Quantitative evaluation method for army management work based on combat capacity three-element evaluation system

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of information management, and particularly relates to an army management work quantitative evaluation method based on a fighting capacity three-element evaluation system, and the method comprises the following steps: 1, constructing an evaluation index system; 2, index system weighting is carried out; step 3, association and processing of evaluation data; step 4, de-dimensionalizing the indexes; and 5, performing aggregation quantification on evaluation results. According to the method, an army management evaluation index system is innovatively constructed based on three elements of fighting capacity, army management work serves fighting capacity generation, a unified evaluation system is provided for all army, and longitudinal and transverse comparison of quantitative results of internal management effects of the whole army is facilitated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of information management technology, and specifically to a quantitative evaluation method for troop management work based on a combat effectiveness three-element evaluation system. Background Art

[0002] In the field of troop management, quantitative evaluation of troop management work is an important means to achieve the transformation from extensive management to refined management. Through scientific methods, we can analyze and study the improvement of quality and efficiency, measure the degree of implementation of various tasks to combat effectiveness standards, reveal their generation, operation and improvement mechanisms, help to accurately locate the weak links in various tasks and make targeted corrections, which is of great significance to improving the contribution rate of troop management services to combat effectiveness.

[0003] At present, there are few studies on mature solutions or methods for quantitative evaluation in the field of troop management. Most of them focus on quantitative evaluation of troop management work in specific troops and specific scenarios. These studies are not universal and it is difficult to scale them up and promote their use. Summary of the invention

[0004] 1. Technical issues to be resolved

[0005] The technical problem to be solved by the present invention is: how to provide a quantitative evaluation method for troop management work based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness.

[0006] (II) Technical solution

[0007] In order to solve the above technical problems, the present invention provides a quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness, such as Figure 1 As shown, the method comprises the following steps:

[0008] Step 1: Construction of evaluation index system;

[0009] Step 2: Empowerment of indicator system;

[0010] Step 3: Evaluate data association and processing;

[0011] Step 4: De-dimensionalize the indicators;

[0012] Step 5: Aggregate and quantify the evaluation results.

[0013] Wherein, in said step 1: constructing an evaluation index system; including:

[0014] Step 11: Indicator selection;

[0015] Evaluation indicators are set according to the three basic elements of combat effectiveness, namely, people, weapons and equipment, and the combination of people and weapons and equipment. Based on the major indicator categories in Table 1, and referring to the troop management regulations, national military standards and other standard specifications, the evaluation factors related to the business activities that contribute to the major indicator categories are extracted and decomposed to form node indicators and leaf indicators.

[0016] Example: For the assessment of the safety management level of the troops, consider the "establishment" indicator category in the "people" factor, combine the safety management regulations of the troops, extract the staffing rate of safety positions, and then decompose it into the staffing rate of each subdivided safety position;

[0017] Table 1. The three basic elements of combat effectiveness

[0018]

[0019] Step 12: Confirmation of indicator system;

[0020] According to the indicator system established above, it is necessary to screen and confirm the indicators and establish the final evaluation indicator system; for the quantitative evaluation scenario of troop management work, the main methods of indicator screening and confirmation include analytical hierarchy method, expert survey method, correlation analysis method and comprehensive method; the indicator screening and confirmation methods are shown in Table 2;

[0021] Table 2. Index screening and confirmation methods

[0022]

[0023] Example: For a certain unit management business evaluation index system, the expert survey method can be used to screen and confirm, to retain relatively important indicators, and to eliminate indicators of little importance; when conducting investigations and inspections, the number of experts is generally 10 to 20 people, and the Likert five-point scale is used to measure the importance of the initial indicators. Through at least two rounds of expert surveys, the final evaluation index system is established.

