Comprehensive quantification method for cooperative benefit evaluation between enterprises

Abstract

The invention discloses a comprehensive quantification method for collaborative benefit evaluation among enterprises in the technical field of enterprise evaluation, and the method supports enterprises to set evaluation index preferences according to an enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index system, set importance degrees of indexes, calculate importance weights of all the indexes, and improve the evaluation efficiency of the enterprises. Generating evaluation preference templates for different types of resource cooperation enterprises; after the cooperative task is completed, the cooperative enterprise performs quantitative evaluation on the cooperative attitude and the cooperative benefit condition of the cooperative enterprise, and evaluation data is input into a cooperative benefit evaluation library by the industrial software platform; in combination with the importance weight of each index of the evaluation preference template and the evaluation data, the method provides auxiliary decision-making data support which can be dynamically updated and quantitatively compared for platform enterprise selection cooperative objects.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of enterprise evaluation, and specifically provides a comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises. Background Art

[0002] Currently, the demand for idle resource sharing and collaborative cooperation between enterprises is increasing day by day. The industrial collaborative software platform has become an important way for enterprises to find collaborative partners. However, since it is difficult to measure the information situation, service attitude, and cooperation degree of collaborative partners before the collaboration, traditional collaborative evaluation methods are limited to single indicators, and there is a lack of a systematic quantification method for collaborative benefit evaluation information. Therefore, the present invention proposes a comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises, providing method support for the quantitative calculation of the collaboration quality and overall benefits between enterprises. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The purpose of this part is to outline some aspects of the embodiments of the present invention and briefly introduce some preferred embodiments. Some simplifications or omissions may be made in this part, as well as in the abstract and title of the present application, to avoid obscuring the purpose of this part, the abstract, and the title, and such simplifications or omissions shall not be used to limit the scope of the present invention.

[0004] Therefore, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises, which solves the problem that it is difficult for enterprises to effectively measure the credit degree, cooperation attitude, and cooperation degree of cooperative enterprises when seeking cooperative partners on the industrial software platform. By using the analytic hierarchy process method and introducing a time decay mechanism, a standardized process for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises is formed, and the calculation of comprehensive evaluation results based on historical evaluation data is realized.

[0005] To solve the above technical problems, according to one aspect of the present invention, the following technical solutions are provided: A comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises, the steps are as follows: S1. Set up an evaluation index system: Formulate 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators from four collaborative benefit evaluation dimensions of the reliability of collaborative objects, the quality of the collaborative process, the benefits of collaborative output, and the level of collaborative innovation, as Figure 5 shown, as the standard for subsequent evaluation and scoring; S2. Generate an evaluation preference template: Import the 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators in step S1, compare the 12 indicators pairwise in sequence, select the more important one from each pair of compared indicators, set the importance degree of this indicator, thereby calculate the importance weights of all indicators, form an evaluation preference template, and save it to the evaluation preference template library of this enterprise; S3. Obtain evaluation data: With reference to the actual performance of the cooperation partner, select the corresponding evaluation level for each evaluation index, obtain the corresponding evaluation data according to the evaluation level reference table, and store the evaluation data in the collaborative benefit evaluation library of the platform; S4. Calculate the evaluation score: Obtain the importance weights of each index in the evaluation preference template in step S2, combine the evaluation data of each evaluation index in step S3, calculate the scores and weights of the four collaborative evaluation dimensions by weighted calculation, standardize the evaluation scores of each collaborative evaluation dimension, and calculate the sum to obtain the collaborative benefit evaluation result of the enterprise; S5. Comprehensive calculation of historical evaluations: Obtain all the evaluation information of the enterprise from the collaborative benefit evaluation library in step S3, introduce a time decay function to update the utility degree of the evaluation data based on the evaluation data of the collaborative benefit evaluation index of each historical evaluation information, and calculate the comprehensive quantitative evaluation result of the enterprise by weighted calculation.

[0006] As a preferred solution of a comprehensive quantitative method for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises according to the present invention, in step S1, the evaluation indexes of the collaborative object reliability evaluation dimension include 3 evaluation indexes: the communication response ability of the collaborative object, the service attitude level of the collaborative object, and the emergency handling ability of the collaborative object; The evaluation indexes of the collaborative process quality evaluation dimension include 3 evaluation indexes: the consistency of the delivered content, the completion degree of the collaborative plan, and the compliance degree of the collaborative requirements; The evaluation indexes of the collaborative output benefit evaluation dimension include 3 evaluation indexes: the improvement degree of business efficiency, the optimization degree of business processes, and the optimization degree of business costs; The evaluation indexes of the collaborative innovation level evaluation dimension include 3 evaluation indexes: the innovation demand response ability, the innovation achievement output ability, and the continuous intention of innovation collaboration.

