Telecommunications Provider Matching System for Credit-Based Routing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

As telecommunications services expand, there is a growing need for effective tools to match customer creditworthiness with service providers' credit requirements, as existing systems lack efficient methods to identify and redirect customers to alternative providers that better suit their financial conditions.

Innovation Solution

A system and method that involves a database and processor to select alternative telecommunications service providers based on a buyer's creditworthiness, using user information, preference indicators, and prior use data to compare and rank service plans, and adjust relative credit difficulty ratings of providers.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a customer applies for telecommunications service with a provider, then the customer can access the service, but the customer may be rejected if they do not meet the provider's credit requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveservice accessibilityVSAvoidcredit requirement compliance
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary system that acts as a mediator between customers and service providers. This system automatically evaluates customer creditworthiness, compares it against provider requirements, and redirects eligible customers to appropriate providers. The intermediary resolves the contradiction by handling credit assessment separately, allowing customers to access services from providers whose requirements they meet without requiring them to manually apply and be rejected by multiple providers.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where credit evaluation results are communicated back to both customers and providers. The system learns from provider responses (acceptance or rejection) and uses this feedback to improve future matching accuracy. This feedback loop enables the system to adapt to changing credit requirements and customer profiles, resolving the contradiction by continuously optimizing the match between customer creditworthiness and provider requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Adaptability or versatility

If customers manually apply to multiple providers to find suitable service, then they can find a matching provider, but the process consumes significant time and resources

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprovider matching capabilityVSAvoidservice acquisition time
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-evaluating customer creditworthiness and pre-comparing it against multiple provider requirements before the customer actually applies for service. This preliminary matching process identifies suitable providers in advance, eliminating the need for customers to manually apply to multiple providers and wait for responses. The contradiction is resolved by performing the time-consuming evaluation and matching work beforehand, so customers can quickly access service from a pre-identified suitable provider.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables self-service by automatically performing the entire provider selection process without requiring customer intervention. The system autonomously evaluates customer profiles, compares them against provider requirements, and directs customers to appropriate providers. This resolves the contradiction by automating what would otherwise be a time-consuming manual process, maintaining comprehensive provider matching capability while reducing customer time investment to minimal system interaction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Reliability

If service providers maintain high credit requirements, then they can ensure service quality and reduce risk, but they exclude potentially valuable customers with lower credit scores

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveservice provider risk managementVSAvoidcustomer base diversity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies local quality by matching different credit requirement levels to different customer segments. Rather than all providers using uniform high credit thresholds, the system enables each provider to maintain their specific credit requirements while automatically directing appropriate customer segments to them. Customers with lower credit scores are redirected to providers with corresponding lower thresholds, ensuring each provider receives customers matching their local quality standards. This resolves the contradiction by allowing providers to maintain their risk management standards while expanding overall customer base diversity through automated segmentation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces dynamics by enabling flexible, adaptive matching between customer credit profiles and provider requirements. Rather than static, fixed provider customer pools, the system dynamically routes customers to providers based on real-time credit evaluation results. This allows providers to maintain their credit standards while the system adapts to direct appropriate customer segments to appropriate providers, resolving the contradiction between maintaining high standards and expanding customer diversity through dynamic, rather than static, allocation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Measurement precision

If the system evaluates creditworthiness for every service application, then accurate matching is achieved, but the processing complexity and computational resources increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecredit evaluation accuracyVSAvoidsystem processing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by performing credit evaluation only to the extent necessary for accurate matching. Rather than re-evaluating all credit factors for every application, the system uses pre-established credit profiles and compares them against provider requirements. This maintains measurement precision by evaluating the necessary credit aspects while avoiding excessive processing of redundant information, resolving the contradiction between accurate evaluation and processing complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary credit evaluation and profile establishment before specific service applications. By pre-processing customer credit information and storing it in accessible formats, the system avoids repeating full credit evaluations for each application. This maintains measurement precision by having accurate credit data ready for comparison while significantly reducing the processing complexity and computational resources required at the time of service application, resolving the contradiction between accurate matching and system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS8175966B2System and method for identifying an alternative provider of telecommunications services
Publication Date: 2012.05.08 WALMART APOLLO LLC
  • US8175966B2 patent drawing
  • US8175966B2 patent drawing
  • US8175966B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for selecting a service provider includes receiving a selection of a provider of telecommunications services, the selection being associated with a buyer. The method further includes determining that the buyer does not meet credit requirements of the provider and selecting at least one of a plurality of alternative providers of telecommunications services in response to determining that the buyer does not meet the credit requirements of the provider.