Government affair appraisal system supporting flexible customization of questionnaire

Abstract

A government affair appraisal system supporting flexible customization of questionnaires includes: 1) appraisal template management; 1.1) determining a target audience; 1.2) designing a questionnaire structure for the crowd in the step 1.1); 1.3) formulating problems; 1.4) including a key field; 1.5) using technical terms; 1.6) setting an evaluation grade; 1.7) performing template management operation; 2) managing appraisal activities; the method comprises the steps of (2.1) appraisal activity creation, (2.2) appraisal activity release, (2.3) appraisal activity starting, (2.4) appraisal group notification through short messages, (2.5) appraisal activity ending, (2.6) activity management operation, (3) appraisal final management, (3.1) appraisal group weight setting, (3.2) appraisal result final calculation, (4) user data acquisition, (4.1) user login, (4.2) data extraction, (5) ranking query statistics, (5.1) appraisal object ranking query and (5.2) appraisal object ranking graphical display.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of electronic government affairs, and in particular to a government affairs review system that supports flexible customization of questionnaires. Background Art

[0002] In accordance with the government's overall arrangements for people's livelihood projects, in order to effectively respond to the urgent, difficult, anxious and expectant issues faced by a large number of enterprises and the public in the field of government services, the Government Service Management Office regularly conducts surveys on people's livelihood needs and collects feedback and suggestions in the form of questionnaires.

[0003] As a vital data collection tool for collecting feedback and suggestions, questionnaires play a core role in many fields such as marketing, sociological research and user research. A well-constructed questionnaire can deeply explore the attitudes, behavior patterns and specific needs of the respondents, thereby extracting valuable information and providing solid data support for the strategic decision-making of various organizations.

[0004] However, the current form of government questionnaire survey still has certain limitations. First, although paper questionnaires are convenient for direct distribution in government halls or service windows, the distribution, filling and collection process takes a long time, especially in the data entry and analysis stage, which can easily delay the generation and feedback of evaluation results, and easily lead to information entry errors, affecting the accuracy and reliability of data, and making it more inconvenient for rapid retrieval and efficient management. Secondly, through PC-side online surveys, although the advantage of the strong accessibility of government service websites is utilized, the audience covered is relatively narrow and the channels are limited. Finally, static web questionnaires are designed to meet a single demand. Their one-time use characteristics lead to the need to redesign the questionnaire when the demand changes, resulting in a waste of resources, and they cannot adapt to the needs of real-time feedback and dynamic adjustment. At the same time, it is difficult to support high concurrent access, which is not conducive to participants to understand the evaluation results in a timely manner. In addition, due to the low efficiency of data processing, it is difficult to provide decision makers with immediate data support, which may delay the timing of decision-making. In order to solve the above problems, we propose a government evaluation system that supports flexible customization of questionnaires. Summary of the invention

[0005] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a government affairs review system that supports flexible customization of questionnaires, thereby solving the problems existing in the background technology.

[0006] In order to solve the above technical problems, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0007] 1) Review template management: 1.1) Determine the target audience: Identify and define the expected audience or stakeholders, and make it clear who you want to get feedback from. For example, for a new industrial machine design, the target audience may include engineers, maintenance personnel, production managers, and industry consultants. These groups are determined to ensure that the questionnaire design can collect valuable feedback from all relevant angles; 1.2) Design the questionnaire structure: Decide what form the questionnaire will take, such as multiple-choice questions, fill-in-the-blank questions, rating scales, or open-ended questions, specifically referring to the scoring system for selecting reviews and the style of selecting reviews; 1.3) Formulate questions: Design specific questions to obtain the information you need, and ensure that the questions are clear and specific. Each question should be directly related to a specific aspect of a topic, such as the innovation of the technology, market potential, or ease of operation. Through clear questions, you can effectively obtain in-depth insights into these key areas; 1.4) Include relevant Key areas: Ensure that the questionnaire covers all key areas and business considerations, which means including questions related to technical performance, cost-effectiveness, user-friendliness and market acceptance to ensure that comprehensive feedback is collected; 1.5) Use professional terminology: Use professional terminology in the industry to ensure that respondents understand the questions correctly, while demonstrating the professionalism and rigor of the questionnaire, improving the credibility of the questionnaire and ensuring the quality of feedback; 1.6) Set evaluation level: Customize the evaluation level EL = {EL1, EL2, EL3...} and the corresponding evaluation score ES = {ES1, ES2, ES3...}; 1.7) Template management operations: The design of review templates is an iterative process, which may require multiple modifications and optimizations. Providing a mechanism to support operations such as viewing, modifying, deleting and reusing templates can ensure that the template always meets the needs of the review and can adapt to different review environments and audiences;

