Overall evaluation method for performance of ship control team organization

Abstract

The embodiment of the invention provides a ship control team organization performance overall evaluation method, and the method comprises the steps: constructing a ship control team organization performance index system for the overall evaluation of the organization performance; establishing a ship control team organization performance indicator weight analysis calculation rule; constructing a ship control team organization performance fuzzy evaluation rule; and determining the overall performance level of the ship control team organization. According to the embodiment of the invention, various factors influencing the performance of the organization can be analyzed, so that the overall performance evaluation accuracy is improved, the importance of each evaluation index can be quantified, the evaluation result is more objective and fair, and fuzzy logic is adopted to process uncertain information, so that the evaluation accuracy is improved. The evaluation system can adapt to various complex and fuzzy actual conditions, the flexibility and applicability of evaluation are improved, meanwhile, a clear performance overall evaluation level result can be provided for an organization, the organization is helped to make a clear improvement direction, and therefore the overall operation team organization efficiency is improved.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of overall evaluation of ship organization performance, in particular to a method for overall evaluation of ship operation team organization performance. BACKGROUND

[0002] With the continuous progress of science and technology, the reliability of hardware and software is improved, while the reliability of human, an important component of man-machine system, has not been fundamentally improved. In system failure, accidents caused by human error account for as high as 60%, and human error has become an important factor affecting system reliability and safety. In human reliability analysis, researchers generally believe that human error is caused by the situation environment in which the human is in, and therefore, in order to reduce human error and improve system performance, it is necessary to study the influence of system human performance. Generally, the execution of tasks and the operation of systems are completed by operation teams, and accidents often occur under certain organizational management conditions. Obviously, the level of organizational performance has a certain influence on the occurrence of accidents. In order to reduce the occurrence of accidents, it is necessary to study the organizational performance. For the purpose of overall evaluation of ship operation team organization performance, a method for overall evaluation of ship operation team organization performance is proposed, which provides method guidance for evaluation and analysis of organizational performance and provides basis for improvement of ship operation team organization performance. SUMMARY

[0003] In view of the above problems existing in the prior art, the embodiment of the present application provides a method for overall evaluation of ship operation team organization performance, so as to solve the technical problem of lack of effective guidance for ship operation team organization performance in the prior art.

[0004] The embodiment of the present application provides a method for overall evaluation of ship operation team organization performance, which comprises the following steps:

[0005] Step S1, constructing a ship operation team organization performance index system for overall evaluation of organization performance;

[0006] Step S2, establishing a ship operation team organization performance index weight analysis and calculation rule for determining the influence weight of the evaluation index;

[0007] Step S3, constructing a fuzzy evaluation rule of ship operation team organization performance for determining the membership degree of overall performance evaluation, and establishing a performance overall evaluation method model;

[0008] Step S4, determining the overall level of ship operation team organization performance, establishing a performance overall evaluation judgment standard, and determining the overall performance evaluation grade of the evaluation target according to the output result of the performance overall evaluation method model and the judgment standard.

[0009] In an embodiment, in step S1, the first-level indexes of the ship maneuvering team organization performance index system include team organization characteristics, team organization work and team organization management.

[0010] In an embodiment,

[0011] The second-level indexes of the team organization characteristics include cohesion, cooperation and coordination, organization structure and communication.

[0012] The second-level indexes of the team organization work include reasonable and effective work supervision, effective and standardized event analysis and experience feedback system, scientific and reasonable work arrangement, mutual exchange of work habits and meticulous self-checking.

[0013] The second-level indexes of the team organization management include detailed and specific safety management system and system, standardized operation process / criteria, emergency response plan, safety measures, tools and methods, effectiveness and rapidity of communication and instruction transmission, open and effective team pre-work meeting system and process.

[0014] In an embodiment, the step S2 includes,

[0015] Step S21, constructing a general evaluation index direct relationship matrix D through general evaluation expert judgment, obtaining the judgment result of the influence relationship between the evaluation indexes by the general evaluation experts, and the judgment result is represented by a numerical value, and different numerical values represent different influence degrees between two indexes;

[0016] Step S22, constructing an evaluation index direct influence matrix X and a comprehensive influence matrix T;

[0017] Step S23, calculating the evaluation index influence weight.

