Project evaluation method and device and electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention discloses a project evaluation method and device and electronic equipment. The method comprises the steps that a pre-evaluation index of a software project is acquired, and the pre-evaluation index is used for representing an index for carrying out risk prediction from multiple dimensions before the software project begins to be implemented; inputting the pre-evaluation index into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a first evaluation value; a post-evaluation index of the software project is obtained, and the post-evaluation index is used for representing an index for performing effect evaluation from multiple dimensions after the software project is completed; inputting the post-evaluation index into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a second evaluation value; and determining a total score of the software project according to the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value. According to the method and the device, the technical problems that the evaluation and feedback of the informatization performance need a large amount of manpower and material resources and the evaluation efficiency of the informatization comprehensive performance is low in the prior art are solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of data processing, and in particular, to a project evaluation method, device and electronic equipment. Background Art

[0002] Among the related technologies, common project evaluation methods include understanding the functions of the system through on-site investigation and observation, evaluating business indicators, user satisfaction and other performance through data collection and analysis, understanding the evaluation and feedback of information performance through questionnaire surveys and expert reviews, determining one's own performance level in the industry through comparative analysis, and forming an evaluation report through comprehensive evaluation to promote the further development of information construction.

[0003] There is no mature evaluation technology in the relevant technology that can complete the evaluation of the entire life cycle of informatization work. It is impossible to comprehensively and dynamically evaluate and calculate the effectiveness of informatization construction, operation, use and other links and the results of quantitative informatization work. The evaluation and feedback of informatization performance requires a lot of manpower and material resources. The method of using data collection and analysis, comparative analysis and comprehensive evaluation to form an evaluation report requires comparative processing of a large amount of data, which has the problem of low efficiency of comprehensive informatization performance evaluation.

[0004] To address the above-mentioned problems, no effective solution has been proposed yet. Summary of the invention

[0005] The embodiments of the present application provide a project evaluation method, device and electronic device to at least solve the technical problems in the related technologies that the evaluation and feedback of informationization performance require a lot of manpower and material resources, and the efficiency of comprehensive informationization performance evaluation is low.

[0006] According to one aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a project evaluation method is provided, including: obtaining pre-evaluation indicators of a software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction of the software project from multiple dimensions before implementation; inputting the pre-evaluation indicators into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project, and obtaining a first evaluation value; obtaining post-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the post-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for effect evaluation of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion; inputting the post-evaluation indicators into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project, and obtaining a second evaluation value; and determining a total score of the software project based on the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value.

[0007] Optionally, obtaining the pre-evaluation indicators of the software project includes: obtaining the main business income growth rate of the organization to which the software project belongs within the first preset time period; determining the overall investment change rate based on the main business income growth rate, wherein the overall investment change rate is determined by the department's overall planned investment within the adjacent first preset time period; determining the investment change score based on the overall investment change rate; obtaining the expected investment completion rate of the software project within the first preset time period, wherein the expected investment completion rate is determined by the expected completed account amount and the total budget within the first preset time period; determining the expected investment completion rate score based on the expected investment completion rate; obtaining the expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators of the software project; determining the expected overall demand effectiveness score based on the expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators; obtaining the average post-evaluation score of a single dimension within the second preset time period and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension within the second preset time period; determining the score of the previous post-evaluation result based on the average post-evaluation score of the single dimension and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension; determining the pre-evaluation indicators based on the investment change score, the expected investment completion rate score, the expected overall demand effectiveness score and the previous post-evaluation result score.

[0008] Optionally, the pre-evaluation indicators are input into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a first evaluation value, including: obtaining a first weight corresponding to the investment change score, a second weight corresponding to the expected investment completion rate score, a third weight corresponding to the expected overall demand effectiveness score, and a fourth weight corresponding to the pre- and post-evaluation result score; the first weight, investment change score, second weight, expected investment completion rate score, third weight, expected overall demand effectiveness score, fourth weight, and pre- and post-evaluation result score are input into the evaluation model to determine the first evaluation value.

[0009] Optionally, obtaining the post-evaluation index of the software project includes: obtaining the number of first projects whose overall construction period does not exceed the standard construction period after the post-evaluation is completed, and obtaining the number of second projects participating in the post-evaluation; determining the overall project progress score based on the number of first projects and the number of second projects; obtaining the expected investment completion score of the software project, wherein the expected investment completion score is determined by the actual account amount within the first preset time period, the expected investment completion rate within the first preset time period, and the total budget within the first preset time period; obtaining the carry-over score of the software project, wherein the carry-over score is determined by the overall carry-over rate within the first preset time period, and the overall carry-over rate is determined by The score of the expected results realization of the software project is determined by the total carry-over amount and the total investment amount in the first preset time period; the score of the expected results realization of the software project is obtained, wherein the score of the expected results realization is determined by the number of realized demand results in the overall post-evaluation stage and the total number of overall expected demand results in the overall pre-evaluation stage; the overall user satisfaction score of the software project is obtained, wherein the overall user satisfaction score is determined by the number of third projects and the number of second projects whose user satisfaction index scores participating in the post-evaluation projects are greater than or equal to the preset number; the post-evaluation indicators are determined based on the overall project progress score, the expected investment completion score, the carry-over score, the expected results realization score and the overall user satisfaction score.

[0010] Optionally, the post-evaluation indicators are input into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a second evaluation value, including: obtaining the fifth weight corresponding to the overall project progress score, the sixth weight corresponding to the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight corresponding to the carry-over score, the eighth weight corresponding to the expected results achievement score, and the ninth weight corresponding to the overall user satisfaction score; the fifth weight, the overall project progress score, the sixth weight, the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight, the carry-over score, the eighth weight, the expected results achievement score, the ninth weight, and the overall user satisfaction score are input into the evaluation model to determine the second evaluation value.

[0011] Optionally, determining the total score of the software project based on the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value includes: obtaining a first evaluation weight corresponding to the first evaluation value, and obtaining a second evaluation weight corresponding to the second evaluation value; determining the total score of the software project based on the first evaluation value, the first evaluation weight, the second evaluation value and the second evaluation weight.

