CN115564482A - Construction method of internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem - Google Patents
Construction method of internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN115564482A CN115564482A CN202211190193.2A CN202211190193A CN115564482A CN 115564482 A CN115564482 A CN 115564482A CN 202211190193 A CN202211190193 A CN 202211190193A CN 115564482 A CN115564482 A CN 115564482A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- delivery
- internal
- value
- index
- market
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F17/00—Digital computing or data processing equipment or methods, specially adapted for specific functions
- G06F17/10—Complex mathematical operations
- G06F17/16—Matrix or vector computation, e.g. matrix-matrix or matrix-vector multiplication, matrix factorization
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F17/00—Digital computing or data processing equipment or methods, specially adapted for specific functions
- G06F17/10—Complex mathematical operations
- G06F17/18—Complex mathematical operations for evaluating statistical data, e.g. average values, frequency distributions, probability functions, regression analysis
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
- G06Q30/0206—Price or cost determination based on market factors
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
- Y02P90/30—Computing systems specially adapted for manufacturing
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Finance (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Accounting & Taxation (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Mathematical Physics (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Pure & Applied Mathematics (AREA)
- Mathematical Analysis (AREA)
- Mathematical Optimization (AREA)
- Computational Mathematics (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Software Systems (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Algebra (AREA)
- Databases & Information Systems (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Computing Systems (AREA)
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Bioinformatics & Cheminformatics (AREA)
- Bioinformatics & Computational Biology (AREA)
- Evolutionary Biology (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Probability & Statistics with Applications (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention relates to the technical field of intelligent manufacturing complex aviation weapon equipment delivery, in particular to a method for constructing an internal marketization management system based on a complex equipment delivery problem, which comprises the following steps: analyzing a business process and an organization structure based on a delivery link, analyzing and combining an internal marketized system construction paradigm, and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system; correcting an internal transfer price and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketization price system based on an SERVQUAL model by taking time as a standard for measuring the value of a delivery problem; constructing an internal marketization accounting system for delivery based on a market system and a price system; and determining the index weight based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process, and constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation system. By the construction method, the constructed management system can effectively solve the problem that the existing delivery problem processing process is complex.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of delivery of intelligently manufactured complex aviation weaponry, in particular to a method for constructing an internal marketization management system based on a complex equipment delivery problem.
Background
The complex device, particularly the complex aeronautical weapon equipment, has the defects of frequent problems in the delivery process, poor delivery robustness, insufficient internal vitality of the delivery link, complex relationships among departments, low disposal efficiency of a plurality of delivery problems and serious influence on the delivery cycle of the complex aeronautical weapon equipment due to the complexity, the particularity, the technical maturity and the like of the complex device. There are specifically three problems:
1) Each department involved in the delivery problem processing makes a decision on the basis of maximizing the own benefits, so that the situation is in conflict with the overall benefits of the company, and the situation is reflected in that the positivity of the processing problem is not high in the delivery problem processing process, so that the tipping period is too long, the company image is damaged, and the like. The problem is difficult to solve only by the existing management mechanism, the interest relationship of each department is difficult to coordinate, and the benefit of each department cannot be guaranteed to develop towards the aspect which is beneficial to the whole benefit of the company. Excessive competition among departments can cause resource waste and influence delivery efficiency.
2) The handling of the delivery problems belongs to an extra part of the daily production task, and in consideration of self interests, in the process of handling the problems, each department can judge whether the income obtained by handling the problems is matched with the responsibility to be born by the department, whether the handling of the delivery problems can influence the daily production task and the like, and the enthusiasm for handling the delivery problems is low due to various factors.
3) When a delivery problem is processed, a plurality of departments operate according to the flow, the phenomenon of deniability responsibility among the departments exists, the problem is laid aside and the processing efficiency is low due to unclear definition of responsibility parties of the delivery problem, the positivity of the processing problem is not high due to insufficient power in each unit, the tipping period is too long, the image of the former company is damaged, and the current situation cannot be solved only by the existing management mechanism.
By analyzing the reasons for the above-mentioned current situation, it is known that: the delivery problem processing process is complex, the delivery problem processing speciality and the delivery problem processing sequence are reflected, and a reasonable reward and punishment mechanism is also lacked.
Disclosure of Invention
In order to solve the technical problems, the invention provides a method for constructing an internal marketized management system based on a complex equipment delivery problem, and the constructed management system can effectively solve the problem that the existing delivery problem processing process is complex.
The invention is realized by adopting the following technical scheme:
the method for constructing the internal marketization management system based on the complex equipment delivery problem is characterized by comprising the following steps of: the method comprises the following steps:
step 1: analyzing a business process and an organization structure based on a delivery link, analyzing and combining an internal marketized system construction paradigm, and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system;
and 2, step: correcting the internal transfer price and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized price system based on an SERVQUAL model by taking time as a standard for delivering problem value measurement;
and 3, step 3: constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketing accounting system based on the market system in the step 1 and the price system in the step 2;
and 4, step 4: and determining the index weight based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process, and constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation system.
The step 1 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 1.1: obtaining a plurality of sub-processes based on the existing three-stage five-section delivery process of the complex aviation weaponry and the related items of the delivery problem;
the existing three-order five-section delivery process based on the complex aviation weaponry comprises the following eight sub-processes: the method comprises the following steps of (1) a delivery operation planning flow, a pre-delivery preparation flow, a complete machine delivery flow, a comprehensive insurance project delivery flow, a part delivery flow, a tipping observation item optimization flow, a tipping work evaluation flow and a delivery legacy project flow; wherein, the following three sub-processes are obtained by extracting the relevant items of the delivery problem: a whole machine delivery flow, a part delivery flow and a tipping observation item optimization flow;
step 1.2: for the sub-processes in the step 1.1, sorting the process name, the related role name, the corresponding position post, the related steps with the delivery problem, the input and output and the process performance index to form a key business process frame facing the delivery under an internal marketing management mode;
step 1.3: and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system based on the key business process framework and the organization structure.
The main body of the market system comprises a primary market main body and a secondary market main body, wherein the primary market main body comprises a delivery management manager, a delivery technician and internal delivery personnel in each delivery department; the secondary market body is composed of delivery personnel of each product manufacturing link department, and the transportation, financial and logistics service departments provide delivery related auxiliary services for key process participants.
