JP2009518709A - Technical evaluation method - Google Patents

Abstract

  The present invention enables systematic risk management that reflects the risk of business failure and environmental risk for the target technology in order to utilize the technology evaluation results for credit, credit guarantee, investment, etc. And a technology evaluation method capable of predicting management results. The technical evaluation method according to the present invention includes a step of obtaining a risk grade that assigns a grade by scoring the probability (excellent probability or unreal probability) calculated by the logit model in order to reflect the business infeasibility of the technology to be evaluated. Obtaining a technical grade that assigns a grade based on a score calculated by a weighted score model (Scoring Model) to reflect the technicality, business feasibility, and marketability of the technology to be evaluated, and the risk grade and the technology And a step of obtaining a technical evaluation certification grade that gives a grade in a comprehensive manner by a matrix having grades as an X axis and a Y axis.

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

〔Technical field〕
The present invention relates to a technology evaluation method, and in particular, in order to utilize the result of technology evaluation for credit, credit guarantee, investment, etc., systematic risk management reflecting the risk of business infeasibility and environmental risk for the target technology is performed. It is possible and relates to a technical evaluation method capable of predicting the unreasonable probability by year and the management result by grade.

[Background Technology]
In general, the types of technical evaluation can be broadly divided into technical evaluation and technical value evaluation, and technical evaluation can be divided again into technical grade evaluation and technical ability evaluation. First, technology grade evaluation is a type that evaluates the feasibility of technology as a percentage or grade. The technical capability evaluation evaluates the overall technical capability of a company, and comprehensively evaluates individual technical levels, technical human resources, intellectual property rights, research facilities, and the like. Technical value evaluation is a type in which the value of an individual technology is converted into money in order to calculate a technology transaction price, a collateral value of an intellectual asset, and the like.

  Here, a grade model, a profile model, an inspection table model, etc. are used as a technical grade evaluation method. A scoring model is a person who assigns a score to each evaluation item of technicality and applies a weight value according to the importance between the evaluation items. The profile model has the advantage that the evaluation element can be expressed in a figure and the advantages and disadvantages of the technology can be quickly grasped. For Checklist Model, check items that must be considered (Check Point) are set, and after setting the minimum standard (Cut-Off Criteria) for each check item, all check items are constant. This is a method for examining whether or not the reference value is satisfied.

  Such a conventional technology evaluation model is a model in which each evaluation element is determined, and a score (importance) is assigned to each evaluation element, and the evaluation is based on a score or a grade. There were limits to using it directly as technical finance such as credit and investment.

  In addition, the conventional technology evaluation method does not reflect the risk of the company's misrepresentation due to the economic environment and economic factors, and the reliability of the evaluation is not high.

  In addition, the conventional technology evaluation method has a limitation that it cannot show the change of corporate disapproval over time, and it is possible to analyze similar technology evaluation cases of past companies and manage the results of new companies. There was no model that could be predicted.

  Under these circumstances, in July 2004, the Korean government announced the “Comprehensive measures for strengthening competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises”. The need to improve the technical grade and certification system with a high degree of confidence to use it for various purposes, such as the construction of a grade setting method that takes into account the unreasonable rate due to the introduction and technical commercialization, raised the head.

Detailed Description of the Invention
The present invention has been devised in order to solve the above-described problems, and an object of the present invention is to provide a technology evaluation method that reflects environmental risks due to the economic environment and economic factors, and technical commercialization risks. Is.

  Another object of the present invention is to reconstruct mutually exclusive technical evaluation items based on the literature analysis and the significance analysis results of past technical evaluation indexes, and to consider each item by adopting the Balance Matrix method. It provides a technical evaluation method in which the objectivity, neutrality, and mutual complementarity of items are improved and the reliability of the evaluation index and application method is verified.

  It is another object of the present invention to provide a technical evaluation method that can show the change of corporate injustice over time.

  Another object of the present invention is to provide a technology evaluation method capable of analyzing similar technology evaluation cases of past companies and predicting the results of new companies.

  In addition, the object of the present invention is to provide a technology evaluation certification class that has a credible power to be used for various purposes such as technology transfer and technology transactions and technology finance (finance and investment), and technology for innovative and well-developed SMEs. It is intended to provide a technical evaluation method capable of creating an activation requirement for financial support.

  In order to achieve the above-mentioned object, the technology evaluation method according to the present invention scores the probability (excellent probability or unreality probability) calculated by the logit model in order to reflect the business infeasibility of the evaluation target technology. A stage for obtaining a risk grade for assigning a grade, and a step for obtaining a technical grade for assigning a grade based on a score calculated by a weighted grade model to reflect the technicality, business potential, and marketability of the technology to be evaluated And obtaining a technical evaluation certification grade that gives a grade by combining the risk grade and the technical grade with a matrix having X and Y axes.

  In addition, the technical evaluation method according to the present invention further includes a step of calculating an unreal probability for each year according to the grade using a life data analysis model (survival analysis model).

  The technology evaluation method according to the present invention further includes a step of predicting the management result by case-based reasoning.

  Further, the technology evaluation method according to the present invention is applied to a technology evaluation model evaluated by a plurality of evaluation indexes respectively indicating four items of a manager's technical capability, technical capability, marketability, business capability, and profitability.

  Further, in the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of calculating the score for each technical evaluation item (small item) used for obtaining the risk grade, the technical grade, and the technical evaluation certification grade is a detailed examination item for each evaluation item. A step of inputting an evaluation content, and a step of calculating a score for each technical evaluation item (small item) according to the evaluation content of the detailed examination item for each technical evaluation item (small item).

  Further, in the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the evaluation content input to the detailed examination items for each technical evaluation item (small item) is checked as a measurement evaluation item evaluated by a value automatically calculated by the system according to the evaluation method. It consists of check evaluation items evaluated by the number of items and evaluator evaluation items to which grades are given.

  Further, in the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of calculating the score for each technical evaluation item (small item) is a 5 × 5 balance matrix or 5 × 5 × 5 balance matrix for each detailed technical evaluation item (small item). Is calculated by

  The stage of calculating the risk score for determining the risk grade by the technical evaluation method according to the present invention includes the step of calculating the logit score reflecting the risk of business infeasibility from the result of the technical evaluation, and the evaluation target technology (company). Calculating an environmental score reflecting internal and external environmental hazards, and combining the logit score and the environmental score at a predetermined ratio to obtain a risk score.

  Further, in the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of calculating the logit score and the environmental score includes calculating a factor variable for the technical evaluation score, calculating a factor variable for the economic indicator, and calculating an enterprise state variable. A step of determining a logit model input value based on a basic calculation value obtained in each of the above steps; a factor variable of the technical evaluation score is input to the logit function 1 to calculate an excellent probability and a logit score is calculated. And a step of calculating an environmental score by calculating a good probability by inputting a factor variable of the economic index and a company state variable into the logit function 2.

  In the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of obtaining the technical grade includes a step of calculating a technical score by giving a weight value for each evaluation item using a weighted score model.

  In the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of obtaining the technical evaluation certification grade is a step of assigning a certification grade based on a matrix evaluation criterion based on a risk grade based on a logit model and a technical grade based on a weighted score model.

  Further, in the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of calculating the unreal probability for each year by the life data analysis model (survival analysis model) includes the step of calculating the survival probability (XB) through the input variable and the coefficient, and the survival probability. And calculating an expected life (or unreal probability) over time to reflect.

  Further, in the technology evaluation method according to the present invention, the step of predicting the management result by the case base reasoning includes a step of calculating a score for each technology evaluation index, a step of measuring the Euclidean distance, and a company having the minimum Euclidean distance. Extracting a certain number of times, and extracting the extracted company results and predicting the company results by case-based reasoning.

  In addition, the technical evaluation method according to the present invention presents the technical evaluation with various visuals in the matrix chart and the commentary section, and the technicality, business feasibility, technical business feasibility, and risk grade variables used in the technical evaluation model are respectively set on the X axis or It is characterized by expressing the characteristics of a company by creating a KTCP matrix on the Y axis.

  In the technical evaluation method according to the present invention, the method of creating the KTCP matrix includes a technical evaluation risk grade, a technical grade, and a technical variable variable selection stage, a risk grade, a technical grade, and a financial safety grade calculation stage, A step of calculating the technicality, businessability, and technical businessability scores, a step of creating a matrix table based on the calculated score values, and a step of destroying the matrix chart portion based on the created matrix table Including.

〔Example〕
Hereinafter, preferred embodiments of a technical evaluation method according to the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

  FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram for explaining the concept of a technical evaluation method according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. The technical evaluation method according to the present invention includes a step of obtaining a major risk grade (S123) and a step of obtaining a technical grade (S125). And a stage for obtaining a technical evaluation certification grade (S129), a stage for obtaining an unreal probability for each year based on the grade (S133), and a management outcome prediction stage (S135).

  The evaluation grades of the technical evaluation method according to the present invention are classified into a risk grade (S123), a technical grade (S125), and a technical assessment (certification) grade (S129).

  The risk class (S123) indicates the possibility of business infeasibility of a company based on the corresponding technology by statistically analyzing the commercialization, technicality and related matters of the technology that is planned or is being commercialized. To reflect the possibility of business infeasibility (Risk) of the target company (technology) as a technology-based corporate risk class that combines the economic and environmental factors that can be considered and affect the business promotion of the company at the same time The probabilities of good or bad calculated by the logit model are scored, given a grade according to a certain standard, and displayed in 10 grades (aaa to d).

  The technology grade (S125) is the business success potential and technological innovation ability of companies based on the relevant technology by comprehensively examining the technicality, business feasibility and marketability of the technology that is planned to be commercialized or being promoted. This is the grade of the calculated technology base, and a grade is given by applying a certain standard to the score calculated by the weighted rating model to reflect the technicality, business potential, marketability, etc. of the company to be evaluated (technology). Display with 10 grades (V1 to V10).

  In the technical evaluation (certification) grade (S129), the risk grade and the technical grade are comprehensively examined by a matrix and given a grade, and are displayed as 10 grades (AAA to D).

  Such an evaluation grade display system is as shown in Table 1 below.

ここで危険等級(Ｓ１２３)、技術等級(Ｓ１２５)は各模型によって算出された危険評点と技術評点とによって一定基準によって付与された等級であり、技術評価(認証)等級(Ｓ１２９)は危険等級と技術等級とをＸ軸とＹ軸にするマトリックスによって総合的に検討して付与されて、その結果は表２のようである。

Here, the risk grade (S123) and the technical grade (S125) are grades assigned according to a certain standard by the risk score and the technical score calculated by each model, and the technical assessment (certification) grade (S129) is a risk grade. Table 2 shows the result given comprehensively by the matrix that makes the technical grade X-axis and Y-axis.

以下で本発明による技術評価方法によって危険等級、技術等級、技術評価認証等級を求める方法を上述する。

The method for obtaining the risk grade, the technical grade, and the technical evaluation certification grade by the technical evaluation method according to the present invention will be described below.

  Table 3 shows the technical evaluation items used to determine the risk grade, technical grade, and technical evaluation certification grade in this technical evaluation method. The technical evaluation items consist of a hierarchical structure of large, medium and small items and detailed examination items, and the score (grade) is calculated for each technical evaluation item (small item) based on the evaluation results of the detailed examination items. The score (class) of this technical evaluation item (small item) is used as an input variable for calculating the risk class and the technical class.

図２は、本発明による技術評価項目別の評価等級を算出する流れ図であり、図２に示すところのように技術評価表をログイン(Ｓ２０１)して、技術評価項目(小項目)別に詳細検討項目の評価内容を入力する(Ｓ２０３)。

FIG. 2 is a flowchart for calculating an evaluation grade for each technical evaluation item according to the present invention. As shown in FIG. 2, the technical evaluation table is logged in (S201), and detailed examination is performed for each technical evaluation item (small item). The evaluation content of the item is input (S203).

  The input evaluation contents are classified into three, namely, a measurement evaluation item, a check evaluation item, and an evaluator evaluation item, depending on the evaluation method.

  The measurement evaluation item is an item that is evaluated based on a value automatically calculated by the system using separately input company data such as company overview data and company financial data. Since it is an item that is automatically calculated by the system, it is very important to check whether data input is okay.

  The measurement evaluation items are classified into evaluation items based on the size (level) of the calculated value itself and evaluation items based on the comparison level of the industry average value (such as the industry-specific average ratio).

  Table 4 shows the calculation method for each item.

チェック評価項目は、評価基準として提示されたチェック項目を評価者がチェック(Check)して、チェックされた項目数によって自動評価する。

As for the check evaluation item, the evaluator checks the check item presented as the evaluation standard, and automatically evaluates it according to the number of checked items.

  The current status of check evaluation items is shown in Table 5 below.

評価者評価項目の対象は、計量及びチェック評価項目以外の評価項目であり、評価画面(Pop-up)上で提示される評価基準によって評価者が任意の等級を付与して評価する。

The target of the evaluator evaluation item is an evaluation item other than the weighing and check evaluation items, and the evaluator assigns an arbitrary grade according to the evaluation standard presented on the evaluation screen (Pop-up) and evaluates it.

  The evaluator evaluation method for each evaluation item is summarized in Table 3 described above.

After inputting the evaluation contents of the detailed examination item for each technical evaluation item (small item) by the evaluation method as described above (S203), it is confirmed whether or not the input item can be dropped (S205). Enter this. (S207)
If all the detailed review items are entered, 5 × 5 balance matrix depending on the number of detailed review items for each technical evaluation item (small item), or 5 × 5 × 5 points according to the technical evaluation item (small item) according to the balance matrix ) Is automatically calculated. (S209)
An example of calculation using a 5 × 5 balance matrix is shown in Table 6 below.

５×５×５バランスマトリックスによる算出例示は下の表７のようである。

An example of calculation using a 5 × 5 × 5 balance matrix is shown in Table 7 below.

図３は、本発明による危険等級を求めるための危険評点(ロジットモデル)を算出する流れ図である。危険予測模型は技術評価表によって評価された技術評価データをロジットモデルに適用して模型を樹立する。

FIG. 3 is a flowchart for calculating a risk score (logit model) for determining a risk grade according to the present invention. The risk prediction model is established by applying the technology evaluation data evaluated by the technology evaluation table to the logit model.

As a procedure for obtaining a logit score for obtaining a risk grade, first, it is checked whether or not evaluation input of detailed examination items can be omitted for each technical evaluation item (small item) (S301). This is a stage of automatically checking whether or not evaluation item scores can be omitted, and whether or not other input variables can be omitted. If the entry of the check result evaluation score is omitted, the item is supplemented. (S303)
Next, by using the score (grade) for each technical evaluation item (small item) input by evaluation, a factor variable of the technical evaluation score by a functional expression is calculated (S305).

  The factor variable calculation formula is as shown in Table 8 below.

要因変数の算出が終了されれば(Ｓ３０５)、次に別途保存された経済指標を活用して、関数式による経済指標の要因変数を算出する(Ｓ３０７)。

If the calculation of the factor variable is completed (S305), the economic index factor variable is calculated by a functional equation using the separately stored economic index (S307).

  A list of economic indicators is shown in Table 9 below.

次に企業状態変数を算出する。(Ｓ３０９)
企業状態変数を算出するための変数目録は下の表１０のようであり、これは別途入力された企業データによって求める。

Next, the company state variable is calculated. (S309)
The variable list for calculating the company state variable is as shown in Table 10 below, which is obtained from separately input company data.

企業状態変数は常時調査及び資料管理ＤＢ入力過程で入力誤りや入力抜け落ちが持続する項目であるので、最終評点を算出する前に企業状態変数目録を画面上に出力(Pop-UP)して評価者の再確認を通すように構成する。(Ｓ３１１)
次に基礎算出値、ロジットモデル投入値を確定して保存する。(Ｓ３１３)
継いて、技術評価評点の要因変数をロジットモデルに投入してロジット点数１を求めて(Ｓ３１５)、優良確率を計算して(Ｓ３１７)ロジット評点を求める。(Ｓ３１９)
ロジット評点を算出するための項目と変数名は下の表１１のようである。

Since company status variables are items in which input errors and omissions continue during the regular investigation and data management database input process, the company status variable list is output on the screen (Pop-UP) and evaluated before the final score is calculated. To pass the reconfirmation of the person. (S311)
Next, the basic calculation value and logit model input value are determined and stored. (S313)
Subsequently, a factor variable of the technical evaluation score is input to the logit model to obtain a logit score of 1 (S315), an excellent probability is calculated (S317), and a logit score is obtained. (S319)
The items and variable names for calculating the logit score are as shown in Table 11 below.

優良確率(Score)は、

The probability (Score) is

の算式によって算出して(Ｓ３１７)、優良確率が計算されると、ロジット評点=優良確率*１００の式によってロジット評点を計算する。(Ｓ３１９)
環境評点を算出するための項目と変数名は下の表１２のようであり、上のロジット評点を求める手続きと同一にロジット点数２を計算して(Ｓ３２１)、優良確率を求めて(Ｓ３２３)環境評点を求める。(Ｓ３２５)

(S 317) When the excellent probability is calculated, the logit score is calculated by the following formula: logit score = excellence probability * 100. (S319)
The items and variable names for calculating the environmental score are as shown in Table 12 below, and the logit score of 2 is calculated in the same manner as the procedure for calculating the logit score above (S321), and the excellent probability is determined (S323). Ask for environmental scores. (S325)

ロジット評点と環境評点が求められると、危険評点=ロジット評点*０．９５+環境評点*０．０５の算式によって危険評点を求める。(Ｓ３２７)
危険評点が求められると、図１に示すところのようにこれによる危険等級を算出する。(Ｓ１２３)
次は加重値評点模型による技術等級を求める段階である。(Ｓ１２５)
ここでは下の表１３でのように技術評価項目(小項目)によって技術評点を求める方法を例示する。

When the logit score and the environmental score are obtained, the risk score is calculated by the formula of risk score = logit score * 0.95 + environmental score * 0.05. (S327)
When the risk score is obtained, the risk grade is calculated as shown in FIG. (S123)
The next step is to obtain a technical grade using a weighted rating model. (S125)
Here, as shown in Table 13 below, a method for obtaining a technical score by a technical evaluation item (small item) is illustrated.

評価項目別の加重値は業種別特性を反映して、業種別に加重値を差別化して適用する。

The weight value for each evaluation item reflects the characteristics of each industry, and the weight values for each industry are differentiated and applied.

  If a technical score is determined by the weighted score model, a technical grade is assigned according to the following evaluation criteria. (S125)

ロジットモデルによる危険等級(Ｓ１２３)と加重値評点模型による技術等級(Ｓ１２５)が算出されると、これを基礎にしてマトリックス評価基準によって最終的に技術評価認証等級を付与する段階を説明する。(Ｓ１２９)
技術評価認証等級算出は、上述した表２の内容のように、マトリックスによる等級評価による。

When the risk grade (S123) based on the logit model and the technical grade (S125) based on the weighted score model are calculated, the stage of finally assigning the technical evaluation certification grade based on the matrix evaluation criteria will be described. (S129)
The technical evaluation certification grade calculation is based on a grade evaluation by a matrix as shown in Table 2 above.

Next, we will explain the stage of calculating the uncertain probability (survival probability) by year according to the grade by the life data analysis model (survival analysis model). (S133)
This stage is a stage to calculate the unreal probability (expected life) by year based on the technical evaluation certification grade using the evaluation result of the technical evaluation table as an input variable.

  Lifespan (survival) data is from the fixed starting point to the time of the incident, for example, from the time of credit guarantee (financing) based on the technical evaluation and evaluation results to the time when the incident of corporate misrepresentation (commercialization failure) occurs. Constructed, this time is referred to as the lifetime.

  Life data analysis (survival analysis) is to measure the expected life of an evaluation target company by analyzing the survival period and obtaining the probability and risk factor of survival after the time t of a technology evaluation and credit guarantee (loan) company. In addition, it provides additional information such as changes in the business failure rate by technology evaluation grade over time.

  The input variable list for calculating the survival probability of the life data analysis model is shown in Table 14 below.

下の表１５は時間(t)別に期待寿命を算出するためのParameter目録の例示である。

Table 15 below shows an example of a parameter list for calculating the expected life by time (t).

このような変数によって年度別期待寿命(または不実確率)算出方法は、
（１）投入変数と係数の線形方程式によって生存確率(ＸＢ)を計算して、
（２）時間別に期待寿命(または不実確率)を計算する。

The calculation method of expected life by year (or unreal probability) by such variables is as follows:
(1) The survival probability (XB) is calculated by a linear equation of input variables and coefficients,
(2) Calculate the expected life (or unreal probability) for each hour.

・ 1 year expected life = EXP (-EXP (-XB * weibull) * y_12weibull)
・ 2 years expected life = EXP (-EXP (-XB * weibull) * y_24weibull)
・ 3 years expected life = EXP (-EXP (-XB * weibull) * y_36weibull)
・ 4 years expected life = EXP (-EXP (-XB * weibull) * y_48weibull)
・ 5 years life expectancy = EXP (-EXP (-XB * weibull) * y_60weibull)
* Unreal probability = 1-Expected life Figure 8-15 shows an example of the expected life (unreal probability) results for each year.

Next, the stage of predicting management results by case-based reasoning (S121) will be described. (S135)
Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) is a method of searching for an existing case similar to a new case and utilizing the similarity of the existing case to the solved problem. Extract past management evaluation cases similar to the company (technology) currently being evaluated, and analyze the management results of the similar technology evaluation case companies to extract the management results of the company (technology).

  FIG. 4 is a procedure diagram of a method for predicting management results, and the calculation method for each stage will be described with reference to this.

  First, a score for each technical evaluation index is calculated. (S401) Here, the score calculated by the technical evaluation table is used as it is.

  Next, the Euclidean distance is measured. (S403) The Euclidean distance is an index indicating a measure of similarity, and is calculated as a square root with respect to the sum of squares of the standard score of the technical evaluation sub-item and the distance between the scores of the comparison target companies (past score cases). It looks like below.

※比較対象企業(過去評点事例)それぞれに対してユークリッド距離を算出
次にユークリッド距離を測定してその距離が最小、すなわち、類似度が最も高い企業１０個の事例を抽出して(Ｓ４０５)、１０個企業の成長性、収益性、活動性などの成果を抽出する。(Ｓ４０７)
評価対象企業に対して事例基盤推論による成果評価結果を比較対象企業(過去評点事例)に累積蓄積して比較対象企業として活用する。以上で本発明による危険等級、技術等級、技術評価認証等級、等級による年度別不実確率、経営成果予測に対して説明した。

* Calculate the Euclidean distance for each of the companies to be compared (past score cases) Next, measure the Euclidean distance and extract the cases of the 10 companies with the smallest distance, that is, the highest similarity (S405) Extract the results of growth, profitability, activity, etc. of 10 companies. (S407)
The results of evaluation based on case-based reasoning for the evaluation target company are accumulated in the comparison target company (past score case) and used as the comparison target company. The risk grade, technical grade, technical evaluation certification grade, unreal probability by year, and management result prediction according to the present invention have been described above.

  In the case where the technical evaluation result by the technical evaluation method of the present invention described above is analyzed from various viewpoints such as risk grade, technical ability, business feasibility, etc., and displayed on a two-dimensional chart (hereinafter referred to as “KTCP matrix”). The method of creating and using such a KTCP matrix will be described where the degree of utilization can be increased.

FIG. 5 is a screen example illustrating the drawing part and the commentary part of the KTCP matrix. As shown in Fig. 5, the KTCP matrix expresses the characteristics of a company in a single chart with the X-axis and Y-axis representing the technicality and businessability, technology / businessability, and risk grade variables used in the technology evaluation model. It consists of a chart part and a commentary part as a technical evaluation and consulting matrix.
The chart part categorizes the evaluation results of the evaluation target company's technicality, business potential, and risk perspective in a certain grade, and then displays them on a matrix.

  The commentary unit is responsible for the function of automatically outputting explanations for each matrix after combining and configuring the matrices from various viewpoints.

  The technology used in the KTCP matrix indicators is a comprehensive evaluation of technology development promotion capability, investment and infrastructure for technology development, technological innovation, completeness, expandability, etc. Comprehensive evaluation of the market situation and competitiveness, productization ability, marketing ability, etc.

  FIG. 6 is a flowchart for destroying the KTCP matrix. In order to construct the KTCP matrix, a variable selection stage (S601), a risk grade, a technical grade, a financial safety grade calculation stage (S603), and a technical property , Business grade, technical / business grade score calculation stage (S605), variable score section setting stage (S607), matrix table creation stage (S609), matrix chart section construction stage (S611) .

  In the variable selection stage (S601), each of the technical evaluation risk class, the technical class, and the technical variable is selected. The technical evaluation risk class uses the technical base risk class calculated by the technical evaluation model, and the technical class is a score or rating calculated by the scoring method method for the overall evaluation items of the technical evaluation index described above. It is.

  As shown in Table 17 below, the technical variable is composed of technical evaluation items of the technical evaluation index.

市場性変数は下の表１８に示すように技術評価指標の市場性評価項目で構成される。

The marketability variable is composed of marketability evaluation items of the technology evaluation index as shown in Table 18 below.

下の表１９は事業性（１）変数である。

Table 19 below shows the business (1) variables.

下の表２０は事業性（２）変数である。

Table 20 below shows the business (2) variables.

技術・事業性変数は下の表２１に示すように、技術評価指標の技術性及び事業性評価項目で構成される。

As shown in Table 21 below, the technology / business feasibility variable is composed of technical and business feasibility evaluation items.

財務安全性変数は企業信用評価システムの財務模型を活用した財務等級を財務安全性変数で活用する。

As the financial safety variable, a financial grade using the financial model of the corporate credit evaluation system is used as the financial safety variable.

When the variable selection stage is completed, the risk grade, technical grade, and financial safety score (grade) are calculated. (S603)
The danger class is a technology-based danger class calculated by the above-described technical evaluation model.

  The technical grade is a grade calculated by the technical evaluation model described above.

  Financial safety is a financial grade calculated by a financial model of a corporate credit evaluation system.

Next, technical, business, and technical / business scores are calculated. (S605)
Based on the scoring model based on the Scoring Method method, the score is converted to 100 points for each field (variable) by the following formula.

  ·a formula

評点が算出されれば、図表部を駆逐するためにまず、変数別各評点(等級)を６個の区間で分類して区間を設定する。(Ｓ６０７)

If the score is calculated, in order to destroy the chart part, first, each score (grade) according to each variable is classified into 6 sections and sections are set. (S607)

※但し、危険等級．ＶＳ．技術等級マトリックスは１０×１０構成
次に算出された評点値によってマトリックス表を作成する。(Ｓ６０９)
<Matrix構築>

* However, risk grade. VS. The technical grade matrix creates a matrix table with the score values calculated next to the 10 × 10 configuration. (S609)
<Matrix construction>

最後に、マトリックス図表部及び解説部を駆逐する。(Ｓ６１１)
図７ａは、技術評価等級を示すＫＴＣＰマトリックス図面であり、技術等級をＸ軸で、危険等級をＹ軸にして作成される。技術評価等級は対象技術と係わって技術力、技術開発現況及び製品化能力を土台に事業化可能性を等級で評価して、危険等級は対象企業の対内外環境を勘案して技術事業の推進過程で予測される今後事業の不実可能性を危険評価模型によって等級で評価したことを意味する。

Lastly, we will destroy the matrix chart and commentary. (S611)
FIG. 7a is a KTCP matrix drawing showing technical rating grades, created with the technical grade on the X axis and the risk grade on the Y axis. The technology evaluation grade is related to the target technology, evaluates the possibility of commercialization based on the technical ability, current technology development status and commercialization ability, and the risk grade promotes the technology business taking into account the internal and external environment of the target company It means that the uncertain possibility of the future business predicted in the process was evaluated by the grade by the risk evaluation model.

  FIG. 7b is a KTCP matrix drawing showing management result prediction. Technology infrastructure business, especially in the case of SMEs, analyze various management results cases of technology companies taking into account that there are many difficulties in predicting future management results when compared with existing traditional forms of enterprises. It is based on predicting the management results of technology companies over the next three years. Management results are calculated based on four financial indicators such as profitability, growth potential, safety and activity, and the higher the grade, the better the results.

  FIG. 7c is a KTCP matrix drawing that explains the technology vs. business potential, and expresses the technical contents, technical level, etc. of the target technology and the technology's ability to commercialize, marketing status, future profitability, etc. on the matrix. It is a chart.

  FIG. 7d is a KTCP matrix drawing explaining the technology vs. marketability, and is a chart expressing the technology contents, technology levels, etc., and the technology market size, growth prospects, competition situation, etc. in contrast to the matrix. .

  Fig. 7e is a KTCP matrix drawing that explains the marketability vs. business potential, comparing the technology market size, growth prospects, competitive situation, etc., with the technology's commercialization ability, marketing situation, future profit prospects, etc. on the matrix. It is a chart expressed as

  Fig. 7f is a KTCP matrix drawing that explains financial safety vs. technology business feasibility, and shows future growth prospects (technical business feasibility) such as technology technicality, business feasibility and profitability, and short-term financial safety at the time of evaluation for companies. It is the chart expressed by contrasting with a matrix.

  The following are screens on a computer to which the above-described technical evaluation method according to the present invention is actually applied. Each screen will be described according to the evaluation procedure of the present invention.

FIG. 8A is a reception management screen at the technical evaluation reception stage.
FIG. 8B is an input screen for details of acceptance at the technical evaluation acceptance stage.

8c to 8f are enterprise data input stages, respectively.
FIG. 8c is an input screen for an outline of a business entity (industry, work force, registration, external supervisor, venture company availability, etc.)
FIG. 8d is an input screen for representative status.
FIG. 8e is an input screen for financial statements.
FIG. 8f is a data management screen for economic environment indicators.

8g to 8o are input stages of evaluation data,
FIG. 8g is an evaluation cover page generation screen.
FIG. 8h is a screen for inputting 45 pieces of data and creating an evaluation table.
FIG. 8i is a rating assignment screen for the evaluation item of the measurement item example 1.
FIG. 8 j is a rating assignment screen for the evaluation item of the measurement item example 2;
FIG. 8k is a grade assignment screen for evaluation items exemplified as check items.
FIG. 8L is an evaluation item grade assignment screen illustrating an evaluator evaluation item.
Figure 8m is a screen showing the balance matrix,
FIG. 8n is a screen showing the score calculation result.

  FIG. 8o is a display stage of the evaluation result, and is a screen showing the technical evaluation grade, the result analysis, and the expected life calculation result.

  As described above, all of the preferred embodiments of the technical evaluation method according to the present invention are realized by a program in which the present invention is realized by data stored in a database by a computer.

[Industrial applicability]
According to the technology evaluation method according to the present invention having the above-described configuration, not only rationally evaluates the technical excellence, business feasibility, marketability, etc. for the target technology, but also simultaneously measures the risk of business infeasibility of the technical infrastructure. By presenting the evaluation results, it is possible to facilitate technical development and financial (guarantee, investment and loan) support for commercialized companies.

  In addition, according to the present invention, it is possible to enhance the predictability of business failure by reflecting the business failure risk calculated through statistical analysis technique (logit model) in the evaluation grade calculation.

  FIG. 9 is a graph comparing the business unpredictability between the conventional technology evaluation method that does not reflect the risk grade of the technology and the technology evaluation method according to the present invention. As shown in FIG. Although the risk of unrealization is not taken into account, the significance of prediction of business inaccuracies by grade due to changes in technical assessment grades is reduced, but according to the technology evaluation method of the present invention, the business inefficiency rate of upper grades is low and goes to lower grades The business unreality rate is so high that the ability to predict the business unreality rate by grade is dramatically improved.

  Moreover, systematic risk asset management is possible by presenting the expected loss risk by technology evaluation grade.

  In addition, by introducing statistical analysis techniques, it is possible to understand the correlation between management results and evaluation data.

  In addition, it is possible to upgrade the continuous evaluation system to improve the reliability of the construction model through continuous feedback system construction.

  Further, according to the present invention, it is possible to reflect the environmental risk due to the economic environment and economic factors in the technical evaluation.

  Further, according to the present invention, it is possible to reflect the change in the unrealization of the company over time in the technical evaluation.

  Further, according to the present invention, it is possible to analyze the financial result data of the past company and predict the result of the new company.

FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram for explaining the concept of a technology evaluation method according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a flowchart for calculating an evaluation grade for each technical evaluation item according to the present invention. FIG. 3 is a flowchart for calculating a risk score (logit model) for determining a risk grade according to the present invention. FIG. 4 is a flowchart of a method for predicting management results. FIG. 5 is a screen example illustrating the drawing part and the commentary part of the KTCP matrix. FIG. 6 is a flow chart for destroying the KTCP matrix. FIG. 7a is a KTCP matrix drawing showing technical evaluation grades. FIG. 7b is a KTCP matrix drawing showing management result prediction. FIG. 7c is a KTCP matrix drawing illustrating technical vs. business. FIG. 7d is a KTCP matrix diagram illustrating the technology vs. marketability. FIG. 7e is a KTCP matrix drawing explaining marketability vs. business potential. FIG. 7f is a KTCP matrix diagram illustrating financial safety vs. technology business. FIG. 8A is a reception management screen at the technical evaluation reception stage. FIG. 8B is an input screen for details of acceptance at the technical evaluation acceptance stage. FIG. 8c is an input screen for a business entity overview. FIG. 8d is an input screen for the representative status. FIG. 8E is a financial statement input screen. FIG. 8f is a data management screen for economic environment indicators. FIG. 8g is an evaluation document cover generation screen. FIG. 8h is a screen for creating an evaluation table by inputting 45 pieces of data. FIG. 8 i is a rating assignment screen for evaluation items of the measurement item example 1. FIG. 8 j is a rating assignment screen for evaluation items of the measurement item example 2. FIG. 8k is a grade assignment screen for evaluation items exemplified as check items. FIG. 8L is an evaluation item grade assignment screen illustrating an evaluator evaluation item. FIG. 8m is a screen showing the balance matrix. FIG. 8n is a screen showing the score calculation result. FIG. 8o is an evaluation result display stage, and is a screen showing the technical evaluation grade, the result analysis, and the expected life calculation result. FIG. 9 is a graph comparing the business unpredictability between the conventional technology evaluation method that does not reflect the technology risk grade and the technology evaluation method according to the present invention.

Claims (15)

In order to reflect the possibility of business infeasibility of the technology to be evaluated on a computer, a number of technical evaluation items are input, a score is calculated for each technical evaluation item (small item), and a score for each technical evaluation item (small item) is calculated. Using the logit model to determine the hazard rating by calculating the risk score,
In order to reflect the technicality, business feasibility, and marketability of the technology to be evaluated by the computer, the score is calculated by calculating a score using a weighted evaluation model using the score calculated for each technical evaluation item (small item). Obtaining the technical grade by
And a step of obtaining a technical evaluation certification grade that gives a grade by combining the risk grade and the technical grade with a matrix having the X-axis and the Y-axis by the computer. .   After the step of obtaining the technical evaluation certification grade, the method further comprises a step of calculating a yearly uncertain probability by a life data analysis model using the technical evaluation certification grade by using the grade of the technical evaluation item as an input variable. Item 2. The technical evaluation method according to Item 1.   The method further includes a step of predicting a management result by case-based reasoning (CBR) on the basis of the score calculated for the technical evaluation item after the step of obtaining the technical evaluation certification grade. The technical evaluation method according to claim 1 or 2.   The technology evaluation method according to claim 1 is applied to a technology evaluation model that is evaluated by a plurality of evaluation indexes that respectively indicate four items of management technical ability, technology, marketability, business potential, and profitability. Technical evaluation method characterized by The step of calculating the risk grade, the point calculation for each technical evaluation item (small item) in the step of obtaining the technical grade, the step of inputting the evaluation content of the detailed examination items for each evaluation item,
The technical evaluation method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of calculating a score for each technical evaluation item (small item) according to an evaluation content of a detailed examination item for each technical evaluation item (small item).   The evaluation content input to the detailed examination items for each technical evaluation item (small item) is evaluated by the evaluation method, each of the evaluation items that are automatically calculated by the system, and the check evaluation that is evaluated by the number of checked items. The technical evaluation method according to claim 5, comprising an evaluator evaluation item to which an item and a grade are assigned.   The step of calculating the score for each technical evaluation item (small item) is performed by calculating detailed examination items for each technical evaluation item (small item) using a 5 × 5 balance matrix or a 5 × 5 × 5 balance matrix. The technical evaluation method according to claim 5. Calculating the risk rating, calculating the risk score, calculating a logit score;
Calculating the environmental score;
The technical evaluation method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of obtaining a risk score by combining the logit score and the environmental score at a predetermined ratio. Calculating the logit score and the environmental score,
Calculating a factor variable for the technical evaluation score;
Calculating a factor variable for the economic indicator;
Calculating a company state variable;
Determining a logit model input value based on a basic calculated value obtained in each of the steps;
Inputting a factor variable of the technical evaluation score into the logit function 1, calculating a probability of goodness, and calculating a logit score;
9. The technology evaluation method according to claim 8, further comprising the step of calculating an environmental score by calculating a probability of goodness by inputting a factor variable and an enterprise state variable of the economic index into a logit function 2. The step of obtaining the technical grade includes
The technical evaluation method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of calculating a technical score by giving a weight value for each evaluation item by a weighted score model.   The method of claim 1, wherein the step of obtaining the technical evaluation certification grade is a step of assigning the certification grade according to a matrix evaluation standard based on a risk grade based on a logit model and a technical grade based on a weighted score model. Technology evaluation method. The step of calculating the unreal probability by year includes:
Calculating survival probability (XB) through input variables and coefficients;
The technical evaluation method according to claim 2, further comprising a step of calculating an expected life (or unreality probability) over time reflecting the survival probability. The stage of predicting management results by the case base reasoning is as follows:
A stage for calculating scores for each technical evaluation item;
Measuring the Euclidean distance;
Extracting a certain number of companies with the smallest Euclidean distance,
The technology evaluation method according to claim 3, further comprising: extracting the extracted company results and predicting the company results by case-based reasoning. It consists of a drawing part and a commentary part on a computer.
A technology evaluation method characterized by expressing the characteristics of a company by creating a KTCP matrix with the X-axis or Y-axis representing the technical, business, technical business, and risk grade variables used in the technical evaluation model. The method of creating the KTCP matrix is as follows:
Technical evaluation risk grade, technical grade, technical variable selection stage,
Risk grade, technical grade, financial safety grade calculation stage,
Calculating the technical, business and technical business scores,
Creating a matrix table with the calculated score values;
The technology evaluation method according to claim 14, further comprising: destroying a matrix diagram portion based on the created matrix table.

Images