Work packet delegation in a software factory

5 downloads 21018 Views 3MB Size Report
Jul 31, 2008 - A- Hamld, Columbus, OH (Us); Rama“ ... liZing the design centers, assembly line and job shops ofa ..... CALL TEMPLATE NEEDED BY.
US008448129B2

(12) United States Patent

(10) Patent No.:

Chaar et a]. (54)

(45) Date of Patent: 5,835,898 A

11/1998 Borg et 31.

SOFTWARE FACTORY

5,953,533 A 5,974,392 A

9/1999 Fink et 31. 10/1999 Endo

_

Inventors: Jarlr K..Chaar,Ardsley, NY (US), A] A- Hamld, Columbus, OH (Us); Rama“ Harishankar, Blacklick, OH (US);

Joseph P. Huchel, Morgan Hill, CA .

6,049,775 A

4/2000

6,226,784 B1 6,237,020 B1 6,286,104 B1

50001 Holmes et al‘ 5/2001 Leymann et a1. 9/2001 Buhle et a1.

,

1?;

,

EOWmaF'Amuah ormen 1

6,516,451 B1

2/2003 Patin

Panza NY (Us), Danlelv- oPPelfhelms

6,519,763 B1

2/2003 Kaufer et a1.

Crown on Hudson, NY (Us); Krlshna C. Ratakonda, Yorktown Heights, NY (Us)

6,550,057 B1 6,601,233 B1 6,601,234 B1

4/2003 Bowman-Amuah 7/2003 Underwood 7/2003 Bowman-Amuah

6,662,357 B1

12/2003 BOWman-Amuah

$155822: d

Corporation, Armonk, NY (US)

Notice:

_

(Continued)

Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this patent is extended or adjusted under 35

USC' 1540:’) by 1243 days‘ (21)

..

_

(22) Filed:

OTHER PUBLICATIONS

US. Appl. No. 12/129,304 (END920080066US1)iNon-Final

Appl NO _ 12/183 423 .

Of?ce Action Mailed Mar. 27, 2012.

,

(Continued)

Jul. 31, 2008

(65)

Prior Publication Data

US 2010/0031226 A1

Int. Cl. G06F 9/44 (52) us. Cl.

Gertner et al.

ms)’ Thomas 5‘ Jol’son’ Jr" New _

(73) Assignee: International Business Machines (*)

May 21, 2013

WORK PACKET DELEGATION IN A .

(75)

US 8,448,129 B2

Primary Examiner i TuanAVu

Feb. 4, 2010

(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm *John R. Pivnichny; Law O?ice of Jim Boice

(51)

USPC

(58)

(2006.01)

(57)

........................................................ ..

ABSTRACT

717/103

Fi61 d of Classi?cation Search USPC 717/100i104 108 120 124 172, 705/7 12

_

_

A method, system, and computer-readable medium for uti liZing the design centers, assembly line and job shops ofa

705/7_15 72,1 72,2 1,29 2,63 3,21 1444’

global delivery network across multiple software factories are

705/34; 718/100; 707/999201; 719/310;

presented. A Work packet is examined to determine if it is

714/3814

authorized to be sub-contracted out to a different design cen

See application ?le for Complete Search history

ter, assembly line or job shop than the design center/ assembly line/job shop that have primary responsibility for the Work

References Cited

P acket. If the Work P acket is authorized to be sub-contracted

56

out, then the Work packet is reassigned to a different pre

quali?ed design center/assembly line/j ob shop.

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS 5,548,506 A 5,550,971 A 5,729,749 A

8/1996 Srinivasan 8/1996 Brunner et a1. 3/1998 Ito

1012

20 Claims, 25 Drawing Sheets

which project types

1‘

Project Type

Factory Process Project Activityv Project Type

Asset Work Padret: Project Type .

.

.

Wm! activlty tasks were .

