RU2736957C1 - Control system for the performance indicators of the enterprise - Google Patents

Abstract

FIELD: physics.SUBSTANCE: invention relates to an enterprise performance monitoring system. System comprises a database with information on basic and integral indicators, where basic indicators have predetermined values, and integral indicators are determined using basic indicators and verified document presentations; system is made with possibility for each of indicators of functional elements detection relating to formation of corresponding indicator, and when a user request for receiving information on the value of the indicator forming the report containing the value of the requested indicator, graphical representation of document containing functional elements relating to formation of requested indicator; database is configured to store orders of determination of integral indicators, recognition of elements of verified presentations of documents related to order of determining indicators, and generating a notification when determining in the verified presentation of the document an order of determining an integral indicator which does not correspond to the order stored in the database.EFFECT: high reliability and veracity of providing documents, streamlining procedures for working with documents.8 cl, 1 tbl, 2 dwg

Description

FIELD OF TECHNOLOGY

The invention relates to the field of information systems for the exchange of specific data, in particular, to the means of formation, verification and distribution of reporting information of the enterprise and can be used to prepare the formation, verification and safe storage of reporting data and documents, as well as to eliminate technical errors made during preparation of data and their use.

LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY

In the current practice of generating reports or summaries on the functioning of information related to the physical and financial indicators of enterprises' activities, as a rule, a request for an indicator by a stakeholder is used, an optional verification of the legitimacy of the request and the calculation of indicators in accordance with predetermined dependencies and in accordance with measured or determined by indirect methods of primary indicators. With this approach to reporting, there is a likelihood of systematic errors in the final reports and summaries caused by a subjective approach to the determination of indicators by the responsible persons or by methodological or physical errors in the means for measuring indicators.

Document circulation systems known on the market are mainly intended for converting document formats, authenticating persons participating in document circulation and forming secure channels of information transmission, and not indirect control over the reliability of the information provided.

For example, the RF patent RU2154298 (C1), published on 08/10/2000, discloses the procedure for the preparation and submission of documents, in which a multi-stage request structure is used, with the provision of automation of the preparation process, verification of the correctness of filling out and submission of reporting documents with confirmation of the authenticity and authorship of these documents ... The known system does not use the base of all documents of the enterprise for storing documents, it is not intended to verify documents in the process of their request and preparation. All requests for documents in a known system are processed in accordance with predetermined rules. The well-known architecture of the document management system is not protected from repeated requests, does not provide a check of the quality of the enterprise structures.

The closest technical solution to the proposed invention is the system disclosed in US patent US6092090 (A), published 07/18/2000. The patent description discloses a system for collecting and processing information, providing for the storage of original documents. The system provides for the division of documents into databases, in accordance with their purpose. The possibility of verification of the electronic version is provided.

The disadvantage of the prototype of the claimed invention, as well as other solutions identified in the prior art and intended for electronic document management, is the impossibility of detecting the reasons for the formation of inaccurate information, the impossibility of automated correction of erroneous data.

Thus, in the prior art, there is a need for an electronic document processing system, characterized by a technical result, which consists in increasing the reliability and reliability of the provision of documents, streamlining the procedures for working with documents both in the workflow system and beyond, as well as ensuring the use of all electronic versions documents registered in the system to improve the reliability and accuracy of the information provided. An additional technical result consists in the ability to provide reliable information presented in accordance with the user's requests, for example, in the form of historical data in different sections of time (day, week, month, quarter, six months, year). The system can be used with the use of computing devices of any format, for example, stationary or tablet computers, and data display can be carried out on a tablet computer in the mode of any time when there is no connection to the network.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

To achieve the above technical result, a system for monitoring the performance of the enterprise is proposed, containing a database, the records of which contain information about the basic and integral indicators, where the basic indicators have predetermined values, and the integral indicators are determined using the basic indicators, and verified document representations determining the values of the indicators, with the allocation in each of the documents of functionally independent elements related to the formation of the values of indicators, while the system is designed with the ability, for each of the indicators, to identify functional elements related to the formation of the corresponding indicator and when the user receives a request for obtaining information about the value of the indicator that generates a report containing the value of the requested indicator, a graphical representation of the document containing functional elements related to the formation of the requested indicator with graphical highlighting of fields related to the corresponding functional elements, while the database is configured to store the procedures for determining integral indicators, recognizing elements of verified document representations related to the procedure for determining indicators, and generating a notification when the procedure for determining integral an indicator that does not correspond to the order stored in the database, while the system is configured to check the compliance of the values of the integral indicators with the values of the basic indicators and the procedures for determining the integral indicators, and generates a notification when a discrepancy is detected.

In one of the particular embodiments, the system is made with the possibility of comparing the calculated integral indicators with the values of the corresponding indicators stored in the database and with the possibility of correcting one of the compared values being compared when they differ.

Also, the system can contain several databases containing information about the parameters of different departments, the system can be performed by identifying similar parameters in the documents of different departments and combining documents related to identical parameters of different departments.

The system can be performed by recognizing identical parameters of various departments and the parameters for determining identical integral parameters of various departments, as well as generating a notification, if the parameters for determining identical parameters in different departments do not match, in the system, for each of the indicators, the person responsible for the value of the indicator can be indicated ...

In addition, if the indicator does not match, a notification can be sent to the person responsible for the indicator value.

In one of the particular implementation options in the system, one or more functionally independent elements determine the weights of the basic indicators used in determining the integral indicators, the system can be configured with the ability to group sets of basic indicators into composite indicators so that when forming the values of integral indicators, the basic indicators grouped into composite key figures are accounted for together as composite key figures.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE GRAPHIC MATERIALS

FIG. 1 illustrates a simplified example of a hardware implementation of the proposed invention.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a computing system suitable for implementing elements of the present invention.

DESCRIPTION OF MODES FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

Used in the present description of the invention, the terms "module", "component", "element", "part", "block", "component" and the like are used to refer to computer entities that may be implemented by hardware of computing means, for example, a processor or a microcontroller that provides the implementation of the assigned functions using, together or separately, the hardware architecture and external instructions, for example, instructions implemented in the form of software.

In the present description, the following terms and abbreviations may be used:

- key performance indicator (KPI) - an evaluation criterion for achieving a goal, used to determine the effectiveness of activities, which is quantifiable. KPIs are measures of the level of achievement of goals, for example, strategy (and / or control tower (RDC), etc.), at least one enterprise (in particular, a company);

- management - the management staff of the enterprise;

- a system of key performance indicators (KPI system) - a set of interrelated corporate and individual indicators formed on the basis of the enterprise strategy, with the help of which the efficiency of the enterprise as a whole and the individual contribution of the enterprise management are assessed;

- performance efficiency - the estimated ratio of the quality of products or services to the costs incurred;

- basic indicators - indicators of the enterprise, reflected in information systems, having fixed values;

- composite indicators - basic indicators grouped in a predetermined way, for example. according to compliance with a criterion or group of criteria of community;

- integral indicators - indicators that qualitatively combine information about a group of composite and basic indicators presented to the user;

- mobile application - a set of software and hardware that provides remote access and operation in the described system using mobile computing devices such as tablets, smartphones, etc., for example, manufactured by Apple and the iOS operating system;

- Web-application - a set of software and hardware that provides remote access and operation in the described system using stationary devices, for example, computers connected from a data network;

- notifications, for example, Push notifications - sound and visual notifications, for example, pop-up windows on the screen of a computing device informing the user about system events that are significant for the user;

- passenger traffic - the number of passengers carried by the airline:

• direct passenger traffic - the number of passengers on a direct flight between the point of departure and destination;

• transit passenger traffic - the number of passengers flying between the point of departure and the point of destination with landing at the hub, that is, the intermediate or distribution airport of the airline;

- passenger-kilometer / ton-kilometer is a unit used in aviation to measure the volume of work for the carriage of passengers;

• maximum passenger turnover (ASK) - a measure of passenger carrying capacity, which the airline has, denotes the movement of one passenger seat over a distance of one kilometer, measured in seat-kilometers (kkm);

• Passenger turnover performed (RPK) - a measure of the actually used passenger carrying capacity, indicates the movement of one passenger over a distance of one kilometer, measured in passenger-kilometers (pkm);

• limiting ton-kilometers (ATK) - a measure of the passenger and freight carrying capacity that an airline has. Indicates the carrying capacity based on the movement of one conventional ton of cargo (passengers and / or commercial cargo) at a distance of one kilometer, measured in tonne-kilometers (tkm);

• Tonne kilometers performed (TKM) is a measure of the actually used passenger and freight capacity at the disposal of the airline. Indicates the actual movement of one ton of cargo (passengers at the rate of 90 kg per passenger and commercial cargo) over a distance of one kilometer, measured in ton-kilometers (tkm);

- passenger seat occupancy factor (SLF) - a measure of the use of the airline's carrying capacity, defined as the ratio of the completed passenger turnover (RPK) to the maximum passenger turnover (ASK).

