Project management applications utilizing summary tasks for top-down project planning

• US 8,160,911 B2
• Filed: 05/19/2009
• Issued: 04/17/2012
• Est. Priority Date: 05/19/2009
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC (Microsoft Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Microsoft Corporation
• Inventors: Lau, Bonny P., Shahdad, Mohammad Yakoob, De Vries, Peter, Steinglass, Alice Pritikin
• Primary Examiner(s): DIXON, THOMAS A
• Application Number:
  US12/468,663
• Publication Number:
  US 20100299171A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,064 Days
• Field of Search: 705/7.16
• US Class Current: 705/7.16
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/063114 Status monitoring or status determination for a person or group
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/063116 Schedule adjustment for a person or group

Abstract

Embodiments of the present invention are directed toward providing a method utilizing project management software for creating a project plan utilizing a top-down strategy allowing a user to describe high-level objectives before filling in details for the underlying tasks of which the high-level objectives are comprised. As an alternative to basing summary task dates and durations solely on subtask data, the present invention allows a user to enter dates and duration values into summary tasks regardless of when the corresponding subtasks occur. By utilizing a top-down project management approach, embodiments of the present invention promote utilizing summary tasks as a starting point of project planning. Users are able to input high-level objectives of a project when more specific details of subtasks are unknown. Because summary task data is not rolled-up from the subtask data, a user may specify details such as dates and durations of subtasks at a later time.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method for creating a top down project plan, the method comprising:

receiving information entered by a user associated with a summary task comprising subtasks;

determining by a processor executing code stored on a computer-readable medium whether a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, or duration fields contain user-entered information;

when at least one, but no more than two of a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, or duration fields contain user-entered information,

determining a schedule of planned dates for the summary task utilizing summary task information entered by the user in addition to calculated roll-up dates of the summary task'"'"'s subtask information;

determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates;

when a task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates, preserving the user-entered planned dates; and

displaying the determined summary task schedule in the corresponding fields of the project plan;

wherein when all three of a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, or duration fields contain user-entered information,

preserving the user-entered planned dates;

identifying differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates of the summary task'"'"'s subtasks when differences exist; and

displaying an indication of whether a task contains planned dates or when the task contains roll-up dates.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein

when no user-entered information is contained in a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, and duration fields,

determining a schedule for the summary task utilizing calculated roll-up dates of the summary task'"'"'s subtask information;

and

displaying the determined summary task schedule in the corresponding fields of the project plan.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein identifying differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates of the summary task includes providing a planned date Gantt bar and a calculated roll-up date Gantt bar displayed on a project plan Gantt chart.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein identifying differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates of the summary task includes providing a planned date field and a roll-up date field within a project plan table.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task start date occurs before all of the start dates of the subtasks of the summary task.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task start date occurs after all the finish dates of the subtasks of the summary task.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task finish date occurs after all the finish dates of the subtasks of the summary task.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task finish date occurs before all the finish dates of the subtasks of the summary task.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein displaying an indication of whether a task contains planned dates or when the task contains roll-up dates includes displaying a push pin icon in association with information displayed for the task when the task contains only planned dates.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein displaying an indication of whether a task contains planned dates or when the task contains roll-up dates includes displaying a push pin icon and a question mark in association with information displayed for the task when the task contains planned dates and roll-up dates.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein displaying an indication of whether a task contains planned dates or when the task contains roll-up dates includes displaying an arrow icon in association with information displayed for the task when the task contains only roll-up dates.

12. A computer-readable storage medium containing computer-executable instructions which when executed by a computer perform a method for creating a top down project plan, the method comprising:

receiving information entered by a user associated with a summary task comprising one or more subtasks;

determining whether a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, or duration fields contain user-entered information;

when at least one, but no more than two of a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, or duration fields contain user-entered information,

determining a schedule of planned dates for the summary task utilizing summary task information entered by the user in addition to calculated roll-up dates of the summary task'"'"'s subtask information;

determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates; and

when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates,

preserving the user-entered planned dates; and

identifying differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates;

displaying the determined summary task schedule in the corresponding fields of the project plan;

but, when no user-entered information is contained in a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, and duration fields,

determining a schedule for the summary task utilizing calculated roll-up dates of the summary task'"'"'s subtask information; and

displaying the determined summary task schedule in the corresponding fields of the project plan;

wherein when all three of a summary task'"'"'s start date, finish date, or duration fields contain user-entered information,

preserving the user-entered planned dates; and

identifying any differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates of the summary tasks'"'"' subtasks; and

displaying an indication of whether a task contains planned dates or when the task contains roll-up dates.

13. The computer-readable medium of claim 12,

wherein identifying differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates of the summary task includes providing a planned date Gantt bar and a calculated roll-up date Gantt bar displayed on a project plan Gantt chart;

and

wherein identifying differences between the planned dates and the roll-up dates of the summary task includes providing a planned date field and a roll-up date field within a project plan table.

14. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task start date occurs before all of the start dates of the subtasks comprising the summary task.

15. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task start date occurs after all the finish dates of the subtasks of the summary task.

16. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task finish date occurs after all the finish dates of the subtasks of the summary task.

17. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining when a summary task'"'"'s calculated roll-up dates contradict planned dates includes determining whether a summary task finish date occurs before all the finish dates of the subtasks of the summary task.