PROCUREMENT OF TASK SERVICES

• US 20140006077A1
• Filed: 12/07/2012
• Published: 01/02/2014
• Est. Priority Date: 12/12/2011
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: TASK Easy Incorporated
• Original Assignee: Moose Loop Holdings, LLC
• Inventors: Davis, Ken R.
• Application Number:
  US13/707,918
• Publication Number:
  US 20140006077A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/7.14
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06311 Scheduling, planning or task assignment for a person or group
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/063116 Schedule adjustment for a person or group
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0621 Item configuration or customization
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/04 Trading; Exchange, e.g. stocks, commodities, derivatives or currency exchange

Abstract

Technology is described for the procurement of task services. In one example, the tasks can be obtained in a single package, such as by the steps of displaying a plurality of tasks and high-level parameters related to the tasks; receiving input to configure the high-level parameters with respect to the tasks; incorporating meta-data parameters with the high-level parameters using the processor; determining a fixed price for performing one or more of the tasks using the processor; and receiving input from the customer for ordering one or more of the tasks. Other examples include inspection regimes for improving efficiencies.

Claims

1. In a computing environment, a method for allowing a customer to procure tasks as a single package, the method comprising:

displaying a plurality of tasks and high-level parameters related to the tasks;

receiving input to configure the high-level parameters with respect to the tasks;

incorporating meta-data parameters with the high-level parameters using the processor;

determining a fixed price for performing one or more of the tasks using the processor; and

receiving input from the customer for ordering one or more of the tasks.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the high-level parameters include one or both of the frequency of service or quality of service.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the high-level parameters include a sporadic service preference based on an environmental condition or unexpected vacancy of a property unit.

4. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of initiating a service order for an inspection to be conducted by an inspector before a task implemented or after a tasked has been completed.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the tasks are related to one or more properties that are also displayed along with the tasks and high-level parameters.

6. The method of claim 5, further comprising the step of assigning one or more of the tasks at one or more of the properties to a service provider'"'"'s schedule.

7. The method of claim 5, wherein the tasks are related to multiple properties controlled by a common customer.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the multiple properties include a list of units within a single property, or a list of multiple units over multiple properties.

9. The method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of tasks are facilitated over a reduced time interval for a rental property unit-turn.

10. The method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of tasks includes the same task repeated over multiple properties or multiple units.

11. In a computing environment, a method for allowing a customer to procure services with the assistance of an inspector, the method comprising:

initiating a service order for an inspection to be conducted by an inspector;

receiving input from the inspector specifying one or more tasks to be performed once the inspector has inspected a task site;

computing fixed prices for the one or more tasks to be performed using a processor; and

identifying one or more service providers to perform the one or more tasks using the processor.

12. The method of claim 11, further comprising the step of obtaining approval from the customer to perform one or more tasks after receiving input for the inspector.

13. The method of claim 11, further comprising the steps of receiving input from the one or more service providers indicating that the one or more tasks have been completed.

14. The method of claim 13, further comprising the step of notifying the inspector or a different inspector to return to the work site once the one or more tasks have been completed to verify that the one or more tasks have been properly performed using the processor.

15. The method of claim 14, further comprising the step of receiving input from the inspector or the different inspector that the one or more tasks were properly performed.

16. The method of claim 14, further comprising the steps of:

receiving input from the inspector or different inspector indicating that the one or more tasks were not properly specified, not performed, or not properly performed; and

creating one or more remediation procedures to remedy any of the one or more tasks that was not properly specified, not performed, or not properly performed using the processor.

17. The method of claim 16, wherein the one or more remediation procedures includes refund or partial refund to the customer, or return of a service provider to a site of the task to complete the task properly.

18. The method of claim 13, further comprising the steps of:

receiving input from the one or more service providers indicating that the inspection or a task performed by another service provider was not properly specified, not performed, or not properly performed; and

creating one or more remediation procedures to remedy the inspection or task that was not properly specified, not performed, or not properly performed using the processor using the processor.

19. The method of claim 18, wherein the one or more remediation procedures includes refund to the customer, or return of a service provider to a site of the task to complete the task properly.

20. The method of claim 11, wherein the tasks are procured by the customer during a single computing session.

21. The method of claim 11, wherein the step of computing fixed prices is based on one or more of:

data provided by the inspector;

data provided by the customer; and

third party data that is obtained about the task.

22. The method of claim 21, wherein the step of computing fixed prices is based at least in part on the third party data, and the third party data is selected from the group consisting of weather data or data stored in a database.

23. The method of claim 11, wherein tasks to be performed are set up according to industry standards and expectations based on the inspection.

24. The method of claim 11, wherein the inspector specifies an order in which the one or more tasks are to be performed as the order relates to at least two specific tasks.

25. The method of claim 11, wherein the inspector that performs the inspection is not permitted to be a service provider for any of the tasks.

26. The method of claim 11, wherein the method facilitates a reduction in time for unit-turn of a rental property.

27. The method of claim 11, wherein the step of receiving input from the inspector is by an electronically uploaded inspector worksheet filled out by the inspector.

28. The method of claim 11, wherein the step of initiating the service order is by a project manager or property owner who overseas unit-turn for a rental unit, and wherein the method further comprises additional steps of the project manager or property owner approving the unit-turn and authorizing payment.

29. The method of claim 11, wherein the method is conducted multiple times by the same inspector at multiple properties or property units.

30. The method of claim 26, wherein at some point after the method is carried out a first time on a first property or property unit, the steps of initiating the service order for the inspection and receiving input from the inspector are not carried out on a subsequent property or property unit.

31. In a computing environment, a method for assigning tasks to a single service provider, the method comprising:

receiving customer or inspector input regarding ordering a plurality of tasks;

generating a group of tasks to be performed by a single service provider using a processor, the group of tasks being grouped based on tasks that are efficiently performed as a group as defined at least in part by the customer, the inspector, or a computer;

identifying a service provider qualified to perform the plurality of tasks requested by the customer or inspector using the processor; and

scheduling the group of tasks to be performed by the single service provider using the processor.

32. The method of claim 31, wherein the method provides for increased efficiencies to the service provider.

33. The method of claim 31, wherein the increased efficiencies include a reduction in fuel cost, travel time, setup time, or cleanup time.

34. The method of claim 31, wherein the method provides cost savings to the customer compared to scheduling each task separately.

35. The method of claim 31, wherein the group of tasks are grouped at least in part by the customer.

36. The method of claim 31, wherein the group of tasks are grouped at least in part by the inspector.

37. The method of claim 31, wherein the group of tasks are grouped at least in part by the computer.