Enterprise management risk assessment informatization evaluation method and system
By constructing a mapping association matrix and setting dynamic assessment coefficient allocation rules, the subjectivity and dynamic adjustment problems of traditional enterprise management risk assessment are solved, scientific quantification and dynamic adaptive risk assessment are achieved, and the enterprise management level and risk response capabilities are improved.
Patent Information
- Application Number
- CN202510698937.9
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- Filing Date
- 2025-05-28
- Publication Date
- 2025-09-09
- Estimated Expiration
- Not applicable · inactive patent
AI Technical Summary
Traditional enterprise management risk assessment methods rely on expert experience, lack scientific quantification, and the assessment results are highly subjective. They are difficult to fully reflect the overall risk status of the enterprise and lack a dynamic adjustment mechanism, resulting in a lack of targetedness and effectiveness in risk management.
By collecting the company's historical supervision and audit data and performance data, building a mapping association matrix, defining risk threshold intervals and setting dynamic assessment coefficient allocation rules, and combining real-time data acquisition and quarterly adjustments, we can achieve scientific quantification and dynamic adaptability of risk assessment.
It realizes data-driven and scientific quantification of risk assessment, enhances the dynamic adaptability and flexibility of assessment, provides intuitive risk assessment results, supports enterprises to timely discover and manage potential risks, and improve management level.
Smart Images
Figure CN120611964A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of enterprise management, and in particular to an enterprise management risk assessment informationization evaluation method and system. Background Art
[0002] In modern enterprise management, risk assessment and control are key to ensuring stable operations and achieving sustainable development. However, traditional enterprise management risk assessment methods have many limitations and are unable to meet the increasingly complex and changing risk management needs of enterprises. Specific issues are as follows: Traditional risk assessments often rely on expert experience or simple qualitative analysis, making the process significantly influenced by human factors and lacking a scientific, systematic, and quantitative approach. For example, when assessing corporate compliance risk, auditors may rely solely on intuitive judgment, making it difficult to accurately measure the extent of the risk and its impact on the company's overall operations. This results in highly subjective assessments that lack objectivity and reliability.
[0003] Existing risk assessment methods typically focus on risks in a specific area or dimension, such as financial performance risk or compliance risk, while ignoring the interrelationships and integrated impacts across all aspects of a company's operations. This single-dimensional approach fails to fully and accurately reflect the overall risk profile faced by a company, easily leading to one-sided and limited risk management.
[0004] Traditional risk assessment methods often use fixed indicators and weighting systems, lacking dynamic adjustment mechanisms. This prevents assessment results from accurately reflecting a company's current risk characteristics and needs, leading to a lack of targeted and effective risk management measures.
[0005] Therefore, it is necessary to provide an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method and system to solve the above technical problems. Summary of the Invention
[0006] In order to solve the above technical problems, the present invention provides an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method and system for solving the problems of strong subjectivity, lack of scientific quantitative basis, single risk assessment dimension, lack of dynamic adjustment mechanism, and difficulty in adapting to the risk needs of enterprises at different development stages.
[0007] The present invention provides an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method, comprising the following steps: The evaluation method comprises the following steps: Regularly collect historical supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise, quantify the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis methods, and thus construct a mapping correlation matrix; Based on the mapping association matrix, the risk threshold intervals of the evaluation indicators are defined, and the boundary conditions of the intervals are determined. The evaluation indicators supervise the audit indicators and performance indicators, and the risk threshold intervals include low-level risk intervals, medium-level risk intervals, and high-level risk intervals. According to different risk intervals, set the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules of the evaluation indicators; Obtain the supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determine the risk threshold range to which each evaluation indicator belongs, trigger the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtain the evaluation coefficients corresponding to each evaluation indicator allocation; Obtain each evaluation indicator from the supervisory audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assign corresponding evaluation coefficients based on each evaluation indicator, calculate the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management by weighted method, and generate a visual risk level report.
