Method and system for evaluating application operation capability of information system

Abstract

The invention relates to an information system application operation capability assessment method and system, and the method comprises the steps: determining an application operation capability assessment index system composed of a three-level index system, and unifying the capability level of the assessment index according to a set principle; determining the capability level of the evaluation index, setting a scoring coefficient according to the capability level, obtaining an evaluation domain evaluation score according to the evaluation index score, distributing the weight of the evaluation domain in operation capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of the scoring indexes, and obtaining a total score of the operation capability; and applying the operation capability total score, setting an access standard for a newly built information system, realizing access control, and carrying out normalized digital-driven operation capability improvement on the information system in combination with an evaluation function, thereby realizing improvement of the application operation capability of the system in each stage.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of information technology services and management, and in particular to an evaluation method and system for information system application operation capability. Background Art

[0002] In the field of information system operational quality management, accurate evaluation mechanisms are essential to ensure the stability, efficiency, and security of the system. However, existing technologies have several limitations in information system operational quality evaluation.

[0003] The currently disclosed system or equipment operation quality assessment methods mainly conduct operation quality assessment based on the evaluation indicators proposed for systems or terminal equipment in specific business fields. The existing assessment methods and evaluation indicators focus on conducting assessments based on system operation performance data, and lack the operational support capabilities possessed by the system itself.

[0004] In order to improve the operational quality and operational capabilities of information systems, it is necessary to measure the production and operation performance and operational support capabilities of information systems. This helps enterprises to comprehensively and objectively grasp the application and operation capabilities of information systems, carry out refined operation management, guide R&D and operation personnel to identify system capability shortcomings and problem risks, and carry out optimization work in a self-driven manner to achieve digital-driven operational capability improvement. The application operation capability assessment is based on the purpose of ensuring the safe and efficient operation of information systems, and conducts a comprehensive and integrated assessment of the operational quality and capabilities of information systems based on the operational performance, production environment, installation configuration and other information of the information system.

[0005] At present, there is no complete indicator system for the evaluation of information system application operation capabilities, and there is a lack of unified "metric standards", making it difficult to implement standardized and quantifiable evaluation of information system application operation capabilities. There is a lack of "performance management" for the operation quality and capabilities of information systems, and the capability shortcomings and risk issues of information systems cannot be paid attention to and effectively managed in a timely manner. Existing technologies focus on conducting a one-time evaluation of the application operation capabilities of information systems, and do not combine the evaluation work with the system's full life cycle management activities to form a mechanism for continuous improvement. Summary of the invention

[0006] In order to address the deficiencies of the prior art, the present invention realizes the establishment of a "metric standard" for the evaluation of the application operation capability of the information system, extracts indicators based on regulatory requirements, and constructs a comprehensive and universal evaluation model, covering the fields of operation quality, efficiency, reliability, maintainability, and security, and can supplement indicators and optimize models from new technologies and operational practices. This evaluation method is applied to the management of the entire life cycle of the system. In the development and testing phase, there is a "Capability Improvement Standard Guide"; in the system commissioning phase, an application operation capability assessment is conducted before the new system goes online to strengthen access control; in the production and operation phase, the "operational state" system is routinely evaluated based on production data, and through ranking and comparison, shortcomings and risks are identified, optimization is guided, and a PDCA cycle of R&D, operation, evaluation, and improvement is formed to promote the continuous improvement of the system's application operation capability.

[0007] To achieve the above objectives, the technical solutions adopted by the present invention include:

[0008] An evaluation method for information system application operation capability, characterized by comprising:

[0009] Determine the application operation capability evaluation indicator system consisting of a three-level indicator system, and unify the capability levels of the evaluation indicators according to the set principles;

[0010] Determine the capability level of the evaluation indicator, set the scoring coefficient according to the capability level, and then obtain the evaluation domain score according to the evaluation indicator score, and assign the evaluation domain weight in the operational capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of scoring indicators to obtain the total operational capability score;

[0011] The total operational capability score is used to set access standards for newly built information systems to implement access control, and the assessment capabilities are combined to conduct regular digital-driven operational capability improvements for the information systems.