[0024] Among them, in step 2, the indicator system is weighted; the details are as follows:

[0025] The weights of the constructed indicator system are set to clarify the relative importance of each indicator in the evaluation system. The indicator weighting methods are mainly divided into subjective weighting method, objective weighting method and combined weighting method; see Table 3 below for details;

[0026] Table 3. Indicator weighting method

[0027]

[0028]

[0029]

[0030] Example: After obtaining a certain evaluation index system, the combined weighting method (using AHP and entropy weight method) can be used to determine the index weights. Based on the evaluation index system, the weights of indicators at each level are first calculated using the analytic hierarchy process, and then the subjective comprehensive weight is obtained; secondly, the objective weight value of the leaf node indicator is calculated using the entropy weight method; finally, the additive synthesis method is used to obtain the combined weight value.

[0031] Wherein, in said step 3, the data association and processing are evaluated; specifically as follows:

[0032] Preferably, the evaluation data association and processing are implemented in the form of a software system, which provides data support for the aggregation and quantification of evaluation results through a series of operations such as evaluation data connection, evaluation data association, and evaluation data preprocessing;

[0033] Step 31: Evaluation data connection;

[0034] Evaluation data can be obtained through database connection, data interface connection, and offline file connection. A visual interface is set up to maintain and operate the connected data. The data connection task monitoring function is set up to view and control the connection task status.

[0035] Step 32: Evaluate data association;

[0036] Associate each indicator in the corresponding evaluation indicator system with the database, table, and field;

[0037] Step 33: Evaluation data preprocessing;

[0038] According to Table 4, a data preprocessing algorithm is bound to each indicator, and the associated data is preprocessed; preferably, a data preprocessing simulation calculation is set to obtain the quantitative intermediate value and result value of the indicator after preprocessing, and verify the data accuracy and algorithm applicability; the data preprocessing algorithm is shown in Table 4;

[0039] Table 4. Data preprocessing algorithms

[0040]

[0041]

[0042]

[0043] Wherein, in said step 4, the indicator is de-dimensionalized;

[0044] In order to avoid the problem that the values ​​of indicators with different dimensions cannot be uniformly calculated in the future, it is necessary to perform dimensionless operations on the indicators in the indicator system, and form various de-dimensionalization algorithms in Table 5 based on the major indicator categories in Table 1; bind an algorithm to each indicator according to Table 5, and preferably set simulation calculations when implementing the system software, input simulation data, and verify and confirm the algorithm;

[0045] Table 5. Dedimensionalization algorithm for indicators

[0046]

[0047]

[0048]

[0049]

[0050] Example: For the "military quality" indicator category in Table 1, it can be measured by the assessment scores of officers and soldiers' military training subjects; assuming that a certain unit has 200 officers and soldiers, of which 15 subjects are assessed, the comprehensive average ratio algorithm can be used to obtain the value of the indicator by inputting the assessment scores of each officer and soldier in each subject and the full score of the subject, as shown in formula (1-1);

[0051]

[0052] Wherein, in said step 5, the evaluation results are aggregated and quantified;

[0053] After completing indicator weighting, data association and processing, and indicator dimensionless processing, the constructed indicator system uses the task dimension to group the quantitative evaluation information of a certain troop management business work for a certain object in steps 1 to 4. Preferably, during the software implementation process, the information in steps 2 to 4 can be allowed to be confirmed or reconfigured. After confirmation or configuration, the indicator values ​​are aggregated upward step by step according to the weighted summation to obtain the indicator values ​​of the parent nodes at all levels, and finally the quantitative evaluation results of a certain troop management business for a certain object are obtained.

[0054] (III) Beneficial effects

[0055] In view of the above problems, the present invention provides a method of quantitative evaluation system based on the three elements of combat effectiveness, aiming to form a unified evaluation system, support the vertical and horizontal comparison of the quantitative evaluation results of troop management work, and realize the overall situation of troop management work. At the same time, through the evaluation results, the weak links are reflected, the work focus is further clarified, and the military and political leaders at all levels are assisted to propose countermeasures and measures, forming an atmosphere of catching up and comparison, and continuously improving the effectiveness of troop management work.

[0056] Compared with the prior art, the innovative features of the present invention include:

[0057] (1) This invention clarifies the ideas and implementation process of the quantitative evaluation method of troop management work. Figure 1 shown.

