Information processing apparatus, work error prevention system, information processing method, and program

Abstract

An acquiring means 81 acquires operating information indicating the content of an input operation performed by means of an input device. If a predetermined standard is exceeded, on the basis of a newly input operation and a standard operation, which is an operation serving as a preset standard, a notifying means 82 notifies another apparatus that the predetermined standard has been exceeded. If the predetermined standard is exceeded, a control means 83 restricts processing in response to input operations to the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device. Then, in accordance with the approval instruction from the other device, the control means 83 releases the restriction on processing responding to input operations to the input device.

Description

Information processing device, work error prevention system, information processing method, and program

[0001] The present invention relates to an information processing device, an operation error prevention system, an information processing method, and a program that prevent operation errors caused by human operation.

[0002] There are known systems that perform processes to prevent operational errors and unauthorized operations. For example, Patent Literature 1 discloses a technology for verifying operational errors.

[0003] JP 2011-170739 A

[0004] The system described in Patent Document 1 compares the logs of operations actually performed in the production environment with operation log patterns, making it difficult to prevent operational errors before incorrect operations are reflected in the system.

[0005] Therefore, an object of the present invention is to provide a technique that can prevent work errors caused by human operation in advance.

[0006] The information processing device according to the present invention comprises an acquisition means for acquiring operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device, a notification means for notifying other devices of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded if the newly input input operation exceeds a predetermined standard based on the newly input input operation and a reference operation which is an operation that serves as a preset standard, and a control means for restricting processing in response to the input operation on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device if the predetermined standard is exceeded, and is characterized in that the control means releases the restriction on processing in response to the input operation on the input device in response to the approval instruction from the other device.

[0007] The work error prevention system according to the present invention comprises a first information processing device and a second information processing device that receives information from the first information processing device, wherein the first information processing device comprises an acquisition means for acquiring operation information indicating the content of input operations performed via an input device, a notification means for notifying the second information processing device of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded based on the newly input input operation and a reference operation that is an operation that serves as a preset standard, when a predetermined standard is exceeded, and a control means for restricting processing in response to input operations on the input device until an approval instruction is received from another device when the predetermined standard is exceeded, wherein the control means releases the restriction on processing in response to input operations on the input device in response to the approval instruction from the second information processing device.

[0008] The information processing method according to the present invention is characterized in that it acquires operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device, and based on the newly input input operation and a reference operation which is an operation that serves as a preset standard, if a predetermined standard is exceeded, notifies other devices of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded, and if the predetermined standard is exceeded, restricts processing in response to the input operation on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device, and lifts the restriction on processing in response to the input operation on the input device in response to the approval instruction from the other device.

[0009] The program according to the present invention is characterized in that it causes a computer to execute an acquisition process for acquiring operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device, a notification process for notifying other devices of the content indicating that the specified standard has been exceeded if the newly input input operation and a reference operation, which is an operation that serves as a preset standard, exceed a specified standard, and a control process for restricting processing in response to input operations on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device if the specified standard is exceeded, and the control process lifts the restriction on processing in response to input operations on the input device in response to the approval instruction from the other device.

[0010] To provide a technology capable of preventing work errors caused by human operation in advance.

[0011] FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an embodiment of a work error prevention system of the present invention. FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the configuration used in the reference operation registration process. FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the reference operation registration process. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the configuration used in actual work. FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of an acquisition unit in actual work. FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of a judgment unit in actual work. FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the judgment unit in actual work. FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of an approval request unit in actual work. FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of a control unit in actual work. FIG. 8 is a block diagram showing an overview of an information processing device according to the present invention. FIG. 9 is a block diagram showing an overview of a work error prevention system according to the present invention.

[0012] First, we will explain the situation assumed in this embodiment. In the operation of an information system, it is necessary to change programs and settings, or replace information devices from time to time. However, if a mistake occurs during such work, it often leads to an accident that stops the services provided by the information system.

