JP2009187330A - Improvement guide system of job quality - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To solve the problem that it becomes difficult to accurately set priorities to the method of process improvement since data combination patterns become huge by acquiring the data of an individual job process for many projects. <P>SOLUTION: The job quality improvement guide system for guiding the improvement method of job process quality comprises: a means of evaluating a job rule according to a predetermined measure and obtaining a numerical evaluation result 1; a means of storing the numerical evaluation result 1; a means of evaluating the execution degree of the job rule according to the predetermined measure and obtaining a numerical evaluation result 2; a means of storing the numerical evaluation result 2; a means of storing the relation of statistic and the improvement method beforehand; a means of calculating the statistic from the numerical evaluation result 1 and the numerical evaluation result 2; a means of comparing the calculated statistic with the stored statistic and selecting the improvement method; and a means of displaying the selected improvement method. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2009,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to a technology for promoting business process improvement by evaluating a business process of an organization and presenting an improvement method. In particular, this technique is used not only for internal process improvement within a company but also for external consulting services.

  In recent years, the product life cycle has been shortened, and the way of thinking about ensuring product quality has also changed. In other words, it is a shift from the idea of eliminating defects in post-development inspection to the idea of creating quality from the upstream of the development process. For this reason, attention has been focused on techniques for evaluating and improving the quality of development processes. There are the following technologies for evaluation and improvement support of business processes including development processes.

  For example, in “Business Process Evaluation Method and System” of Patent Document 1, a person who performs a business process improvement activity and a person who is actually in charge of the business process sequentially answer a list of prepared question items. Thus, a technique for reducing the preparation man-hours and the execution man-hours for the business process diagnosis and improving the accuracy of the diagnosis result is disclosed.

  Further, “Business Process Quality Evaluation Method” in Patent Document 2 discloses a method for evaluating a quality management system based on general-purpose quality management standards and evaluating the degree of execution of the quality management system for individual projects. ing. This facilitates the mutual use of good practices of quality management systems and enables highly accurate business process evaluation by taking into account the execution of the project.

  These technologies enable general-purpose and high-accuracy evaluation while reducing the man-hours for business process diagnosis, and without having to spend a great deal of man-hours on a large number of evaluation data for detailed business processes in many projects. Can be acquired.

JP 2005-108132 A JP 2007-172291 A

  However, while the conventional technology described above can acquire a large number of evaluation data from individual business processes of a large number of projects, it has been difficult to derive an effective process improvement measure by combining them. That is, by acquiring the data of individual business processes of a large number of projects, the combination pattern of process improvement targets and improvement points increases, and it has been difficult to accurately prioritize process improvement. Furthermore, it has been difficult to accurately select whether the business rules should be improved or whether the execution level should be improved rather than the business rules in the process improvement.

  The present invention has been made in view of the above problems, and prioritizes and presents business process improvement means that should be preferentially implemented as an organization from the evaluation results of individual business processes of many projects. The purpose is to provide.

  The problem can be solved by the following configuration.

  In a system for providing a system administrator interface means, a business improver interface means, and a business staff interface means through a network to guide a method for improving business process quality, the system administrator The interface means includes means for supporting editing of a question sentence for guiding evaluation for each business process, and means for accepting registration of a parameter for extracting an improvement method from the statistics of the business process. The interface means includes a means for accepting registration of an evaluation level of a business rule and a means for presenting a calculation result of an evaluation score of a business rule that is an average value of evaluation scores of processes belonging to each phase. Interface means for accepting registration of project execution, and Means for presenting a calculation result of the evaluation score of the project, a first database for holding the question sentence, a storage column for the evaluation result in a data table, and a second database for storing the evaluation data of the business rule A third database that stores evaluation data of the execution degree of the project, a fourth database that stores parameters for extracting an improvement method from the statistics of the business process, and the third database Extraction of business rule improvement guideline and business process improvement guideline data by means of means for reading out evaluation data of project execution degree and calculating statistics, the statistics and parameters read from the fourth database And means for presenting to the interface means for business improvers.

  First, by calculating statistics, it is possible to grasp the degree of execution for a large number of projects with a small number of indicators, and the most effective improvement as an organization without being affected by the superiority or inferiority of each project. Guidance can be obtained.

  Furthermore, by associating the statistic with a specific improvement method, an appropriate improvement method can be efficiently selected even if various statistics appear.

  According to the present invention, it is possible to obtain a guideline for business process improvement that should be preferentially performed as an organization from the evaluation results of individual business processes of a large number of projects, and it is possible to efficiently implement business process improvements.

  Embodiments of the present invention will be described below.

