Dynamic auditor distribution method

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of administrative approval systems, in particular to a dynamic auditor allocation method, which comprises the following steps: S1, establishing an auditor database and a task tag database; s2, adding a corresponding task type label when initiating an auditing task; s3, when the auditing task reaches a predetermined auditor, judging the availability of the predetermined auditor, if the predetermined auditor is available, maintaining the original auditing process, and if the predetermined auditor is unavailable, entering the step S4; s4, screening the auditor from the auditor database as an alternative auditor; step S5, calculating a priority score of each alternative auditor; and S6, selecting the alternative auditor with the highest priority score to replace the predetermined auditor. The problem that in the prior art, process approval mostly adopts a fixed auditor mode, and when an auditor cannot fulfill responsibilities or cannot fulfill the responsibilities in time, the whole approval process may be shelved or delayed is solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of administrative examination and approval systems, and in particular to a method for allocating dynamic reviewers. Background Art

[0002] In many companies and organizations, all work and tasks need to go through multiple levels of approval. The traditional approval process usually designates certain people as reviewers. This results in the entire approval process being shelved or delayed when these reviewers are unable to perform their duties or are unable to perform their duties in a timely manner due to personal matters, such as vacation, business trip, temporary inability to review, or other factors. Therefore, a system is needed that can dynamically adjust the review process based on the actual availability of the reviewer. Summary of the invention

[0003] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a dynamic reviewer allocation method to solve the problem in the prior art that process approval mostly adopts a fixed reviewer method. When the reviewer is unable to perform his duties or is unable to perform his duties in a timely manner, the entire approval process may be shelved or delayed.

[0004] In order to solve the above technical problems, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0005] A dynamic auditor allocation method includes the following steps: step S1, establishing an auditor database and a task label database; step S2, when initiating an audit task, adding a corresponding task type label from the task label database; step S3, when the audit task reaches a predetermined auditor, judging the availability of the predetermined auditor through a multi-source fusion module, if the predetermined auditor is available, maintaining the original audit process, and the predetermined auditor performs the audit; if the predetermined auditor is not available, entering step S4; step S4, based on the task type label of the current audit task, screening auditors from the auditor database that match the task type label and have a load rate of <70% as candidate auditors; step S5, for the candidate auditors screened in step S4, using the formula P=w 1 *S+w 2 *(1−L)+w 3 *A calculates the priority score of each candidate auditor, where S is the skill matching degree, L is the real-time load rate, A is the historical accuracy rate, and w 1 、w 2 、w 3 is the weight coefficient; step S6, selecting the candidate auditor with the highest priority score to replace the scheduled auditor.

[0006] A further technical solution is that the multi-source fusion module includes a heartbeat monitoring unit, a load calculation unit and a positioning unit. The heartbeat monitoring unit uses the UDP protocol to send a heartbeat packet every 5 minutes, and is judged to be offline if there is no response for 5 consecutive times; the load calculation unit is used to calculate the load rate of the auditor; the positioning unit is used to determine the location of the auditor; when the scheduled auditor meets one or more of the unavailable conditions, the scheduled auditor is judged to be unavailable, and the unavailable conditions include that the scheduled auditor is offline, the load rate of the scheduled auditor is greater than 95%, and the location of the scheduled auditor deviates from the preset location by more than 1 kilometer.

[0007] A further technical solution is that the positioning unit adopts GPS positioning or Beidou positioning.

[0008] A further technical solution is that the auditor database includes the auditor's name, position, contact information, skill parameter set and location information, wherein the skill parameter set includes personnel professional field labels, skill level labels, historical audit accuracy labels, online status labels, and current load rate labels; the task type labels include task professional field labels and task level labels; in step S4, when screening auditors that match the task type labels from the auditor database, the task professional field labels are matched with the personnel professional field labels, and the skill level labels are matched with the task level labels.

[0009] A further technical solution is that the auditor's real-time load rate L is calculated using the formula, L=Q / (V*T+ε), where V is the auditor's average processing rate, T is the auditor's window duration, and ε is a smoothing coefficient to prevent division by zero errors, with a default value of 0.01.

[0010] A further technical solution is that the calculation formula for the auditor's skill matching degree S in step S5 is S=α*E+β*Z+γ*G, where E is the auditor's professional background score, Z is the auditor's skill level score, G is the auditor's work experience score, α, β, γ are weight coefficients, and the specific values ​​of α, β, γ are dynamically adjusted according to the average load rate of all auditors.