[0013] In today's information society, information systems support the foundations of society in a variety of ways. Therefore, if an accident occurs that causes a service outage, it can cause major social disruption and economic losses, such as making it impossible to withdraw deposits, making electronic money unusable at stores, halting train and plane services, and halting production at factories.

[0014] For this reason, preventing operational errors in the operation of information systems is an important issue in industry. To this end, various methods have been devised, and the following standard methods exist:

[0015] The first thing to do is to create a work procedure manual. The work is broken down into steps in advance, and the work to be done in each step is clearly documented. Then, the method for verifying that each step has been done correctly and the criteria for determining whether it is normal are clearly documented, and the manual is reviewed by multiple people and revised repeatedly to prevent work errors.

[0016] When operating an information system, most tasks are performed by the operator using a mouse or keyboard input from their terminal.

[0017] At the same time, "task automation" is carried out. Humans are prone to making mistakes when it comes to complicated tasks. Therefore, the complicated parts of the work procedure are automated to prevent mistakes. When operating an information system, task automation is carried out by creating an automation program.

[0018] The next step is a "pre-test" using the created work procedures and automation programs. Work procedures are often created through desk-based discussion. Therefore, when applied to an actual information system, errors, excesses, or deficiencies in procedures, verification methods, and normal standards occur.

[0019] However, we cannot allow malfunctions to occur by suddenly applying the work to the actual information systems that support the foundations of society. Therefore, an information system similar to the actual information system is constructed in advance, and a pre-test is conducted in which the workers who will be performing the work in the actual system actually perform the work using the work procedure manuals and automation programs created on that system.

[0020] In pre-testing, not only are errors and omissions in the work procedures and automation programs detected and corrected, but it is also important to verify that workers can read and understand the procedures written in the work procedures manual using text and diagrams, and can carry them out without error.

[0021] After these advance preparations, the actual operational work on the information system is called "production work." Even with all this advance preparation, workers can make mistakes during production work. For this reason, when operating important information systems, a system is adopted in which a checker is assigned to each worker, who checks the work and verification results of the worker against the work procedure manual and then approves the worker's progress to the next step. This is called "double checking." The checker should be the same person who will be assigned to the pre-test as the person who will be performing the production work, and must be made to understand the contents of the work procedure manual.

[0022] Furthermore, in pre-testing, it is often difficult to build an information system that is exactly the same as the actual information system, and slight differences will occur between the actual information system. As a result, subtle differences will arise between the tasks performed in pre-testing and the tasks performed in the actual work. These differences can be absorbed by modifying the work procedure manuals and automation program settings between pre-testing and the actual work.

[0023] Here, among the common solutions, methods other than automating work are methods that deal with work rules and personnel allocation. However, no matter how much improvement is made, humans will make mistakes, and it is difficult to eliminate work mistakes with these measures.

[0024] Even when double-checking, once workers become accustomed to it, they start to think that they can neglect checking because the person checking is there, and the person checking also starts to think that they don't need to check as carefully because the worker is checking. In this situation, work mistakes will occur even if double-checking is performed.

[0025] In addition to the above, in the operation of many information systems, multiple items are set on one screen, and then the settings of multiple items are reflected in the system by special operations such as pressing the execute button with the mouse or pressing the enter key on the keyboard. Specifically, the setting of multiple items and the operation of reflecting the settings are sometimes performed consecutively, but when multiple operations are performed consecutively, there is a risk of mistakes occurring that deviate from business rules.

[0026] Automating tasks with an automation program can prevent manual errors. However, there is a problem in that creating and verifying an automation program takes a lot of time and money. For example, even if a manual step can be completed in 2-3 minutes, creating an automation program can take several hours, and verifying that it actually works correctly can take even more time.

[0027] Nevertheless, because information systems have different configurations and programs, the automation programs can often only be used for a single task, making them so-called disposable programs.

[0028] From a business management perspective, even if they agree with the goal of preventing work errors, they cannot agree to spending an infinite amount of time and money to achieve this, so the creation of such automated programs is limited to cases where the same work is performed repeatedly. In other words, although work automation is a powerful solution, it is difficult to apply from a cost-effectiveness perspective.

