Enterprise health degree assessment method based on multi-dimensional data

Abstract

The invention provides an enterprise health degree evaluation method based on multi-dimensional data, and belongs to the technical field of enterprise evaluation, and the method comprises the steps: S1, constructing an evaluation index of enterprise safety management; s2, according to the evaluation indexes, configuring exclusive score assigning lists for different industries; s3, obtaining enterprise dynamic data through the mobile terminal / WEB terminal; s4, calculating a score through a dynamic score assignment algorithm to obtain an evaluation result; s5, the evaluation result is visualized; s6, periodic inspection and application are conducted on the evaluation result, the enterprise safety production health degree intelligent evaluation method supporting industry differentiation configuration, index dynamic assignment and real-time state feedback is provided, and the problems that evaluation indexes are single, and enterprise safety production full-cycle data are not fully utilized are solved; the problem that the grading rule is solidified and cannot adapt to supervision requirements of different industries is also solved; and meanwhile, the problem that the real-time health state of an enterprise is difficult to reflect due to lack of dynamic updating of results is solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of enterprise evaluation technology, specifically relating to a method for assessing enterprise health based on multi-dimensional data. Background Technology

[0002] Existing enterprise health assessments mainly rely on manual scoring or simple rule engines, which have the following problems: 1. The assessment indicators are singular and do not make full use of the enterprise's full-cycle safety production data; 2. The scoring rules are rigid and cannot adapt to the regulatory needs of different industries; 3. The results lack dynamic updates and are difficult to reflect the real-time health status of the enterprise. Therefore, an enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data is needed to solve the above problems. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a method for assessing enterprise health based on multi-dimensional data, comprising the following steps: S1: Construct evaluation indicators for enterprise security management; S2: Based on the evaluation indicators, configure a unique scoring list for different industries; S3: Obtain dynamic enterprise data via mobile / web devices; S4: After configuring the exclusive scoring list, the score is calculated through a dynamic scoring algorithm to obtain the evaluation result; S5: Visualize the evaluation results; S6: Periodically check and apply the evaluation results.

[0004] Furthermore, the evaluation indicators in step S1 include: core indicators for personnel safety, core indicators for machinery and equipment, core indicators for the working environment, core indicators for safety management, and core indicators for risk control. For each industry, a unique scoring list is configured for each core indicator.

[0005] Furthermore, the scoring list includes the following elements: checkpoint name, hazard level, industry involved, degree of danger, veto item identifier and weight value; Hazard levels are divided into general hazards and major hazards.

[0006] Furthermore, the calculation formula for the dynamic scoring algorithm in step S3 specifically includes the following: Total score setting for each core indicator: The baseline score for each core indicator is 100 points, and the scores for the sub-inspection items are assigned using a weighted allocation method; The scoring formula for the inspection items is as follows: S = W / ∑W * 100; W is the weight value of a single inspection item, and ∑W is the sum of the weights of all inspection items under this indicator; Rules for handling veto items: When a veto item fails to meet the standard, that indicator will be directly judged as 0 points and an early warning mechanism will be triggered.

[0007] Furthermore, in step S4, the evaluation results are visualized in a multi-dimensional way, using a radar chart to display the scores of the five core indicators.

[0008] Furthermore, step S5 involves periodically checking and applying the evaluation results, specifically including the following: S51: Flexible configuration of inspection cycles; S52: After configuration, perform periodic checks to obtain continuous evaluation results; S53: Regulatory authorities generate blacklists and whitelists of companies based on continuous assessment results and conduct oversight.

[0009] Furthermore, the flexible configuration of the inspection cycle includes two modes: a uniform cycle and a risk level-customized mode. The unified inspection cycle is divided into: daily inspection, weekly inspection, and monthly inspection; The risk level is customized as follows: the frequency of inspections is dynamically adjusted based on the company's historical assessment results.

[0010] Furthermore, the enterprise blacklist and whitelist are divided into blacklisted enterprises and whitelisted enterprises; The blacklist includes companies that have scored less than 60 points in two consecutive assessments or have significant unrectified hidden dangers, triggering frequent special inspections. Whitelist companies: those with a score of >90 points in three consecutive assessments and no veto items are included in the low-risk regulatory category, reducing the frequency of routine inspections.

[0011] The advantages of this invention are: 1. Construction of a dynamic core indicator system: It supports regulatory authorities in customizing evaluation indicators and weights according to industry characteristics; 2. Dynamic scoring intelligent algorithm model: Introducing machine learning to improve scoring accuracy and automatically identify data correlation patterns; 3. Automatic generation of enterprise blacklists and whitelists: The enterprise list is automatically adjusted based on continuous evaluation results, reducing manual intervention.

