Email Response Tracking via User Routine Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Users face difficulties in tracking which emails require responses, distinguishing between partially and fully satisfied requests, and managing email responses efficiently, leading to wasted time and resources due to manual flagging and lack of distinction in conventional technologies.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a system that analyzes and tracks emails using user context, routine models, and message attributes to provide automatic notifications, reducing the need for manual flagging and improving response management by distinguishing between response statuses.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If users manually flag emails to track which need responses, then email tracking capability is improved, but user time and effort are wasted due to continuous manual flagging and unflagging

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveemail tracking accuracyVSAvoiduser time for manual flagging

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically detects and flags emails that require responses by analyzing email content, sender relationships, and user behavior patterns, eliminating the need for users to manually flag emails. The system serves itself by autonomously identifying and managing emails needing attention.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors user interactions with emails and adjusts flagging decisions based on feedback from user responses, reading patterns, and communication history, improving tracking accuracy over time without additional user effort.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Ease of operation

If users rely on opened/unopened status to determine emails needing responses, then simplicity is maintained, but accuracy deteriorates because opened emails may not require action

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveemail status determinationVSAvoidresponse requirement detection

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different analysis methods to different emails based on their characteristics, such as analyzing the presence of call-to-action phrases, deadline mentions, or request indicators in the email content, rather than using a uniform approach for all emails.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces the simple mechanical opened/unopened status indicator with an intelligent analysis system that uses natural language processing and machine learning to determine whether an email requires a response, based on content analysis and contextual understanding.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Difficulty of detecting and measuring

If users search through and read emails to discover which need responses, then comprehensive detection is improved, but user efficiency and computing resources are reduced

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveemail response requirement detectionVSAvoiduser efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

Difficulty of detecting and measuringVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of email content, extracting key features and determining response requirements before the user needs to review the emails, so that only relevant emails are presented to the user for attention.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system extracts and analyzes specific features from email content such as action verbs, deadline indicators, and request phrases to automatically determine which emails require responses, eliminating the need for users to read entire emails to identify action items.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Reliability

If conventional flagging systems are used, then basic tracking is achieved, but distinction between partially and fully satisfied requests is lost

Engineering Contradiction:

Improverequest satisfaction trackingVSAvoidresponse status distinction

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the response status into multiple levels including not started, partially satisfied, and fully satisfied, allowing users to track the degree of completion for each email request rather than treating all emails as binary flagged/unflagged states.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system allows for partial satisfaction of email requests by detecting when some but not all requirements of an email have been met, enabling nuanced tracking of response completion status rather than requiring complete action before marking as satisfied.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS11546283B2Notifications based on user interactions with emails

Publication Date: 2023.01.03 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC

AI summary

In some implementations, a method includes extracting message attributes of an email associated with a user from the email. User interaction data is identified that is generated by the user in association with display of the email based on sensor data from one or more sensors. It is determined that the user interaction data corresponds to a routine of the user based on a routine-related aspect generated from a user routine model representing the routine. A time to present a notification of the email is determined based on the routine. The notification is provided to the user on a user device based on the determined time to present the notification.