[0029] Furthermore, differences in the work procedure manuals and automation program settings between pre-testing and the actual work are also a major cause of work errors in the actual work. First of all, in addition to omissions and mistakes occurring when correcting differences, it is also possible that workers or checkers will remember the work content from the pre-test and then perform the work from the pre-test without noticing that the difference has been corrected.

[0030] In response to these issues, in recent years, methods have been adopted in which confirmation programs are used to check whether manually entered data is within an acceptable range, etc. For example, when changing the settings of an information system, an accident can occur due to a work error, such as when someone makes a mistake in the digits of a number entered into a setting field, and the setting is instantly reflected, causing the information system to malfunction and shut down.

[0031] To prevent such operational mistakes, one method is to set the upper and lower limits permissible for each setting item in advance in a confirmation program. This method somehow places the confirmation program between the worker's terminal and the information system, automatically checking the worker's input.

[0032] However, the process of pre-setting the upper and lower limits for each setting item in the verification program is essentially automating the visual verification process performed by an operator or a verifying person. Therefore, this automation requires a great deal of time and money. Furthermore, this automation is often only applicable to one-time tasks, resulting in a poor return on investment.

[0033] In view of the above circumstances, the present inventor has invented a technology that can prevent work errors caused by human operation in advance. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0034] 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of an embodiment of a work error prevention system of the present invention. The work error prevention system 1 of this embodiment includes an information processing device 100 and an information processing device 200. In this embodiment, the information processing device 100 is used by a worker, and the information processing device 200 is used by an approver who approves the work content performed by the worker.

[0035] Furthermore, although the present embodiment illustrates a case where the information processing device 100 and the information processing device 200 have different configurations, the information processing device 100 and the information processing device 200 may have the same configuration. In this case, the information processing device 100 may be realized as a device including the configuration of the information processing device 200. In the following description, in order to distinguish between the respective terminal devices, the information processing device 100 may be referred to as "one device" and the information processing device 200 as "another device." The information processing device 100 and the information processing device 200 may be realized, for example, by a PC (Personal Computer) or a tablet.

[0036] The information processing device 100 includes a storage unit 10, an input device 20, a display unit 30, an acquisition unit 40, a determination unit 50, and a control unit 60. In this embodiment, the information processing device 100 performs a process to prevent work errors in input operations, and therefore the information processing device 100 can be called a work error prevention device. Furthermore, the unidirectional arrows shown in FIG. 1 simply indicate the direction of information flow and do not exclude bidirectionality.

[0037] The storage unit 10 stores information used by the information processing device 100 of this embodiment for various processes. Specifically, the storage unit 10 stores a preset reference operation (hereinafter referred to as a reference operation). The reference operation may be stored in the form of a database 11, as shown in FIG. 1.

[0038] The reference operation is a proceduralized version of the operations to be performed in a series of expected tasks, such as a pre-test operation performed in a test environment. The test environment is an environment that is similar to the production environment before the actual work is performed, and is generally an environment that differs from the production environment. The reference operation may be created by a user or the like, or may be an actual operation on the information processing device 100 acquired by the acquisition unit 40 described later.

[0039] The content of the reference operation may be any content as long as it can be compared with the operation performed by the user by the determination unit 50 (described later). Examples of the reference operation include an execution log of the pre-test data on the terminal and an operation log on the browser.

[0040] The input device 20 is a device that accepts operational input by a user. The input device 20 may be any device that can detect operational input by a user. Examples of the input device 20 include a pointing device such as a mouse that specifies an operation position or operation range, and a touch panel. Other examples of the input device 20 include a keyboard or a pen tablet that inputs characters. Alternatively, the input device 20 may be a microphone for voice recognition.

[0041] 1 illustrates a keyboard 21 and a mouse 22 as examples of the input device 20. Note that the input device 20 is not limited to the keyboard 21 and the mouse 22. Furthermore, the number of input devices 20 is not limited to two, and may be one, or three or more.