[0008] Preferably, the process of regularly collecting historical supervisory audit data and performance data of an enterprise, quantifying the mapping relationship between supervisory audit indicators and performance indicators through a correlation analysis method, and constructing a mapping correlation matrix specifically includes the following steps: Obtain historical supervisory audit data, including compliance inspection records, problem rectification records, and risk event records; obtain historical performance data, including financial performance, operational performance, and strategic performance; The absolute value of the correlation between the supervisory audit indicators and the performance indicators is quantified using the Pearson correlation coefficient in the correlation analysis method, and the indicator pairs with an absolute correlation value ≥ 0.5 are selected as the core indicators for constructing the mapping relationship; Based on the core indicators of the mapping relationship, a mapping association matrix is constructed with supervision and audit indicators as rows and performance indicators as columns.
[0009] Preferably, the specific steps of defining the risk threshold interval of the evaluation indicator based on the mapping association matrix and determining the interval boundary conditions include: The risk threshold intervals for the evaluation indicators are defined as follows: Low risk threshold interval: the evaluation indicator value is within ±10% of the historical mean; Medium risk threshold interval: the indicator value deviates from the historical mean by 10%-30%; High risk threshold interval: the indicator value exceeds the historical mean by >30%; Determine the boundary conditions specifically as follows: Based on the company's historical supervisory audit data, performance data and industry standards, determine the critical values of each risk interval; The interval boundaries are adjusted every quarter based on the latest corporate historical supervision and audit data and performance data.
[0010] Preferably, the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules for setting evaluation indicators for different risk intervals include: Low-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 0.5, medium-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 1.0, high-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 1.5.
[0011] Preferably, the specific steps of obtaining the supervisory audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determining the risk threshold interval to which each evaluation indicator belongs, triggering the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtaining the evaluation coefficients corresponding to the allocation of each evaluation indicator include: Through real-time API connection to the enterprise's ERP, audit system, and financial statements, it automatically obtains the company's current cycle's supervisory audit data and performance data, extracts data from it, and compares it with the risk threshold range of the assessment indicators to obtain comparison results; Based on the comparison results, the risk level of each assessment indicator is determined and divided; Based on the results of risk level determination and classification of each evaluation indicator, a corresponding evaluation coefficient is assigned to each evaluation indicator through dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules.
[0012] Preferably, the specific steps of obtaining each evaluation indicator from the supervisory audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assigning a corresponding evaluation coefficient based on each evaluation indicator, weightedly calculating the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management, and generating a visual risk level report include: Based on the obtained evaluation indicators and the corresponding evaluation coefficients assigned to each evaluation indicator, a comprehensive risk index is calculated, and risk levels are divided based on the comprehensive risk index. The formula for calculating the comprehensive risk index is: comprehensive risk index = Σ (evaluation indicator value × evaluation coefficient). The specific risk levels include: comprehensive risk index < 10 is low risk level, 10 ≤ comprehensive risk index < 15 is medium risk level, and comprehensive risk index ≥ 15 is high risk level; A visual risk level report is generated based on the risk level divided by the comprehensive risk index, wherein the visual risk level report specifically includes a chart display or a text description display.
[0013] An enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation system, the evaluation system comprising: The analysis and correlation module is used to regularly collect historical supervision and audit data and performance data of enterprises, quantify the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis methods, and thus construct a mapping correlation matrix; A threshold definition module is used to define the risk threshold intervals of the evaluation indicators based on the mapping association matrix and determine the interval boundary conditions, wherein the evaluation indicators supervise the audit indicators and performance indicators, and the risk threshold intervals include low-level risk intervals, medium-level risk intervals, and high-level risk intervals; The allocation definition module is used to set the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules of the evaluation indicators for different risk intervals; The evaluation allocation module is used to obtain the supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determine the risk threshold range to which each evaluation indicator belongs, trigger the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtain the evaluation coefficient corresponding to each evaluation indicator allocation; The risk generation module is used to obtain various evaluation indicators from the supervision and audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assign corresponding evaluation coefficients based on each evaluation indicator, calculate the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management by weight, and generate a visual risk level report.
