Modular Software Architecture for Enterprise Project Management

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Large and complex enterprise software systems require a scalable and cost-effective architecture that efficiently manages internal projects, including network scheduling, resource staffing, cost estimation, time confirmation, and progress monitoring, but existing solutions lack a cohesive and modular design for effective implementation.

Innovation Solution

A software architecture design featuring multiple process components interacting through service interfaces, including a Costing component for project cost estimates, an Accounting component for business transactions, and a Time and Labor Management component for employee working times and absences, allowing for scalable deployment across different hardware platforms and enabling end-to-end process management.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If enterprise software systems are designed to be large and complex to handle multiple functions (network scheduling, resource staffing, cost estimation, time confirmation, progress monitoring), then the system can provide comprehensive project management capabilities, but the architecture becomes difficult to implement, maintain, and scale

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomprehensive project management capabilitiesVSAvoidsoftware architecture complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the enterprise software system into distinct process components (Project Processing, Costing, Accounting, Time and Labor Management) that can be independently developed, deployed, and maintained. Each component handles specific project management functions, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining comprehensive capabilities through modular architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The process components are designed with universal service interfaces that enable them to work together in multiple configurations. The same core components can serve different project management needs (network scheduling, resource staffing, cost estimation, etc.) through standardized interaction protocols, avoiding the need for separate specialized systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If the software system is designed as a monolithic architecture to ensure integrated functionality, then all components work together seamlessly, but the system becomes costly to implement and difficult to scale across different hardware platforms

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveintegrated functionalityVSAvoidimplementation cost and scalability
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The system is segmented into independently deployable process components that can be manufactured and implemented separately on different hardware platforms. This reduces implementation costs by allowing selective deployment and avoids the high costs associated with monolithic system installation while maintaining integrated functionality through service interfaces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a new architectural dimension by separating process components from their deployment environments. Components can be deployed across multiple hardware platforms and geographical locations without losing functional integration, as the service interfaces maintain the logical connections between distributed components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Adaptability or versatility

If process components are deployed on separate hardware platforms to improve scalability, then the system can be scaled independently, but the interaction between components becomes more complex to manage

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovescalabilityVSAvoidcomponent interaction complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Service interfaces are designed with universal protocols that work across all process components regardless of their deployment location. This standardization simplifies component interaction by providing consistent communication rules, making it easier to manage distributed systems while maintaining full scalability across different hardware platforms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS8321831B2Architectural design for internal projects application software
Publication Date: 2012.11.27 SAP SE
  • US8321831B2 patent drawing
  • US8321831B2 patent drawing
  • US8321831B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer program products, for implementing a software architecture design for a software application implementing an internal projects application useful for planning and executing internal projects and measures, including network scheduling, resource staffing, cost estimation and management, time confirmation, and progress monitoring. The application is structured as multiple process components interacting with each other through service interfaces, and multiple service interface operations, each being implemented for a respective process component. The process components include a Costing process component that maintains project cost estimates; an Accounting process component that records relevant business transactions; a Project Processing process component that structures, plans and executes simple, short-term measures and complex projects; and a Time and Labor Management process component that supports the definition of employees' planned working times as well as the recording of the actual working times and absences and their evaluation.