  First, a business process targeted by the present invention will be described with reference to FIG. The figure shows the flow of product development work in a business unit. The horizontal axis is time 1901, and time advances from left to right. A business process can be described as a chain of individual tasks. In other words, the output of a certain business becomes the input of the next business, and the output of this business becomes the input of the next business. There is no variation for any individual task, and rules are defined as business rules so that they can be executed stably without omission. Based on these business rules, product development projects are repeatedly implemented. Here, each job is called a process 1902, and a meaningful chunk of the process is called a phase 1903. The planning phase 1904 shown in FIG. 1 includes a goal setting process 1905, a resource estimation process 1906, a schedule planning process 1907, and a risk evaluation process 1908. A product 1909 as a product is realized through a plurality of phases. Here, it is important to improve the quality of individual processes in order to continue to develop products of high quality stably. And the quality of individual processes is achieved by ensuring that good business rules 1910 are executed.

  Next, with reference to FIG. 20, the improvement of the business process targeted by the present invention will be described. FIG. 4A shows a business process before improvement, and FIG. 4B shows a business process after improvement. FIG. 6A shows a state in which three projects from Project 1 (2001) to Project 3 (2003) proceed to develop products A2004, B2005, and C2006, respectively. In the figure, because the second business rule is deficient (×) 2007, the quality of the second process has deteriorated in each project (△) 2008. In addition, although the business rule itself is not defective in the fourth business rule (○) 2009, Project 2 (2002) failed to comply with the business rule (×) 2010, and the process quality deteriorated. Yes. As a result, the products A, B, and C all have deteriorated product quality. The central graph in the figure shows the transition of the number of shipments over the product life cycle, with the horizontal axis representing time and the vertical axis representing the number of shipments. In the graph on the right side of the figure, the horizontal axis represents the same period of time, and the vertical axis represents the number of product accidents (the number of defects that could not be detected by the shipping inspection but were found after the product was delivered to the market). Shows the number of product accidents occurring over the product life cycle. Products A and C have the number of accidents 2011 proportional to the number of shipments because product defects due to the second process quality degradation have been created. In addition, in product B, the fourth process quality has also deteriorated, so more product accidents occur in 2012. On the other hand, FIG. 5B shows a case where this is improved. By improving the second business rule 2013, the process quality at the same location has been improved 2014. In addition, for Project 2 (2002), the fourth business rule non-compliance 2015 has been improved to improve process quality. As a result, products A, B, and C can all improve product quality, and as a result, the number of product accidents on the right side of the figure can be reduced in 2016. Here, in order to improve to the state shown in FIG. 6B, where the quality is degraded, where is the cause of the quality degradation (whether the business rules are incomplete or the project rules are not observed) It is a problem to specify accurately. The business quality improvement guide system according to the present invention is intended to promptly and accurately present the cause of quality degradation, which is the latter of the above problems.

  DETAILED DESCRIPTION Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. The input / output unit 101 is used by a system user to input and output data. The input / output unit 101 includes a display unit such as a display and an input unit such as a keyboard and a mouse, and is a general-purpose computer device connected to the network 102. The business quality improvement guide system 103 includes a general-purpose server device and a database connected to a network. The business process diagnosis table 104 is a table composed of a question text for evaluating business process quality and a storage column for evaluation results, and may be pre-defined or edited by a system administrator. The business rule evaluation unit 105 is a unit that receives input of business rule evaluation information in the business process diagnosis table. The business rule evaluation data 106 is a means for storing the output of the business rule evaluation means 105, and can be rewritten like a database. The execution level evaluation unit 107 is a unit that reads the business rule evaluation data and receives input of execution level evaluation information. The execution degree evaluation data 108 is a means for storing the output of the execution degree evaluation means, and can be rewritten like a database. The statistic calculation means is a means for calculating the statistic from the execution degree evaluation data. The improvement method data 110 is data in which a statistic and an improvement method are related, and may be registered in advance, or may be editable by a system administrator. The improvement method selection means 111 is a means for comparing the statistics output from the statistics calculation means 109 with the statistics of the improvement method data and selecting an improvement method. The selected improvement method is displayed on the display of the input / output device 101.

  FIG. 2 is a flowchart of the business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. The flowchart is divided into four types according to the ID of the user of the system. The figure (a) is a flow of a screen for a system administrator, the figure (b) is a flow of business rule registration for a screen for a business improver, and the figure (c) is a flow of a screen for a business person in charge. FIG. 4D is a flow for displaying the improvement method on the screen for business improvers. 3 to 14 are screen examples of the system displayed on the display of the input / output device. Hereinafter, the flowchart of the business quality improvement guide system will be described with reference to FIGS.

  First, the flowchart of the system administrator screen in FIG. 2A will be described. When a program stored in the system is started by “start” 201 in FIG. 2A, a screen of “accept ID and password” 202 is displayed.

  FIG. 3 is an example of a login screen of the business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. When an ID and a password are entered in the ID column 301 and the password column 302 on the screen and the login button 303 is pressed, “user type identification” 203 in FIG. 2A is performed. In this process, the input ID and password are compared with the ID and password in the user information table registered in advance in the database, the user type is identified, and the corresponding screen is displayed.

