Analytical survey system

• US 20050060219A1
• Filed: 09/16/2003
• Published: 03/17/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 09/16/2003
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: SAP AG (SAP SE)
• Original Assignee: SAP AG (SAP SE)
• Inventors: Ostertag, Manfred, Schoenecker, Mathias, Deitering, Franz
• Application Number:
  US10/662,633
• Publication Number:
  US 20050060219A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/10
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06375 Prediction of business process outcome or impact based on a proposed change
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0639 Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06393 Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06398 Performance of employee with respect to a job function
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0203 Market surveys; Market polls
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0205 Location or geographical consideration

Abstract

Embodiments of the present invention provide integrated, flexible, automated and secure functionality for surveys such as E-surveys. In one embodiment, responsive to an indicator of business performance, a segment of E-survey results data corresponding to the indicator may be extracted. The extracted segment may be compared to an aggregate set of E-survey results data. Any E-survey results data from the extracted segment that statistically differ from responding results data from the aggregate set by a predetermined amount may be identified.

Claims

1. A automated personnel evaluation method, comprising:

responsive to an indicator of business performance, extracting a segment of E-survey results data corresponding to the indicator;

comparing the extracted segment to an aggregate set of E-survey results data;

identifying any E-survey results data from the extracted segment that statistically differ from responding results data from the aggregate set by a predetermined amount.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator identifies an organizational unit of a business experiencing anomalous performance.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator identifies a period of time.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator identifies a geographic region.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator is a key performance indicator.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator is a customer satisfaction indicator.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator is an employee satisfaction indicator.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the aggregate set is E-survey results data for a business and the extracted segment is a portion of the aggregate set.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein the aggregate set is E-survey results data for a market in which the business participates.

10. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

comparing the extracted segment of E-survey results data to historical data.

11. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

comparing the extracted segment of E-survey results data to external benchmarks.

12. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

comparing the extracted segment of E-survey results data to key performance indicators.

13. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

comparing the extracted segment of E-survey results data to at least one of sales revenues, turn over rates, profit statistics, cost statistics, quality statistics, customer satisfaction rates and illness rates.

14. An automated E-survey method, comprising:

comparing a class identifier indicating an intended user of an E-survey to a profile of network users;

transmitting the E-survey to each network user for which the profile matches the class identifier;

receiving the E-survey results therefrom; and

storing the E-survey results in a database.

15. The method of claim 14, further comprising:

transmitting the E-survey to each network user identified in a target list of users.

16. The method of claim 14, further comprising:

validating E-survey results from only users identified in the target list of users.

17. The method of claim 14, further comprising:

comparing an access identifier with contents of a results access profile;

permitting access to the E-survey results to an administrator for which the access profile matches the access parameter.

18. The method of claim 14, further comprising:

validating the E-survey results from each network user only if the profile matches the class identifier.

19. The method of claim 14, further comprising:

validating the E-survey results from each network user only if a single response is received from each network user.

20. The method of claim 14, further comprising:

discarding the E-survey results from a network user if more than one response is received from the network user.

21. A system comprising:

a survey database to store survey data collected from a survey completed by a plurality of users identified in a survey target list;

an analytic engine to apply a comparison function to the collected survey data; and

an output manager to generate a result based on the applied comparison function.

22. The system of claim 21, wherein the output manager is to permit access to the generated result based on pre-determined access rights.

23. The system of claim 21, wherein the analytic engine is to:

responsive to an input, extract a segment of the collected survey data; and

apply the comparison function to the extracted segment.

24. The system of claim 23, wherein the comparison function applied by the analytic engine is to:

compare the extracted segment of the survey data to an aggregate set of survey data stored in the survey database.

25. The method of claim 24, wherein the aggregate set is survey data for a business and the extracted segment is a portion of the aggregate set.

26. The method of claim 25, wherein the aggregate set is survey data for a market in which the business participates.

27. The system of claim 23, further comprises:

an business information database to store business information, wherein responsive to the input, the analytic engine is to extract a segment of the business information stored in the business information database and is to compare the extracted segment of the survey data to the extracted segment of the business information.

28. The system of claim 27, wherein the extracted segment of the business information relates to historical information.

29. The system of claim 27, wherein the extracted segment of the business information relates to external bench marks.

30. The system of claim 27, wherein the extracted segment of the business information relates to key performance indicators.

31. The system of claim 27, wherein extracted segment of the business information relates to at least one of sales revenues, turn over rates, profit statistics, cost statistics, quality statistics, customer satisfaction rates and illness rates.

32. The system of claim 23, wherein the input identifies a period of time.

33. The system of claim 23, wherein the input identifies a geographic region.

34. The system of claim 23, wherein the input is a key performance indicator.

35. The system of claim 23, wherein the input is a customer satisfaction indicator.

36. A method for analysis of survey data, comprising:

receiving a comparison parameter input from a user;

retrieving data from a comparison database based on the input;

retrieving a segment of survey results data from a survey results database based on the input;

comparing the retrieved comparison data with the retrieved segment of survey results data; and

generating an output based on the comparison.

37. The method of claim 36, further comprising:

sorting the collected survey data based on questions included in a survey.

38. The method of claim 36, wherein the comparison parameter includes one or more data categories to be compared.

39. The method of claim 36, wherein the comparison parameter includes an output format for the output.

40. A survey results data evaluation method, comprising:

responsive to an indicator of business performance, extracting a segment of E-survey results data corresponding to the indicator;

comparing the extracted segment of E-survey results data to business data;

analyzing the segment of the E-survey results data and the business data using a balanced scorecard approach;

based on the analysis, identifying any E-survey results data from the extracted segment that is out of balance with respect to the business data.

41. The data evaluation method of claim 40, wherein the business data includes key performance indicators.

42. The data evaluation method of claim 40, wherein the business data includes profit statistics.

43. The data evaluation method of claim 40, wherein the business data includes productivity statistics.

44. The data evaluation method of claim 40, wherein the extracted segment of E-survey results data relates to employee satisfaction rates.

45. The data evaluation method of claim 40, wherein the extracted segment of E-survey results data relates to customer satisfaction rates.

46. The data evaluation method of claim 40, wherein the extracted segment of E-survey results data relates to employee satisfaction rates.

47. A method comprising:

receiving strategic enterprise management objectives;

extracting collected e-survey data based on the received management objectives;

determining one or more targets based on the received management objectives;

comparing the extracted e-survey data with the targets to determine whether the one or more targets are being met;

identifying the one or more targets that are not being met.

48. The method of claim 47, further comprising:

determining the one or more targets based on key performance indicators.

49. The method of claim 48, wherein the key performance indicators include at least one of profits, income, and employee turnover rates.