System and method for selecting a service provider

• US 20030182413A1
• Filed: 12/02/2002
• Published: 09/25/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 06/02/2000
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: River Dynamics Pty Limited
• Original Assignee: River Dynamics Pty Limited
• Inventors: Hudgeon, Douglas Robert, Allen, Matthew Robert
• Application Number:
  US10/308,519
• Publication Number:
  US 20030182413A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/223
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/06 Buying, selling or leasing transactions
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 12/14 Charging , metering or billing arrangements for data wireline or wireless communications
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 12/145 trading network capacity or selecting route based on tariff

Abstract

A preferred embodiment provides a selection system to facilitate the provision of services on a computer network to prospective service users. According to a first aspect of the invention provides a system for enabling the selection of a service provider from a plurality of service providers for the performance of a job, said system including, a database which is accessible by a service user via a network, the database including a plurality of records, each record being associated with a service provider, wherein each record includes a service provider profile including a plurality of comparable performance criteria indicative of the performance attributes of the service provider; interface means for receiving a job request comprising at least one desired performance criterion from said service user, and processor means for comparing the stored comparable performance criteria and the at least one desired performance criterion, and for extracting at least one preferred service provider from the database on the basis of said comparison. The invention also provides a method of enabling a service user to select a service provider from a plurality of service providers for the performance of a job, said method including the steps of: providing a database which is accessible by the service user via a network, storing in said database a plurality of records, each record being associated with a service provider, wherein each record includes a service provider profile including a plurality of comparable performance criteria indicative of the performance attributes of the service provider; receiving a job request comprising at least one desired performance criterion from said service user, comparing the plurality of stored performance criteria with the desired performance criterion, and automatically selecting at least one preferred service provider from the database on the basis of said comparison.

Claims

1. A system for enabling the selection of a service provider from a plurality of service providers for the performance of a job, said system including:

a database which is accessible by a service user via a network, the database including a plurality of records, each record being associated with a service provider, wherein each record includes a service provider profile including a plurality of comparable performance criteria indicative of the performance attributes of the service provider;

an interface for receiving a job request comprising at least one desired performance criterion from said service user, and

a processor for comparing the stored comparable performance criteria and the at least one desired performance criterion, and for extracting at least one preferred service provider from the database on the basis of said comparison.

2. A system as claimed in claim 1 in which the processor is arranged to extract a plurality of service providers from the database on the basis of said comparison, and to compile a list of the plurality of preferred service providers for distribution to the service user.

3. A system as claimed in claim 2 wherein said database is additionally accessible by said service providers via a network for enabling the service providers to update their associated performance profiles.

4. A system as claimed in claim 1 which includes prioritising means for allowing at least two desired performance criteria to be prioritised in accordance with user-selected priorities, and wherein said comparison is made in accordance with said prioritisation.

5. A system as claimed claim 1 which includes weighting means for weighting at least some of the comparable performance criteria according to their relative importance to the user, to enable said comparison to be made in accordance with said weightings.

6. A system as claimed in claim 1 wherein said database includes at least one historical rating field associated with each service provider for enabling a service user to rate at least one past job performed by the service provider.

7. A system as claimed in claim 1 wherein said at least one desired performance criterion and said comparable performance criteria are selected from a group including the following classes of criteria:

quality criteria, cost criteria and timeliness criteria.

8. A system as claimed in claim 7 wherein said quality criteria relate to the quality and extent of the resources drawn on by the service provider.

9. A system as claimed in claim 7 wherein said cost criteria relate to at least one of the following, namely the current cost structure of the service provider, the average cost of similar jobs performed by the service provider in the past, and discounts offered by the service provider.

10. A system as claimed in claim 7 wherein said timeliness criterion reflects the timeliness of at least one past job performed by the service provider.

11. A system according to claim 1 in which each service provider profile includes at least one qualifying criterion indicative of the ability of the service provider to perform the job, and wherein the job request includes at least one desired qualifying criterion.

12. A system as claimed in claim 11 in which said qualifying criteria relate to at least one of the following, namely the type of service, the area of operation of the service provider and the availability of the service provider.

13. A system as claimed in claim 1 wherein said interface is adapted to receive a selection confirmation from said service user identifying the service provider selected for the job.

14. A system as claimed in claim 1 wherein said system additionally includes generating means for generating and sending a job confirmation message to the service provider selected by the service user for the job.

15. A system as claimed in claim 1 wherein the job to be performed is an investigation.

25. A system as claimed in claim 5 in which said weighting means operates according to the formula

16. A method of enabling a service user to select a service provider from a plurality of service providers for the performance of a job, said method including:

providing a database which is accessible by the service user via a network,

storing in said database a plurality of records, each record being associated with a service provider, wherein each record includes a service provider profile including a plurality of comparable performance criteria indicative of the performance attributes of the service provider;

receiving a job request comprising at least one desired performance criterion from said service user,

comparing the plurality of stored performance criteria with the desired performance criterion, and automatically selecting at least one preferred service provider from the database on the basis of said comparison.

17. A method as claimed in claim 16 in which a plurality of preferred service providers are automatically selected from the database, and said method additionally includes compiling a list of the plurality of preferred service providers.