  FIG. 16 shows an example of a user information table registered in the database. For each user, user information of ID 1601, password 1602, user type 1603, name 1604, affiliation 1605, mail address 1606, and remarks 1607 is registered. The ID and password entered on the screen of FIG. 3 are searched in the same table to identify the user type 1603 of the matching data record. The system displays an operation screen corresponding to the user type on the input / output device. Hereinafter, a case where the “system administrator screen” corresponds will be described.

  FIG. 4 is an example of a screen when the question text edit button on the system management screen of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. The left side of the screen is an operation menu column, and menus that can be operated by the user are arranged in a button format. When the menu button is pressed, the corresponding screen is displayed in the operation screen column on the right side. The figure shows an example in which the “Edit Question” button 401 in the operation menu column is pressed. The operation screen displays a business process diagnosis table for evaluating business process quality. In the vertical direction, phase 404, which is a large division, and questions corresponding to individual processes are arranged. In the horizontal direction, input fields for a phase 404, a question number 405, a question sentence 406, a business rule evaluation 407, and an execution degree evaluation 408 are arranged. A question sentence which is an initial value of the system is displayed on the screen, and the system accepts editing of the question sentence as necessary. In editing, the question text can be rewritten more specifically. For example, “product achievement goal ...” 409 is rewritten as “product quality goal, cost goal, delivery date goal ...”. This facilitates the understanding of the business improver who inputs the business rules and the business staff who inputs the execution level, and can improve the accuracy of the input information. When the upper right registration button 410 is pressed, the edited result is registered as a business process diagnosis table, and the process returns to button operation identification.

  FIG. 5 is a screen example when the selection button for registering the relationship between the statistics on the screen for system administrator of the business quality improvement guide system and the business improvement plan is pressed. This screen, which will be described later, is a screen for registering parameters for automatically extracting improvement methods from the statistics of business processes, and is an important embodiment of the present invention. From the pull-down menu 501 on the upper side of the screen, it is possible to select which phase is to be registered. In the displayed phase 502, the phase names described in the business process diagnosis table of FIG. 4 are registered in advance and can be selected.

  The upper part of the figure is a parameter registration area for processing the relationship between the business rule and the statistics of the execution degree, and accepts parameter settings for presenting a method for improving the business rule. The execution level is displayed on the horizontal axis (x) 503, and the business rule evaluation score is displayed on the vertical axis (y) 504. In both cases, the initial value is 0 and the maximum value is 100. The two-dimensional area shown in the figure is divided into four areas a to d, which are used for selection processing. The boundary values 505 and 506 set for the x-axis and y-axis are selection conditions. In each case, the initial value is displayed in the input field, but the change of the boundary condition from 0 to 100 is accepted. The initial value is, for example, 50 (505). There is an actual value of the organization as a guide for value input. If the actual value of the business process of the past organization has been obtained, enter it with reference to the value. When there is no actual value, the operation is started with the initial value of the system, and it is reviewed when the actual value is obtained. An improvement proposal is received in each of the areas a to d. Although the initial plan is registered in the system, the user may correct the text to match the organization. Area a (507) is a case where the level of business rules is high and the degree of execution is also high. In this case, since no improvement is necessary for the phase, the improvement method does not require improvement of the business rules. Area b (508) is a case where the business rule level is low and the execution degree is high. In this case, since the current business rules are sufficiently executed, there is room for improving the level of business rules and improving business process quality to a higher target. For this reason, it is necessary to consider improvement of business rules as an improvement method. The area c (509) is a case where the business rule level is high and the execution level is low. In this case, there is a high possibility that the current business rules are too high for the capability of the organization, and as a result, the quality of the business process is degraded. For this reason, it is an improvement method to improve the execution degree even if the level of the business rule is lowered. Area d (510) is a case where the execution level is low even though the level of the business rule is low. In this case, since the execution method of the business rule is not specifically defined, there is a possibility that the implementation content varies. For this reason, the improvement plan eliminates the ambiguity of the business rules.

  The middle part of the figure is an area that accepts parameter settings for processing the relationship between the average value of multiple projects and the statistics of variance regarding the degree of execution. This is for presenting improvement guidelines that focus on projects. It is. An average value is displayed on the horizontal axis (x) 511, and a variance is displayed on the vertical axis (y) 512. In each case, the initial value is 0 and the maximum value is 100. However, the upper limit is displayed as an input standard for dispersion, and no upper limit is set for processing. The two-dimensional area shown in the figure is divided into four areas e to h and used for selection. The boundary values 513 and 514 set for the x-axis and y-axis are conditions, the initial values are displayed in the respective input fields, the initial values are, for example, 50 and 10, and improvement of e to f Although the initial plan of the system is registered in the method input field, accepting the correction so that the user can correct the text to match the organization is the same as the upper case. Regions e (515) and g (517) are cases where the variance is large. In this case, the improvement of individual projects is often more effective than the improvement of business rules. For this reason, a comment giving a suggestion that there is variation depending on the project is displayed. On the other hand, regions f (516) and h (518) are cases where the variance is small. In this case, there are many cases where there is an effect in improvement focusing on the business rules that are common factors, rather than focusing on individual projects. For this reason, comments suggesting improvements other than those caused by projects that are easy to implement (or difficult) common to the projects are input as initial values. For example, in the region f (516), since it is easy to implement in common, the level of business rules can be improved. In the area g (517), since it is difficult to implement in common, it is necessary to consider lowering the level of business rules.