[0042] The display unit 30 visualizes the content of input operations (hereinafter referred to as operation information) performed on the information processing device 100 via the input device 20. The display unit 30 is realized by, for example, a terminal 31 or a browser 32. Note that the content of the display unit 30 is not limited to the terminal 31 or the browser 32, and any application can be used, for example. Furthermore, the number of applications that realize the display unit 30 is not limited to two, and may be one, or three or more.

[0043] The acquisition unit 40 acquires the content of an input operation performed on the information processing device 100 via the input device 20 (i.e., operation information). The acquisition unit 40 may store the acquired operation information in the storage unit 10. The content of the operation information is arbitrary, and examples thereof include an execution log of the terminal 31 and an operation log of the browser 32. The acquisition unit 40 may acquire the operation information in any method. For example, the acquisition unit 40 may acquire the operation information using hardware or software that monitors network packets, such as a sniffer. Note that methods for acquiring operation information are widely known, and therefore detailed description thereof will be omitted here.

[0044] The determination unit 50 determines a difference between a new input operation performed on the information processing device 100 via the input device 20 and a reference operation. Specifically, the determination unit 50 determines the difference between the new input operation and the reference operation using a predetermined execution operation as a trigger. The execution operation is an operation that triggers the information processing device 100 to execute some process, such as an operation when executing a process or an operation when confirming a process. Examples of the execution operation include pressing the enter key on a terminal or pressing (clicking) an execute button on a browser.

[0045] Then, the determination unit 50 notifies the other device (in this embodiment, the information processing device 200) of the details of the difference determination result. Specifically, if the predetermined criterion is exceeded (more specifically, if the determination unit 50 determines that there is a difference that exceeds the predetermined criterion), the determination unit 50 notifies the difference display unit 220 of the information processing device 200, which will be described later, of the details indicating that the predetermined criterion has been exceeded and causes the difference display unit 220 to display the details. The predetermined criterion is determined in advance by a user or the like depending on the details of the reference operation, such as requiring a perfect match or allowing some input differences.

[0046] The content of the notification from the determination unit 50 (more specifically, the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded) is arbitrary, and examples include information indicating whether or not there is a difference, detailed information about the difference, and the like.

[0047] When the determination unit 50 determines that the predetermined standard is exceeded, the control unit 60 restricts processing in response to input operations on the input device 20 until an approval instruction is received from the information processing device 200 (more specifically, the approval request unit 210), which will be described later. Then, the control unit 60 releases the restriction on processing in response to input operations on the input device 20 in response to the approval instruction from the information processing device 200. In the example shown in FIG. 1 , the control unit 60 restricts processing in response to input operations (more specifically, execution operations) on the keyboard 21 and the mouse 22 until an approval instruction is received from the information processing device 200.

[0048] The method of restricting processing in response to an input operation may be any method as long as the control content can prevent work errors in advance. The control unit 60 may restrict processing in response to an input operation on the input device 20 by disabling the input operation, and then canceling the disabling of the input operation on the input device 20 in response to an approval instruction from another device. Alternatively, the control unit 60 may restrict processing in response to an input operation on the input device 20 by displaying a screen to put the input operation on hold, and then canceling the display on the input device 20 and the hold state in response to an approval instruction from the other device. The control unit 60 may also disable input operations for a specific application.

[0049] The information processing device 200 includes an approval request unit 210 and a difference display unit 220. As described above, the information processing device 200 may include the configuration of the information processing device 100.

[0050] The difference display unit 220 displays the notification of the content received from the information processing device 100 .

[0051] When the approval request unit 210 receives a notification from the information processing device 100, it displays the received content on the difference display unit 220. Then, when the approval request unit 210 detects an approval instruction issued by the user (i.e., the approver) operating the information processing device 200 in accordance with the content displayed on the difference display unit 220, it transmits the approval instruction to the information processing device 100.