[0007] As a preferred solution of a comprehensive quantitative method for evaluating the collaborative benefits between enterprises according to the present invention, in step S2, the specific steps for generating the evaluation preference template are as follows: Import 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indexes in the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index system; Compare the 12 imported indexes pairwise, and select the more important evaluation index from each pair of compared indexes; Select the importance level for the more important evaluation index. The importance levels include five levels: "absolutely important, very important, significantly important, slightly important, equally important", and quantify the importance level according to the importance level reference table; Construct a collaborative benefit evaluation index judgment matrix A according to the quantified value of the importance level;

[0008] The cell elements in the matrix Indicates the importance scale of the row evaluation index compared to the column evaluation index; Calculate the root mean square value of each evaluation index using the following formula to measure the importance of each evaluation index relative to the enterprise synergy benefit evaluation index system;

[0009] Normalize the root mean square values of the 12 evaluation indexes using the following formula to obtain the importance weight of each evaluation index ;

[0010] Then introduce consistency test to judge the consistency of matrix A. If the consistency test fails, the enterprise needs to re-judge the importance level; if the consistency test passes, the importance weights of all evaluation indexes form an evaluation preference template and are stored in the enterprise's evaluation preference template library.

[0011] As a preferred solution of a comprehensive quantification method for enterprise - to - enterprise synergy benefit evaluation described in the present invention, in step S3, the specific steps for obtaining evaluation data are as follows: Select an evaluation preference template from the enterprise's evaluation preference template library, that is, obtain the importance weights of all evaluation indexes; The enterprise combines the actual performance of the cooperation partner and selects an evaluation level for each of the 12 evaluation indexes of the cooperation partner from the five preset levels of "very well achieved, relatively well achieved, generally achieved, poorly completed, extremely poorly completed". The evaluation level is used to measure the achievement of the cooperation partner in a certain evaluation index, and each evaluation data is obtained according to the evaluation level reference table ; The platform stores the evaluation data of the cooperation partner in the synergy benefit evaluation library.

[0012] As a preferred solution of a comprehensive quantification method for enterprise - to - enterprise synergy benefit evaluation described in the present invention, in step S4, the specific steps for calculating the evaluation score are as follows: Use the following formula to perform weighted summation of each evaluation data with its corresponding evaluation index importance weight to obtain the score of each evaluation index , calculate the scores of 4 synergy evaluation dimensions and the dimension weights , the evaluation dimensions and the order of evaluation indicators are defined according to the enterprise synergy benefit index system table; ,

[0013]

[0014]

[0015] Standardize the evaluation scores of each synergy evaluation dimension using the following formula , which is used to measure the evaluation benefits of each synergy evaluation dimension within the enterprise;

[0016] Use the following formula to sum up the scores of the 4 synergy evaluation dimensions to obtain the synergy benefit evaluation result of the enterprise ; .

[0017] As a preferred solution of the comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the synergy benefit between enterprises described in the present invention, in step S5, the specific steps of historical evaluation comprehensive calculation are as follows: According to the enterprise unique identification code, obtain all the historical evaluation information received by the enterprise from the synergy benefit evaluation database, and each evaluation information includes the evaluation record time , the evaluation data of each index ; Extract the evaluation record time parameter in each evaluation information. The evaluation record time parameter is stored as a string composed of eight digits, and use the formula Calculate the number of days between the current time and the evaluation record time of each evaluation information ; Use the time decay function formula , calculate the validity weight of each evaluation information based on the number of days between each evaluation information. The larger the number of days between, the lower the validity of the evaluation information, and the smaller the number of days between, the higher the validity of the evaluation information; The validity weight of the evaluation information will be an important parameter for adjusting the influence degree of each evaluation information on the final historical comprehensive evaluation result. Use the formula Assign the validity weight to the evaluation index scores in each evaluation information. The higher the validity weight of the evaluation information, the greater the influence of the evaluation information on the final historical comprehensive evaluation result; Use the formula Take the average value of all the weighted evaluation index scores to obtain the historical comprehensive evaluation result of the enterprise ; Among them, represents the evaluation result of the th evaluation index after weighted calculation in the th evaluation information, represents the total number of evaluation information owned by the current enterprise.

