Service Candidate Identification via Eligibility Matrix

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current service-oriented development models lack systematic and quantitative techniques for identifying suitable service candidates from business process functions, relying on manual methods and lacking metric evaluation, which can lead to cost-intensive iterations and suboptimal system quality.

Innovation Solution

An algorithmic and programmatic approach that utilizes conceptual business process models to evaluate service candidates by calculating a total service eligibility value based on indicators such as reusability, data cohesion, stakeholder integration, and event-oriented relevance, using a Service Identification and Evaluation Matrix (SIEM) to filter and prioritize potential service functions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If manual methods are used to identify service candidates, then flexibility and adaptability are maintained, but productivity is low and manufacturing precision is poor

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveservice candidate identification efficiencyVSAvoidalgorithmic approach complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables automated self-evaluation of business process functions against service eligibility criteria. The algorithmic approach allows the system to automatically identify, evaluate, and rank service candidates without requiring manual analyst intervention for each evaluation, thereby significantly improving productivity while managing complexity through standardized automated processes

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transforms the service candidate identification process from a qualitative manual assessment to a quantitative automated evaluation by introducing specific parameters and metrics (reusability, data cohesion, stakeholder integration, event-oriented relevance). These parameter changes enable systematic comparison and automated decision-making, improving both productivity and evaluation precision

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

2Measurement precision

If manual identification methods are used, then ease of operation is maintained, but manufacturing precision and measurement precision are insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveservice eligibility evaluation accuracyVSAvoidservice candidate identification simplicity

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical evaluation processes with an automated algorithmic system that calculates service eligibility scores based on objective criteria. This substitution enables precise measurement of service candidate eligibility through quantitative metrics (reusability, data cohesion, stakeholder integration, event-oriented relevance) while maintaining operational simplicity through automated execution of the evaluation algorithm

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary algorithmic layer that mediates between business process functions and service candidate identification. This intermediary automatically applies evaluation criteria and calculates eligibility scores, providing measurement precision without requiring users to manually assess each criterion, thus maintaining ease of operation while improving accuracy

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Manufacturing precision

If automated algorithmic approaches are implemented, then productivity and measurement precision improve, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveservice candidate selection accuracyVSAvoidsystem architecture complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the service candidate identification process into distinct evaluatable dimensions (reusability, data cohesion, stakeholder integration, event-oriented relevance). Each dimension is assessed independently using specific metrics, allowing the complex evaluation to be broken down into manageable components that can be systematically processed by the algorithm, thereby improving selection accuracy while managing system complexity through structured segmentation

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS8359224B2Systems and/or methods for identifying service candidates based on service identification indicators and associated algorithms

Publication Date: 2013.01.22 SAG ARIS GMBH

AI summary

Certain example embodiments relate to algorithmic and/or programmatic approaches to identifying service candidates from among business process functions. In certain example embodiments, a method of analyzing functions of a business process model for possible exposure as service capabilities in a service-oriented business process system (SO-BPS) is provided. A business process model defined by a plurality of objects is received, with each said object having metadata attributes associated therewith. Business process analysis intelligence is obtained at design time for each said object. Process performance intelligence at run time is obtained for each said object. Indicators corresponding to the design time and run time gathered intelligence are stored together with the metadata attributes for the corresponding object. Via at least one processor of the SO-BPS, an overall service candidate algorithm is applied to the stored indicators to arrive at a total service eligibility value for each process function in the model.