Wtat assets are associated

wtuch packet were assocrale

wnh specdlc work packets

with that specmc project type

same project type

Asset Work Packet

Project Type: Work Packet

M5,,‘ Task; pmieq Type

1' - -Tr!nplate: Project Type: Work Packet

What worklllwr detail mapped to to those task

Template: Work Packet

Activity Tasks Wnrk?iwr Detail

' ~ ' Template Type: Template: Work Packet

vmith worktllwr were delired with

were used

those workflow details belore

Terrrplatz Template Type

Worlrtlrm Worklkrw Detail

valldate those templates sdlemii Tmlale

int rt

mi

'rrt

tion

vfmasfjilecirftcwny

Fm PM ,

'Y

‘w M 3

955- Pml

My

s - Activity Tasks Project: Workllow Details Workllow

which type of templates

t- - - Schema Terrplate Template Type

Fact

- - - Activity Tasks: Project Workllow

mm ten-plates were used lor those work packets

which sotema was used to

'-

associated to Project; or the _

- ~ - Asslgree: Tasks. Worktliwi Details Wurk?ow

tasks assigned to assignee

Tasks: Assignee - ' ' Assig'ee Tasks: Delivermle

which deliverable were a result at

tte task pe?orrrred Tasks; Deliverable

US 8,448,129 B2 Page 2 US. PATENT DOCUMENTS 6,854,107 B2

6931621 B2

6,964,034 B1 ’



80005 G

2005/0114829 A1

.

Robln etal. ................ .. 717/101

2005/0160395 A1

7/2005 Hughes

2005/0166178 A1

7/2005 Masticolaetal.

’ ’ 7,062,449 B1

Osnow at” 6/2006 Clark

2005/0177260 A1

8/2005

2005/0198618 A1

9/2005 Lalonde etal.

2005/0216882 A1

2005/0234698 2005/0283751 2006/0005157 2006/0031812

6/2006 Cyretal.

7,137,100 B2 7,139,999 B2

11/2006 lhorra etal. 11/2006 Bowman'Amuah

7,155,400 B1

12/2006 Jilketal.

7,234,131 B1 7,272,575 B2 7,292,990 B2

5/2005

1

“.OW

4/2006 Mllleretal. 500% R 1

7,159,206 B1 7,197,740 B2

1/2005 Miller *

110005 green at”

7,035,809 B2 7051036 B2 7,062,749 B2

2005/0015678 A1

20005 Green et a1‘

V2007 Sadhu et a1~ 3/2007 Beringer etal.

6/2007 speyreretal' 9/2007 Vega 11/2007 Hughes .

A1 A1 A1 A1

9/2005

10/2005 12/2005 1/2006 2/2006

Schweizerhofetal. Sundararajan etal.

Plnto etal. - etal. Bassrn Saxena etal. olson etal

2006/0036954 A1

' 2/2006 Satyadasetal.

2006/0064486 A1 2006/0069605 A1

3/2006 Baron etal. 300% Hatoun

2006/0070020 A1

3/2006 Puttaswamyetal.

2006/0184933 A1

8/2006 Chesselletal.

2006/0218521 A1 2006/0229929 A1

9/2006 Hagstromet a1. 10/2006 Hughes et al.

2/2008 Psamsetal‘

2006 0235732 A1

102006 M1 er eta.

7,360,201 B2

4/2008 Srivastava

2006/0248504 141* 11/2006 Hughes

7,406,432 B1

7/2008 Motoyama

2006/0259524 A1

11/2006 HOI‘tOn ........................ .. 707/201

7,406,453 B2 7,418,443 B2

7/200g Mundie et a1‘ 8/2008 Yoshimura er a1,

2006/0293942 A1 2006/0294439 A1

12/2006 Chaddha et a1. 12/2006 Rolia etal.

7,421,648 7,422,374 7,483,841 7,516,439 7,546,575

9/2008 Davis 9/2008 Pitwon 1/2009 Jin etal.