[0058] (2) This invention proposes a broad index system based on the three elements of combat effectiveness, as shown in Table 1.

[0059] (3) This invention proposes a de-dimensionalization algorithm for the index system built around the three elements of combat effectiveness, as shown in Table 5.

[0060] The advantages of the present invention are as follows:

[0061] (1) Innovatively integrating the ideas and processes of weapon and equipment systems and combat effectiveness evaluation into the quantitative evaluation of troop management work, providing an operational method for the quantitative evaluation of troop management work.

[0062] (2) The innovative construction of a troop management evaluation index system based on the three elements of combat effectiveness not only reflects that troop management work serves the generation of combat effectiveness, but also provides a unified evaluation system for all troops, which is conducive to the vertical and horizontal comparison of the quantitative results of internal management effectiveness of the entire army. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0063] Figure 1 This is the flow chart for the implementation of this quantitative evaluation.

[0064] Figure 2 Schematic diagram showing the data visualization of the evaluation results. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0065] In order to make the purpose, content, and advantages of the present invention more clear, the specific implementation methods of the present invention are further described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and examples.

[0066] In order to solve the above technical problems, the present invention provides a quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness, such as Figure 1 As shown, the method comprises the following steps:

[0067] Step 1: Construction of evaluation index system;

[0068] Step 2: Empowerment of indicator system;

[0069] Step 3: Evaluate data association and processing;

[0070] Step 4: De-dimensionalize the indicators;

[0071] Step 5: Aggregate and quantify the evaluation results;

[0072] Step 6: Evaluation results analysis and prediction.

[0073] Wherein, in said step 1: constructing an evaluation index system; including:

[0074] Step 11: Indicator selection;

[0075] Evaluation indicators are set according to the three basic elements of combat effectiveness, namely, people, weapons and equipment, and the combination of people and weapons and equipment. Based on the major indicator categories in Table 1, and referring to the troop management regulations, national military standards and other standard specifications, the evaluation factors related to the business activities that contribute to the major indicator categories are extracted and decomposed to form node indicators and leaf indicators.

[0076] Example: For the assessment of the safety management level of the troops, consider the "establishment" indicator category in the "people" factor, combine the safety management regulations of the troops, extract the staffing rate of safety positions, and then decompose it into the staffing rate of each subdivided safety position;

[0077] Table 1. The three basic elements of combat effectiveness

[0078]

[0079] Step 12: Confirmation of indicator system;

[0080] According to the indicator system established above, it is necessary to screen and confirm the indicators and establish the final evaluation indicator system; for the quantitative evaluation scenario of troop management work, the main methods of indicator screening and confirmation include analytical hierarchy method, expert survey method, correlation analysis method and comprehensive method; the indicator screening and confirmation methods are shown in Table 2;

[0081] Table 2. Index screening and confirmation methods

[0082]

[0083] Example: For a certain unit management business evaluation index system, the expert survey method can be used to screen and confirm, to retain relatively important indicators, and to eliminate indicators of little importance; when conducting investigations and inspections, the number of experts is generally 10 to 20 people, and the Likert five-point scale is used to measure the importance of the initial indicators. Through at least two rounds of expert surveys, the final evaluation index system is established.

[0084] Among them, in step 2, the indicator system is weighted; the details are as follows:

[0085] The weights of the constructed indicator system are set to clarify the relative importance of each indicator in the evaluation system. The indicator weighting methods are mainly divided into subjective weighting method, objective weighting method and combined weighting method; see Table 3 below for details;

[0086] Table 3. Indicator weighting method

[0087]

[0088]

[0089]

[0090] Example: After obtaining a certain evaluation index system, the combined weighting method (using AHP and entropy weight method) can be used to determine the index weights. Based on the evaluation index system, the weights of indicators at each level are first calculated using the analytic hierarchy process, and then the subjective comprehensive weight is obtained; secondly, the objective weight value of the leaf node indicator is calculated using the entropy weight method; finally, the additive synthesis method is used to obtain the combined weight value.