[0008] 2) Review activity management: 2.1) Open the template in step 1) to create a review activity, fill in the title of the review activity, the organizer, select the review template to be used for this activity, select the review type, select the review object, set the start time of the review activity, review items, select the review group, set review restrictions, add attachments, etc.; 2.2) Publish the review activity: After ensuring that all information is accurate, publish the review activity announcement through formal channels (such as email, official announcements or professional social platforms). The published information should include key information such as a detailed description of the activity, how to participate, review standards and time nodes; 2.3) Start the review activity: According to the set start and end time of the review activity, that is, T b and T b', the system automatically starts and ends; in addition, you can manually click the button to control the start and end time of the review, so that you can flexibly carry out activities in advance; 2.4) SMS notification of the review group. After the review activity is started, you can send text messages to the group members participating in the evaluation to inform them of the evaluation-related operations and precautions. Different types of group members can edit and send different text message contents, and send text message contents in a targeted manner; 2.5) End the review activity: manually end the activity at the scheduled end time or when necessary, to ensure timely summary and analysis of the review results; 2.6) Activity management operations: provide a complete set of activity management tools, allowing organizers to adjust the status of activities as needed, such as withdrawing, canceling, suspending or reopening review activities, to ensure flexibility and controllability of activity management;

[0009] 3) Review and settlement management: 3.1) Set the review group weight w = {w1, w2, w3...}: Assign appropriate weights to each group based on the importance and professionalism of different review groups. Percentage weights can be assigned to each type, requiring the sum of the weights of all groups to be 100%: Final score = ∑ (group score × group weight); 3.2) Review and settlement results. After the review data is collected, the system will automatically settle the data and generate the total score, average score and other statistical indicators for each review object. These data will be displayed on the settlement workbench page for further analysis and review by the organizer;

[0010] 4) User data acquisition: 4.1) Users log in and fill in relevant information on the login interface: When participants access the review system, they need to enter their detailed information through the login interface, which may include name, occupation, contact information, etc. This helps to ensure that the responders of the review are qualified professionals or target groups; 4.2) Extract data from the government information corresponding to the target users and establish a keyword set {u1, u2, u3, ..., u N}, where N represents the number of users; 5) Ranking query statistics: 5.1) Review object ranking query: First, calculate the total score SUM, average score AVE, etc. of the target user group for each review object, and be able to display the number of respondents in each rating interval. These data can help understand the popularity of different review objects among the audience and the potential room for improvement. The following formula is the calculation formula for the total score and average score: SUM = s1 + s2 + ... + s N , Among them, s represents the score of user u on a certain review object; then the exported ranking of the supporting ranking data can be arranged and displayed according to different dimensions, such as ranking by total score, ranking by average score, and the ranking display results can be queried from high to low or from low to high scores; 5.2) Graphical display of review object ranking: In order to display the review results more intuitively, the system will provide charts and visualization tools, such as bar charts, line charts, etc., to show the score trends and rankings of different review objects. These graphical data representation methods can help decision makers quickly understand and compare the performance of different options;

[0011] Preferably, the review styles described in step 1.2) are divided into two types: "simple style and complex style". The simple style is suitable for situations where the review options have fewer words, and the complex style is suitable for situations where the review options have more words.

[0012] Preferably, the evaluation level described in step 1.6) is generally divided into 5 levels by default: EL = {very good, relatively good, good, average, poor}, ES = {5, 4, 3, 2, 1}.