7,302,674 B1 7,318,216 B2 7,337,429 B1

B1 B2 B1 B2 B1

11/2007 Gladleux etal. 1/2008 Drab

/

1

6/2009 Dlllman eta1~

7,565,643 B1

7/2009 Sweet et a1. ................ .. 717/121

2007/011g433 A1

5/2007 Bess

3,2231%; 5% , r Egg/(7)2; 5%

13/5883 iwtltdamrillzin eta1~ O ewe ~ ‘£818 gryssoltet a1~M~~1~ ~~~~~ ~~5~1~~ 705/263

2007/0124231 A1 2007/0143735 A1 2007/0162170 A1

5/2007 Clemm Ristock etal. etal. 7/2007 Nakamura

2007/0174810 A1

7/2007 Hockenberry etal.

'

Bailey etal. Kuesteretal. Zhang etal. Luietal. Hite etal.

6/2007

7,752,606 B2

7/2010 Se ea me

7’774’742 B2

8/2010 Givatieet a1

2007/0198558 A1

8/2007 Chen

7’774’743 B1

8/2010 smfchez em‘

2007/0220479 A1

9/2007 Hughes

7,778,866 B2

eoet

1/2007 1/2007 1/2007 4/2007 4/2007

.11

2007/0006122 2007/0006161 2007/0022404 2007/0083813 2007/0094256

4/2009 Robinson

A1 A1 A1 A1 A1

/

2007/0240154 A1

10/2007 Gerzymisch et a1.

7,810,067 B2 7,823,120 B2 7,849,438 B1

10/2010 Kaelicke et a1‘ 10/2010 Kazakov etal. 12/2010 Hemmatetal,

2007/0288107 A1 2008/0034347 A1 2008/0046859 A1

12/2007 FernandeZ-Ivern et a1. 2/2008 Vetal. 2/2008 Velarde etal.

7,853,556 7,865,875 7,908,582 7,913,222 7,926,029 7,987,110

12/2010 1/2011 3/2011 3/2011 4/2011 7/2011

Swaminathan etal. Hockenberryet a1. Pep_in_etal. ogllvle etal $t9yeneta1~ Cases eta1~

2008/0059450 2008/0082956 2008/0082959 2008/0141242 2008/0155508 2008/0178145

52111‘? {31

2008/0209417 A1*

B2 B2 B2 B2 B1 B2

8/2010 Hughes

24383;? g; ,

,

“136

~

A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1

3/2008 4/2008 4/2008 6/2008 6/2008 7/2008

Joseph etal. Guraetal. Fowler Shapiro Sarkaretal. Lindley

8/2008 Jakobson .................... .. 718/100

2008/0255696 A1

10/2008

3/2002 weller 3/2002 Green etal.

2008/0256390 A1 2008/0256507 A1 Zoos/0256529 A1

10/2008 chaar 10/2008 chaar 10/2008 Ch

2001/0037494 A1

11/2001 Levien etal.

2002/0029272 A1 2002/0038449 A1

Ch

w

2002/0046157 A1

4/2002 Solomon

2008/0282219 A1

11/2008 sejtélllraraman etal

2002/0069079 A1

6/2002

2002/0095650 A1

7/2002 Green etal.

Zoos/0288269 A1

11/2008 Hérwlg

2002/0103731 A1

8/2002 Barnard etal. ............... .. 705/34

2009/0043622 A1

2/2009 Flnlayson

2009/0043631 A1 2009/0055237 A1

2/2009 Flnlayson et a1. 2/2009 Henry eral.

Vega

.

2002/0104067 A1 2002/0156668 A1

8/2002 Green et a1‘ 10/2002 Morrow etal.

2002/0184071 A1

12/2002 Bicknelletal. ................. .. 705/9

2009/0055795 A1

2003/0055659 2003/0093477 2003/0097650 2003/0101089 2003/0106039 2003/0158760 2003/0192029 2003/0221184

A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1

3/2003 5/2003 5/2003 5/2003 6/2003 8/2003 10/2003 11/2003

2004/0010772 A1 2004/0015870 A1

1/2004 1/2004

2004/0030696 A1 2004/0044617 A1 2004/0064805 A1

2/2004 Lechner 3/2004 Lu 4/2004 spmgo et a1‘

2004/0073886 A1

4/2004 Irani

2004/00935g4 A1 2004/0143811 A1

5/2004 Le 7/2004 Kaelicke etal.