[0052] The display unit 30, the acquisition unit 40, the determination unit 50, and the control unit 60 are realized by a processor (for example, a CPU (Central Processing Unit), a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit)) of a computer that operates according to a program.

[0053] For example, the program may be stored in the storage unit 10 of the information processing device 100, and the processor may read the program and operate as the display unit 30, the acquisition unit 40, the determination unit 50, and the control unit 60 in accordance with the program. Furthermore, the functions of the information processing device 100 may be provided in a SaaS (Software as a Service) format.

[0054] The display unit 30, the acquisition unit 40, the determination unit 50, and the control unit 60 may each be realized by dedicated hardware. Some or all of the components of each device may be realized by general-purpose or dedicated circuits, processors, etc., or a combination of these. These may be configured by a single chip, or by multiple chips connected via a bus. Some or all of the components of each device may be realized by a combination of the above-mentioned circuits, etc., and a program.

[0055] Furthermore, when some or all of the components of the information processing device 100 are realized by multiple information processing devices, circuits, etc., the multiple information processing devices, circuits, etc. may be centrally or decentralized. For example, the information processing devices, circuits, etc. may be realized as a client-server system, a cloud computing system, or the like, in a form in which each is connected via a communication network.

[0056] Next, the operation of the work error prevention system 1 of this embodiment will be described. In the following description, invalidation of input operations will be exemplified as a specific method for controlling input operations. First, as preparation, the process of registering input operations for the information processing device 100 in a pre-test (i.e., the process of registering a reference operation) will be described. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a configuration used in the process of registering a reference operation. Also, FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the process of registering a reference operation.

[0057] 2, in this process, the acquisition unit 40 acquires operation details displayed on the display unit 30 in response to input operations using the input device 20, and stores the details in the storage unit 10. Specifically, before working in the production environment, an operator works in a test environment equivalent to the production environment. First, the acquisition unit 40 (e.g., a sniffer) included in the information processing device 100 collects execution logs of the terminal 31 and operation logs of the browser 32 (step S101 in FIG. 3), and stores the logs in the database 11 of the storage unit 10 (step S102).

[0058] Next, the operations performed in the production environment will be described. FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a configuration used in production work. FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the acquisition unit in production work. FIGS. 6 and 7 are flowcharts showing an example of the operation of the determination unit in production work. As shown in FIG. 4, the subsequent processing is realized by the overall configuration of the work error prevention system 1. In the following description, an example is shown in which the input device 20 is realized by a keyboard 21 and a mouse 22.

[0059] When the user starts inputting data into the information processing device 100 according to the procedure via the input device 20, the acquisition unit 40 collects the execution log of the terminal 31 and the operation log of the browser 32 as the input operations of the worker in the current production work (step S201 in Figure 5), and transmits the logs to the judgment unit 50 (step S202).

[0060] The determination unit 50 receives a log indicating the input operation from the acquisition unit 40 (step S301 in FIG. 6 ) and compares the received log with the reference operation at the time of the pre-test stored in the database 11 (step S302). If there is no difference between the two (No in step S303), the processing from step S301 onwards is repeated. On the other hand, if there is a difference between the two (Yes in step S303), the determination unit 50 notifies the other device (information processing device 200) of the location and content of the difference (step S304).

[0061] On the other hand, after receiving a log indicating an input operation from the acquisition unit 40 (step S301 in FIG. 7), the determination unit 50 determines whether a predetermined execution operation, such as pressing the Enter key or the Execute button, has been performed (step S401). If no execution operation has been performed (No in step S401), the process from step S302 onward illustrated in FIG. 6 is performed.

[0062] On the other hand, if the execution operation has been performed (Yes in step S401), the determination unit 50 determines whether there is a difference between the current input content and the input content of the pre-test (step S402). If there is no difference (No in step S402), the process proceeds to step S302 and subsequent steps in FIG. 6.

[0063] On the other hand, if there is a difference (Yes in step S402), the determination unit 50 requests the control unit 60 to disable the keyboard 21 and the mouse 22 (step S403). Furthermore, the determination unit 50 requests approval from the approval request unit 210 of the information processing device 200 (step S404).