[0012] Furthermore, in the application operation capability evaluation index system, the first-level index is the evaluation domain, including operation quality, operation efficiency, reliability, maintainability, and security; the second-level index is the evaluation subdomain, which is a subdivided subdomain of the evaluation domain; the third-level index is the evaluation indicator, which proposes evaluation indicators and evaluation standards for the evaluation subdomain that can reflect its capabilities.

[0013] Specifically, the evaluation subdomain is a further subdivision of the evaluation content under the evaluation field. It is the foothold for conducting field evaluation and the embodiment of the system's capabilities in a specific field. It plays a connecting role in the design of the evaluation system. It should cover and reflect the core capabilities of the evaluation field, and further propose specific and implementable evaluation indicators.

[0014] Furthermore, the ability levels of the evaluation indicators are unified according to the set principles, including dividing the ability levels into levels as needed, wherein the evaluation indicators are proposed according to the system norms, the evaluation standards of the evaluation indicators are consistent with the system norms, the evaluation indicators that violate the mandatory principles are rated as the initial level, those that violate the non-mandatory principles or do not fully comply with the system norms are rated as the control level, and the rest are rated with scoring weights according to the set levels.

[0015] Furthermore, the calculation formula for obtaining the total operational capability score is:

[0016]

[0017] The evaluation domain score range is [0-100]. If the score exceeds 100 points, it will be calculated as 100 points. If the score is less than 0 points, it will be calculated as 0 points.

[0018]

[0019] Where n is the number of evaluation indicators, and the scoring indicator deduction value = scoring indicator score * (1-scoring coefficient).

[0020] Furthermore, the combination of the evaluation capability to improve the operational capability of the information system in a normalized digitally driven manner includes: the evaluation administrator updating and maintaining the evaluation indicators;

[0021] The data obtained from the operational capability evaluation index system is displayed, including providing evaluation result query, information system evaluation ranking, and information system evaluation report, supporting development and operation and maintenance personnel to analyze and view the evaluation results online.

[0022] Furthermore, the combination of the evaluation capability to improve the operational capability of the information system in a normalized digitally driven manner also includes providing data collection, wherein:

[0023] For evaluation indicators supported by operational data, the tool interface is called to automatically query and obtain data, and the evaluation indicator scores are automatically filled in according to the rules;

[0024] For indicators involving subjective evaluation, an evaluation page is provided to support operation and maintenance personnel to fill in the evaluation results online;

[0025] For evaluation indicators that use special work result data, batch import of data is supported.

[0026] Furthermore, the normalized digital-driven operational capability improvement of the information system in combination with the evaluation capability also includes capability improvement analysis, prompting optimization and improvement directions for evaluation indicators evaluated as "unevaluable", "initial", and "control level", and for evaluation indicators evaluated as "unevaluable" and "initial", mandatory feedback of rectification suggestions for the evaluation indicators when closing the evaluation report;

[0027] Special problem analysis supports vertical analysis from the dimension of evaluation indicators and supports special governance for specific types of problems;

[0028] Provide feedback on issues and suggestions, support the optimization and reconstruction of the evaluation index system and evaluation model based on the evaluation results, and promote the continuous optimization of the evaluation model.

[0029] The present invention also provides an information system application operation capability evaluation system, which is characterized by comprising:

[0030] An evaluation system construction module is used to determine an application operation capability evaluation indicator system consisting of a three-level indicator system, and unify the capability levels of the evaluation indicators according to the set principles;

[0031] An evaluation model setting module is used to determine the capability level of the evaluation indicator, set the scoring coefficient according to the capability level, and then obtain the evaluation domain score according to the evaluation indicator score, and allocate the weight of the evaluation domain in the operational capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of scoring indicators to obtain the total operational capability score;

[0032] The evaluation function system application module is used to apply the total operational capability score to set access standards for newly built information systems, implement access control, and combine the evaluation capabilities to improve the operational capabilities of the information systems in a regular, digitally driven manner.

[0033] The present invention also provides an electronic device, characterized in that it includes a processor and a memory;

[0034] The memory is used to store computer programs;

[0035] The processor is configured to execute the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 by calling a stored computer program.

[0036] The present invention also relates to a computer program product, comprising a computer program and / or instructions, characterized in that the computer program and / or instructions implement any of the methods described in claims 1-7 when executed by a processor.