2009/0100406 2009/0125875 2009/0204471 2009/0210282 2009/0300577 2009/0300586 2010/0017252 20l0/0017782 2010/0017783 2010/0023918 2010/0023919 2010/0023920 2010/0023921 2010/0031090 2010/0031226

9/2004 Kataoka ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,, 705/10

2010/0031234 A1

2004/0186765 A1

Alling Daimon Bahrsetal. Chappeletal ROSIIOW eta1~ Kannenberg Hughes Gunjal etal. McKenna etal. Arbouzov etal.

A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1

2004/0229199 A1

11/2004 Ashley etal.

2010/0162200 A1

2004/0255265 A1 2004/0268296 A1

12/2004 Brown etal. 12/2004 Kayam etal.

2010/0269087 A1 2012/0124559 A1

2/2009 Finlayson

4/2009 5/2009 8/2009 8/2009 12/2009 12/2009 1/2010 V2010 1/2010 1/2010 1/2010 1/2010 1/2010 2/2010 2/2010

Green?eld etal. Schmitteretal. Elenbaasetal. Elenbaasetal. Bernardinietal. Bernardinietal. chaar etal. Chm et a1‘ . . Brlnlnstoolet a1. . . Bernardlnlet a1. Chaaretal. chaar etal. Chaar 61-3-1. Bernardlnlet a1. Chaar eta1~

2/2010 chaar etal.

6/2010 Karniyarna etal. 10/2010 Kabra 5/2012 Konelur

'

US 8,448,129 B2 Page 3 OTHER PUBLICATIONS Lucia A., et al., “Assessing the Maintenance Processes ofa Software

Organization: An Empirical Analysis of a Large Industrial Project,” Journal of Systems and Software 2003; 65(2): 87-103. De Lucia, A., et al., “Early Effort Estimation of Massive Maintenance Processes,” Software Maintenance, 2002. Proceedings. International Conference on, pp. 234-237.

U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,315 (END920080062US1)iEXaminer’s Answer Mailed Mar. 27, 2012.

US. Patent Application No. 12/ 129,438 (END920080067US1)i Requirement for Information Under 37 CFR 1.105 Mailed Apr. 12, 2012.

US. Appl. No. 12/173,175 (END920080059US1)iNon-Final

U.S. Appl. No. 12/173,175, Application Speci?cation, Jul. 15,2008. Brykczynski, B., “A Survey of Software Inspection Checklists,” ACM, Jan. 1999, pp. 82-89. Keil et al., “The In?uence of Checklists and Roles on Software

Practitioner Risk Perception and Decision-Making,” IEEE, 2006, pp. 1-12.

Objectbuilders, Inc., “Software Factory Assembly Methodology and

Training Pathways,” Copyright 2006, www.objectbuilders.com/ downloads/SFiMethodologyiWPpdf. Department of Commerce, “IT Architecture Capability Maturity Model,” May 2003, 15 Pgs, http://ocio.os.doc.gov/groups/public/

@doc/@os/@ocio/@oitpp/documents/content/prod01i002340. pdf.

16, 2012.

Slaughter et al., “Aligning Software Processes With Strategy,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 891-918, 2006. Musat et al., “Value Stream Mapping Integration in Software Product Lines,” ACM Profes, pp. 110-111, 2010. Rosenmuller et al., “Tailoring Dynamic Software Product Lines,” ACM GPCE, pp. 3-12, 2011. Yoshida et al., “The Integrated Software Product Line Model,” IEEE

Coqueiro et al, “Developing Portlets Using Eclipse and Websphere

pp. 538-543, 2004.