  The lower part of the figure shows a determination condition setting area for presenting a specific improvement plan for each project. For example, when the variance is large in the middle of the figure, there are cases where the variance is increased because there are unique projects even though most projects have similar execution degrees. In this case, the effect of business process improvement is often increased by focusing on the unique project. In other words, if there is an excellent project in particular, it can be used as a reference for improving the level of other projects by investigating the reason why it is highly executed despite belonging to the same organization and following the same business rules. Is likely to be. The system automatically suggests which phase of which project should be focused on, so that the object of analysis can be narrowed down and the efficiency of improvement can be improved. On the other hand, if there is a particularly problematic project, the degree of execution is low despite the fact that other projects can be executed in common. It is necessary to improve the product at an early stage to prevent the product quality from decreasing. The setting of the determination condition is accepted as an input in the entry field 519 displayed on the screen how many times the standard deviation is set as the upper limit or the lower limit with respect to the average value. The variation of projects belonging to an organization approaches a normal distribution as the number of projects is increased if the business rules are the same. For this reason, it is possible to adjust and set what percentage of the project can be extracted by setting an upper limit and a lower limit with a multiple of the standard deviation with respect to the average value. As a result, a project corresponding to the area i (520) exceeding the upper limit is a good project, and a project corresponding to the area j (521) below the lower limit is a cautionary project.

  FIG. 17 is an example of the improvement method selection condition table registered in the database. When the registration button 522 at the upper right of the screen in FIG. 5 is pressed, the set parameters are registered as the improvement method data 110 in FIG. There are three types of conditions: business rules and execution levels 1701, average and distribution of execution levels 1702, and singular project extractions 1703. The results registered in the upper, middle, and lower sections of the operation screen column in FIG. Is saved. For the areas a to j (1704) in FIG. 5, the start point (1705) and end point (1706) in the x direction, the start point (1707) and end point (1708) in the y direction, and the comment (1709) of the improvement plan are registered. .

  When the logout button 403 displayed in the operation menu field on the left side of FIG. 5 is pressed, the screen is closed and the process ends.

  Next, the flowchart of the screen for business improvers in FIG. A in FIG. 9A is connected to the starting point in FIG. Specifically, the ID and password entered on the login screen in FIG. 3 are compared with the ID and password in the user information table, and the user type is identified as a business improver.

  FIG. 6 is an example of a screen when the business rule level registration button on the business improver screen of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. On the operation screen, the same business process diagnosis table as in FIG. 4 is displayed. On the same screen, an input is accepted in the business rule evaluation column 604. The business rule evaluation column is divided into a business rule evaluation point column 605 and a business rule name column 606. Hereinafter, an example of inputting the business rule evaluation point and the business rule name will be described using the question 607 regarding the target setting No. 1 as an example.

  FIG. 14 is an example of a help screen of the business quality improvement guide system. When the “Help” button 608 at the upper right of the screen in FIG. 6 is pressed, the help screen in FIG. 14 is popped up. When the X button 1401 in the upper right is pressed, the pop-up screen is closed. In the upper part of the figure, evaluation criteria for business rules are described. The evaluation standard is a five-level evaluation 1402 from level 0 to level 4, and evaluation points 1403 are defined in increments of 25 from 0 points to 100 points, respectively. For each level, a general-purpose business rule criterion 1404 is described. Furthermore, a specific example 1405 is described in parentheses, taking the target setting of question No. 1 in FIG. 6 as an example.