[0037] The beneficial effects of the present invention are: it realizes the establishment of a "metric standard" for the evaluation of information system application operation capabilities, refines indicators based on regulatory requirements, and constructs a comprehensive and universal evaluation model, covering areas such as operation quality, efficiency, reliability, maintainability, and security, and can supplement indicators and optimize models from new technologies and operational practices. This evaluation method is applied to the management of the entire life cycle of the system. In the development and testing phase, there is a "Capability Improvement Standard Guide"; in the system commissioning phase, an application operation capability assessment is conducted before the new system goes online to strengthen access control; in the production and operation phase, the "operational state" system is routinely evaluated based on production data, and through ranking and comparison, shortcomings and risks are identified, optimization is guided, and a PDCA cycle of R&D, operation, evaluation, and improvement is formed to promote the continuous improvement of system application operation capabilities. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0038] Figure 1 The figure is a flow chart of the method for evaluating the application operation capability of the information system of the present invention.

[0039] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the evaluation system for the application operation capability of the information system of the present invention.

[0040] Figure 3 It is a schematic diagram of the relationship between the three-level indicators of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0041] In order to make the purpose, technical solutions and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are part of the embodiments of the present invention, rather than all of the embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present invention generally described and shown in the drawings here can be arranged and designed in various different configurations. Therefore, the following detailed description of the embodiments of the present invention provided in the drawings is not intended to limit the scope of the claimed invention, but merely represents selected embodiments of the present invention. Based on the embodiments in the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0042] It should be noted that similar reference numerals and letters represent similar items in the following drawings, so once an item is defined in one drawing, it does not need to be further defined and explained in the subsequent drawings. At the same time, in the description of the present invention, the terms "first", "second", etc. are only used to distinguish the description and cannot be understood as indicating or implying relative importance.

[0043] PDCA cycle (also known as the "Plan-Do-Check-Act" cycle, is an iterative management and continuous improvement method. The concept was originally proposed by statistician Walter A. Shewhart and further developed by William Edwards Deming as a key component of Total Quality Management (TQM).

[0044] The first aspect of the present invention relates to a process of steps as follows Figure 1 The assessment method of information system application operation capability shown includes:

[0045] Determine the application operation capability evaluation indicator system consisting of a three-level indicator system, and unify the capability levels of the evaluation indicators according to the set principles;

[0046] Specifically, the evaluation of information system application operation capability refers to the evaluation of the system's non-functional requirements and operation support capabilities from the perspective of application operation. The application operation capability evaluation index system is decomposed layer by layer, consisting of evaluation domain, evaluation subdomain, and evaluation index. The evaluation domain is the first-level index, the evaluation subdomain is the second-level index, and the evaluation index is the third-level index. The relationship between the three is as follows: Figure 3 As shown. The evaluation requirements raised in the application operation activities of the information system are sorted out, refined, classified and merged, and the main evaluation areas of the application operation capability are determined with reference to the standard specifications, including: operation quality, operation efficiency, reliability, maintainability, and security. The main framework of the application operation capability evaluation is formed. Among them, operation quality refers to the evaluation of the production and operation quality, availability, service quality, and user demand satisfaction of the information system. Operational efficiency refers to the evaluation of the investment and effective utilization of equipment resources of the information system. Reliability is the evaluation of the robustness and stability of the information system against disasters, software and hardware failures, and unexpected events.

[0047] Maintainability refers to the evaluation of the operability, standardization and efficiency of the information system in carrying out operational activities (such as commissioning, changes, emergency response, monitoring, etc.). Security refers to the evaluation of the system's information security protection capabilities.

[0048] In addition, operational quality and operational efficiency are based on the production and operation data to evaluate the information system's operational performance, which belongs to the performance layer evaluation. Reliability, maintainability, and security are based on the system's deployment architecture, installation configuration, etc. to evaluate the system's internal operational support capabilities, which belongs to the capability layer evaluation. The capability layer determines and affects the performance of the performance layer, and the performance layer also reflects the capabilities of the capability layer. The combination of the two complements each other and can more comprehensively and objectively reflect the application and operation capabilities of the information system.