[0014] Compared with related technologies, the enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method and system provided by the present invention has the following beneficial effects: The present invention collects historical supervisory audit and performance data and constructs an association matrix based on the quantified indicator mapping relationship, thereby realizing data-driven and scientific quantification of risk assessment, so that enterprises can clearly and quantitatively understand their own risk status; based on the association matrix, the risk threshold interval is defined and the dynamic assessment coefficient allocation rule is set, and the combination of real-time data acquisition and quarterly interval boundary adjustment enhances the dynamic adaptability and flexibility of the assessment, which can timely reflect the latest risks of the enterprise; by weighted calculation of the comprehensive risk index and generation of a visual report, the enterprise management is provided with intuitive and easy-to-understand risk assessment results, which strongly supports decision-making; the present invention integrates multi-dimensional data, comprehensively and comprehensively assesses enterprise management risks, helps enterprises to timely discover potential risk factors and take measures to control them, effectively improves the enterprise management level and risk response capabilities, and ensures the stable development of the enterprise. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0015] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a system block diagram of an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation system of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0016] The present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments.
[0017] Example 1 like Figure 1 As shown, an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method includes the following steps: S1. Regularly collect historical supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise, quantify the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis methods, and construct a mapping correlation matrix; S2. Define risk threshold intervals for evaluation indicators based on the mapping association matrix and determine interval boundary conditions, where the evaluation indicators supervise audit indicators and performance indicators, and the risk threshold intervals include low-risk intervals, medium-risk intervals, and high-risk intervals; S3. Set dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules for evaluation indicators for different risk intervals; S4. Obtain the supervisory audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determine the risk threshold range to which each evaluation indicator belongs, trigger the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtain the evaluation coefficient corresponding to each evaluation indicator allocation; S5. Obtain each evaluation indicator from the supervisory audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assign corresponding evaluation coefficients based on each evaluation indicator, calculate the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management by weighted calculation, and generate a visual risk level report.
[0018] In the specific implementation process, the specific steps of step S1 include: S101. Obtain historical supervisory audit data, including compliance inspection records, problem rectification records, and risk event records; obtain historical performance data, including financial performance, operational performance, and strategic performance.
[0019] Specifically, obtain records generated by the company's internal audit and compliance departments, namely historical supervisory audit data. This includes compliance inspection records (such as inspection records of the implementation of various rules and regulations), problem rectification records (records of rectification of problems discovered during inspections), and risk event records (detailed information on risk events that occurred in the company). Secondly, obtain historical performance data from the company's finance, operations management, and strategic planning departments. This data covers financial performance (such as operating income, net profit, and other indicators), operational performance, and strategic performance. This data can be extracted through the company's internal database system and document management system.
[0020] S102. Quantify the absolute value of the correlation between the supervisory audit indicators and the performance indicators through the Pearson correlation coefficient in the correlation analysis method, and select indicator pairs with an absolute value of correlation ≥ 0.5 as the core indicators for constructing the mapping relationship.
[0021] Specifically, the Pearson correlation coefficient is used to quantify the correlation between supervisory audit indicators and performance indicators. It should be noted that the Pearson correlation coefficient ranges from -1 to 1. The closer the absolute value is to 1, the stronger the linear correlation between the two variables; the closer the absolute value is to 0, the weaker the linear correlation between the two variables. In this embodiment, indicator pairs with an absolute correlation value ≥ 0.5 are set as the core indicators for constructing the mapping relationship. Specifically, statistical software (such as SPSS, SAS) or data analysis tools (such as Excel's data analysis plug-in) are used to calculate the Pearson correlation coefficient.
[0022] S103. Based on the core indicators of the mapping relationship, a mapping association matrix is constructed with the supervision and audit indicators as rows and the performance indicators as columns.
[0023] Specifically, a two-dimensional matrix is constructed with supervisory audit indicators as rows and performance indicators as columns, which is the mapping association matrix. Each element in the mapping association matrix represents the correlation coefficient between the corresponding supervisory audit indicators and performance indicators. The mapping association matrix intuitively shows the mapping relationship between supervisory audit indicators and performance indicators, providing an important data basis for subsequent risk assessment.
