DE102019107352A1 - Process and system for the automatic evaluation of installers for fire extinguishing systems - Google Patents

Abstract

A method for the automatic evaluation of installer companies for fire extinguishing systems is proposed, with several criteria for the certification of an installer company being specified, whereby an evaluation metric is specified on the system side, by means of which the information for the fulfillment of the criteria is automatically evaluated and it is determined whether prerequisites for certification of the installer company are fulfilled. Furthermore, a corresponding system for the automatic evaluation of installers of fire extinguishing systems is proposed.

Description

The present invention relates to a method and a system for the automatic evaluation of installation companies, in particular for fire extinguishing systems.

An installation company within the meaning of the present invention is a company that sets up fire extinguishing systems. The construction of a fire extinguishing system preferably includes the planning, project planning, assembly, commissioning, checking, acceptance and / or handover of a fire extinguishing system to an operator.

The present invention particularly preferably relates to the certification of installation companies for fire extinguishing systems, but can in principle also be advantageously applied to the certification of installation companies for other, in particular safety-relevant systems. The invention has proven to be particularly advantageous in connection with the certification of companies installing fire extinguishing systems. Advantages are achieved, in particular, through the increased effectiveness, efficiency and / or reproducibility of the certification process and the associated potentially improved reliability and safety of fire extinguishing systems.

Fire extinguishing systems are technical systems that are designed to extinguish a fire with an extinguishing agent. In particular, the present invention relates to installation companies for stationary or permanently installed fire extinguishing systems. Some examples of (stationary) fire extinguishing systems are sprinkler systems, water spray extinguishing systems, foam extinguishing systems, water mist systems, spark extinguishing systems, gas extinguishing systems, inerting systems and oxygen reduction systems.

For a fire extinguishing system to function properly, it is of the utmost importance that the fire extinguishing system is installed by a qualified company. As proof of qualification, installer companies can go through an approval or certification process at a certification body. A large number of criteria are checked during the recognition process and a certificate is issued if the criteria are sufficiently met.

A disadvantage of known certification methods is that a large number of different criteria must be checked in order to obtain a certificate. There are criteria, the fulfillment of which is essential for receiving a certificate, as well as criteria with less relevance. If, during an examination of the criteria, it is found that the vast majority of the criteria are met and only minimal deficiencies in the fulfillment of a criterion of low relevance are found, a certificate can usually still be issued.

The aim in this context is that in practice a uniform evaluation standard is always applied, which is comparable, preferably identical, for all installer companies that apply for certification.

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a method and a system for the automatic evaluation of installers for fire extinguishing systems and a computer program, with a uniform evaluation of installers for fire extinguishing systems being ensured, preferably with a recognition or certification process comprehensible, objective and efficient can be designed.

The above object is achieved by a method according to claim 1, a system according to claim 15 or a computer program according to claim 16. Advantageous further developments are the subject of the subclaims.

In the proposed procedure for the automatic evaluation of installer companies for fire extinguishing systems, several criteria for the certification of an installer company are specified. For this purpose, an evaluation metric is specified by the system, by means of which information on the fulfillment of the criteria is automatically evaluated and, in particular automatically or by means of the evaluation metric, it is determined whether requirements for certification of the installer company are met.

An automatic evaluation and / or a system-side specification of the evaluation metrics are conducive to an objective and uniform evaluation.

“Information on the fulfillment of a criterion” in the sense of the present invention is in particular details or information on whether or to what extent the criterion is met. An installation company is assessed in particular on the basis of this information. The information can be in various forms, in particular with different information being possible for different criteria. Examples of information on the fulfillment of a criterion are Boolean information such as "Criterion fulfilled", "Criterion not fulfilled", "Evidence available", "Evidence not available" or the like, or numerical information such as "40 units available" or the like.

In an optional first, preferably upstream step, it is determined or checked whether and to what extent the installer company meets the criteria. In other words, information on the fulfillment of the criteria is created, determined and / or entered in this step. This can be done automatically and / or manually, e.g. B. by an employee of the certification body or an employee of the installer company. For example, appropriate information and / or details, such as documents that serve to prove that the criteria have been met, are requested from the installer company, (electronically) recorded and / or checked. Alternatively or additionally it is possible that at least some criteria are checked directly on site at the installation company and / or during the installation of a fire extinguishing system by the installation company. An automatic determination of information for the fulfillment of the criteria can take place in that corresponding information or documents are completely or partially automatically recorded, obtained and / or checked, for example by database retrieval, reading in or recording of user inputs.

In order to check the criteria, one or more catalogs of criteria or checklists are preferably provided, in which or with the help of which it can be recorded whether or to what extent the criteria are met.

Criteria catalog (s) can be present, designed and / or used, for example, in paper form and / or in electronic form, in particular as an electronic list or table. If these are available in paper form, they are preferably read in or digitized for automatic evaluation.

Automatic user guidance can be provided for the structured checking of the criteria or the recording of information on the fulfillment of the criteria. The automatic user guidance can automatically guide a user, in particular an employee of the certification body or an installation company, through the catalog of criteria or catalogs. This improves the completeness of the information and documents and facilitates a reliable, structured determination or verification of the fulfillment of the criteria.

It is preferably provided that at least one of the criteria is mandatory for certification or must be met. This means that the requirements for certification of the installer company are not met if the mandatory criterion is not met. The fulfillment of this at least one criterion, which is mandatory for certification, is preferably determined automatically. The evaluation metric can be designed accordingly.