[0064] When the approval result is received from the information processing device 200, the approval result is fed back to the information processing device 100 (one device) (step S405 in FIG. 7). Specifically, the determination unit 50 instructs the acquisition unit 40 on whether or not to press the enter key and execute button based on the approval result (step S407). Furthermore, the determination unit 50 requests the control unit 60 to cancel the invalidation performed in step S403 (step S406).

[0065] 8 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the approval request unit during production work. The approval request unit 210 receives the approval request transmitted in step S404 shown in FIG. 7 (step S501). Based on the received request, the approval request unit 210 displays a screen on the difference display unit 220 prompting the user to approve or decline the continuation of the process, requests approval from the user, and performs the approval process (step S502). Once the approval result is determined, the approval request unit 210 transmits the approval result to the determination unit 50 of the information processing device 100 (step S503).

[0066] 9 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the control unit 60 during production work. The control unit 60 determines whether the transmitted request is the invalidation request transmitted in step S403 in FIG. 7 or the request to cancel invalidation transmitted in step S406 (step S601).

[0067] In the case of an invalidation request ("invalidation request" in step S601), the control unit 60 invalidates input operations of the keyboard 21 and the mouse 22 (step S602). On the other hand, in the case of an invalidation cancellation request ("cancellation request" in step S601), the control unit 60 cancels the invalidation of input operations of the keyboard 21 and the mouse 22 (step S603).

[0068] The processes shown in FIGS. 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are repeated to verify whether the work is being carried out in accordance with the procedure manual.

[0069] As described above, in this embodiment, the acquisition unit 40 acquires operation information. If a predetermined standard is exceeded based on a newly input input operation and a reference operation, the determination unit 50 notifies the information processing device 200 of content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded, and the control unit 60 restricts processing in response to input operations on the input device 20 until an approval instruction is received from the information processing device 200. Thereafter, the control unit 60 lifts the restriction on processing in response to input operations on the input device 20 in response to the approval instruction from the information processing device 200. This makes it possible to prevent work errors due to human operation in advance.

[0070] For example, in the operation of an information system, during a pre-test, mouse 22 movements during work, keystroke logs on the keyboard 21, character input locations, and the like are saved as data. Then, during actual work, the judgment unit 50 refers to the saved data, compares it with the work being performed by the worker, and presents the differences to the worker and the approver. Then, when content entered using the mouse 22 or keyboard 21 on the worker's information processing device 100 is applied to the information system, the control unit 60 intercepts the worker's application instruction message (specifically, an execution operation) along the path from the worker's information processing device 100 to the information system. The approval request unit 210 displays a screen requesting approval on the difference display unit 220 of the approver's information processing device 200, and when the approver gives approval, the control unit 60 sends the message to the information system, which applies the content to the processing.

[0071] Here, because the pre-test is a task already performed in standard operations to reduce work errors, no additional time or expense is required to acquire the data. Furthermore, the work error prevention program of this embodiment (i.e., a program that saves input operations during work as data, compares them with the actual work, and displays the differences) does not need to be created for each individual information system. This makes it a highly cost-effective system. Furthermore, the approval request unit 210 of this embodiment displays the differences between the pre-test and the actual work to alert the approver, thereby reducing work errors.

[0072] Furthermore, when using a general method, there is a possibility that an operator may make a mistake that deviates from business rules by setting multiple items and then performing the operation to reflect the settings without waiting for approval from the checker. On the other hand, in this embodiment, the determination unit 50 and the control unit 60 intercept the application instruction message from the operator midway and, when the approver has confirmed it, send the message to the target information system, making it possible to prevent work errors in advance.

[0073] Note that differences between the pre-test and the actual work may result in operational discrepancies. In this case, the information processing device 100 of this embodiment simply detects the discrepancies and presents them to the worker or approver, eliminating the need for data correction or other work to address the discrepancies. Even if the presented discrepancies are due to differences between the pre-test and the actual work, they are still important points that could potentially lead to operational errors. In this embodiment, the approval request unit 210 presents the discrepancies and calls attention to them, thereby reducing operational errors.

[0074] Next, an overview of the present invention will be described. Fig. 10 is a block diagram showing an overview of a work error prevention device according to the present invention. An information processing device 80 (e.g., information processing device 100) according to the present invention includes: acquisition means 81 (e.g., acquisition unit 40) for acquiring operation information indicating the content of input operations (e.g., mouse 22 movements, keystroke logs on keyboard 21, etc.) performed via an input device (e.g., input device 20); notification means 82 (e.g., determination unit 50) for notifying another device (e.g., information processing device 200) of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded based on a newly input input operation and a reference operation that serves as a preset standard; and control means 83 (e.g., control unit 60) for restricting processing in response to input operations on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device if the predetermined standard has been exceeded.

[0075] Then, the control means 83, in response to an approval instruction from another device, removes the restriction on processing in response to input operations to the input device.

[0076] Such a configuration can prevent operational errors caused by human operation in advance.

[0077] The information processing device 80 may also include a determination means (e.g., the determination unit 50) that determines a difference between a newly input input operation and a reference operation. If it is determined that there is a difference exceeding a predetermined standard, the notification means 82 may notify the other device of the content of the difference, and if it is determined that there is a difference exceeding the predetermined standard, the control means 83 may restrict processing in response to input operations to the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device.

[0078] In addition, the control means 83 may disable the input operation as a restriction on processing in response to an input operation on the input device, and may lift the restriction on processing in response to an input operation on the input device in response to an approval instruction from another device.

[0079] Furthermore, when a predetermined execution operation is acquired as operation information, the determination means may determine a difference between the input operation and a reference operation, and the control means 83 may invalidate the execution operation when it is determined that there is a difference exceeding a predetermined standard. With this configuration, processing can be interrupted before a message is sent to the information system, making it possible to prevent operational errors in advance.

[0080] Specifically, the determination means may determine the difference between the input operation and the reference operation when the execution operation is a pressing of the enter key on the terminal or a pressing of the execute button on the browser. By determining the difference according to such an operation, the user can easily grasp the point at which the system determines the difference.

[0081] The work error prevention device 80 may also include a storage means (e.g., the storage unit 10) for storing reference information. The acquisition means 81 may store the acquired operation information in the storage means, and the determination means 82 may use the operation information stored in the storage means as the reference operation and determine the difference between the newly input operation and the reference operation. This configuration makes it possible to automatically create operation information to be used for actual comparison.

[0082] Specifically, the acquisition unit 81 may store the operation information in the test environment as a reference operation in the storage unit. Then, the determination unit 82 may determine the difference between the input operation in the production environment and the reference information. This configuration makes it possible to grasp the difference between the test environment and the production environment.

[0083] 11 is a block diagram showing an overview of a work error prevention system according to the present invention. The work error prevention system according to the present invention (e.g., work error prevention system 1) includes a first information processing device 180 (e.g., information processing device 100) and a second information processing device 190 (e.g., information processing device 200) that receives information from the first information processing device 180.

[0084] The first information processing device 180 includes an acquisition means 181 (e.g., acquisition unit 40) that acquires operation information indicating the content of input operations (e.g., movement of the mouse 22, keystroke log of the keyboard 21, etc.) performed via an input device (e.g., input device 20), a notification means 182 (e.g., determination unit 50) that, if a predetermined standard is exceeded based on the newly input input operation and a reference operation that is an operation that serves as a preset standard, notifies the second information processing device 190 of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded, and a control means 183 (e.g., control unit 60) that, if the predetermined standard is exceeded, restricts processing in response to the input operation to the input device until an approval instruction is received from the second information processing device 190.

[0085] Then, in response to an approval instruction from the second information processing device 190, the control means 183 removes the restriction on processing in response to input operations on the input device.