The step 2 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.1: analyzing the type and difficulty level of the delivery problem, and determining an internal transfer price E 'of the delivery problem' j ；
Step 2.2: performing service quality correction on the internal transfer price based on the SERVQUAL model to obtain various delivery problems and corrected internal transfer price P j 。
The step 2.1 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.1.1: calculating the value quantity of the single-time aircraft connection period, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
wherein M is i Loading cycle value quantities for a single cross-over for an i-th aircraft; p is i Is a unit price of the i type airplane; t is i A standard value of a handover cycle of the i-th airplane is set; y is i The hook coefficient of the i-th airplane; 2% is the proportion of the value of the transfer cycle, namely the total value of the airplane; 365 x 2 is the two year shelf life of delivery;
step 2.1.2: and calculating the total annual delivery value of the company by the following specific calculation method:
wherein i is the type of aircraft delivered year by the company; a is the total annual delivery value of the company; m i The value of the single-frame cross-connection period of a certain airplane is measured; n is a radical of i Delivering the planned number for a certain type of airplane year;
step 2.1.3: based on the classification calculation of the basic prices of the delivery problems with different difficulty coefficients, the specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein i is the type of airplane delivered annually by the company; j is the type of delivery issue; e j Base price for class j delivery issue; w is a ij The number of class j delivery issues for the ith type of aircraft for the previous year; r is a radical of hydrogen j Difficulty factor for class j delivery issue; x is the proportion of the total annual delivered value of the company that can be used for internal marketing incentives;
step 2.1.4: based on the actual situation, whether the delivery problem processing party and the problem generation party are consistent and are repeatedly handling the problem or not is judgedAnd adding or subtracting the base prices proportionally to obtain the internal transfer price E' j 。
The step 2.2 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.2.1: designing a service quality evaluation system from reliability, responsiveness, guarantee, emotion and formability based on an SERVQUAL model, and determining a primary index weight U i And secondary index weight U ij ；
Step 2.2.2: integrating internal customers inside the delivery to form a service quality evaluation expert group with N persons in total, and grading the service quality of the delivery problem processing to obtain Q k 、L k And F k The specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein Q k A composite evaluation score representing the quality of service provided by the kth internal customer at that stage of a market entity; l is a radical of an alcohol k A composite evaluation score representing the quality of service historically provided by the kth internal customer to the market entity; f k An expected score indicating the quality of service of the kth internal customer for the handover issue processing; s. the Q 、S L 、S E Scoring the scores of each evaluation index by five scores; u shape i Is a first-level index weight; u shape ij Is the second-level index weight;
step 2.2.3: calculating a quality of service coefficient q 1 、q 2 The specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein q is 1 For the present and past quality of service gap coefficient, q 2 The service quality difference coefficient of the internal customer expectation and perception is obtained, and N is the total number of people participating in service quality evaluation;
step 2.2.4: calculating the internal transfer price corrected based on the SERVQUAL model, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
when (q) 1 ≥1)∩(q 2 When the content is more than or equal to 1),
otherwise:
wherein a + b =1, a, b are weight factors;
an internal price adjustment factor; e' j The internal transfer price stated in step 2.1; z j Market prices referenced for outsourcing the service.
The step 3 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 3.1: determining the ratio of the delivery value of each unit according to the delivery task and the achievement condition of the index, and distributing the total annual delivery value of the company to the performance of each unit according to the ratio of the delivery value of each unit;
step 3.2: the post index income s of the delivery personnel of each unit under the internal marketization management mechanism facing the delivery is calculated by the following specific calculation method:
the system comprises a plurality of units, wherein the unit s comprises a value amount for handling delivery problems, a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of a repeated typical problem occurrence rate and a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of a one-time qualification rate; w is a ij Processing the number of class j delivery issues for the delivery person for the ith type of aircraft; p j An internal transfer price based on a SERVQUAL model revision for a class j delivery issue; c. C ij Repeating the typical problem scheduling occurrence for a class ii delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; c. C i ' j Repeating the typical problem actual occurrence rate for a class j delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; y is 1 Unit punishment or reward amount corresponding to the reduction or improvement of the occurrence rate of the repeated typical quality problems; m is a unit of ij Predicting a first pass yield for a jth delivery problem of an ith type of aircraft; m is a unit of i ' j Actual first pass yield for the jth delivery problem of the ith type of airplane; y is 2 The unit punishment or the reward amount corresponding to the first-time qualification rate reduction or improvement; t is t 1 、t 2 、1-t 1 -t 2 The weight of the delivery problem quantity, the repeated occurrence rate and the first-time qualified rate index are respectively.
The step 4 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.1: determining an internal marketization degree evaluation index system for delivery;
and 4.2: and determining the weight of each index based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process and obtaining a measurement value of the internal marketization degree.
The step 4.1 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.1.1: constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation index system based on a delivery-oriented internal marketization management mechanism implementation target, wherein the internal marketization measure evaluation index system comprises a primary index and a secondary index; the first-level index comprises the equal status of economic individuals in the internal market of the delivery link, the market property of the organization system structure of the delivery link and the delivery problem processing effect of the delivery link; the second-level indexes comprise the labor right, the leader style, the function organization scale, the guiding document proportion, the market promotion of an ascending system, the improvement rate of the average delivery problem processing efficiency, the reduction rate of the delivery problem quantity, the reduction rate of the quantity of repeated typical problems and the improvement rate of the quantity of once qualified problems;
step 4.1.2: and calculating the measurement value of each index, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
primary index position equality degree:
D＝a 1 ×C+a 2 ×F/100
wherein C is the right of the laborer to ask for the job, which is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the default fund to the annual income; f is a leader style, the upper level, the lower level and the same level respectively mark the same manager and take an average value, and the marking range is 0-100; a is a 1 、a 2 The weight value is a secondary index weight value;
the first-level index organization system structure:
G＝λ 1 ×N+λ 2 ×W+λ 3 ×Z
wherein N is the set scale of the organization and function management department, and is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the number of the personnel in the delivery related function department to the number of the personnel in the whole company; w is the proportion of delivering the internal marketized instructional documents, which is equal to the ratio of the number of the instructional documents to the total number of the documents; z is an internal advancing system which is equal to the ratio of the number of people who advance in the delivery link and meet the performance to the total number of people who advance in the delivery link; lambda 1 、λ 2 、λ 3 Is the second-level index weight;
the primary index delivery problem treatment effect promotion degree:
J＝b 1 ×T+b 2 ×Q+b 3 ×S+b 4 ×Y
wherein, T is the improvement rate of the average handing-over problem processing efficiency, which is equal to the difference between the average handing-over problem processing efficiency before implementation and the difference after implementation; q is the reduction rate of the number of the handing over problems, S is the reduction rate of the number of the repeated typical problems, and Y is the improvement rate of the number of the primary qualified problems; b 1 、b 2 、b 3 、b 4 Is the secondary index weight.