[0018] In an embodiment, the judgment result is represented by numerical values 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, wherein 0 represents no influence between two indexes; 1 represents a weak influence relationship between two indexes; 2 represents a small influence relationship between two indexes; 3 represents a general influence relationship between two indexes; 4 represents a large influence relationship between two indexes; and 5 represents a great influence relationship between two indexes.

[0019] In an embodiment, the step S3 includes,

[0020] Step S31, determining a factor set U;

[0021] Step S32, determining a comment set V and grade division;

[0022] Step S33, determining a membership degree matrix R;

[0023] Step S34, establishing the performance overall evaluation model.

[0024] In an embodiment, in the step S32, the evaluation set V corresponds to the index evaluation result divided into five levels including excellent, good, medium, poor and bad, and the score interval corresponding to each level is excellent (80, 100], good (60, 80], medium (40, 60], poor (20, 40], and bad (0, 20].

[0025] In an embodiment, in the step S33, the grade proportion method is used to determine the membership degree of the index.

[0026] In an embodiment, in the step S4, the overall level of the ship operation team organization performance is divided into a plurality of levels capable of representing the degree of the organization performance.

[0027] In an embodiment, the overall level of the ship operation team organization performance is divided into five levels of poor, poor, general, good and excellent, and the overall level of the ship operation team organization performance is divided into the level corresponding to the evaluation set V corresponding to the index evaluation result.

[0028] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the ship operation team organization performance overall evaluation method provided by the embodiment of the present application are that the embodiment of the present application can analyze various factors affecting the organization performance, thereby improving the accuracy of the overall performance evaluation, and can quantify the importance of each evaluation index, ensure that the evaluation result is more objective and fair, and use fuzzy logic to process uncertain information, so that the evaluation system can adapt to various complex and fuzzy actual situations, improve the flexibility and applicability of the evaluation, and at the same time, the embodiment of the present application can provide clear overall performance evaluation level results for the organization, which helps the organization to clearly improve the direction, and the evaluation result of the embodiment of the present application can be used as the basis for the organization to improve, help the organization to identify performance short boards, and develop improvement measures, thereby improving the overall operation team organization performance. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0029] Figure 1 The flowchart of the ship operation team organization performance overall evaluation method provided by the embodiment of the present application is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0030] In order for those skilled in the art to better understand the technical solutions of the present application, the present application will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings and specific embodiments.

[0031] The various solutions and features of the present application are described herein with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0032] These and other characteristics of the present application will become apparent from the following description of the preferred forms given, by way of non-restrictive example only, with reference to the attached drawings.

[0033] It should also be understood that although this application has been described with reference to some specific examples, those skilled in the art can certainly implement many other equivalent forms of this application, which have the features described in the claims and are therefore all within the scope of protection defined herein.

[0034] The above and other aspects, features and advantages of this application will become more apparent when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and in view of the following detailed description.

[0035] Specific embodiments of this application are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings; however, it should be understood that the claimed embodiments are merely examples of this application, which can be implemented in various ways. Well-known and / or repeated functions and structures are not described in detail to ascertain the true intent based on the user's historical operations, and to avoid unnecessary or redundant details that would obscure this application. Therefore, the specific structural and functional details claimed herein are not intended to be limiting, but merely serve as the basis and representative basis for the claims to teach those skilled in the art to use this application in various ways with substantially any suitable detailed structure.

[0036] This specification may use the phrases “in one embodiment,” “in another embodiment,” “in yet another embodiment,” or “in other embodiments,” all of which may refer to one or more of the same or different embodiments according to this application.