Commercial load factor is the ratio of the number of performed ton-kilometers to the limit ton-kilometers;

- points of departure and destination (O&D) - points between which passengers are transported. In the context of passenger traffic, the term is used to measure the quantitative characteristics of different markets, determined by the point of arrival and departure, regardless of whether there is direct or transit traffic;

- specific income / cost per passenger turnover - key performance indicators in aviation, defined as income or costs for fulfilled or maximum passenger turnover:

• yield rate (yield) - the amount of income received from the completed passenger turnover (RPK);

• revenue per maximum passenger turnover (RASK) - the ratio of revenue from air travel to the maximum passenger turnover;

• costs for the maximum passenger turnover (CASK) - the ratio of total operating costs to the maximum passenger turnover;

• total shareholder return (TSR) - an indicator of the return on investment for a shareholder, taking into account changes in share prices for the period and dividend yield;

- EBITDA is a financial indicator that indicates profit before taxes, interest, depreciation and amortization. The calculation may include the indicator of paid customs duties.

- EBITDAR is a financial indicator that indicates profit before taxes, interest, depreciation and amortization and operating lease expenses. The calculation may include the indicator of paid customs duties;

- low-cost carrier - an airline that generally offers lower prices for air tickets than traditional carriers, due to a limited level of service and collects additional fees on board and at the airport;

- network (mainline) carrier - an airline that, unlike low-cost air carriers, offers a wide range of services in various service classes, usually through one or more hubs with synchronized connecting flights;

- hub - the airline's hub airport, which is the central connecting point for various flights: passengers and goods are transported from the point of departure to the hub, from where they are delivered to their final destination on a second plane along with other passengers and goods from different points of departure.

In the present invention, the following symbols and abbreviations are used:

- AK - airline;

- AT - aviation equipment;

- AS - automated system;

- DB - database;

- BP - basic indicator;

- VL - overhead lines;

- VVL - domestic air lines;

- VP - co-pilot;

- ВС - aircraft;

- GA - civil aviation;

- Fuels and lubricants - fuels and lubricants;

- DC - subsidiaries (enterprises);

- IAS - information and analytical system;

- IP - integral indicator;

- PIC - aircraft commander;

- KPI - key performance indicator;

- LA - aircraft;

- MVL - international air lines;

- PVS - damage to the aircraft;

- pkm - passenger-kilometer;

- software - software;

- p.p. - percentage point;

- SP - composite indicator;

- SPO - special software;

- t km - ton-kilometer;

- Maintenance and repair (MRO) - maintenance, current repair and overhaul of the aircraft.

Analysis of the current situation and decision support are among the key management tasks in the economic, administrative and social spheres. The analysis of situations and the development of options for solutions, as a rule, is preceded by the stage of formalization of the management model, that is, the identification of the main parameters of the economic and technological efficiency of activities, the links between the parameters and the degree of influence of some factors on others. At the same time, for complex subject areas, such work turns out to be laborious in the absence of automated computing and analytical support. Modern decision support systems, in addition to using methods of analysis, assessment and decision-making, should include methods for structuring the situation, a developed user interface for the work of experts, tools for editing and setting up models, as well as visualization of the entire process of building a model, analyzing the results of modeling, their interpretation and explanation. , including the generation of notifications in the event of inconsistencies identified during the mentioned data processing.

The development of an enterprise management system can include appropriate hardware capable of using and implementing, in particular, the implementation (implementation, etc.), methods (including mathematical), models, algorithms used to solve problems of optimal use of existing economic resources with the help of modern information technologies. Generalization and further development of the methodological foundations of modeling and algorithmic complex processes is an urgent task, the solution of which provides the necessary level of theoretical knowledge and the quality of the systems being created. Such systems are extremely effective using the above methods, etc. to the design of logical schemes of dialog systems, databases and information systems, including the creation of formal methods of object programming.

The task of monitoring indicators and displaying (with notifying users) the current state of key indicators of the enterprise for its management staff to make informed and timely management decisions is relevant for most areas of activity. However, for large enterprises, the number of monitored indicators and the complexity of their interrelationships are so great that this task becomes extraordinary and requires innovative solutions adapted to the specifics of such enterprises.

FIG. 1 shows a simplified example of the hardware implementation of the proposed invention. A computer network can be a geographically dispersed collection of nodes connected by communication lines and segments for transferring data between end nodes such as personal computers, workstations, or peripheral devices such as printers or scanners. There are many types of networks available, from local area networks (LANs) to wide area networks (WANs). As shown in FIG. 1, an exemplary computer network 1100 may include a variety of network devices, such as routers, switches, computers, and the like, interconnected by communication lines. For example, multiple network devices can connect one or more user devices (“client devices”) 1110 that can be used by the user, such as computers, smartphones, tablets, and so on. The communication channels connecting different network devices can be wired lines or shared media (eg, wireless lines). Communication channels can connect different network devices in any possible configuration. One or more servers 1120 (eg, host servers, web servers, databases, etc.) may communicate with the network 1100 and thus with multiple client devices 1110. Those of skill in the art will appreciate that any number and location of nodes, devices, communication lines, etc. can be used in a computer network, and the illustration shown in FIG. 1 is a simplified example of a hardware implementation of a system.

FIG. 2 shows an example of a computing system suitable for implementing the elements of the proposed invention. As shown in FIG. 2, the computing system includes a computing device 1200 provided with a power supply 1260 that can be used as a user device or a server. The memory 1240 of the computing device stores the operating system 1242, computer programs 1244, and data structures 1245. Memory 1240 of the device 1200 is connected by a bus 1250 to a processor 1220 and at least one network interface 1210 that transfers data to a network 1100 (FIG. 1) and from the network 1100 (FIG. 1).

The proposed system for monitoring the performance of the enterprise contains a database. The database records contain at least information about the base and cumulative indicators. These baselines have predetermined values, and the integral indicators are determined using the baselines. The database also contains verified representations of documents defining the values of indicators. In each of the documents, by means of the described system, for example, by the element selection module, functionally independent elements are identified that are related to the formation of indicator values. In addition, for each of the indicators, the means of the described system are used to identify functional elements related to the formation of the corresponding indicator. When the user receives a request to obtain information about the value of the indicator by means of the described system, for example, by the reporting module, a report is generated containing the value of the requested indicator. Also, by means of the described system, for example, a module for generating a graphical presentation of documents, a graphical presentation of a document containing functional elements related to the formation of the requested indicator with a graphical highlighting of fields related to the corresponding functional elements is carried out.

The mentioned database is made with the ability to store methods or orders (values and / or sequences of actions, operations, etc.) for determining integral indicators, as well as recognizing or presenting elements of verified document representations related to the procedure for determining indicators. Elementary or basic operations for determining integral indicators can be separated from the general structure of the presentation of methods by the element recognition module, which can also form a visual representation of elementary operations and values of indicators used in the implementation of operations.

The database, together with the database management tools, can generate a notification when it detects in the verified document representation the order of determining the integral indicator that does not correspond to the order stored in the database or in other storage and data collection modules of the system.

The module for checking the correspondence of values can check the correspondence of the values of the integral indicators to the values of the basic indicators and the procedures for determining the integral indicators.

The module for generating notifications generates a notification when one or more inconsistencies are detected. In this case, one notification can be generated when several nonconformities are detected within a predetermined time, or a separate notification can be generated for each nonconformity.

By means of the described system, for example, a module for comparing indicators, the calculated integral indicators can be compared with the values of the corresponding indicators stored in the database, if necessary, the correction module corrects at least one of the compared values, if they differ, in the system may contain a means of selecting the value to be considered as the base value during the adjustment. For example, a value used in several independent documents or reports is used as the base or correct value, the value can be selected as the base value, the validity of which is confirmed by users after sending them appropriate notifications about the need for adjustment.

The system can manage data from several databases, each of which contains information about the parameters of various departments, in the event that a direct or indirect correspondence can be established, identified or assigned between the parameters of various departments. Such a correspondence can be the use of indicators of departments in the consolidated reporting of an enterprise, while the module for identifying similar parameters can identify similar parameters in documents of different departments, and the module for combining documents can combine documents related to identical parameters of different departments. In a particular case, the parameter recognition module (in particular, the identical parameters recognition module) can recognize identical parameters of different departments and the parameters for determining identical integral parameters of different departments.

The module for generating notifications can generate at least one notification if the parameters for determining identical parameters in different departments do not match.

In a particular case, for each of the mentioned indicators, the person responsible for the value of the indicator can be indicated, for example, by at least one user using the means of the described system, for example, using the data entry module. The data input module can be a data input device (for example, a keyboard, a manipulator of the "mouse" type, etc.) or can be associated with such a data (information) input device.

In a particular case, if the indicator does not correspond to the means of the described system, for example, the notification transmission module, at least one notification can be sent (transmitted, sent) to the person (including the user of the described system) responsible for the indicator value.

In a particular case, one or more functionally independent elements can determine the weighting factors of the basic indicators used in determining the integral indicators.

In a particular case, by means of the described system, for example, the module for grouping (sets) of indicators, the sets of basic indicators can be grouped into composite indicators so that when forming the values of integral indicators, the basic indicators grouped into composite indicators are taken into account together as part of composite indicators.

The modules described in the present invention may form part of said database (eg, part or parts of a database management system).

The mentioned documents, as well as the data (information) contained in them, can be added to the database by creating a digital entity (such a document), for example, a digital copy of such a document, by using input devices that analyze objects (image, text) from creating a digital image, in particular by scanning (for example, using a scanner).

Existing systems can store information about an almost unlimited number of key performance indicators of an enterprise and related indicators in one way or another, for example, subsidiaries, represented in the information and analytical system.

The analysis of the mentioned indicators can be carried out in the following aspects:

- collection of data (composition, sufficiency, completeness, uniformity of identical data, units of measurement, etc.);

- data processing (methods of measuring and calculating indicators, etc.);

- presentation of data (classification, comparison by periods, with a plan, etc.).

In the process of collecting data, it may be revealed that a number of data that can be used to calculate key performance indicators of the enterprise are not presented. For example, the collection of data on personnel may not be carried out (the number for each enterprise, in the context of categories of specialists, etc.), etc. For example, the lack of data on personnel can lead to the impossibility of calculating and presenting such indicators as labor productivity, personnel efficiency in the enterprise, as well as comparing these characteristics of similar departments of various DKs, etc. Also, the dynamics of changes in the number of personnel in general and by category may not be traced specialists. Thus, the data in the described system should include such data that would allow the calculation of the necessary indicators.

For a number of indicators, not all data of the same type can be collected, but only those data for which efficiency and reliability can be ensured. For example, data of the same type can be collected on aircraft commanders and co-pilots for different types of aircraft of an airline, but not by aircraft family.

In terms of uniformity of designations for identical data, information can be collected from various sources, which are filled in separately, without using a single universal regulation or standard for data entry, and indicators related to the same objects can have different designations. If there is no unambiguous constant correspondence of different designations to each other, then there may be uncertainty as to which data can or should be used in the calculation of complex indicators, and which in the calculation of integral and composite indicators.

Differences in the choice of units of measure for identical characteristics of different indicators can make it difficult or difficult to compare and calculate indicators.

For example, the cost of fuels and lubricants for one flight hour can be calculated in thousands of rubles, and the average price per ton of fuels and lubricants - in dollars (or other currency). So, in a particular case, when comparing interrelated indicators, as well as when calculating complex indicators, including the above, certainty (unambiguity) with units of measurement, conversion factor is required, in addition, a separate agreed method of accounting for changes in the exchange rate for a period can be used , for example, including a table of exchange rates, rate updates, etc.

By means of the proposed system, not only the adjustment or verification of indicators can be carried out, but also the verification of the possibility of implementing the planned indicators. For individual indicators, planned values can be provided, which makes it possible to increase the operational qualitative and quantitative assessment of the dynamics of changes in indicators. Taking into account the influence of the indicators of various departments on the general planned indicators provides an opportunity to improve the quality of management if the actual indicators of one of the departments do not ensure the achievement of the planned indicators of the entire production.

When using the system to manage normative indicators, data can be stored and presented in an explicit form, for example, in the form of values established or assigned to each norm or in an implicit form, that is, the definition of norms is carried out by calculations according to the procedures or an algorithm provided in the system for certain standards. Indicators can be presented in comparison with past periods or in dynamics, including without a predetermined quality criterion for the phenomenon or process characterized by the indicator.

In a number of indicators, standards may be present in an implicit form. For example, the staffing of commanders of various types of aircraft may contain an established or calculated standard for the number of commanders of an aircraft of a certain type with the current number of aircraft. In a particular case, the presentation and storage of indicators in an explicit form allows for a quick assessment, including a visual one, of which indicators and to what extent are affected by the current value of under-occupancy.

A standard can be not only a certain value (or range of values) of an indicator, but also its deviation from a given threshold or target value. In such cases, the target values and the developed (calculated) criteria for the criticality of deviations can be reduced.

In a particular case, one of the problems to be solved by the present invention is building a system of standards with the implementation of determining the degree of influence of some indicators on others, as well as identifying and tracking the relationship between indicators.

The indicators of the enterprise's activity collected and presented in the system can be distributed according to the formed structure, while the indicators can be attributed (including unambiguously) to certain blocks of classification.

Also, indicators characterizing the same (or similar, comparable) phenomena and processes can be scattered across different blocks in accordance with the responsibility of the blocks.

As described in the framework of the present invention, indicators can be interrelated. For example, such interrelated indicators can be indicators of flight hours, fuel consumption and its cost. In a particular case, data on flight hours can be placed in the production unit, indicators for fuel consumption per flight hour in tons and rubles - in the financial unit, and information on the average price per ton of fuel and lubricants - in the procurement section.

Information about the presence and location of one or another indicator that complements the integrity of the picture, all systems of interrelated indicators can be readily available, including presented, for example, in a screen formed by the user or by means of the described system, such as "Favorites". Since most of the indicators are to some extent directly or indirectly related to each other, the number of indicators that are online can include a large number of them. Important relationships, patterns and trends can be identified if most of the indicators characterizing certain phenomena or processes are collected within a single data set, for example, being in online access.

To calculate the profitability of the route network by types of aircraft, data are used on the number of aircraft of various types and on the parameters of use and maintenance of the aircraft, including the average range of flights, and the total flight time. The indicator of the route network profitability can be determined by the regions of flights. To speed up data processing and calculation of indicators, storage and presentation of indicators in the format of interrelated indicators in the form of a “tree” can be used. For example, to simplify and speed up the calculation and analysis of indicators, the place of the indicator in the structure and hierarchy of the system of interrelated indicators is determined. When the indicator is selected by the user using the graphical interface, marking can be carried out, including with hints, of indicators related or comparable to the selected indicator. him (and).

Indicators can be generated and presented in the format of a generalized indicator, which, in relation to a given threshold (normative) value (or range), forms a characteristic of the current situation.

From such generalized indicators, a system of complex composite and integral indicators can be formed, linking characteristics from different parts of the existing classification.

Data for the formation of composite and integral indicators may include, for example:

- speeches and interviews with the top management of the enterprise;

- publications (including open access) about the company's activities, including on the company's website;

- annual reports of the enterprise and other reporting and presentation materials, including those in the public domain;

- internal regulatory documents, for example, provisions on the procedure for preparing, collecting and calculating key indicators characterizing the efficiency of the enterprise, etc .;

- reports on the implementation of a daily, quarterly, annual plan, for example, a daily flight plan;

- data stored in the information and analytical system.

Using the above data, blocks of information can be formed containing one or several parameters intended for mandatory familiarization with them by decision-makers on strategic and operational management.

The system of indicators can be a representation of the strategy and development program of the enterprise in the form of specific characteristics that allow assessing the current state and serve as a basis for making management decisions. In a particular case, the development of an enterprise can be carried out in several directions, for example:

- relationship with clients (defines / indicates what should be the work with clients in order to attract them and achieve the required financial results);

- finance (reflects the focus on the growth of the company's financial results, increasing the value of the company and income for shareholders);

- internal processes, operational activities (shows which processes play the most important role in the implementation of the strategy and development program of the enterprise, how these processes are organized, what is their effectiveness);

- development of personnel and infrastructure, innovation.

For the aforementioned customer relationships, the basic factors that determine the company's strategy in working with customers may be:

- safety;

- the volume and quality of services.

Maintaining a high level of safety, such as flight safety and security, is usually the highest priority for the enterprise. Ensuring the level of security, as a rule, is regulated by a number of internal regulations.

In a particular case, one of the key performance indicators KPI, determined by the relevant regulation and taking into account the industry specifics, is one of the most important indicators.

In the IAS, indicators characterizing safety can be separated into a separate unit, for example, a production unit.

As a rule, safety is directly or indirectly influenced by a mass of phenomena and processes, for example, the composition and level of personnel, the state of technology (for example, the aircraft fleet) and the level of maintenance, the quality and development of infrastructure, etc., and their characteristics can be placed in other information blocks.

In many cases, levels of consumer safety, convenience and comfort are among the most important benchmarks. The desire to maintain and improve the specified level of service, as well as expanding the range of services provided, leads to the fact that an increasing number of phenomena and processes require display, tracking, evaluation and response from the strategic and operational management of the enterprise. At the same time, the level of efficiency and effectiveness of management decisions should at least not decrease.

The proposed system can store (and represent) a large number of indicators and entire information blocks that reflect and characterize the quality and availability of services provided by the enterprise. In a particular case, the placement of indicators is not limited only to thematic blocks (for example, work with clients, passenger service, etc.), but can be widely represented in the entire structure of the system.

As a rule, indicators reflect different aspects of customer relationships, have different dimensions and are collected in the system from various data sources.

In addition, a number of important performance indicators, such as, for example, the percentage of seat occupancy or the level of punctuality (regularity of flights), on the one hand, determines customer loyalty, on the other hand, being reflected in customer requests, including negative ones, essentially characterizes the quality of service. ...

Due to the above features of collecting and presenting data, indicators can be formed into separate groups for and regular monitoring of a large number of indicators that somehow determine the level of services provided by the enterprise.

In a particular case, the introduction of a number of integral indicators, which allows, based on a certain set of the most significant characteristics (basic indicators), reflecting the quality of services, to give a generalized assessment of the current situation, for example, to improve the quality and efficiency of monitoring and control, to analyze the results achieved and the reasons for their deviations and developing marketing campaigns.

In terms of finance, the goal of an enterprise is usually sustainable and dynamic growth, increasing the value of the enterprise and stable income for shareholders.

In the system of key performance indicators of the enterprise, defined and approved by the relevant regulatory document (in particular, the regulation on KPIs), most of the indicators (for example, 8 out of 12) relate to the financial and economic aspect of the enterprise.

In a rapidly changing market environment, when the key factor exerting pressure on the dynamics of financial and economic indicators may be an increase in fuel prices, in particular, for aviation kerosene, the company's management may decide to implement a large-scale program to maintain financial results. Thus, the focus may be on proactive revenue management and cost optimization initiatives.

Ensuring an optimal financial result can largely depend on a comprehensive monitoring of financial and economic indicators and strict control over the processes that determine them.

The system database can store a large number of indicators that can indicate the quality of implementation of both the above program to maintain financial results, and the overall strategy and development program of the enterprise in terms of finance.

Thus, the peculiarity of data presentation in the system and the presence of heterogeneous, different-sized indicators characterizing the financial activities of an enterprise, its subsidiaries and individual departments determine the need to generalize indicators, including from different structural blocks. At the same time, the form is important, in particular, a convenient form, including for the presentation and processing of generalized data, and a scheme for calculating the indicator and transparent and reasonable methods of analysis that provide both the promptness of the assessment and the possibility of detailing the situation and its in-depth consideration, identifying relationships and trends.

Thus, a group of financial and economic characteristics can be formed into one integral indicator, as described in the framework of the present invention.

With regard to internal processes and operational activities, the organization of enterprise processes (including business processes, production processes, etc.) is directly interconnected both with the volume, quality and range of services provided, and with the achieved financial results.

The information contained in data sources such as reports, presentations, regulatory documents, interviews, reports, etc., reflecting the activities of the enterprise, in terms of information related to the determination of the state and the possibility of optimization of the enterprise processes can also be systematized and used for optimization. processes and service improvement.

This information can be used to:

- improvement of ground handling technologies;

- improving the quality and optimizing the timing of tasks and benchmarks;

- improving fuel efficiency;

- optimization of the schedule and work schedules of personnel;

- improving the efficiency of aircraft maintenance;

- increasing labor productivity and a number of other processes that play the most important role in the activities of the enterprise.

Production indicators, for example, data on labor productivity, including the ratio of the number of passengers departing from the airport, referred to the average number of ground personnel, can be important indicators of processes and the quality of their organization. Correlation of current values of indicators with standards and plans allows to form an assessment of the situation, to identify the most critical aspects.

Various-sized characteristics, interrelated indicators for different blocks, etc. are used to detect problems, assess accuracy and efficiency, and identify the causes of the current situation.

For a number of performance indicators, a generalization of heterogeneous characteristics is carried out and their reduction into integral indicators, as well as providing the possibility of detailing the situation for its in-depth analysis and making management decisions.

Thus, a cumulative score can be generated to fulfill a line of production targets as described in the context of the present invention.

With regard to personnel development, indicators characterizing the state and development of personnel represent a significant layer of information that should be in the area of constant attention, including the strategic and operational management of the enterprise.

At the same time, at least a complete, transparent and reliable data set for most categories of personnel should be formed.

The state of affairs in the field of personnel, for example, aircraft crews and flight attendants, is a key aspect affecting the safety and quality of services that determines the financial results of the enterprise, for example, increased requirements for the selection of personnel and the quality of their training, the level of training of personnel as on staff, employed by the company, and available in the labor market.

In a particular case, the generated data sets (or, in a particular case, one data set) about personnel can include indicators for the structural composition of personnel, including the total actual headcount, headcount, vacancies and the number of trained personnel.

In the generated dataset, the data may include static data, in particular, it may not include data on the possible movement of personnel and the planned change in the number of jobs. This can lead to the fact that the manager will suddenly face the fact of a shortage of any of the key categories of personnel. In this regard, the list of basic indicators can be supplemented with other indicators, such as the forecast of staff turnover and departure, the recruitment plan for newly commissioned jobs, indicators characterizing the situation on the personnel labor market.

For example, for the integral indicator "Personnel" ("Flight personnel"), the following integral indicators can be added: "Current staffing (of aircraft crews)" and "Staffing forecast".

The indicator of the current state of the Personnel IP can be three-level: green, yellow, red, and the IP can be built on the basis of indicators for the structural composition of aircraft commanders (PIC) and co-pilots (VP), including the total actual number of PACs and VPs, number by state, vacancies and the number of trained pilots for each type of aircraft (independently).

The PI indicator changes color when the manning level (PIC or VP) of any particular aircraft family changes:

From green to yellow - when the staffing level drops to 0.95;

From yellow to red - when the staffing level is reduced to 0.90;

(these values are selected according to the criteria set at the enterprise).

Having noted that the indicator of FE "Personnel" has changed its color from green to yellow or red, the manager has the opportunity, by clicking on the indicator, to go to a more detailed level, where he will see specific figures characterizing the situation. In particular, it will be shown on the existing screens data on the manning of crews by category of pilots and types of aircraft.

As a result of this logic of indication of FE "Personnel", the manager gets the opportunity to quickly and accurately respond to the current personnel situation.

In more detail, the calculation and display of the mentioned integral indicator characterizing the current staffing of groups at workplaces is described in the framework of the present invention.

Also, FE "Staffing forecast" can be formed using (in particular, based on) baseline indicators (PP) of staff turnover (for example, pilots), the number of personnel in training, and the number of resumes per vacancy. PP data can be converted to IP using weights.

In a particular case, the head may have access to a color indicator of the forecast of the expected state of staffing, for example, of aircraft crews, taking into account the state of the labor market and the quality of work of the recruitment and training service. The forecasting horizon can be three-level: a quarter, half a year and a year, or, in a particular case, it can be divided into shorter periods, in particular, if, for example, personnel movement processes are not sufficiently inertial.

In a particular case, the color switching of the Individual Entrepreneur can be carried out with a decrease in the predicted staffing for the PIC or VP categories (for one of the aircraft types) below the first specified level in a quarter, or below the second specified level, which is less than the first level, after half a year and \ or a year.

Within the framework of the present invention, the grouping and generalization of basic indicators for the analysis of enterprise activities can be carried out without loss of information content and reducing the quality of the assessment.

To form an enterprise IP, the methods and principles of qualimetry can be used - the science of measuring and quantifying product quality, and in a broader sense of various phenomena and processes, in particular, when IP are generalizing indicators of the quality of work in certain areas of the enterprise and individual DK ...

In addition, qualimetry contains and sufficiently deeply studied the very concept of an integral indicator, and various methods and methods of calculating it, their strengths and weaknesses, as well as limitations and important conditions when applying each of them. One of the main tasks solved in qualimetry is the expression of a set of indicators describing one area by one number, i.e. a value that can be placed on a certain scale and used to assess the situation in this area.

Originally developed to assess the quality of products manufactured by enterprises, today qualimetry has become a discipline, the methods of which, due to their versatility, are used in various fields to solve problems not directly related to product quality. Thus, separate special subareas of Qualimetry of large groupings of objects appeared and are developing - not only products, but also processes, services, projects (design qualimetry), etc.

Generalization of basic indicators in the integral in qualimetry is carried out taking into account certain principles. Below are some of them and how to implement them in practice.

Table 1. Principles of generalization of indicators in qualimetry and methods of their practical implementation.

The principle of generalization of indicators The method of practical implementation in the development of IP activities of the enterprise An integral assessment cannot be obtained without a reference for comparison (i.e. reference values of indicators that determine the quality of the process as a whole) IP are developed for groups of indicators that have standard or planned values The quality of the whole object is determined by the quality of its constituent parts (the indicator of any generalization, except for the lowest level, is predetermined by the corresponding indicators of the previous hierarchical level). The method of formation (calculation) of the IP takes into account the required degree of sensitivity of the value of the final IP to changes in the value of the BP included in it When using the method of complex process assessment, all different-sized indicators must be converted to one dimension. As a universal method,% of the plan fulfillment for each BP can be used, calculated as the ratio of the actual BP value for the studied period to the planned (normative) In the summary indicator, each base indicator included in its composition should be adjusted by the weighting factor. The possibility of using BP weights is taken into account when developing IP models When assigning weights to individual basic indicators as part of a generalizing indicator, they are most often selected in such a way that their sum is equal to 1. The sum of the weights of individual power supply units as part of the IP is reduced to 1. When quantifying quality, you cannot use the same quality property twice. Each power supply unit is used 1 time in the IP formula

In qualimetry, which can be used in the implementation of the invention, various methods of generalized assessment of the situation in the studied area are deeply studied and used. The five most common methods are discussed below:

- differential method;

- complex method;

- mixed method;

- statistical method;

- method of expert assessment.

The differential method is based on the use of single indicators, namely, on comparing the set of values of single indicators with the corresponding set of values of the reference (planned, normative) indicators. Each indicator of the process under study is compared with the corresponding reference indicator, after which the one with the best set of single indicators is selected from several compared options. This method allows the use of weights of individual baselines to best reflect the degree of their importance in the process under study.

This method does not imply the integration of basic indicators into one common one, therefore, in a particular case, it can be used to develop IP activities of an enterprise and individual DCs with restrictions.

The complex method is based on the use of complex (integral) indicators of the quality of a process or product, characterizing several of its properties. The key point in its use is the expression of the integral indicator in the form of a certain function of several basic indicators of the process under study. As a rule, when applying this method, the weight coefficients of basic indicators are used, the correctness of the establishment of which is important for the results of the integral assessment of the process.

This method can be used to form the IP of the enterprise and individual DCs.

As its name suggests, the mixed method is based on the simultaneous use of both single and generalized (integral) indicators, that is, it is a kind of mixture of the above-described differential and complex methods.

Usually it is used in rather difficult situations, when the development of the Integral Indicator, which adequately describes the situation, is impossible in principle (there are too many single basic indicators and they are very diverse), or when the Integral Indicator is developed, but still does not fully describe all aspects of the process under study. ...

When using this method:

1) Basic unit indicators are combined into groups, for each of which an Integral (group) indicator is developed.

2) The most significant single indicators are not included in the groups, but they are considered on a par with the group Integral;

3) The indicators of items 1) and 2) apply the Differential method of assessment, i.e. compare their values with the corresponding reference values, and on the basis of the analysis evaluate the investigated process or situation.

It is considered that the indicator obtained by the mixed assessment method is both generalized and complex at the same time.

This method can be used in the formation of complex multi-level IP activities of the enterprise and individual DCs.

The statistical method is based on the use of the accumulation of statistical data and the application of methods of mathematical statistics and the theory of probability to them. It is used in cases where the values of a single baseline are random variables that have arisen under the influence of some random factors.

This method is aimed primarily at identifying the dependence of basic indicators on random factors and does not imply the mandatory integration of basic indicators into one common one, therefore it can be used to form the IP of an enterprise's activities and individual DCs with restrictions. In addition, the indicators available in the system reflect the result of the systematic and controlled work of the enterprise and are not random values. However, it can be applied in some cases, for example, when in-depth study of the reasons for flight delays, which are affected by random factors such as weather events, unforeseen incidents, etc.

The expert assessment method is based on the involvement of experts to assess the situation. It is used in the presence of immeasurable indicators and is extremely subjective, because depends on the private opinion of a particular expert. Nevertheless, it is believed that despite possible differences in the assessments of individual experts, the overall assessment of the situation becomes quite correct with an increase in the number of experts. The assessment of the situation can be carried out in one or several stages, the work can be organized both with the exchange of opinions between experts (for this, meetings, round tables, and brainstorming sessions are held), and with individual work. Combinations of these methods are also possible - for example, individual research with subsequent discussion.

One way or another, this method also does not imply the mandatory integration of the baseline into one common, and therefore can be used with restrictions.

Thus, of all the five methods of generalized assessment of the situation considered above, one (but not the only) one seems to be the most applicable complex method. Also, when developing complex and multi-level IP, it is possible to use a mixed method.

Further, as an example, an approximate version of the methods of combining individual indicators into an integral one within the framework of the integrated method is carried out.

In situations where IP cannot be expressed through single BPs using an objective functional dependence, a subjective method of combining indicators according to the principle of a weighted average can be applied. In this case, the choice of the averaging logic (or the actual method of combining single indicators) is subjective; the IP itself remains an objective quantitative characteristic of the evaluated phenomenon or process.

In practice, the following BP averaging methods can be used:

- additive (calculating the arithmetic mean weighted value);

- multiplicative (calculating the geometric mean weighted value);

- combined (is a combination of the previous two);

- harmonic (calculation of the harmonic average weighted value).

Regarding the additive method (calculating the arithmetic mean weighted value), in the case when the sum of the weights of individual BPs in the calculated PI is equal to 1 (or 100%), the PI formula with a single-level hierarchical PI structure is as follows:

, где

where

PI - calculated Integral indicator;

BPi - value of the base indicator;

вi is the weight of the i-th power supply unit as part of the calculated IP;

n is the number of power supply units as part of the calculated IP.

In a particular case, when the weights of individual power supply units are equal, the arithmetic weighted average is equal to the arithmetic average.

The formula for a two-level IP structure is:

, где

where

t is the number of groups of basic indicators;

Вj - weight of the j-th group of basic indicators;

nj is the number of single basic indicators in the j-th group;

вij - the weight of the i-th indicator of the j-th group;

BPij is the value of the i-th basic indicator in the j-th group.

With a 3-level IP structure, the IP formula takes the form:

, где

where

z is the number of groups of basic indicators;

tk - the number of subgroups in the k-th group of basic indicators;

njk is the number of single basic indicators in the j-th subgroup of the k-th group.

The sensitivity of the IP value to changes in the values of individual BPs in its composition for the additive method is relatively low, but the influence of individual BPs can be controlled by changing their weights (the higher the weight, the greater the effect). Nevertheless, situations are possible when the value of the final IP remains acceptable (in a graphical representation, the IP remains in the "green" zone) with an unacceptable value ("red" zone) of a specific power supply unit with a low weight, which is taken into account when assigning weights to individual power supply units. On the other hand, a zero value of one or several PSUs using this method will never lead to a zero value of the final PI.

This generalization method can be used, among other things, when homogeneous BPs are combined, the spread of values of which is small.

Thus, the additive method can be used to calculate the PI, for example, to calculate the following PIs below:

- SP Manning of aircraft crews;

- SP Fulfillment by the Line of production targets;

- SP Fulfillment by the Line of plans for financial and economic indicators.

For the multiplicative method (calculating the geometric mean weighted value), the IP can be calculated by multiplying the values of all BPs included in it, raised to powers equal to their weights. The IP formula when using the multiplicative method for combining BP in the case when the sum of the weights of individual BPs in the calculated PI is equal to 1 (or 100%) is as follows:

, где

where

- PI - calculated Integral indicator;

- BPi - value of the base indicator;

- vi is the weight of the i-th power supply unit as part of the calculated IP;

- n is the number of power supply units as part of the calculated IP.

In the case when the weights of individual power supplies are equal to each other, the weighted geometric mean is equal to the geometric mean.

The sensitivity of the IP value to changes in the values of individual power supply units in its composition when using the multiplicative method is higher than with the additive method, and the situation described above with an acceptable value of the final IP with unacceptable values of some power supply units is less likely, since a low value of an individual power supply unit has a much greater effect on PI value. On the other hand, in a particular case, the zero value of even one BP zeroes out the final IP, so this method can be used when calculating some IP, for example, those related to finance (the total financial result will be zero if the result of at least one BP is zero, which meaningless), with restrictions. So, according to the method of geometric weighted average, single basic indicators can be combined, for example, when they are heterogeneous and have a significant spread.

The multiplicative method can be used to calculate the IP, for example, in cases when a higher sensitivity of the final IP is required to changes in individual BPs, as well as their heterogeneity and with a significant scatter of BP values. So, it can be used to calculate the following PI below:

- SP Quality of Service.

The combined method (a combination of weighted arithmetic mean and geometric weighted mean) is a combination of arithmetic and geometric weighted averages, and is used in calculating complex multi-level PI. In the case when the sum of the weights of individual power supply units as part of the calculated IP is equal to 1 (or 100%), the IP formula is as follows:

, где

where

PI - calculated Integral indicator;

BPij - value of the base indicator;

Вi - weight of the i-th group of basic indicators

вij - the weight of the i-th indicator of the j-th group;

n is the number of power supply units as part of the calculated IP;

t is the number of power supply groups in the calculated IP.

This method, as described above, can be applied when calculating complex multi-level UI. In this case, the same features take place as in the additive and multiplicative methods, namely, the sensitivity of the value of the group indicator (in fact, the IP of the lowest level), obtained using the additive generalization method, can be relatively low, but at the same time there is a high sensitivity of the final PI to changes in the values of the group PI of the lowest level, and the zero value of at least one group PI nullifies the final PI.

Thus, the combined method can be used with limitations.

The IP formula when using the harmonic method (calculating the harmonic weighted average value) of the BP combination is as follows:

, где

where

PI - calculated Integral indicator;

BP1-BPn - Baseline values;

в1-вn - power supply weights as part of the calculated IP;

n is the number of power supply units as part of the calculated IP.

The sensitivity of the IP value to changes in the values of individual BP in its composition when using the harmonic method is higher than with the additive method, but lower than with the multiplicative method. This method can be applied, for example, in cases when the BPs for which it is required to obtain the arithmetic mean value are given inverse values. Otherwise, in special cases, its use can complicate the calculations without giving any practical benefit in comparison with the calculation of the arithmetic mean (additive method).

Thus, the harmonic method can be used with restrictions, for example, when none of the BP values are given a reverse value.

The following are examples of integral indicators.

The aircraft crew manning PI displays the current state of the manning of the crews across the entire fleet of the airline's aircraft and for individual types of aircraft, as well as for certain categories of specialists (aircraft commanders, co-pilots, flight attendants).

Regarding the overall manning of the aircraft crews, in a particular case, the analysis (and processing) of the following information can be carried out: work with personnel, flight personnel, vacancies and the actual number of flight attendants (people); standards and current presentation with the interpretation of numerical values - ("permissible" / "is a critical value" / "not permissible"); staffing values and comparison by aircraft type.

Indicators can be highlighted (colored) according to the traffic light principle in accordance with the specified assessment standards, which can be changed by the user.

In a particular case, IP The manning of aircraft crews (the first level of the hierarchy in the IP Architecture) consists of three Composite Indicators (SP) of the second level:

- staffing of the PIC;

- staffing with co-pilots;

- staffing with flight attendants;

and is calculated as the arithmetic mean of the DP data.

In a particular case, LP Manning of PIC and LP The manning of co-pilots, in turn, is calculated as the weighted average of the manning indicators, respectively, of the PIC and co-pilots for each type of aircraft (third level of the hierarchy). In a particular case, a joint venture The staffing of flight attendants may not be divided by aircraft type.

IP calculation The manning of aircraft crews can be carried out in the following way:

A) Determination of the standards for assessing the values of IP, SP and BP

The approximate value of the standards (standards for assessing IP) common to the IP and all JV and BP included in it is presented below:

- permissible: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.95;

- is a critical value: greater than or equal (> =) 0.90;

- not allowed: less than (<) 0.90.