[0049] Determine the capability level of the evaluation indicator, set the scoring coefficient according to the capability level, and then obtain the evaluation domain score according to the evaluation indicator score, and assign the evaluation domain weight in the operational capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of scoring indicators to obtain the total operational capability score;

[0050] Specifically, for the defined assessment subdomains, it is necessary to further propose evaluation indicators that can effectively distinguish the ability levels of the ability subdomains and determine the evaluation standards.

[0051] The following principles should be followed when designing and defining evaluation metrics:

[0052] Purposefulness: The evaluation indicators should be core indicators that reflect the capability subdomains, have effective differentiation capabilities, have high standards, and play a leading role. Comprehensiveness: The evaluation indicators can cover all important aspects of the capability subdomains. Operability: The evaluation data is accessible, the evaluation standards are clear, and the conditions are operable. Versatility: The evaluation indicators are widely applicable and support the evaluation of various systems. Openness: Support the improvement, expansion, and withdrawal of indicators.

[0053] The implementation standards for the corresponding capability assessment should also be formulated for the assessment indicators, and the following principles should be followed:

[0054] Standard consistency: Based on the evaluation indicators proposed by the system norms, the evaluation standards must be consistent with the requirements of the system norms. For situations that violate the mandatory principles of the system norms, the assessment is the initial level. For situations that violate the non-mandatory principles or fail to fully comply with the system norms, the assessment is the control level.

[0055] Assessment by the shortest link: With the purpose of fully identifying risks, for multiple assessment results of multiple instances in the system, the assessment should be conducted based on the shortest link (worst result) of the system.

[0056] Based on the above principles, 92 evaluation indicators are further refined and proposed on the basis of 24 evaluation sub-domains as the third-level indicators of the indicator system, thus forming a complete application operation capability evaluation indicator system. The specific contents are shown in Table 1.

[0057] Table 1 Application operation capability evaluation index system

[0058]

[0059]

[0060]

[0061]

[0062] Unified capability level standards: The unified capability level standards for each evaluation indicator are: 0-5 and NA. The specific capability level standards are shown in Table 2:

[0063] Table 2 Capability level classification table

[0064]

[0065] The scoring coefficients are set according to the level of ability, as shown in Table 3:

[0066] Table 3. Corresponding scoring coefficients for capability levels

[0067] Ability level Capability Name Rating coefficient Level 0 Not Evaluable 0 Level 1 Initial level 0 Level 2 Control level 0.5 Level 3 Mature 1 Level 4 Excellent 1.2 Level 5 Excellence 1.5 NA level Not involved 1

[0068] Based on this, we can calculate the deduction value of a single indicator according to the importance level and capability level of the indicator. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0069] Evaluation index deduction value = scoring index score * (1-scoring coefficient), where the initial value of the scoring index score is divided into three levels of high, medium and low according to expert experience, corresponding to different initial scores. As shown in Table 4:

[0070] Table 4 Initial value setting of scoring indicators

[0071] Importance level Indicator Type Score Weight high Core indicators 50 middle Important indicators 20 Low General indicators 10

[0072] For those rated as unevaluable, initial, or control levels, the calculation result is a positive value, which will result in a corresponding deduction of points from the overall score of the evaluation field. For those rated as excellent or outstanding, the calculation result is a negative value, which will result in an addition of points to the overall score of the evaluation field.

[0073] The full score of a single evaluation domain is 100 points, and the evaluation subdomain is scored using the evaluation index deduction value. The calculation rules are as follows:

[0074]

[0075] The evaluation domain score range is [0-100]. In special cases, if the score exceeds 100 points, it will be calculated as 100 points, and if the score is less than 0 points, it will be calculated as 0 points.

[0076] Based on the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of evaluation indicators, the weight of the evaluation domain in the overall system evaluation is assigned, as shown in Table 5:

[0077] Table 5 Evaluation domain setting weights

[0078] Evaluation domain Evaluation weight Operational quality 25％ Operational efficiency 10％ reliability 25％ Easy to maintain 30％ Security 10％

[0079] The weights of the evaluation subdomains are set as shown in Figure 6:

[0080] Table 6 Evaluation subdomain weight setting example

[0081]

[0082] The overall score of the system is calculated by weighted average of the scores in each evaluation area. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0083]

[0084] The total operational capability score is used to set access standards for newly built information systems, implement access control, and conduct regular digital-driven operational capability improvements on the information systems.

