Material risk assessment method and system

Abstract

The invention discloses a material risk assessment method and system, and the method comprises the steps: defining impact scores and risk weights of impact factors with different material risks, carrying out the summation of the product of the impact score of each impact factor and the corresponding risk weight, and calculating a comprehensive risk value of a material; an evaluation system comprising a front-end display module, a maintenance module, a storage query module and a system background is designed; therefore, the material risk can be quantitatively represented more reasonably, the problems of high dependence on manual experience, single consideration factor, lack of a unified quantification method when multiple factors are considered and difficulty in realizing evaluation consistency and accuracy in the prior art are solved, and the material risk can be automatically and quantitatively estimated more accurately.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of material management, and particularly to a method and system for material risk assessment. Background Art

[0002] The assessment and control of material risks are the core links in an enterprise's supply chain management, directly affecting aspects such as production progress, product quality, and cost control.

[0003] The current ERP system does not have such a functional module. Although there is data on various aspects affecting material risks, it is not summarized and analyzed, nor can it be put into use through simple configuration, and it cannot control the actions of purchase applications and purchase orders, effectively reducing the possibility and impact degree of risk occurrence.

[0004] The existing means of material risk identification are single, mainly based on the application of the material itself or the quality performance of the material, without considering many factors related to the material in the entire production process, such as substitute materials, material usage, and sources of supply. Ultimately, the risk assessment depends highly on manual experience and has insufficient practicality.

[0005] The Chinese invention patent with the publication number CN 115907456 A and the name of a material management method and device hierarchically divides the internal modules of the material based on the parent-child relationship between the internal modules of the material to generate a material model; it continuously monitors the attribute information of the modules in the material model. If the attribute information of the module changes, according to the preset risk identification rules, the risk value of the material model is obtained. This risk value still does not consider the relevant factors in the entire production process. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The purpose of the present invention is to overcome the defects existing in the prior art and provide a method and system for material risk assessment. Due to the need for the prediction and control of material risks, through the method of jointly analyzing various influencing factors, influence priorities, and influence proportion weights (i.e., risk weights), the risk values of the material at different time periods can be estimated, guiding the formulation of subsequent purchase applications and purchase orders, and controlling the risk values, thereby ensuring the normal operation of the supply chain and production, and further controlling the cost.

[0007] To achieve the above purpose, the present invention designs a method for material risk assessment. The assessment method calculates the comprehensive risk value by defining the influence scores and risk weights of different influencing factors of the material risk size, and summing the products of the influence scores of each influencing factor and the corresponding risk weights; that is Comprehensive risk value = Σ (influence scores of all defined influencing factors * risk weights); If the comprehensive risk value is greater than or equal to the risk threshold of the material, the risk value is controlled by controlling the source of goods, ratio, purchase quantity, etc. of the purchase application and purchase order; The influencing factors at least include the usage stage of the material, substitute material statistics, source of goods and delivery cycle, material usage amount, and incoming material quality; the sum of the full score influencing values of all influencing factors is a fixed value, and the sum of all risk weights is a fixed value; The evaluation method further includes establishing a correspondence table between the attribute values of the influencing factors and the influencing values, as well as a risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors or the correspondence relationship between the influencing factors and the risk weights.

[0008] Furthermore, the influencing factor information obtains data of various relevant documents through the existing ERP system and extracts relevant attribute values therefrom.

[0009] Furthermore, the usage stage includes two attribute values, namely "trial / small batch stage" and "finalized stage".

[0010] Furthermore, the substitute material statistics at least include two sub-factors, namely "whether there are substitute materials" and "range of product categories used".

[0011] Furthermore, the source of goods and delivery cycle at least include two sub-factors, namely "whether there are multiple source channels" and "supplier delivery cycle".

[0012] Furthermore, the material usage amount at least includes two sub-factors, namely "total annual usage amount of the material" and "total annual purchase amount of the material".

[0013] Furthermore, the incoming material quality at least includes two sub-factors, namely "first-pass rate of incoming materials" and "frequency of incoming material returns".