  FIG. 15 is an explanatory diagram of business rules and execution evidence. The concept of the determination criterion of FIG. 14 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 4A is an example of business rules, and FIG. 4B is an example of evidence that executes business rules. The quality management system required by ISO is defined as organizational standards as shown in the figure. Each criterion is composed of a text 1501 in which the rules are clearly written, and an entry format 1502 in which the rules are specifically executed and recorded. It is desirable for the business rules to be able to be reliably implemented without any variation in the content requested by the standards. Therefore, the upper table in FIG. 14 defines this as a level. First, at level 0, the case where there is no business rule 1501 corresponding to FIG. Level 1 corresponds to the case where the business rule 1501 of FIG. 15A exists, but the entry format 1502 is not defined, or the entry is not standardly defined even if the format exists. . For example, this corresponds to a case where the items in the target entry column in FIG. Level 2 corresponds to the case where the business rule 1501 of FIG. 15A exists and the entry format 1502 is also defined. For example, as shown in FIG. 15A, if the items in the target entry field are specified, it is possible to prevent the description of the target from being missed by the project. In Level 3, the business rules 1501 in FIG. 15 (a) exist, the entry format 1502 is also defined, and further, a third party checks whether the entry format is filled in according to the procedure described in the entry format. This is the case when the standard is defined as instructing business staff to make improvements. That is, even if there is an entry format, it is meaningless to set a target if it is blank or a description such as “conventional”. Here, the person in charge of business improvement corresponds to the third party. Level 4 corresponds to the case where it is determined as a criterion that the results checked in level 3 are statistically summarized, the tendency of the organization is grasped, and the business rules are improved. That is, even at level 3, even if an individual project is instructed to improve, it becomes a so-called muffled state and does not lead to an essential improvement. If a deficiency in entry commonly occurs in many projects by grasping a statistical tendency, deficiency in the entry format 1502 in FIG. 15A needs to be improved. Furthermore, instead of temporarily implementing such improvement activities, it is possible to continuously implement improvements as an organization by being clearly stated in the standards.

  The entry example of FIG. 6 will be described in detail with reference to FIG. 15. In the case of FIG. 15A, the item 1503 is specifically defined in the entry format 1502, and therefore the level 2 requirement is satisfied. Furthermore, since the text 1501 stipulates that the business improvement person should check the entry results, it corresponds to 75 points of level 3. For this reason, 75 points (609) are input as the business rule evaluation points of No. 1 in FIG. Further, the development plan creation standard, which is the standard name in FIG. 15A, is described in the business rule name column (610). When the registration button (611) in the upper right of FIG. 6 is pressed, the result is stored in the database as business rule evaluation data.

  FIG. 18 shows an example of evaluation data registered in the database of the business quality improvement guide system. There are two types of data. FIG. 4A shows registered data of results registered by the evaluation means, and FIG. 4B shows data registered with evaluation point calculation results. With the above operation, the result is stored in the business rule evaluation score column 1802 in FIG.

  FIG. 7 is an example of a screen when the business rule evaluation point calculation button 602 on the business improver screen of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. The evaluation point calculation is calculated as an average value of evaluation points of processes belonging to each phase.

  Here, Ei is a mechanism evaluation point of phase i, n = 1 to Ni is a process number, and en is an evaluation point of process n. The calculation result is stored in a column 1813 of business rule evaluation points in FIG. When the calculation is completed, the graph of FIG. 7 is displayed. The vertical axis of the graph is the phase 704, and the horizontal axis 705 is the evaluation score. By comparing the heights of the graphs, it is possible to roughly know the order of improvement of business rules. In the example shown in the figure, the planning 706, specification analysis 707, and design development 708 are performed in this order. However, the improvement of business rules cannot be judged accurately unless it is combined with the performance of the organization. The present invention is characterized in that it is possible to accurately determine the priority of business improvement by combining with the execution level, instead of evaluating only the evaluation result of the business rule independently. When the logout button 703 displayed in the operation menu field on the left side of FIG. 7 is pressed, the screen is closed and the process is terminated.

  Next, the flowchart of the screen for business staff in FIG. 2C will be described. B in FIG. 9A is connected to the starting point in FIG. Specifically, the ID and password entered on the login screen in FIG. 3 are compared with the ID and password in the user information table, and the user type is identified as the person in charge of business.

FIG. 8 is an example of a screen when the project execution level registration button on the screen for business personnel in the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. On the operation screen, the same business process diagnosis table as in FIG. 4 is displayed. On the same screen, an input in the evaluation evaluation column 804 is accepted. The execution degree evaluation column is divided into an execution degree column 805 and an evidence column 806. In the following, the execution method and evidence input method will be described with reference to the question 807 relating to No. 1 goal setting.
When the “Help” button 808 at the upper right of the screen is pressed, the help screen of FIG. 14 is displayed in a pop-up manner. In the lower part of the figure, the evaluation criteria for the degree of execution are described. The degree of execution is a five-level evaluation 1406 from level 0 to level 4, and the degree of execution is defined in steps of 25% from 0% to 100%, respectively. For each level, a general-purpose execution criterion 1408 is described. Further, in parentheses, a specific example 1409 is described taking the target setting of question No. 1 in FIG. 8 as an example. A specific example of this will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 4B shows an example of evidence in which business rules are executed. Based on the business rules shown in FIG. 11A, the person in charge of each project creates FIG. In terms of performance, it is desirable that the implementation requirements described in the business rules are reliably implemented. For this reason, this is defined as a level in the lower table of FIG. First, at level 0, the target entry field 1505 in FIG. 15B corresponds to a blank field. Level 1 is a case where FIG. 15B is described, but all the contents are ambiguous expressions such as “conventional”. Level 2 is a case where a part of the entry column in FIG. 15B is an ambiguous expression such as “conventional” 1505. Level 3 is a case where the column of FIG. 15 (b) the conventional product is blank. Level 4 corresponds to the case where a specific actual value is also described in the column of the conventional product.

