method of claim 18, wherein the first prioritization model is determined based on the prioritization information.
  • 20. The method of claim 11, further comprising: receiving a request to export the first prioritization model; andexporting the first prioritization model.
US Referenced Citations (296)
Number Name Date Kind
5233687 Henderson, Jr. Aug 1993 A
5524077 Faaland Jun 1996 A
5623404 Collins Apr 1997 A
5721770 Kohler Feb 1998 A
5983277 Heile Nov 1999 A
6024093 Cron Feb 2000 A
6256651 Tuli Jul 2001 B1
6621505 Beauchamp Sep 2003 B1
6769013 Frees Jul 2004 B2
6859523 Jilk Feb 2005 B1
7039596 Lu May 2006 B1
7086062 Faour Aug 2006 B1
7349920 Feinberg Mar 2008 B1
7418482 Lusher Aug 2008 B1
7428723 Greene Sep 2008 B2
7676542 Moser Mar 2010 B2
7805327 Schulz Sep 2010 B1
7917855 Satish Mar 2011 B1
7996774 Sidenur Aug 2011 B1
8214747 Yankovich Jul 2012 B1
8314809 Grabowski Nov 2012 B1
8499300 Zimberg Jul 2013 B2
8527287 Bhatia Sep 2013 B1
8554832 Moskovitz Oct 2013 B1
8572477 Moskovitz Oct 2013 B1
8627199 Handley Jan 2014 B1
8639552 Chen Jan 2014 B1
8831879 Stamm Sep 2014 B2
8843832 Frields Sep 2014 B2
8863021 Bee Oct 2014 B1
9009096 Pinckney Apr 2015 B2
9024752 Tumayan May 2015 B2
9143839 Reisman Sep 2015 B2
9152668 Moskovitz Oct 2015 B1
9208262 Bechtel Dec 2015 B2
9350560 Hupfer May 2016 B2
9383917 Mouton Jul 2016 B2
9405532 Sullivan Aug 2016 B1
9405810 Smith Aug 2016 B2
9454623 Kaptsan Sep 2016 B1
9514424 Kleinbart Dec 2016 B2
9600136 Yang Mar 2017 B1
9785445 Mitsui Oct 2017 B2
9842312 Rosati Dec 2017 B1
9949681 Badenes Apr 2018 B2
9959420 Kiang May 2018 B2
9978040 Lee May 2018 B2
9990636 Lewis Jun 2018 B1
10003693 Wolthuis Jun 2018 B2
10083412 Suntinger Sep 2018 B2
10157355 Johnson Dec 2018 B2
10192181 Katkar Jan 2019 B2
10235156 Johnson Mar 2019 B2
1026406 Subramani Apr 2019 A1
1030899 Chauvin Jun 2019 A1
10373090 Holm Aug 2019 B2
10382501 Malatesha Aug 2019 B2
10496943 De Dec 2019 B2
10606859 Smith Mar 2020 B2
10613735 Karpe Apr 2020 B1
10684870 Sabo Jun 2020 B1
10706484 Murnock Jul 2020 B1
10785046 Raghavan Sep 2020 B1
10810222 Koch Oct 2020 B2
20020065798 Bostleman May 2002 A1
20020082889 Oliver Jun 2002 A1
20020143594 Kroeger Oct 2002 A1
20030028595 Vogt Feb 2003 A1
20030036934 Ouchi Feb 2003 A1
20030097410 Atkins May 2003 A1
20030126001 Northcutt Jul 2003 A1
20030225598 Yu Dec 2003 A1
20030233265 Lee Dec 2003 A1
20030233268 Taqbeem Dec 2003 A1
20040083448 Schulz Apr 2004 A1
20040093290 Doss May 2004 A1
20040093351 Lee May 2004 A1
20040125150 Adcock Jul 2004 A1
20040187089 Schulz Sep 2004 A1
20040207249 Baumgartner Oct 2004 A1
20040230447 Schwerin-Wenzel Nov 2004 A1
20050216111 Ooshima Sep 2005 A1
20050222971 Cary Oct 2005 A1
20060028917 Wigginton Feb 2006 A1
20060047454 Tamaki Mar 2006 A1
20060085245 Takatsuka Apr 2006 A1