A mandatory criterion is especially a particularly important criterion, the fulfillment of which can in no way be waived, for example if the installer company cannot provide sufficient public liability insurance, if the installer company does not have a certified quality management system, for example according to EN ISO 9001, or if the staff of the Company is not sufficiently trained.

An evaluation attribute is preferably assigned to each criterion by means of the evaluation metric. The evaluation attribute represents the relevance of the criterion. For example, it can be specified in the evaluation attribute or by means of the evaluation attribute that a criterion is a mandatory criterion. It is also possible that the evaluation attributes of the criteria are generally formed by numbers or factors or weights, with particularly important criteria being assigned a high number or a high factor or generally a higher weight and less important criteria correspondingly being assigned a lower number or weight. a lower factor or generally a lower one is assigned.

According to a further aspect, at least one of the criteria can be partially fulfilled, a fulfillment coefficient being assigned to this criterion in the evaluation by means of the evaluation metric. The fulfillment coefficient can be assigned to the criterion, in particular in addition to the evaluation attribute. The fulfillment coefficient represents the extent to which the criterion is fulfilled. In particular, the compliance coefficient or its value is determined on the basis of the information previously recorded for compliance with the criteria.

For example, a criterion can be provided in which it is specified which quantity and type of spare parts must be stored by an installation company. A criterion according to which 50 sprinklers of a certain specification have to be stocked can be partially fulfilled, for example, if the number of required sprinklers is not reached, for example if only 45 sprinklers or 90% of the required 50 sprinklers are in stock. This can be represented by the compliance coefficient. As an alternative or in addition, such a criterion can be partially met by the fact that the quantity of stored sprinklers corresponds to the required quantity of 50 pieces, but the specification does not correspond to the required specification, for example because the umbrella sprinklers have a different nominal opening temperature and / or a different sensitivity than according to have the criterion required. This can alternatively or additionally be represented by the fulfillment coefficient.

It is preferably provided that if the criterion is only partially met, it is determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met if the fulfillment coefficient fulfills a corresponding fulfillment condition. In the above example, this can be the case if only 49 sprinkler systems are in stock instead of the required 50.

It is also possible to record one or more secondary conditions, for example a proven order for the complete fulfillment of the criterion and / or the consideration of the secondary condition (s) in the assessment.

In other words, the relevance of a partially fulfilled or achievable criterion can be taken into account by the fulfillment condition, similar to an evaluation attribute, so that certification can also take place in the case of minor defects that do not overall affect the qualification of an installation company. The fulfillment condition ensures that this is done in the same way, in particular uniformly and objectively, for all installer companies.

According to a further preferred aspect, at least two or more criteria are not absolutely necessary for certification. This means that the installation company can generally also be certified if one of these criteria is not or not fully met.

The criteria that are not absolutely necessary preferably form one or more groups for which an additional condition is specified in the evaluation metric, whereby it is only determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met if the additional condition is met. The additional condition can preferably ensure that certification does not take place if too many criteria are not met or not fully met. The evaluation metric preferably has these additional condition (s) so that the additional condition is automatically checked by applying the evaluation metric.

According to a preferred aspect, a value is calculated on the basis of the evaluation attributes and / or the fulfillment coefficient, the calculated value having to reach or exceed a threshold value in order to fulfill the additional condition. This ensures that not too many criteria are only partially met and / or that one or more criteria of a corresponding relevance are met to a sufficient extent. In particular, in this way, depending on the criteria and their relevance, absolute minimum conditions can be established that must be met in order to meet the requirements for certification, even if the criteria are not in themselves mandatory criteria. In this way, a corresponding leeway or goodwill can be implemented in the evaluation metric, but a uniform and objective evaluation standard is ensured.

Alternatively or additionally, the additional condition can preferably only be met if several criteria of the group are met together. This ensures that no certification takes place if none of the criteria that are not absolutely necessary are met.

According to a further preferred aspect, the additional condition can only be met if at least one criterion from a selection of criteria of the group is met. This makes it possible to ensure that at least one criterion from a selection of criteria that interact with one another is met. The evaluation metric can have a group membership and / or when the evaluation metric is used, the group membership can be automatically taken into account.

For example, it can be provided that either a type A device or a type B device must be present for certification. In this case, neither type A nor type B devices are required, but certification cannot be carried out if neither type A nor type B devices are present. This can be or will be implemented in the evaluation metric by the additional condition.

The evaluation metric, the evaluation attributes, the fulfillment coefficients, the secondary condition (s) and / or the additional condition serve to objectify and standardize the method. In particular, “expert knowledge” can also be integrated into the system by means of these means. In addition, this, especially in combination with the expert knowledge, implements a certain tolerance in the certification or evaluation of the installer companies. This is desirable because, on the one hand, a large number of criteria are specified for the assessment and certification, on the other hand, minor deficiencies in the fulfillment of one or more criteria do not negatively affect the qualification of an installation company in practice and would be determined by an expert in an overall assessment that overall, taking into account all the circumstances Installer company meets the requirements for certification.

A major advantage of the proposed method is that the specialist knowledge of an expert who is able to assess the relevance of individual criteria for the qualification of the installer company as a whole can be integrated into the system and reproduced automatically, so that a certain " A sense of proportion ”is guaranteed, but a uniform and objective procedure is still implemented.

In addition, there is an improvement in the proposed method compared to known methods in that the method is more efficient, simplified and accelerated.