[0024] In the specific implementation process, the specific steps of step S2 include: S201. Define the risk threshold intervals of the assessment indicators as follows: Low-level risk threshold interval: the value of the assessment indicator is within ±10% of the historical mean; Intermediate risk threshold interval: the indicator value deviates from the historical mean by 10%-30%; High-level risk threshold interval: the indicator value exceeds the historical mean by >30%.
[0025] Specifically, first, collect the company's supervisory audit data and performance data over the past period of time (such as the past year), calculate the historical mean of each evaluation indicator (supervisory audit indicator and performance indicator), and then, based on the historical mean of each evaluation indicator (supervisory audit indicator and performance indicator), determine the risk threshold interval for each evaluation indicator in accordance with the definitions of low-level risk threshold interval (the value of the evaluation indicator is within the range of ±10% of the historical mean), medium-level risk threshold interval (the indicator value deviates from the historical mean by 10%-30%), and high-level risk threshold interval (the indicator value exceeds the historical mean by >30%).
[0026] S202. Determine the boundary conditions specifically as follows: Based on the company's historical supervision and audit data, performance data and industry standards, determine the critical values of each risk interval.
[0027] Specifically, based on the risk threshold intervals, the critical values for each risk interval are further precisely determined by combining the company's historical supervisory audit data, performance data, and industry standards. For example, in this embodiment, for the net profit growth rate, the industry average growth rate is 12%. The upper limit of the low-risk interval is adjusted to 16%, and the upper limit of the medium-risk interval is adjusted to 19% to ensure the rationality of the risk assessment.
[0028] S203. Adjust the interval boundaries every quarter based on the latest corporate historical supervision and audit data and performance data.
[0029] Specifically, the latest historical corporate supervision and audit data and performance data are collected every quarter, the historical average of the evaluation indicators is recalculated, and the boundary conditions of the risk threshold range are adjusted based on the new historical average and industry standards.
[0030] In the specific implementation process, the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules in step S3 include: Low-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 0.5, medium-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 1.0, high-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 1.5.
[0031] In the specific implementation process, the specific steps of step S4 include: S401. Real-time connection with the enterprise ERP, audit system and financial statements through the API interface to automatically obtain the supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, extract data from them, and compare them with the risk threshold range of the evaluation indicators to obtain the comparison results.
[0032] Specifically, existing APIs are used to integrate with the enterprise's ERP system, audit system, and financial reporting system, extracting data related to the evaluation indicators from the acquired data. For example, if the evaluation indicators include the number of issues discovered during compliance checks and the net profit growth rate, the values of these two indicators for the current period are extracted from the data. The extracted evaluation indicator values are then compared with the risk threshold range defined in step S2. A determination is made as to which risk threshold range the value of each evaluation indicator falls within.
[0033] S402. Based on the comparison results, determine and classify the risk level of each assessment indicator.
[0034] Specifically, based on the comparison results of step S401, the risk level of each assessment indicator is determined according to the risk threshold interval defined in step S2. For example, if the number of issues found in the compliance check falls within the low-level risk threshold interval, the risk level is determined to be low risk; if it falls within the medium-level risk threshold interval, it is determined to be medium risk; if it falls within the high-level risk threshold interval, it is determined to be high risk. Finally, the risk level of each assessment indicator is recorded for subsequent use. By determining the risk level of each assessment indicator, the company's current risk status in each assessment indicator can be intuitively understood.
[0035] S403: Based on the results of the risk level determination and classification of each evaluation indicator, a corresponding evaluation coefficient is assigned to each evaluation indicator through a dynamic evaluation coefficient assignment rule.
[0036] Specifically, according to the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule set in step S3, a corresponding evaluation coefficient is assigned to each evaluation indicator. For example, if the risk level of an evaluation indicator is low risk, an evaluation coefficient of 0.5 is assigned; if the risk level is medium risk, an evaluation coefficient of 1.0 is assigned; if the risk level is high risk, an evaluation coefficient of 1.5 is assigned. Then, the evaluation coefficient assigned to each evaluation indicator is recorded for use in the subsequent calculation of the comprehensive risk index.