20060167736 Weiss Jul 2006 A1
20060200264 Kodama Sep 2006 A1
20060218551 Berstis Sep 2006 A1
20060224430 Butt Oct 2006 A1
20060277487 Poulsen Dec 2006 A1
20070016646 Tendjoukian Jan 2007 A1
20070025567 Fehr Feb 2007 A1
20070038494 Kreitzberg Feb 2007 A1
20070041542 Schramm Feb 2007 A1
20070050225 Leslie Mar 2007 A1
20070073575 Yomogida Mar 2007 A1
20070147178 Masuda Jun 2007 A1
20070150327 Dromgold Jun 2007 A1
20070232278 May Oct 2007 A1
20070255674 Mahoney Nov 2007 A1
20070260499 Greef Nov 2007 A1
20070288283 Fitzpatrick Dec 2007 A1
20070294344 Mohan Dec 2007 A1
20080033777 Shukoor Feb 2008 A1
20080046471 Moore Feb 2008 A1
20080079730 Zhang Apr 2008 A1
20080082389 Gura Apr 2008 A1
20080082956 Gura Apr 2008 A1
20080120129 Seubert May 2008 A1
20080126930 Scott May 2008 A1
20080134069 Horvitz Jun 2008 A1
20080158023 Chung Jul 2008 A1
20080167937 Coughlin Jul 2008 A1
20080175104 Grieb Jul 2008 A1
20080195964 Randell Aug 2008 A1
20080221946 Balon Sep 2008 A1
20080268876 Gelfand Oct 2008 A1
20080270198 Graves Oct 2008 A1
20080281665 Opaluch Nov 2008 A1
20080313004 Ryan Dec 2008 A1
20090048986 Anderson Feb 2009 A1
20090076878 Woerner Mar 2009 A1
20090089133 Johnson Apr 2009 A1
20090094623 Chakra Apr 2009 A1
20090133027 Gunning May 2009 A1
20090167553 Hong Jul 2009 A1
20090187454 Khasin Jul 2009 A1
20090199192 Laithwaite Aug 2009 A1
20090204463 Burnett Aug 2009 A1
20090204471 Elenbaas Aug 2009 A1
20090234699 Steinglass Sep 2009 A1
20090241053 Augustine Sep 2009 A1
20090260010 Burkhart Oct 2009 A1
20100005087 Basco Jan 2010 A1
20100070888 Watabe Mar 2010 A1
20100088137 Weiss Apr 2010 A1
20100106627 O'Sullivan Apr 2010 A1
20100114786 Aboujaoude May 2010 A1
20100115523 Kuschel May 2010 A1
20100131860 DeHaan May 2010 A1
20100145801 Chekuri Jun 2010 A1
20100169146 Hoyne Jul 2010 A1
20100180212 Gingras Jul 2010 A1
20100223575 Leukart Sep 2010 A1
20100269049 Fearon Oct 2010 A1
20100299171 Lau Nov 2010 A1
20100312605 Mitchell Dec 2010 A1
20100313151 Wei Dec 2010 A1
20110015961 Chan Jan 2011 A1
20110055177 Chakra Mar 2011 A1
20110071878 Gingras Mar 2011 A1
20110071893 Malhotra Mar 2011 A1
20110072372 Fritzley Mar 2011 A1
20110093538 Weir Apr 2011 A1
20110093619 Nelson Apr 2011 A1
20110113365 Kimmerly May 2011 A1
20110154216 Aritsuka Jun 2011 A1
20110161128 Barney Jun 2011 A1
20110184768 Norton Jul 2011 A1
20110270644 Roncolato Nov 2011 A1
20110307772 Lloyd Dec 2011 A1
20120030194 Jain Feb 2012 A1
20120066030 Limpert Mar 2012 A1
20120066411 Jeide Mar 2012 A1
20120072251 Mircean Mar 2012 A1
20120079449 Sanderson Mar 2012 A1
20120110087 Culver May 2012 A1
20120117499 Mori May 2012 A1
20120131191 May May 2012 A1
20120158946 Shafiee Jun 2012 A1
20120192086 Ghods Jul 2012 A1
20120221963 Motoyama Aug 2012 A1
20120239451 Caligor Sep 2012 A1