Preferably, but not mandatory, a certificate is automatically created if it is determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. This speeds up and simplifies the process.

It is preferred to automatically check whether there is sufficient information on the basis of which it can be determined whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. If the check reveals that insufficient information is available, a warning message can be output, for example, and / or further continuation of the method can be interrupted. This can prevent errors or failure of the test.

According to a further preferred aspect, it is possible for the content of a document required to meet a criterion to be determined automatically. For example, documents, certificates, certificates or the like, for example to prove the qualifications of employees, can be scanned in or otherwise electronically recorded and / or the content of such documents can be determined automatically.

Furthermore, on the basis of the specific content, it can be automatically determined whether the criterion for which the document is required is fulfilled. This is conducive to a fast and efficient process.

It is preferred that the authenticity of a document required to meet a criterion is checked automatically. This allows forgeries to be reliably detected and fraud to be prevented.

Furthermore, it is advantageous if a plausibility check is carried out in which it is checked whether the information for fulfilling the criteria is plausible. In this way, errors in input or acquisition can be prevented or discovered.

According to a further aspect, which can also be implemented independently, the present invention relates to a system for the automatic evaluation of installers for fire extinguishing systems, the system having an evaluation module for evaluating criteria for certification of the installer. The system or the evaluation module has an evaluation metric by means of which information on the fulfillment of the criteria can be evaluated automatically. Furthermore, the system or evaluation module is designed to determine whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met.

The system is preferably designed to carry out the method described above and below.

The system is particularly preferably an electronic system or a computer system or a data processing system.

According to a further aspect that can also be implemented independently, the present invention relates to a system for data processing, comprising means for carrying out the method described above and below.

According to yet another aspect, which can also be implemented independently, the present invention relates to a computer program or computer program product, having instructions which, when the program is executed by a computer, cause the computer to execute the method described above and / or below.

An “evaluation metric” in the sense of the present invention is in particular an evaluation scheme or an evaluation algorithm for evaluating criteria or information for fulfilling the criteria. The evaluation metric preferably has various factors or variables, such as evaluation attributes and / or fulfillment coefficients, which are or are assigned to the criteria. The evaluation metric also preferably has an algorithm that can be used to automatically determine whether the requirements for certification of the established company are met on the basis of the (partially) fulfilled criteria or the information on fulfilling the criteria.

The aforementioned and following aspects and features of the present invention can be combined with one another in different ways, but can also be implemented independently of one another.

• 1 einen schematischen Ablauf eines Anerkennungsverfahrens zur Prüfung bzw. Zertifizierung von Errichterunternehmen für Feuerlöschanlagen, bei dem das vorschlagsgemäße Verfahren zur automatischen Bewertung der Errichterunternehmen durchgeführt wird; und
• 2 einen schematischen Aufbau eines Ausführungsbeispiels des vorschlagsgemäßen Systems.

Further aspects, features, advantages and properties of the present invention emerge from the claims and the following description of preferred embodiments with reference to the drawing. In the drawing shows:

• 1 a schematic sequence of an approval process for testing or certification of installer companies for fire extinguishing systems, in which the proposed method for the automatic evaluation of the installer company is carried out; and
• 2 a schematic structure of an embodiment of the proposed system.

In the following, different aspects of the proposed method are first explained using non-limiting examples, these aspects being able to be implemented individually and advantageously in different combinations with one another, these aspects and combinations each being able to form independent subjects of the invention, even if this is to avoid repetition is not explicitly mentioned below.

In a first step A1 an order for testing or certification of the installer company is issued. This can be done, for example, by means of a written request from the installer company by email, letter or the like.

However, it is also possible for the order to be issued automatically, for example if an existing certificate is to be extended for an installation company, for which an approval procedure or certification procedure has to be carried out again.

In a second step A2 General data of the client or installation company and the type of fire extinguishing system are preferably recorded in one system. For different types of fire extinguishing systems, different approval procedures are preferably provided, which differ in the number and type of criteria to be checked. Furthermore, the type of order is preferably ascertained or determined or noted in the system.

Various types of order are preferably provided, namely a provisional approval, in which an installation company goes through an approval process for the first time, and an extension of the approval, in which the extension of an already issued certificate is sought, whereby a new approval process must be followed.

One or more processes P1, P2, P3 are then started or carried out, in particular depending on the type of order.

In the process P1 it is preferably checked whether the documents required for the installation approval or certification have been received or whether sufficient information is available so that it can be determined whether the requirements for certification are met. This can be done manually by a clerk or automatically.

In the process P2, a preliminary approval of an installation company is preferably carried out. In the process P3, an extension of the approval is preferably carried out.

When evaluating or testing an installation company, only one of processes P2 and P3 is preferably carried out. Process P1 is preferably carried out in addition to or in parallel with process P2 or P3 or as part of here.

The processes P2 and P3 preferably differ only in the number and type of specified criteria for the recognition or certification. The following statements therefore apply to both process P2 and process P3, unless otherwise noted.

In the processes P1, P2, P3, criteria catalogs such as checklists are preferably provided which have the criteria or in which the criteria are listed. The criteria catalogs or checklists are available, for example, in paper form or in electronic form, in particular in the form of a list or table.

In this context, a catalog of criteria or a checklist is preferably a list or an organized compilation of the criteria, so it can, but does not have to be, a sequence of the criteria in a certain order.

• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Handelsregisterauszugs bzw. Gewerberegisterauszugs,
• • Vorhandensein einer Betriebshaftpflichtversicherung bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein eines Qualitätsmanagementsystems, insbesondere nach ISO 9001, bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Bankauskunft,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Instandhaltungsvertrags bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Instandhaltungsvertrags (Errichter/Betreiber) bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Notdienstes bzw. einer Notdienst-Dokumentation bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Lieferzusage bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Organigramms bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer, insbesondere ordnungsgemäßen bzw. Vorgaben entsprechenden, Übersicht zu Fachpersonal bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Antrags für einen Zugang zu einem Kundenportal bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Firmenlogos Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Berechnungsprogramms bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber und/oder
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage von Angaben zu verbundenen Unternehmen.

A criteria catalog or a checklist, in particular for process P2 or for a preliminary approval of an installation company, can have one, several or all of the following criteria:

• • Existence or submission of an extract from the commercial register or an extract from the trade register,
• • Existence of a company liability insurance or proof of this,
• • Existence of a quality management system, in particular according to ISO 9001, or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of bank information,
• • Existence or submission of a maintenance contract or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of a maintenance contract (installer / operator) or proof of this,
• • Presence or submission of an emergency service or emergency service documentation or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of a delivery promise or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of an organizational chart or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of an overview of specialist personnel or proof of this, in particular an overview of specialist personnel that is in accordance with regulations,
• • Existence or submission of an application for access to a customer portal or proof of this,
• • Existence or presentation of a company logo. Existence or presentation of a calculation program or proof of this and / or
• • Existence or submission of information on affiliated companies.

• • Bestehen einer Prüfung durch die Fachkraft bzw. Vorhandensein oder Vorlage eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Bestehen eines Arbeitsverhältnisses mit einer Dauer von mindestens 3 Monaten vor Benennung zur verantwortlichen Fachkraft bzw. Vorhandensein oder Vorlage eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Beschäftigung bei anerkanntem Errichter in den letzten 24 Monaten bzw. Vorhandensein oder Vorlage eines Nachweises hierüber und/oder
• • Besuchen bzw. Bestehen einer oder mehrerer Schulungen und/oder Fortbildungen bzw. Vorhandensein oder Vorlage eines oder mehrerer Nachweise hierüber, insbesondere bei bestehender Qualifikation.

Alternatively or additionally, a catalog of criteria or a checklist, in particular for a responsible specialist, can have one, several or all of the following criteria:

• • Passing an examination by the specialist or presence or submission of evidence of this,
• • Existence of an employment relationship with a duration of at least 3 months prior to appointment to the responsible specialist or existence or submission of proof of this,
• • Employment with a recognized installer in the last 24 months or existence or submission of evidence of this and / or
• • Attending or passing one or more training courses and / or advanced training courses or the presence or submission of one or more proof of this, especially if you have an existing qualification.

• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Nachweises darüber, dass das System anerkannt ist,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer, insbesondere ordnungsgemäßen bzw. Vorgaben entsprechenden, Zeichnung einer oder mehrerer Demonstrationsanlagen bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein einer BMA-Fachkraft bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein einer Ersatzteilebevorratung bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein von Konzentrationsmessgeräten bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber und/oder
• • Möglichkeit des Zugriffs auf Konzentrationsmessgeräte bzw. Vorhandensein oder Vorlage eines Nachweises hierüber.

Alternatively or additionally, a catalog of criteria or a checklist, in particular for technical documents, can have one, several or all of the following criteria:

• • Existence or submission of evidence that the system is recognized,
• • Existence or submission of a drawing of one or more demonstration systems, in particular a drawing of one or more demonstration systems, or proof of this,
• • Presence of a BMA specialist or proof of this,
• • Existence of a stock of spare parts or proof of this,
• • Presence of concentration measuring devices or proof of this and / or
• • Possibility of access to concentration measuring devices or the presence or submission of proof of this.

• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Vereinbarung über eine Zusammenarbeit bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Nachweises und/oder von Angaben zu dem Unternehmensverbund,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Bestätigung der Mutter bzw. Holding bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Kapitalbeteiligung, vorzugsweise von mindestens 75 %, bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber und/oder
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Prozessbeschreibung bzw. Weisungsbefugnis bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber.

Alternatively or additionally, a catalog of criteria or a checklist, in particular for other companies in a group of companies, can have one, several or all of the following criteria:

• • Existence or submission of an agreement on cooperation or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of evidence and / or information about the group of companies,
• • Existence or submission of a confirmation from the parent or holding company or proof of this,
• • Existence or presentation of a capital participation, preferably of at least 75%, or proof of this and / or
• • Existence or submission of a process description or authority to issue instructions or proof of this.

• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Mindestbevorratung bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber bzw. von Angaben hierzu,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage von Planung und Projektierung bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber bzw. von Angaben hierzu,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage einer Demonstrationsanlage bzw. eines Nachweises hierüber,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Nachweises und/oder von Angaben zu einer Installation,
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Nachweises und/oder von Angaben zu einer Werkstatt
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Nachweises und/oder von Angaben zu einer Instandhaltung und/oder
• • Vorhandensein bzw. Vorlage eines Nachweises und/oder von Angaben zu Fachkräften.