[0085] Specifically, the evaluation function is implemented based on the evaluation model design, supporting the automatic collection of system production and operation data, and implementing regular evaluation of the application and operation capabilities of the information system. The main evaluation capabilities are: indicator management, data collection, evaluation calculation, result display, and management analysis.

[0086] Indicator management provides online viewing of indicator systems and evaluation models. Ordinary users can filter and view evaluation indicators and evaluation model content online. Indicator maintenance functions are provided to support evaluation administrators to update and maintain evaluation indicators.

[0087] Data collection provides data access functions such as tool platform docking, manual interactive evaluation, and batch data import, and supports multiple forms of data acquisition methods. For evaluation indicators supported by operational data (such as transaction quality, event tickets, etc.), the tool interface is called to automatically query and obtain data, and the evaluation values ​​of relevant indicators are automatically filled in according to the rules. For indicators involving subjective evaluation (such as current limiting, circuit breakers, etc.), an evaluation page is provided to support operation and maintenance personnel to fill in the evaluation results online. For evaluation indicators that use special work result data (such as software and hardware EOS statistics, etc.), batch import of data is supported.

[0088] The evaluation calculation is based on the acquired evaluation data, and the scoring calculation is performed according to the calculation rules of the evaluation model to output an evaluation report.

[0089] Results display provides evaluation result query, system evaluation ranking, system evaluation report, and overall evaluation report, supporting development and operation and maintenance personnel to analyze and view evaluation results online.

[0090] Management analysis provides the capability improvement analysis function, and provides optimization and improvement directions for evaluation results that are evaluated as "unevaluable", "initial", and "control level". For evaluation indicators that are evaluated as "unevaluable" and "initial", when closing the evaluation report, it is mandatory to provide rectification suggestions for the indicator feedback.

[0091] It provides special problem analysis function, supports vertical analysis from the indicator dimension, and supports special governance for specific types of problems.

[0092] Provides problem suggestion feedback function, supports optimization and reconstruction suggestions for evaluation results, feedback indicator system and evaluation model, and promotes continuous optimization of evaluation model.

[0093] Regularly evaluate the application and operation capabilities of operational systems (i.e., information systems that have passed the access standards and have been put into use). Identify the capability shortcomings and problem risks of information systems through capability ranking and horizontal comparison, and guide system operation and R&D personnel to carry out optimization work in a self-driven manner. Form a PDCA cycle of full life cycle management of R&D, operation, evaluation, and improvement. Quantitatively evaluate the application and operation capabilities of the system based on production and operation data, and generate an evaluation report. Identify the problem risks of the system, and track and manage the problems through the process for indicators evaluated as "unevaluable" and "initial" (violating the mandatory principles of institutional norms, or there are business continuity risks). New systems cannot be evaluated from the performance level (operation quality, operation efficiency) due to the lack of production and operation data. Access evaluation is conducted on new systems, and they are evaluated from the capability level (reliability, maintainability, and security). Set compliance lines for different types of systems, and those that do not meet the standards will not be allowed to enter. For evaluation indicators evaluated as "initial", optimization and improvement or reasonable reasons need to be explained. See the data shown in Table 7 for details:

[0094] Table 7 Admission standards for initial information systems

[0095] System Level A+ A B C reliability 80 70 65 60 Easy to maintain 80 70 65 60 Security 80 70 65 60

[0096] Another aspect of the present invention also relates to an evaluation system for information system application operation capability, the structure of which is as follows: Figure 2 As shown, including:

[0097] An evaluation system construction module is used to determine an operational capability evaluation indicator system consisting of a three-level indicator system and unify the capability levels of the evaluation indicators according to the set principles;

[0098] Among them, based on the areas of concern of application operation activities, the application operation capability evaluation index system is divided into five major evaluation areas, namely: reliability, maintainability, security, operation quality, and operation efficiency. As the first-level evaluation indicators, they constitute the main framework of the evaluation system. Figure 3 As shown,

[0099] An evaluation model setting module is used to determine the capability level of the evaluation indicator, set the scoring coefficient according to the capability level, and then obtain the evaluation domain score according to the evaluation indicator score, and allocate the weight of the evaluation domain in the operational capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of scoring indicators to obtain the total operational capability score;

[0100] The evaluation system application module is used to apply the total operational capability score to set access standards for newly built information systems, implement access control, and conduct regular digital-driven operational capability improvement for the information systems.