20120254218 Ali Oct 2012 A1
20120266068 Ryman Oct 2012 A1
20120278388 Kleinbart Nov 2012 A1
20120296993 Heyman Nov 2012 A1
20130013560 Goldberg Jan 2013 A1
20130014023 Lee Jan 2013 A1
20130018688 Nudd Jan 2013 A1
20130021629 Kurilin Jan 2013 A1
20130067375 Kim Mar 2013 A1
20130067549 Caldwell Mar 2013 A1
20130103412 Nudd Apr 2013 A1
20130124638 Barreto May 2013 A1
20130151421 Van Der Ploeg Jun 2013 A1
20130151604 Ranade Jun 2013 A1
20130173486 Peters Jul 2013 A1
20130179208 Chung Jul 2013 A1
20130215116 Siddique Aug 2013 A1
20130227007 Savage Aug 2013 A1
20130246110 Nakhayi Ashtiani Sep 2013 A1
20130246399 Schneider Sep 2013 A1
20130279685 Kohler Oct 2013 A1
20130317871 Kulkarni Nov 2013 A1
20130339831 Gulanikar Dec 2013 A1
20140007005 Libin Jan 2014 A1
20140025767 De Kezel Jan 2014 A1
20140036639 Boni Feb 2014 A1
20140059910 Norton Mar 2014 A1
20140074536 Meushar Mar 2014 A1
20140101310 Savage Apr 2014 A1
20140156539 Brunet Jun 2014 A1
20140165001 Shapiro Jun 2014 A1
20140208325 Chen Jul 2014 A1
20140215344 Ligman Jul 2014 A1
20140229609 Wong Aug 2014 A1
20140244334 De Aug 2014 A1
20140257894 Melahn Sep 2014 A1
20140279294 Field-Darragh Sep 2014 A1
20140288987 Liu Sep 2014 A1
20140310047 De Oct 2014 A1
20140310051 Meng Oct 2014 A1
20140350997 Holm Nov 2014 A1
20140364987 Shikano Dec 2014 A1
20150007058 Wooten Jan 2015 A1
20150012330 Sugiura Jan 2015 A1
20150052437 Crawford Feb 2015 A1
20150058053 De Feb 2015 A1
20150134393 De May 2015 A1
20150213411 Swanson Jul 2015 A1
20150312375 Valey Oct 2015 A1
20150317595 De Nov 2015 A1
20150339006 Chaland Nov 2015 A1
20150363733 Brown Dec 2015 A1
20150379472 Gilmour Dec 2015 A1
20160012368 O'Connell Jan 2016 A1
20160048786 Fukuda Feb 2016 A1
20160063449 Duggan Mar 2016 A1
20160072750 Kass Mar 2016 A1
20160140474 Vekker May 2016 A1
20160140501 Figlin May 2016 A1
20160147773 Smith May 2016 A1
20160147846 Smith May 2016 A1
20160148157 Walia May 2016 A1
20160180277 Skiba Jun 2016 A1
20160224939 Chen Aug 2016 A1
20160234391 Wolthuis Aug 2016 A1
20160313934 Isherwood Oct 2016 A1
20160328217 Hagerty Nov 2016 A1
20160342927 Reznik Nov 2016 A1
20170004213 Cunico Jan 2017 A1
20170009387 Ge Jan 2017 A1
20170017364 Kekki Jan 2017 A1
20170061341 Haas Mar 2017 A1
20170068933 Norton Mar 2017 A1
20170093874 Uthe Mar 2017 A1
20170099296 Fisher Apr 2017 A1
20170116552 Deodhar Apr 2017 A1
20170132200 Noland May 2017 A1
20170153799 Hoyer Jun 2017 A1
20170177671 Allgaier Jun 2017 A1
20170185592 Frei Jun 2017 A1
20170192642 Fishman Jul 2017 A1
20170206217 Deshpande Jul 2017 A1
20170249577 Nishikawa Aug 2017 A1
20170316367 Candito Nov 2017 A1
20170317898 Candito Nov 2017 A1
20170323233 Bencke Nov 2017 A1
20170323267 Baek Nov 2017 A1
20170344754 Kumar Nov 2017 A1
20180032524 Byron Feb 2018 A1
