Conflict Resolution in a Computerized Calendaring System

• US 20120004942A1
• Filed: 06/30/2010
• Published: 01/05/2012
• Est. Priority Date: 06/30/2010
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Original Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Inventors: Callanan, Sean, Lyle, Ruthie D., O'Sullivan, Patrick Joseph, Raguillat, Fred, Zimmet, Carol Sue
• Application Number:
  US12/827,653
• Publication Number:
  US 20120004942A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/7.22
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06312 Adjustment or analysis of established resource schedule, e.g. resource or task levelling, or dynamic rescheduling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/1093 Calendar-based scheduling for persons or groups

Abstract

Conflict resolution in a computerized calendaring system executed by a processor includes: with the processor, receiving a request to schedule a new event that conflicts with a previously scheduled event; determining with the processor that the previously scheduled event has priority over the new event based on historical event data; and imposing with the processor a constraint on scheduling the new event according to a defined priority policy.

Claims

1. A method of conflict resolution in a computerized calendaring system executed by a processor, said method comprising:

with said processor, receiving a request to schedule a new event that conflicts with a previously scheduled event;

determining with said processor that said previously scheduled event has priority over said new event based on historical event data; and

imposing with said processor a constraint on scheduling said new event according to a defined priority policy.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein imposing said constraint comprises preventing said new event from being scheduled in conflict with said previously scheduled event.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein imposing said constraint comprises scheduling said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event if an owner of said previously scheduled event consents to said scheduling of said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event.

4. The method of claim 3, further comprising:

transmitting with said processor a conflict notification to said owner of said previously scheduled event; and

soliciting said owner to consent to said scheduling of said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event through said electronic notification.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein said previously scheduled event is a recurring event and said historical event data comprises data corresponding to past occurrences of said previously scheduled event.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein said data corresponding to past occurrences of said previously scheduled event comprises a number of times said previously scheduled event has been previously held.

9. The method of claim 7, wherein said historical event data comprises historical attendance data for said previously scheduled event.

10. The method of claim 7, wherein said determining with said processor that said previously scheduled event has priority over said new event based on historical event data comprises determining that said previously scheduled event has priority over said new event based on a determined historical precedent associated with past occurrences of said previously scheduled event.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein said historical event data comprises attendance data corresponding to an attendee associated with at least one of said new event and said previously scheduled event.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein said determining with said processor that said previously scheduled event has priority over said new event based on historical event data comprises determining that said previously scheduled event has a higher likelihood of success than said new event.

5. The method of claim I, wherein imposing said constraint comprises scheduling said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled if a third party arbitrator consents to said scheduling of said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event.

6. The method of claim 5, further comprising requesting consent from said third party arbitrator only if an owner of said previously scheduled event does not consent to said scheduling of said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event.

13. A method of conflict resolution in a computerized calendaring system executed by a processor, said method comprising:

with said processor, determining that a first future event and a second future event share a common time period and a common tentative attendee;

determining with said processor that said first future event has priority to said common attendee for said common time period based on historical event data; and

imposing a constraint on scheduling said common attendee for said second future event according to a defined priority policy.

14. The method of claim 13, wherein imposing said constraint comprises preventing said common attendee from being scheduled for said second future event during said common time period.

15. The method of claim 13, wherein imposing said constraint comprises permitting said common attendee to be scheduled for said second future event during said common time period if an owner of said first future event consents to said scheduling of said common attendee for said second future event during said common time period.

16. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

transmitting with said processor a conflict notification to said owner of said first future event; and

soliciting said owner of said first future event to consent to said scheduling of said common attendee for said second future event during said common time period through said electronic notification.

17. The method of claim 13, wherein imposing said constraint comprises permitting said common attendee to be scheduled for said second future event during said common time period if a third party arbitrator consents to said scheduling of said common attendee for said second future event during said common time period.

18. The method of claim 17, further comprising requesting consent from said third party arbitrator only if an owner of said first future event does not consent to said scheduling of said common attendee for said second future event during said common time period.

19. The method of claim 13, wherein said first future event is a recurring event and said historical event data comprises data corresponding to past occurrences of said first future event.

20. The method of claim 19, wherein said determining with said processor that said first future event has priority to said common attendee for said common time period based on historical event data comprises determining that said first future event has priority over said second future event based on a detected precedential pattern associated with past occurrences of said first future event.

21. The method of claim 13, wherein said determining with said processor that said first future event has priority to said common attendee for said common time period based on historical event data comprises determining that said first future event has a higher likelihood of success than said second future event.

22. A system, comprising:

a processor; and

a memory communicatively coupled to said processor;

said memory comprising executable code stored thereon such that said processor, upon executing said executable code is configured to;

receive a request to schedule a new event that conflicts with a previously scheduled event;

determine that said previously scheduled event has priority over said new event based on historical event data; and

impose a constraint on scheduling said new event according to a defined priority policy.

23. The system of claim 22, wherein imposing said constraint comprises preventing said new event from being scheduled in conflict with said previously scheduled event.

24. The system of claim 22, wherein imposing said constraint comprises scheduling said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event if an owner of said previously scheduled event consents to said scheduling of said new event in conflict with said previously scheduled event.

25. A computer program product for conflict resolution in a computerized calendaring system, comprising:

a computer readable storage medium having computer readable program code embodied therewith, the computer readable program code comprising;

computer readable program code configured to receive a request to schedule a new event that conflicts with a previously scheduled event;

computer readable program code configured to determine that said previously scheduled event has priority over said new event based on historical event data; and

computer readable program code configured to impose a constraint on scheduling said new event according to a defined priority policy.