[0101] By using this system, the above-mentioned operation processing method can be executed and the corresponding technical effects can be achieved.

[0102] An embodiment of the present invention also provides an electronic device for executing the above method. As an implementation device of the method, the electronic device has at least a processor and a memory, and in particular, the memory stores data and related computer programs required for executing the method, and the processor calls the data and programs in the memory to execute all steps of the implementation method and obtains the corresponding technical effect.

[0103] Preferably, the electronic device may include a bus architecture, the bus may include any number of interconnected buses and bridges, and the bus will include various circuits linked together by one or more processors and memories. The bus may also link together various other circuits such as peripherals, voltage regulators, and power management circuits, which are all well known in the art and are therefore not further described herein. The bus interface provides an interface between the bus and the receiver and transmitter. The receiver and transmitter may be the same component, i.e., a transceiver, providing a unit for communicating with various other systems over a transmission medium. The processor is responsible for managing the bus and general processing, while the memory may be used to store data used by the processor when performing operations.

[0104] In addition, the electronic device may further include components such as a communication module, an input unit, an audio processor, a display, and a power supply. The processor (or controller, operation control) used may include a microprocessor or other processor device and / or a logic device, which receives input and controls the operation of various components of the electronic device; the memory may be one or more of a cache, a flash memory, a hard drive, a removable medium, a volatile memory, a non-volatile memory, or other suitable devices, which may store the above-mentioned related data information, and may also store a program for executing related information, and the processor may execute the program stored in the memory to realize information storage or processing, etc.; the input unit is used to provide input to the processor, for example, it may be a key or a touch input device; the power supply is used to provide power to the electronic device; the display is used to display display objects such as images and text, for example, it may be an LCD display. The communication module is a transmitter / receiver that sends and receives signals via an antenna. The communication module (transmitter / receiver) is coupled to the processor to provide input signals and receive output signals, which may be the same as the case of a conventional mobile communication terminal. Based on different communication technologies, multiple communication modules may be provided in the same electronic device, such as a cellular network module, a Bluetooth module and / or a wireless local area network module, etc. The communication module (transmitter / receiver) is also coupled to a speaker and a microphone via an audio processor to provide an audio output via the speaker and receive an audio input from the microphone, thereby realizing a common telecommunication function. The audio processor may include any suitable buffer, decoder, amplifier, etc. In addition, the audio processor is also coupled to a central processor, so that recording can be performed on the machine through the microphone, and the sound stored on the machine can be played through the speaker.

[0105] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that embodiments of the present invention may be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, the present invention may take the form of a complete hardware embodiment, a complete software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware. Moreover, the present invention may take the form of a computer program product implemented on one or more computer-usable storage media (including but not limited to disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0106] The present invention is described with reference to flowcharts and / or block diagrams of methods, devices (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the present invention. It should be understood that each process and / or block in the flowchart and / or block diagram, as well as the combination of processes and / or blocks in the flowchart and / or block diagram, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, an embedded processor, or other programmable data processing device to produce a machine, so that the instructions executed by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device generate instructions for implementing the processes in the flowchart and / or block diagram. Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A system that specifies the functions of a box or multiple boxes.

[0107] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to work in a specific manner, so that the instructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce a product including an instruction system, which is implemented in the process Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A function specified in one or more boxes.

[0108] These computer program instructions can also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing device so that a series of operating steps are executed on the computer or other programmable device to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing instructions for implementing the process. Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The steps of the functions specified in a box or multiple boxes. Although the preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described, those skilled in the art may make additional changes and modifications to these embodiments once they know the basic creative concept. Therefore, the attached claims are intended to be interpreted as including the preferred embodiments and all changes and modifications that fall within the scope of the present invention.