[0037] The principles and features of the present invention are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. The embodiments described are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. The following description, in conjunction with... Figure 1 The preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described in further detail below:

[0038] like Figure 1 As shown in the figure, this invention provides a method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams, including the following steps:

[0039] Step S1: Construct a performance indicator system for ship handling teams to evaluate overall organizational performance;

[0040] A comprehensive evaluation index system for the performance (A) of Hubei's control team organization is constructed from three aspects: control team organizational characteristics (A1), control team organizational work (A2), and control team organizational management (A3). The overall performance evaluation indicators include primary indicators and multiple secondary indicators corresponding to each primary indicator. See Table 1 for details.

[0041] Table 1 Performance Indicator System for Ship Handling Teams

[0042]

[0043] Step S2, establish the ship maneuvering team organization performance index weight analysis calculation rule for determining the evaluation index influence weight;

[0044] Step S21, by the overall evaluation expert judgment, construct the overall evaluation index direct relationship matrix D, obtain the judgment result of the influence relationship between the evaluation indexes by the overall evaluation expert, the judgment result is expressed by 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 numerical value: 0 indicates that there is no influence between two indexes; 1 indicates that there is a weak influence relationship between two indexes; 2 indicates that there is a small influence relationship between two indexes; 3 indicates that there is a general influence relationship between two indexes; 4 indicates that there is a greater influence relationship between two indexes; 5 indicates that there is a great influence relationship between two indexes. According to the scoring results of the overall evaluation expert.

[0045]

[0046] In formula (1), n is the number of indexes, the diagonal line is 0, x ij Indicates the direct influence degree of horizontal index i on vertical index j.

[0047] Step S22, construct the evaluation index direct influence matrix X and the comprehensive influence matrix T:

[0048] The evaluation direct influence matrix X is:

[0049]

[0050] The evaluation evaluation index comprehensive influence matrix T is:

[0051] T=X(I-X) -1 (3)

[0052] Wherein, the evaluation index comprehensive influence matrix T, namely {t ij} n×n , t ij Indicates the element of the i-th row and the j-th column of the comprehensive influence matrix; I is the unit matrix.

[0053] Step S23, calculate the evaluation index influence weight, the calculation formula is as follows:

[0054]

[0055] Wherein, n i Is the influence degree of index n;

[0056] Step S3, construct the ship maneuvering team organization performance fuzzy evaluation rule for determining the performance overall evaluation membership degree, and establish the performance overall evaluation method model;

[0057] Step S31, determine the factor set U;

[0058] Let U = {U1, U2, U3,... U n}, where U represents the factor set of the evaluation object, the factor set U of the overall evaluation object of the ship maneuvering team organization performance is:

[0059] U = {maneuvering team organization characteristics (A1), maneuvering team organization work (A2), maneuvering team organization management (A3)}.

[0060] U1 = {cohesion (A11), cooperation and coordination (A12), organizational structure (A13), communication (A14)}.

[0061] U2 = {rational and effective work supervision (A21), effective and normative event analysis and experience feedback system (A22), scientific and reasonable work arrangement (A23), mutual exchange of work habits (A24), meticulous self-checking (A25)}.

[0062] U3 = {detailed and specific safety management system and system (A31), normative operation process / criteria (A32), emergency response plan (A33), safety measures, tools and methods (A34), effectiveness and speed of communication and instruction transmission (A35), open and effective team pre-work meeting system and process (A36)}.

[0063] Step S32, determine the comment set V and the grade division;

[0064] Let V = {V1, V2, V3,... V p}, where V represents the comment set of the evaluation object, which represents the various overall evaluation results that the evaluation experts can make on the evaluated object. V e (e = 1, 2, 3,... p) represents the jth evaluation result, and p represents the total number of evaluation results. A comment set of five levels is used, i.e. the index evaluation result is divided into five levels, i.e. {excellent, good, medium, poor, poor}, the evaluation grade corresponding to the score interval: excellent (80, 100], good (60, 80], medium (40, 60], poor (20, 40], and poor (0, 20].