[0014] Furthermore, the influencing values include a hundred-point system, a twenty-point system, a ten-point system, or a one-point system, and the value of the sum of all risk weights includes 1 or 0.5.

[0015] Furthermore, the evaluation method further includes timely maintaining the correspondence table between the attribute values of various influencing factors and the influencing values, as well as the risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors.

[0016] On the other hand, a material risk assessment system, the assessment system includes a system implemented according to the material risk assessment method described in any one of claims 1 to 9, and the assessment system generally includes a maintenance module, a storage and query module, and a system background that are respectively electrically connected to the front-end display module.

[0017] The advantages and beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: The present invention first analyzes and determines the influencing factors of material risk, defines the influence scores and risk weights of different influencing factors, so as to more reasonably quantify and characterize the material risk, overcoming the problems of strong dependence on manual experience, single consideration factor, lack of a unified quantification method when considering multiple factors, and difficulty in achieving the consistency and accuracy of evaluation. It can automatically and quantitatively estimate the material risk more accurately, which plays a significant role in the effective control of the continuous production process of modern enterprises, is beneficial to the control of production progress, product quality, and cost, and makes up for the deficiencies of existing systems such as ERP.

[0018] At the same time, with the change of environmental conditions or application scenarios, the present invention also designs a maintenance function for the influence score correspondence table and risk weight allocation table, which can timely adjust the influencing factors and their characterization values of the influence on material risk, so that the finally obtained risk value is getting closer and closer to the actual situation, providing data support for subsequent risk control and cost control; designs a material risk record query function, which can query the historical risk score records of materials, form a risk trend, and is beneficial to the subsequent adjustment of influence scores and risk weights and risk assessment; obtains information (attribute values) of material risk-related influencing factors through the existing enterprise production management system such as the ERP system, which can effectively avoid the problems of repeated development of application systems and difficulties in obtaining and maintaining original information. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0019] Figure 1 is the principle block diagram of the material risk assessment method of the present invention; Figure 2 is the decomposition diagram of material risk influencing factors; Figure 3 is the principle block diagram of the material risk assessment system of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0020] The following combines the drawings and embodiments to further describe the specific implementation manners of the present invention. The following embodiments are only used to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention and cannot be used to limit the protection scope of the present invention.

[0021] Embodiment 1: A material risk assessment method, as Figure 1 shown, the assessment method calculates the comprehensive risk value by defining the influence scores and risk weights of different influencing factors of the material risk size, and summing the products of the influence scores of each influencing factor and the corresponding risk weights; that is Comprehensive risk value = Σ (influence scores of all defined influencing factors * risk weights); If the comprehensive risk value is greater than or equal to the material risk threshold, the risk value is controlled by controlling the source of goods, ratio, purchase quantity, etc. of the procurement application and procurement order; As Figure 2As shown, the influencing factors at least include the usage stage of the material, substitute material statistics, source of supply and delivery cycle, material usage amount, and incoming material quality; the sum of the full - score influence scores of all influencing factors is a fixed value, and the sum of all risk weights is a fixed value; The evaluation method further includes establishing a correspondence table between the attribute values of the influencing factors and the influence scores, as well as a risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors or the correspondence relationship between the influencing factors and the risk weights. Generally, building a table is more convenient for maintenance, thus facilitating the automatic operation of the system. The software automatically obtains various relevant documents related to the influencing factors from the existing ERP system, extracts the attribute values related to the influencing factors, looks up the table to obtain the influence scores, and then looks up the table to obtain the risk weights, so as to automatically calculate the comprehensive risk value.

[0022] The technical problems to be solved by the present invention: Comprehensively consider and determine various influencing factors affecting the material risk assessment and their influence characterization methods, including the usage stage of the material, the usage scope in the bill of materials, and whether there are substitute materials; consider the source channels, prices, and delivery cycles of the materials; consider the annual total usage amount, annual procurement frequency, and annual total procurement amount of the materials; consider the delivery quality, return frequency, etc. of the materials.