[0018] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: 1. Through the preference setting of the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index, it is possible to set the importance weight value for the corresponding index according to different collaborative benefit concerns emphasized by the enterprise, generate the corresponding evaluation index preference template for the collaborative benefit evaluation of different enterprises and different types of demand resources, and can meet the adjustment of the importance degree of the evaluation index of the preference template as the enterprise's own situation changes such as time and growth of collaborative tasks, and update the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index preference template for this type of demand resources.

[0019] 2. By obtaining the comprehensive evaluation score of the collaborative benefit of the cooperative enterprise through the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, it is possible to combine the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index system and index evaluation data, calculate the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation result through the comprehensive evaluation dimension, meet the dynamic update of the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation result with the adjustment of the key evaluation index of the preference template, and provide a reference for the comparison of the historical collaborative benefit scores of the collaborative enterprises of this type of resources that have been evaluated after cooperation when the enterprise seeks the same type of resource demand again.

[0020] 3. By introducing the time decay mechanism for the historical collaborative benefit evaluation information of each enterprise, it is possible to provide the utility degree of the historical collaborative benefit evaluation information of the enterprise according to the time sequence of the evaluation information, and calculate the historical comprehensive quantitative evaluation result of the enterprise through weighted calculation, which can solve the "depreciation" effect of information brought by time factors and provide an auxiliary reference basis for the enterprise to find cooperative partners on the industrial software platform. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0021] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings and detailed embodiments. Obviously, the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present invention, and those of ordinary skill in the art can obtain other drawings without creative efforts. Among them: Figure 1 is a flow chart of a comprehensive quantitative method for evaluating the collaborative benefit between enterprises of the present invention; Figure 2 is an importance degree reference table for calculating the importance weight value of the index of the present invention; Figure 3 is an RI value judgment standard table for consistency test of the present invention; Figure 4This is the evaluation grade reference table for quantifying the evaluation grades of the indicators of the present invention; Figure 5 This is the evaluation index system table for the collaborative benefit of enterprises of the present invention. Specific implementation manners

[0022] To make the above objects, features and advantages of the present invention more obvious and understandable, the specific implementation manners of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0023] As Figure 1 shown, the present invention forms an evaluation index preference template by comparing the collaborative benefit evaluation indicators of enterprises in pairs and quantifying the importance level of the indicators. Based on the actual performance of the enterprise, the evaluation data of the indicators is quantified. The analytic hierarchy process is used to calculate the weights of each indicator, calculate and output the scores of the four collaborative evaluation dimensions and the collaborative benefit evaluation score of the enterprise, introduce a time decay function to update the utility degree of the evaluation data, and calculate the historical comprehensive quantitative evaluation result of the enterprise by weighted calculation.

[0024] A comprehensive quantitative method for evaluating the collaborative benefit between enterprises of the present invention includes the following steps: (1) According to the capabilities and benefits that the user enterprise focuses on in the collaborative enterprises in the resource sharing and collaboration tasks, the industrial software platform proposes 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators from four collaborative benefit evaluation dimensions of the reliability of collaborative objects, the quality of the collaborative process, the benefits of collaborative output, and the level of collaborative innovation, as the criteria for subsequent evaluation and scoring; (2) Based on the 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators, the enterprise compares the 12 indicators pairwise according to its own focus on the collaborative benefit, selects the more important one from each pair of compared indicators, sets the importance level of this indicator, thereby calculates the importance weights of all indicators, forms an evaluation preference template for the same type of resources, and saves it to the evaluation preference template library of the enterprise. Among them, the evaluation indicator preference template corresponding to the resource type can be modified and adjusted at any time, and the historical collaborative benefit evaluation scores of the collaborative enterprises will also change accordingly; (3) After the collaborative task is completed, both parties of the cooperative enterprises need to evaluate the collaborative enterprises, select or import the evaluation indicator preference template of this type of required resources, and refer to the actual performance of the cooperative object. The evaluating enterprise selects the corresponding evaluation grade for each evaluation indicator, obtains the corresponding evaluation data according to the evaluation grade reference table, and stores the evaluation data in the collaborative benefit evaluation library of the platform; (4) Based on the importance weights of each indicator in the evaluation preference template and the evaluation data of each evaluation indicator, use the analytic hierarchy process to calculate the scores and weights of the four collaborative evaluation dimensions by weighted calculation, standardize the evaluation scores of each collaborative evaluation dimension, sum and calculate to obtain the collaborative benefit evaluation result of the enterprise, and store it in the historical collaborative benefit information library of the evaluating enterprise; (5) Obtain all the evaluation information of the enterprise from the collaborative benefit evaluation database of the platform. Each evaluation information includes the evaluation record time and the evaluation data of each index. Based on the evaluation data of the collaborative benefit evaluation index of each historical evaluation information, introduce a time decay function to update the utility degree of the evaluation data, and calculate the comprehensive quantitative evaluation result of the enterprise through weighted calculation, and store it in the enterprise collaborative benefit score database.