[0109] The above is only a preferred specific embodiment of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any changes or substitutions that can be easily thought of by a person skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the application operation capability of an information system, characterized in that: include: Determine the application operation capability evaluation indicator system consisting of a three-level indicator system, and unify the capability levels of the evaluation indicators according to the set principles; Determine the capability level of the evaluation indicator, set the scoring coefficient according to the capability level, and then obtain the evaluation domain score according to the evaluation indicator score, and assign the weight of the evaluation domain in the application operation capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of scoring indicators to obtain the total operation capability score; The total operational capability score is used to set access standards for newly built information systems to implement access control, and the evaluation function is combined to conduct regular digital-driven operational capability improvement for the information systems.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The application operation capability evaluation index system includes the first-level indicators as evaluation domains, including operation quality, operation efficiency, reliability, maintainability, and security; the second-level indicators as evaluation subdomains, which are subdivided subdomains of the evaluation domains; and the third-level indicators as evaluation indicators, which propose evaluation indicators and evaluation standards for evaluation subdomains that can reflect their capabilities.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that The ability levels of the evaluation indicators are unified according to the set principles, including dividing the ability levels into levels as needed, wherein the evaluation indicators are proposed according to the system specifications, the evaluation standards of the evaluation indicators are consistent with the system specifications, the evaluation indicators that violate the mandatory principles are rated as the initial level, those that violate the non-mandatory principles or do not fully comply with the system specifications are rated as the control level, and the rest are rated with scoring weights according to the set levels.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The calculation formula for obtaining the total operational capability score is: The evaluation domain score range is [0-100]. If the score exceeds 100 points, it will be calculated as 100 points. If the score is less than 0 points, it will be calculated as 0 points. Where n is the number of evaluation indicators, and the scoring indicator deduction value = scoring indicator score * (1-scoring coefficient).

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The improvement of the operational capability of the information system through normalized digital drive in combination with the evaluation function includes: the evaluation administrator updates and maintains the evaluation indicators; The data obtained from the application operation capability evaluation index system is displayed, including providing evaluation result query, information system evaluation ranking, and information system evaluation report, supporting development and operation and maintenance personnel to analyze and view the evaluation results online.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that The combination of the evaluation function to improve the operational capability of the information system through normalized digital drive also includes providing data collection, wherein: For evaluation indicators supported by operational data, the tool interface is called to automatically query and obtain data, and the evaluation indicator scores are automatically filled in according to the rules; For evaluation indicators involving subjective evaluation, an evaluation page is provided to support operation and maintenance personnel to fill in the evaluation results online; For evaluation indicators that use special work result data, batch import of data is supported.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that The combination of the evaluation function to improve the operational capability of the information system through normalized digital drive also includes: Capacity improvement analysis: for evaluation indicators that are evaluated as "unevaluable", "initial", and "control level", optimization and improvement directions are suggested. For evaluation indicators that are evaluated as "unevaluable" and "initial", feedback on rectification suggestions for the evaluation indicators is mandatory when the evaluation report is closed; Special problem analysis supports vertical analysis from the dimension of evaluation indicators and supports special governance for specific types of problems; Provide feedback on issues and suggestions, support the optimization and reconstruction of the evaluation index system and evaluation model based on the evaluation results, and promote the continuous optimization of the evaluation model.

8. An evaluation system for information system application operation capability, comprising: An evaluation system construction module is used to determine an application operation capability evaluation indicator system consisting of a three-level indicator system, and unify the capability levels of the evaluation indicators according to the set principles; An evaluation model setting module is used to determine the capability level of the evaluation indicator, set the scoring coefficient according to the capability level, and then obtain the evaluation domain score according to the evaluation indicator score, and allocate the weight of the evaluation domain in the operational capability evaluation according to the importance of the evaluation domain and the number of scoring indicators to obtain the total operational capability score; The evaluation function system application module is used to apply the total operational capability score to set access standards for newly built information systems, implement access control, and combine the evaluation capabilities to improve the operational capabilities of the information systems in a regular, digitally driven manner.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that: including a processor and a memory; The memory is used to store computer programs; The processor is configured to execute the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 by calling a stored computer program.

10. A computer program product comprising a computer program and / or instructions, characterized in that: When the computer program and / or the instructions are executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 are implemented.

Images