18. A method as claimed in claim 16 which includes:

periodically capturing and storing updated performance criteria in order to update the stored profile of least one service provider.

19. A method as claimed in claim 18 in which said database is accessible by said plurality of service providers and wherein said method includes:

enabling the service providers periodically to update their associated performance profiles in the database.

20. A method as claimed in claim 16 in which said job request includes a plurality of desired performance criteria and wherein said method additionally includes:

enabling the service user to prioritise at least two desired performance criteria; and

automatically selecting the at least one preferred service provider on the basis of the prioritisation.

21. A method as claimed in claim 16 which includes:

allowing said user to allocate a weighting to said comparative performance criteria indicative of the relative importance of said comparative performance criteria to the service user; and

automatically selecting the at least one preferred service provider at least partly on the basis of said weighting.

22. A method as claimed in claim 16 wherein said database includes at least one historical rating field associated with each service provider, and wherein said method includes:

enabling a service provider to rate at least one past job performed by said service provider; and

capturing said rating in said at least one historical rating field associated with the service provider.

23. A method as claimed in claim 19 in which each of said service provider profiles includes at least one stored qualifying criterion indicative of the ability of a service provider to perform the job, and in which said job request includes at least one qualifying criterion, wherein said method includes;

comparing said stored qualifying criterion with said desired qualifying criterion to select at least one qualified service provider on the basis of said comparison,

wherein at least one preferred service provider is a subset of at least one qualified service provider so selected.

24. A method as claimed in claim 16 wherein said services are insurance investigation services.

26. A computerized method of enabling a buyer to select a service provider for performing a service;

said method including;

(a) processing a service enquiry for a particular service;

(b) retrieving historical cost data associated with said service in respect of a plurality of service providers in response to said enquiry;

(c) processing said historical cost data to arrive at comparable cost data in respect of said service providers for enabling the selection of a service provider to perform the particular service;

(d) capturing cost data relating to the provision of the particular service by the selected service provider, and

(e) updating the historical cost data by incorporating said captured cost data.

27. A method as claimed in claim 26 which includes repeating steps (a) to (e) to enable a buyer to select a service provider for the provision of subsequent services with the aid of regularly updated cost data.

28. A method as claimed in claim 27 which includes compiling an historical cost dataset including historical cost data associated with the provision of at least one similar previous service by each service provider.

29. A method as claimed in claim 26 wherein the service enquiry includes a plurality of service components and the historical cost data includes historical cost data for a plurality of comparable service components, and step (c) includes:

processing said historical cost data to arrive at cost data for each of said service components.

30. A method as claimed in claim 26 wherein the cost data captured in step (d) includes cost data for each of the service components included in the service enquiry.

31. A method as claimed in claim 30 in which the service components include cost per unit of time and distance, in combination together with units of time and distance.

32. A method as claimed in claim 30 which includes:

(f) retrieving historical quality data associated with said service in respect of a plurality of service providers in response to said enquiry; and

(g) processing said historical quality data to arrive at comparable quality data in respect of said service providers to enable the selection of a service provider to perform the particular service.

33. A method as claimed in claim 32 which includes:

(h) capturing quality data relating to the provision of the particular service by the selected service provider; and

(i) updating the historical quality data to reflect said captured quality data.

34. A method as claimed in claim 33 which includes:

Repeating steps (f) to (i) to assist a buyer to select a service provider for the provision of subsequent services with the aid of regularly updated quality data.

35. A method as claimed in claim 34 which includes:

compiling a historical quality dataset including historical quality data associated with the provision of at least one previous service by each service provider.

36. A method as claimed in claim 32 wherein the historical quality data includes historical quality data for a plurality of performance attributes, and the service request enquiry includes a plurality of comparable performance attribute weightings reflecting the relative importance of at least two of the performance attributes to the buyer.

37. A method as claimed in claim 32 wherein step (g) includes:

processing said historical quality data in respect of each of the performance attributes to arrive at comparable performance data in respect of each performance attribute, and combining said comparable performance data according to performance attribute weightings contained in the service enquiry for each service provider, to generate said comparable quality data.

38. A method as claimed in claim 32 which includes quantifying the selected quality factors using any derived scale, weighting such factors according to their relative importance, normalising the factors and combining them with the similarly normalised historical cost factors, in combination with an additional weighting factor.

39. A method as claimed in claim 32 wherein the comparable cost data and comparable quality data in respect of each of the service providers is combined to derive a comparable performance index for each service provider for enabling the selection of a service provider to perform the particular service, with the combination of the comparable cost data and comparable quality data being arranged in accordance with weightings reflecting the relative importance of the comparable cost data and comparable quality data to the buyer.

40. A computerized method of enabling a buyer to select a service provider for performing a service, said method including:

(a) compiling historical cost and quality datasets including historical cost and quality data associated with the provision of at least one previous service by each service provider.

(b) receiving and processing a service enquiry from the buyer for a particular service;

(c) retrieving historical cost and quality data associated with said service in respect of a plurality of service providers in response to said enquiry; and

(d) processing said historical cost and quality data to arrive at comparable cost and quality data in respect of said service providers for enabling the selection of a service provider to perform the particular service.