[0025] Step (1) The enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index system includes 4 collaborative evaluation dimensions and 12 collaborative evaluation indexes, specifically including: (1.1) The collaborative object reliability evaluation dimension is used to evaluate the attitude and cooperation degree of the collaborative partner during the collaboration process. Under this evaluation dimension, 3 indexes are set, namely the collaborative object communication response ability, the collaborative object service attitude level, and the collaborative object emergency handling ability. The smooth communication and response degree of the collaborative enterprise in the evaluation business collaboration process, the business stability and process standardization in the cooperation process, and the active response speed to emergencies are used as the reference for index evaluation; (1.2) The collaborative process quality evaluation dimension is used to evaluate whether the collaborative partner executes according to the agreed content during the collaborative process. Under this evaluation dimension, 3 indexes are set, namely the consistency of the delivered content, the completion degree of the collaborative plan, and the compliance degree of the collaborative requirements. The matching degree between the actual resources or rewards and the agreed content, the execution degree of the behavior mode and task node requirements according to the collaborative plan requirements, and the consistency between the task execution effect and completion situation and the collaborative plan requirements are used as the reference for index evaluation; (1.3) The collaborative output benefit evaluation dimension is used to evaluate the degree of efficiency improvement of the collaborative task compared with the traditional way of completing the task. Under this evaluation dimension, 3 indexes are set, namely the degree of business efficiency improvement, the degree of business process optimization, and the degree of business cost optimization. The reduction of the evaluation business time cycle and the increase in output quantity, the reduction times of interaction frequency and the reduction ratio of the number of task process links, and the proportion of capital consumption compared with the traditional way are used as the reference for index evaluation; (1.4) The evaluation collaborative innovation level evaluation dimension is used to evaluate the degree of improvement of the enterprise's own innovation ability. Under this evaluation dimension, 3 indexes are set, namely the innovation demand response ability, the innovation achievement output ability, and the continuous intention of innovation collaboration. The improvement degree of the analysis and achievement ability of the innovation demand performance index and its function, the growth ratio of intellectual property achievements and new product technology output quantity compared with the traditional way, and the cooperation achievement rate of new business services and technology R & D are used as the reference for index evaluation.

[0026] Step (2) includes the following processes: (2.1) When the enterprise evaluates the collaborative benefit of a certain type of resource demand sharing, it needs to import 12 indexes of the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index system; (2.2)Compare the 12 imported indicators pairwise, and select the more important evaluation indicator from each pair of compared indicators; (2.3)Select the importance level for the more important evaluation indicator. The importance levels include five levels: "completely important, very important, significantly important, slightly important, equally important". And according to the importance reference table (as Figure 2 shown), convert the importance evaluation results of each pair of indicators into specific importance scales to quantify the importance levels; (2.4)Based on the quantified values of the importance levels, construct the judgment matrix A formula (1) for the collaborative benefit evaluation indicators. The judgment matrix is a square matrix, where both the rows and columns are 12 evaluation indicators. The cell element in the matrix represents the importance scale of the evaluation indicator in the th row compared to the evaluation indicator in the th column; (1) (2.5)Calculate the root value of each evaluation indicator using formula (2) , which is used to measure the importance of each evaluation indicator relative to the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicator system; (2) (2.6)Normalize the root values of the 12 evaluation indicators using formula (3) to obtain the importance weights of each evaluation indicator; (3) (2.7)Introduce the consistency test to judge the consistency of the judgment matrix A; calculate the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix to verify the consistency of the judgment matrix. For an n-order positive reciprocal matrix A, its unique non-zero eigenvalue is n. When and only when the maximum eigenvalue of A is equal to n, the matrix A meets the consistency standard. Based on the comparison between the maximum eigenvalue and n, the greater the gap between the two, the higher the degree of inconsistency of the matrix A. The calculation formula for the maximum eigenvalue refers to formula (4); (4) The consistency index CI can quantify this inconsistency. The closer the CI value is to zero, the higher the consistency level. See formula (5).