[0011] A further technical solution is that the professional field label of the personnel is (J 1 ·d 1 , J 2 ·d 2 , J 3 ·d 3 ), where J 1 , J 2 , J 3 There are three different professional fields, namely field 1, field 2, and field 3. 1 d 2 d 3Corresponding to the professional background scoring coefficients of the three fields, d 1 d 2 d 3 The value range is 0.1-0.9; the task professional field label is (J 4 ·d 4 , J 5 ·d 5 , J 6 ·d 6 ), where J 4 , J 5 , J 6 There are three different professional fields, namely field 3, field 4, and field 5. 4 d 5 d 6 Corresponding to the professional background scoring coefficients of the three fields, d 4 d 5 d 6 The value range is 0.1-0.9; the auditor's professional background score E is calculated using E=d 1 *d 4 *M 1 +d 2 *d 5 *M 2 +d 3 *d 6 *M 3 , if J 1 With J 4 The same, then M 1 =1, otherwise M 1 =0; if J 2 With J 5 The same, then M 2 =1, otherwise M 2 =0; if J 3 With J 6 The same, then M 3 =1, otherwise M 3 =0.

[0012] A further technical solution is to label the skill level as Q 1 , Q 1 The range is 0-10, and the task level label is Q 2 , Q 2 The range is an integer from 0 to 10. The auditor's skill level score Z is calculated as Z=Q 1 -Q 2 +D, where D is any value between 0.01 and 0.99.

[0013] Assume there are n auditors in total, and the load rate of each auditor is , then the average load rate of all auditors is ; α=4*K 1 ,β=3*K 2 ,γ=3*K 3 , .

[0014] w 1 >w 2 >w 3 , and w 1 +w 2 +w 3 =1.

[0015] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are: 1. With the help of the multi-source fusion module, the availability of the scheduled auditor can be determined in time, so that when the scheduled auditor is unavailable, the auditor can be dynamically adjusted in time to perform the corresponding audit, thereby avoiding the situation where the work task is stuck in the process; 2. The selected candidate auditors are determined by priority scores, and the best auditor can be selected from the candidate auditors to replace the task audit, thereby improving the accuracy of the task audit and reducing the occurrence of audit errors. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0016] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the process framework of a dynamic reviewer allocation method of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0017] In order to make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the present invention more clearly understood, the present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only used to explain the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0018] Figure 1 An embodiment of the present invention is shown.

[0019] Example:

[0020] A dynamic auditor allocation method includes the following steps: step S1, establishing an auditor database and a task label database; step S2, when initiating an audit task, adding a corresponding task type label from the task label database; step S3, when the audit task reaches a predetermined auditor, judging the availability of the predetermined auditor through a multi-source fusion module, if the predetermined auditor is available, maintaining the original audit process, and the predetermined auditor performs the audit; if the predetermined auditor is not available, entering step S4; step S4, based on the task type label of the current audit task, screening auditors from the auditor database that match the task type label and have a load rate of <70% as candidate auditors; step S5, for the candidate auditors screened in step S4, using the formula P=w 1 *S+w2 *(1−L)+w 3 *A calculates the priority score of each candidate auditor, where S is the skill matching degree, L is the real-time load rate, A is the historical accuracy rate, and w 1 、w 2 、w 3 is the weight coefficient; step S6, selecting the candidate auditor with the highest priority score to replace the scheduled auditor.

[0021] The multi-source fusion module includes a heartbeat monitoring unit, a load calculation unit and a positioning unit. The heartbeat monitoring unit uses the UDP protocol to send a heartbeat packet every 5 minutes. If there is no response for 5 consecutive times, it is judged to be offline. Through this heartbeat detection mechanism based on the UDP protocol, the system can effectively monitor the online status of the auditor and provide accurate status information for the dynamic auditor allocation method. The load calculation unit is used to calculate the auditor's load rate. By calculating the load rate of each auditor in real time, it is convenient to screen the candidate auditors. The positioning unit is used to determine the auditor's location. When the scheduled auditor meets one or more of the unavailable conditions, the scheduled auditor is judged to be unavailable. The unavailable conditions include that the scheduled auditor is offline, the scheduled auditor's load rate is greater than 95%, and the scheduled auditor's location deviates from the preset location by more than 1 km. The auditor's load rate is greater than 95%, which means that the auditor's workload rate is too high and the current audit task cannot be processed quickly. Subsequent audit tasks will be postponed.

[0022] The positioning unit uses GPS positioning or Beidou positioning. The location of the auditor is determined by collecting the location information of the auditor's mobile phone during working hours. If the auditor is temporarily out and the distance from the preset location, that is, the office location, is more than 1 km, it means that the auditor cannot quickly return to handle the audit task.

[0023] The auditor database includes the auditor's name, position, contact information, skill parameter set and location information, wherein the skill parameter set includes personnel professional field labels, skill level labels, historical audit accuracy labels, online status labels, and current load rate labels; the task type labels include task professional field labels and task level labels; in step S4, when screening auditors that match the task type labels from the auditor database, the task professional field labels are matched with the personnel professional field labels, and the skill level labels are matched with the task level labels.

[0024] The calculation formula of the auditor's real-time load rate L is L=Q / (V*T+ε), where V is the auditor's average processing rate, T is the auditor's window duration, and ε is the smoothing coefficient to prevent zero division errors. The default value is 0.01. The window duration refers to a fixed time range used to count and calculate related data. In the dynamic auditor allocation method, it is an important parameter in the sliding window mechanism. For example, when calculating the auditor's load rate, a specific time length is set as the window duration. During this time period, the auditor's task processing status is collected and analyzed to measure its workload status. For example, the window duration is set to 15 minutes. During these 15 minutes, the number of tasks to be reviewed by auditor A is 60, and its task processing rate is 4 / minute. Then according to the load rate calculation formula, the load rate of auditor A can be calculated as 60 / (4×15)=1.0. This load rate data can help the system determine the workload of auditor A and make reasonable task allocation decisions.

[0025] The calculation formula for the auditor's skill matching degree S in step S5 is S=α*E+β*Z+γ*G, where E is the auditor's professional background score, Z is the auditor's skill level score, G is the auditor's work experience score, α, β, γ are weight coefficients, and the specific values ​​of α, β, γ are dynamically adjusted according to the average load rate of all auditors.

[0026] Personnel professional field label is (J 1 ·d 1 , J 2 ·d 2 , J 3 ·d 3 ), where J 1 , J 2 , J 3 There are three different professional fields, namely field 1, field 2, and field 3. 1 d 2 d 3 Corresponding to the professional background scoring coefficients of the three fields, d 1 d 2 d 3 The value range is 0.1-0.9; the task professional field label is (J 4 ·d 4 , J 5 ·d 5 , J 6 ·d 6 ), where J 4 , J 5 , J 6 There are three different professional fields, namely field 3, field 4, and field 5. 4 d 5 d6 Corresponding to the professional background scoring coefficients of the three fields, d 4 d 5 d 6 The value range is 0.1-0.9; the auditor's professional background score E is calculated using E=d 1 *d 4 *M 1 +d 2 *d 5 *M 2 +d 3 *d6*M3, if J1 is the same as J4, then M1=1, otherwise M1=0; if J2 is the same as J5, then M2=1, otherwise M2=0; if J3 is the same as J6, then M3=1, otherwise M3=0. Matrix convolution operation is used to calculate the task-auditor matching degree. Taking a simple vector dot product as an example, assuming that the professional field label matrix of auditor B is (law·0.7, finance·0.9, technology·0.2), and the task label is (law·0.2, finance·0.7, technology·0.1), then the matching score = 0.7×0.2×1+ 0.9×0.7×1 + 0.2×0.1 ×1 = 0.73. This method can quickly derive a quantitative professional background score based on the fit between the auditor's professional skills and the skills required for the task.

[0027] Skill level label is Q 1 , Q 1 The range is 0-10, and the task level label is Q 2 , Q 2 The range is an integer from 0 to 10. The auditor's skill level score Z is calculated as Z=Q 1 -Q 2 +D, where D is any value between 0.01 and 0.99. 1 and Q 2 The difference between the auditor's skill level and the skill level required for the audit task can be quickly obtained. The higher the difference, the higher the auditor's skill level score. By setting D as a score compensation, it is possible to avoid 0 points for the same level.

[0028] Assume there are n auditors in total, and the load rate of each auditor is , then the average load rate of all auditors is ; α=4*K 1 ,β=3*K 2 ,γ=3*K 3 , This calculation method can dynamically adjust the weights of various parameters when calculating the skill matching degree S according to the average load rate of all auditors. When the average load rate is lower, K1 The larger the value, the greater the weight of the professional background score when calculating the skill matching degree S, and the greater the impact on the final result. This depends on the fact that when the load rate is low, more emphasis is placed on the professional background score, which is conducive to auditors with more suitable professional backgrounds becoming the final candidate auditors. When the load rate is high, more emphasis is placed on the skill level score and work experience score, which will test the auditor's skills and experience more when the workload becomes busy, which is conducive to making correct judgments.

[0029] w 1 >w 2 >w 3 , and w 1 +w 2 +w 3 =1.

[0030] Although the present invention is described herein with reference to a number of illustrative embodiments of the present invention, it will be appreciated that those skilled in the art may devise many other modifications and implementations that fall within the scope and spirit of the principles disclosed herein. More specifically, within the scope of the present disclosure, drawings, and claims, a variety of variations and modifications may be made to the components and / or layout of the subject combination layout. In addition to the variations and modifications made to the components and / or layout, other uses will also be apparent to those skilled in the art.