[0065] Step S33, membership degree matrix R;

[0066] R i = {r i1 ,r i2 ,......r ij}(i = 1, 2, 3,... h; j = 1, 2, 3,... p) (5)

[0067] Ri is the single-factor evaluation set of the ith evaluation index, indicating that the evaluation is made from the factor i alone, and the membership degree of the evaluation set V is determined, h represents the number of indexes, and p represents the number of evaluation sets.

[0068] In the overall evaluation of organizational performance, the membership degree of the index is determined by the grade proportion method, and the frequency of each factor corresponding to different grades (evaluation set) is obtained according to the overall evaluation of organizational performance experts, so as to form the membership degree;

[0069]

[0070] In formula (6), r ij，c represents the membership degree of the evaluation index x at the cth grade, Q ij is the expert opinion of the shadow factor X at the cth grade, and Q is the total number of valid expert opinions.

[0071] Step S34, the overall performance evaluation model is established:

[0072] P g (organizational performance) = S * V T (7)

[0073] P g (organizational performance) represents the comprehensive membership degree of the gth primary evaluation index of organizational performance, that is, the comprehensive score of the evaluation object, V T represents the transpose of the evaluation set V, P g (organizational performance) is proportional to the performance. Wherein,

[0074]

[0075] S is a fuzzy subset on the evaluation set V, s j (j = 1, 2,..., p) represents the evaluation set result V j the membership degree of S, ω d is the weight of the dth index.

[0076] Step S4, the overall level of the ship maneuvering team organizational performance is determined, the overall performance evaluation judgment standard is established, and the overall performance evaluation level of the evaluation target is determined according to the output result of the overall performance evaluation method model and the judgment standard.

[0077] The overall level of organizational performance is divided into multiple grades corresponding to the evaluation set, which is used to represent the degree of organizational performance. In order to determine the high and low of the overall level of organizational performance, the evaluation grade is divided and corresponding to the evaluation set, the overall level of the ship maneuvering team organizational performance is divided into five grades of poor, poor, general, good and excellent, which is used to represent the degree of organizational performance, as shown in the following table.

[0078] Table 2 Ship maneuvering team organization performance overall evaluation level judgment criteria

[0079] Overall evaluation value Pg of organizational performance (organizational performance) Performance level 0 < Pg (Group Organizational Performance) <= 20 Poor 20 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 40 Fair 40 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 60 Average 60 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 80 Good 80 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 100 Excellent

[0080] Example 1

[0081] Step S1, constructing a ship maneuvering team organization performance index system for overall evaluation of organization performance;

[0082] From the aspects of maneuvering team organization characteristics (A1), maneuvering team organization work (A2), and maneuvering team organization management (A3), a ship maneuvering team organization performance (A) overall evaluation index system is constructed, and each index of the overall evaluation of organization performance includes a first-level index and a plurality of second-level indexes corresponding to each first-level index. See Table 3 for details.

[0083] Table 3 Ship maneuvering team organization performance index system

[0084]

[0085]

[0086] Step S2, establishing a ship maneuvering team organization performance index weight analysis and calculation rule for determining the evaluation index influence weight;

[0087] Step S21, constructing a total evaluation index direct relationship matrix D through overall evaluation expert judgment, obtaining the judgment results of the influence relationship between the evaluation indexes by the overall evaluation experts, and the judgment results are represented by 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 values: 0 represents no influence between two indexes; 1 represents a weak influence relationship between two indexes; 2 represents a small influence relationship between two indexes; 3 represents a general influence relationship between two indexes; 4 represents a large influence relationship between two indexes; and 5 represents a great influence relationship between two indexes. According to the scoring results of the overall evaluation experts.

[0088]

[0089] In formula (1), n is the number of indexes, the diagonal line is set to 0, x ij represents the direct influence degree of horizontal index i on vertical index j.

[0090] Step S22, constructing an evaluation index direct influence matrix X and a comprehensive influence matrix T:

[0091] The evaluation direct influence matrix X is:

[0092]

[0093] The evaluation evaluation index comprehensive influence matrix T is:

[0094] T = X(I - X) -1 (3)

[0095] Wherein, the evaluation index comprehensive influence matrix T, namely {t ij} n×n , t ij The element of the first i row and the first j column of the comprehensive influence matrix, I is the unit matrix.