Portlet Factory,” IBM, Jun. 5, 2006.

Amin et al., “A Proposed Reusability Attribute Model for Aspect Oriented Software Product Line Components,” IEEE, pp. 1138 1 141, 2010.

Of?ce Action Mailed May 4, 2012.

US. Appl. No. 12/178,185 (END920080063US1)iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed May 8, 2012.

US. Appl. No. 12/183,566 (END920080068US1)iNotice of Allowance Mailed May 9, 2012. US. Appl. No. 11/735,099iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Apr.

Kramer, “IBM Websphere Portlet Factory 5.11.3,” Patricia Seybold Group, Mar. 2006. IBM, “Service-Oriented Web Application Development With IBM Websphere Portlet Factory Software,” Mar. 2006. US. Appl. No. 11/836,937iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Apr. 18, 2012. US. Appl. No. 11/735,070iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Apr. 26, 2012. US. Appl. No. 11/735,086iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed May 18, 2012. US. Appl. No. 11/844,031-Final Of?ce Action Mailed May 25, 2012.

US. Appl. No. 11/735,275iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Jun. 5, 2012.

IBM, “Best Practices for Service-Oriented Model Development With IBM Websphere Portlet Factory Software,” Mar. 2006, pp. 1-16. U.S. Appl. No. 12/173,175, Non-Final Of?ce Action Aug. 3, 2011. Dominguez et al., “Quality in Development Process for Software Factories According to ISO 15504”, Jun. 2006, CLEI Electronic Journal, vol. 9, No. 1, Paper 3. US. Appl. No. 12/177,3 15, Final Of?ceAction, Mailed Nov. 2, 20 1 1. US. Appl. No. 12/183,566, Non-Final Of?ce Action, Mailed Nov. 9,

US. Appl. No. 11/735,275iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/735,168iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/735,152iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/735,152iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Apr. 29, 201 1. US. Appl. No. 11/735,152iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Feb. 1 5, 20 12. US. Appl. No. 11/735,152iFinal Of?ce Action Mailed Sep. 21, 201 1.

US. Appl. No. 11/735,120iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/735,120iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Sep. 29, 2010. US. Appl. No. 11/735,120iNotice of Allowance Mailed Feb. 1, 201 1.

US. Appl. No. 11/735,056iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/735,056iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Dec. 23, 2010. US. Appl. No. 11/735,056iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Jun. 9, 201 1.

US. Appl. No. 11/735,056iNotice of Allowance Mailed Dec. 1,

201 1.

201 1.

US. Appl. No. 12/177,645, Notice of Allowance, Mailed Nov. 2,

US. Appl. No. US. Appl. No. US. Appl. No. US. Appl. No. US. Appl. No.

201 1.

US. Appl. No. 12/ 129,438, Request for Information Under Rule 105, Mailed Oct. 18,2011.

“IBM Web Experience Factory (Formerly Websphere Portlet Fac tory)” Web Site, Retrieved From [URL:http://www-01.ibm.com/ software/genservers/webeXperiencefactory/] on Oct. 3, 2011. J. Zhou et al., “Modeling Network Intrusion Detection Alerts for Correlation,” ACM Transactions on Information and System Secu

rity, vol. 10, No. 1, Article 4, Feb. 2007, pp. 1-31.

S. Degwekar et al., “Event-Triggered Data and Knowledge Sharing Among Collaborating Goverment Organizations,” ACM Interna tional Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 228: Proceedings of the 8th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference, Philadelphia, PA, May 20-23, 2007, pp. 102-111. U.S. Appl. No. 12/173,388iProsecution History. US. Appl. No. 12/178,092iSpeci?cation. U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,315iProsecution History. US. Appl. No. 12/178,185iSpeci?cation. U.S. Appl. No. 12/183,504iSpeci?cation. U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,645iProsecution History. US. Appl. No. 12/129,304iSpeci?cation. U.S. Appl. No. 12/129,43 8iSpeci?cation. U.S. Appl. No. 12/183,566iSpeci?cation. J. Green?eld et al., “Software Factories Assembling Applications With Patterns, Models, Frameworks and Tools”, Oct. 2003, ACM 1-58113-751-06/03/0010.

