Computer based process for strategy evaluation and optimization based on customer desired outcomes and predictive metrics

• US 6,115,691 A
• Filed: 08/27/1999
• Issued: 09/05/2000
• Est. Priority Date: 09/20/1996
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Strategyn Holdings LLC
• Original Assignee: Anthony W. Ulwick
• Inventors: Ulwick, Anthony W.
• Primary Examiner(s): Stamber, Eric W.
• Assistant Examiner(s): Kazimi, Hani M.
• Application Number:
  US09/385,661
• Time in Patent Office: 375 Days
• Field of Search: 705/7, 705/8, 705/9, 705/10, 707/5, 707/6, 348/1, 455/2
• US Class Current: 705/7.32
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0635 Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0637 Strategic management or analysis, e.g. setting a goal or target of an organisation; Planning actions based on goals; Analysis or evaluation of effectiveness of goals
• 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 30/0201 Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0203 Market surveys; Market polls

Abstract

A computer program product for use with a computer system for providing a process for strategy evaluation and optimization, the computer program product comprising a computer-readable medium of instructions for directing a computer to evaluate data for optimizing strategic options including: (1) data storage for storing data relating to specific desired outcomes relating to a specific process for an identified customer set; (2) the data storage further storing data relating to metrics which predict the satisfaction of the desired outcomes; (3) data processing unit including computer program for quantifying the degree to which each of the metrics predict satisfaction of each of the customer desired outcomes; (4) input unit for defining strategic options, each of the strategic options designed to satisfy the customer desired outcomes; (5) data processing unit including computer program for quantifying the degree to which each of the strategic options satisfy the customer desired outcomes; (6) and evaluating a plurality of strategic options thus yielding a strategic option which best satisfies the customer desired outcomes.

Claims

1. A computer implemented method for optimizing strategic options designed to solve a selected mission, comprising the following steps:

(a) processing data relating to subject specific desired outcomes for at least one predetermined customer set, said desired outcomes having predetermined prioritized ratings, each of said desired outcomes defining a benefit of value, said desired outcomes free from any solution or specification, each of said desired outcomes, remaining stable over time;

(b) processing data relating to predictive metrics which predict satisfaction of said desired outcomes;

(c) evaluating the degree to which each of said predictive metrics predict satisfaction of each of said desired outcomes for each of said customer sets;

(d) defining strategic options, each of said defined strategic options designed to satisfy at least one of said customer desired outcomes;

(e) comparing each of said user defined strategic options with a user defined baseline strategic option to determine which of said user defined strategic options best predict satisfaction of each of said customer desired outcomes; and

(f) presenting the compared user defined strategic options to allow the user to determine which of said user defined strategic options best predict satisfaction of each of said customer desired outcomes.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein step (e) includes quantifying the degree to which each of said strategic options satisfy said customer desired outcomes by comparing the degree to which each of said defined strategic options positively or negatively incorporate said predictive metrics, said quantification means comparing each of said defined strategic options to said preselected base line option thereby yielding a strategic option which best satisfies said customer desired outcomes.

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising the following steps:

prioritizing each of said defined strategic options into said prioritized ratings; and

creating new strategic options to compare with previously defined strategic options.

4. The method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of:

identifying specific strengths and weaknesses of each of said defined strategic options, and allowing the user to create new strategic options.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein said data relating to said customer desired outcomes is obtained by the following steps:

identifying a customer set;

interviewing a statistically representative sample of individual customers from said customer set whereby customer desired outcomes, identifying specific benefits that said customer set values, are obtained including the importance of each of said desired outcomes and the degree to which each of said desired outcomes is currently satisfied;

quantifying said desired outcomes by ranking said desired outcomes in terms of prioritized importance such that desired outcomes identified by said customer set as important yet unsatisfied are ranked high while outcomes identified by said customer set as unimportant or satisfied are ranked low; and

storing said desired outcomes.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein said data relating to said metrics which predict satisfaction of said customer desired outcomes is obtained by a method including the following steps:

defining a predictive metric for each desired outcome identified by said customer set;

establishing relationships between each of said desired outcomes and each of said predictive metrics by assigning each predictive metric a representative value depending upon the degree to which said predictive metric predicts satisfaction of each of said desired outcomes; and

storing said predictive metrics and said assigned values.

7. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of selecting a specific subject of interest from a plurality of subjects of interest and a specific mission from a plurality of missions related to said select subject of interest, said selected mission being selected for strategic evaluation.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein step (c) comprises ranking said predictive metrics in relation to said desired outcomes utilizing matrix analysis for determining the relationship between each of said desired outcomes and each of said predictive metrics for each selected customer set to identify those predictive metrics which predict the highest degree of desired outcome satisfaction factoring in said predetermined prioritized ratings of said desired outcomes.

9. A computer implemented method for finding an optimal solution that will satisfy strategic personal and business decisions related to a selected process, comprising the following steps:

(a) storing data obtained from conducting interviews of a statistically representative sample of individual customers from a plurality of customer sets in connection with specific processes, said data comprising a plurality of desired outcomes from said customer sets, said desired outcomes having predetermined prioritized ratings, each of said desired outcomes defining a benefit of value, said desired outcomes free from any solution or specification, each of said desired outcomes remaining stable over time, each of said desired outcomes having an associated importance factor and an associated satisfaction factor, said satisfaction factor indicating the degree to which a corresponding desired outcome has been achieved, said data including a plurality of predictive metrics, each of said predictive metrics having a corresponding relationship with each of said desired outcomes, said predictive metrics comprising measurable parameters which predict the satisfaction of said desired outcomes, each of said predictive metrics assigned scaled indicator for each of said desired outcomes, said scaled indicators representing the degree to which each predictive metric satisfies a corresponding particular customer desired outcome;

(b) selecting a specific process to be evaluated for optimization in accordance with said data;

(c) selecting a plurality of customer sets for evaluation of said selected process;

(d) weighting the importance of said selected customer sets by assigning each of said selected customer sets a weighting value;

(e) ranking said desired outcomes associated with said selected process and said selected and weighted customer sets, whereby said desired outcome ranking is dependent upon said customer set weighting values and said importance and satisfaction factors such that desired outcomes identified as important yet unsatisfied are red higher than desired outcomes identified as unimportant or satisfied;

(f) prioritizing said predictive metrics in terms of the degree to which said predictive metrics predict the satisfaction of said desired outcomes associated with said selected customer sets and said selected process, whereby those predictive metrics which predict satisfaction of said ranked desired outcomes are quantified and prioritized;

(g) defining a plurality of process specific strategic options, each of said strategic options designed to satisfy said customer desired outcomes;

(h) quantifying the degree to which each of said strategic options satisfy said customer desired outcomes; and

(i) presenting the quantified strategic to allow the user to determine which of said strategic options best predict satisfaction of each of said desired outcomes.

10. A computer implemented method for evaluating and optimizing business strategies in connection with a data storage device containing data obtained from conducting interviews of a statistically representative sample of individual customers from a plurality of said discrete customer sets, whereby desired outcomes, identifying benefits that each customer set values, are elicited and stored in said data storage device in discrete files corresponding to said customer sets, each of said desired outcomes having an assigned importance factor and an assigned satisfaction factor, said desired outcomes having predetermined prioritized ratings, said desired outcomes free from any solution or specification, each of said desired outcomes remaining stable over time, said data storage device further including predictive metrics for each of said desired outcomes identified by each of said customer sets, said predictive metrics comprising measurable parameters for satisfying said desired outcomes, each of said predictive metrics assigned scaled indicators for each of said desired outcomes, said scaled indicators representing the degree to which a predictive metric predicts satisfaction of a particular customer desired outcome;

said method comprising the following steps;

(a) selecting a plurality of customer sets for analysis;

(b) assigning weighting values to said selected customer sets thereby positively or negatively weighting the influence of each of said selected customer sets;

(c) ranking said desired outcomes in terms of importance and satisfaction whereby desired outcomes identified as important yet unsatisfied are ranked high while desired outcomes identified as unimportant or satisfied are ranked low, said rating being dependent upon said customer set weighting;

(d) prioritizing said predictive metrics, said prioritization dependent upon said cumulative ranking of desired outcomes and dependent upon said predictive metric scaled indicators whereby the predictive metrics which predict satisfaction of high ranked desired outcomes are assigned a high priority while the predictive metrics which predict satisfaction of low ranked dashed outcomes are assigned a low priority;

(e) displaying a list of said predictive metrics prioritized in terms of normalized importance relative to said ranked desired outcomes;

(f) defining a plurality of strategic options;

(g) evaluating each of said defined strategic options in terms of the degree to which each defined strategic options satisfies said desired outcomes; and

(h) presenting the evaluated strategic options to allow the user to determine which od said strategic options best predict satisfaction of each of said desired outcomes.