[0096] Step S23, the evaluation index influence weight is calculated, and the calculation formula is as follows:

[0097]

[0098] Wherein, n i The influence degree of index n,

[0099] Table 4 weight of performance influence factor of complex industrial system control room organization

[0100]

[0101] Step S3, the fuzzy evaluation rule of ship operation team organization performance is constructed, which is used to determine the overall performance evaluation membership degree, and the overall performance evaluation method model is established;

[0102] Step S31, determine the factor set U;

[0103] Let U = {U1, U2, U3, …… U n}, in the formula, U represents the factor set of the evaluation object, and the factor set U of the overall performance evaluation object of the ship operation team organization is:

[0104] U = {operating team organization characteristics (A1), operating team organization work (A2), operating team organization management (A3)}.

[0105] U1 = {cohesion (A11), cooperation and coordination (A12), organizational structure (A13), communication (A14)}.

[0106] U2 = {reasonable and effective work supervision (A21), effective and normative event analysis and experience feedback system (A22), scientific and reasonable work arrangement (A23), mutual exchange of work habits (A24), meticulous self-checking (A25)}.

[0107] U3={Detailed and specific safety management system and system (A31), standard operation process / guidelines (A32), emergency response plan (A33), safety measures, tools and methods (A34), effectiveness and speed of communication and instruction transmission (A35), open and effective team pre-work meeting system and process (A36)}.

[0108] Step S32, determine the set of comments V and grade division;

[0109] Let V={V1, V2, V3, … V p}, where V represents the set of comments of the evaluation object, and V represents the various overall evaluation results that the evaluation expert may make on the evaluated object. V e (e=1,2,3,…p) represents the jth evaluation result, and p represents the total number of evaluation results. A set of comments with five levels is used, i.e. the evaluation results of the index are divided into five levels, i.e. {excellent, good, medium, poor, poor}, and the evaluation grade corresponds to the score interval: excellent (80, 100], good (60, 80], medium (40, 60], poor (20, 40], and poor (0, 20].

[0110] Step S33, membership matrix R;

[0111] R i ={r i1 ,r i2 ,......r ij}(i=1,2,3,......h;j=1,2,3,......p) (5)

[0112] R i is the single-factor evaluation set of the ith evaluation index, which means that the evaluation is carried out separately from factor i, and the membership degree of the evaluation set V is determined, h represents the number of indexes, and p represents the number of evaluation sets.

[0113] Wherein, in the process of overall evaluation of organizational performance, the membership degree of the index is determined by using the grade proportion method, and the frequency of each factor corresponding to different grades (set of comments) is obtained according to the overall evaluation of organizational performance experts, so as to form the membership degree;

[0114]

[0115] In formula (6), r ij，c represents the membership degree of the evaluation index x in the cth grade, Q ij is the expert opinion of the shadow factor X in the cth grade, and Q is the total number of valid expert opinions.

[0116] Step S34, establish the overall performance evaluation model:

[0117] Pg (Organization Performance) = S * V T (7)

[0118] P g (Organization Performance) represents the comprehensive membership degree of the gth primary evaluation index of organization performance, i.e., the comprehensive score of the evaluation object, V T represents the transpose of the comment set V, P g (Organization Performance) is proportional to the performance. Among them,

[0119]

[0120] S is a fuzzy subset on the comment set V, s j (j = 1, 2,... p) represents the evaluation set result V j the membership degree of S, ω d is the weight of the dth index.

[0121] Step S4, determine the overall level of the ship operation team organization performance, establish the overall performance evaluation judgment standard, and determine the overall performance evaluation level of the evaluation target according to the output result and the judgment standard of the overall performance evaluation method model.

[0122] The overall organization performance evaluation level is divided into multiple levels corresponding to the comment set, which is used to represent the degree of organization performance. In order to determine the high and low of the overall organization performance evaluation level, the evaluation level is divided according to the comment set, and the overall level of the ship operation team organization performance is divided into five levels of poor, poor, general, good and excellent, which is used to represent the degree of organization performance, as shown in the following table.