An example of the execution of No. 1 in FIG. 8 and the input of evidence will be specifically described with reference to FIG. In the case of FIG. 15B, the cost item 1506 has specific numerical values for both the target and the conventional product and satisfies the requirements of level 4, but the quality target column 1507 is 1505 as before, Level 2 For this reason, 50 points (811) of level 2 are input. Further, the A project development plan, which is the evidence name in FIG. 15B, is described in the evidence column (809). The result is registered in the database by pressing the registration button (810) in the upper right of FIG. As a result, the result is stored in the column (1805) of the project A of the execution degree shown in FIG.
FIG. 9 is an example of a screen when the project evaluation point calculation button on the screen for business personnel of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. The evaluation point calculation is calculated as an average value of evaluation points of processes belonging to each phase.

  Here, Pi is the degree of execution of phase i, n = 1 to Ni is the process number, and pn is the evaluation point of process n. The calculation result is stored in the column 1816 of the project A of the execution degree shown in FIG. When the calculation is completed, the graph of FIG. 9 is displayed. The vertical axis of the graph is the phase 904, and the horizontal axis is the execution degree 905. By comparing the heights of the graphs, you can roughly know the order of improvement in the degree of execution of your project. In the example shown in the figure, the order is design development 908, specification analysis 907, and planning 906. However, the degree of execution cannot be accurately determined by looking only at the results of the project itself. The present invention is characterized in that it is possible not to evaluate only the evaluation result of a single project but to accurately determine the priority of business improvement by combining statistical trends of a plurality of projects. When the logout button 903 displayed in the operation menu field on the left side of FIG. 9 is pressed, the screen is closed and the process is terminated.

  Finally, a flowchart of the screen for business improvement person in FIG. C in FIG. 7B is connected to the starting point in FIG. Specifically, in FIG. 5 (b), log in as the user type of the person in charge of business, and if execution data exists in the database, rewrite 216 business rule information and inconsistency will occur. To do.

  FIG. 10 is an example of a screen when the statistic calculation button on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. When the button 1001 is pressed, the evaluation data stored in the database is read and the statistics are calculated.

  A method for calculating a statistic will be described with reference to FIG. First, in the execution degree column 1804 of FIG. 9A, data is stored by performing the operation of FIG. 2C on a plurality of projects. The figure shows the results of projects A1805, B1806, and C1807. In the statistics calculation 241, the process No. Statistics for the registered project are calculated every (1801). Specifically, the average is 1808, the variance is 1809, the maximum is 1810, and the minimum is 1811. Further, a process evaluation score that is the product of the average value and the business rule evaluation score is calculated. The process evaluation point 1803 is an index indicating how much the evaluation point 1802 of the business rule is applied to an actual business depending on the degree of execution. In other words, no matter how high the business rule evaluation point 1802 is, if the project execution level 1804 is low, the level of the mechanism functioning in the actual business process will be low. That is, it becomes an index indicating the quality of the actual business process. On the other hand, the same calculation is executed in FIG. That is, for each phase 1812, an average 1819, variance 1820, and process evaluation point 1814 are calculated. However, as shown in the table, the number of good projects 1821 and the number of projects requiring attention 1822 are different from FIG. The meaning of these numbers will be explained below. When the statistic calculation is completed, the results are displayed in the graph and table of FIG. The graph and table in FIG. 18 display the results of processing the table in FIG. 18B based on the improvement method data in FIG. In the table, for each phase 1005, a business rule evaluation point 1006, a process evaluation point 1007, an average degree of execution 1008, a variance 1009, a good project number 1010, and a cautionary project number 1011 are displayed. The vertical axis of the graph is the phase 1012, and the horizontal axis is the evaluation point 1013. The graph shown in FIG. 9 is a combination of the business rule evaluation result graph shown in FIG. 7 and the project execution graph shown in FIG. That is, for each phase, the business rule evaluation point 1014 and the process evaluation point 1015 are displayed in an overlapping manner. The process evaluation score 1015 is obtained as the product of the evaluation score of the business rule and the average value of the execution levels of all projects. Looking at the process evaluation points in the figure, the priority required to improve the business process is the order of design development 1017, planning 1015, specification analysis 1016, and only the evaluation result of FIG. This is different from any of FIG. That is, in order to accurately determine the priority of the business process improvement, it is understood that it is necessary to evaluate the business rule and the execution degree in combination.