Alternatively or additionally, a criteria catalog or a checklist, in particular for one or more further business premises, can have one, more or all of the following criteria, preferably with these criteria being provided several times, especially for each (further) business premises:

• • Existence or submission of a minimum stockpiling or proof of this or information on this,
• • Existence or submission of planning and project planning or proof of this or information on this,
• • Existence or submission of a demonstration system or proof of this,
• • Existence or submission of evidence and / or information on an installation,
• • Existence or submission of evidence and / or information on a workshop
• • Presence or submission of evidence and / or information on maintenance and / or
• • Existence or submission of evidence and / or information on skilled workers.

The aforementioned criteria and / or criteria catalogs or checklists can also be used individually and / or form part of the invention in different combinations.

In the process P2, P3, it is preferably first checked whether the criteria are met or which of the criteria are met. In other words, information on the fulfillment of the criteria is recorded or created. It is then preferably assessed whether the criteria that have been met are sufficient for the installation company to be certified. The checking of the criteria or the creation of the information for the fulfillment of the criteria can be carried out by a clerk or automatically.

The check of whether the criteria are met can, for example, be carried out on the basis of documents that are to be submitted or have been submitted by the installer company. As an alternative or in addition, it is possible for the test to be checked on site, for example at the installation company itself and / or during the installation of a fire extinguishing system at a customer of the installation company.

The information for fulfilling the criteria is preferably recorded automatically and / or with technical aids. For this purpose, it can be provided, on the one hand, that the information can be input or is input via an input device. Alternatively or additionally, the information can be read in electronically, for example using imaging methods such as scanning or photography, and / or by receiving or retrieving from a server, a database or some other storage device that provides the corresponding information or information.

According to the proposal, the evaluation of whether the fulfilled criteria are sufficient for certification takes place automatically and / or by means of an evaluation metric specified by the system.

It is preferably determined, in particular by means of the evaluation metric, whether requirements for certification of the installer company are met. This takes place in particular in the process P1, P2 and / or P3.

Particularly preferably, the evaluation metric is automatically applied to the information for fulfilling the criteria. This can be an algorithm or a mathematical operation in which the application of the evaluation metric to the information on the fulfillment of the criteria leads to a result as to whether a certificate can be issued or not. In an intermediate result, the application of the evaluation metric to the information for fulfilling the criteria can lead to a result vector or a result matrix, which in turn leads to the result via a transformation. Alternatively or additionally, a transformation can be part of the application of the evaluation metric to the information.

The result of the application of the evaluation metric is preferably a Boolean variable in the sense that the result has only two states and with these two states clearly differentiates between a positive result, which means that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met, and a negative result, according to which the prerequisites for certification are not met. Alternatively or additionally, however, the result can also contain further information, for example information on deficiencies that still need to be remedied for certification or despite certification.

In another optional step A3 a certificate for the installer company can be created (automatically) if it has been determined beforehand that the requirements for certification are met. Otherwise no certificate will be created. Provision is preferably made for the creation of a certificate to be prevented if the automatic assessment shows that the requirements for certification of the installer company are not met. In this way, the system prevents certification from taking place in spite of serious deficiencies, which means that the safety not only of the certification process but also of the fire extinguishing systems installed by a certified installation company can be better ensured.

The processes P1, P2 and / or P3 preferably form the proposed method for the automatic evaluation of installers for fire extinguishing systems.

The processes P1, P2, P3 can also be formed by a single process and / or linked to one another.

Preferably at least one of the criteria is mandatory for certification. This is preferably specified or specified by the system in the evaluation metric. If a mandatory criterion is not met, it is preferably determined that no certificate can be issued for the installer company or that the requirements for certification are not met, in particular regardless of whether and to what extent other criteria are met.

A mandatory criterion could, for example, be that the installer company names a specialist responsible for setting up the fire extinguishing system or a certain type of fire extinguishing system, or the named specialist has the required qualification, for example a degree according to the level 6 of the European Qualifications Framework.

An evaluation attribute is preferably assigned to the criteria by means of the evaluation metric. The evaluation attribute is, in particular, a variable that determines or represents the relevance of the criterion in evaluating or checking the company's qualifications for setting up fire extinguishing systems.

For example, it can be specified in an assessment attribute that a criterion is absolutely necessary.

Alternatively or additionally, the evaluation attribute can be formed by a value, a number, a factor, a coefficient or a weighting, in particular with the numerical value corresponding to the relevance of the criterion. Accordingly, particularly important criteria can be assigned high numbers and more subordinate criteria low numbers (or vice versa). For example, the evaluation attributes can be formed by numbers from 0 to 1 or from 0 to 100 or the like.

In particular, different types of evaluation attributes can also be provided.

For example, the criteria can be divided into two or more classes, in particular a first class of mandatory criteria and a second class of non-mandatory criteria. Several evaluation attributes, in particular different types of evaluation attributes, can be assigned to the criteria of different classes.

In a preferred aspect, an evaluation attribute in the form of a Boolean variable or the like is assigned to each of the criteria. When testing or evaluating the criteria, it can be determined immediately if the requirements for certification are not met, namely if a mandatory criterion is not met.

As an alternative or in addition to an evaluation attribute in the form of a Boolean variable, the criteria, in particular the criteria of the second class, can be assigned an evaluation attribute, for example in the form of a numerical value or the like, which represents the relevance of the criterion.

At least one of the criteria can preferably be partially met.

Examples of criteria that can be partially met are criteria in which minimum quantities are specified for execution parts to be stored. Such a criterion can be partially fulfilled in that the number of the stored execution parts does not match the number specified or required in the criterion or falls below it. As an alternative or in addition, such a criterion can also be partially fulfilled in that at least some of the execution parts do not correspond to the required specification.