The step 4.2 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.2.1: constructing a judgment matrix of indexes, wherein the first layer comprises 3 factors, the second layer comprises 9 factors, and the weight occupied by the indexes of the second layer is determined by comparing the influence of the indexes of the second layer on the factors of the upper layer; with a ij Representing the comparison result of the ith criterion relative to the jth criterion, the pairwise comparison matrix is as follows:
wherein, a ij ＝1/a ji The importance degree of the index adopts a nine-division scaling method, and the scaling is 1 to indicate that the two factors are equally important; a scale of 3 indicates that two factors are slightly more important than one another; a scale of 5 indicates that two factors compare, one factor being significantly more important than the other; a scale of 7 indicates that two factors compare, one factor being more important than the other; a scale of 9 indicates that two factors are compared, one factor being extremely important than the other; when the comparison between the factor i and the factor j judges that a is ij Then the comparison of factor j and factor i is judged
Scales 2, 4, 6 and 8 are respectively the median values of the two adjacent judgments;
step 4.2.2: performing hierarchical single ordering and consistency check
Finding the maximum characteristic root λ corresponding to the decision matrix max The normalized feature vector is marked as W; normalizing each column:
summing up the elements of each row
Normalization
According to a ω = λ max Omega, solving the maximum eigenvalue and the maximum eigenvector; and introduce uniformityIndex of Performance CI (λ) max -n)/(n-1) to determine if the evaluator has a logical error, the consistency ratio CR = CI/RI, where RI is the corresponding average random consistency index, and when n is 3, RI is 0.58; if n is 4, the RI value is 0.89; if n is 5, the RI value is 1.12; if n is 6, the RI value is 1.26; if n is 7, the RI value is 1.36; if n is 8, the RI value is 1.41; if n is 9, the RI value is 1.46; if n is 10, the RI value is 1.49; if n is 11, the RI value is 1.52; if n is 12, the RI value is 1.54;
when CR is less than 0.1, the consistency test is considered to be passed, and if CR is not met, the judgment matrix needs to be corrected;
step 4.2.3: performing total hierarchical ordering and consistency check, and calculating the relative important weight of all factors of a certain hierarchy to the highest-level element through the operation of the judgment matrix; the consistency check utilizes the total sort consistency ratio to judge
When CR is less than 0.1, the consistency is checked, and if CR is not satisfied, the judgment matrix is required to be corrected;
step 4.2.4: calculating the measure M of the internal marketization degree, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
M＝a×D+λ×G+b×J
wherein, the index weights of the three primary indexes D, G and J are a, lambda and b respectively; d is the equal degree of the positions of the economic individuals in the internal market of the delivery link; g is the market property of the delivery link organization system structure; j, delivering the problem processing effect in the delivery link.
Compared with the prior art, the invention has the beneficial effects that:
1. the invention realizes the innovation of a delivery management mechanism of complex aviation weaponry on the basis of internal marketization mechanism construction paradigm, SEVQUAL model, analytic hierarchy process and the like, improves the delivery problem processing efficiency and quality and accelerates the delivery process.
2. The construction of the delivery-oriented internal marketization management system of the complex aviation weaponry belongs to the brand-new application field, and meets the urgent need of delivery management innovation of the complex aviation weaponry.
3. Based on the handling characteristics of the delivery problems of the complex aviation weapon equipment and the SERVQUAL model, the internal transfer price is corrected by considering the service quality, so that the competitive power inside an enterprise is further improved, and compared with the existing management mechanism, the subjective initiative that internal workers participate in the delivery problem handling can be more effectively stimulated; the time is used as the unique standard to measure the value of delivery problem processing, and the method accords with the actual condition of an enterprise.
4. The method has the advantages that the fundamental purpose of implementing an internal marketization management system by means of complex aviation weaponry is achieved, the delivery problem processing effect is increased, the influence on the internal marketization measure is improved, and the implementation degree of the internal marketization is further measured.
Drawings
The invention will be described in further detail with reference to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and detailed description, in which:
FIG. 1 is a schematic flow diagram of the present invention;
FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a key business process framework for delivery in the present invention;
FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of an organizational structure of a delivery service domain;
FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of an internal transfer price correction model based on the SEVQUAL model;
FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of an evaluation system for an effect index of an internal marketing implementation.
Detailed Description
Example 1
As a basic implementation mode of the invention, the invention comprises a method for constructing an internal marketing management system based on a complex equipment delivery problem, and with reference to the attached figure 1 of the specification, the method comprises the following steps:
step 1: establishing an internal marketing management mode facing delivery, which specifically comprises the following steps:
and analyzing the business process and the organization structure based on the delivery link, and constructing an internal marketized market system oriented to delivery by analyzing and combining an internal marketized system construction paradigm. The method specifically comprises the following steps: the operation characteristics of the delivery process are determined by analyzing the business process, and an internal market trading subject is determined by analyzing the organization architecture to construct a market system.
And correcting the internal transfer price based on the SERVQUAL model by taking time as a standard for measuring the value of the delivery problem, and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized price system. The method specifically comprises the following steps: and (4) formulating the internal transfer price, determining an internal transfer price formulation method according to the delivery link flow and characteristics, and establishing a price system.
Step 2: a delivery-oriented internal market management support system formed by related management rules and an assessment mechanism is established and used for supporting the delivery-oriented internal market management system. The support system specifically comprises an internal marketing accounting system and an internal marketing measure evaluation system which are constructed for delivery. Wherein, the internal marketization accounting system is constructed according to a market system and a price system. The construction of the internal market measure evaluation system is based on AHP analytic hierarchy process to determine index weight.
Example 2
As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the present invention includes a method for constructing an internal marketing management system based on a complex equipment delivery problem, comprising the following steps:
step 1: and analyzing the business process and the organization structure based on the delivery link, and constructing an internal marketized market system oriented to delivery by analyzing and combining an internal marketized system construction paradigm. The method specifically comprises the following steps:
step 1.1: a plurality of sub-processes are obtained based on the existing three-stage five-stage delivery process of the complex aviation weaponry and the related items of the delivery problem.
Step 1.2: and (3) for the sub-processes in the step 1.1, sorting the process name, the related role name, the corresponding position post, the related step with the delivery problem, the input and output and the process performance index to form a key service process frame for delivery under an internal marketing management mode.
Step 1.3: and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system based on the key business process framework and the organization structure.
Step 2: and (3) correcting the internal transfer price and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized price system based on a SERVQUAL model by taking time as a standard for delivering the value of the problem. The method specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.1: analyzing the type and difficulty level of the delivery issue, determining an internal transfer price E 'of the delivery issue' j ；
Step 2.2: based on SERVQUAL model, the service quality correction is carried out on the internal transfer price to obtain various delivery problems and corrected internal transfer price P j 。
And step 3: and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketing accounting system based on the market system in the step 1 and the price system in the step 2. The method specifically comprises the following steps:
step 3.1: determining the ratio of the delivery value of each unit according to the delivery task and the achievement condition of the index, and distributing the total annual delivery value of the company to the performance of each unit according to the ratio of the delivery value of each unit;
step 3.2: the post index income s of the delivery personnel of each unit under the internal marketization management mechanism facing the delivery is calculated by the following specific calculation method:
the system comprises a plurality of units, wherein the unit s comprises a value amount for handling delivery problems, a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of a repeated typical problem occurrence rate and a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of a one-time qualification rate; w is a ij Processing the number of class j delivery issues for the delivery person for the ith type of aircraft; p j An internal transfer price based on a SERVQUAL model revision for a class j delivery issue; c. C ij Repeating the typical problem scheduling occurrence for a class ii delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; c' ij Repeating the typical problem actual occurrence for a jth delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; y is 1 Unit punishment or reward amount corresponding to the reduction or improvement of the occurrence rate of the repeated typical quality problems; m is ij Anticipating a contract for class j delivery issues for an ith type of aircraftThe lattice rate; m' ij Actual first pass yield for the jth delivery problem of the ith type of airplane; y is 2 The unit punishment or the reward amount corresponding to the first-time qualified rate reduction or improvement; t is t 1 、t 2 、1-t 1 -t 2 The weight of the delivery problem quantity, the repeated occurrence rate and the first-time qualified rate index are respectively.
