Evaluation method, system, medium and equipment for evaluating quality management system of each production department of iron and steel enterprise

Abstract

The invention discloses an evaluation method, system, medium and equipment for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of an iron and steel enterprise, and the method comprises the steps: referring to the standard of the quality management system for the quality management system of each production department of the iron and steel enterprise according to a customer guiding process, a supporting process and a management process; dividing a to-be-evaluated production department quality management system to obtain a quality target under each process; according to the quality target under each process, respectively designing a corresponding quantitative evaluation index and a corresponding qualitative evaluation index, designing a weight, a scoring standard and a scoring mode for each evaluation index, and carrying out step-by-step weighting on the weights according to the process and the evaluation indexes; and based on the weight, the scoring standard and the scoring mode designed by each evaluation index, evaluating step by step according to the evaluation index and the process to obtain an effectiveness score about the to-be-evaluated production department quality management system.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of steel enterprise evaluation, and in particular to an evaluation method, system, medium and equipment for evaluating the quality management systems of various production departments of a steel enterprise. Background Art

[0002] At present, the steel industry has entered a new round of deep adjustment period. Due to the prominent contradiction between supply and demand, declining profitability, and intensified all-round fierce competition among enterprises, it is necessary to establish an effective quality management system to ensure advantages in competition.

[0003] The production department is an important carrier for achieving the quality of steel products. Steel enterprises are long-process production enterprises, including coking, ironmaking, steelmaking, hot rolling, cold rolling and other production units. Large steel enterprises usually include nearly ten production departments. Therefore, how to evaluate the effectiveness of the quality management system of different production departments is particularly important.

[0004] At present, the evaluation of quality management systems is mainly based on auditing, which is qualitative and cannot quantitatively evaluate the quality management systems of different production departments, resulting in the evaluation being of no reference value. Summary of the invention

[0005] In order to solve or partially solve the technical problem that the quality management systems of different production departments cannot be quantified, the present invention provides an evaluation method, system, medium and equipment for evaluating the quality management systems of various production departments of a steel enterprise. The quality management system standard is used as a criterion, and the quality management system of the production department is divided according to customer-oriented process, support process and management process. Each process focuses on the quality goal, and according to the quality goal of each process, quantitative indicators for measuring results and qualitative indicators for measuring behaviors are designed respectively. Each evaluation indicator is designed with weight, scoring standard and scoring method, so as to score the effectiveness of the quality management system of the production department and obtain an objective evaluation.

[0006] In order to solve the above technical problems, the first aspect of the present invention discloses a method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, the method comprising:

[0007] For the quality management systems of various production departments of steel enterprises, refer to the quality management system standards, divide the quality management systems of production departments to be evaluated into customer-oriented processes, support processes, and management processes, and obtain the quality objectives under each process;

[0008] According to the quality objectives of each process, corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators are designed respectively. Each evaluation indicator is designed with weight, scoring standard and scoring method. The weight is assigned step by step according to the process and evaluation indicator.

[0009] Based on the weight, scoring criteria and scoring method designed for each evaluation indicator, the evaluation is conducted step by step according to the evaluation indicators and processes to obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

[0010] Optionally, the quantitative evaluation index is used to measure the results of each process, including at least: scrap reduction, SPC good and good rate, quality objection loss rate of 10,000 yuan, equipment function accuracy index, MSA evaluation, production cooperation package unit evaluation, key parameter blocking release rate, company-level long-term listing supervision project completion rate, plate and coil marking qualified rate;

[0011] The qualitative evaluation indicators are used to measure the behavioral compliance of each process, including at least: compliance with variety trial production plan, compliance with process execution sampling inspection, compliance with process change, compliance with quality sampling inspection, compliance with accident closed-loop sampling inspection, compliance with quality objection closed-loop sampling inspection, compliance with technical documents, and compliance with packaging quality and product stacking sampling inspection.

[0012] Optionally, the weighting structure of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is:

[0013]

[0014] Among them, MC i represents the weight of the ith subprocess in the customer-oriented process, MS i′ represents the weight of the i′th subprocess in the supporting process, MM i″ represents the weight of the ith sub-process in the management process, NC j represents the weight of the jth indicator in the i-th subprocess, NS j′ represents the weight of the j′th indicator in the i′th subprocess, NM j″ Represents the weight of the j"th indicator in the i"th sub-process.