[0023] The present invention characterizes the influence through the influence score and the risk weight. The method given needs to obtain the data of various relevant documents from the existing ERP - like system to obtain the attribute values of each influencing factor and the corresponding influence scores through looking up the table or calculation, and then combine the corresponding risk weights to obtain the risk value of the material through the calculation rule. Its advantage is that through the automatic value - taking of the system and the set calculation rules, the risk values of different materials at different time periods can be directly queried and historical records can be generated; the disadvantage is that it is necessary to maintain the correspondence table between the attribute values of various influencing factors and the influence scores, as well as the risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors, and timely change and adjust the above - mentioned influence score correspondence table, risk weight distribution table, etc. according to different situations, so as to make the finally obtained risk value closer and closer to the actual situation, providing more accurate data support for subsequent risk control and cost control.

[0024] The software or system implemented by using the method of the present invention, through the configuration and automatic calculation of the material risk influencing factors, obtains the current risk value of the material, and through the control of the risk value, further controls the source of supply, ratio, purchase quantity, etc. of the purchase application and purchase order. At the same time, the historical risk values can be queried and used to adjust the subsequent influence parameters, ultimately achieving the purpose of avoiding risks to the greatest extent.

[0025] Preferably, the influencing factor information obtains the data of various relevant documents through the existing ERP system and extracts the relevant attribute values from them.

[0026] Combined with the ERP system, directly utilizing its existing information provides great convenience for the application of the method of the present invention, and users do not need to collect relevant influencing factor information anymore. For example, for the information in the material usage stage, the value of "material usage stage" in the "material attributes" in the ERP system (Bill of Materials BOM) should be retrieved (which is called the attribute value in the present invention), and this value is normally maintained by the ERP system.

[0027] Preferably, the usage stage includes two attribute values, namely "trial / small batch stage" and "finalized stage". In this embodiment, when the material is in the "trial / small batch" stage, whether it meets the product usage performance is to be determined, so it is at high risk, and the full score of the influencing score is taken as 20 points; when it is in the finalized stage, the influencing score is taken as 0 points, that is, after the "trial" and "small batch" stages, the material meets the product requirements and can be purchased in batches, so the risk is the lowest.

[0028] Preferably, the substitute material statistics at least include two sub-factors, namely "whether there is a substitute material" and "range of product categories used"; in this embodiment, the full score of the influencing scores of both sub-factors is 10 points. Retrieve the Bill of Materials in the ERP system to check whether there is a substitution relationship and how many substitute materials there are. When there is no substitute material, the influencing score is 10 points; when there is exactly one substitute material, the influencing score is 5 points; when there are 2 or more substitute materials, the influencing score is 0 points. Retrieve the Bill of Materials in reverse and count the categories of products that the material is used for (note that it is not the product model, and one category may have multiple product models). If it is not used for any product category or is only used for one product category, the influencing score is 10 points; when it is used for 2 to 5 product categories, the influencing score is 5 points; when it is used for more than 5 product categories, the influencing score is 10 points.

[0029] Preferably, the source of supply and delivery cycle at least include two sub-factors, namely "whether there are multiple source channels" and "supplier delivery cycle"; in this embodiment, the full score of the influencing scores of both sub-factors is 10 points. Retrieve whether there are multiple source channels and the specific number of this material in the source management. If there is only one source channel, the influencing score is 10 points; when there are 2 source channels, the influencing score is 5 points; when there are 3 or more source channels, the influencing score is 0 points. Retrieve the "planned delivery cycle" maintained in the material attributes, and at the same time count the actual delivery cycle of this material (the average value of the receipt date - the supplier confirmation date of the purchase order for the most recent receipt and the previous 10 receipts). Compare the two. When the actual delivery cycle >= the planned delivery cycle or the planned delivery cycle is empty, the influencing score is 10 points; when the actual delivery cycle < the planned delivery cycle and the float is within 10% (inclusive), the influencing score is 5 points; when the actual delivery cycle < the planned delivery cycle and it is more than 10%, the influencing score is 0 points.