[0027] (5) When the value of the consistency index CI is zero, it means that the judgment matrix has achieved perfect consistency; if the value of CI is close to zero, it indicates that the consistency level of the judgment matrix is acceptable. Relatively speaking, the increase in the CI value implies an increase in the degree of inconsistency in the judgment matrix. The random consistency index RI is introduced. Based on the theoretical distribution of random matrices, this index can provide a reference standard for CI. The reference standard for the RI value of the consistency index is as Figure 3 shown.

[0028] Compare the calculated CI with RI to obtain the consistency ratio CR. If the value of CR is less than 0.1, it is considered that the consistency test is passed. The calculation formula of CR is shown in formula (6) (6) (2.8)If the consistency test fails, the enterprise needs to re-judge the importance level; if the consistency test passes, the importance weights of all evaluation indicators form an evaluation preference template and are stored in the enterprise's evaluation preference template library; the evaluation preference template reflects the importance and weights of each evaluation indicator under the collaborative task of sharing and collaborating on the same type of resources in the enterprise, and can provide a reference basis for the enterprise's collaborative benefit evaluation, support operations such as querying, calling, and modifying the stored preference templates, and can create preference templates according to different resource types and classify them for management to ensure that the collaborative benefit evaluation preferences of the enterprise at different time points can be effectively recorded and traced.

[0029] Step (3) includes the following processes: (3.1)When the completion of the collaborative task triggers the collaborative benefit evaluation process, the evaluating enterprise selects or imports the corresponding evaluation template from the enterprise's evaluation preference template library according to the resource demand type of the collaborative task. If there is no suitable template for this type of resource in the template library, the enterprise can create or adjust the template according to actual needs to ensure that the importance of the evaluation indicators matches the actual situation of the collaborative task; (3.2)The evaluating enterprise combines the actual performance of the cooperation partner and selects an evaluation level from the five preset levels of "very well achieved, achieved better, achieved generally, achieved poorly, achieved extremely poorly" for each of the 12 evaluation indicators of the cooperation partner. The evaluation level is used to measure the achievement of the cooperation partner in a certain evaluation indicator. According to the evaluation level reference table (such as Figure 4 shown), obtain the evaluation data for each item , and the scoring adopts a unified percentage-based quantitative standard; (3.3)The platform stores the evaluation data of the cooperation partner in the collaborative benefit evaluation library to form a complete evaluation record, supporting queries and statistics according to conditions such as the enterprise, resource demand type, time range, etc.

[0030] Step (4) includes the following processes: (4.1)Use formula (7) to multiply each evaluation data by its corresponding importance weight of evaluation index and perform weighted summation to obtain the score of each evaluation index . Calculate the scores of 4 collaborative evaluation dimensions and dimension weights . The order of evaluation dimensions and evaluation indexes is defined according to the enterprise collaborative benefit index system table

[0031] (7) (4.2)Use formula (8) to standardize the evaluation scores of each collaborative evaluation dimension for measuring the evaluation benefits of each collaborative evaluation dimension within the enterprise (8) (4.3)Use formula (9) to sum up the scores of 4 collaborative evaluation dimensions to obtain the collaborative benefit evaluation result of the enterprise ; (9) Use the collaborative benefit quantification value to reflect the collaborative performance . The larger the value, the better the collaborative performance, providing an auxiliary reference for establishing a collaborative relationship. The platform stores the collaborative benefit evaluation result and detailed scoring data in the historical collaborative benefit information database of the evaluated enterprise and outputs them in visual forms such as a scoring table, a radar chart, and a bar chart

