Browse Prior Art Database

Text Analytics for Agile Project Planning Disclosure Number: IPCOM000244198D
Publication Date: 2015-Nov-23
Document File: 6 page(s) / 201K

Publishing Venue

The Prior Art Database


Disclosed is a method to update the work breakdown structure (WBS) of a project plan and to identify which team is best to work on it. Historical data is used which evolves and learns as more data is entered to the system.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 23% of the total text.

Page 01 of 6

Text Analytics for Agile Project Planning


Work Break Down Structure and Initial Parsing

    This solution takes the project plan and work break down structure. It runs text analytics on it to identify any possible gaps in the work break structure as well as the weighting of the tasks. The text analytics first look for repeating words to identify the level of granularity. If there is a lack of repeating words, it may not be granular enough (as a start).

    Then it will parse the database of historic project plans and look for overlap. If for example project 'Deploy XYZ on Application Server X' has a task including a keyword like 'get signed certificate' but any mention of certificates is missing from the project plan, this will be presented to the user as a potential gap. Where there are multiple alternatives (e.g. generate self-signed certificate, turn off Secure Sockets Layer), these alternatives will be weighted according to how well they match. This weighting will be based on certain criteria such as

1. The similarity of the project - how similar is the project to those in the database in terms of overall text comparison

2. The similarity of the customer - is it a bank, a software house, retail.

3. The success or status of the historic project where the alternative has been taken from - be wary of repeating history or following another live project that has yet to be proven successful.

4. The number of occurrences of an alternative. It the same task repeats across multiple project it will have a higher weighting
The user identifies which tasks to take, or manually adapts with something

new, or disagrees and concluded it is not actually a gap. For example maybe the

way Application Server X is deployed in the organization in question takes care of

the certificates with no action or thought needed for the deploy XYZ project.

The project plan is then input to the database so that the body of knowledge increases and future projects will have stronger weighting to the alternatives they are presented with.


    A teaming feed is taken to identify teams that can fulfill the project. In cases there are multiple teams that are available, look at the skill gaps, time gaps, possible issues associated with the teams (such as geography - i.e., country x for certain accounts not allowing specific geographies), and risks (i.e., known issues for delivery) for multiple, global teams to provide an optimal solution. This optimal solution will be provided by a risk analysis (there are many available from Poisson to Monte Carlo) and then a simulation to provide a sliding scale of risk analysis based on the number of risks and provide the level of risk provided.


    This solution is unique as it takes the project plan that has been run through the historical database (which is not unique) and adds in the ability to provide the most optimal project plan based on the various combinations of the teams with a risk assessment of the different comb...