The present disclosure relates to systems and methods for generating prioritization models and predicting workflow prioritizations.
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.
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.
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.
Returning to
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.
Returning to
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
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
It should be appreciated that although components 108, 110, 112, 114, 116, and/or 118 are illustrated in
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.
| 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 |
| 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. |