In the evaluation by means of the evaluation metric, a criterion that can be partially fulfilled is preferably assigned a fulfillment coefficient which represents the extent to which the criterion is fulfilled. The fulfillment coefficient can in particular be provided in addition to the evaluation attribute.

The fulfillment coefficient can, for example, have a factor or a number or be formed by this. For example, if the criterion stipulates that N parts of a specific specification must be stocked and the test determines that only M (M <N) parts of this specification are stocked, where M and N denote (natural) numbers, then this criterion is preferably assigned the fulfillment coefficient M / N (that is, the quotient of M and N) by means of the evaluation metric.

Alternatively or additionally, the fulfillment coefficient can be formed by a number or a factor if a specification of stored parts deviates from the required specification, the factor being a measure of the deviation between the required and the actual specification. For example, such a factor can assume a value from 0 to 1, the factor 1 represents a complete correspondence with the required specification and the factor 0 represents that the actual specification in no way corresponds to the required specification.

It is preferably provided that if a criterion that can be partially fulfilled is only partially fulfilled, it is determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are fulfilled if the fulfillment coefficient fulfills a corresponding fulfillment condition.

This can be implemented in that the fulfillment coefficient is formed by a number or a factor, as described above, and a minimum value for the number or the factor is specified in the fulfillment condition.

For example, the criterion that can be partially met can be that it is required that 50 A certain type of sprinkler must be kept in stock. In this case, the compliance factor can be formed by the quotient M / 50, where M denotes the number of sprinklers of the specific sprinkler type actually stored. As a fulfillment condition it can be specified that the fulfillment coefficient is at least 0.9 (corresponding to a minimum quantity of 45 Pieces) so that the requirements for certification are met.

In one aspect of the present invention, at least two criteria are not absolutely necessary for certification or are not absolutely necessary to be fulfilled, these criteria forming a group. For this group, an additional condition is preferably specified in the evaluation metric, which must be met in order to meet the overall requirements for certification of the installer company.

A group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary for certification is preferably a (real) subset of the class of criteria that are not absolutely necessary for certification. However, it is also possible that the group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary for certification is identical to the class of criteria that are not absolutely necessary for certification.

The additional condition preferably makes it possible to implement a certain tolerance in the evaluation of the qualification of the installer company in the evaluation metric, so that it is still possible to certify the installer company in the event of minor deficiencies such as the incomplete fulfillment of a few and / or rather unimportant criteria. On the other hand, the additional condition prevents certification from taking place if too many criteria or certain combinations of criteria are not met.

In the additional condition, requirements for the fulfillment coefficient can be stipulated, so that certification of the installer company is only possible if the partially fulfillable criteria are sufficiently fulfilled.

A group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary in the aforementioned sense can be formed by a combination of two or more of the following criteria, already mentioned above and only given here in brief, in particular with regard to a provisional approval of an installer company: Commercial register extract / trade register extract, public liability insurance, quality management system (according to ISO 9001), bank information, maintenance contract, maintenance contract (installer / operator), documentation emergency service, delivery commitment, organizational chart, (proper) overview of specialist staff, application for access to customer portal, company logo and / or calculation program.

Alternatively or additionally, a (further) group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary in the aforementioned sense can be formed by a combination of two or more of the following criteria already mentioned above and only given here in brief, in particular with regard to a responsible specialist: Passing an examination , Employment relationship at least 3 months prior to appointment, last 24 months with recognized installer and / or training certificates (if the qualifications are passed).

Alternatively or additionally, a (further) group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary in the aforementioned sense can be formed by a combination of two or more of the following criteria already mentioned above and only given here in brief, particularly with regard to technical documents: system recognized, drawing Demonstration system available, drawing of the demonstration system in order, presence of a BMA specialist, spare parts inventory, presence of concentration measuring devices and / or possibility of access to concentration measuring devices.

Alternatively or additionally, a (further) group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary in the aforementioned sense can already be extended by a combination of two or more of the following The criteria mentioned above and only briefly reproduced here, in particular with regard to other companies in a group of companies, must be formed: Agreement on cooperation, information on the group of companies, confirmation from the parent or holding company, equity participation and / or process description or authority to issue instructions.

Alternatively or additionally, a (further) group of criteria that are not absolutely necessary in the aforementioned sense can be formed by a combination of two or more of the following criteria, which have already been mentioned above and are only listed here in key words, in particular with regard to further business premises: minimum stockpiling, planning and Project planning, demonstration system, installation, workshop, maintenance, information on skilled workers.

The aforementioned criteria and / or criteria catalogs or checklists can also be used individually and / or form one or more groups in different combinations and thus in particular form part of the invention.

According to one aspect, on the basis of the evaluation attributes and / or the fulfillment coefficients, a value is calculated which must reach or exceed a threshold value in order to fulfill the additional condition.

The evaluation attributes and / or fulfillment coefficients are preferably each formed by numerical values, for example from 0 to 100 or from 0 to 1, the evaluation attributes and / or fulfillment coefficients forming the variables of a function by means of which, depending on the evaluation attributes and / or fulfillment coefficients, the value is calculated, which must reach or exceed a threshold value in order to meet the additional condition.

According to a further aspect of the present invention, a minimum number of criteria is preferably specified in the additional condition and / or one or more combinations of criteria are specified in the additional condition that must be met or at least sufficiently met in order to meet the additional condition.