And 4, step 4: and determining the index weight based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process, and constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation system. The method specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.1: determining an internal marketization degree evaluation index system for delivery;
step 4.2: and determining the weight of each index based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process and obtaining a measurement value of the internal marketization degree.
Example 3
As the best mode of implementing the invention, the invention comprises a method for constructing an internal marketing management system based on a complex equipment delivery problem, and specifically comprises the following steps with reference to the attached figures 2-5 of the specification:
step 1: and analyzing the business process and the organization structure based on the delivery link, and constructing an internal marketized market system oriented to delivery by analyzing and combining an internal marketized system construction paradigm. More specifically, the method comprises the following steps:
based on the existing three-stage five-section delivery flow framework and organization structure analysis of complex aviation weaponry, a two-stage internal marketization market system is divided.
The existing three-stage five-section delivery process of the complex aviation weapon equipment is divided into the following eight sub-processes: the method comprises a delivery operation planning flow, a pre-delivery preparation flow, a complete machine delivery flow, a comprehensive insurance project delivery flow, a part delivery flow, a tipping observation item optimization flow, a tipping work evaluation flow and a delivery legacy project flow. Extracting the relevant items of the delivery problem to obtain the following three sub-processes: the whole machine delivery process, the part delivery process and the tipping observation item optimization process.
And forming a key service flow framework oriented to delivery under an internal marketing management mode for the sub-flow carding flow name, the related role name, the corresponding position post, the steps related to the delivery problem, the input and the output and the flow performance index. And constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system based on the key business process block diagram and the organization structure. The market system has a body comprising a primary market body and a secondary market body.
First-level market main body: a delivery management manager, a delivery technician and internal delivery personnel in each delivery department. The delivery-oriented inner marketization defines the delivery range based on the organizational structure of the tipping service domain, so that the inner marketized market system has a simpler structure and takes main participants as a primary market main body.
A secondary market subject: the consignor in each product manufacturing link department forms a secondary market of an internal market, and departments of transportation, finance, logistics and the like provide related delivery auxiliary services for key process participants. Because the handling and optimization scheme of the delivery problem usually involves technical personnel of a plurality of professional factories, a linking relation of the previous handling step and the next handling step exists, the technical personnel of the previous handling step is transmitted to the executive personnel of the next handling step to form a certain transaction service relation, and therefore the handling and optimization scheme is used as a secondary market main body.
Step 2: and taking time as a standard for measuring the value of the delivery problem, carrying out service quality correction on the internal transfer price based on a SERVQUAL model, and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized price system. The method specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.1: analyzing the type and difficulty level of the delivery problem, and determining the internal transfer price E 'of the delivery problem' j ；
Step 2.1.1: calculating the value of the single aircraft connection period, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
wherein M is i Loading cycle value quantities for a single cross-over for an i-th aircraft; p i Is a unit price of the i type airplane; t is i The standard value of the transfer installation period of the i-th airplane is obtained; y is i The hook coefficient of the i-th airplane; 2% is the proportion of the value of the handover period, namely the value of the total value of the airplane; 365 x 2 is the two year shelf life of delivery.
Because the related real data has certain confidentiality, the simulation data is adopted for calculation, and five types are taken as examples:
P 1 ＝200000000，T 1 ＝30，Y 1 ＝0.2；
P 2 ＝400000000，T 2 ＝50，Y 1 ＝0.3；
P 3 ＝200000000，T 3 ＝50，Y 3 ＝0.2；
P 4 ＝400000000，T 4 ＝45，Y 4 ＝0.3；
P 5 ＝200000000，T 5 ＝28，Y 5 ＝0.2；
the calculation results show that:
step 2.1.2: and calculating the annual delivery value total amount of the company by the following specific calculation method:
wherein i is the type of aircraft delivered year by the company; a is the total annual delivery value of the company; m i The value of the single-frame cross-connection period of a certain airplane is measured; n is a radical of i The planned number is delivered for a certain type of aircraft year.
Taking the existence of five models as an example, N 1 ＝15，N 2 ＝20，N 3 ＝25，N 4 ＝30，N 5 =10; the calculation results show that:
A＝91139×110+205128×110+128205×125+256410×115+185807×120＝100399014
step 2.1.3: based on the classification calculation of the delivery problem basic prices with different difficulty coefficients, the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
wherein i is the type of aircraft delivered year by the company; j is the type of delivery issue; e j Base price for class j delivery issue; w is a ij A number of class j delivery issues for the ith type of aircraft for the previous year; r is j A difficulty factor for a delivery issue of category j; x is the proportion of the total annual delivery value of the company that can be used to make an internal marketing incentive.
Based on the calculation method, taking delivery problems classified as manufacturing, surface manufacturing and paint quality as an example, an enterprise leader determines the proportion x =5 for an internal marketization excitation part through analysis tools such as a brainstorming and a Delphi method, and r can be known according to a delivery problem processing cycle baseline 1 =6, the delivery problem category is 36, which is calculated as:
step 2.1.4: based on the actual situation, one of the delivery problem processing party and the problem causing party is judgedWhether it is a problem of repeated disposal or not, and adding or subtracting the base price in a certain proportion to obtain the internal transfer price E' j 。
Based on the actual situation evaluation, or taking the delivery problem manufacture-surface manufacture-paint quality as an example, the actual responsible party of the delivery problem is the secondary market subject 1, the actual processing party is the secondary market subject 2, the addition proportion of the non-responsible party processing is 20%, and the problem is processed for the first time, so the internal transfer price of the delivery problem is E 1 '＝602×(1+20％)＝722.4。
Step 2.2: based on SERVQUAL model, the service quality correction is carried out on the internal transfer price to obtain the internal transfer price P of various delivery problems j 。
Step 2.2.1: designing a service quality evaluation system from reliability, responsiveness, assurances, emotions and formability based on an SERVQUAL model, and determining a primary index weight U i Second level index weight U ij 。
Step 2.2.2: integrating internal customers inside the delivery to form a service quality evaluation expert group with N persons in total, and grading the service quality of the delivery problem processing to obtain Q k 、L k 、F k The specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein Q k A composite evaluation score representing the quality of service provided by the kth internal customer at that stage of a market entity; l is k Represents a composite assessment of the quality of service historically provided by the market entity by the kth internal customerScoring the price; f k An expected score indicating the quality of service of the kth internal customer for the handover issue processing; s. the Q 、S L 、S E Scoring the scores of each evaluation index by five scores; u shape i Is a primary index weight; u shape ij Is the second level index weight.
Step 2.2.3: calculating a quality of service coefficient q 1 、q 2 The specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein q is 1 For the present and past quality of service gap factor, q 2 And N is the total number of persons participating in service quality evaluation.