[0030] Preferably, the material usage amount includes at least two sub - factors: "total annual material usage amount" and "total annual procurement amount of materials". In this embodiment, the full score of the influence scores of the two sub - factors is 10 points each. The total annual usage amounts of the material for the year one year back, two years back, and three years back from the current time are counted (including material requisition forms, supplementary material forms, other outbound order forms, assembly and disassembly order forms, etc., and the effective information can be comprehensively utilized for extraction). If the usage amount of each year in two consecutive years fluctuates within ±10% compared with the usage amount of the previous year, the influence score is 5 points. If the usage amount of each year in two consecutive years increases by more than 20% compared with the usage amount of the previous year, the influence score is 0 points. When excluding the situations corresponding to the above two score values (including but not limited to: the total annual usage amounts of only one or two of these years make it impossible to make a comparison, or the total annual usage amount of one or two of these years decreases by more than 10%), the influence score is 10 points. The total procurement amounts of the annual procurement orders of the material for the year one year back, two years back, and three years back from the current time are counted. If the procurement amount of each year fluctuates within ±30% compared with the procurement amount of the previous year, the influence score is 5 points. If the procurement amount of each year in two consecutive years increases by more than 30% compared with the procurement amount of the previous year, the influence score is 0 points. Excluding the situations corresponding to the above two score values (including but not limited to: the total annual procurement amounts of only one or two of these years make it impossible to make a comparison, or the total annual procurement amount of one or two of these years decreases by more than 30%), the influence score is 10 points.

[0031] Preferably, the incoming material quality includes at least two sub - factors: "first - pass rate of incoming materials" and "frequency of incoming material returns". In this embodiment, the full score of the influence scores of the two sub - factors is 10 points each. The first - pass rate of incoming materials in the inspection forms for the year one year back, two years back, and three years back from the current time of the material is counted. If the first - pass rate of incoming materials of each year fluctuates within ±0.1% (inclusive) compared with the first - pass rate of incoming materials of the previous year, the influence score is 5 points. If the first - pass rate of incoming materials of each year increases by more than 0.1% (exclusive) compared with the first - pass rate of incoming materials of the previous year, the influence score is 0 points. Excluding the situations corresponding to the above two score values (including but not limited to: the first - pass rate of incoming materials of only one or two of these years, or the first - pass rate of incoming materials of one or two of these years decreases by more than 0.1% (exclusive)), the influence score is 10 points. The frequency of incoming material returns in the procurement return forms for the year one year back, two years back, and three years back from the current time of the material is counted. If the frequency of incoming material returns of each year fluctuates within ±10% (inclusive) compared with the frequency of incoming material returns of the previous year, the influence score is 5 points. If the frequency of incoming material returns of each year decreases by more than 10% compared with the frequency of incoming material returns of the previous year, the influence score is 0 points. Excluding the situations corresponding to the above two score values (including but not limited to: the frequency of incoming material returns of only one or two of these years, or the frequency of incoming material returns of one or two of these years increases by more than 10%), the influence score is 10 points.

[0032] This embodiment is merely a specific definition method for risk influencing factors and their influence magnitudes. In actual work, users should define the impact scores and weights according to the actual risk influencing factors of the materials to be estimated and the influence magnitudes of each influencing factor. Therefore, although there may be infinitely many intermediate processes and results in the actual risk estimation implemented, it does not affect its essence of not exceeding the protection scope of the present invention.

[0033] Preferably, the impact scores include the hundred-mark system, the twenty-mark system, the ten-mark system, or the one-mark system, and the sum of all risk weights takes a value of 1 or 0.5; regardless of which impact score definition or risk weight value definition is used, the impact scores and weight values of all influencing factors participating in the material risk assessment should be defined under a unified standard and remain consistent; the relative magnitudes of the impact score values of the same influencing factor in different situations need to reflect the relative magnitudes of the impacts on the material risk in different situations, and theoretically, the relative magnitudes of the impact score values of different influencing factors and the corresponding risk weight values need to reflect the relative magnitudes of the impacts of the current influencing factors on the material risk.

[0034] For the sake of simplicity in this embodiment, the full score values of different influencing factors are defined to be the same (the full score is 20 points for all), and different impact scores are defined for different situations of the same influencing factor; different influencing factors define their risk weights according to their overall influence magnitudes on the material risk.