B) Calculation and assessment according to the standard joint venture PIC staffing

1.calculation of the weights of PIC groups by state for each type of aircraft in the total number of PICs by state as the ratio of the private values of the number of PICs for each type of aircraft to the total number of PICs by state;

2. calculation of the staffing ratios of the PIC for each type of aircraft as the ratio of PIC values in fact to PIC values by state;

3. Evaluation of the values of the staffing factors of the PIC in accordance with the standards for evaluating the IP;

4. calculation of products of the values of pp. 1 and 2;

5. calculation of the joint venture The staffing of the PIC as the sum of the values of item 3 (additive method of generalization);

6. Evaluation of the value of the joint venture The staffing of the PIC in accordance with the standards for evaluating the IP.

C) Calculation and evaluation according to the standard of joint venture Staffing of co-pilots

1. repetition of the calculations described in paragraph B) for co-pilots.

D) Calculation and evaluation according to the standard of joint venture Staffing of flight attendants

1. calculation of joint venture Staffing of flight attendants, as the ratio of the number of flight attendants in fact to the number of flight attendants by state;

2. Evaluation of SP values The staffing of flight attendants in accordance with the standards for the assessment of individual entrepreneurs.

E) Calculation and assessment according to the IP standard The manning of aircraft crews

1. calculation of IP Manning of aircraft crews as an arithmetic mean value of three composite indicators: LP Manning of PIC, LP Manning of co-pilots and LP Manning of flight attendants (additive method of generalization);

2. assessment of the IP value The manning of the aircraft crews in accordance with the standards for assessing the IP.

For a correct assessment of the situation when calculating the IP Manning of aircraft crews, the standards for assessing the IP can be clarified with the interested managers of the enterprise.

PI Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators reflects the degree of fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators for the selected period.

Regarding the individual entrepreneur Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators, in a particular case, can be analyzed (and processed) the following information: flights; passenger traffic; transfer passengers; the volume of freight and postage; passenger turnover; passenger loading; threshold passenger load; commercial download; threshold commercial load, which can be grouped in a summary form in the main indicators along the line, and in the detailed form - in the line passport - (line name) - Production indicators, standards and current presentation with the interpretation of numerical values - ("acceptable" / "is critical value "/" not allowed ").

Indicators can be highlighted (colored) according to the traffic light principle in accordance with the specified assessment standards, which can be changed by the user.

IP Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators (the first level of the hierarchy in the IP Architecture) consists of eight basic indicators (BP) of the second level:

- flights;

- passenger traffic;

- the volume of freight and postage;

- passenger turnover;

- passenger loading;

- commercial download;

and is calculated as a weighted average of the BP data values.

The indicator Transfer passengers, as the Main indicators for the line, may not be taken into account if its planned value is not indicated and, therefore, the degree of fulfillment of the plan cannot be calculated, and the indicators Threshold passenger load and Threshold commercial load may also be ignored. to. they are calculated from the indicators already taken into account, respectively, Passenger load and Commercial load.

Calculation of IP Execution by the Line of plans for production indicators can be carried out in the following way:

A) Determination of the standards for assessing the values of IP and BP

The approximate value of the standards (standards for assessing IP) common to the IP and all JVs and BPs included in it is presented below:

- permissible: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.95;

- is a critical value: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.90;

- not allowed: less than (<) 0.90.

B) Calculation and assessment according to the IP standard Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators

1.determination of the weight of individual production indicators in the IP (at this initial stage, it is proposed to introduce equal weights for all production indicators, but in the future they can be changed in accordance with the change in the priorities of the Customer);

2. calculation of the coefficients of fulfillment of plans for individual production indicators as the ratio of the actual values for each indicator to the planned ones;

3. calculation of IP Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators as the sum of the products of the values of pp. 1 and 2 for each production indicator (additive generalization method);

4. Evaluation of the value of the IP Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators in accordance with the standards for assessing the IP.

For a correct assessment of the situation when calculating the individual entrepreneur. Fulfillment by the Line of plans for production indicators can be carried out to clarify the standards for evaluating the individual entrepreneur with the interested managers of the enterprise.

SP Fulfillment by the Line of plans in terms of financial and economic indicators, in a particular case, is similar to the previous one and reflects the degree of fulfillment by the Line of plans in terms of financial and economic indicators for the selected period.

Concerning the individual entrepreneur Fulfillment by the Line of plans for financial and economic indicators, in a particular case, can be analyzed (and processed) the following information: income from the transportation of passengers and baggage; income from the transportation of goods and mail; expenses, total; cost-effectiveness, total; Net SDS; Yield; Rask; Cask; which can be grouped in a summary form in the main indicators along the line, and in the detailed form - in the passport of the line - (line name) - Financial and economic indicators, standards and the current presentation with the interpretation of numerical values - ("acceptable" / "is a critical value" / "Not allowed").

Indicators can be highlighted (colored) according to the traffic light principle in accordance with the specified assessment standards, which can be changed by the user.

IP Fulfillment by the Line of plans for financial and economic indicators (the first level of the hierarchy in the IP Architecture) consists of eight basic indicators (BP) of the second level:

- income from the carriage of passengers and baggage;

- income from the transportation of goods and mail;

- expenses, total;

- cost-effectiveness, total;

- VTS net;

- Yield;

- Rask;

- Cask;

and is calculated as a weighted average of the BP data values.

Calculation of IP The execution of plans by the Line for financial and economic indicators can be carried out in the following way:

A) Determination of standards for assessing the values of IP and BP

The approximate value of the standards (standards for evaluating IP) common to the IP and all JV and BP included in it is presented below:

- permissible: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.95;

- is a critical value: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.90;

- not allowed: less than (<) 0.90.

B) Calculation and assessment according to the IP standard Fulfillment by the Line of plans for financial and economic indicators

1.determination of the weight of individual indicators in the IP (at this initial stage, it is proposed to introduce equal weights for all indicators, but in the future they can be changed in accordance with the change in the priorities of the Customer);

2. Calculation of the coefficients of implementation of plans for individual financial and economic indicators as the ratio of actual values for each indicator to the planned;

3. calculation of IP Fulfillment by the Line of plans for financial and economic indicators as the sum of the products of the values of pp. 1 and 2 for each financial and economic indicator (additive generalization method);

4. assessment of the value of the individual entrepreneur Fulfillment by the Line of plans for financial and economic indicators in accordance with the standards for evaluating the individual entrepreneur.

For a correct assessment of the situation when calculating the individual entrepreneur. The execution of the plans by the Line for financial and economic indicators can be clarified by the standards for evaluating the individual entrepreneur with the interested managers of the enterprise.

SP Quality of Service reflects the integral level of service in various aspects of customer service.

Regarding the SP Quality of Service, in a particular case, the following information can be analyzed (and processed): adjusted punctuality of scheduled flights from the airport, adjusted punctuality of scheduled flights to the airport, the share of positive requests from passengers, the share of negative requests from passengers, conversion of site visits in online bookings, the share of passengers notified of changes in the total number, the share of self-check-in of passengers for flights, the percentage of lost customer calls, the percentage of calls with waiting more than one minute, the share of successful on-line payments, the average rating of AFL mobile applications in app stores, average availability of onboard Internet system / service.

Indicators can be highlighted (colored) according to the traffic light principle in accordance with the specified assessment standards, which can be changed by the user.

IP Quality of service (1st level of the hierarchy in the IP Architecture) is made up of twelve base (BP) or composite (SP) of the 2nd level described above and is calculated as the weighted average of BP data values.

Calculation of IP Quality of service can be carried out in the following way:

A) Determination of standards for assessing the values of IP and BP

The approximate value of the standards (standards for evaluating IP) common to the IP and all JV and BP included in it is presented below:

- permissible: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.95;

- is a critical value: greater than or equal to (> =) 0.90;

- not allowed: less than (<) 0.90.