[0015] Optionally, each qualitative evaluation indicator is evaluated through a random inspection + deduction system until all points are deducted; at the same time, a veto condition is set for each qualitative evaluation indicator. If a veto condition occurs, the evaluation indicator score is 0.

[0016] Optionally, each quantitative evaluation indicator includes a T-level evaluation and a comparative target value evaluation;

[0017] The T-level evaluation refers to the evaluation level obtained by comparing the current level of each quantitative evaluation indicator with its own history and reference period. The T-level evaluation includes at least the following evaluation levels:

[0018] T1: best level in history;

[0019] T2: the best level within the reference period;

[0020] T3: advanced average level within the reference period;

[0021] T4: average level within the reference period;

[0022] T5: Worse level within the reference period;

[0023] T6: the worst level in the reference period;

[0024] T7: the worst level in history;

[0025] Each evaluation level corresponds to its own score. The higher the level, the lower the score, and the transition is from a positive score system to a negative score system.

[0026] The target value comparison evaluation is to compare the actual value with the target value, and score by comparing the difference between the target values;

[0027] Taking the target value as the benchmark score, if the actual value is higher than the target value, the greater the difference, the score will increase; if the actual value is lower than the target value, the greater the difference, the score will decrease.

[0028] Optionally, the evaluation methods for each evaluation indicator include: self-evaluation by the department to be evaluated, special evaluation by multiple functional departments corresponding to the customer-oriented process, the support process and the management process, and self-evaluation by the department to be evaluated + professional confirmation by multiple functional departments.

[0029] Optionally, after obtaining the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, the method further includes:

[0030] The effectiveness score is generated with "month" as the time unit to point out the weak links and development trends of the quality management system operation of the production department to be evaluated;

[0031] Based on the actual operation results of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, revise the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

[0032] The second aspect of the present invention discloses a system for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, characterized by comprising:

[0033] The division module is used to divide the quality management system of each production department of the steel enterprise into customer-oriented process, support process and management process according to the quality management system standards, and obtain the quality target under each process;

[0034] A design module is used to design corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators according to the quality objectives of each process, and to design weights, scoring standards and scoring methods for each evaluation indicator, and the weights are assigned step by step according to the process and evaluation indicator;

[0035] The evaluation module is used to evaluate the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated step by step based on the weight, scoring standard and scoring method designed for each evaluation indicator, and obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

[0036] According to a third aspect of the present invention, a computer-readable storage medium is disclosed, on which a computer program is stored, and when the program is executed by a processor, the steps of the above method are implemented.

[0037] The fourth aspect of the present invention discloses an evaluation device for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor implements the steps of the above method when executing the program.

[0038] Through one or more technical solutions of the present invention, the present invention has the following beneficial effects or advantages:

[0039] The present invention provides an evaluation method, system, medium and equipment for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise. The quality management system standard is used as a criterion, and the quality management system of the production department is divided according to the customer-oriented process, support process and management process. Each process focuses on the quality goal, and according to the quality goal of each process, quantitative indicators for measuring results and qualitative indicators for measuring behavior are designed respectively. Each evaluation indicator is designed with weights, scoring standards and scoring methods, so as to score the effectiveness of the quality management system of the production department and obtain an objective evaluation. It can be seen that the technical solution in the present invention can measure both the results and the process, can control the development trend of various business indicators, can objectively evaluate each production department, has continuous operability, improves the effectiveness level of the quality management system of each production department, reduces waste and quality objections of external users, and can form a comparative advantage in competition.

[0040] The above description is only an overview of the technical solution of the present invention. In order to more clearly understand the technical means of the present invention, it can be implemented according to the contents of the specification. In order to make the above and other purposes, features and advantages of the present invention more obvious and easy to understand, the specific implementation methods of the present invention are listed below. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0041] Various other advantages and benefits will become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art by reading the detailed description of the preferred embodiments below. The accompanying drawings are only for the purpose of illustrating the preferred embodiments and are not to be considered as limiting the present invention. Moreover, the same reference symbols are used throughout the accompanying drawings to represent the same components. In the accompanying drawings:

[0042] Figure 1 A flow chart of a method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0043] Figure 2 A schematic diagram of an evaluation structure for evaluating the effectiveness of a quality management system according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0044] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of a system for evaluating the quality management systems of various production departments of a steel enterprise according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0045] The exemplary embodiments of the present invention will be described in more detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Although the exemplary embodiments of the present invention are shown in the accompanying drawings, it should be understood that the present invention can be implemented in various forms and should not be limited by the embodiments set forth herein. On the contrary, these embodiments are provided in order to enable a more thorough understanding of the present invention and to enable the scope of the present invention to be fully communicated to those skilled in the art.