[0035] Commonly used score definitions are generally the hundred-mark system or the ten-mark system, and the weight definition generally controls the sum of all weight values to be equal to 1, but this is not necessary. To illustrate the diversity of this definition, this embodiment takes 5 influencing factors, namely the usage stage, substitute material statistics, source and delivery cycle, material usage amount, and incoming material quality, as examples. The full score weight of each influencing item is defined as 20 points (i.e., the twenty-mark system), and according to the influence magnitudes of each influencing factor on the overall material risk in the production stage, the risk weights of the above 5 stages are defined as 0.2, 0.1, 0.1, 0.05, and 0.05 in sequence. Thus, the maximum risk value is 10, that is, it can be understood that the total risk value adopts the ten-mark system, and at the same time, a risk threshold of 6 is set. When the threshold is exceeded, the system alarms or gives a prompt for handling; other definition methods are not listed one by one, as long as the consistency principle is satisfied. For example, if the full score weight of each influencing item is defined as 10 points (i.e., the ten-mark system), and the risk weights of the above 5 stages are 0.4, 0.2, 0.2, 0.1, and 0.1 in sequence, the maximum risk value is still 10, that is, the ten-mark system is also adopted.

[0036] In calculation, the evaluation method further includes timely maintaining the correspondence table between the attribute values of various influencing factors and the influence scores, as well as the risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors. Generally, the above-mentioned correspondence table of influence scores, risk weight distribution table, etc. are adjusted in a timely manner according to different scenarios, so as to make the finally obtained risk value closer to the actual situation, providing more accurate data support for subsequent risk control and cost control. This maintenance and adjustment does not violate the principle that the sum of the full score influence values of all influencing factors is a fixed value and the sum of all risk weights is a fixed value. However, if a new set of evaluation criteria is established, such as adding or deleting influencing factors, or the influence of a certain influencing factor changes significantly with the change of the environment, generally manifested as an obvious relative change in the risk weight, at this time, the "sum of influence scores" and the "sum of risk weights" can also be redefined. Generally, after the correspondence table of influence scores and risk weight distribution table is maintained or modified, especially after redefining the "sum of influence scores" and the "sum of risk weights", the newly obtained comprehensive material risk value is no longer compared with the comprehensive risk value before maintenance.

[0037] Specifically, through the query of material risk history, mainly query the historical risk score records of materials, form a risk trend, and assist in the subsequent adjustment of influence scores, risk weights and risk assessment.

[0038] It should be noted that this maintenance work is not contradictory to the principle that "the influence scores and weight values of all influencing factors participating in the material risk assessment should be defined under a unified standard". The former means that if the material risk values in different periods are to be compared, the risk values should be defined or calculated under a unified standard; if the comparison is abandoned (which does not mean that it cannot be compared at all), it is naturally allowed to redefine the standard after a period of time, or stage by stage or when the situation changes.

[0039] Example 2: The difference from Example 1 is that the influencing factor "material usage amount" in this example also includes the sub-factor "inventory quantity", and the three score-taking levels of the influence scores of the two sub-factors "total annual material usage" and "total annual procurement amount of materials" are modified to 6 points, 3 points, and 0 points respectively, corresponding to the original 10 points, 5 points, and 0 points; the score-taking method for the sub-factor "inventory quantity" is to total the current inventory quantity and the consumption demand within a certain period of time in the future. The certain period of time, such as 3 days, one week, half a month, one month, half a year, one year, etc., mainly depends on the ability of the enterprise to consider reasonable inventory to support continuous production according to the market supply and internal consumption situation of the material. If "average current inventory quantity / consumption demand >= 100%", the influence score is 0 points; if "100% > average current inventory quantity / consumption demand >= 50%", the influence score is 4 points; if "average current inventory quantity / consumption demand < 50%", the influence score is 8 points.

[0040] Example 3: The difference from Embodiment 1 is that in this embodiment, five influencing factors, namely the usage stage, substitute material statistics, source and delivery cycle, material usage amount, and incoming material quality, all adopt a 100-point system. All sub-factors of the same influencing factor equally divide its 100 points, and the weights are 0.4, 0.2, 0.2, 0.1, and 0.1 in sequence. In this way, the comprehensive risk value is also in a 100-point system, and at the same time, the risk threshold is set to 50.