11/735,070iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. 11/735,086iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. 11/735,099iSpeci?cation ?led Apr. 13, 2007. 11/835,200iSpeci?cation ?led Aug. 7, 2007. 11/835,200iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed May

26, 201 1. US. Appl. No. 11/835,200iNotice of Allowance Mailed Nov. 28, 201 1.

US. Appl. No. 11/836,937iSpeci?cation ?led Aug. 10, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/844,031iSpeci?cation ?led Aug. 23, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/844,031iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Nov. 28, 201 1.

US. Appl. No. 11/847,952iSpeci?cation ?led Aug. 30, 2007. US. Appl. No. 11/847,952iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Aug. 30, 201 1. US. Appl. No. 11/847,952iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Mar. 5, 2012.

US. Appl. No. 12/178,092, Jarir K. Chaar et al., (END920080069US1)iNon-Final Of?ce Action Mailed Jun. 20, 2012.

US. Appl. No. 12/183,504, Jarir K. Chaar et al., (END920080064US1)iNotice of Allowance Mailed Aug. 8, 2012. Regio, M. And Green?eld, J ., “Designing and Implementing a Soft ware Factory,” MSDN, Jan. 2006, 10 Pgs.

Green?eld, J., “Software Factories: Assembling Applications With Patterns, Models, Frameworks, and Tools,” MSDN, Nov. 2004, 15

Pgs.

US 8,448,129 B2 Page 4 US. Appl. No. 11/735,152iNotice of Allowance Mailed Jun. 15,

US. Appl. No. 11/735,086iFinal Of?ce Action Mailed Oct. 22,

2012.

2012.

Wells, D., et al., “Taming Cyber Incognito Tools for Surveying Dynamic/Recon?gurable Software Landscapes ”, Working Confer

US. Appl. No. 12/129,304 (END920080066US1)iFinal Of?ce

ence on Complex and Dynamic Systems Architectures, Brisbane,

LenZ, G., and Wienands, C., “Practical Software Factories in .Net”, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, USA, 2006, pp. 1-230. U.S. Appl. No. 12/173,175 (END920080059US1)iNotice of

Australia, Dec. 2001, pp. 13-24, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/ GetTRDoc?AD:ADA419185.

Mitritek Systems, Inc., “Building Quality Intelligent Transportation Systems Through Systems Engineering ”, Apr. 2002, pp. 1-71, http:// ntl.bts. gov/j podocs/reptsite/ 1 3620 .htrnl. U.S. Appl. No. 11/847,952iFinal Of?ce Action Mailed Sep. 4,

Action Mailed Nov. 16, 2012.

Allowance Mailed Nov. 29, 2012. Amaral, J ., et al., “Analyzing Supply Chains at HP Using Spreadsheet

2012.

Models,” Interfaces, Jul/Aug. 2008, vol. 38, No.4, pp. 228-240. U.S. Appl. No. 12/129,438 (END920080067US1)iNon-Final

US. Appl. No. 11/735,070iFinal Of?ce Action Mailed Sep. 19,

Of?ce Action Mailed Dec. 19, 2012.

2012.

Forsberg et al., “Managing Outsourcing of Software Development”,

US. Appl. No. 12/178,185 (END920080063US1)iNotice of

Stockholm University/Royal Institute of Technology, Dept. of Com puter and Systems Sciences, Master Thesis, Spring 2001, pp. 1-54.

Allowance Mailed Oct. 2, 2012. US. Appl. No. 11/735,168iFinal Of?ce Action Mailed Oct. 18, 2012.