[0013] The beneficial effects of the present invention are: (1) the present invention flexibly customizes the review questionnaire in the review template management module, improves the pertinence, flexibility and efficiency of the review, and ensures the uniformity and quality of the data, which is conducive to long-term tracking and management, and improves the user experience; (2) the present invention publishes multi-dimensional review activities online in the review activity management module, invites and notifies a diverse group of reviewers to participate in questionnaire scoring online, and provides a multi-entry online review method, which can significantly improve the efficiency and quality of the review work, expand the scope of participation, and increase the diversity and comprehensiveness of the review; this method not only enhances interactivity and transparency, but also facilitates data collection and analysis, providing more powerful support for decision-making; (3) the present invention speeds up data statistics and result analysis in the review settlement management and ranking query statistics module, significantly improves the efficiency and accuracy of the review activities, and provides a convenient and user-friendly operation experience, which not only improves the transparency and fairness of the review activities, enhances the trust of the participants, but also provides timely and accurate data support for decision makers, promotes the continuous improvement and competitiveness of the organization, and ensures the efficiency, fairness and adaptability of the review activities. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0014] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0015] Figure 1A flowchart of a government affairs review system that supports flexible customization of questionnaires provided in an embodiment of the present application.

[0016] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the system structure connection of the present invention.

[0017] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the template management operation of the present invention.

[0018] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the summary of the evaluation results of the present invention.

[0019] Figure 5 This is a diagram showing the ranking query interface for the review objects of the present invention.

[0020] Figure 6 This is a graph showing the average ranking of the review objects of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0021] The following will be combined with the attached embodiment of the present invention Figure 1 , clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of them. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0022] Reference Figure 2 As shown, the present invention provides a government affairs review system that supports flexible customization of questionnaires, including: a customized review template module, a review activity management module, a review settlement management and ranking query statistics module and a login interface.

[0023] 1. Review template management

[0024] (1) Determine the target audience: Identify and define the intended audience or stakeholders and clearly identify the people from whom you want to obtain feedback. For example, for a new industrial machine design, the target audience may include engineers, maintenance personnel, production managers, and industry consultants. Identifying these groups is to ensure that the questionnaire design can collect valuable feedback from all relevant perspectives.

[0025] (2) Design the questionnaire structure: Decide what form the questionnaire will take, such as multiple-choice questions, fill-in-the-blank questions, rating scales, or open-ended questions. Take the district-level annual comprehensive evaluation review template as an example, as shown in the figure below, which specifically refers to the scoring system and style of the selected review. The review style is divided into two types: "simple and complex". The simple style is suitable for situations where the review options have fewer words, and the complex style is suitable for situations where the review options have more words.

[0026] (3) Formulate questions: Design specific questions to get the information you need. Make sure your questions are clear and specific. Each question should be directly related to a specific aspect of the topic, such as the innovation of the technology, market potential, or ease of operation. With clear questions, you can effectively gain in-depth insights into these key areas.

[0027] (4) Cover key areas: Ensure that the questionnaire covers all key areas and business considerations. This means including questions related to technical performance, cost-effectiveness, user-friendliness and market acceptance to ensure comprehensive feedback is collected.

[0028] (5) Use professional terminology: Use industry professional terminology to ensure that respondents understand the questions correctly, while demonstrating the professionalism and rigor of the questionnaire, improving the credibility of the questionnaire and ensuring the quality of feedback.

[0029] (6) Setting the evaluation level: Customize the evaluation level EL = {EL1, EL2, EL3…} and the corresponding evaluation score ES = [ES1, ES2, ES3…}; further, we divide the evaluation level into 5 levels: EL = {very good, relatively good, good, average, poor}, ES = {5, 4, 3, 2, 1}.

[0030] (7) Template management operations: The design of review templates is an iterative process that may require multiple modifications and optimizations. Providing a mechanism to support operations such as viewing, modifying, deleting, and reusing templates can ensure that the templates always meet the review requirements and can adapt to different review environments and audiences. Figure 3 Shown is a schematic diagram of the template management operation of the present invention.

[0031] 2. Review activity management

[0032] (1) Create a review activity, fill in the title of the review activity, the organizer, select the review template to be used for this activity, select the review type, select the review object, set the start time of the review activity, describe the review items, select the review group, set review restrictions, add attachments, etc.;

[0033] (2) Announcement of review activities: After ensuring that all information is accurate, announce the review activities through formal channels (such as email, official announcements, or professional social platforms). The information published should include key information such as a detailed description of the activity, how to participate, review criteria, and time nodes.