[0012] Optionally, the method also includes: when the total score is greater than or equal to a first score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level; when the total score is less than the first score threshold and greater than or equal to a second score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the second level, wherein the first score threshold is greater than the second score threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; when the total score is less than the second score threshold and greater than or equal to a third score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second score threshold is greater than the third score threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; when the total score is less than the third score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

[0013] According to another aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a project evaluation device is also provided, including: a first acquisition module, used to obtain pre-evaluation indicators of a software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction of a software project from multiple dimensions before implementation; a first evaluation module, used to input the pre-evaluation indicators into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a first evaluation value; a second acquisition module, used to obtain post-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the post-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for effect evaluation of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion; a second evaluation module, used to input the post-evaluation indicators into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a second evaluation value; a determination module, used to determine the total score of the software project based on the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value.

[0014] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present application, there is also provided an electronic device, including: a memory and a processor, the memory being used to store program instructions; the processor being connected to the memory and being used to execute the evaluation method for implementing the above-mentioned project.

[0015] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present application, a non-volatile storage medium is provided, wherein the non-volatile storage includes a stored computer program, wherein the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located executes the evaluation method of the above-mentioned project by running the computer program.

[0016] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present application, a computer program product is provided, including computer instructions, which implement the evaluation method of the above-mentioned project when executed by a processor.

[0017] In an embodiment of the present application, by obtaining pre-evaluation indicators of a software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction of a software project from multiple dimensions before implementation; the pre-evaluation indicators are input into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project, and a first evaluation value is obtained; post-evaluation indicators of the software project are obtained, wherein the post-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for effect evaluation of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion; the post-evaluation indicators are input into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project, and a second evaluation value is obtained; based on the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value, the total score of the software project is determined, thereby achieving the purpose of accurately quantifying the performance of the software project throughout its life cycle, thereby achieving the technical effect of improving evaluation efficiency and accuracy, reducing manpower and material costs, and optimizing decision-making processes, thereby solving the technical problem that the evaluation and feedback of informationization performance in related technologies require a large amount of manpower and material resources, and there is low efficiency in the comprehensive informationization performance evaluation. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0018] The drawings described herein are used to provide a further understanding of the present application and constitute a part of the present application. The illustrative embodiments of the present application and their descriptions are used to explain the present application and do not constitute an improper limitation on the present application. In the drawings:

[0019] Figure 1 It is a hardware structure block diagram of a computer terminal for implementing a project evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present application;

[0020] Figure 2 is a flow chart of a project evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present application;

[0021] Figure 3 It is a structural diagram of a project evaluation device according to an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0022] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the solution of the present application, the technical solution in the embodiments of the present application will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present application, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work should fall within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0023] It should be noted that the terms "first", "second", etc. in the specification and claims of the present application and the above-mentioned drawings are used to distinguish similar objects, and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that the data used in this way can be interchangeable where appropriate, so that the embodiments of the present application described herein can be implemented in an order other than those illustrated or described herein. In addition, the terms "including" and "having" and any of their variations are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions, for example, a process, method, system, product or device comprising a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units clearly listed, but may include other steps or units that are not clearly listed or inherent to these processes, methods, products or devices.

[0024] The information collected in the embodiments of the present application is information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties, and the collection, storage, use, processing, transmission, provision, disclosure and application of the relevant data comply with the relevant laws, regulations and standards of the relevant regions, take necessary confidentiality measures, do not violate public order and good morals, and provide corresponding operation entrances for users to choose to authorize or reject automated decision-making results; if the user chooses to reject, the expert decision-making process will be entered.

[0025] First, some nouns or terms that appear in the process of explaining the embodiments of the present application are subject to the following explanations:

[0026] Comprehensive performance: comprehensive performance, the output and results of the information technology project.

[0027] Construction quality: construction quality refers to the management and technical level of the information technology project during the construction period.

[0028] Application effect: application effect refers to the degree to which the information system meets user needs during the application process and the results it produces for project stakeholders.

[0029] Economic benefit: economic benefit, including financial profitability, debt repayment ability, viability and non-financial benefits of the information technology project after it is put into use.

[0030] In order to solve the problems existing in the related art, the present application embodiment provides a project evaluation method, which can be run on Figure 1 In the computer terminal shown, the computer terminal is explained below.

[0031] The project evaluation method embodiment provided in the embodiment of the present application can be executed in a mobile terminal, a computer terminal or a similar computing device. Figure 1FIG. 1 shows a hardware structure block diagram of a computer terminal for implementing a project evaluation method. Figure 1 As shown, the computer terminal 10 may include one or more (102a, 102b, ..., 102n are used to illustrate) processors (the processor may include but is not limited to a processing device such as a microprocessor MCU or a programmable logic device FPGA), a memory 104 for storing data, and a transmission module 106 for communication functions connected via a wired and / or wireless network. In addition, it may also include: a display, a keyboard, a cursor control device, an input / output interface (I / O interface), a universal serial bus (USB) port (which may be included as one of the ports of the I / O interface), a network interface, and a BUS bus. Those skilled in the art can understand that Figure 1 The structure shown is only for illustration and does not limit the structure of the above electronic device. Figure 1 More or fewer components as shown, or with Figure 1 Different configurations are shown.

[0032] It should be noted that the one or more processors and / or other data processing circuits described above may generally be referred to herein as "data processing circuits". The data processing circuits may be embodied in whole or in part as software, hardware, firmware, or any other combination thereof. In addition, the data processing circuit may be a single independent processing module, or may be incorporated in whole or in part into any of the other components in the computer terminal 10. As described in the embodiments of the present application, the data processing circuit acts as a processor control (e.g., selection of a variable resistor terminal path connected to an interface).