[0123] Table 5 Overall evaluation level of ship operation team organization performance

[0124] Overall evaluation value Pg of organizational performance (organizational performance) Performance level 0 < Pg (Tissue Performance) <= 20 Poor 20 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 40 Fair 40 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 60 Average 60 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 80 Good 80 < Pg (tissue performance) <= 100 Excellent

[0125] The above examples are only exemplary embodiments of the present application and are not used to limit the present application, and the protection scope of the present application is defined by the claims. Those skilled in the art can make various modifications or equivalent replacements to the present application within the spirit and protection scope of the present application, and such modifications or equivalent replacements should also be considered to fall within the protection scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step S1: Construct a performance indicator system for ship handling teams to evaluate overall organizational performance; Step S2: Establish the weighting analysis and calculation rules for the performance indicators of the ship handling team to determine the influence weight of the evaluation indicators. Step S3: Construct fuzzy evaluation rules for the organizational performance of ship handling teams to determine the membership degree of the overall performance evaluation and establish a model for the overall performance evaluation method. Step S4: Determine the overall performance level of the ship handling team, establish overall performance evaluation criteria, and determine the overall performance evaluation level of the evaluation target based on the output results and criteria of the overall performance evaluation method model.

2. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S1, the primary indicators of the ship control team organizational performance indicator system include three aspects: control team organizational characteristics, control team organizational work, and control team organizational management.

3. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 2, characterized in that: The secondary indicators for controlling the organizational characteristics of work teams include four aspects: cohesion, cooperation and coordination, organizational structure, and communication. The secondary indicators for controlling the organization of work teams include five aspects: reasonable and effective work supervision, effective and standardized event analysis and experience feedback system, scientific and reasonable work arrangement, work habits of mutual communication, and meticulous self-inspection. The secondary indicators for the control team organization and management include six aspects: detailed and specific safety management system and framework, standardized operating procedures / guidelines, emergency response plan, safety measures, tools and methods, effectiveness and speed of communication and instruction transmission, and open and effective pre-work meeting system and process for the team.

4. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step S2 includes, Step S21: Construct the direct relationship matrix D of the overall evaluation indicators through the judgment of the overall evaluation experts, and obtain the judgment results of the overall evaluation experts on the influence relationship between the evaluation indicators. The judgment results are expressed in numerical form, and different numerical values ​​indicate that the two indicators have different degrees of influence. Step S22: Construct the direct impact matrix X and the comprehensive impact matrix T of the evaluation indicators; Step S23: Calculate the influence weight of the evaluation indicators.

5. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 4, characterized in that: The judgment results are represented by the values ​​0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, where 0 indicates no influence between the two indicators; 1 indicates a slight influence between the two indicators; 2 indicates a small influence between the two indicators; 3 indicates a moderate influence between the two indicators; 4 indicates a large influence between the two indicators; and 5 indicates a very large influence between the two indicators.

6. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 1, characterized in that: Step S3 includes: Step S31, determine the factor set U; Step S32: Determine the comment set V and the grade classification; Step S33: Determine the membership matrix R; Step S34: Establish an overall performance evaluation model.

7. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step S32, the evaluation results of the indicators corresponding to the comment set V are divided into 5 levels, including excellent, good, average, poor, and bad, and the score ranges corresponding to each level are: excellent (80, 100), good (60, 80), average (40, 60), poor (20, 40), and bad (0, 20).

8. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step S33, the membership degree of the index is determined using the grade weighting method.

9. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 7, characterized in that: In step S4, the overall performance level of the ship handling team is divided into multiple levels that can characterize the degree of organizational performance.

10. The method for overall performance evaluation of ship handling teams according to claim 9, characterized in that: The overall performance level of the ship handling team is divided into five levels: poor, poor, average, good, and excellent. The overall performance level of the ship handling team corresponds to the level of the evaluation results of the corresponding indicators in the comment set V.

Images