[0034] (3) Start review activities

[0035] 1) According to the start and end time of the review activity, that is, T b and T b ', the system automatically starts and ends;

[0036] 2) Manually click the button to control the start and end time of the review, so that activities can be carried out flexibly in advance (4) SMS notification to the review group. After the review activity is started, you can send SMS to the group members participating in the review to inform them of the relevant operations and precautions of the review. Different types of group members can edit and send different SMS content, and send SMS content in a targeted manner.

[0037] (5) End the review activity: End the activity at the scheduled end time or manually when necessary to ensure timely summary and analysis of the review results.

[0038] (6) Event management operations: A complete set of event management tools is provided to allow organizers to adjust the status of events as needed, such as withdrawing, canceling, pausing, or reopening review events, ensuring the flexibility and controllability of event management.

[0039] 3. Review and settlement management

[0040] (1) Set the review group weight w = {w1, w2, w3...}: According to the importance and expertise of different review groups, assign appropriate weights to each group. For example, for a patent review involving high specialization, the weight of industry experts may be set higher. Each type can be assigned a percentage weight, requiring the sum of the weights of all groups to be 100%:

[0041] Final score = ∑(group score × group weight)

[0042] (2) Completion of evaluation results. After the evaluation data is collected, the system will automatically calculate the total score, average score and other statistical indicators for each evaluation object. These data will be displayed on the Completion Workbench page for further analysis and review by the organizer.

[0043] Specifically, Figure 4 Shown is a schematic diagram of the summary of the evaluation results of the present invention, and the summary workbench page includes the evaluation content weights and total scores, average scores, and operations of the evaluation objects.

[0044] 4. User data acquisition

[0045] (1) Users log in and fill in relevant information on the login interface: When participants access the review system, they need to enter their detailed information through the login interface, which may include name, occupation, contact information, etc. This helps ensure that the respondents to the review are professionals or target groups that meet the requirements.

[0046] (2) Extract data from the government information corresponding to the target users and establish a keyword set {u1, u2, u3, ..., u N}, where N represents the number of users

[0047] 5. Ranking query statistics

[0048] (1) Review object ranking query

[0049] 1) Calculate the total score SUM, average score AVE, etc. of each review object by the target user group, and display the number of respondents in each rating range. These data can help understand the popularity of different review objects among the audience and the potential room for improvement. The following formula is the calculation formula for the total score and average score:

[0050]

[0051] Among them, s represents the rating of a review object given by user u.

[0052] 2) Supports export of ranking data. Rankings can be arranged and displayed according to different dimensions, such as total score ranking, average score ranking, and can also be displayed by querying rankings from high to low or from low to high.

[0053] Specifically, the review object ranking query display interface is as follows: Figure 5 As shown in the figure, the evaluation objects are ranked from high to low based on the average score. (2) Graphical display of evaluation object ranking: In order to more intuitively display the evaluation results, the system will provide charts and visualization tools, such as bar charts and line charts, to show the score trends and rankings of different evaluation objects. These graphical data representation methods can help decision makers quickly understand and compare the performance of different options.

[0054] Specifically, the bar chart display interface of the review object ranking is as follows: Figure 6 As shown, the review objects are ranked from high to low by average score.