[0046] The exemplary embodiments of the present invention will be described in more detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Although the exemplary embodiments of the present invention are shown in the accompanying drawings, it should be understood that the present invention can be implemented in various forms and should not be limited by the embodiments set forth herein. On the contrary, these embodiments are provided in order to enable a more thorough understanding of the present invention and to enable the scope of the present invention to be fully communicated to those skilled in the art.

[0047] First, as Figure 1 As shown, the method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise provided by the embodiment of the present invention comprises at least the following steps:

[0048] S101, with reference to the quality management system standards, divides the quality management system of each production department of the steel enterprise into customer-oriented process, support process and management process, and obtains the quality objectives under each process.

[0049] During the specific implementation process, based on the core clauses of the quality management system standards, the production processes required for the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated are identified, and then the production processes required for the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated are divided into customer-oriented processes, support processes, and management processes, and corresponding quality objectives are set for each process.

[0050] Among them, the core clauses of the quality management system standard are the key clauses in the ISO 9001 quality management system standard. The core clauses of this standard usually include but are not limited to the following aspects: 1) Quality policy and quality objectives: The organization should formulate quality policies and quality objectives and keep them consistent with the strategic direction of the organization. 2) Organizational structure and responsibilities: Clarify the responsibilities and authority of personnel at all levels to ensure the effective operation of the quality management system. 3) Resource management: Including the management of human resources, infrastructure, working environment, etc. to support the operation of the quality management system. 4) Product realization: Covering the entire process from product design, procurement, production, inspection to delivery to ensure that the product meets the specified requirements. 5) Measurement, analysis and improvement: Through monitoring, measurement, analysis and improvement and other activities, continuously improve the effectiveness of the quality management system and customer satisfaction.

[0051] The processes required for the production of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated that are identified refer to the processes that are essential to achieving quality goals and customer satisfaction that are identified by steel enterprises based on their actual conditions and customer needs when implementing the quality management system. These processes usually include: 1) Key production processes: such as blast furnace smelting, converter steelmaking, continuous casting, steel rolling, etc. These processes directly affect the quality and performance of the products. 2) Key support processes: such as procurement management, equipment management, human resource management, etc. These processes provide necessary support for the production process to ensure the smooth progress of the production process. 3) Special processes: such as heat treatment, surface treatment, etc. These processes have special process requirements and control conditions and require special attention and management. When identifying the processes required for the production of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, the identification should be made by comprehensively considering customer needs, organizational strategy, process importance, resource input, etc.

[0052] Furthermore, by classifying the aforementioned processes according to customer-oriented processes, support processes, and management processes, the quality objectives corresponding to each sub-process under the customer-oriented processes, support processes, and management processes can be obtained.

[0053] Specifically, the customer-oriented process refers to the process that originates from and is directly related to the customers, and includes at least the following sub-processes: project analysis and determination, project planning, quotation and contract review, product and manufacturing process development management, production process, and customer feedback processing.

[0054] According to each sub-process under the customer-oriented process, the production process required for the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is divided, and the quality objectives of each sub-process are set. Taking the production process as an example, its quality objectives are: implement refined production process control to ensure that every link in the production process meets the quality requirements; regularly maintain and calibrate production equipment to ensure the accuracy and stability of production parameters; conduct comprehensive quality inspection and testing of finished products to ensure that product performance and quality indicators meet customer requirements.

[0055] The support process is used to provide support and guarantee for the customer-oriented process to ensure the smooth progress of the production process. Its sub-processes include at least: equipment maintenance and management, measurement process management, quality peripheral management, tooling management, identification and traceability management, stakeholder management, inspection and testing management, non-conforming product management, product protection, document management, technical support and R&D management.