* cited by examiner

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

@NT

Sheet 1 or 25

MQE M m zE

US 8,448,129 B2

@NT/

08§M,N9.QIF My@253 a $5 vMaggi 1\2 a:E;g.o9

g52 52

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 2 0f 25

US 8,448,129 B2

f 204 RECEIVE INPUT, AT A SOFTWARE FACTORY, FROM CLIENT BUSINESS GOVERNANCE BOARD DESCRIBING SOFTWARE NEEDS OF ENTERPRISE CLIENT

CREATE A PROJECT SOFTWARE PROPOSAL DEFINITION FOR A SOFTWARE I206 PROJECT THAT MEETS THE SOFTWARE NEEDS OF THE ENTERPRISE CLIENT

INDUCT/REINDUCT THE SOFTWARE PROJECT FOR EVALUATION, QUALIFICATION, SCORING AND CATEGORIZATION

PARSE SOFTWARE PROJECT INTO MAJOR FUNCTIONAL AREAS

r205

r212

OBTAIN WORK PACKETS NEEDED FOR ALL FUNCTIONAL AREAS OF THE SOFTWARE PROJECT SEND OBTAINED WORK PACKETS TO ASSEMBLY LINE TO CREATE DELIVERABLE r216 CUSTOM SOFTWARE THAT MEETS THE CRITERIA SET FOR THE SOFTWARE PROJECT TEST CUSTOM SOFTWARE

f 215

DELIVER CUSTOM SOFTWARE f 220

SUPPORT CUSTOM SOFTWARE / 222

END

FIG. 2

224

US. Patent

502

May 21, 2013

WORK PACKET

IS DEFINED

Sheet 3 or 25

US 8,448,129 B2

_______ __?

:

516

l

I I 504

506

WORK PACKET

ASSEMBLY LINE

I

I

ISASSEMBLED

: I I

woRK PACKET IS ARCHIVED

ASSET REPOSITORY

505

WORK PACKET IS DISTRIBUTED

510

WORK PACKET IS PULLED FOR EXECUTION

FIG. 5

520x WORK PACKET

jaw MESSAGE

ASSET MANAGER

\

\

512

514

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 4 or 25

GOVERNANCE ARTIFACTS

410J BUSINESS CONTEXTUAL ARTIFACTS

404

412) 414/

/

ARCHITECTURAL ARTIFACTS TEST

416 /

ARTIFACTS

415 f

ARTIFACTS

'

PROJECT

GOVERNANCE

420/

METRICS

/

FACTORY METRICS

f

SYSTEM METRICS

422

424

V

METRICS

7

406

FIG. 4

US 8,448,129 B2

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 5 or 25

US 8,448,129 B2

( START V502 CREATE PACKET DEFINITIONS NEEDED FOR f 504 WORK PACKETS USED IN A DELIVERABLE

CALL TEMPLATE NEEDED BY TEMPLATE FOR PACKET DEFINITIONS

K 506

CALL ARTIFACTS NEEDED BY TEMPLATE FOR PACKET DEFINITIONS

f 508

CALL METRICS NEEDED BY TEMPLATE FOR PACKET DEFINITIONS

1-510

ASSEMBLE WORK PACKETS USING CALLED 1-512 TEMPLATE, ARTIFACTS AND METRICS

FIG. 5

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 6 or 25

US 8,448,129 B2

602

/ NAME "SECURITY

WORK PACKET"

600

FUNCTION SECURITY

PROPRIETARY FOR CLIENT?

POINTER Addressl

ORIGINAL DELIVERABLE

COMPONENT NAMEIS)

YES

Server

"Standard 100"

(Toyota)

Password manager

"Integration 101"

604

/ CODE

FIG. 6A

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 7 or 25

US 8,448,129 B2

SI@Q

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 8 or 25

@702 DEFINE HEADER COMPONENTS

FOR ASSET IE.G., WORK PACKET) HEADER

f704

I

POPULATE HEADER [706 COMPONENTS

ARCHIVE WORK PACKET WITH POINTERS [708 TO WORK PACKET HEADER ENTRIES

RETRIEVE WORK PACKET IN ACCORDANCE f71 O

WITH REQUISITE HEADER COMPONENTS 71 2 END

FIG. 7

US 8,448,129 B2

US. Patent

May21,2013

Sheet90f25

( START )’