[0086] Even with such a configuration, it is possible to prevent operational errors caused by human operation in advance.

[0087] The present invention is preferably applied to an operation error prevention device that prevents operation errors caused by human operation. Specifically, the present invention is preferably applied to the operation of various information systems that support society, regardless of industry or business.

[0088] Although the present invention has been described above with reference to the embodiments and examples, the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments and examples. Various modifications that can be understood by those skilled in the art can be made to the configuration and details of the present invention within the scope of the present invention.

[0089] This application claims priority based on Japanese Patent Application No. 2023-36303, filed on March 9, 2023, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein in its entirety.

[0090] REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 1 work error prevention system 10 storage unit 11 database 20 input device 21 keyboard 22 mouse 30 display unit 31 terminal 32 browser 40 acquisition unit 50 determination unit 60 control unit 100, 200 information processing device

Claims

1. an acquisition means for acquiring operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device; a notification means for notifying other devices of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded when a predetermined standard is exceeded based on the newly input operation and a reference operation that is a preset standard; a control means for restricting processing in response to an input operation on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device when the predetermined standard is exceeded; The control means, in response to an approval instruction from the other device, removes restrictions on processing in response to an input operation to the input device.

1. An information processing device comprising:

2. The control means disables the input operation as a restriction on processing in response to the input operation to the input device, and releases the disablement of the input operation to the input device in response to an approval instruction from another device.

2. The information processing device according to claim 1.

3. a determination means for determining a difference between a newly input operation and a reference operation; the notifying means, when it is determined that there is a difference exceeding a predetermined standard, notifies the other device of the content of the difference; When it is determined that there is a difference exceeding the predetermined standard, the control means restricts processing in response to input operations to the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device.

3. The information processing device according to claim 1.

4. The determination means determines a difference between the input operation and a reference operation when a predetermined execution operation is acquired as the operation information; The control means invalidates the execution operation when it is determined that there is a difference exceeding a predetermined standard.

4. The information processing device according to claim 3.

5. The determination means determines a difference between the input operation and a reference operation when an operation of pressing an enter key on a terminal or an operation of pressing an execute button on a browser is acquired as the execution operation.

5. The information processing device according to claim 4.

6. a storage means for storing reference information; The acquisition means stores the acquired operation information in the storage means; The determining means determines a difference between the operation information stored in the storage means as a reference operation and a newly input operation.

4. The information processing device according to claim 3.

7. The acquisition means stores the operation information in the test environment as a reference operation in the storage means; The determination means determines a difference between the input operation in the production environment and the reference information.

7. The information processing device according to claim 6.

8. a first information processing device; a second information processing device that receives information from the first information processing device, The first information processing device an acquisition means for acquiring operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device; a notification means for notifying the second information processing device of content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded when a predetermined standard is exceeded based on the newly input input operation and a reference operation that is a preset standard; a control unit that, when the predetermined standard is exceeded, restricts processing in response to an input operation on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the second information processing device; The control means, in response to an approval instruction from the second information processing apparatus, removes restrictions on processing in response to an input operation to the input device. A work error prevention system characterized by the above.

9. acquiring operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device; If a predetermined standard is exceeded based on the newly input operation and a reference operation that is a preset standard, notify other devices of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded; If the predetermined standard is exceeded, restricting processing in response to input operations to the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device; In response to an approval instruction from the other device, the restriction on processing in response to an input operation to the input device is lifted.

1. An information processing method comprising:

10. On the computer, an acquisition process for acquiring operation information indicating the content of an input operation performed via an input device; a notification process for notifying other devices of the content indicating that the predetermined standard has been exceeded when a predetermined standard is exceeded based on the newly input operation and a reference operation that is a preset standard; and If the predetermined standard is exceeded, a control process is executed to restrict processing in response to an input operation on the input device until an approval instruction is received from the other device; In the control process, in response to an approval instruction from the other device, a restriction on a process corresponding to an input operation to the input device is lifted. Program for.