According to a further aspect of the present invention, the additional condition can preferably only be met if at least one criterion from a selection of criteria of the group is met. This makes it possible to take into account that, if necessary, various measures are equally suitable for achieving a specific goal, on the basis of which the qualifications of an installation company can be assessed. If several alternative measures for achieving a goal come into question, these different measures can be represented by different criteria, which are not absolutely necessary in themselves. The additional condition can then stipulate that at least one of these alternative criteria must be met for successful certification. In other words, this creates the possibility, in certain cases, of allowing the installer company to decide in which way a certain requirement is met if, in principle, different measures come into consideration.

It is preferably checked automatically whether there is sufficient information on the basis of which it can be determined whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. In particular, the receipt of required or requested documents, on the basis of which the qualification of the installer company is assessed, can be checked automatically or by the system. For example, provision can be made for the installation company to send the required documents to a special e-mail address or to a special database 2 uploaded so that the receipt and / or content of the documents can be checked automatically.

It is possible that a warning will be issued if the information available is insufficient to determine whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met.

According to a preferred aspect of the present invention it is provided that a specific document must be present according to a criterion. The existence of such a document can be determined automatically. Such a document is particularly preferably recognized automatically and the authenticity of the document is verified. This can be done for example by text recognition and / or structural analysis. Alternatively or additionally, it can be provided that the content of one or more documents contains information and / or details for fulfilling a criterion. Such information and / or details can be determined automatically, for example by text recognition or reading out text from such a document. For this purpose, documents can be digitized, for example scanned, photographed or the like. Alternatively or in addition, digital documents can be read in, accessed and / or received. An analysis or verification can then take place in order to determine whether and to what extent a criterion has been met.

Preferably, on the basis of the automatically determined content of a document, it is automatically determined whether a criterion for which a document is required to be fulfilled is fulfilled.

For example, one criterion can consist or be required in a criterion that a business liability insurance with a defined coverage amount is available. It can then preferably be automatically determined or verified whether a document is present in which the conclusion of a corresponding public liability insurance is confirmed.

It is advantageous if the authenticity of a document required to meet a criterion is checked automatically. This can be done by determining or checking the structure of the document, by checking characteristic features and / or certain security features such as watermarks, seals or the like, by comparing them with a reference document and / or by checking an electronic signature. This can prevent fraud.

Furthermore, a plausibility check is preferably carried out, in which it is checked whether information on the fulfillment of the criteria is plausible. In particular, contradicting information can be identified in this way and errors, for example due to incorrect or incorrectly read inputs, can be avoided.

For example, it is possible that it has been stated that there is no required training certificate for an employee, although such training certificate has already been recorded and checked by the system. In this case, a corresponding message can be issued for correction or checking.

In a preferred development of the present invention, a certificate is automatically created or a certification is automatically issued if it is determined with the proposed method or system that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met.

The creation of a certificate is very preferably prevented, that is to say in particular the production or printing of a certificate, in particular in the form of a certificate, is prevented if the requirements for certification of the installer company are not met. For this purpose, the creation or production of a certificate is preferably tied to the system or the implementation of the method in such a way that a certificate can only be created or produced under the condition that the requirements for the certification of the installer company are met .

The method is preferably carried out on a system designed for this purpose or by means of a system designed for this purpose S. carried out. The system S. is preferably a system S. for data processing or a computer system.

2 shows an embodiment of a proposed system S. .

The proposed system S. preferably has an input device 1 for entering information 1B to meet criteria 1A on.

At the input device 1 it is particularly preferably a smartphone or a tablet or generally a portable input device. The input device 1 however, it can alternatively or additionally also be a stationary input device.

The input device 1 can be a display device 1C like a display. The display device 1C can be touch sensitive for input so that the information 1B to meet criteria 1A can be entered here.

Furthermore, the input device 1 have user guidance. The user guidance can be implemented in the form of an app or a web interface of a server or the like. However, other solutions are also conceivable here.

The user guidance is preferably designed to structure a user, particularly preferably an employee of a certification body or an installation company, by the criteria to be met 1A to lead and here inputs as information 1B to the respective criteria 1A to be recorded and assigned to them. The user guidance preferably shows criteria for this purpose 1A on the display device 1C and enables the input of the corresponding information 1B . In this case, the input is preferably made by the input device 1 as an indication 1B recorded and the respective criterion 1A assigned.

In principle, it is preferably provided that data or information are entered 1B , especially via the input device 1 by an employee of a certification body. However, it is also possible that such inputs are made by an employee of an installation company or a company to be assessed.

The proposed system S. can be a database 2 exhibit. This database 2 can, in particular supplementary, information 1B to meet the criteria 1A provide. Alternatively or in addition, the can through the input device 1 recorded information 1B fully or partially in the database 2 get saved.

The proposed system S. can be one or more servers 3 exhibit. The server or servers 3 can be designed to provide the information 1B or the criteria 1A automatically rate. The server 3 is a stationary and / or central computing device in the illustrated example. Alternatively or additionally, the server 3 however, it can also be a software component and / or a module and / or part of the database 2 and / or the input device 1 form.

The server 3 can the database 2 have or form these.

The server (s) preferably form / are 3 and / or the database 2 a cloud or a cloud system or part of it. In particular, the server (s) 3 and / or the database 2 be stationed at any location and are not necessarily stationed at the certification body.