[0091] Wherein, in said step 3, the data association and processing are evaluated; specifically as follows:

[0092] Preferably, the evaluation data association and processing are implemented in the form of a software system, which provides data support for the aggregation and quantification of evaluation results through a series of operations such as evaluation data connection, evaluation data association, and evaluation data preprocessing;

[0093] Step 31: Evaluation data connection;

[0094] Evaluation data can be obtained through database connection, data interface connection, and offline file connection. A visual interface is set up to maintain and operate the connected data. The data connection task monitoring function is set up to view and control the connection task status.

[0095] Step 32: Evaluate data association;

[0096] Associate each indicator in the corresponding evaluation indicator system with the database, table, and field;

[0097] Step 33: Evaluation data preprocessing;

[0098] According to Table 4, a data preprocessing algorithm is bound to each indicator, and the associated data is preprocessed; preferably, a data preprocessing simulation calculation is set to obtain the quantitative intermediate value and result value of the indicator after preprocessing, and verify the data accuracy and algorithm applicability; the data preprocessing algorithm is shown in Table 4;

[0099] Table 4. Data preprocessing algorithms

[0100]

[0101]

[0102]

[0103] Wherein, in said step 4, the indicator is de-dimensionalized;

[0104] In order to avoid the problem that the values ​​of indicators with different dimensions cannot be uniformly calculated in the future, it is necessary to perform dimensionless operations on the indicators in the indicator system, and form various de-dimensionalization algorithms in Table 5 based on the major indicator categories in Table 1; bind an algorithm to each indicator according to Table 5, and preferably set simulation calculations when implementing the system software, input simulation data, and verify and confirm the algorithm;

[0105] Table 5. Dedimensionalization algorithm for indicators

[0106]

[0107]

[0108]

[0109]

[0110] Example: For the "military quality" indicator category in Table 1, it can be measured by the assessment scores of officers and soldiers' military training subjects; assuming that a certain unit has 200 officers and soldiers, of which 15 subjects are assessed, the comprehensive average ratio algorithm can be used to obtain the value of the indicator by inputting the assessment scores of each officer and soldier in each subject and the full score of the subject, as shown in formula (1-1);

[0111]

[0112] Wherein, in said step 5, the evaluation results are aggregated and quantified;

[0113] After completing indicator weighting, data association and processing, and indicator dimensionless processing, the constructed indicator system uses the task dimension to group the quantitative evaluation information of a certain troop management business work for a certain object in steps 1 to 4. Preferably, during the software implementation process, the information in steps 2 to 4 can be allowed to be confirmed or reconfigured. After confirmation or configuration, the indicator values ​​are aggregated upward step by step according to the weighted summation to obtain the indicator values ​​of the parent nodes at all levels, and finally the quantitative evaluation results of a certain troop management business for a certain object are obtained.

[0114] Wherein, in said step 6, the evaluation results are analyzed and predicted;

[0115] With the help of BI tools or software programs, multi-dimensional statistical analysis of evaluation result data can be realized and visualized, and a situation page can be further formed. The evaluation object and evaluation time can be distinguished to conduct comparative analysis, month-on-month analysis, trend forecast, etc. of the results, and visualized, preferably supporting custom graphics and charts.

[0116] Based on visual charts and evaluation data, the evaluation report is automatically generated with the help of software programs.

[0117] Example: Evaluation result visualization chart Figure 2 shown.

[0118] The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the technical principles of the present invention. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness, characterized in that: The method comprises the following steps: Step 1: Construction of evaluation index system; Step 2: Empowerment of indicator system; Step 3: Evaluate data association and processing; Step 4: De-dimensionalize the indicators; Step 5: Aggregate and quantify the evaluation results.

2. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that: In the step 1: constructing an evaluation index system; include: Step 11: Indicator selection; Evaluation indicators are set according to the three basic elements of combat effectiveness, namely, people, weapons and equipment, and the combination of people and weapons and equipment. Based on the major indicator categories in Table 1, and referring to the troop management regulations, national military standards and other standard specifications, the evaluation factors related to the business activities that contribute to the major indicator categories are extracted and decomposed to form node indicators and leaf indicators. Table 1. The three basic elements of combat effectiveness Step 12: Confirmation of indicator system; According to the indicator system established above, it is necessary to screen and confirm the indicators and establish the final evaluation indicator system; for the quantitative evaluation scenario of troop management work, the main methods of indicator screening and confirmation include analytical hierarchy method, expert survey method, correlation analysis method and comprehensive method; the indicator screening and confirmation methods are shown in Table 2; Table 2. Index screening and confirmation methods 3. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 2 is characterized in that: In step 2, the indicator system is weighted; the details are as follows: The weights of the constructed indicator system are set to clarify the relative importance of each indicator in the evaluation system. The indicator weighting methods are mainly divided into subjective weighting method, objective weighting method and combined weighting method; see Table 3 below for details; Table 3. Indicator weighting method 4. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 3 is characterized in that: In step 3, the data association and processing are evaluated; the details are as follows: Preferably, the evaluation data association and processing are implemented in the form of a software system, which provides data support for the aggregation and quantification of evaluation results through a series of operations such as evaluation data connection, evaluation data association, and evaluation data preprocessing; Step 31: Evaluation data connection; Evaluation data can be obtained through database connection, data interface connection, and offline file connection. Set up a visual interface to maintain and operate the access data; set up the data access task monitoring function to view and control the access task status; Step 32: Evaluate data association; Associate each indicator in the corresponding evaluation indicator system with the database, table, and field; Step 33: Evaluation data preprocessing; According to Table 4, a data preprocessing algorithm is bound to each indicator, and the associated data is preprocessed; preferably, a data preprocessing simulation calculation is set to obtain the quantitative intermediate value and result value of the indicator after preprocessing, and verify the data accuracy and algorithm applicability; the data preprocessing algorithm is shown in Table 4; Table 4. Data preprocessing algorithms 5. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 4 is characterized in that: In the step 4, the indicator is de-dimensionalized; In order to avoid the problem that the values ​​of indicators with different dimensions cannot be uniformly calculated in the future, it is necessary to perform dimensionless operations on the indicators in the indicator system, and form various de-dimensionalization algorithms in Table 5 based on the major indicator categories in Table 1; bind an algorithm to each indicator according to Table 5, and preferably set simulation calculations when implementing the system software, input simulation data, and verify and confirm the algorithm; Table 5. Dedimensionalization algorithm for indicators 6. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 5 is characterized in that: In the step 5, the evaluation results are aggregated and quantified; After completing indicator weighting, data association and processing, and indicator dimensionless processing, the constructed indicator system uses the task dimension to group the quantitative evaluation information of a certain troop management business work for a certain object in steps 1 to 4. Preferably, during the software implementation process, the information in steps 2 to 4 can be allowed to be confirmed or reconfigured. After confirmation or configuration, the indicator values ​​are aggregated upward step by step according to the weighted summation to obtain the indicator values ​​of the parent nodes at all levels, and finally the quantitative evaluation results of a certain troop management business for a certain object are obtained.

7. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 6 is characterized in that: The method forms a unified evaluation system, supports vertical and horizontal comparison of quantitative evaluation results of troop management work, and realizes a comprehensive understanding of the troop management work situation.

8. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 6 is characterized in that: The method reflects weak links through evaluation results, further clarifies work priorities, assists military and political leaders at all levels in proposing countermeasures and measures, forms an atmosphere of catching up and comparison, and continuously improves the effectiveness of troop management.

9. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 6 is characterized in that: The method innovatively integrates the ideas and processes of weapon and equipment system and combat effectiveness evaluation into the quantitative evaluation of troop management work, providing an operational method for the quantitative evaluation of troop management work.

10. The quantitative evaluation method for troop management based on the three-element evaluation system of combat effectiveness as claimed in claim 6 is characterized in that: The method innovatively constructs a troop management evaluation index system based on the three elements of combat effectiveness, which not only reflects that troop management work serves the generation of combat effectiveness, but also provides a unified evaluation system for each troop, which is conducive to the vertical and horizontal comparison of the quantitative results of internal management effectiveness of the entire army.

Images