[0012] The present invention will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. Attached Figure Description

[0013] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the multi-dimensional enterprise health assessment method of the present invention.

[0014] Figure 2 This is the first schematic diagram of the present invention.

[0015] Figure 3 This is the second schematic diagram of the present invention.

[0016] Figure 4 This is the third schematic diagram of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0017] To further illustrate the technical means and effects of the present invention in achieving its intended purpose, the specific implementation methods, structural features and effects of the present invention are described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments.

[0018] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0019] In the description of this invention, it should be understood that the terms "center", "upper", "lower", "front", "rear", "left", "right", "vertical", "horizontal", "aligned", "overlapping", "bottom", "inner", "outer", etc., indicate the orientation or positional relationship based on the orientation or positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings. They are only for the convenience of describing this invention and simplifying the description, and do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation. Therefore, they should not be construed as limitations on this invention.

[0020] The terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly specifying the number of technical features indicated. Thus, a feature defined as "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include one or more of that feature; in the description of this invention, unless otherwise stated, "a plurality of" means two or more.

[0021] Example 1

[0022] This embodiment provides, for example Figure 1 The enterprise health assessment method shown includes the following steps: S1: Obtain enterprise information through the enterprise side to construct assessment indicators for enterprise security management; S2: Based on the evaluation indicators, configure a unique scoring list for different industries; S3: Obtain dynamic enterprise data via mobile / web devices; S4: After configuring the exclusive scoring list, the score is calculated through a dynamic scoring algorithm to obtain the evaluation result; S5: Visualize the evaluation results; S6: Periodically check and apply the evaluation results.

[0023] Furthermore, the evaluation indicators in step S1 include: core indicators for personnel safety, core indicators for machinery and equipment, core indicators for the working environment, core indicators for safety management, and core indicators for risk control. For each industry, a unique scoring list is configured for each core indicator.

[0024] Furthermore, the scoring list includes the following elements: checkpoint name, hazard level, industry involved, degree of danger, veto item identifier and weight value; Hazard levels are divided into general hazards and major hazards.

[0025] Furthermore, the calculation formula for the dynamic scoring algorithm in step S3 specifically includes the following: Total score setting for each core indicator: The baseline score for each core indicator is 100 points, and the scores for the sub-inspection items are assigned using a weighted allocation method; The scoring formula for the inspection items is as follows: S = W / ∑W * 100; W is the weight value of a single inspection item, and ∑W is the sum of the weights of all inspection items under this indicator; Rules for handling veto items: Fatal veto items (such as major hidden dangers not being rectified, will be directly scored as 0 points and trigger a red alert). When there is a veto item that fails to meet the standard, that indicator will be directly judged as 0 points and the warning mechanism will be triggered.

[0026] Furthermore, in step S4, the evaluation results are visualized in a multi-dimensional way, using a radar chart to display the scores of the five core indicators.

[0027] Furthermore, step S5 involves periodically checking and applying the evaluation results, specifically including the following: S51: Flexible configuration of inspection cycles; S52: After configuration, perform periodic checks to obtain continuous evaluation results; S53: Regulatory authorities generate blacklists and whitelists of companies based on continuous assessment results and conduct oversight.

[0028] Furthermore, the flexible configuration of the inspection cycle includes two modes: a uniform cycle and a risk level-customized mode. The unified inspection cycle is divided into: daily inspection, weekly inspection, and monthly inspection; The risk level is customized as follows: the frequency of inspections is dynamically adjusted based on the company's historical assessment results.

[0029] Furthermore, the enterprise blacklist and whitelist are divided into blacklisted enterprises and whitelisted enterprises; The blacklist includes companies that have scored less than 60 points in two consecutive assessments or have significant unrectified hidden dangers, triggering frequent special inspections. Whitelist companies: those with a score of >90 points in three consecutive assessments and no veto items are included in the low-risk regulatory category, reducing the frequency of routine inspections.