[0056] According to each sub-process under the support process, the production process required for the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is divided, and the quality objectives of each sub-process are set. Taking equipment maintenance and management as an example, its quality objectives are: to ensure that the production equipment is in good condition and the equipment integrity rate reaches more than 95%; to perform regular maintenance and maintenance on the equipment to reduce the failure rate and downtime. Taking the quality peripheral management as an example, its quality objectives are: to establish a complete quality management system to ensure that every link in the production process meets the quality requirements; to implement advanced quality management methods such as SPC (statistical process control) to improve process capability and product quality stability.

[0057] The management process is used for internal resource allocation and process optimization to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the overall operation of the enterprise. Its sub-processes include at least: production planning and scheduling, cost control, and continuous improvement. According to each sub-process under the management process, the production process required for the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is divided, and each sub-process is set with its own quality goal. Taking production planning and scheduling as an example, its quality goals are: formulate a scientific and reasonable production plan to ensure the timely completion of production tasks; strengthen production scheduling and coordination to reduce waste and delays in the production process. Taking cost control as an example, its quality goals are: implement comprehensive cost control measures to reduce production costs and operating costs; improve resource utilization efficiency and production efficiency to maximize economic benefits.

[0058] S102: According to the quality objectives of each process, corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators are designed respectively. Weights, scoring standards and scoring methods are designed for each evaluation indicator. The weights are assigned step by step according to the process and evaluation indicator.

[0059] Among them, the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process contain several sub-processes, and each sub-process is designed with its own corresponding quality objectives. Each sub-process contains corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators. Since the quality objectives of each sub-process are different, the corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators are different, and the corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators are also different.

[0060] Quantitative evaluation indicators are used to measure the results of each process. The data comes from the relevant indicator system of production and operation, including at least: reduction of scrap, SPC quality rate, quality objection loss rate of 10,000 yuan, equipment function accuracy index, MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) evaluation, production collaboration unit evaluation, key parameter blocking and release rate, company-level long-term supervision project completion rate, and plate and coil identification qualification rate.

[0061] Qualitative evaluation indicators are used to measure the behavioral compliance of each process, mainly through random inspections, including at least: compliance with variety trial production plans, compliance with process execution random inspections, compliance with process changes, compliance with quality random inspections, compliance with accident closed-loop random inspections, compliance with quality objection closed-loop random inspections, compliance with technical documents, and compliance with packaging quality and product stacking random inspections.

[0062] See also Figure 2 , is a schematic diagram of the evaluation structure for the effectiveness evaluation of the quality management system.

[0063] For the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, according to the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process, several sub-processes under each process are divided into corresponding quality targets, and then the evaluation indicators corresponding to each sub-process are obtained, which include quantitative evaluation indicators and qualitative evaluation indicators. For example, the customer-oriented process contains n sub-processes, and each sub-process contains m indicators (the number of indicators m is the sum of quantitative analysis indicators and qualitative analysis indicators). The support process contains n′ sub-processes, and each sub-process contains m′ indicators (the number of indicators m′ is the sum of quantitative analysis indicators and qualitative analysis indicators). The management process contains n″ sub-processes, and each sub-process contains m″ indicators (the number of indicators m″ is the sum of quantitative analysis indicators and qualitative analysis indicators). Among them, n, m, n′, m′, n″, m″ are all positive integers.

[0064] When designing weights, weights are assigned step by step according to processes and evaluation indicators, and comprehensive weights are assigned with reference to quality, cost, and efficiency. Each process corresponds to its own weight, and each sub-process under each process has its own evaluation indicator.

[0065] The weighting structure of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is:

[0066]

[0067] Among them, MC i represents the weight of the ith sub-process in the customer-oriented process, MS i′ represents the weight of the i′th subprocess in the support process, MM i″ represents the weight of the i″th sub-process in the management process, NC j represents the weight of the jth indicator in the i-th subprocess, NS j′ represents the weight of the j′th indicator in the i′th subprocess, NM j″ Represents the weight of the j″th indicator in the i″th sub-process.

[0068] When designing the evaluation criteria for evaluation indicators, each qualitative evaluation indicator is evaluated through a random inspection + deduction system until all points are deducted; at the same time, a veto condition is set for each qualitative evaluation indicator. If a veto condition occurs, the evaluation indicator score is 0.

[0069] Each quantitative evaluation indicator includes T-level evaluation and comparative target value evaluation.

[0070] T-level evaluation refers to the evaluation level obtained by comparing the current level of each quantitative evaluation indicator with its own history and reference period. In its own history, the evaluation level is divided according to the best level and the worst level, and in its own reference period, the level is divided according to the best, average, and worst level within the period. After the division, the T-level evaluation includes at least the following evaluation levels:

[0071] T1: best level in history;

[0072] T2: the best level within the reference period;

[0073] T3: advanced average level within the reference period;

[0074] T4: average level within the reference period;

[0075] T5: Worse level within the reference period;

[0076] T6: the worst level in the reference period;

[0077] T7: the worst level in history;

[0078] The reference period is generally 1 year, but it is not a limit. For example, when evaluating in March 2024, the reference period is March 2023-February 2024. Each evaluation level corresponds to its own score. The higher the level, the lower the score. The transition from positive to negative points is to control the development trend of indicators and warn of risks in advance. In the T-level evaluation level, a penalty system is implemented, and the score may be negative.

[0079] Taking the T-level evaluation grade of waste reduction rate as an example, the scoring system is shown in Table 1.

[0080] T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 5 4 3 2 0 -1 -2

[0081] Table 1

[0082] The comparison target value evaluation is to compare the actual value with the target value, and score by comparing the difference between the target values. Specifically, the target value is used as the benchmark score. If the actual value is higher than the target value, the greater the difference, the score increases; if the actual value is lower than the target value, the greater the difference, the score decreases.

[0083] Taking the comparative target value evaluation of the key parameter blocking release rate as an example, the target value for achieving the target is 80 points, with 5 points added for every 0.5% decrease and 5 points subtracted for every 0.5% increase.

[0084] The evaluation methods for each evaluation indicator include self-evaluation, special evaluation, and self-evaluation + professional confirmation. Among them, self-evaluation is the self-evaluation of the department to be evaluated. Special evaluation is the special evaluation of at least three functional departments including the departments corresponding to the customer-oriented process, support process and management process. Self-evaluation + professional confirmation is: self-evaluation of the department to be evaluated + professional confirmation of multiple functional departments. The department to be evaluated first conducts the evaluation, and then multiple functional departments conduct professional evaluation and scoring.

[0085] S103, based on the weight, scoring standard and scoring method designed for each evaluation indicator, evaluate the evaluation indicators and processes step by step to obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

[0086] Specifically, for each indicator, first score according to the scoring criteria from three methods: self-evaluation, special evaluation, and self-evaluation + professional confirmation. Then, the average score based on the scoring of various methods is calculated as the score corresponding to each indicator. The score of each indicator is calculated in combination with the weights under each indicator. Furthermore, the sum of the indicator scores under each sub-process is used as the score of each sub-process, and then the scores of the sub-processes contained in the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process are determined. Combined with the weights of the sub-processes of the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process, the scores of the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process are calculated, and the scores of the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process are summed to obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

[0087] The effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is calculated as follows:

[0088]

[0089] Among them, score jrepresents the score of the jth indicator in the i-th subprocess, represents the score of the ith subprocess, Indicates the score of the customer-oriented process. j′ represents the score of the j′th indicator in the i′th subprocess, represents the score of the i′th subprocess, Indicates the score of the support process, score j″ represents the score of the j″th indicator in the i″th subprocess, represents the score of the i″th subprocess, A score representing the management process.

[0090] After obtaining the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, the effectiveness score is generated with "month" as the time unit to point out the weak links and development trends of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated. Specifically, the evaluation methods for each evaluation indicator include self-evaluation, special evaluation, and self-evaluation + professional confirmation. All evaluation indicators are evaluated in three ways every month, and the effectiveness score is automatically generated according to the weight. Combined with the actual operation results of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is continuously revised. Through monthly evaluation, the weak links and improvement directions of the quality management system of each production department can be pointed out. The weak links and improvement directions have individual parts and common parts. The individual part is improved independently by the production department, and the common part is improved at the company level.

[0091] Each production department in a steel enterprise evaluates the effectiveness of its quality management system in the above manner.

[0092] Furthermore, the effectiveness scores of the quality management systems of various production departments can be added together to obtain the corresponding effectiveness score of the steel enterprise.

[0093] The technical solution in this invention can break down the interface barriers between departments, measure both the results and the process; can control the development trend of various business indicators, always compare with its own historical level, and pursue the goal of continuously refreshing history; can objectively evaluate multiple production departments every month, and has continuous operability. It has stimulated the subjective initiative of each production department to actively participate in quality improvement, improved the effectiveness of the quality management system of each production department, reduced waste and quality objections from external users, and helped the company's products form a comparative advantage in the market.

[0094] The technical solution of the present invention covers the customer-oriented process, support process, and management process related to the production department. Combined with the correlation between the processes, each process focuses on the quality goal to ensure the quality consistency between the processes. In addition, for the quality goal of each process, quantitative indicators for measuring results and qualitative indicators for measuring process behavior are designed, which can evaluate results and behaviors at the same time, thereby achieving effective scoring of the quality management system of the production department.

[0095] In the technical solution of the present invention, the quantitative indicator scoring method adopts two methods: comparative target value scoring and T-level scoring. Comparative target value evaluation can guide the completion of the company's various production and operation indicator tasks. In addition to guiding the completion of the company's current production and operation indicator tasks, T-level evaluation also guides comparison with its own history, pursuing the best of the same period in history and creating the best in history. T-level evaluation implements a penalty system, and the score is negative when the worst level of the historical cycle and the worst level in history are reached. Compared with comparative target values, T-level evaluation can better control development trends, compare with its own history, and pursue continuous progress, especially for the control indicators of continuous completion of current target values, it can better point out the problems behind indicator management and clarify the future work direction.

[0096] In the technical solution of the present invention, the scoring method of qualitative indicators adopts a deduction system and a veto system. If a behavior is found to violate the scoring criteria, points will be deducted for each item until all points are deducted. When a veto item occurs, the score is 0. This can ensure the consistency of the scores of different evaluators.

[0097] In the technical solution of the present invention, the evaluation method adopts three methods: self-evaluation, special evaluation, and self-evaluation + professional confirmation. The evaluation tasks are divided according to responsibilities, which can reduce the workload of specific people and make it feasible to evaluate all operating departments every month.

[0098] In the technical solution of the present invention, the evaluation model forms a PDCA positive closed-loop improvement system through new construction, trial operation, revision and verification, formal operation, annual effectiveness review, and adjustment and optimization when necessary, thereby improving the scientificity and effectiveness of the evaluation model itself.

[0099] In the technical solution of the present invention, the effectiveness of the quality management system of each production department is scored monthly according to the evaluation model, so as to point out the weak links and improvement directions of the quality management system operation of each production department. The individual parts are improved independently by each production department, and the common parts are improved systematically by the company, forming a reverse closed-loop improvement of the quality management system.

[0100] In the second aspect, based on the same inventive concept as the method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise provided in the embodiment of the first aspect, the embodiment of the present invention also provides a system for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, see Figure 3 ,include:

[0101] The division module 301 is used to divide the quality management system of each production department of the steel enterprise into the customer-oriented process, the support process, and the management process according to the quality management system standard, and obtain the quality target under each process;

[0102] Design module 302, for designing corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators according to the quality objectives of each process, and designing weights, scoring standards and scoring methods for each evaluation indicator, and weights are assigned step by step according to the process and evaluation indicator;

[0103] The evaluation module 303 is used to evaluate the evaluation indicators and processes step by step based on the weight, scoring standard and scoring method designed for each evaluation indicator to obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

[0104] It should be noted that the system for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise provided in the embodiment of the present invention, wherein the specific manner in which each module performs operations has been described in detail in the method embodiment provided in the above-mentioned first aspect, and the specific implementation process can refer to the method embodiment provided in the above-mentioned first aspect, and will not be elaborated here.

[0105] In the third aspect, based on the same inventive concept as the method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise provided in the embodiment of the first aspect mentioned above, the embodiment of the present invention also discloses a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of any of the methods described above.

[0106] In the fourth aspect, based on the same inventive concept as the method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise provided in the embodiment of the first aspect mentioned above, the embodiment of the present invention also discloses an evaluation device for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor implements the steps of any of the methods described above when executing the program.

[0107] Although the preferred embodiments of the present application have been described, those skilled in the art may make other changes and modifications to these embodiments once they have learned the basic creative concept. Therefore, the appended claims are intended to be interpreted as including the preferred embodiments and all changes and modifications that fall within the scope of the present application.

[0108] Obviously, those skilled in the art can make various changes and modifications to the present application without departing from the spirit and scope of the present application. Thus, if these modifications and variations of the present application fall within the scope of the claims of the present application and their equivalents, the present application is also intended to include these modifications and variations.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, characterized in that: The method comprises: For the quality management systems of various production departments of steel enterprises, refer to the quality management system standards, divide the quality management systems of production departments to be evaluated into customer-oriented processes, support processes, and management processes, and obtain the quality objectives under each process; According to the quality objectives of each process, corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators are designed respectively. Each evaluation indicator is designed with weight, scoring standard and scoring method. The weight is assigned step by step according to the process and evaluation indicator. Based on the weight, scoring criteria and scoring method designed for each evaluation indicator, the evaluation is conducted step by step according to the evaluation indicators and processes to obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The quantitative evaluation indicators are used to measure the results of each process, including at least: scrap reduction, SPC good and good rate, quality objection loss rate of 10,000 yuan, equipment function accuracy index, MSA evaluation, production cooperation package unit evaluation, key parameter blocking release rate, company-level long-term listing supervision project completion rate, plate and coil identification qualified rate; The qualitative evaluation indicators are used to measure the behavioral compliance of each process, including at least: compliance with variety trial production plan, compliance with process execution sampling inspection, compliance with process change, compliance with quality sampling inspection, compliance with accident closed-loop sampling inspection, compliance with quality objection closed-loop sampling inspection, compliance with technical documents, and compliance with packaging quality and product stacking sampling inspection.

3. The method according to claim 1 or 3, characterized in that The weighting structure of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated is: Among them, MC i represents the weight of the ith subprocess in the customer-oriented process, MS i′ represents the weight of the i′th subprocess in the supporting process, MM i″ represents the weight of the ith sub-process in the management process, NC j represents the weight of the jth indicator in the i-th subprocess, NS j′ represents the weight of the j′th indicator in the i′th subprocess, NM j″ Represents the weight of the j"th indicator in the i"th sub-process.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Each qualitative evaluation indicator is evaluated through random inspection + deduction system until all points are deducted; at the same time, a veto condition is set for each qualitative evaluation indicator. If a veto condition occurs, the evaluation indicator score will be 0.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Each quantitative evaluation indicator includes T-level evaluation and comparative target value evaluation; The T-level evaluation refers to the evaluation level obtained by comparing the current level of each quantitative evaluation indicator with its own history and reference period. The T-level evaluation includes at least the following evaluation levels: T1: best level in history; T2: the best level within the reference period; T3: advanced average level within the reference period; T4: average level within the reference period; T5: Worse level within the reference period; T6: the worst level in the reference period; T7: the worst level in history; Each evaluation level corresponds to its own score. The higher the level, the lower the score, and the transition is from a positive score system to a negative score system. The target value comparison evaluation is to compare the actual value with the target value, and score by comparing the difference between the target values; Taking the target value as the benchmark score, if the actual value is higher than the target value, the greater the difference, the score will increase; if the actual value is lower than the target value, the greater the difference, the score will decrease.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The evaluation methods for each evaluation indicator include: self-evaluation by the department to be evaluated, special evaluation by multiple functional departments corresponding to the customer-oriented process, the support process and the management process, and self-evaluation by the department to be evaluated + professional confirmation by multiple functional departments.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that After obtaining the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, the method further includes: The effectiveness score is generated with "month" as the time unit to point out the weak links and development trends of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated; Based on the actual operation results of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated, revise the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

8. A system for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, characterized in that: include: The division module is used to divide the quality management system of each production department of the steel enterprise into customer-oriented process, support process and management process according to the quality management system standards, and obtain the quality target under each process; A design module is used to design corresponding quantitative evaluation indicators and corresponding qualitative evaluation indicators according to the quality objectives of each process, and to design weights, scoring standards and scoring methods for each evaluation indicator, and the weights are assigned step by step according to the process and evaluation indicator; The evaluation module is used to evaluate the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated step by step based on the weight, scoring standard and scoring method designed for each evaluation indicator, and obtain the effectiveness score of the quality management system of the production department to be evaluated.

9. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When the program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 are implemented.

10. An evaluation device for evaluating the quality management system of each production department of a steel enterprise, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, characterized in that: When the processor executes the program, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 are implemented.

Images