JP2003141274A - System and method for evaluating it environment in office building - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a system and a method for evaluating IT environment capable of totally evaluating the IT environment from the viewpoint of a user's request, the constitution of the system and the structure of a building, etc. SOLUTION: This evaluation system and an evaluation method evaluate an information system, etc., to be constructed in an office building by using a computer, are provided with a question data base in which questions and alternatives addressed to a building manager, a system user and a system manager are stored and a totaling means of answers to the questions, the totaling means integrates a weighting coefficient indicating degrees of importance of evaluation items and an influence frequency indicating degrees of influence of the alternatives provided as the answers to the questions for the respective answerers and totals for the respective items.

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an IT environment evaluation system and an evaluation method for evaluating the equipment environment of an information system constructed in an office building and an information system including a building surrounding the information system, a building facility and the like.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art For example, an information system using a network such as a LAN is likely to be used in various fields as the performance of a computer and the like and the infrastructure such as a network are rapidly improved. Then, the user of the information system comes to think of seeking a new function in the information system or using the information system for a new purpose. Therefore, every time a new request occurs, the equipment that composes the existing system is changed to a high-performance model, the network is expanded, etc., and the operating system contains equipment with greatly different performance. In many cases, the old and new networks are added together.

[0003]

The above information system has been largely changed from the purpose and system configuration at the time of construction. Even if the system administrator, the operating information system is suitable for the request of the system user. It is difficult to judge whether or not

[0004] Further, the information system is largely applicable not only to technical elements such as equipment and facilities, network environment, and applications to be operated, but also to the performance of the building and construction equipment where the information system is constructed and the organization to be operated. To be affected. For this reason, when changing or rebuilding the information system, not only the information system manager, but also the people in charge of multiple departments including the manager of the office building where the information system is constructed must be involved. Therefore, when evaluating whether or not the constructed information system is suitable for the demands of system users, it is necessary to evaluate many evaluation items related to other departments. However, since there is no evaluation system or evaluation method that comprehensively evaluates such evaluation items across multiple departments, there was a problem that the information system had to be used without checking its suitability.

The present invention has been made in view of the above-mentioned problems, and provides an IT environment, a user's request, a system configuration,
It is an object of the present invention to provide an IT environment evaluation system and an evaluation method that can be comprehensively evaluated from the viewpoint of a building structure and the like.

[0006]

According to a first aspect of the present invention, there is provided an IT environment evaluation system for achieving the above object, wherein an information environment constructed in an office building and an equipment environment of the information system are installed in a computer. An IT environment evaluation system to be evaluated using a building administrator who manages the office building, a system user who installs the information system, and a system administrator who manages the information system are respondents. , A question database that stores a question for which each of the respondents is requested to answer, and an option that is an answer to the question, and a question and an option associated with the evaluation item of the IT environment from these question databases. The question presenting means to be extracted and presented to the respondent, and the evaluation item of the IT environment are weighted based on the importance to the IT environment. A weighting factor setting means for setting a coefficient, an influence degree setting means for setting an influence degree on the option based on a degree of influence on the evaluation item, and an aggregating means for aggregating based on the answer of the respondent. ,
The question for the evaluation item is set for each respondent, and the aggregating unit integrates the weighting factor and the influence frequency based on the answer of each respondent, and aggregates for each evaluation item. .

According to this IT environment evaluation system, a question for each respondent regarding the IT environment evaluation items is presented to the building manager who is the respondent of the question, the system user, and the system manager. Therefore, for each evaluation item,
Information in each position can be obtained from the building administrator, system user, and system administrator. As a result, it becomes possible to comprehensively evaluate from various perspectives by adding each position to each evaluation item of the IT environment.

Further, since the degree of importance of each item for the IT environment and the degree of influence of each option for each item are aggregated, each item can be objectively and quantitatively evaluated. . Here, the system user is
It mainly indicates the president, officers, branch managers, department heads, managers, etc. who are responsible for the activities performed in the office building.
Anyone who clearly understands the true purpose and requirements of the information system will do.

Further, the question to the system user is related to the purpose of introducing the information system, the question to the building manager is related to the building and its equipment, and the question to the system manager is the device of the information system. And related to the equipment environment.

That is, the purpose and desire for the IT environment including this information system can be extracted from the question to the system user, and the current state of the existing IT environment or , It is possible to grasp the specifications of the information system that is about to be constructed and the environment surrounding it. By comparing and evaluating these, the gap between the demand for the IT environment and the current situation, and the information that is being constructed It is possible to clearly know the degree of achievement of the system requirements.