[0037] In this embodiment, an enterprise has selected "the number of problems found in compliance inspections" (supervisory audit indicators) and "net profit growth rate" (performance indicators) as evaluation indicators, and has completed the work of steps S1-S3, defined the risk threshold range and dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules, and obtained the data of the current cycle from the enterprise ERP system, audit system and financial statements through the API interface. Among them, the "number of problems found in compliance inspections" is 6, and the "net profit growth rate" is 12%; the "number of problems found in compliance inspections" is compared with the low-level risk threshold range (4.5-5.5 problems), the medium-level risk threshold range (3.5-4.5 problems and 5.5-6.5 problems), and the high-level risk threshold range (less than 3.5 problems and more than 6.5 problems). It is found that it falls within the medium-level risk threshold range (5.5-6.5 problems). Then, the "net profit growth rate" is compared with the low-level risk threshold range (13.5%-16.5). %), medium risk threshold range (10.5%-13.5% and 16.5%-19.5%), and high risk threshold range (less than 10.5% and greater than 19.5%), and found that they fell within the low risk threshold range. Based on the comparison results, the risk level of "number of problems found in compliance inspections" was determined to be medium risk, and the risk level of "net profit growth rate" was determined to be low risk. Finally, according to the dynamic assessment coefficient allocation rule, an assessment coefficient of 1.0 was assigned to "number of problems found in compliance inspections", and an assessment coefficient of 0.5 was assigned to "net profit growth rate".
[0038] In the specific implementation process, the specific steps of step S5 include: S501. Calculate the comprehensive risk index based on the obtained evaluation indicators and the corresponding evaluation coefficients assigned to each evaluation indicator, and divide the risk levels based on the comprehensive risk index. The formula for calculating the comprehensive risk index is: comprehensive risk index = Σ (evaluation indicator value × evaluation coefficient). The risk levels specifically include: comprehensive risk index <10 is low risk level, 10≤comprehensive risk index <15 is medium risk level, and comprehensive risk index ≥15 is high risk level.
[0039] Specifically, the values of each evaluation indicator and the corresponding evaluation coefficient of the current period are obtained from step S4, and calculated according to the formula: comprehensive risk index = Σ (evaluation indicator value × evaluation coefficient), that is, the value of each evaluation indicator is multiplied by its corresponding evaluation coefficient, and then all the results are added together to obtain a comprehensive risk index; according to the preset risk level classification standard, the calculated comprehensive risk index is compared with the corresponding threshold to determine the risk level of enterprise management. Through the calculation of the comprehensive risk index and the classification of risk levels, the risk status of enterprise management can be comprehensively and quantitatively evaluated, providing a basis for the enterprise's risk management decision-making.
[0040] For example, a company selected the number of problems found by internal audits (supervisory audit indicator) and sales profit margin (performance indicator) as evaluation indicators. After the previous steps, the following data was obtained: Number of issues discovered by internal audits: The current cycle value is 8, and the evaluation coefficient is 1.0. Sales profit margin: The current cycle value is 12%, and the evaluation coefficient is 0.5. Therefore, the contribution value of the number of issues discovered by internal audits is 8 × 1.0 = 8, and the contribution value of sales profit margin is 12 × 0.5 = 6. The comprehensive risk index is 8 + 6 = 14. According to the preset risk level classification criteria, the comprehensive risk index is 10 ≤ 14 < 15, which is a medium risk level.
[0041] S502. Generate a visual risk level report based on the risk level divided by the comprehensive risk index, wherein the visual risk level report specifically includes a chart display or a text description display.
[0042] Specifically, based on the risk level classification results, design the content and structure of the report, including a description of the risk level, the risk situation of each assessment indicator, an analysis of the impact on the enterprise, etc. Then, select an appropriate visualization method, such as a bar chart, line chart, pie chart, etc., to visually display the risk level and the risk situation of each assessment indicator; at the same time, you can also add text descriptions to explain the risk level and assessment results in detail; integrate the visual display and text description to generate a visual risk level report.
[0043] Example 2 like Figure 2 As shown, an enterprise management risk assessment informationization evaluation system applied to an enterprise management risk assessment informationization evaluation method specifically includes: The analysis and correlation module is used to regularly collect historical supervision and audit data and performance data of enterprises, quantify the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis methods, and thus construct a mapping correlation matrix; A threshold definition module is used to define the risk threshold intervals of the evaluation indicators based on the mapping association matrix and determine the interval boundary conditions, wherein the evaluation indicators supervise the audit indicators and performance indicators, and the risk threshold intervals include low-level risk intervals, medium-level risk intervals, and high-level risk intervals; The allocation definition module is used to set the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules of the evaluation indicators for different risk intervals; The evaluation allocation module is used to obtain the supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determine the risk threshold range to which each evaluation indicator belongs, trigger the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtain the evaluation coefficient corresponding to each evaluation indicator allocation; The risk generation module is used to obtain various evaluation indicators from the supervision and audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assign corresponding evaluation coefficients based on each evaluation indicator, calculate the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management by weight, and generate a visual risk level report.
[0044] The present invention collects historical supervisory audit and performance data and constructs an association matrix based on the quantified indicator mapping relationship, thereby realizing data-driven and scientific quantification of risk assessment, so that enterprises can clearly and quantitatively understand their own risk status; based on the association matrix, the risk threshold interval is defined and the dynamic assessment coefficient allocation rule is set, and the combination of real-time data acquisition and quarterly interval boundary adjustment enhances the dynamic adaptability and flexibility of the assessment, which can timely reflect the latest risks of the enterprise; by weighted calculation of the comprehensive risk index and generation of a visual report, the enterprise management is provided with intuitive and easy-to-understand risk assessment results, which strongly supports decision-making; the present invention integrates multi-dimensional data, comprehensively and comprehensively assesses enterprise management risks, helps enterprises to timely discover potential risk factors and take measures to control them, effectively improves the enterprise management level and risk response capabilities, and ensures the stable development of the enterprise.
[0045] The present application is described with reference to the flowcharts and / or block diagrams of the methods, devices (systems), and computer program products according to the embodiments of the present application. It should be understood that each process and / or box in the flowchart and / or block diagram, as well as the combination of the processes and / or boxes in the flowchart and / or block diagram, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, an embedded processor, or other programmable data processing device to produce a machine, so that the instructions executed by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device generate instructions for implementing the steps in the process. Figure 1 a process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in a block or multiple blocks.
[0046] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that all or part of the steps in the various methods of the above embodiments can be completed by instructing related hardware through a program, and the program can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, including a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a programmable read-only memory (PROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), a one-time programmable read-only memory (OTPROM), an electronically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), a compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM) or other optical disc storage, magnetic disk storage, magnetic tape storage, or any other computer-readable medium capable of carrying or storing data.
[0047] It should also be noted that the terms "comprises," "includes," or any other variations thereof are intended to encompass non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, commodity, or apparatus that includes a series of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not explicitly listed, or includes elements inherent to such process, method, commodity, or apparatus. In the absence of further limitations, an element defined by the phrase "comprises a ..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, commodity, or apparatus that includes the element.
Claims
1. An enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method, characterized in that: The evaluation method comprises the following steps: Regularly collect historical supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise, quantify the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis methods, and thus construct a mapping correlation matrix; Based on the mapping association matrix, the risk threshold intervals of the evaluation indicators are defined, and the boundary conditions of the intervals are determined. The evaluation indicators supervise the audit indicators and performance indicators, and the risk threshold intervals include low-level risk intervals, medium-level risk intervals, and high-level risk intervals. According to different risk intervals, set the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules of the evaluation indicators; Obtain the supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determine the risk threshold range to which each evaluation indicator belongs, trigger the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtain the evaluation coefficients corresponding to each evaluation indicator allocation; Obtain each evaluation indicator from the supervisory audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assign corresponding evaluation coefficients based on each evaluation indicator, calculate the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management by weighted method, and generate a visual risk level report.
2. The enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The process of regularly collecting historical supervision and audit data and performance data of an enterprise, quantifying the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis, and constructing a mapping correlation matrix specifically includes the following steps: Obtain historical supervisory audit data, including compliance inspection records, problem rectification records, and risk event records; obtain historical performance data, including financial performance, operational performance, and strategic performance; The absolute value of the correlation between the supervisory audit indicators and the performance indicators is quantified using the Pearson correlation coefficient in the correlation analysis method, and the indicator pairs with an absolute correlation value ≥ 0.5 are selected as the core indicators for constructing the mapping relationship; Based on the core indicators of the mapping relationship, a mapping association matrix is constructed with supervision and audit indicators as rows and performance indicators as columns.
3. The enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The specific steps of defining the risk threshold interval of the evaluation indicator based on the mapping association matrix and determining the interval boundary conditions include: The risk threshold intervals for the evaluation indicators are defined as follows: Low risk threshold interval: the evaluation indicator value is within ±10% of the historical mean; Medium risk threshold interval: the indicator value deviates from the historical mean by 10%-30%; High risk threshold interval: the indicator value exceeds the historical mean by >30%; Determine the boundary conditions specifically as follows: Based on the company's historical supervisory audit data, performance data and industry standards, determine the critical values of each risk interval; The interval boundaries are adjusted every quarter based on the latest corporate historical supervision and audit data and performance data.
4. The enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules for setting evaluation indicators for different risk intervals include: Low-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 0.5, medium-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 1.0, high-risk interval: assessment coefficient = 1.
5.
5. The enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The specific steps of obtaining the supervisory audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determining the risk threshold interval to which each evaluation indicator belongs, triggering the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtaining the evaluation coefficients corresponding to the allocation of each evaluation indicator include: Through real-time API connection to the enterprise's ERP, audit system, and financial statements, it automatically obtains the company's current cycle's supervisory audit data and performance data, extracts data from it, and compares it with the risk threshold range of the assessment indicators to obtain comparison results; Based on the comparison results, the risk level of each assessment indicator is determined and divided; Based on the results of risk level determination and classification of each evaluation indicator, a corresponding evaluation coefficient is assigned to each evaluation indicator through dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules.
6. The enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The specific steps of obtaining each evaluation indicator from the supervisory audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assigning a corresponding evaluation coefficient based on each evaluation indicator, and weightedly calculating the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management to generate a visual risk level report include: Based on the obtained evaluation indicators and the corresponding evaluation coefficients assigned to each evaluation indicator, a comprehensive risk index is calculated, and risk levels are divided based on the comprehensive risk index. The formula for calculating the comprehensive risk index is: comprehensive risk index = Σ (evaluation indicator value × evaluation coefficient). The specific risk levels include: comprehensive risk index < 10 is low risk level, 10 ≤ comprehensive risk index < 15 is medium risk level, and comprehensive risk index ≥ 15 is high risk level; A visual risk level report is generated based on the risk level divided by the comprehensive risk index, wherein the visual risk level report specifically includes a chart display or a text description display.
7. An enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation system, applied to an enterprise management risk assessment information evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that: The evaluation system includes: The analysis and correlation module is used to regularly collect the company's historical supervision and audit data and performance data, quantify the mapping relationship between supervision and audit indicators and performance indicators through correlation analysis methods, and thus construct a mapping correlation matrix; A threshold definition module is used to define the risk threshold intervals of the evaluation indicators based on the mapping association matrix and determine the interval boundary conditions, wherein the evaluation indicators supervise the audit indicators and performance indicators, and the risk threshold intervals include low-level risk intervals, medium-level risk intervals, and high-level risk intervals; The allocation definition module is used to set the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rules of the evaluation indicators for different risk intervals; The evaluation allocation module is used to obtain the supervision and audit data and performance data of the enterprise in the current cycle, determine the risk threshold range to which each evaluation indicator belongs, trigger the dynamic evaluation coefficient allocation rule to allocate evaluation coefficients to each evaluation indicator, and obtain the evaluation coefficient corresponding to each evaluation indicator allocation; The risk generation module is used to obtain various evaluation indicators from the supervision and audit data and performance data of the current cycle, assign corresponding evaluation coefficients based on each evaluation indicator, calculate the comprehensive risk index of enterprise management by weight, and generate a visual risk level report.