[0032] Step (5) includes the following processes (5.1)According to the enterprise unique identification code, obtain all the historical evaluation information received by the enterprise from the collaborative benefit evaluation database. Each evaluation information includes the evaluation record time and the evaluation data of each index ; (5.2)Extract the evaluation record time parameter in each evaluation information. The evaluation record time parameter is stored as a string composed of eight digits. Use formula (10) to calculate the number of days between the current time and the evaluation record time of each evaluation information (10) (5.3) The smaller the time difference is, the closer the time when the evaluation information is obtained is to the current time, and the more the evaluation information can reflect the current collaboration status of the enterprise being evaluated. Using the time decay function formula (11), the effectiveness weight of each piece of evaluation information is calculated based on the number of days between each piece of evaluation information. The larger the number of days between, the lower the effectiveness of the evaluation information. The smaller the number of days between, the higher the effectiveness of the evaluation information. Industrial manufacturing enterprises will carry out corresponding rectifications and adjustments every year. Evaluation information more than one year ago has basically no reference value. Therefore, the time decay function is set to 365; (11) (5.4)The effectiveness weight of the evaluation information will be an important parameter for adjusting the influence degree of each piece of evaluation information on the final historical comprehensive evaluation result. Using formula (12), the effectiveness weight is assigned to the score of the evaluation index in each piece of evaluation information. The higher the effectiveness weight of the evaluation information, the greater the influence of the evaluation information on the final historical comprehensive evaluation result; (12) (5.5)Using formula (13), the average value of all weighted scores of the evaluation indexes is taken to obtain the historical comprehensive evaluation result of the enterprise , and the comprehensive evaluation results of each evaluation dimension of the enterprise are output, providing an auxiliary reference for the platform enterprise to select shared cooperation partners.

[0033] (13) Among them, represents the evaluation result of the th evaluation index after weighted calculation in the th piece of evaluation information, represents the total number of evaluation information owned by the current enterprise.

[0034] Although the present invention has been described with reference to the embodiments above, various improvements can be made to it and components therein can be replaced with equivalents without departing from the scope of the present invention. In particular, as long as there is no structural conflict, the various features in the disclosed embodiments of the present invention can be combined with each other in any way. The exhaustive description of these combinations is omitted in this specification only for the sake of saving space and resources. Therefore, the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments disclosed herein, but includes all technical solutions falling within the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. An integrated quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits among enterprises, characterized in that, The steps are as follows: S1. Set up an evaluation index system: Formulate 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators from four collaborative benefit evaluation dimensions of the reliability of collaborative objects, the quality of the collaborative process, the benefits of collaborative output, and the level of collaborative innovation, which will be used as the criteria for subsequent evaluation and scoring; S2. Generate an evaluation preference template: Import the 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators in step S1, compare the 12 indicators pairwise in sequence, select the more important one from each pair of compared indicators, set the importance level of this indicator, and thus calculate the importance weights of all indicators to form an evaluation preference template, which is saved to the enterprise's evaluation preference template library; S3. Obtain evaluation data: Refer to the actual performance of the cooperation object, select the corresponding evaluation level for each evaluation indicator, obtain the corresponding evaluation data according to the evaluation level reference table, and store the evaluation data in the collaborative benefit evaluation library of the platform; S4. Calculate the evaluation score: Obtain the importance weights of each indicator in the evaluation preference template in step S2, combine the evaluation data of each evaluation indicator in step S3, calculate the scores and weights of the four collaborative evaluation dimensions through weighted calculation, standardize the evaluation scores of each collaborative evaluation dimension, and calculate the sum to obtain the collaborative benefit evaluation result of the enterprise; S5. Comprehensive calculation of historical evaluations: Obtain all the evaluation information of this enterprise from the collaborative benefit evaluation library in step S3. Based on the evaluation data of the collaborative benefit evaluation indicators of each historical evaluation information, introduce a time decay function to update the utility degree of the evaluation data, and calculate the comprehensive quantitative evaluation result of this enterprise through weighted calculation.

2. The comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits among enterprises according to claim 1, wherein, In step S1, the evaluation indicators in the evaluation dimension of the reliability of collaborative objects include 3 evaluation indicators: the communication response ability of collaborative objects, the service attitude level of collaborative objects, and the emergency handling ability of collaborative objects; The evaluation indicators in the evaluation dimension of the quality of the collaborative process include 3 evaluation indicators: the consistency of delivered content, the completion degree of the collaborative plan, and the compliance degree with collaborative requirements; The evaluation indicators in the evaluation dimension of the benefits of collaborative output include 3 evaluation indicators: the improvement degree of business efficiency, the optimization degree of business processes, and the optimization degree of business costs; The evaluation indicators in the evaluation dimension of the level of collaborative innovation include 3 evaluation indicators: the innovation demand response ability, the innovation achievement output ability, and the continuous intention of innovation collaboration.