B) Calculation and assessment according to the IP standard Quality of service

1.determination of the weight of individual indicators in the IP (at this initial stage, it is proposed to introduce equal weights for all indicators, but in the future they can be changed in accordance with the change in the priorities of the Customer);

2. Calculation of the coefficients of fulfillment of plans for individual indicators as the ratio of the actual values for each indicator to the planned ones (for indicators Nos. 4, 8 and 9, inverse ratios are taken, because in these cases, the lower the coefficient, the better);

3. calculation of IP Quality of service as a product of the values of item 2 in powers of item 1 for each indicator (multiplicative way of generalization);

4. assessment of the value of individual entrepreneurs The quality of service in accordance with the standards for evaluating individual entrepreneurs

For a correct assessment of the situation when calculating the IP Quality of service, the standards for assessing the IP can be clarified with the interested managers of the enterprise.

Also, integral indicators can include PI for delays and / or related punctuality indicator. Punctuality of departure and arrival of flights, regularity of flights can be one of the key indicators for an enterprise. Punctuality can be reflected (and the data for it are grouped) in the following indicators: adjusted punctuality of scheduled flights from the airport, adjusted punctuality of scheduled flights arriving at the airport, which can be taken into account in IP Quality of Service.

Composite indicators can be provided (including to users) to enable a deeper analysis of the key performance indicators of the enterprise, including through a visual comparison and comparison of basic indicators.

A block of indicators (for example, "Indicators") may contain the possibility of combining basic indicators to obtain composite indicators (including by users on their own), for example, in web applications and in mobile applications. The implemented composite indicators can be stored in one block (section), for example, "Favorites" of an authorized user.

The ability to create composite metrics may depend on the user's role model. Baselines from closed sources (for example, user-accessible screens) may not be available to add to composite measures.

For composite indicators, indicators can be exported into known formats (xls, pdf, ppt, etc.) and indicators can be edited and deleted from the block ("Favorites").

When a user creates composite indicators, the transition to creating a composite indicator can be carried out through the menu of basic indicators. The basic indicators menu may contain a menu item for creating a composite indicator (for example, "Create a composite indicator") with a further transition to the mode of creating a new composite indicator. The form for creating a composite indicator can be a list of baselines available for creating a composite indicator. The top of the list can contain a search string to quickly find the desired baseline from the list of baselines. Baselines that are compatible with each other for creating a composite indicator be highlighted, for example, with a color, in particular, have an active color. Baselines that are incompatible with each other may be inactive. The baselines used to create a composite measure can be “bold” in color. The selection of baselines to create a composite indicator can be done by selecting, for example, ticking the box next to the required baseline. The baseline used to create a composite measure can be displayed at the bottom of the work area. For each underlying metric involved, it can be possible to customize the data series to display in the composite metric by ticking the desired data series.

The mode of creating a composite indicator may contain the ability to edit its name with editing the added data series from the basic indicators, as well as the ability to rename data series, move them using drag-and-drop and delete, and the ability to display data in a composite indicator in dynamics, when ticking the corresponding field.

The created composite indicator can be saved automatically in a block, for example, in the "Favorites" section.

Also, for a composite indicator, you can change the type of the chart displaying the composite indicator (including using the menu of the composite indicator); displaying a composite indicator in dynamics; discussion of the composite indicator; exporting a composite indicator to known formats (for example, xls, pdf, ppt); viewing information about a composite indicator; editing a composite indicator.

Integral indicators allow analyzing key performance indicators in the context of areas / activities and optimizing the process of analyzing and monitoring activities.

In a particular case, the block of indicators contains a block of integral indicators.

Integral indicators can be created in the indicator constructor, for example, in a web application. In a particular case, the creation of integral indicators is available to users with the "Administrator" role.

In a particular case, for integral indicators, a transition is made to base indicators (drilldown); displaying a list of baselines; setting the time period; notification of users about deviations in indicators from the norm; export of indicators to well-known formats (pdf, ppt, etc.).

The order of calculating integral indicators can be specified using existing indicators in the indicator designer. For each integral indicator, a separate indicator passport can be used, which indicates on the basis of which basic indicators, other data and calculation formulas a specific integral indicator is determined or calculated.

In a particular case, the integral indicators contain a deviation from the established acceptable limit. In a particular case, integral indicators by default have the “bar” or “speedometer” chart type.

Two highlight colors, for example, blue and red, can be used to visually represent the threshold values of the cumulative indicators, where one color (blue) identifies values within the threshold values, and the second, for example, red, identifies deviations from the threshold values. For instance:

- values from 0 to 80 - deviation from the threshold values. The scale color is red;

- values from 80 to 100 - there is no deviation from the threshold values. The color of the scale is blue.

In the working area of the integral indicators screen, a timeline can be located with the ability to select past periods to monitor deviations for past periods.

In a particular case, indicators can be divided into different categories, according to the degree of importance and / or reliability. For example, indicators with a low degree of reliability, determined by the correspondence of the indicator value to independent initial data, can be categorized as “require verification”, and indicators reflecting the general state of the enterprise - in the category “require attention”.

In a particular case, on the screen of integral indicators, a transition to detailing a specific integral indicator is implemented. A transition can be a link with an underscore (drilldown) in the name of integral indicators.

In a particular case, the transition to the detailing of the integral indicator is the working area where the following are displayed:

- deviations of the values of the integral indicator from the established limit for the selected period;

- the values of the basic indicators that led to the deviation of the values of the integral indicator;

- the dynamics of change in the indicator for the specified time period.

Detailing may contain the ability to analyze the deviation of values from the standard of the integral indicator for past periods.

In a particular case, when the integral indicators deviate from the threshold values, user alerts are generated, and alerts can be displayed in the format of pop-up notifications indicating the number of notifications.

In a particular case, when the user chooses options for such a pop-up notification, a transition to a detailed view of the history of deviations of integral indicators is performed, indicating the standard and actual values.

The following items can be accessed in the integral indicator menu:

- discussion of the integral indicator;

- export of an integral indicator in a known format (pdf, ppt, etc.);

- viewing information about the integral indicator.

Claims (8)

1. The system of monitoring the performance indicators of the enterprise, containing a database, the records of which contain information about the basic and integral indicators, where the basic indicators have predetermined values, and the integral indicators are determined using the basic indicators, and verified representations of documents defining the values of indicators, with highlighting in each of the documents functionally independent elements related to the formation of the values of indicators, while the system is made with the ability, for each of the indicators, to identify functional elements related to the formation of the corresponding indicator, and when the user receives a request for information about the value of the indicator that generates the report containing the value of the requested indicator, a graphical representation of a document containing functional elements related to the formation of the requested indicator with a graphical highlighting of fields related to the corresponding functional elements, while the database is made with the ability to store the procedures for determining integral indicators, recognizing elements of verified document representations related to the procedure for determining indicators, and generating a notification when a procedure for determining an integral indicator is detected in the verified document representation that does not correspond to the order stored in the database data, while the system is made with the ability to check the compliance of the values of the integral indicators with the values of the basic indicators and the procedures for determining the integral indicators and generating a notification when a discrepancy is detected. 2. The system according to claim 1, characterized in that it is made with the possibility of comparing the calculated integral indicators with the values of the corresponding indicators stored in the database and with the possibility of correcting one of the compared values being compared when they differ. 3. The system according to claim 1, characterized in that it contains several databases containing information about the parameters of various departments, the system is made to identify similar parameters in the documents of different departments and combine documents related to identical parameters of different departments. 4. The system according to claim 3, characterized in that it recognizes identical parameters of various divisions and parameters for determining identical integral parameters of various divisions, as well as generating a notification if the parameters for determining identical parameters in different divisions do not match. 5. The system according to any of the previous paragraphs, in which for each of the indicators the person responsible for the value of the indicator is indicated. 6. The system of claim 5, characterized in that if the indicator does not match, the notification is sent to the person responsible for the indicator value. 7. The system according to claim 1, characterized in that one or more functionally independent elements determine the weight coefficients of the basic indicators used in determining the integral indicators. 8. The system according to claim 1, characterized in that it is made with the possibility of grouping sets of basic indicators into composite indicators so that when forming the values of integral indicators, the basic indicators grouped into composite indicators are taken into account together as part of composite indicators.

Images