Based on the above process, a service quality evaluation framework of the complex aviation weaponry is established as shown in the following table:
selecting 10 employees closely related to the delivery problem processing in the delivery service domain to fill in a questionnaire, and grading the service quality of market main bodies 1, 2 and 3 based on a five-point system, wherein the 1 point represents that the delivery problem processing quality is extremely poor and internal customers are very dissatisfied; 2, the delivery problem treatment quality is poor, and internal customers are not satisfied; the score of 3 indicates that the delivery problem processing quality is medium and the internal customer satisfaction is general; 4, the delivery problem processing quality is better, and internal customers are more satisfied; score 5 indicates that the delivery issue handling quality is very good and the internal customer is very satisfied.
The results of the questionnaire survey were summarized to obtain the results of the quality of service coefficients for each market entity, as shown in the following table:
step 2.2.4: calculating the internal transfer price corrected based on the SERVQUAL model, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
when (q) 1 ≥1)∩(q 2 When the ratio is more than or equal to 1),
otherwise:
wherein a + b =1, a, b are weighting factors;
is an internal price adjustment factor; e' j The internal transfer price stated in step 2.1; z j Market prices to which the service can be outsourced; q. q of 1 The service quality gap coefficient between the current and the past is obtained; q. q.s 2 A factor for the quality of service gap expected and perceived for the interior customer.
The corrected internal transfer prices are shown in the following table:
and 3, step 3: and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketing accounting system based on the internal market and the price system.
Step 3.1: and determining the proportion of each unit delivery value according to the delivery task and the index achievement condition, and distributing the total annual delivery value of the company to the performance of each unit according to the proportion of each unit delivery value.
Step 3.2: calculating the post index income s of delivery personnel of each unit under the internal marketization management mechanism facing the delivery, wherein the specific calculation formula is as follows:
the system comprises a plurality of units, wherein the unit s comprises a delivery problem processing value amount, a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of the appearance rate of a repeated typical problem, and a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of one-time qualification rate; w is a ij Processing the number of class j delivery issues for the delivery person for the ith type of aircraft; p j Internal transfer prices modified based on the SERVQUAL model for class j delivery issues; c. C ij Repeating the typical problem scheduling occurrence for a jth delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; c' ij Repeating the typical problem actual occurrence rate for a class j delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; y is 1 Reducing or increasing the corresponding unit punishment or reward amount for the repeated typical quality problem occurrence rate; m is ij Predicting a first pass yield for a jth delivery problem of an ith type of aircraft; m' ij Actual first pass yield for the jth delivery problem of the ith type of airplane; y is 2 The unit punishment or the reward amount corresponding to the first-time qualified rate reduction or improvement; t is t 1 、t 2 、1-t 1 -t 2 The weight of the delivery problem quantity, the repeated occurrence rate and the first-time qualified rate index are respectively.
Determining the index weight as t through expert evaluation index weight 1 ＝0.4，t 2 =0.3, calculating monthly index post income based on information such as the number of delivery problems processed by the consignor monthly, occurrence of repeated problems, one-time qualified number and the like
And 4, step 4: and determining index weight based on an AHP (analytic hierarchy process) to construct an internal market measure evaluation system.
Step 4.1: and determining an internal marketization degree evaluation index system for delivery.
Step 4.1.1: constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation index system based on an internal marketization management mechanism implementation target oriented to delivery, wherein a primary index comprises the equal degree of the status of economic individuals in the internal market of a delivery link, the market property of a delivery link organization system structure and the delivery link delivery problem processing effect; the second-level indexes comprise the expression and work right of a worker, a leader style, the scale of a function organization, the proportion of guiding documents, the marketization of an upgrade system, the improvement rate of the processing efficiency of average delivery problems, the reduction rate of the number of repeated typical problems and the improvement rate of the number of once qualified problems.
1) Rank equality D: the political status among individuals in an external market is completely equal, but the economic status is unequal, in an internal market, the economic status of the individuals is improved by sacrificing the political status, and the loss of the political status of the economic individuals can be recovered to a certain extent by a marketization means, and is specifically expressed as the labor persons turn over the duties and leadership style indexes;
the right of the laborer to freely control the self labor force is expressed as a role-giving right, the role-giving difficulty degree represents the free degree of the flowing of the labor force, namely the size of the role-giving right of the laborer, the role-giving difficulty degree is represented by the proportion of default funds which the laborer must pay in the annual acceptors of the laborer, the role-giving cost is higher when the proportion is larger, the role-giving right is smaller, and the role-giving right is smaller
The more democratic the leader style, the more equal the status between individuals and between the upper and lower levels to a certain extent, the numerical value is calculated by adopting a method of calculating the percentage, the score of 0 represents that the leader style of the delivery link is very independent, the score of 100 represents that the leader style is very democratic, and the score of F is 88 by summarizing questionnaire survey results.
2) Organization system structure G: the internal marketing management mode is used as a tactical decision for operating an enterprise based on a stable and efficient base tone and seeking for growth, and can generate certain influence on the organizational system structure of the enterprise, and the internal marketing management mode is specifically expressed as functional organizational scale, guiding file proportion and promotion system marketing indexes.
Wherein, in the enterprise for implementing the inner marketization management mode, the scale of each functional department is smaller, the right for the higher inner marketization degree is more dispersed, the scale of the functional department related to the delivery is smaller, the change of the organization structure of the enterprise for implementing the inner marketization management mode is described by the proportion of the number of the functional department related to the delivery to the total number of the whole company, the smaller the proportion, the higher the inner marketization degree is in an inverse relationship, and the size of the functional organization is smaller
In an enterprise implementing internal marketing, the number of policy rule documents in the documents issued by the company level in one year is more, the number of instruction documents is reduced, the number of instructive and frame documents is increased, the internal marketing degree of the delivery link is positively correlated with the delivery instructive document ratio,
the promotion mechanism under the internal marketization management is different from the traditional promotion mechanism, a competition mechanism of an external market is introduced into the appraisal and promotion mechanism, the promotion condition is linked with the performance of an individual, so that the larger the proportion of the number of persons promoted in the total number of annual promoted persons due to performance coincidence or competitive winning is, the higher the internal marketization degree is, and the promotion system is
3) Delivery problem processing effect improvement degree J: the initial purpose of market management in the delivery link is to improve the delivery problem processing efficiency, further realize the aims of high quality, punctuality and low cost, and evaluate whether the delivery problem processing effect is improved or not and mainly develop from three aspectsThe average delivery cycle, the delivery problem number and the delivery memo number are respectively; wherein, the first and the second end of the pipe are connected with each other,
the number of delivery problems = the number of delivery problems with the customer,
judging the improvement degree of the delivery problem processing effect, namely measuring the improvement rate T of the average delivery problem processing efficiency, the reduction rate Q of the number of delivery problems, the reduction rate S of the number of repeated typical problems and the improvement rate Y of the number of one-time qualified problems;
step 4.1.2: and calculating the measurement value of each index, wherein a specific calculation formula is as follows:
primary index bit equality:
D＝a 1 ×C+a 2 ×F/100
wherein C is the right of the laborer to ask for the job, which is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the default fund to the annual income; f is a leader style, the upper level, the lower level and the same level respectively mark the same manager and take an average value, and the marking range is 0-100; a is a 1 、a 2 The weight value is a second-level index weight value;
the first-level index organizational system structure:
G＝λ 1 ×N+λ 2 ×W+λ 3 ×Z
wherein N is the set scale of the organization and function management department, and is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the number of the personnel in the delivery related function department to the number of the personnel in the whole company; w is the proportion of delivering the internal marketized instructional documents, and is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the number of the instructional documents to the total number of the documents; z is an internal advancing system which is equal to the ratio of the number of people in the advancing and performance conforming to the advancing number of the delivery link to the total number of people in the advancing and performance conforming to the advancing number of the delivery link; lambda 1 、λ 2 、λ 3 Is the second-level index weight;
the primary index delivery problem treatment effect promotion degree:
J＝b 1 ×T+b 2 ×Q+b 3 ×S+b 4 ×Y
wherein T is the improvement rate of the average handing-over problem processing efficiency, and is equal to the difference between the average handing-over problem processing efficiency before implementation and the difference after implementation; q is the reduction rate of the number of delivery problems, S is the reduction rate of the number of repeated typical problems, and Y is the improvement rate of the number of one-time qualified problems; b 1 、b 2 、b 3 、b 4 Is the second level index weight.