An IT environment evaluation method according to a third aspect of the present invention is an IT environment evaluation method for evaluating the information system constructed in an office building and the equipment environment of the information system using a computer. The building administrator who manages the office building, the system user who introduces the information system, and the system administrator who manages the information system are the respondents, and the questions for which the respondents are asked to answer, and their questions. A question database that stores options that are answers to the question, extracts questions and options that are associated with evaluation items of the IT environment from the question database, presents them to the respondent, and evaluates the evaluation items. In addition, a weighting factor is set based on the degree of importance to the IT environment, and the options are based on the degree of influence on the evaluation item. Set the impact frequency, and based on the answers from the respondents, add the weighting factor set for the answered option and the impact frequency set for the option, and add up for each evaluation item. Characterize.

According to this IT environment evaluation method, the building manager, who is the respondent to the question, the system user, and the system manager simply answer the presented question, and the IT
It is possible to evaluate the environment objectively and quantitatively.

[0013]

BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION An embodiment of an IT environment evaluation system and evaluation method according to the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 shows an I in an office building of the present invention.
It is a conceptual diagram which shows the process of the IT diagnostic system (evaluation system) provided in order to implement | achieve the evaluation method of T environment.

The IT diagnosis system 10 is an information processing system including a programmed computer and is connected to a network such as the Internet or a LAN.
A person who wishes to diagnose the IT environment (hereinafter referred to as a person who desires diagnosis), who is a respondent to a question to be described later, operates and communicates with a terminal equipped with a browser function (hereinafter referred to as a person who wants to make a request). Here, the person who desires diagnosis manages the system user who introduces the information system included in the IT environment to be evaluated, and the IT environment including the information system and the building or building equipment in which the information system is constructed. At least three people, a system administrator and a building administrator, form one group. Those who wish to make a diagnosis each have the IT diagnosis system 10
And enter information for evaluating the IT environment to be evaluated by a questionnaire in the form of answering the question presented by the IT diagnosis system 10.

In this IT diagnosis system 10, AHP (A
The IT environment is evaluated using an analysis method called nalytic Hierarchy Process. Figure 2 shows AHP
An example of the evaluation tree generated by is partially shown. In this AHP, the large evaluation items set in the first layer (upper layer side) are branched toward the second layer, the third layer, ... And the lower layer side, respectively, and the subdivided evaluation items are linked in a tree shape. An evaluation tree is generated as a result, and each evaluation item is set with a weighting coefficient α according to its importance.

For example, the first layer has six items as shown in FIG. 3, which are short-term flexibility, long-term flexibility, normal reliability, abnormal reliability, spatial productivity, and electronic productivity. Is listed. Of these, paying attention to long-term flexibility, in the second tier, the evaluation items of capacity and space are branched, and in the third tier, the capacity is branched into information infrastructure and building infrastructure, and the space is occupied. The evaluation items are linked further toward the lower layer, such as branching into space and equipment space. The weighting factor α for each evaluation item differs depending on the importance of the evaluation item. For example, the weighting factor between each evaluation item in the lower layer branched from one evaluation item in the upper layer is calculated by the paired comparison method by the analysis method of AHP.
The weighting factors are distributed so that the sum becomes 1.
In the above example, long-term flexibility: 1, second-tier capacity: 0.5, space 0.5, third-tier information infrastructure 0.43, building infrastructure 0.57, and weighting factor α are set. There is.

In the lowest evaluation item located in the lowest hierarchy (n-th layer) of the evaluation tree, a set of alternative questions corresponding to the lowest evaluation item and their corresponding options are set,
For this option, the degree of influence of each option with respect to the lowest evaluation item is set in, for example, five levels.

When an option having the influence degree indicating the influence degree set to "5" is selected as the answer to the question, the influence degree "5" and the weight set in the lowest evaluation item are selected. The coefficient αn is integrated, and the evaluation tree is further traced from the lowest evaluation item to the first layer, and all weighting factors set in the evaluation items of each layer are integrated. Evaluation values for long-term flexibility are aggregated by adding up the values accumulated up to the first layer for each question. Therefore, as described above, if there are 6 items in the first layer, 6 evaluation values will be aggregated.

The IT diagnosis system 10 includes a presentation screen database (not shown) and an applicant information database 1.
2, a question database 14 for building managers, a question database 16 for system applicants, a question database 18 for system managers, a database 20 by industry, an evaluation item database 22, and a weight coefficient database 24.
, Answer result database 26, and evaluation database 2
8 and.

The presenting screen database stores screen data for displaying information on the screen of the terminal of the requesting diagnosis requesting person of the applicant, and this screen data stores input means for execution events and Other information is hyperlinked.

In the applicant information database 12, the applicant information, such as the type of business, the business type and the organizational scale of the applicant who has accessed the IT diagnosis system 10 and the information for specifying the three persons forming the group, is stored in the applicant ID. Is added and registered, and is used for authentication at the time of re-access, authentication for whether the accessed user belongs to the group, or the like.

The industry-specific database 20 stores information such as the business type, business type and organizational scale input by the applicant, and the business type I.
The data table is associated with D. When the type of business is input by the applicant, a type of business ID is given based on this data table, and an evaluation tree, which will be described later, is associated with this business type ID, and a weighting factor, which will be described later.

The evaluation item database 22 stores a large number of evaluation items for generating the evaluation tree, and is provided with a data table in which the business type ID and the evaluation items are associated with each other. Further, each evaluation item is provided with hierarchical information that is a relative positioning of evaluation items that are related to each other, based on the information such as the type of industry, the evaluation item is extracted, and the hierarchical information of the extracted evaluation item is added. An evaluation tree will be generated based on this.

The question database 14 for the building manager,
In the question database 16 for system users and the question database 18 for system administrators, the question and the answer corresponding to the evaluation item that can be the lowest evaluation item and the answer options are the building manager and the system that are the respondents. It is stored for each user and system administrator. Here, the question to the system user is a question to guide the information about the purpose of introduction and the request of the information system, and the question to the building manager is a question to guide the information about the building and its equipment. Questions for persons are composed of questions for guiding information about facilities and environment of the information system. Therefore, the system user's response confirms the ideal state of the IT environment including the information system, and the system administrator and the building manager's response confirm the current state of the information system and the equipment environment of the information system. It is possible to grasp the degree of achievement of requirements.

In the weighting coefficient database 24, a paired comparison data indicating a mutual weighting relationship with the trader ID is obtained by a paired comparison method for weighting each two items of the evaluation items. It is associated and stored.

The response result database 26 stores the response results obtained from the building manager, the system user, and the system manager, and also stores the evaluation value accumulated in association with these. .

The evaluation database 28 stores an evaluation commentary message, an advice message indicating an improvement point, etc. corresponding to the aggregated evaluation value and analysis result.

==== Evaluation of Information System === Here, it is assumed that the IT diagnostic system 10 and a terminal operated by a person who wants to diagnose the IT environment are connected via the Internet. , IT diagnosis system 10 will be described as an example. Here, the person who accesses is the system user, but the person who first accesses may be the system administrator or the building administrator, and the processing is executed in the same manner.

The IT diagnostic system 10 provides the accessing system user with a registration form of applicant information required when using the IT diagnostic system 10.
It is generated from the data in the presentation screen database and sent as TOP screen data. In this TOP screen data, a registration section in which an input section for applicant information and an input means for issuing a registration execution event of these data are laid out,
And a diagnosis execution unit that acquires the second screen data and executes the diagnosis. In this diagnosis execution unit, a layout is provided with an input unit for an already registered person to input a desired person ID to be described later in order to acquire the second screen data and an event input means for acquiring the second screen data. Has been done. Here, the applicant information includes at least the diagnosis applicant who has accessed, the name of the organization that uses the information system to be diagnosed, the type of business, the business category, the scale of the organization, and the like.
The names of the other two persons among the persons who wish to be diagnosed as a group of persons or the name of the organization to which the person belongs are included.

T displayed on the terminal of the system user
When a predetermined item is written in the OP screen data and an execution event to register is input, the IT diagnostic system 1
0 stores the input applicant information in the applicant information database 12 with the applicant ID added. Requester ID addressed to the system user who has accessed at this time
Is sent. This applicant ID is commonly set for the three registered persons (building administrator, system user, system administrator), and this applicant ID can specify the IT environment to be diagnosed. It becomes possible, and it becomes possible to share the stored information. That is,
Any building administrator, system user, or system administrator can use the applicant ID to input information for evaluating a single IT environment.

Applicant ID by the applicant who has completed registration
When is input and an event requesting the 2nd screen data is input, in order to confirm the position of this applicant, that is, whether the person corresponds to a building administrator, system user or system administrator. The second screen data on which the input means is laid out is sent to the applicant terminal.

When the applicant who has acquired the second screen data inputs that the applicant is a system user, and the information indicating the position of the applicant is issued from the applicant terminal to the IT diagnostic system 10, the IT diagnostic system is issued. Reference numeral 10 reads the business type, business type, and scale data of the applicant information database 12, and refers to the business type database 20 to assign a business type ID. Evaluation items in the evaluation item database 22 are extracted based on the industry type ID, an evaluation tree is generated based on the hierarchical information of the extracted evaluation items, and each evaluation item is calculated based on the weight coefficient database 24. The weighting factor α is set. At this time, the weighting coefficient indicating the degree of importance between each evaluation item in each hierarchy of the generated evaluation tree is set so that the sum of the weighting coefficients of each evaluation item in each hierarchy becomes 1 by the AHP analysis method. Is set based on the paired comparison data in the weighting coefficient database 24.

When this evaluation tree is generated, the question and the option corresponding to the lowest evaluation item are extracted from the system user question database 16 in which the question for the system user is stored. Here, the generated evaluation tree is an evaluation tree from which questions to the system user for confirming the desired state of the IT environment are extracted, and system management for grasping the current state of the information system and its environment. And an evaluation tree from which questions to the building manager and the building manager are extracted.

The evaluation tree is generated, and the extracted questions are laid out in question screen data displaying one question at a time and sent to the terminal of the system user, and the question and the option are selected by the browser function of the terminal. It is displayed on the terminal of the system user. A check box is provided for each option, and the answer is selected by the applicant marking the check box corresponding to the option. In this question screen data, an event input means for advancing to the next question is laid out, and by inputting this event, the questions are sequentially sent out from the IT diagnostic system 10 to the terminal of the system user.

On the screen data of the final question, a completion event input means indicating that the answer is completed is laid out.
When the completion event is input by the applicant, answer data indicating the option selected by the system user is sent from the applicant terminal to the IT diagnostic system 10 in association with all the questions. This answer data is stored in the answer result database 26 of the IT diagnosis system 10.

In the IT diagnosis system 10, the influence degree of each answer is acquired based on the answer data stored in the answer result database 26, and each evaluation located upstream from the bottom evaluation item associated with each question. The weighting factors of the items are extracted, these are added up, and all the answer data are totaled according to the above AHP. By this totaling, the six evaluation values corresponding to the large evaluation items of the first layer are totalized for the system user and stored in the response result database 26.

The building manager and the system manager also answer the corresponding questions as described above, so that the answers are stored in the answer result database 26 and are aggregated in the same manner as the system users' answers.

FIG. 4 is an example showing a method of presenting diagnostic results. (A) is a display of comprehensive evaluation by a radar chart, (b) is a display by scores, (c) is a comment on the evaluation result, and (d). Shows the display of the evaluation for each evaluation item on the radar chart. As shown in FIG. 4 (a), the diagnostic result is obtained by, for example, creating a hexagonal radar chart having the above-mentioned six major evaluation items as vertices and plotting the evaluation values on the respective evaluation axes.
It is possible to present an easily understandable evaluation result to a diagnosis applicant.

Since the question to the system user is to extract the purpose and desire of the applicant, the evaluation value of the system user indicates the ideal state of the IT environment to be evaluated. It will be. On the other hand, by asking questions to the building manager and the system manager, it is possible to grasp the current state of the IT environment including the information system from the viewpoint of equipment and environment.

Then, the evaluation axes of the radar chart showing the ideal state based on the evaluation value of the system user and the radar chart showing the current state based on the evaluation values of the building manager and the system manager are overlapped. This makes it possible to clearly show the gap between the purpose and desire of the system user and the current state of the IT environment.

Further, as shown in FIG. 4 (b), this gap can be quantified by taking the area of the overlapping portion of the two radar charts and the difference between the evaluation values, and can be quantified. The information can be presented to the diagnostic applicant. Further, as shown in FIG. 4C, the numerical value indicating the gap, the area ratio of the overlapping portion, the explanation message of the evaluation of the evaluation database 28, the advice message indicating the improvement point, etc. are associated with each other. If not only presented with easy-to-understand evaluation results, IT
It can be a guide to bring the environment closer to what it should be.

In the present embodiment, an example in which there are two evaluation trees is shown, but an evaluation tree may be generated for each of a building manager, a system user, and a system manager, and each evaluation value may be obtained. . At this time, among the evaluation values of the building manager and the system manager, the evaluation value for the same evaluation item is multiplied by the ratio based on their contribution to the IT environment, etc. By generating data in which the evaluation values of and are integrated and generating the radar chart based on the integrated data, it is possible to obtain an evaluation result indicating the current state of the IT environment to be diagnosed.

In the above embodiment, the IT diagnosis system is connected to the applicant terminal by the network. However, the IT diagnosis system is executed by the program stored in the stand-alone computer, and the three applicants make the diagnosis. You may enter the information directly into the computer.

[0045]

As described above, according to the IT environment evaluation system and the evaluation method of the present invention, the same evaluation items related to the IT environment are selected from the building manager, the system user, and the system manager. It is possible to obtain information from a standpoint and take into account each standpoint to make a comprehensive evaluation from various perspectives.

Further, since evaluation values are aggregated from the importance of each item for the IT environment and the influence of each option for each item, each item can be evaluated objectively and quantitatively. .

Further, the purpose and demand of the IT environment to be evaluated are known by the response from the system user, and the current state of the IT environment including the existing information system is obtained by the response from the building manager and the system manager. Or, it is possible to grasp the specifications of the IT environment that is about to be built. Therefore, by comparing and evaluating these, the gap between the demand for the IT environment and the current situation can be clarified.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a conceptual diagram of an IT diagnostic system serving as an evaluation system for implementing an IT environment evaluation method according to the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation tree generated by AHP.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of first-level evaluation items by AHP.

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of evaluation results of an IT environment evaluation method according to the present invention.

[Explanation of symbols]

10 IT diagnosis system (evaluation system) 12 Applicant information DB (database) 14 Question DB (database) for building managers 16 Question DB (database) for system users 18 System administrator question DB (database) 20 Industry DB (database) 22 Evaluation item DB (database) 24 Weighting coefficient DB (database) 26 Answer result DB (database) 28 Evaluation DB (database)

Continued front page    (72) Inventor Naoyuki Yamaguchi             2-15-2 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo Co., Ltd.             Obayashi Tokyo Main Office (72) Inventor Ryoji Mizuno             2-15-2 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo Co., Ltd.             Obayashi Tokyo Main Office (72) Inventor Yoshishima Kojima             2-15-2 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo Co., Ltd.             Obayashi Tokyo Main Office (72) Inventor Satoshi Tsunoda             2-15-2 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo Co., Ltd.             Obayashi Tokyo Main Office

Claims (3)

[Claims] 1. An IT environment evaluation system for evaluating, using a computer, an information system and an equipment environment of the information system built in an office building, the building manager managing the office building, and the information system. A question database in which a system user who introduces the system and a system administrator who manages the information system are respondents, and a question for which an answer is sought from each of the respondents and an option which is an answer to the question are stored, Question presenting means for extracting questions and options associated with IT environment evaluation items from these question databases and presenting them to the respondent, and an important item for the IT environment in the IT environment evaluation items. A weighting factor setting means for setting a weighting factor based on the degree, and the option based on the degree of influence on the evaluation item. And an impact degree setting means for setting an impact degree, and an aggregating means for aggregating based on the answers of the respondents, the questions for the evaluation items are respectively set for each respondent, the aggregating means, An IT environment evaluation system characterized by adding up a weighting factor and an influence frequency based on the answers of the respondents and totaling each evaluation item. 2. A question to the system user is related to the purpose of introducing the information system, a question to the building manager is related to the building and its equipment, and a question to the system manager is a device of the information system. The IT environment evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the IT environment evaluation system is related to the equipment environment. 3. An IT environment evaluation method for evaluating, using a computer, an information system built in an office building and an equipment environment of the information system, the building manager managing the office building, and the information system. A system user who introduces the system and a system administrator who manages the information system are respondents, and a question database is stored that stores questions for which each of the respondents is asked for an answer, and options that are the answers to the question. , A question and options associated with the evaluation item of the IT environment are extracted from the question database and presented to the respondent, and a weighting factor is added to the evaluation item based on the importance to the IT environment. Set, in the option, set the influence frequency based on the degree of influence on the evaluation item, the response of the respondent Zui by the set weighting coefficients answered alternatives, by integrating the impact frequency, which is set in that selection, evaluation method of IT environment, characterized in that the aggregate for each evaluation item.