20180053127 Boileau Feb 2018 A1
20180059910 Wooten Mar 2018 A1
20180060785 Carnevale Mar 2018 A1
20180060818 Ishiyama Mar 2018 A1
20180063063 Yan Mar 2018 A1
20180068271 Abebe Mar 2018 A1
20180088754 Psenka Mar 2018 A1
20180095938 Monte Apr 2018 A1
20180131649 Ma May 2018 A1
20180157477 Johnson Jun 2018 A1
20180225795 Napoli Aug 2018 A1
20180247352 Rogers Aug 2018 A1
20180260081 Beaudoin Sep 2018 A1
20180262620 Wolthuis Sep 2018 A1
20180285471 Hao Oct 2018 A1
20180357049 Epstein Dec 2018 A1
20180373804 Zhang Dec 2018 A1
20190005048 Crivello Jan 2019 A1
20190034057 Rudchenko Jan 2019 A1
20190068390 Gross Feb 2019 A1
20190079909 Purandare Mar 2019 A1
20190080289 Kreitler Mar 2019 A1
20190095839 Itabayashi Mar 2019 A1
20190095846 Gupta Mar 2019 A1
20190102700 Babu Apr 2019 A1
20190138961 Santiago May 2019 A1
20190147386 Balakrishna May 2019 A1
20190213509 Burleson Jul 2019 A1
20190340296 Cunico Nov 2019 A1
20190340574 Ekambaram Nov 2019 A1
20190347094 Sullivan Nov 2019 A1
20190370320 Kalra Dec 2019 A1
20200328906 Raghavan Oct 2020 A1
Non-Patent Literature Citations (36)
Entry
Fruhlinger, Joshua. “The Best To-Do List Apps for Feeling Productive; With the right app, feeling productive can be just as gratifying as actually getting things done” Wall Street Journal (Online); New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]Nov. 8, 2013 (Year: 2013).
www.asana.com (as retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20160101054536/https://asana.com/press and https://web.archive.org/web/20160101054527/https://asana.com/product) (Year: 2016).
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,750, Examiner Interview Summary dated Feb. 25, 2016”, 3 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,750, Non Final Office Action dated Aug. 28, 2015”, 21 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,750, Notice of Allowance dated Mar. 28, 2016”, 8 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,750, Response filed Feb. 29, 2015 to Non Final Office Action dated Aug. 28, 2015”, 16 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,850, Final Office Action dated Sep. 1, 2017”, 31 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,850, Non Final Office Action dated Jan. 10, 2017”, 9 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/584,850, Response filed Apr. 10, 2017 to Non Final Office Action dated Jan. 10, 2017”, 13 pgs.
Biggs, “GateGuru Relaunches With New Ways to Streamline Your Travel Experience”, Techcrunch, (Apr. 26, 2013), 3 pgs.
www.cogmotive.com/blog/author/alan Alan Byrne: “Creating a company Shared Calendar in Office 365”; pp. 1-17; Sep. 10, 2013.
Asana Demo and Product Tour, you tube excerpt, Dec. 7, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMAFWVLGFyw (Year: 2017) (16 pages).