  FIG. 11 is an example of a screen when the graph display button on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. When the button 1102 is pressed, the improvement method selection means 111 in FIG. 1 reads out the evaluation data in FIG. 18B stored in the database and displays it as a graph. In the figure, a four-stage graph is displayed. The top graph 1105 is the same as FIG. The graph 1106 in the second row displays details of the statistics of the planning phase, and the graphs 1107 and 1108 in the third and fourth rows are also detailed displays of the statistics of each phase. The second graph 1106 will be described. The horizontal axis is the same as the uppermost graph. The vertical axis is composed of two areas. The upper side 1109 shows the distribution of the entire project, and the lower side 1110 shows the result of each project. The distribution of the entire project on the upper side is displayed by generating a normal distribution graph from the mean and variance of FIG. The result of each project on the lower side is a plot of the execution level of each project in FIG. 18B. From this figure, it is possible to grasp the trends of projects in the organization that are not known from the average and variance, which are representative values of statistics. Here, the number of good projects is calculated by comparing the degree of execution of each project in the table of FIG. 18B with the extraction of unique projects in FIG. The number of projects corresponding to (area j) is extracted. For example, since the C project corresponds to the cautionary project 1111 in the planning of FIG. 11, the number of cautionary projects in the planning phase in the table of FIG. 10 is 1 (1018). In addition, since the E project corresponds to the good project 1112 in the specification analysis of FIG. 11, the number of good projects in the specification analysis phase of the table of FIG. 10 is 1 (1019). In FIG. 11, the singular project is highlighted and displayed. In other words, in the distribution of FIG. 11, the planning and specification analysis take larger values than the design and development, but in fact, the project C1111 is unique in the planning and the project E1112 is unique in the specification analysis. However, if these projects are excluded, it can be seen that the difference in variance is not so large. The existence of these unique projects is detected as a statistic when the number of good projects 1019 or the number of projects requiring attention 1018 in the table of FIG. 10 has a value other than zero.

  FIG. 12 is an example of a screen when the improvement method selection button on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. When the button 1003 is pressed, the improvement method selecting means 111 reads the evaluation data of FIG. 18B and the improvement method data of FIG. 17 stored in the database, and selects the improvement method by comparing both. indicate. The lower table of the figure shows the display results of the improvement method. This table describes the phase 1201 in the vertical direction and the improvement method 1202 in the horizontal direction. In the improvement method 1202, for each phase 1201, the business rule evaluation point 1813 of FIG. 18B, the average 1819 of execution, and the variance 1820 are set as “business rule and execution” 1701 and “average of execution” in FIG. Compared with 1702 and “distributed” 1702, the corresponding comments are extracted and displayed.

  Further, FIG. 13 shows the continuation of the screen of FIG. FIG. 13 is a graph showing the mechanism by which the improvement method selection means selects the improvement method. The lower graph is an example of extracting business rule improvement guidelines, and is the same graph as described in FIG. The statistics shown in the table of FIG. 12 are plotted with ○ 1301 for the planning phase, Δ1302 for the specification analysis phase, and □ 1303 for the design development phase. For example, focusing on the specification analysis phase 1302, since it belongs to the area of a1304, “improvement of business rule improvement” 1305 of the improvement plan is extracted. In the lower graph, for example, when attention is paid to the planning phase 1301, since it belongs to the area of e1306, the improvement plan “variation by project” 1307 is extracted. Furthermore, the improvement method selection means detects that the number of projects requiring attention in the statistics shown in FIG. 18B is 1 (1823). By combining the above results, a sentence (1308) of the improvement method in the table of FIG. 13 is created. When the logout button 1204 displayed in the operation menu column on the left side of FIG. 13 is pressed, the screen is closed and the process is terminated.

  In the present invention, as described in the above embodiment, the business improvement user can accurately grasp the business process improvement guidelines by confirming the displays in FIGS. Specifically, by comparing the heights of the process evaluation points in the graphs of FIGS. 10 to 12 between phases, it is possible to accurately grasp which phase needs to be improved with priority. The relationship between the graph heights of the phases in FIGS. 10 to 12 is different from both FIG. 7 in which only the business rule evaluation result is displayed and FIG. 9 in which only the execution result is displayed. This is knowledge obtained only from the graphs of FIGS. 10 to 12 that are displayed by combining the rule evaluation result and the execution degree. In addition, by confirming the improvement plans shown in FIGS. 12 and 13, it is possible to accurately know the order of business process improvement, such as whether to improve the business rules or to improve the execution of the project. As shown in the figure, it is understood that business rules need to be improved in planning and design development, but there is no need for improvement in specification analysis, and improvement guidance is required for individual projects in planning and specification analysis. . Furthermore, by checking FIG. 11 in combination, it is possible to grasp which phase of which project is the problem. Further, in the design and development of FIGS. 12 and 13, the business rule level down is presented as an improvement candidate. From the perspective of business process improvement, only improvement is likely to be considered as an improvement option, but it suggests that the quality of the process is reduced because the level is too high compared to the capability of the organization. This is a finding obtained only by the configuration according to the present invention.