[0041] Embodiment 4: A material risk assessment system, the assessment system includes a system implemented by the material risk assessment method described in any one of the above embodiments and its preferred solutions, as Figure 3 shown, the assessment system generally includes a maintenance module, a storage and query module, and a system background that are respectively electrically connected to the front-end display module.

[0042] The maintenance module is mainly used to complete the maintenance of various influencing factors and risk weights, as well as the update and maintenance of the corresponding relationship between the attribute values and influence scores of each influencing factor.

[0043] The system background includes an existing system that provides statistics such as the usage stage of the material, the usage scope in the bill of materials, and whether there are substitute materials, the source channels and delivery cycles of the material, the total annual usage amount and total annual purchase amount of the material, the delivery quality of the material, and the return frequency, that is, a system that provides all influencing factor attribute values, which can be a corresponding developed software module or an existing system, such as an enterprise's ERP system.

[0044] The front-end display module is mainly used to obtain all influencing factor attribute values from the system background, obtain the corresponding influence scores and risk weights through the maintenance module, calculate, display, and send the comprehensive risk value of the corresponding material and corresponding time to the storage and query module.

[0045] The storage and query module provides historical queries of material risks, which is mainly used to query the records of the comprehensive risk values of materials in history, form a risk trend, assist in the adjustment of subsequent influence scores and risk weights and the optimization and prediction of risks, and ultimately achieve the expected goal of avoiding risks to a greater extent.

[0046] The above are only the preferred embodiments of the present invention. It should be noted that for those of ordinary skill in the art in the technical field, without departing from the technical principle of the present invention, several improvements and refinements can be made, such as defining different new influencing factors and their combinations, or adopting different score or weight representation methods. These improvements and refinements should also be regarded as the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for material risk assessment, characterized in that, The described evaluation method calculates the comprehensive risk value by defining the influence scores and risk weights of different influencing factors for the material risk level, and summing the products of the influence scores of each influencing factor and the corresponding risk weights; That is Comprehensive risk value = Σ (influence scores of all defined influencing factors * risk weights); The influencing factors at least include the usage stage of the material, alternative material statistics, source and delivery cycle, material usage amount, and incoming material quality; the sum of the full score influence scores of all influencing factors is a fixed value, and the sum of all risk weights is a fixed value; The described evaluation method also includes establishing a correspondence table between the attribute values of the influencing factors and the influence scores, as well as a risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors or the correspondence between the influencing factors and the risk weights.

2. The material risk assessment method according to claim 1, wherein The information of the influencing factors obtains the data of various relevant documents through the existing ERP system and extracts the relevant attribute values from them.

3. The material risk assessment method according to claim 1, characterized in that The usage stage includes two attribute values of "trial / small batch stage" and "finalized stage".

4. The material risk assessment method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The alternative material statistics at least include two sub-factors of "whether there is an alternative material" and "usage product category range".

5. A method for material risk assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that The source and delivery cycle at least include two sub-factors of "whether there are multiple source channels" and "supplier delivery cycle".

6. The material risk assessment method according to claim 1, wherein The material usage amount at least includes two sub-factors of "total annual material usage amount" and "total annual procurement amount of the material".

7. A method for material risk assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that, The incoming material quality at least includes two sub-factors of "first-pass yield of incoming materials" and "frequency of incoming material returns".

8. A material risk assessment method according to claim 1, characterized in that The influence scores include a hundred-point system, a twenty-point system, a ten-point system, or a one-point system, and the value of the sum of all risk weights includes 1 or 0.

5.

9. A material risk assessment method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The described evaluation method also includes maintaining the correspondence table between the attribute values of various influencing factors and the influence scores, as well as the risk weight distribution table corresponding to the influencing factors.

10. A material risk assessment system, characterized in that, The described evaluation system includes a system implemented according to the material risk evaluation method described in any one of claims 1 to 9. The evaluation system includes a maintenance module, a storage and query module, and a system background that are respectively electrically connected to the front-end display module.

Images