3. A comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits among enterprises according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S2, the specific steps for generating the evaluation preference template are as follows: Import the 12 enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation indicators in the enterprise collaborative benefit evaluation index system; Compare the 12 imported indicators pairwise, and select the more important evaluation indicator from each pair of compared indicators; Select the importance level for the more important evaluation indicator. The importance levels include "completely important, very important, significantly important, slightly important, equally important" five levels, and quantify the importance level according to the importance level reference table; Construct a collaborative benefit evaluation index judgment matrix A according to the quantified value of the importance level; ； Cell elements in the matrix Indicates the importance scale of the row evaluation index compared to the column evaluation index; Calculate the root mean square value of each evaluation index using the following formula , which is used to measure the importance of each evaluation index relative to the enterprise synergy benefit evaluation index system; ； Normalize the root mean square values of 12 evaluation indicators using the following formula to obtain the importance weights of each evaluation indicator ; ； Then introduce a consistency test to judge the consistency of matrix A. If the consistency test fails, the enterprise needs to re-judge the importance level; If the consistency test passes, the importance weights of all evaluation indicators form an evaluation preference template and are stored in the enterprise's evaluation preference template library.

4. An integrated quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits among enterprises according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S3, the specific steps for obtaining evaluation data are as follows: Select an evaluation preference template from the enterprise's evaluation preference template library, that is, obtain the importance weights of all evaluation indicators; The enterprise combines the actual performance of the cooperation partner and selects an evaluation level for each of the 12 evaluation indicators of the cooperation partner from the five preset levels of "very well achieved, fairly well achieved, moderately achieved, poorly completed, extremely poorly completed". The evaluation level is used to measure the achievement of the cooperation partner in a certain evaluation indicator, and various evaluation data are obtained according to the evaluation level reference table ; The platform stores the evaluation data of the cooperation object in the collaborative benefit evaluation library.

5. The comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits among enterprises according to claim 1, wherein In step S4, the specific steps for calculating the evaluation score are as follows: Use the following formula to process each evaluation data and its corresponding evaluation index importance weight to perform weighted summation to obtain the score of each evaluation index , and calculate the scores of 4 collaborative evaluation dimensions and dimension weights . The evaluation dimension and the order of evaluation indexes are defined according to the enterprise collaborative benefit index system table; , ； ； ； Standardize the evaluation scores of each collaborative evaluation dimension using the following formula for measuring the evaluation benefits of each collaborative evaluation dimension within the enterprise; ； The scores of the four collaborative evaluation dimensions are summed up using the following formula to obtain the evaluation result of the enterprise's collaborative benefit ; 。 6. The comprehensive quantification method for evaluating the collaborative benefits among enterprises according to claim 1, wherein In step S5, the specific steps for comprehensive calculation of historical evaluations are as follows: According to the enterprise's unique identification code, all historical evaluation information received by the enterprise is obtained from the collaborative benefit evaluation database, and each evaluation information includes the evaluation record time , the evaluation data of each index ; Extract the evaluation record time parameter in each piece of evaluation information. The evaluation record time parameter is stored as a string composed of eight digits. Use the formula to calculate the current time and the number of days between the evaluation record time of each piece of evaluation information ; Using the time decay function formula , calculate the effectiveness weight of each piece of evaluation information based on the number of days between each piece of evaluation information. The greater the number of days between, the lower the effectiveness of the piece of evaluation information; the smaller the number of days between, the higher the effectiveness of the piece of evaluation information. The weight of the evaluation information validity will be an important parameter for adjusting the influence degree of each piece of evaluation information on the final historical comprehensive evaluation result. Using the formula Assign a validity weight to the score of the evaluation index in each piece of evaluation information. The higher the weight of the evaluation information validity, the greater the influence of this piece of evaluation information on the final historical comprehensive evaluation result; Using the formula Take the average of all weighted evaluation index scores to obtain the historical comprehensive evaluation result of the enterprise ; Among them, represents the evaluation result of the th evaluation index after weighted calculation in the th evaluation information, and represents the total number of evaluation information owned by the current enterprise.

Images