Step 4.2: determining the weight of each index based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process and obtaining a measurement value of the internal marketization degree;
step 4.2.1: constructing a decision matrix of the index
The first layer comprises 3 factors, the second layer comprises 9 factors, and the weight of the second layer is determined by comparing the influence of the indexes of the second layer on the factors of the upper layer. By a ij The relative importance of the indexes is obtained by the expert according to the comparison result of the ith criterion relative to the jth criterion, and the pairwise comparison matrix is as follows:
wherein, a ij ＝1/a ji The importance degree of the index adopts a nine-point scale method, and the scale is 1, which indicates that the two factors are equally important compared; a scale of 3 indicates that two factors are slightly more important than one another; a scale of 5 indicates that two factors compare, one factor being significantly more important than the other; a scale of 7 indicates that two factors compare, one factor being more important than the other; a scale of 9 indicates that two factors are compared, one factor being extremely important over the other; when the comparison between the factor i and the factor j judges that a is ij Then the comparison of factor j and factor i is judged
Scales 2, 4, 6 and 8 are respectively the median values of the two adjacent judgments;
wherein, the judgment matrix of the relative importance between M and the first-level index is as follows:
wherein, the judgment matrix of the relative importance between the first level index and the second level index is as follows:
step 4.2.2: performing hierarchical single ordering and consistency check
Finding the maximum characteristic root λ corresponding to the decision matrix max The normalized feature vector is marked as W; normalizing each column:
summing up the elements of each row
Normalization
According to A omega = lambda max ω, findingMaximum eigenvalue and maximum eigenvector; and introducing a consistency index CI (lambda) max -n)/(n-1) to determine if the evaluator has a logical error, the consistency ratio CR = CI/RI, where RI is the corresponding average random consistency index, and when n is 3, RI is 0.58; if n is 4, the RI value is 0.89; if n is 5, the RI value is 1.12; if n is 6, the RI value is 1.26; if n is 7, the RI value is 1.36; if n is 8, the RI value is 1.41; if n is 9, the RI value is 1.46; if n is 10, the RI value is 1.49; if n is 11, the RI value is 1.52; if n is 12, the RI is 1.54;
and when CR is less than 0.1, the consistency test is considered to be passed, and if CR is not met, the judgment matrix needs to be corrected.
And through the inspection, the CR values of all judgment matrixes are less than 0.1, and the judgment matrixes are not required to be corrected through the consistency inspection.
Step 4.2.3: performing total hierarchical ordering and consistency check, and calculating the relative important weight of all factors of a certain hierarchy to the highest-level element through the operation of the judgment matrix; the consistency check utilizes the total sort consistency ratio to judge
And when CR is less than 0.1, the consistency test is considered to be passed, and if CR is not met, the judgment matrix needs to be corrected.
Similar to the hierarchical single-sequencing process, the CR values of the judgment matrixes are smaller than 0.1 through consistency test without correcting the judgment matrixes.
According to an analytic hierarchy process, using MATLAB software to obtain index weights of all levels, carrying out consistency test, and passing the test, wherein the index weight results are as follows:
(a,λ,b)＝(0.25,0.5,0.25)；
(a 1 ,a 2 )＝(0.5,0.5)；
(λ 1 、λ 2 、λ 3 )＝(0.2297,0.1220,0.6483)；
(b 1 ,b 2 ,b 3 ,b 4 )＝(0.6478,0.0684,0.2154,0.0684)；
D＝0.5×0.96+0.5×0.88＝0.92；
G＝0.85×0.2297+0.15×0.1220+0.3×0.6483＝0.408；
J＝0.6478×0.6+0.0684×0.3+0.2154×0.25+0.27×0.0684＝0.4815
step 4.2.4: calculating the internal marketization degree measure M, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
M＝0.25×0.92+0.5×0.408+0.25×0.4815＝0.5544
wherein the index weights of the three primary indexes D, G and J are a, lambda and b respectively; d is the equal degree of the positions of the economic individuals in the internal market of the delivery link; g is the market property of the delivery link organization system structure; j, delivering the problem processing effect in a delivery link; the value range of M is 0-1, the value of M reflects the internal marketization degree, the more M approaches to 1, the higher the internal marketization degree is, the more effective the constructed management system is, and the more M approaches to 0, the lower the internal marketization degree is.
In summary, after reading the present disclosure, those skilled in the art should make various other modifications without creative efforts according to the technical solutions and concepts of the present disclosure, which are within the protection scope of the present disclosure.
Claims (10)
1. The method for constructing the internal marketization management system based on the complex equipment delivery problem is characterized by comprising the following steps of: the method comprises the following steps:
step 1: analyzing a business process and an organization structure based on a delivery link, analyzing and combining an internal marketized system construction paradigm, and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system;
step 2: correcting the internal transfer price and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized price system based on an SERVQUAL model by taking time as a standard for delivering problem value measurement;
and step 3: constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketing accounting system based on the market system in the step 1 and the price system in the step 2;
and 4, step 4: and determining the index weight based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process, and constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation system.
2. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 1, characterized in that: the step 1 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 1.1: obtaining a plurality of sub-processes based on the existing three-stage five-stage delivery process of the complex aviation weaponry and the related items of the delivery problem;
the existing three-order five-section delivery process based on the complex aviation weaponry comprises the following eight sub-processes: a delivery operation planning flow, a pre-delivery preparation flow, a complete machine delivery flow, a comprehensive protection project delivery flow, a part delivery flow, a tipping observation item optimization flow, a tipping work evaluation flow and a delivery legacy project flow; wherein, the following three sub-processes are obtained by extracting the relevant items of the delivery problem: a whole machine delivery flow, a part delivery flow and a tipping observation item optimization flow;
step 1.2: for the sub-processes in the step 1.1, sorting the process name, the related role name, the corresponding position post, the related steps with the delivery problem, the input and output and the process performance index to form a key business process frame facing the delivery under an internal marketing management mode;
step 1.3: and constructing a delivery-oriented internal marketized market system based on the key business process framework and the organization structure.
3. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 2, characterized in that: the main body of the market system comprises a primary market main body and a secondary market main body, wherein the primary market main body comprises a delivery management manager, a delivery technician and internal delivery personnel of each delivery main department; the secondary market body is composed of delivery personnel of each product manufacturing link department, and the transportation, financial and logistics service departments provide delivery related auxiliary services for key process participants.
4. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 1 or 3, characterized in that: the step 2 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.1: analyzing the type and difficulty level of the delivery problem, and determining an internal transfer price E 'of the delivery problem' j ；
Step 2.2: based on SERVQUAL model, the service quality correction is carried out on the internal transfer price to obtain various delivery problems and corrected internal transfer price P j 。
5. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 4, wherein: the step 2.1 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.1.1: calculating the value of the single aircraft connection period, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
wherein, M i Loading cycle value quantities for a single cross-over for an i-th aircraft; p i Is a unit price of the i type airplane; t is i The standard value of the transfer installation period of the i-th airplane is obtained; y is i The hooking coefficient of the i-th airplane; 2% is the proportion of the value of the transfer cycle, namely the total value of the airplane; 365 x 2 is the two year shelf life of the delivery;
step 2.1.2: and calculating the total annual delivery value of the company by the following specific calculation method:
wherein i is the type of aircraft delivered year by the company; a is the total annual delivery value of the company; m i Receiving cycle value quantities for a single-frame cross-connect of a certain type of airplane; n is a radical of i A planned number of annual deliveries for a certain type of aircraft;
step 2.1.3: based on the classification calculation of the basic prices of the delivery problems with different difficulty coefficients, the specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein i is the type of airplane delivered annually by the company; j is the type of delivery issue; e j Base price for class j delivery issue; w is a ij The number of class j delivery issues for the ith type of aircraft for the previous year; r is j Difficulty factor for class j delivery issue; x is the proportion of the total annual delivery value of the company that can be used for internal marketing incentives;
step 2.1.4: based on actual conditions, judging whether the delivery problem processing side and the problem causing side are consistent and are the repeated problem, and proportionally adding or subtracting the basic price to obtain the internal transfer price E' j 。
6. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 4, characterized in that: the step 2.2 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 2.2.1: designing a service quality evaluation system from reliability, responsiveness, assurances, emotions and formability based on an SERVQUAL model, and determining a primary index weight U i And secondary index weight U ij ；
Step 2.2.2: integrating internal customers inside the delivery to form a service quality evaluation expert group with N persons in total, and grading the service quality of the delivery problem processing to obtain Q k 、L k And F k The specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein Q k A composite evaluation score representing the quality of service provided by the kth internal customer at that stage of a market entity; l is k A composite evaluation score representing the quality of service historically provided by the kth internal customer to the market entity; f k An expected score indicating the quality of service of the kth internal customer for the handover issue processing; s Q 、S L 、S E Scoring the scores of each evaluation index by five scores; u shape i Is a first-level index weight; u shape ij Is the second-level index weight;
step 2.2.3: calculating a quality of service coefficient q 1 、q 2 The specific calculation method is as follows:
wherein q is 1 For the present and past quality of service gap factor, q 2 The service quality difference coefficient of the internal customer expectation and perception is obtained, and N is the total number of people participating in service quality evaluation;
step 2.2.4: calculating the internal transfer price corrected based on the SERVQUAL model, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps: when (q) 1 ≥1)∩(q 2 When the content is more than or equal to 1),
otherwise:
wherein a + b =1, a, b are weighting factors;
an internal price adjustment factor; e' j Internal transfer prices as described in step 2.1; z is a linear or branched member j Market prices referenced for service outsourcing.
7. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises the following steps: the step 3 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 3.1: determining the ratio of the delivery value of each unit according to the delivery task and the achievement condition of the index, and distributing the total annual delivery value of the company to the performance of each unit according to the ratio of the delivery value of each unit;
step 3.2: the post index income s of the delivery personnel of each unit under the internal marketization management mechanism facing the delivery is calculated by the following specific calculation method:
the system comprises a plurality of units, wherein the unit s comprises a delivery problem processing value amount, a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of the appearance rate of a repeated typical problem, and a reward punishment amount corresponding to reduction or promotion of one-time qualification rate; w is a ij Processing the number of class j delivery issues for the delivery person for the ith type of aircraft; p j Internal transfer prices modified based on the SERVQUAL model for class j delivery issues; c. C ij Repeating the typical problem scheduling occurrence for a class ii delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; c' ij Repeating the typical problem actual occurrence rate for a class j delivery problem for an ith type of aircraft; y is 1 Reducing or increasing the corresponding unit punishment or reward amount for the repeated typical quality problem occurrence rate; m is ij Predicting a first pass yield for a jth delivery problem of an ith type of aircraft; m' ij Type j intersection for type i aircraftThe actual first pass percent of the problems is solved; y is 2 The unit punishment or the reward amount corresponding to the first-time qualification rate reduction or improvement; t is t 1 、t 2 、1-t 1 -t 2 The weight of the delivery problem quantity, the repeated occurrence rate and the first-time qualified rate index are respectively.
8. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 7, characterized in that: the step 4 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.1: determining an internal marketization degree evaluation index system for delivery;
step 4.2: and determining the weight of each index based on an AHP analytic hierarchy process and obtaining a measurement value of the internal marketization degree.
9. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 8, characterized in that: the step 4.1 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.1.1: constructing an internal marketization measure evaluation index system based on a delivery-oriented internal marketization management mechanism implementation target, wherein the internal marketization measure evaluation index system comprises a primary index and a secondary index; the primary indexes comprise the equal degree of the status of economic individuals in the internal market of the delivery link, the market property of the organization system structure of the delivery link and the delivery problem processing effect of the delivery link; the second-level indexes comprise the labor right, the leader style, the function organization scale, the guiding document proportion, the market promotion of an ascending system, the improvement rate of the average delivery problem processing efficiency, the reduction rate of the delivery problem quantity, the reduction rate of the quantity of repeated typical problems and the improvement rate of the quantity of once qualified problems;
step 4.1.2: and calculating the measurement value of each index, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
primary index position equality degree:
D＝a 1 ×C+a 2 ×F/100
wherein C is the right of the laborer to ask for the job, which is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the default fund to the annual income; f is a leader style, composed ofThe upper level, the lower level and the same level respectively score the same manager and take the average value, and the scoring range is 0-100; a is a 1 、a 2 The weight value is a second-level index weight value;
the first-level index organization system structure:
G＝λ 1 ×N+λ 2 ×W+λ 3 ×Z
wherein N is the set scale of the organization and function management department, and is equal to 1 minus the ratio of the number of the personnel in the delivery related function department to the number of the personnel in the whole company; w is the proportion of delivering the internal marketized instructional documents, which is equal to the ratio of the number of the instructional documents to the total number of the documents; z is an internal advancing system which is equal to the ratio of the number of people who advance in the delivery link and meet the performance to the total number of people who advance in the delivery link; lambda [ alpha ] 1 、λ 2 、λ 3 Is the second-level index weight;
the first-level index delivery problem treatment effect promotion degree:
J＝b 1 ×T+b 2 ×Q+b 3 ×S+b 4 ×Y
wherein, T is the improvement rate of the processing efficiency of the average handing over problem, which is equal to the difference between the processing efficiency of the average handing over problem before implementation and the processing efficiency after implementation; q is the reduction rate of the number of the handing over problems, S is the reduction rate of the number of the repeated typical problems, and Y is the improvement rate of the number of the primary qualified problems; b is a mixture of 1 、b 2 、b 3 、b 4 Is the second level index weight.
