IP Library Granted Patent US 10,740,705
Granted Patent B2
US 10,740,705 · App. 16/106,477 · Granted Aug 11, 2020

Survey insight reporting system and method

Inventors: Richard Johnson Joi (Lancaster, PA); Zachary Jordan Leaman (East Earl, PA); Douglas John Claffey (Malvern, PA); Ethan Salk (Glenside, PA); Kinsey Smith (Royersford, PA)
Assignee: ENERGAGE, LLC
G06Q10/063G06F9/451G06T11/206G06F3/04842G06T11/60G06T2200/24
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 10,740,705
App. No.
16/106,477
Granted
Aug 11, 2020
Kind
B2
Abstract

In one embodiment, the invention can be a method of displaying survey results. The method can include, for each of a plurality of survey items, receiving survey responses from survey respondents, wherein each response is chosen from response options, the response options corresponding to an ordinal scale; each respondent is associated with a collection of respondent segments; and each response to each item by each survey respondent corresponds with a response score. The method can further include, for each item and respondent segment, determining a composite score based on the response score. Further, response groupings can be displayed according to a noteworthiness ranking that is based on at least two of the composite score, a change in the composite score, and a sum of weights for each respondent segment.

Claims (77)

1. A method of displaying survey results, the method comprising:

a) for each of a plurality of survey items, receiving survey responses from survey respondents, wherein:

i) each response is chosen from response options, the response options corresponding to an ordinal scale;

ii) each respondent is associated with a collection of respondent segments; and

iii) each response to each item by each survey respondent corresponds with a response score;

b) for each item, determining a composite score based on the response score for each response to the item;

c) for each respondent segment, determining a composite score based on the response score for each response associated with the respondent segment; and

d) providing a display of response groupings, the displayed response groupings comprising at least a portion of the plurality of items and the collection of respondent segments;

e) wherein the response groupings are located on the display along a first axis; and

f) wherein the display includes, for each response grouping, a corresponding image, the corresponding image being located with respect to the first axis or a distinct second axis according to a noteworthiness ranking, the noteworthiness ranking being based on at least two of:

i) the composite score for the response grouping;

ii) a change in the composite score for the response grouping from a previous composite score for the response grouping; and

iii) a sum of weights for each respondent segment, where each survey respondent or possible survey respondent is assigned a weight.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the noteworthiness ranking is based on each of:

i) the composite score for the response grouping;

ii) a change in the composite score for the response grouping from a previous composite score for the response grouping; and

iii) a sum of weights for each respondent segment, where each survey respondent or possible survey respondent is assigned a weight.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein the response score for each response is determined based on whether the response is positive or negative, an integer assignment, or z-scores.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein the response score for each response is a calibrated score, the calibrated score based on a probability that a person having the collection of respondent segments associated with the survey respondent would provide either:

i) the response to the item or any of the response options to the item that are lower on the ordinal scale; or

ii) the response to the item or any of the response options to the item that are higher on the ordinal scale.

5. The method of claim 4 wherein the calibrated scored is further based on benchmark data, and the benchmark data comprises a calibrated score for each response option for each item for each possible collection of respondent segments.

6. The method of claim 4 wherein each calibrated score is a logit-based score.

7. The method of claim 1 ,

a) wherein the collection of respondent segments comprises demographic segments and department segments; and

b) wherein the demographic segments are associated with at least one of respondent tenure, respondent hours worked, respondent salary range, respondent management level, and respondent role.

8. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with instructions which, when executed on a processor, perform the method of:

a) for each of a plurality of survey items, receiving survey responses from survey respondents, wherein:

i) each response is chosen from response options, the response options corresponding to an ordinal scale;

ii) each respondent is associated with a collection of respondent segments; and

iii) each response to each item by each survey respondent corresponds with a response score;

b) for each item, determining a composite score based on the response score for each response to the item;

c) for each respondent segment, determining a composite score based on the response score for each response associated with the respondent segment; and

d) providing a display of response groupings, the displayed response groupings comprising at least a portion of the plurality of items and the collection of respondent segments;

e) wherein the response groupings are located on the display along a first axis; and

f) wherein the display includes, for each response grouping, a corresponding image, the corresponding image being located with respect to the first axis or a distinct second axis according to a noteworthiness ranking, the noteworthiness ranking being based on at least two of:

i) the composite score for the response grouping;

ii) a change in the composite score for the response grouping from a previous composite score for the response grouping; and

iii) a sum of weights for each respondent segment, where each survey respondent or possible survey respondent is assigned a weight.

9. The medium of claim 8 wherein the noteworthiness ranking is based on each of:

i) the composite score for the response grouping;

ii) a change in the composite score for the response grouping from a previous composite score for the response grouping; and

iii) a sum of weights for each respondent segment, where each survey respondent or possible survey respondent is assigned a weight.

10. The medium of claim 8 wherein the response score for each response is determined based on whether the response is positive or negative, an integer assignment, or z-scores.

11. The medium of claim 8 wherein the response score for each response is a calibrated score, the calibrated score based on a probability that a person having the collection of respondent segments associated with the survey respondent would provide either:

i) the response to the item or any of the response options to the item that are lower on the ordinal scale; or

ii) the response to the item or any of the response options to the item that are higher on the ordinal scale.

12. The medium of claim 11 wherein the calibrated scored is further based on benchmark data, and the benchmark data comprises a calibrated score for each response option for each item for each possible collection of respondent segments.

13. The method of claim 11 wherein each calibrated score is a logit-based score.

14. The method of claim 1 ,

a) wherein the collection of respondent segments comprises demographic segments and department segments; and

b) wherein the demographic segments are associated with at least one of respondent tenure, respondent hours worked, respondent salary range, respondent management level, and respondent role.

15. A system for displaying survey results, the system comprising:

a) respondent devices configured to receive survey items and communicate survey responses to the items; and

b) a server configured to carry out the steps of:

i) for each item, receiving survey responses from respondent devices, wherein:

(1) each response is chosen from response options, the response options corresponding to an ordinal scale;

(2) each respondent is associated with a collection of respondent segments; and

(3) each response to each item by each survey respondent corresponds with a response score;

ii) for each item, determining a composite score based on the response score for each response to the item;

iii) for each respondent segment, determining a composite score based on the response score for each response associated with the respondent segment; and

iv) providing a display of response groupings, the displayed response groupings comprising at least a portion of the plurality of items and the collection of respondent segments;

v) wherein the response groupings are located on the display along a first axis; and

vi) wherein the display includes, for each response grouping, a corresponding image, the corresponding image being located with respect to the first axis or a distinct second axis according to a noteworthiness ranking, the noteworthiness ranking being based on at least two of:

(1) the composite score for the response grouping;

(2) a change in the composite score for the response grouping from a previous composite score for the response grouping; and

(3) a sum of weights for each respondent segment, where each survey respondent or possible survey respondent is assigned a weight.

16. The system of claim 15 wherein the noteworthiness ranking is based on each of:

i) the composite score for the response grouping;

ii) a change in the composite score for the response grouping from a previous composite score for the response grouping; and

iii) a sum of weights for each respondent segment, where each survey respondent or possible survey respondent is assigned a weight.

17. The system of claim 15 wherein the response score for each response is determined based on whether the response is positive or negative, an integer assignment, or z-scores.

18. The system of claim 15 wherein the response score for each response is a calibrated score, the calibrated score based on a probability that a person having the collection of respondent segments associated with the survey respondent would provide either:

i) the response to the item or any of the response options to the item that are lower on the ordinal scale; or

ii) the response to the item or any of the response options to the item that are higher on the ordinal scale.

19. The system of claim 18 wherein the calibrated scored is further based on benchmark data, and the benchmark data comprises a calibrated score for each response option for each item for each possible collection of respondent segments.

20. The system of claim 18 wherein each calibrated score is a logit-based score.

Assignments (2)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Nov 4, 2021
From: ENERGAGE, LLC
To: WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK
Reel/Frame 058018/0866 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 21, 2018
From: JOI, RICHARD JOHNSON; LEAMAN, ZACHARY JORDAN; CLAFFEY, DOUGLAS JOHN; SALK, ETHAN; SMITH, KINSEY
To: ENERGAGE, LLC
Reel/Frame 046868/0062 →
Continuity (5)
Continuation 15943990 · Apr 3, 2018
Continuation In Part 14932017 · Nov 4, 2015
Provisional Application 62480684 · Apr 3, 2017
Provisional Application 62075097 · Nov 4, 2014
Related Publication 20180357579A1 · Dec 13, 2018
Cited By (1)
US 12,211,058