US 8,448,129 B2

802

DETERMINE CHOKE-POINTS IN

I 504

SOFTWARE FACTORY TOR TIRsT PROJECT

POPULATE CHECKLIST WITH [806 DETERMINED CHOKE-POINTS

IN RESPONSE TO RECEIPT OF NEW [55025 WORK ORDER, CHECK CHECKLIST

SEND "NOT READY" MESSAGE T0

516

CONFIGURE

/

SOFTWARE FACTORY

SOFTWARE FACTORY OPERATIONS

BASED ON PRIOR PROJECT

END

FIG. 8

514

I512

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 10 or 25

US 8,448,129 B2

FACTORY PROIEOI

CANDIDATE PROJECT

OUT

SERVICE

FACTORY

SERVICE

INDUCTION ?g

964

REPOSITORY SCORECARD

/ 92&

sERvIcE 91th DEFINITION

TEMPLATE

9&2

SCORING&

Fr____________11l

CLASSIFICATION

SERVICE

.. 3RD PARTY {:

%

ASSESSMENT

I IOONIRAOIORI I . l l 9201».L PROVIDER I.

H 3RD PARTY

/

\

CHECKLISTS

I’! 3I§€QBIRFETDY \I

922T? SERWCE lI""--'4\ CONSENT | II PROVIDER I:

Ii____________j:

I: vENOOR H

924% PRODUCT I:

{I SUPPORT II

IIIIIII'J

QLQ

REVIEW IsAR)

_

,/ \ \

. ------------_E I

REMEDIATION

I

II

\\ i5. /

‘~—"

/

TOO

F169

$2

905

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

CHECKLIST

Sheet 11 0125

CHECKLIST

\ \ 908A \\

-

-

-

+ \ :90555 i

\

\\

l

\\

/

:

\\ \\ :I

// /

CHECKLIST

/

i

\

US 8,448,129 B2

//

PRE-QUALIFYING QUESTIONS \ 1002

FIG.1OA

//

/

/ \ / 905M

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 12 or 25

US 8,448,129 B2

1007A

/ Leading indicator

PK Leading indicator_|D FKI Leading |ndicator_Desc Evaluation Rule_|D

Check|ist_Category PK Check|ist_Category_lD

I100“

Checklist_Category_Description 10055

/

10075

Question Checklist

PK Question»

PK Check|ist_|D .

Checkhstjesc FKI Checkiist_Category_|D FKZ Parent_Check|ist_|D Template _|D \

.. FKI

Questuon

CheckHSUD

%

PK Evaluation Rule_|D '

Evaluation Ru|e_Desc

REMEDY

PK Answer_|D FKI AnsweLHag FK2 Question_|D Evaluation RUIQJD

1004

Evauation Rule

Answer '

1005C

/

\

10050

FIG. 105

PK Remedy_lD FKI Remedy_Desc Evaluation Ru|e_|D

\

10076

US. Patent

May 21, 2013

Sheet 16 or 25

START

US 8,448,129 B2

1014

PRESENT INITIAL CHECKLIST r1016 BASED ON PROJECT CATEGORY

RECEIVE ANSWERS TO r1015

QUESTIONS IN CHECKLIST

DO RECEIVED ANSWERS PROMPT A PRESENTATION OF A NEW CHECKLIST?

USING PREVIOUSLY STORED QUESTIONS, PRESENT fIOZZ A DYNAMICALLY GENERATED NEW CHECKLIST THAT IS BASED ON RECEIVED ANSWERS

EVALUATE ANSWERS TO NEW CHECKLIST [1024 BASED ON CONTEXTUAL REFERENCE AND NATURE OF THE QUESTIONING OBJECTIVES

FIG. IOE