Secure Approval Workflow System for Project Plans
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current systems for managing and approving project proposals face challenges in securing communication of sensitive information and efficiently coordinating interactions among diverse stakeholders with varying security levels and geographical locations, leading to difficulties in timely and secure review and implementation.
Innovation Solution
A method and system for automatic and secured processing of requests, which involves encoding identifiers and intelligible data, determining security levels, identifying authorized personnel, calculating approval scores, and updating requests based on predetermined thresholds, while facilitating dynamic workflow coordination through a communication, classification, and management module.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If multiple reviewers from different departments and geographical areas are involved in proposal evaluation, then the evaluation quality and comprehensiveness are improved, but the coordination complexity and communication security requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the proposal evaluation process into distinct phases (submission, review, approval, implementation) and assigns different reviewers to different phases based on their expertise and security clearances. This segmentation allows multiple reviewers to contribute without requiring all reviewers to coordinate simultaneously, reducing coordination complexity while maintaining evaluation quality.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces a centralized proposal management system that acts as an intermediary between reviewers, the proposer, and implementers. This system automatically manages reviewer assignments, tracks proposal status, controls information access based on security clearances, and coordinates communication, thereby reducing the coordination burden on individual reviewers while maintaining comprehensive evaluation.
2Reliability
If the number of reviewers and stakeholders involved in proposal management increases, then the diversity of perspectives and evaluation thoroughness are improved, but the timeliness and security of proposal review deteriorate
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary actions by pre-assigning reviewers based on their expertise and security clearances before the proposal review begins. The proposal management system proactively notifies reviewers of upcoming review assignments and prepares review materials in advance, enabling reviewers to begin their evaluation work immediately upon assignment without delays in coordination or access setup.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements periodic action through structured review cycles with defined timeframes for each evaluation phase. The system automatically tracks proposal status through different review stages, sends reminders to reviewers approaching deadline, and progresses proposals through the approval workflow in systematic intervals, ensuring timely completion while maintaining thorough evaluation by multiple reviewers.
3Productivity
If confidential business data is shared across multiple departments and external partners, then the collaboration efficiency is improved, but the security risk and access control complexity increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by implementing differential access control where different reviewers and stakeholders receive different levels of access to proposal data based on their specific roles, security clearances, and expertise. The proposal management system automatically applies appropriate security restrictions to each user, allowing maximum information sharing within security constraints, thereby maintaining collaboration efficiency while ensuring data security.
4Reliability
If a centralized system tracks all proposal parameters through multiple review stages, then the proposal management control is improved, but the system complexity and implementation burden increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements universality through a centralized proposal management system that performs multiple functions: tracking proposal parameters, managing reviewer assignments, controlling data access, monitoring review progress, and coordinating communication. This multi-functional system consolidates what would otherwise require multiple separate tools and processes, improving proposal management control while actually reducing overall system complexity by eliminating the need for multiple separate systems.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
The invention relates to a method for automatic and secured processing of a request (1) comprising the steps of: - receiving (100) an approval request (AR1) of a current project plan encoding an identifier and intelligible data; - identifying (200): • the identifier and determining related security data, • the intelligible data and determining, a required security level; - identifying computer device authorizers (300) regarding the identifier and the intelligible data; - generating (500) an approval notification (AN) and sending said approval notification to identified authorizer computer device (40); - calculating (550) an approval score based on a response message (MR1, MR2) to the approval notification (AN) sent to the identified authorizer computer device (40), - updating (600) the approval request (AR1) and sending an updated approval request (AR2) to the third-party computer device (30) if the approval score previously calculated is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold.