JP3965970B2 - IT environment evaluation system and method in office buildings - Google Patents

Description

[0001]
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to an information system constructed in an office building and an IT environment evaluation system and evaluation method for evaluating the equipment environment of an information system including buildings, building facilities, etc. surrounding the information system.
[0002]
[Prior art]
For example, an information system using a network such as a LAN has become more and more useful as the information system becomes more versatile as the performance of computers and the like and the rapid development of infrastructure such as a network increase. Users will seek new functions in the information system or will use the information system for new purposes. For this reason, every time a new request occurs, the devices that make up the existing system are changed to high-performance models or the network is expanded repeatedly. In many cases, the old and new networks are connected to each other.
[0003]
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
The above information system is greatly changed from the original purpose and system configuration, and even if it is a system administrator, it is not possible to judge whether the operating information system is suitable for the system user's request. difficult.
[0004]
In addition, information systems are greatly influenced not only by technical elements such as equipment, facilities, network environments, and applications that are operated, but also by the performance of the buildings and building equipment in which the information systems are constructed and the organizations in which they are operated. . For this reason, when changing or reconstructing an information system, not only the information system administrator but also the person in charge of multiple departments, including the administrator of the office building where the information system is built, is involved. Therefore, when evaluating whether or not the constructed information system is suitable for the demand of the system user, it is necessary to evaluate a large number of 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 has been a problem that it must be used without confirming the suitability of the information system.
[0005]
The present invention has been made in view of the above-described problems, and provides an IT environment evaluation system and evaluation method capable of comprehensively evaluating an IT environment from the viewpoint of user requirements, system configuration, building structure, and the like. The purpose is to provide.
[0006]
[Means for Solving the Problems]
To achieve this object, an IT environment evaluation system according to claim 1 of the present invention is an IT environment evaluation system for evaluating an information system constructed in an office building and an installation environment of the information system using a computer. The building manager who manages the office building, the system user who introduces the information system, and the system manager who manages the information system become respondents, and each respondent asks for a reply. A question database storing questions and options that serve as answers to the questions, and a question presenting means for extracting questions and options associated with evaluation items of the IT environment from these question databases and presenting them to the respondent And a weighting factor setting that sets a weighting factor in the evaluation item of the IT environment based on the importance to the IT environment And the option includes an influence frequency setting means for setting the influence frequency based on the degree of influence on the evaluation item, and a counting means for counting based on the answer of the respondent, The questions set for each respondent and the system user are questions for confirming what the IT environment should be, and the questions for the system administrator and the building administrator are the current status of the IT environment. The aggregation means adds up the weighting factor and the influence frequency based on the answers of each respondent, and totals each evaluation item, and based on this aggregation, the IT environment should be It is characterized by presenting the evaluation results of appearance and the current evaluation results of IT environment .
[0007]
According to this IT environment evaluation system, questions for each respondent regarding the IT environment evaluation items are presented to the building administrator, system user, and system administrator who are respondents to the question. For each evaluation item, information on the respective positions can be acquired from the building administrator, system user, and system administrator. As a result, it is possible to comprehensively evaluate from a variety of perspectives, taking into account each position, for each evaluation item of the IT environment.
[0008]
Further, since the items are aggregated using the importance of each item with respect to the IT environment and the degree of influence of each option on each item, each item can be objectively and quantitatively evaluated. Here, the system user mainly indicates the person responsible for the activities performed in the office building, such as the president, officers, branch managers, department managers, managers, etc. It doesn't matter as long as it clearly understands the request.
[0009]
Also, the question to the system user is related to the purpose of introducing the information system, the question to the building administrator is related to the building and its facilities, and the question to the system administrator is the equipment and equipment of the information system. It is characterized by being related to the environment.
[0010]
In other words, the purpose and request 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 the construction from now on by the question to the building administrator and the system administrator. Since it is possible to grasp the specifications of the information system that is going to be done 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 system to be built You can clearly know the degree of achievement for the request.
[0011]
An IT environment evaluation method according to claim 3 is an IT environment evaluation method for evaluating an information system constructed in an office building and an installation environment of the information system using a computer. The building manager to be managed, the system user who introduces the information system, and the system administrator who manages the information system are the respondents. The question to the system user is a question for confirming the ideal state of the IT environment, and the question to the system administrator and the building administrator is a question of the IT environment. It is a question of order to grasp the present situation, question and are associated with the evaluation items of the iT environment from the question database An option is extracted and presented to the respondent, and a weighting factor is set for the evaluation item based on the importance to the IT environment, and an influence frequency is set for the option based on the degree of influence on the evaluation item. set, based on the respondent's reply, the set weighting coefficient answered alternatives, by integrating the impact frequency, which is set in that selection, aggregated for each evaluation item, on the basis of the aggregate It is characterized by presenting the evaluation result of the ideal state of the IT environment and the current evaluation result of the IT environment .
[0012]
According to this IT environment evaluation method, the building administrator, the system user, and the system administrator who are the respondents to the question simply answer the presented questions to make the IT environment objective and quantitative. It becomes possible to evaluate.
[0013]
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF 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.
[0014]
FIG. 1 is a conceptual diagram showing processing of an IT diagnosis system (evaluation system) provided for realizing the IT environment evaluation method in an office building of the present invention.
[0015]
This IT diagnosis system 10 is an information processing system composed of a programmed computer, and is connected to a network such as the Internet or a LAN, and is a person who wishes to diagnose an IT environment as a respondent to a question to be described later (hereinafter, a person who wants to diagnose). To communicate with a terminal equipped with a browser function (hereinafter referred to as a requester terminal). Here, the diagnosis applicant manages a system user who introduces an information system included in the IT environment to be evaluated, and an IT environment including the information system and a building or a building facility in which the information system is built. At least three of the system manager and the building manager form one group. Each diagnosis applicant accesses the IT diagnostic system 10 and inputs information for evaluating the IT environment to be evaluated by a questionnaire in the form of answering a question presented from the IT diagnostic system 10 To do.
[0016]
In this IT diagnosis system 10, the IT environment is evaluated using an analysis method called AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). FIG. 2 partially shows an example of an evaluation tree generated by AHP. In this AHP, the large evaluation items set in the first layer (upper layer side) are branched to the second layer, the third layer,... And the lower layer side, and the subdivided evaluation items are linked in a tree shape. Thus, an evaluation tree is generated, and a weighting coefficient α corresponding to the importance is set for each evaluation item.
[0017]
For example, the first level includes six items such as short-term flexibility, long-term flexibility, normal reliability, non-normal reliability, spatial productivity, and electronic productivity as shown in FIG. Suppose that Of these, paying attention to long-term flexibility, the second tier branches to capacity and space evaluation items, and the third tier divides the capacity into information infrastructure and building infrastructure, and the space is used as office space. As it branches into a space and a facility space, the evaluation items are further branched into a lower layer side.
The weighting coefficient α for each evaluation item varies depending on the importance of the evaluation item. For example, the weighting factors between the evaluation items in the lower layer branched from one evaluation item in the upper layer are distributed so that the sum of the weighting factors becomes 1 by the pair comparison method based on the AHP analysis method. 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. Yes.
[0018]
In the lowest evaluation item located in the lowest hierarchy (n layer) of the evaluation tree, a set of questions corresponding to this lowest evaluation item and options to be answered are set. The degree of influence of each option on the lowest evaluation item is set, for example, in five stages.
[0019]
Then, when an option whose influence degree indicating the influence degree is set to “5” is selected as the answer to the question, the influence degree “5” and the weight coefficient αn set as the lowest evaluation item And the evaluation tree is traced back from the lowest evaluation item to the first hierarchy, and all weighting factors set in the evaluation items of each hierarchy are integrated. By adding up the values accumulated up to the first hierarchy for each question, the evaluation values for long-term flexibility are aggregated. Therefore, if there are six items in the first layer as described above, six evaluation values are aggregated.
[0020]
The IT diagnosis system 10 includes a presentation screen database (not shown), a applicant information database 12, a building administrator question database 14, a system applicant question database 16, and a system administrator question database 18. , An industry database 20, an evaluation item database 22, a weight coefficient database 24, an answer result database 26, and an evaluation database 28.
[0021]
In the presentation screen database, screen data for displaying information on the screen of the terminal of the applicant who has accessed the diagnosis is stored, and the screen data includes an execution event input means and other information. Is hyperlinked.
[0022]
The applicant information database 12 is provided with the applicant ID of the applicant who has accessed the IT diagnosis system 10, such as the type of business, the business type and the organization size, and information for specifying the three members of the group. Are used for authentication at the time of re-access, authentication for whether or not the access belongs to the group, and the like.
[0023]
The industry-specific database 20 includes a data table in which information such as a business type, business type, and organization size input by the applicant is associated with a business type ID. When a business type or the like is input by the applicant, a business type ID is assigned based on this data table, and an evaluation tree (to be described later) and a weighting factor (to be described later) are set in association with the business type ID.
[0024]
The evaluation item database 22 stores a large number of evaluation items for generating the evaluation tree, and includes a data table in which the industry type ID and the evaluation items are associated with each other. In addition, each evaluation item is assigned hierarchical information that is a relative positioning of the evaluation items related to each other, and the evaluation items are extracted based on the information such as the type of industry, and the extracted evaluation item hierarchical information Based on this, an evaluation tree is generated.
[0025]
The question database for building manager 14, the question database for system user 16, and the question database for system administrator 18 are the question associated with the evaluation item that can be the lowest evaluation item and the options that are the answer to the question. It is stored for each building administrator, system user, and system administrator who is the respondent. here,
The question for the system user is a question for deriving information on the purpose and demand of the information system. The question for the building administrator is a question for deriving information on the building and its facilities. The question for the system administrator. Is composed of questions to guide information related to the facilities and environment of the information system. For this reason, the response of the system user confirms the ideal IT environment including the information system, and the response of the system administrator and the building administrator confirms the current state of the information system and the installation environment of the information system or The degree of achievement for the request can be grasped.
[0026]
In the weighting coefficient database 24, paired comparison data indicating a mutual weight relationship is associated with the supplier ID by a paired comparison method in which each two combinations of the evaluation items are weighted with respect to each other. Is remembered.
[0027]
The answer result database 26 stores answer results answered from the building manager, the system user, and the system manager, and also stores evaluation values accumulated in association with the answer results.
[0028]
In the evaluation database 28, evaluation comment messages corresponding to the totaled evaluation values and analysis results, advice messages indicating improvement points, and the like are stored.
[0029]
==== 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 an IT environment are connected via the Internet, and a system user accesses the IT diagnostic system 10 as an example. . Here, the system user is assumed to be accessed, but the person who accesses first may be a system administrator or a building administrator, and the processing is executed similarly.
[0030]
The IT diagnosis system 10 generates a registration form for applicant information necessary for using the IT diagnosis system 10 from the data of the presentation screen database and sends it as TOP screen data to the accessing system user. To do. The TOP screen data includes a registration unit in which an input unit for requester information and an input means for issuing a registration execution event for these data are laid out, and a diagnosis for executing the diagnosis by acquiring the second screen data And an execution unit. The diagnosis execution unit is laid out with an input unit for inputting a user ID (to be described later) for acquiring a second screen data by an already registered person, and an event input unit for acquiring the second screen data. Has been. Here, the applicant information includes the name of the person who requested the diagnosis, the name of the organization that uses the information system to be diagnosed, the type of industry, type of business, size of the organization, and the like. Among them, the names of the other two persons or the organization name to which the persons belong are included.
[0031]
When predetermined items are written in the TOP screen data displayed on the system user's terminal and an execution event for registration is input, the IT diagnosis system 10 uses the input requester information An ID is assigned and stored in the applicant information database 12. At this time, the requester ID is sent to the system user who has accessed. This applicant ID is set in common for the three registered persons (building administrator, system user, and system administrator), and the IT environment to be diagnosed can be specified by this applicant ID. And the stored information can be shared. That is, any of the building manager, the system user, and the system manager can input information for evaluating a single IT environment by using the applicant ID.
[0032]
When the applicant ID is input by the applicant who has completed registration and the event requesting the second screen data is input, the position of the applicant, that is, the person is the building administrator, system user, system administrator. The second screen data in which the input means for confirming which one of these is laid out is transmitted to the applicant terminal.
[0033]
When the applicant who acquired the second screen data inputs that the user is a system user and information indicating the position of the applicant is issued from the applicant terminal to the IT diagnostic system 10, the IT diagnostic system 10 The business type, business type, and scale data of the applicant information database 12 are read, and the business type ID is assigned by referring to the business type database 20. Based on this industry ID, evaluation items in the evaluation item database 22 are extracted, and an evaluation tree is generated based on the hierarchical information of the extracted evaluation items. Each evaluation item is based on the weight coefficient database 24. A weighting factor α is set. At this time, the weighting coefficient indicating the degree of importance between the evaluation items in each layer of the generated evaluation tree is set so that the sum of the weighting factors of the evaluation items in each layer becomes 1 by the AHP analysis method. Are set based on the paired comparison data in the weighting coefficient database 24.
[0034]
When this evaluation tree is generated, questions and options corresponding to the lowest evaluation item are extracted from the system user question database 16 in which questions for the system user are stored. Here, the generated evaluation tree includes an evaluation tree from which questions to system users for confirming the ideal 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 manager and the building manager are extracted.
[0035]
An evaluation tree is generated and the extracted questions are laid out in question screen data to be displayed one by one and sent to the system user's terminal, and the question and options are converted to the system user by the browser function of the terminal. Displayed on the terminal. Each option is provided with a check box, and the answer is selected by the applicant marking the check box corresponding to the option. In the question screen data, event input means for proceeding to the next question is laid out. By inputting this event, questions are sequentially sent from the IT diagnosis system 10 to the terminal of the system user.
[0036]
On the screen data of the final question, a completion event input unit indicating that the answer is completed is laid out. When the completion event is input by the applicant, answer data indicating options selected by the system user is sent from the applicant terminal to the IT diagnosis system 10 in association with all questions. This answer data is stored in the answer result database 26 of the IT diagnosis system 10.
[0037]
In the IT diagnosis system 10, the influence frequency of each answer is acquired based on the answer data stored in the answer result database 26, and the weight of each evaluation item on the upstream side from the lowest evaluation item associated with each question. Coefficients are extracted, integrated, and totalized for all answer data according to the AHP. As a result of the totalization, six evaluation values corresponding to the large evaluation items in the first hierarchy are totaled for the system user and stored in the answer result database 26.
[0038]
The building manager and the system manager also answer the corresponding question as described above, so that the answer is stored in the answer result database 26 and is aggregated in the same manner as the answer of the system user.
[0039]
FIG. 4 shows an example of a method for presenting a diagnosis result. (A) is a display of comprehensive evaluation by a radar chart, (b) is a display by score, (c) is a comment on the evaluation result, and (d) is a radar chart. The display of evaluation for each evaluation item is shown. As shown in FIG. 4 (a), the diagnosis result is obtained by, for example, creating a hexagonal radar chart having the above six large evaluation items as vertices and plotting the evaluation values on the respective evaluation axes. An easy-to-understand evaluation result can be presented to the applicant.
[0040]
Here, since the question to the system user is to extract the purpose and request of the applicant, the evaluation value of the system user shows the ideal state of the IT environment to be evaluated. . On the other hand, questions to the building manager and the system manager can grasp the current state of the IT environment including the information system in terms of facilities and environment.
[0041]
And, by superimposing the evaluation axis of the radar chart indicating the ideal state based on the evaluation value of the system user and the radar chart indicating the current state based on the evaluation value of the building administrator and the system administrator, It is possible to clearly show the gap between the purpose and request of the system user and the current state of the IT environment.
[0042]
Furthermore, as shown in FIG. 4B, this gap can be quantified by taking the area of the overlapping part of the two radar charts and the difference between the evaluation values, and quantitative information can be diagnosed. Can be presented to the applicant. Further, as shown in FIG. 4C, the numerical value indicating the gap, the area ratio of the overlapping portion, the comment message of the evaluation of the evaluation database 28, the advice message indicating the improvement point, and the like are associated with each other. In addition to presenting easy-to-understand evaluation results, it can be a guideline for bringing the IT environment closer to what it should be.
[0043]
In the present embodiment, an example in which two evaluation trees are used has been described. However, an evaluation tree may be generated for each of a building administrator, a system user, and a system administrator, and each evaluation value may be obtained. At this time, among the evaluation values of the building administrator and the system administrator, the building administrator and the system administrator are multiplied by the evaluation value for the same evaluation item and the ratio based on their contribution to the IT environment. Is generated, and the radar chart is generated based on the integrated data, it is possible to obtain an evaluation result indicating the current state of the IT environment to be diagnosed.
[0044]
In the above-described embodiment, an example in which the IT diagnosis system is connected to the applicant terminal via the network is shown. However, the diagnosis is executed by a program stored in a stand-alone computer, and three diagnosis applicants directly connect to this computer. Information may be entered.
[0045]
【The invention's effect】
As described above, according to the IT environment evaluation system and evaluation method of the present invention, information on the same evaluation items related to the IT environment is obtained from the building administrator, the system user, and the system administrator. In addition, it is possible to comprehensively evaluate from various aspects, taking into account each position.
[0046]
Further, since the evaluation values are tabulated from the importance of each item to the IT environment and the influence of each option on each item, each item can be objectively and quantitatively evaluated.
[0047]
Furthermore, the objectives and requests of the IT environment to be evaluated are obtained from the responses from the system users, and the current status of the IT environment including the existing information system is obtained from the responses from the building administrator and the system administrator, or It is possible to grasp the specifications of the IT environment that is about to be constructed. Therefore, when these are compared and evaluated, the gap between the demand for the IT environment and the current situation can be clarified.
[Brief description of the drawings]
FIG. 1 is a conceptual diagram of an IT diagnosis system which is an evaluation system for realizing an IT environment evaluation method according to the present invention.
FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of an evaluation tree generated by AHP.
FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of an evaluation item of the first hierarchy by AHP.
FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation result 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 Building Manager Question DB (Database)
16 System user question DB (database)
18 System administrator question DB (database)
20 Industry-specific DB (database)
22 Evaluation item DB (database)
24 Weight coefficient DB (database)
26 Response result DB (database)
28 Evaluation DB (database)

Claims (3)

An IT environment evaluation system that uses a computer to evaluate an information system constructed in an office building and the environment of the information system.
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 respondents, and each of those respondents asks for answers, A question database that memorizes the answers to the questions;
A question presenting means for extracting questions and options associated with the evaluation items of the IT environment from these question databases and presenting them to the respondent;
A weighting factor setting means for setting a weighting factor in the evaluation item of the IT environment based on the importance with respect to the IT environment;
An influence frequency setting means for setting an influence frequency based on a degree of influence on the evaluation item in the option;
And tally means for tallying based on the answers of the respondents,
The question for the evaluation item is set for each respondent, and the question for the system user is a question for confirming the ideal state of the IT environment. The question for the system administrator and the building administrator Is a question to understand the current state of the IT environment,
The aggregation means accumulates the weighting factor and the influence frequency based on the answers of the respondents, aggregates the evaluation items, and based on the aggregation, the evaluation result of the IT environment and the current state of the IT environment An IT environment evaluation system characterized by presenting the evaluation results .   The question to the system user is related to the purpose of introducing the information system, the question to the building administrator is related to the building and its facilities, and the question to the system administrator is related to the equipment of the information system and its installation environment. The IT environment evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the IT environment evaluation system is related. An IT environment evaluation method for evaluating an information system constructed in an office building and an installation 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 respondents, and each of those respondents asks for answers, And a question database storing options that serve as answers to the questions. The question for the system user is a question for confirming the ideal state of the IT environment, and the question for the system administrator and the building administrator is , A question to understand the current state of the IT environment,
Extracting questions and options associated with IT environment evaluation items from the question database and presenting them to the respondent, and setting a weighting factor for the evaluation items based on the importance to the IT environment, In the options, set the influence frequency based on the degree of influence on the evaluation item,
Based on the answer of the respondent, the weighting factor set for the answered option and the influence frequency set for the selected option are added up and totaled for each evaluation item. An evaluation method for an IT environment, characterized by presenting an evaluation result of an ideal form of IT and a current evaluation result of the IT environment.

Images