[0055] The above contents are merely examples and explanations of the concept of the present invention. Those skilled in the art may make various modifications or additions to the specific embodiments described or replace them in a similar manner. As long as they do not deviate from the concept of the invention or exceed the scope defined by the present invention, they shall all fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A government affairs review system supporting flexible customization of questionnaires, comprising the following steps: 1) Review template management: 1.1) Determine the target audience: Identify and define the intended audience or stakeholders and make it clear who you want to get feedback from. For example, for a new industrial machine design, the target audience may include engineers, maintenance personnel, production managers, and industry consultants. Identifying these groups is to ensure that the questionnaire design can collect valuable feedback from all relevant perspectives; 1.2) Design the questionnaire structure: decide what form the questionnaire will take, such as multiple choice questions, fill-in-the-blank questions, rating scales or open-ended questions, specifically the scoring system and style of the selection and evaluation; 1.3) Formulate questions: Design specific questions to get the information you need. Make sure the questions are clear and specific. Each question should be directly related to a specific aspect of a topic, such as the innovation of the technology, market potential, or ease of operation. Through clear questions, you can effectively obtain in-depth insights into these key areas. 1.4) Coverage of key areas: Ensure that the questionnaire covers all key areas and business considerations. This means including questions related to technical performance, cost-effectiveness, user-friendliness and market acceptance to ensure comprehensive feedback is collected; 1.5) Use professional terminology: Use professional terminology in the industry to ensure that respondents understand the questions correctly, while demonstrating the professionalism and rigor of the questionnaire, improving the credibility of the questionnaire and ensuring the quality of feedback; 1.6) Set evaluation level: Customize the evaluation level EL = {EL1, EL2, EL3...} and the corresponding evaluation score ES = {ES1, ES2, ES3...}; 1.7) Template management operations: The design of review templates is an iterative process that may require multiple modifications and optimizations. Providing a mechanism to support operations such as viewing, modifying, deleting, and reusing templates can ensure that the templates always meet the review requirements and can adapt to different review environments and audiences; 2) Review activity management: 2.1) Open the template in step 1) to create a review activity, fill in the title of the review activity, the organizer, select the review template to be used for this activity, select the review type, select the review object, set the start time of the review activity, describe the review items, select the review group, set review restrictions, add attachments, etc.; 2.2) Announcement of review activities: After ensuring that all information is accurate, announce the review activities through formal channels (such as email, official announcements or professional social platforms). The information published should include key information such as a detailed description of the activity, how to participate, review criteria and time nodes; 2.3) Start the review activity: Set the start and end time of the review activity, i.e. T b and T b ', the system automatically starts and ends; in addition, the button can be manually clicked to control the start and end time of the review, so that activities can be carried out flexibly in advance; 2.4) SMS notification to the review group. After the review activity is started, you can send SMS to the group members participating in the review to inform them of the relevant operations and precautions for the review. Different types of group members can edit and send different SMS contents, and send SMS contents in a targeted manner; 2.5) End the review activity: End the activity at the scheduled end time or manually when necessary to ensure timely summary and analysis of the review results; 2.6) Event management operations: Provide a complete set of event management tools, allowing organizers to adjust the status of events as needed, such as withdrawing, canceling, suspending or reopening review activities, ensuring flexibility and controllability of event management; 3) Review and settlement management: 3.1) Set the review group weight w = {w1, w2, w3...}: According to the importance and expertise of different review groups, assign appropriate weights to each group. For example, for a patent review involving high specialization, the weight of industry experts may be set higher. Each type can be assigned a percentage weight, requiring the sum of the weights of all groups to be 100%: Final score = ∑ (group score × group weight); 3.2) Calculation of evaluation results. After the evaluation data collection is completed, the system will automatically calculate and generate the total score, average score and other statistical indicators for each evaluation object. These data will be displayed on the calculation workbench page for further analysis and review by the organizer; 4) User data acquisition: 4.1) Users log in on the login interface and fill in relevant information: When accessing the review system, participants need to enter their detailed information through the login interface, which may include name, occupation, contact information, etc. This helps to ensure that the responders of the review are qualified professionals or target groups; 4.2) Extract data from the government information corresponding to the target user and establish a keyword set {u1, u2, u3, ..., u N }, where N represents the number of users; 5) Ranking query statistics: 5.1) Review object ranking query: First, calculate the total score SUM, average score AVE, etc. of each review object by the target user group, and display the number of respondents in each rating interval. These data can help understand the popularity of different review objects among the audience and the potential room for improvement. The following formula is the calculation formula for the total score and average score: SUM = s1 + s2 + ... + s N , Among them, s represents the score of user u on a certain review object; then the exported ranking of the supporting ranking data can be arranged and displayed according to different dimensions, such as ranking by total score, ranking by average score, and ranking and displaying the results from high to low or from low to high scores; 5.2) Graphical display of evaluation object rankings: In order to display the evaluation results more intuitively, the system will provide charts and visualization tools, such as bar charts, line charts, etc., to show the score trends and rankings of different evaluation objects. These graphical data representation methods can help decision makers quickly understand and compare the performance of different options.

2. A government affairs review system supporting flexible customization of questionnaires as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The review styles described in step 1.2) are divided into two types: "simple style and complex style". The simple style is suitable for situations where the review options have fewer words, while the complex style is suitable for situations where the review options have more words.

3. A government affairs review system supporting flexible customization of questionnaires as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation level described in step 1.6) is generally divided into 5 levels by default: EL = {very good, relatively good, good, average, poor}, ES = {5, 4, 3, 2, 1}.

Images