[0033] The memory 104 can be used to store software programs and modules of application software, such as program instructions / data storage devices corresponding to the evaluation method of the project in the embodiment of the present application. The processor executes various functional applications and data processing by running the software programs and modules stored in the memory 104, that is, realizing the evaluation method of the above-mentioned project. The memory 104 may include a high-speed random access memory, and may also include a non-volatile memory, such as one or more magnetic storage devices, flash memory, or other non-volatile solid-state memory. In some examples, the memory 104 may further include a memory remotely arranged relative to the processor, and these remote memories may be connected to the computer terminal 10 via a network. Examples of the above-mentioned network include, but are not limited to, the Internet, an intranet, a local area network, a mobile communication network, and combinations thereof.

[0034] The transmission module 106 is used to receive or send data via a network. The specific example of the above network may include a wireless network provided by a communication provider of the computer terminal 10. In one example, the transmission module 106 includes a network adapter (Network Interface Controller, NIC), which can be connected to other network devices through a base station so as to communicate with the Internet. In one example, the transmission module 106 can be a radio frequency (RF) module, which is used to communicate with the Internet wirelessly.

[0035] The display may be, for example, a touch screen liquid crystal display (LCD) that enables a user to interact with a user interface of the computer terminal 10 .

[0036] It should be noted that, in some optional embodiments, the above Figure 1 The computer terminal shown may include hardware elements (including circuits), software elements (including computer code stored on a computer-readable medium), or a combination of hardware elements and software elements. It should be noted that Figure 1 This is merely one example of a particular embodiment and is intended to illustrate the types of components that may be present in the computer terminal described above.

[0037] In the above-mentioned operating environment, an embodiment of the present application provides an embodiment of a project evaluation method. It should be noted that the steps shown in the flowchart of the accompanying drawings can be executed in a computer system such as a set of computer executable instructions, and although the logical order is shown in the flowchart, in some cases, the steps shown or described can be executed in an order different from that shown here.

[0038] Figure 2 is a flow chart of a project evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present application, such as Figure 2 As shown, the method comprises the following steps:

[0039] Step S202, obtaining pre-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction from multiple dimensions before the implementation of the software project.

[0040] Step S204: input the previous evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a first evaluation value.

[0041] In the above steps S202 to S204, the process of pre-assessment helps to optimize resource allocation, avoid unnecessary waste of investment, and provide clear guidance and basis for each stage of project implementation. The evaluation model is usually a mathematical model or algorithm, which takes the collected pre-assessment indicator data as input, and outputs a quantitative evaluation value representing the comprehensive risk and expected performance of the project through the set weights and calculation rules. The design of the evaluation model needs to fully consider the characteristics and goals of the software project to ensure the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the evaluation. In the evaluation model, each pre-assessment indicator will be assigned a quantitative score. In order to reflect the importance of different indicators to the success of the project, the evaluation model should also include weight allocation, that is, set a weight value for each indicator to express its relative importance in the overall evaluation. When the data and weights of all pre-assessment indicators are input into the evaluation model, the model will perform a series of calculations to obtain a comprehensive quantitative evaluation result, i.e., the first evaluation value. The first evaluation value is used to intuitively reflect the comprehensive performance forecast of the project before it is launched. The first evaluation value can be used as an important basis for project decision-making. If the evaluation value is high, it means that the project has performed well in the pre-evaluation stage, has low risks, and has high expected returns. The project can be considered for approval and continued. On the contrary, if the evaluation value is low, it may indicate that the project has high risks or poor expected performance, and further analysis and adjustment of the project plan are needed, or even reconsideration of whether the project is feasible.

[0042] Step S206, obtaining post-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the post-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for evaluating the effects of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion.

[0043] Step S208: input the post-evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a second evaluation value.

[0044] In the above steps S206 to S208, the post-evaluation indicators are multi-dimensional evaluations of the actual effects and performance of the project after its completion. The post-evaluation indicators cover the key areas after the implementation of the software project, aiming to verify whether the project has achieved the predetermined goals, evaluate the project's contribution to business, technology, finance and society, and the actual performance of user satisfaction.

[0045] In the embodiment of the present application, the evaluation model for evaluating the pre-evaluation index and the evaluation model for evaluating the post-evaluation index can be the same evaluation model or different models. When different models are used, the evaluation model for evaluating the pre-evaluation index can be called the pre-evaluation model, and the evaluation model for evaluating the post-evaluation index can be called the post-evaluation model. The post-evaluation model focuses more on the comparative analysis of actual results and expected goals. In an optional embodiment, when the evaluation model is used, the actual post-evaluation data collected is compared with the goals set at the beginning of the project, and the qualitative description is converted into a quantitative score. For example, the project progress can be quantified as the percentage of deviation between the actual completion time and the planned time, and user satisfaction may be quantified by questionnaire scores. In the evaluation model, each post-evaluation indicator has its specific weight, reflecting the importance of the indicator in the overall performance evaluation. For example, economic benefits and social impact are given higher weights, while some minor performance indicators have lower weights. The evaluation model integrates and calculates the quantitative data and weights of all post-evaluation indicators to obtain a comprehensive score representing the actual performance of the software project, i.e., the second evaluation value. This is usually a numerical value or grade, which intuitively reflects the comprehensive effect after the project is completed. The second assessment is used to review the degree of project success and identify any areas that did not meet expectations.

[0046] Step S210: determining a total score of the software project according to the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value.

[0047] In the above step S210, in the evaluation model, the first evaluation value (pre-evaluation result) and the second evaluation value (post-evaluation result) may be assigned certain weights to reflect the importance of the evaluation results at different stages in the total score. For example, the pre-evaluation may focus more on the risk prediction and expected benefits of the project, while the post-evaluation is more concerned with the comparison between the actual results and the goals. The weights of the two in the total score may be adjusted according to the project characteristics and organizational strategies. The first evaluation value and the second evaluation value are weighted averaged according to their weights, or a pre-set formula or algorithm is used for comprehensive calculation to obtain the total score of the software project. The calculation formula may be as follows: total score = (first evaluation value × pre-evaluation weight) + (second evaluation value × post-evaluation weight). The total score is an overall performance indicator of the software project, reflecting the degree of match between the expectations of the project in the planning stage and the actual performance in the execution stage. A high total score usually means that the project performs well at different stages, while a low score indicates that the project has major problems in one or some stages. For example, 90 points and above are "excellent", 70-89 points are "good", 60-69 points are "passing", and below 60 points are "failure". These standards help to quickly identify the level of project performance and take corresponding management measures accordingly. The total score is used to guide subsequent project decisions, such as whether to make additional investments, adjust resource allocation, improve project management processes, or serve as a basis for project acceptance and team performance evaluation. It provides management with a comprehensive perspective on the performance of the project throughout its life cycle, helping to make more reasonable and effective decisions.

[0048] In another optional embodiment, the total score can be applied to improve internal performance indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, network latency, etc. For example, a multi-objective optimization algorithm can be designed to ensure that resources are optimally allocated while effectively improving various performance indicators. If based on priority queues and genetic algorithms (GA), the specific algorithm implementation framework is as follows:

[0049] 1. Data collection and preprocessing: Convert unstructured pre-evaluation indicator and post-evaluation indicator data into structured data that can be processed by machine learning algorithms, which may include data cleaning, normalization, and feature selection.

[0050] 2. Build an evaluation model: Identify key features that affect the overall score, such as expected improvement, cost, risk, and other factors. Use machine learning algorithms, such as random forests, support vector machines, or neural networks, to train an evaluation model based on historical project data. The goal is to learn how to predict the comprehensive effect of a project on performance improvement from project characteristics.

[0051] 3. Project evaluation and priority sorting: For each project, use the trained evaluation model to calculate the evaluation value of the comprehensive improvement of performance indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, network latency, etc. Based on the total score, all projects are sorted from high to low priority to form an optimization project queue.

[0052] 4. Multi-objective optimization and resource allocation: First, define the objective function. The objective function should comprehensively consider the degree of performance improvement and resource cost. The degree of improvement and cost of multiple performance indicators can be added or multiplied to form a multi-objective function. Then initialize the genetic algorithm and create an initial population. Each individual represents a different resource allocation scheme, where resources include hardware upgrades, software optimization, etc. Each scheme corresponds to the optimization project queue sorted in step 3. For each individual in the population, use the objective function to calculate its fitness or score. The score reflects the balance effect of the resource allocation scheme between improving performance indicators and resource costs. Perform selection, crossover, and mutation operations in the genetic algorithm to generate a new population until the preset termination condition is reached, such as the maximum number of iterations or meeting a specific fitness threshold. Select the best individual from the final population as the optimal resource allocation scheme, which will be used to guide the improvement of internal performance indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, and network latency.

[0053] 5. Implementation and monitoring: Based on the optimal resource allocation plan, prioritize high-priority optimization projects and reasonably allocate hardware, software, and human resources. During the implementation of the project, continuously monitor changes in indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, and network latency to evaluate the effectiveness of project implementation. If the monitoring results show that some projects have not achieved the expected results or that resource allocation needs to be adjusted, you can rerun steps 2 to 4 to dynamically optimize the model and resource allocation.

[0054] 6. Evaluation model update: Feedback the implementation results to the evaluation model to update the model parameters and improve the accuracy and reliability of future evaluations. Continuously collect new project data, regularly train and update the evaluation model to ensure that it can adapt to the latest trends and needs of system performance improvement.

[0055] Through the above algorithm framework, the total score is not only used for project sorting, but also combined with the genetic algorithm to form a multi-objective optimization method to guide the effective allocation of resources, thereby achieving maximum improvement in key performance indicators such as CPU utilization, memory usage, I / O response time, and network latency.

[0056] Through the above steps S202 to S210, the purpose of accurately quantifying the performance of the entire life cycle of the software project is achieved, thereby achieving the technical effects of improving evaluation efficiency and accuracy, reducing manpower and material costs, and optimizing the decision-making process, thereby solving the technical problems in related technologies that the evaluation and feedback of information performance requires a lot of manpower and material resources, and there is a low efficiency in the comprehensive performance evaluation of informationization. The following is an explanation.

[0057] In step S202 of the evaluation method of the above project, the pre-evaluation index of the software project is obtained, including: obtaining the main business income growth rate of the organization to which the software project belongs within the first preset time period; determining the overall investment change rate based on the main business income growth rate, wherein the overall investment change rate is determined by the overall planned investment of the department within the adjacent first preset time period; determining the investment change score based on the overall investment change rate; obtaining the expected investment completion rate of the software project within the first preset time period, wherein the expected investment completion rate is determined by the expected account amount and the total budget within the first preset time period; determining the investment change score based on the expected investment completion rate. Expected investment completion rate score; obtain the expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators of the software project; determine the expected overall demand effectiveness score based on the expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators; obtain the average post-evaluation score of a single dimension within the second preset time period and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension within the second preset time period; determine the score of the previous post-evaluation result based on the average post-evaluation score of a single dimension and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension; determine the previous evaluation indicators based on the investment change score, the expected investment completion rate score, the expected overall demand effectiveness score and the previous post-evaluation result score.

[0058] In some embodiments of the present application, the pre-evaluation index includes four first-level indicators, namely: 1. Investment changes; 2. Expected investment completion; 3. Expected overall demand results; 4. Pre-evaluation results. Specifically: Investment changes are used to evaluate the investment change rate of the overall project investment amount of the current period compared with the overall planned investment amount of the previous period. Its considerations may include: the difference between the actual investment amount of the current period and the planned investment amount of the previous period, and the analysis of the reasons for the increase or decrease in investment (such as market changes, technical adjustments, etc.). The expected investment completion is used to evaluate the indicator of the expected annual overall investment completion target, and the value is the percentage score of the expected annual account amount to the total annual budget. Its considerations may include: the total annual budget, the expected annual account amount, and the deviation between actual expenditure and budget. The expected overall demand results are used to judge the indicators of overall investment results and construction effects. Its considerations may include: the degree of realization of project functions, the compliance of performance indicators, market acceptance and user feedback. The pre-evaluation results are comprehensive considerations of the post-evaluation of the single project dimension of the previous year and the post-evaluation results of the overall dimension of the previous year. The factors to be considered may include: post-evaluation results of single projects in the previous year, post-evaluation results of the overall dimension in the previous year, and lessons learned from previous projects.

[0059] In the embodiment of the present application, the calculation formula of the investment change score IC is as follows:

[0060] IC=N1×100

[0061] Among them, N1 represents the overall investment change rate compared with the previous period. If the overall investment change rate is negative, N1 takes a value of 1; if the overall investment change rate is 0-0.25X (inclusive), N1 takes a value of 0.8; if the overall investment change rate is 0.25X (exclusive)-0.5X (inclusive), N1 takes a value of 0.6; if the overall investment change rate is 0.5X (exclusive)-0.75X (inclusive), N1 takes a value of 0.4; if the overall investment change rate is 0.75X (exclusive)-X (inclusive), N1 takes a value of 0.2; if the investment change rate exceeds X (exclusive), N1 takes a value of 0, overall investment change rate = (the overall planned investment of the department in the current year-the overall planned investment of the department in the previous year) / the overall planned investment of the department in the previous year, and the first preset time period can be in years; X is used to represent the growth rate of the main business income of the organization to which the software project belongs in the first preset time period (such as the current year).

[0062] The calculation formula of the expected investment completion rate score SI is as follows:

[0063] SI=N2×100

[0064] Wherein, N2 represents the estimated investment completion rate within the first preset time period, and the estimated investment completion rate = the estimated annual accounting amount to be completed / the total annual budget.

[0065] The calculation formula for the expected overall demand effectiveness score OD is as follows:

[0066] OD=n1 / N3×100

[0067] Among them, n1 represents the number of expected overall demand effectiveness indicators actually reported that do not deviate from the overall planning report (that is, the above-mentioned actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators), and N3 represents the number of expected overall demand effectiveness indicators proposed in the current overall planning report.

[0068] The calculation formula for the RP score of the preliminary and post-evaluation results is as follows:

[0069] RP = N4 × 50% + X1 × 50%

[0070] Among them, N4 represents the average post-evaluation score of the single project dimension in the previous year (i.e. the second preset time period mentioned above) (i.e. the average post-evaluation score of the single dimension within the second preset time period mentioned above), and X1 represents the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension in the previous year (i.e. the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension within the second preset time period mentioned above).

[0071] In step S204 of the evaluation method of the above project, the pre-evaluation indicators are input into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a first evaluation value, including: obtaining a first weight corresponding to the investment change score, a second weight corresponding to the expected investment completion rate score, a third weight corresponding to the expected overall demand effectiveness score, and a fourth weight corresponding to the previous and subsequent evaluation result score; the first weight, investment change score, second weight, expected investment completion rate score, third weight, expected overall demand effectiveness score, fourth weight, and previous and subsequent evaluation result score are input into the evaluation model to determine the first evaluation value.

[0072] The first evaluation value in the embodiment of the present application can be determined by the following formula:

[0073] i-CORE1=K1×IC+K2×SI+K3×OD+K4×RP

[0074] Among them, i-CORE1 is the first evaluation value mentioned above, K1 is the first weight mentioned above; IC is the investment change score mentioned above; K2 is the second weight; SI is the expected investment completion rate score; K3 represents the third weight; OD represents the expected overall demand effectiveness score; K4 represents the fourth weight; RP represents the pre- and post-evaluation result score. In an optional embodiment, the weights of K1 to K4 can be set to 40%, 20%, 20%, and 20% respectively.

[0075] In step S206 of the evaluation method of the above project, the post-evaluation index of the software project is obtained, including: obtaining the number of first projects whose overall construction period does not exceed the standard construction period after the post-evaluation is completed, and obtaining the number of second projects participating in the post-evaluation; determining the overall project progress score based on the number of first projects and the number of second projects; obtaining the expected investment completion score of the software project, wherein the expected investment completion score is determined by the actual account amount within the first preset time period, the expected investment completion rate within the first preset time period, and the total budget within the first preset time period; obtaining the carry-over score of the software project, wherein the carry-over score is determined by the overall carry-over rate within the first preset time period. The overall carryover rate is determined by the overall carryover amount and the total investment amount within the first preset time period; the expected effectiveness realization score of the software project is obtained, wherein the expected effectiveness realization score is determined by the number of realized demand results in the overall post-evaluation stage and the total number of overall expected demand results in the overall pre-evaluation stage; the overall user satisfaction score of the software project is obtained, wherein the overall user satisfaction score is determined by the number of third projects and the number of second projects whose user satisfaction index scores participating in the post-evaluation projects are greater than or equal to the preset number; the post-evaluation indicators are determined based on the overall project progress score, the expected investment completion score, the carryover score, the expected effectiveness realization score and the overall user satisfaction score.

[0076] In some embodiments of the present application, the post-evaluation index includes five first-level indicators, namely: 1. Overall project progress; 2. Expected investment completion realization; 3. Carryover; 4. Expected results realization; 5. Overall user satisfaction. Specifically: The overall project progress is used to evaluate the overall average level of the project construction progress in the seven engineering stages of demand freeze handover, feasibility study, design, construction, initial inspection, trial operation and final inspection. Its considerations may include: the comparison of the actual completion time of each stage with the planned time, the achievement of key milestones, the reasons for any delays and their impact analysis. The expected investment completion realization is used to evaluate the indicator of the overall investment completion rate of the annual budget. Its considerations may include: the comparison of actual expenditures with the annual budget, the situation of investment overspending or savings, and the handling of unforeseen expenses. The quantitative method used can be scored by calculating the proportion of actual expenditures to the annual budget. For example, if the actual expenditure reaches more than 90% of the budget, a high score is obtained; if it is less than 90%, the score is reduced proportionally. The carryover situation is used to evaluate the indicator of the overall investment completion progress. The factors to be considered may include: the efficiency of the project's use of funds, the amount of unused budget and the reasons, and the inventory status of materials. The quantitative method used can score according to the proportion of carry-over funds. For example, if most of the budget is effectively used and there is less remaining funds, a high score will be obtained; otherwise, a low score will be obtained. The realization of expected results is used to evaluate the realization of the total number of overall expected demand results proposed in the overall dimension pre-evaluation stage in the overall post-evaluation stage. The factors to be considered may include: the degree of functional realization, the achievement of performance indicators, market acceptance, and user feedback. Overall user satisfaction is used to evaluate the overall satisfaction of users with the use of the software system. The factors to be considered may include: user experience reports, customer satisfaction survey results, frequency of use, and positive and negative opinions in user feedback.

[0077] In the embodiment of the present application, the calculation formula of the overall project progress score PP is as follows:

[0078] PP=n2 / N5×100

[0079] Among them, n2 represents the number of first items, and N5 represents the number of the second items mentioned above.

[0080] The calculation formula of the expected investment completion score AC is as follows:

[0081] AC=N6×100

[0082] Among them, N6 represents the actual amount booked for the year / (estimated investment completion rate for the current year*annual total budget) (if it exceeds 100%, it will be calculated as 100%), the actual amount booked for the year is the actual amount booked for the above-mentioned first preset time period, the estimated investment completion rate for the current year is the estimated investment completion rate for the above-mentioned first preset time period, and the annual total budget is the total budget for the above-mentioned first preset time period.

[0083] The calculation formula of carry-forward score SC is as follows:

[0084] SC=N7×100

[0085] Wherein, N7 represents the overall carry-over rate within the first preset time period, such as the annual overall carry-over rate, the annual overall carry-over rate = annual overall carry-over amount / annual point-in-time total investment amount, the annual overall carry-over amount is the overall carry-over amount within the first preset time period, and the annual point-in-time total investment amount is the total investment amount within the first preset time period. If the carry-over rate is between 0-20%, N7 takes a value of 1; if the carry-over rate is between 20-40%, N7 takes a value of 0.8; if the carry-over rate is between 40-60%, N7 takes a value of 0.6; if the carry-over rate is between 60-80%, N7 takes a value of 0.4; if the carry-over rate is between 80-100%, N7 takes a value of 0.2; if the carry-over rate is above 100%, N7 takes a value of 0.

[0086] The calculation formula for the expected results achievement score ER is as follows:

[0087] ER=E1 / E2×100

[0088] Among them, E1 represents the number of realized demand results in the overall post-evaluation stage, and E2 represents the total number of expected demand results in the overall pre-evaluation stage.

[0089] The calculation formula for the overall user satisfaction score US is as follows:

[0090] US=n3 / N5×100

[0091] Among them, n3 represents the number of third projects whose user satisfaction index scores of the post-participation evaluation projects are greater than or equal to a preset number (such as a value of 4), and N5 represents the number of second projects.

[0092] In step S208 of the evaluation method of the above project, the post-evaluation indicators are input into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a second evaluation value, including: obtaining the fifth weight corresponding to the overall project progress score, the sixth weight corresponding to the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight corresponding to the carry-over score, the eighth weight corresponding to the expected effectiveness score, and the ninth weight corresponding to the overall user satisfaction score; the fifth weight, the overall project progress score, the sixth weight, the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight, the carry-over score, the eighth weight, the expected effectiveness score, the ninth weight, and the overall user satisfaction score are input into the evaluation model to determine the second evaluation value.

[0093] In some embodiments of the present application, the calculation formula of the second evaluation value is as follows:

[0094] i-CORE2=K5×PP+K6×AC+K7×SC+K8×ER+K9×US

[0095] Among them, i-CORE2 represents the second evaluation value, K5 represents the fifth weight; PP represents the overall project progress score; K6 represents the sixth weight; AC represents the expected investment completion score; K7 represents the seventh weight; SC represents the carry-over score; K8 represents the eighth weight; ER represents the expected results score; K9 represents the ninth weight; US represents the overall user satisfaction score. In an optional embodiment, the weights of K5 to K9 can be set to 20%, 30%, 10%, 20%, and 20% respectively.

[0096] In step S210 of the evaluation method of the above project, the total score of the software project is determined based on the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value, including: obtaining a first evaluation weight corresponding to the first evaluation value, and obtaining a second evaluation weight corresponding to the second evaluation value; determining the total score of the software project based on the first evaluation value, the first evaluation weight, the second evaluation value and the second evaluation weight.

[0097] In some embodiments of the present application, the total score may be determined by the following formula:

[0098] Total score = (first evaluation value × first evaluation weight) + (second evaluation value × second evaluation weight)

[0099] In the evaluation method of the above-mentioned project, the method also includes: when the total score is greater than or equal to a first scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level; when the total score is less than the first scoring threshold and greater than or equal to a second scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the second level, wherein the first scoring threshold is greater than the second scoring threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; when the total score is less than the second scoring threshold and greater than or equal to a third scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second scoring threshold is greater than the third scoring threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; when the total score is less than the third scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

[0100] In an embodiment of the present application, the project level to which the software project belongs is determined according to different total scores. For example, the first level may be "excellent", the second level may be "good", the third level may be "passing", and the fourth level may be "unqualified".

[0101] The project evaluation method provided in the embodiment of the present application improves the scientificity and fairness of the evaluation and promotes the standardization and normalization of the evaluation process. It realizes efficient digitization of evaluation and assessment, simplifies the evaluation process, improves work efficiency, and improves the accuracy and speed of evaluation through digital tools. It ensures the comprehensiveness and systematicness of the evaluation and assessment, and considers the economic, technical, market, management and other aspects of the project in multiple dimensions. It strengthens the versatility and openness of the evaluation and assessment, is suitable for projects of different types and sizes, and allows adjustment and expansion according to new needs and technological developments. It ensures the continuity and evolution of the evaluation and assessment, can maintain relevance and effectiveness for a long time, and promotes the continuous improvement of the project. It optimizes resource allocation to ensure that funds are invested in the most valuable projects and avoids wasting resources on poorly performing projects.