41. A method as claimed in claim 40 which includes:

(e) capturing cost and quality data relating to the provision of the particular service by the selected service provider;

(f) updating the historical cost and quality data to incorporate said captured cost and quality data, and repeating steps (b) to (f) to enable a buyer to select a service provider for the provision of subsequent services.

42. A method as claimed in claim 40 which includes formatting the service enquiry into a plurality of service components, and formatting the historical cost and quality data into a plurality of comparable service components, with step (d) including:

processing said historical cost and quality data to arrive at cost and quality data for each of said components.

43. A computer-readable medium having stored thereon executable instructions for causing a computer to perform a method of enabling a buyer to select a service provider for performing a service;

said method including;

(a) processing a service enquiry for a particular service;

(b) retrieving historical cost data associated with said service in respect of a plurality of service providers in response to said enquiry;

(c) processing said historical cost data to arrive at comparable cost data in respect of said service providers for enabling the selection of a service provider to perform the particular service;

(d) capturing cost data relating to the provision of the particular service by the selected service provider, and

(e) updating the historical cost data by incorporating said captured cost data.

44. The computer-readable medium as claimed in claim 43 having further executable instructions for causing a computer to repeat steps (a) to (e) to enable a buyer to select a service provider for the provision of subsequent services with the aid of regularly updated cost data.

45. A computer operating under the control of the computer readable medium of claim 43.

46. A computer system to enable a buyer to select a service provider for performing a service, said system including:

an enquiry processing device configured to receive and process a service enquiry for a particular service from the buyer;

a database configured to store historical cost data associated with said service in respect of a plurality of service providers;

a processor adapted to retrieve and process said historical cost data from said database in response to said query to arrive at comparable cost data in respect of said service providers for enabling the buyer to select a service provider, on the basis of said comparable cost data, to perform the particular service.

47. A computer system as claimed in claim 46 which includes:

a data capture component configured to capture cost data relating to the provision of the particular service by the selected service provider, and updating means to update the historical cost data on the database with said captured cost data.

48. A computer system as claimed in claim 46 in which the database includes:

a data compilation component configured to compile a dataset including historical cost and quality data associated with the provision of at least one previous service by each service provider.

49. A computer system as claimed in claim 46 wherein the enquiry processing device is configured to additionally retrieve historical quality data associated with said service in respect of a plurality of service providers in response to said enquiry, and the enquiry processing device is configured to generate comparable quality data from said historical quality data in respect of said service providers.

50. A computer system as claimed in claim 49 wherein the historical quality data includes historical quality data, for a plurality of performance attributes, and the service request enquiry includes a plurality of comparable performance attribute weightings reflecting the importance of each of the performance attributes to the buyer.

51. A computer system as claimed in claim 50 wherein the processor is configured to process said historical quality data in respect of each of the performance attributes to arrive at comparable performance data in respect of each performance attribute, and to combine the comparable performance data according to the performance attribute weightings included in the service enquiry for each service provider, to generate said comparable quality data.

52. A computer system as claimed in claim 49 wherein the processor is configured to derive a comparable performance index for each service provider by combining the comparable cost data and comparable quality data in respect of each of the service providers with the combination of the comparable cost data and comparable quality data being is performed in accordance with weightings reflecting the relative importance of the comparable cost data and comparable quality data to the buyer.

53. A computer system to enable a buyer to select a service provider for performing a service;

said system including;

a database configured to store a first dataset including a plurality of service providers, a plurality of associated services and a plurality of associated historical costs;

a processor in communication with said database, wherein said processor is configured to receive historical cost data associated with each service provider and to generate comparative cost data for each service provider according to a predetermined algorithm; and

a communication device configured to communicate said comparative cost data to said buyer to enable the buyer to select a service provider.

54. A computer system as claimed in claim 53 wherein the predetermined algorithm includes weighting means configured to weight a plurality of received historical cost data according to the respective associated service of the historical cost data, and to generate the comparative cost data in accordance with said weighting.

55. A computer system as claimed in claim 54 wherein said processor includes weighting optimisation means adapted to optimise the weightings applied by the weighting means to the received historical cost data, with the weighting optimisation means utilizing an algorithm which has the effect of weighting the most recent data more heavily.

56. A computer system as claimed in claim 53 which further includes data capture means configured to capture cost data associated with a current service provided by a service provider, and updating means adapted to update said first data set to include said cost data associated with the current service provided by a service provider.

57. A computer system as claimed in claim 53 wherein the historical cost data includes a plurality of associated service components and associated historical cost component data;

and the processor is configured to generate comparative cost data in respect of each service component for each service provider.

58. A computer system as claimed in claim 53 wherein the data storage means is configured to store a second dataset including a plurality of service providers, a plurality of associated services and a plurality of associated historical quality data, and said processor means is configured to additionally receive historical quality data associated with each service provider and generate comparative quality data for each service provider according to a predetermined algorithm;

and said communication means is arranged to communicate said comparative quality data to the buyer to enable the buyer to select a service provider.