  As described above, according to the present invention, it is possible to obtain a guideline for business process improvement that should be preferentially performed as an organization from the detailed business process evaluation results of a large number of projects, and to efficiently implement the business process improvement. As explained.

  The system of the present invention can be implemented with a general-purpose computer device, database, and network, and can be easily used not only in companies but also in organizations such as public utilities.

It is a block diagram of the work quality improvement guide system for implementing this invention. 3 is a flowchart of a business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. 3 is a flowchart of a business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. 3 is a flowchart of a business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. 3 is a flowchart of a business quality improvement guide system for carrying out the present invention. It is an example of the login screen of the business quality improvement guide system for implementing this invention. It is a screen example when the edit button of the question text on the system management screen of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. It is an example of a screen when a registration button is pressed for the relationship between the statistics on the system management screen of the business quality improvement guide system and the improvement method. It is an example of a screen when the business rule level registration button on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. It is an example of a screen when the evaluation rule calculation button of the business rule on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. It is an example of a screen when a project execution registration button is pressed on a screen for a business person in the business quality improvement guide system. It is an example of a screen when a project evaluation point calculation button on a screen for a business person in the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. It is an example of a screen when the statistic calculation button on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. It is an example of a screen when the graph display button of the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. It is an example of a screen when the improvement method selection button on the screen for business improvers of the business quality improvement guide system is pressed. This is a graph showing how the improvement method selection means of the business quality improvement guide system selects an improvement method. It is an example of the help screen of a business quality improvement guide system. It is explanatory drawing of a business rule and execution evidence. It is an example of the user information table registered in the database. It is an example of the improvement method selection condition table registered in the database. It is an example of the evaluation data registered in the database of the business quality improvement guide system. It is explanatory drawing about the business process which this invention makes object. It is explanatory drawing about the improvement of the business process which this invention aims at.

Explanation of symbols

101 ... Input / output means, 102 ... Network, 103 ... Business quality improvement guide system,
104 ... Business process diagnosis table, 105 ... Business rule evaluation means, 106 ... Business rule evaluation data, 107 ... Execution degree evaluation means, 108 ... Execution degree evaluation data, 109 ... Statistics calculation means,
110 ... improvement method data, 111 ... improvement method selection means

Claims (9)

A system for providing an interface means for a system administrator, an interface means for a business improver, and an interface means for a business person through a network to guide a method for improving business process quality,
The interface means for the system administrator includes means for supporting editing of a question sentence that guides evaluation for each business process, and means for accepting registration of parameters for extracting an improvement method from the statistics of the business process. ,
The business improver interface means includes means for accepting registration of an evaluation level of a business rule, and means for presenting a calculation result of an evaluation score of a business rule that is an average value of evaluation scores of processes belonging to each phase,
The business staff interface means comprises means for accepting registration of project execution, and means for presenting calculation results of project evaluation points,
A first database that holds the question sentence and a storage column for evaluation results in a data table;
A second database for storing evaluation data of the business rules;
A third database storing evaluation data of the project execution degree;
A fourth database for storing parameters for extracting improvement methods from the statistics of the business process;
Means for reading out evaluation data of the project execution degree from the third database and calculating statistics;
Means for extracting business rule improvement guidelines and business process improvement guidelines data based on the statistics and parameters read from the fourth database, and presenting them to the business improver interface means;
Business quality improvement guide system characterized by comprising.   The business quality improvement guide system according to claim 1, wherein the statistics include statistics regarding an average and a variation with respect to evaluation data of at least one project execution degree.   The means for extracting business rule improvement guidelines and business process improvement guidelines data based on the statistics and the parameters read from the fourth database and presenting them to the business improver interface means is: 3. The business quality improvement guide system according to claim 2, wherein the comparison is performed by combining the average of the evaluation data of the degree of execution and the statistics regarding the variation.   The business quality improvement guide system according to claim 1, wherein the statistical quantity includes a statistical quantity with respect to a product of business rule evaluation data and an average value of project execution evaluation data.   The business improver interface means displays on the same coordinates the result of calculating the statistic for the product of the business rule evaluation data and the average value of the project execution evaluation data for different business operations. The business quality improvement guide system according to claim 1, wherein   The business improver interface means, for each business, in addition to the statistics for the product of the business rule evaluation data and the average value of the project execution evaluation data, the business rule evaluation data is the same. 6. The business quality improvement guide system according to claim 5, wherein the system is displayed on coordinates.   7. The work quality improvement guide system according to claim 5, wherein the work improver interface means displays information related to variation in evaluation data of at least one project execution degree.   8. The work quality improvement guide system according to claim 7, wherein the information regarding the variation includes at least one of a scatter diagram or a normal distribution graph drawn from an average value and variance of evaluation data of project execution.   4. The work quality improvement guide system according to claim 3, wherein said work improver interface means displays each work as a plot on a scatter diagram having coordinates combined for comparison as coordinate axes.

Images