[0102] Figure 3 is a structural diagram of an evaluation device for a project according to an embodiment of the present application, such as Figure 3 As shown, the device comprises:

[0103] A first acquisition module 30 is used to acquire pre-evaluation indicators of a software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction from multiple dimensions before the software project is implemented;

[0104] A first evaluation module 32, used to input the pre-evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a first evaluation value;

[0105] The second acquisition module 34 is used to acquire the post-evaluation index of the software project, wherein the post-evaluation index is used to represent the index for effect evaluation of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion;

[0106] The second evaluation module 36 is used to input the post-evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a second evaluation value;

[0107] The determination module 38 is used to determine the total score of the software project according to the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value.

[0108] In the first acquisition module in the evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the first acquisition module is also used to obtain the main business income growth rate of the organization to which the software project belongs within the first preset time period; determine the overall investment change rate based on the main business income growth rate, wherein the overall investment change rate is determined by the overall planned investment of the department within the adjacent first preset time period; determine the investment change score based on the overall investment change rate; obtain the expected investment completion rate of the software project within the first preset time period, wherein the expected investment completion rate is determined by the expected account amount and the total budget within the first preset time period; determine the expected investment completion rate based on the expected investment completion rate. Investment completion rate score; obtain the expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators of the software project; determine the expected overall demand effectiveness score based on the expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand effectiveness indicators; obtain the average post-evaluation score of a single dimension within the second preset time period and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension within the second preset time period; determine the score of the previous post-evaluation result based on the average post-evaluation score of a single dimension and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension; determine the previous evaluation indicators based on the investment change score, the expected investment completion rate score, the expected overall demand effectiveness score and the previous post-evaluation result score.

[0109] In the first evaluation module in the evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the first evaluation module is also used to obtain a first weight corresponding to the investment change score, a second weight corresponding to the expected investment completion rate score, a third weight corresponding to the expected overall demand effectiveness score, and a fourth weight corresponding to the previous and subsequent evaluation result score; the first weight, investment change score, second weight, expected investment completion rate score, third weight, expected overall demand effectiveness score, fourth weight, and previous and subsequent evaluation result score are input into the evaluation model to determine the first evaluation value.

[0110] In the second acquisition module in the evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the second acquisition module is also used to obtain the number of first projects whose overall construction period does not exceed the standard construction period after the post-evaluation is completed, and to obtain the number of second projects participating in the post-evaluation; determine the overall project progress score based on the number of first projects and the number of second projects; obtain the expected investment completion score of the software project, wherein the expected investment completion score is determined by the actual account amount within the first preset time period, the expected investment completion rate within the first preset time period, and the total budget within the first preset time period; obtain the carry-over score of the software project, wherein the carry-over score is determined by the overall carry-over rate within the first preset time period, and the overall The overall carryover rate is determined by the overall carryover amount and the total investment amount within the first preset time period; the expected effectiveness realization score of the software project is obtained, wherein the expected effectiveness realization score is determined by the number of realized demand results in the overall post-evaluation stage and the total number of overall expected demand results in the overall pre-evaluation stage; the overall user satisfaction score of the software project is obtained, wherein the overall user satisfaction score is determined by the number of third projects and the number of second projects whose user satisfaction index scores participating in the post-evaluation projects are greater than or equal to the preset number; the post-evaluation indicators are determined based on the overall project progress score, the expected investment completion score, the carryover score, the expected effectiveness realization score and the overall user satisfaction score.

[0111] In the second evaluation module in the evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the second evaluation module is also used to obtain the fifth weight corresponding to the overall project progress score, the sixth weight corresponding to the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight corresponding to the carry-over score, the eighth weight corresponding to the expected results achievement score and the ninth weight corresponding to the overall user satisfaction score; the fifth weight, the overall project progress score, the sixth weight, the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight, the carry-over score, the eighth weight, the expected results achievement score, the ninth weight and the overall user satisfaction score are input into the evaluation model to determine the second evaluation value.

[0112] In the determination module in the evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the determination module is also used to obtain the first evaluation weight corresponding to the first evaluation value, and to obtain the second evaluation weight corresponding to the second evaluation value; based on the first evaluation value, the first evaluation weight, the second evaluation value and the second evaluation weight, the total score of the software project is determined.

[0113] In the determination module in the evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the determination module is also used to determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level when the total score is greater than or equal to the first score threshold; when the total score is less than the first score threshold and greater than or equal to the second score threshold, determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the second level, wherein the first score threshold is greater than the second score threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; when the total score is less than the second score threshold and greater than or equal to the third score threshold, determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second score threshold is greater than the third score threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; when the total score is less than the third score threshold, determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

[0114] It should be noted that Figure 3 The evaluation device of the project shown is used to perform Figure 2 Therefore, the relevant explanations in the evaluation method of the above project are also applicable to the evaluation device of this project and will not be repeated here.

[0115] An embodiment of the present application also provides an electronic device, which includes a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store program instructions; the processor is connected to the memory and is used to execute the evaluation method for implementing the above-mentioned project.

[0116] An embodiment of the present application also provides a non-volatile storage medium, which includes a stored computer program, wherein the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located executes the evaluation method of the above-mentioned project by running the computer program.

[0117] An embodiment of the present application also provides a computer program product, including computer instructions, which, when executed by a processor, implement the steps of the project evaluation method in each embodiment of the present application.

[0118] The embodiments of the present application also provide a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the project evaluation method in each embodiment of the present application.

[0119] The serial numbers of the above-mentioned embodiments of the present application are for description only and do not represent the advantages or disadvantages of the embodiments.

[0120] In the above embodiments of the present application, the description of each embodiment has its own emphasis. For parts that are not described in detail in a certain embodiment, please refer to the relevant description of other embodiments.

[0121] In the several embodiments provided in this application, it should be understood that the disclosed technical content can be implemented in other ways. Among them, the device embodiments described above are only schematic. For example, the division of the units can be a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some interfaces, indirect coupling or communication connection of units or modules, which can be electrical or other forms.

[0122] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the present embodiment.

[0123] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present application may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit. The above-mentioned integrated unit may be implemented in the form of hardware or in the form of software functional units.

