Jul 31, 2008 - A- Hamld, Columbus, OH (Us); Ramaâ ... 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