Claims

1. A dynamic reviewer allocation method, characterized in that: The method comprises the following steps: step S1, establishing an auditor database and a task label database; step S2, adding a corresponding task type label from the task label database when initiating an audit task; step S3, when the audit task reaches the scheduled auditor, judging the availability of the scheduled auditor through the multi-source fusion module, if the scheduled auditor is available, maintaining the original audit process, and the scheduled auditor performs the audit; if the scheduled auditor is not available, entering step S4; step S4, based on the task type label of the current audit task, screening auditors matching the task type label and with a load rate <70% from the auditor database as candidate auditors; step S5, calculating the priority score of each candidate auditor screened in step S4 through the formula P=w1*S+w2*(1−L)+w3*A, where S is the skill matching degree, L is the real-time load rate, A is the historical accuracy rate, and w1, w2, and w3 are weight coefficients; step S6, selecting the candidate auditor with the highest priority score to replace the scheduled auditor.

2. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 1, characterized in that: The multi-source fusion module includes a heartbeat monitoring unit, a load calculation unit and a positioning unit. The heartbeat monitoring unit uses the UDP protocol to send a heartbeat packet every 5 minutes, and is judged to be offline if there is no response for 5 consecutive times; the load calculation unit is used to calculate the load rate of the auditor; the positioning unit is used to determine the location of the auditor; when the scheduled auditor meets one or more of the unavailable conditions, the scheduled auditor is judged to be unavailable, and the unavailable conditions include that the scheduled auditor is offline, the load rate of the scheduled auditor is greater than 95%, and the location of the scheduled auditor deviates from the preset location by more than 1 kilometer.

3. A dynamic reviewer allocation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The positioning unit adopts GPS positioning or Beidou positioning.

4. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 1, characterized in that: The auditor database includes the auditor's name, position, contact information, skill parameter set and location information, wherein the skill parameter set includes personnel professional field labels, skill level labels, historical audit accuracy labels, online status labels, and current load rate labels; the task type labels include task professional field labels and task level labels; in step S4, when screening auditors that match the task type labels from the auditor database, the task professional field labels are matched with the personnel professional field labels, and the skill level labels are matched with the task level labels.

5. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 4, characterized in that: The calculation formula of the auditor's real-time load rate L is, L=Q / (V*T+ε), where V is the auditor's average processing rate, T is the auditor's window length, and ε is a smoothing coefficient to prevent division by zero errors, with a default value of 0.

01.

6. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 5, characterized in that: The calculation formula for the auditor's skill matching degree S in step S5 is S=α*E+β*Z+γ*G, where E is the auditor's professional background score, Z is the auditor's skill level score, G is the auditor's work experience score, α, β, γ are weight coefficients, and the specific values ​​of α, β, γ are dynamically adjusted according to the average load rate of all auditors.

7. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 6, characterized in that: The professional field labels of the personnel are (J1·d1, J2·d2, J3·d3), where J1, J2, and J3 are three different professional fields, namely field 1, field 2, and field 3, d1, d2, and d3 correspond to the professional background scoring coefficients of the three fields, and the value ranges of d1, d2, and d3 are all 0.1-0.9; the professional field labels of the tasks are (J4·d4, J5·d5, J6·d6), where J4, J5, and J6 are three different professional fields, namely field 3, In field 4 and field 5, d4, d5 and d6 correspond to the professional background scoring coefficients of the three fields respectively. The value ranges of d4, d5 and d6 are all 0.1-0.

9. The calculation method of the auditor's professional background score E is E=d1*d4*M1+d2*d5*M2+d3*d6*M3. If J1 is the same as J4, then M1=1, otherwise M1=0; if J2 is the same as J5, then M2=1, otherwise M2=0; if J3 is the same as J6, then M3=1, otherwise M3=0.

8. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 6, characterized in that: The skill level label is Q1, and the range of Q1 is an integer from 0 to 10. The task level label is Q2, and the range of Q2 is an integer from 0 to 10. The calculation formula for the auditor's skill level score Z is Z=Q1-Q2+D, where D takes any value from 0.01 to 0.

99.

9. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 6, characterized in that: There are n auditors in total, and the load rate of each auditor is ( =1, 2, 3..., ), then the average load rate of all auditors is ; α=4*K1, β=3*K2, γ=3*K3, K1=1- ,K2= / 2,K3= .

10. A method for dynamic reviewer allocation according to claim 1, characterized in that: The w1>w2>w3, and w1+w2+w3=1.

Images