[0124] If the integrated unit is implemented in the form of a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present application, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art or all or part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product, and the computer software product is stored in a storage medium, including a number of instructions to enable a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the method described in each embodiment of the present application. The aforementioned storage medium includes: U disk, read-only memory (ROM, Read-Only Memory), random access memory (RAM, Random Access Memory), mobile hard disk, disk or optical disk and other media that can store program codes.

[0125] The above is only a preferred implementation of the present application. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principles of the present application. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present application.

Claims

1. A project evaluation method, characterized in that: include: Obtaining pre-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction of the software project from multiple dimensions before implementation; Inputting the pre-evaluation index into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a first evaluation value; Obtaining post-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the post-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for effect evaluation of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion; Inputting the post-evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a second evaluation value; The total score of the software project is determined according to the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Get pre-assessment metrics for software projects, including: Obtaining the main business income growth rate of the organization to which the software project belongs within a first preset time period; Determine the overall investment change rate according to the main business income growth rate, wherein the overall investment change rate is determined by the overall planned investment of the department within the adjacent first preset time period; Determining an investment change score based on the overall investment change rate; Obtaining an estimated investment completion rate of the software project within the first preset time period, wherein the estimated investment completion rate is determined by the estimated account amount and the total budget within the first preset time period; Determine the expected investment completion rate score based on the estimated investment completion rate; Obtain the expected number of overall demand performance indicators and the actual expected number of overall demand performance indicators of the software project; Determine the expected overall demand effectiveness score based on the number of expected overall demand effectiveness indicators and the actual number of expected overall demand effectiveness indicators; Obtaining the average post-evaluation score of the single dimension within the second preset time period and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension within the second preset time period; Determine the score of the previous post-evaluation result according to the average post-evaluation score of the single dimension and the post-evaluation score of the overall dimension; The pre-evaluation index is determined based on the investment change score, the expected investment completion rate score, the expected overall demand effectiveness score and the pre-evaluation and post-evaluation result scores.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that Inputting the pre-evaluation index into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a first evaluation value includes: Obtaining a first weight corresponding to the investment change score, a second weight corresponding to the expected investment completion rate score, a third weight corresponding to the expected overall demand effectiveness score, and a fourth weight corresponding to the pre- and post-evaluation result score; The first weight, the investment change score, the second weight, the expected investment completion rate score, the third weight, the expected overall demand effectiveness score, the fourth weight, and the pre- and post-evaluation result scores are input into the evaluation model to determine the first evaluation value.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Obtain post-evaluation indicators of the software project, including: Obtain the number of first projects whose overall duration after the post-evaluation of the software project does not exceed the standard duration, and obtain the number of second projects participating in the post-evaluation; Determine the overall project progress score based on the first project quantity and the second project quantity; Obtaining an expected investment completion score of the software project, wherein the expected investment completion score is determined by an actual account amount within a first preset time period, an expected investment completion rate within the first preset time period, and a total budget within the first preset time period; Obtaining a carry-over score of the software project, wherein the carry-over score is determined by an overall carry-over rate within the first preset time period, and the overall carry-over rate is determined by an overall carry-over amount and a total investment amount within the first preset time period; Obtaining a score for the realization of the expected results of the software project, wherein the score for the realization of the expected results is determined by the number of realized required results in the overall post-evaluation phase and the total number of overall expected required results in the overall pre-evaluation phase; Obtaining an overall user satisfaction score of the software project, wherein the overall user satisfaction score is determined by the number of third projects and the number of second projects whose user satisfaction index scores of the post-evaluation projects are greater than or equal to a preset number; The post-evaluation indicators are determined based on the overall project progress score, the expected investment completion score, the carry-over score, the expected results achievement score and the overall user satisfaction score.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that Inputting the post-evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project to obtain a second evaluation value includes: Obtain the fifth weight corresponding to the overall project progress score, the sixth weight corresponding to the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight corresponding to the carry-over score, the eighth weight corresponding to the expected effectiveness score, and the ninth weight corresponding to the overall user satisfaction score; The fifth weight, the overall project progress score, the sixth weight, the expected investment completion score, the seventh weight, the carry-over score, the eighth weight, the expected results achievement score, the ninth weight, and the overall user satisfaction score are input into the evaluation model to determine the second evaluation value.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Determining a total score of the software project according to the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value includes: Obtaining a first evaluation weight corresponding to the first evaluation value, and obtaining a second evaluation weight corresponding to the second evaluation value; The total score of the software project is determined according to the first evaluation value, the first evaluation weight, the second evaluation value and the second evaluation weight.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The method further comprises: When the total score is greater than or equal to a first score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level; When the total score is less than a first score threshold and greater than or equal to a second score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is a second level, wherein the first score threshold is greater than the second score threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; In the case where the total score is less than a second score threshold and greater than or equal to a third score threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second score threshold is greater than the third score threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; When the total score is less than the third score threshold, it is determined that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

8. A project evaluation device, characterized in that: include: A first acquisition module is used to acquire pre-evaluation indicators of a software project, wherein the pre-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for risk prediction of the software project from multiple dimensions before implementation; A first evaluation module, used for inputting the pre-evaluation index into an evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a first evaluation value; A second acquisition module is used to acquire post-evaluation indicators of the software project, wherein the post-evaluation indicators are used to represent indicators for effect evaluation of the software project from multiple dimensions after completion; A second evaluation module, used for inputting the post-evaluation index into the evaluation model to evaluate the software project and obtain a second evaluation value; A determination module is used to determine the total score of the software project according to the first evaluation value and the second evaluation value.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that: include: A memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store program instructions; the processor is connected to the memory and is used to execute an evaluation method for a project according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A non-volatile storage medium, characterized in that: The non-volatile storage medium includes a stored computer program, wherein the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located executes the project evaluation method described in any one of claims 1 to 7 by running the computer program.

11. A computer program product comprising computer instructions, characterized in that: When the computer instructions are executed by a processor, the project evaluation method described in any one of claims 1 to 7 is implemented.

Images