Asana integrations, Asana tutorial, youtube, excerpt, Nov. 16, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBiQ7DJNinE (Year: 2016) (21 pages).
Asana Workload and Portfolios,youtube,excerpt, Aug. 1, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XchfFDG6M (Year: 2019) (20 pages).
Asana YouTube channel, list of all product videos, Nov. 19, 2014-Aug. 19, 2019 https://www.youtube.com/user/AsanaTeam/videos?disable_polymer=1 (Year: 2019) (5 pages).
Asana, Task dependencies, archives org, Aug. 25, 2017 https://web.archive.org/web/20170825002141/https://asana.com/guide/help/tasks/dependencies (Year: 2017) (5 pages).
Asana,Manage your team capacity with Workload, youtube, excerpt, Aug. 1, 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ufXyZDzZnA&list=PLJFG93oi0wJAi Uwy0hIGVVHdtJzJrzylBv (Year: 2019) (1 page).
Castaneda Samuel, Introduction Manual—Asana, Sep. 25, 2017 https://static1.squarespace.com/static/586d532ae58c6232db243a65/t/5c210c10f950b7fc7a8e3274/1545669658049/Asana+Manual.pdf (Year: 2017) (20 pages).
How to Asana Asana time tracking, youtube, excerpt, May 24, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z91qlex-TLc (Year: 2017) (1 page).
How to Asana, Asana project management, youtube, excerpt, Mar. 7, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqANMTvVpE (Year: 2017) (28 pages).
How to Asana, Creating your first Asana project, youtube, excerpt, Jan. 31, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L04WmcUdsLo (Year: 2017) (1 page).
How to Asana, Getting Asana into your workflow, youtube, excerpt, Jul. 17, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YLrNMdv3o (Year: 2017) (24 pages).
How to Asana, Planning with Asana calendar, youtube excerpt, Feb. 14, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8t6KYiVPyc (Year: 2017) (19 pages).
How to Asana, Using Asana for task management, youtube, excerpt, Feb. 7, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwvbgiejhQ (Year: 2017) (8 pages).
How to Asana, Visualizing work with Asana kanban boards, youtube, excerpt, Feb. 21, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmZaZGydfPY (Year: 2017) (41 pages).
How to Asana, Workflow management, youtube, excerpt, May 30, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk8nPWmeR0 (Year: 2017) (9 pages).
How to use Advanced Search in Asana, Asana tutorial, May 25, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VyJ310PfQM (Year: 2016) (28 pages).
Justin Rosenstein, Unveiling the Future of Asana, Mar. 28, 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRI?d_WM4Bc (Year: 2018) (2 pages).
Prioritize My Tasks in Asana, Asana tutorial, youtube, excerpt, May 25, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbcnMvw01nl (Year: 2016) (3 pages).
Project views, Asana tutorial, youtube, excerpt May 25, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYjA82H3ceQ (Year: 2016) (5 pages).
Using Asana Premium, Asana tutorial, youtube, excerpt, Sep. 10, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMgLtDDmyeo (Year: 2016) (4 pages).
Where does Asana fit in, archives org, Jul. 8, 2017 https://web.archive.org/web/20170708150928/https://asana.com/guide/resources/infosheets/where-does-asana-fit (Year: 2017) (5 pages).
Command and control, wikipedia, archives org, Mar. 16, 2018 https://web.archive.org/web/20180316193655/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_and_control (Year: 2018), 6 pages.
“How to Asana: Inviting teammates to Asana.” YouTube, Asana, Mar. 21, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLOruY1KyxU ( Year: 2017), 13 pages.
Critical chain project management, Wikipedia, archives org, Dec. 17, 2016 https://web.archive.Org/web/20161217090326/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_chain_project_management (Year: 2016) 5 pages.
Critical Path Method, Wikipedia, archives org, Sep. 19, 2017 https://web.archive.Org/web/20170919223814/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_path_method (Year: 2017) 6 pages.