[0030] First, construct assessment indicators for enterprise safety management, including: core indicators for personnel safety, core indicators for machinery and equipment, core indicators for the working environment, core indicators for safety management, and core indicators for risk control, and build a hierarchical assessment model. Secondly, based on the assessment indicators, a dedicated scoring list is configured for each core indicator for different industries. For example, in the core risk control indicator for the chemical industry, the inspection item of compliance with the storage of hazardous chemicals has been added. The elements of the scoring list include: inspection point name, hazard level, industry involved, degree of danger, veto item identifier and weight value; the hazard level is divided into general hazard and major hazard. Then, after configuring the dedicated scoring list, the score is calculated through a dynamic scoring algorithm to obtain the evaluation result; Next, the evaluation results will be visualized in multiple dimensions. The scores of the five core indicators will be displayed using a radar chart, and the enterprise's safety management strengths and weaknesses will be reflected intuitively through a graphical interface. Finally, the inspection cycle is flexibly configured, divided into two modes: a unified cycle and a risk level customization mode. The unified cycle is further divided into daily, weekly, and monthly inspections. The risk level customization mode is to dynamically adjust the inspection frequency based on the company's historical assessment results. After configuration, periodic checks are conducted and refined management is implemented to obtain continuous assessment results. Specifically, refined management involves matching differentiated inspection cycles with industry-specific parameters, such as the monitoring frequency of reactors in chemical enterprises and the inspection cycle of scaffolding in construction enterprises, to ensure that the granularity of the assessment is appropriate for the risk level. Regulatory authorities generate blacklists and whitelists of enterprises based on continuous assessment results and conduct supervision accordingly. The blacklists and whitelists are divided into blacklists and whitelists. Blacklists are enterprises whose scores are less than 60 points in two consecutive assessments or whose major hidden dangers have not been rectified, triggering high-frequency special inspections. Whitelists are enterprises whose scores are greater than 90 points in three consecutive assessments and have no veto items, and are included in the low-risk supervision category, reducing the frequency of routine inspections.

[0031] In summary, this invention provides an intelligent assessment method for enterprise safety production health that supports industry-specific configuration, dynamic scoring of indicators, and real-time status feedback. It not only solves the problems of single assessment indicators and insufficient utilization of enterprise safety production data throughout the entire lifecycle, but also addresses the issues of fixed scoring rules that cannot adapt to the regulatory needs of different industries, and the lack of dynamic updates in the results that make it difficult to reflect the real-time health status of enterprises.

[0032] The above description, in conjunction with specific preferred embodiments, provides a further detailed explanation of the present invention. It should not be construed that the specific implementation of the present invention is limited to these descriptions. For those skilled in the art, various simple deductions or substitutions can be made without departing from the concept of the present invention, and all such modifications and substitutions should be considered within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for assessing enterprise health based on multi-dimensional data, characterized in that: Includes the following steps: S1: Construct evaluation indicators for enterprise security management; S2: Based on the evaluation indicators, configure a unique scoring list for different industries; S3: Obtain dynamic enterprise data via mobile / web devices; S4: After configuring the exclusive scoring list, the score is calculated through a dynamic scoring algorithm to obtain the evaluation result; S5: Visualize the evaluation results; S6: Periodically check and apply the evaluation results.

2. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation indicators in step S1 include: core indicators for personnel safety, core indicators for machinery and equipment, core indicators for the working environment, core indicators for safety management, and core indicators for risk control. For each industry, a unique scoring list is configured for each core indicator.

3. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 2, characterized in that: The scoring list includes the following elements: checkpoint name, hazard level, industry involved, degree of danger, veto item identifier and weight value; Hazard levels are divided into general hazards and major hazards.

4. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 3, characterized in that: The calculation formula for the dynamic scoring algorithm in step S3 includes the following: Total score setting for each core indicator: The baseline score for each core indicator is 100 points, and the scores for the sub-inspection items are assigned using a weighted allocation method; The scoring formula for the inspection items is as follows: S = W / ∑W * 100; W is the weight value of a single inspection item, and ∑W is the sum of the weights of all inspection items under this indicator; Rules for handling veto items: When a veto item fails to meet the standard, that indicator will be directly judged as 0 points and an early warning mechanism will be triggered.

5. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 4, characterized in that: In step S4, the evaluation results are visualized in a multi-dimensional way, using a radar chart to display the scores of the five core indicators.

6. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 3, characterized in that: Step S5 involves periodically checking and applying the evaluation results, specifically including the following: S51: Flexible configuration of inspection cycles; S52: After configuration, perform periodic checks to obtain continuous evaluation results; S53: Regulatory authorities generate blacklists and whitelists of companies based on continuous assessment results and conduct oversight.

7. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 6, characterized in that: The flexible configuration of the inspection cycle includes two modes: a uniform cycle and a risk level-customized mode. The unified inspection cycle is divided into: daily inspection, weekly inspection, and monthly inspection; The risk level is customized as follows: the frequency of inspections is dynamically adjusted based on the company's historical assessment results.

8. The enterprise health assessment method based on multi-dimensional data as described in claim 6, characterized in that: Enterprise blacklists and whitelists are divided into blacklisted enterprises and whitelisted enterprises; The blacklist includes companies that have scored less than 60 points in two consecutive assessments or have significant unrectified hidden dangers, triggering frequent special inspections. Whitelist companies: those with a score of >90 points in three consecutive assessments and no veto items are included in the low-risk regulatory category, reducing the frequency of routine inspections.

Images