The system S. preferably has a processor 4th on, the one with the proposed rating metric 5 equipped and is thus set up to check the requirements for the certification of the installer company.

The processor 4th is preferably part of the server 3 the certification body.

The system S. can be a data interface D for reading, calling up and / or receiving information 1B to meet the criteria 1A exhibit. That way the system can S. the processor 4th by means of the input device 1 captured or through the database 2 information provided 1B provide that the processor 4th based on the assessment.

The evaluation is carried out with the system S. preferably by applying the scoring metric 5 on the information 1B to meet the criteria 1A or is trained for this. In detail, this is preferably done as explained above in connection with the proposed method or the system S. is trained for this.

The system S. preferably has one or more output devices 6 by means of which this is done by the processor 4th using the evaluation metric 5 on the information 1B or criteria 1A generated result 8th issued and / or the certificate 7th can be created.

The creation of the certificate can be linked to the condition that the automatic evaluation of the criteria 1A or information 1B by means of the evaluation metric 5 has shown that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met.

The input device 1 is in the example shown via a preferably wireless data connection D with the processor 4th can be coupled, which is in accordance with the illustration example 2 in a server 3 is located. However, other solutions are also possible here.

Furthermore, it is alternatively or additionally possible that the information 1B to meet the criteria 1A via a preferably wireless data connection D to the database 2 transmitted and / or by means of the database 2 be cached. However, it can also be provided here that the database 2 no data connection D with the input device 1 and only supplementary information 1B to meet the criteria 1A provides.

The processor 4th preferably applies the scoring metric 5 to that of the input device 1 and / or the database 2 received or retrieved information 1B to meet the criteria 1A on. This can result in 8th generated and by means of an output device 6 issued. Alternatively or additionally, the generation, in particular the printing, of the certificate 7th released or automatically triggered if it has been automatically determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met.

In a further aspect, which can also be implemented independently, the invention relates to a computer program or computer program product, having instructions which, when the program is executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method described above.

The computer program or computer program product or a part thereof is preferably an app for a tablet or smartphone or the like, by means of which information is provided 1B to meet the criteria 1A can be entered and fed to an evaluation module. By means of the evaluation module, the evaluation metric can be based on this and / or further information 1B can be used to automatically determine whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. The evaluation module can be a software and / or hardware component that runs on the processor 4th is executed or executable.

Preferably the system S. , the computer program or computer program product, the server 3 or the processor 4th the evaluation module for evaluating the criteria 1A on. The evaluation module can use the evaluation metric 5 and instructions on how to apply them to the information 1B or criteria 1A exhibit.

Individual aspects and features of the present invention can be implemented independently of one another, but also in different combinations.

List of reference symbols

1

Input device

1A

criteria

1B

Information

1C

Display

2

Database

3

server

4th

processor

5

Rating metric

6

Output device

7th

certificate

8th

Result

A1

first step

A2

second step

A3

Third step

D.

Data Connection

P1

process

P2

process

P3

process

S.

system

Claims (16)

Method for the automatic evaluation of installer companies, preferably for fire extinguishing systems, whereby several criteria for the certification of an installer company are specified, whereby an evaluation metric (5) is specified on the system side, by means of which information on the fulfillment of the criteria is automatically evaluated and it is determined whether prerequisites for certification of the installer company are fulfilled. Procedure according to Claim 1 , characterized in that at least one of the criteria is mandatory for certification, so that it is determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are not met if this criterion is not met. Procedure according to Claim 1 or 2 , characterized in that an evaluation attribute is assigned to each criterion by means of the evaluation metric (5). Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that at least one of the criteria can be partially fulfilled, this criterion being assigned a fulfillment coefficient in the evaluation by means of the evaluation metric (5), in particular in addition to an evaluation attribute, which represents the extent to which the Criterion is met. Procedure according to Claim 4 , characterized in that if the criterion is only partially fulfilled, it is determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are fulfilled if the fulfillment coefficient meets a corresponding fulfillment condition. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that at least two criteria are not absolutely necessary for certification, these criteria forming a group for which an additional condition is specified in the evaluation metric (5), whereby it is only determined when the additional condition is met that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. Procedure according to Claim 6 , characterized in that a value is calculated on the basis of the evaluation attributes and / or the fulfillment coefficient and the calculated value must reach or exceed a threshold value in order to fulfill the additional condition. Procedure according to Claim 6 or 7th , characterized in that the additional condition can only be met if several criteria of the group are met together. Method according to one of the Claims 6 to 8th , characterized in that the additional condition can only be met if at least one criterion of a selection of criteria of the group is met. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that a certificate is automatically created if it is determined that the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that it is automatically checked whether there is sufficient information on the basis of which it can be determined whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the content of a document required to meet a criterion is automatically determined, preferably with it being automatically determined on the basis of the determined content whether the criterion is met. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the authenticity of a document required to meet a criterion is automatically checked. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that a plausibility check is carried out during which the check whether information on the fulfillment of the criteria is plausible. System (S) for the automatic evaluation of installation companies for fire extinguishing systems, the system (S) having an evaluation module for evaluating criteria for the certification of an installation company, the system (S) or the evaluation module having an evaluation metric (5) by means of the information can be automatically assessed to meet the criteria, and the system (S) or assessment module is designed to determine whether the requirements for certification of the installer company are met, preferably the system (S) for carrying out a method according to one of the preceding claims is formed. Computer program, comprising instructions which, when the program is executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method according to one of the Claims 1 to 14th execute.

Images