10. The method for building an internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem according to claim 9, wherein: the step 4.2 specifically comprises the following steps:
step 4.2.1: constructing a judgment matrix of indexes, wherein the first layer comprises 3 factors, the second layer comprises 9 factors, and the weight of the judgment matrix is determined by comparing the influence of the indexes of the second layer on the factors of the upper layer; by a ij Representing the comparison result of the ith criterion relative to the jth criterion, the pairwise comparison matrix is as follows:
wherein, a ij ＝1/a ji The importance degree of the index adopts a nine-division scaling method, and the scaling is 1 to indicate that the two factors are equally important; a scale of 3 indicates that two factors are slightly more important than one other; a scale of 5 indicates that two factors compare, one factor being significantly more important than the other; a scale of 7 indicates that two factors compare, one factor being more important than the other; a scale of 9 indicates that two factors are compared, one factor being extremely important over the other; when the comparison between the factor i and the factor j judges that a is ij Then the comparison of factor j and factor i is judged
Scales 2, 4, 6 and 8 are respectively the median values of the two adjacent judgments;
step 4.2.2: performing hierarchical single ordering and consistency check
Finding the maximum characteristic root λ corresponding to the decision matrix max The normalized feature vector is marked as W; normalizing each column:
summing up the elements of each row
Normalization
According to a ω = λ max Omega, solving the maximum eigenvalue and the maximum eigenvector; and introducing a consistency index CI (lambda) max -n)/(n-1) to determine if the evaluator has a logical error, the consistency ratio CR = CI/RI, where RI is the corresponding average random consistency index, and when n is 3, RI is 0.58; if n is 4, RI is 0.89; if n is 5, the RI value is 1.12; if n is 6, the RI value is 1.26; if n is 7, the RI value is 1.36; if n is 8, the RI value is 1.41; if n is 9, the RI value is 1.46(ii) a If n is 10, the RI value is 1.49; if n is 11, the RI is 1.52; if n is 12, the RI value is 1.54;
when CR is less than 0.1, the consistency is checked, and if CR is not satisfied, the judgment matrix is required to be corrected;
step 4.2.3: performing total hierarchical ordering and consistency check, and calculating the relative important weights of all factors of a certain hierarchy to the elements of the highest layer through the operation of a judgment matrix; the consistency check utilizes the total ordering consistency ratio to judge
When CR is less than 0.1, the consistency is checked, and if CR is not satisfied, the judgment matrix is required to be corrected;
step 4.2.4: calculating the internal marketization degree measure M, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
M＝a×D+λ×G+b×J
wherein the index weights of the three primary indexes D, G and J are a, lambda and b respectively; d is the equal degree of the positions of the economic individuals in the internal market of the delivery link; g is the market property of the delivery link organization system structure; j is the effect of handling the delivery problems in the delivery link.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211190193.2A CN115564482A (en) | 2022-09-28 | 2022-09-28 | Construction method of internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211190193.2A CN115564482A (en) | 2022-09-28 | 2022-09-28 | Construction method of internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN115564482A true CN115564482A (en) | 2023-01-03 |
Family
ID=84743670
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211190193.2A Pending CN115564482A (en) | 2022-09-28 | 2022-09-28 | Construction method of internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN115564482A (en) |
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN116384842A (en) * | 2023-06-05 | 2023-07-04 | 商飞软件有限公司 | Method for realizing airplane delivery judgment based on airplane delivery state evaluation model |
| CN117952574A (en) * | 2024-03-27 | 2024-04-30 | 成都飞机工业（集团）有限责任公司 | Aviation complex equipment digital delivery management system based on end-to-end flow |
-
2022
- 2022-09-28 CN CN202211190193.2A patent/CN115564482A/en active Pending
Cited By (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN116384842A (en) * | 2023-06-05 | 2023-07-04 | 商飞软件有限公司 | Method for realizing airplane delivery judgment based on airplane delivery state evaluation model |
| CN116384842B (en) * | 2023-06-05 | 2023-08-29 | 商飞软件有限公司 | Method for realizing airplane delivery judgment based on airplane delivery state evaluation model |
| CN117952574A (en) * | 2024-03-27 | 2024-04-30 | 成都飞机工业（集团）有限责任公司 | Aviation complex equipment digital delivery management system based on end-to-end flow |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US7818152B2 (en) | Computerized method and system for maturity assessment of business processes | |
| CN115564482A (en) | Construction method of internal marketing management system based on complex equipment delivery problem | |
| Lazarevic et al. | A model for business performance improvement: A case of the postal company | |
| JP2022035965A (en) | Intelligent supplier managing system and intelligent supplier managing method | |
| CN108846645A (en) | A kind of enterprise's flattened management method and system | |
| CN113763154A (en) | Steel trade supply chain financial risk assessment method based on fuzzy grey evaluation | |
| CN114881485A (en) | Enterprise fund risk assessment method based on analytic hierarchy process and cloud model | |
| Javaid et al. | Supply chain responsiveness and supply chain performance: the role of supply chain risk management | |
| Zaitsev et al. | A methodology to assess innovation performance in digital economy. | |
| He et al. | Is corporate social responsibility engagement influenced by nearby firms? Evidence from China | |
| Hong et al. | Performance evaluation of logistics firms based on DEA model | |
| Kang Hong | Management accounting in the public sector | |
| JP2003036346A (en) | Method for evaluating operational risk and its system | |
| Siregar et al. | Analysis Of The Effect Of Competence And Integrity On The Quality Of Internal Audit Results In Medan City | |
| CN109544337A (en) | A kind of equity estimation method | |
| CN115796585A (en) | Enterprise operation risk assessment method and system | |
| Pravdiuk et al. | Quality of financial reporting of the enterprise: Evaluation methodology | |
| CN113592675A (en) | Customer commitment oriented contract order management method and system | |
| Du et al. | MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE ABILITY OF MIXED-OWNERSHIP REFORM ENTERPRISES: EVIDENCE FROM CHINA. | |
| Mock et al. | Audit program planning using a belief function framework | |
| Tatiana et al. | Development of methodology for evaluation of innovative IT-projects | |
| Moon et al. | An integrated DEA-AHP model for the acquisition of a weapon system: Selection of a next-generation fighter system in Korea | |
| Pugacheva et al. | Principles of the economic analysis and criteria for evaluation of corporate structures functioning | |
| ZAKIZADEH et al. | Measuring the Quality of Accounting Information in the Face of with Employer Loyalty with Approach PSO Algorithm | |
| Polyakova et al. | Evaluation of the results of the foreign economic activity of the enterprise based on the balanced scorecard |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination |