CN111652492A - Administrator evaluation system, method, electronic device and storage medium - Google Patents
Administrator evaluation system, method, electronic device and storage medium Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN111652492A CN111652492A CN202010468253.7A CN202010468253A CN111652492A CN 111652492 A CN111652492 A CN 111652492A CN 202010468253 A CN202010468253 A CN 202010468253A CN 111652492 A CN111652492 A CN 111652492A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- administrator
- information
- manager
- module
- capability information
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q40/00—Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
- G06Q40/08—Insurance
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Accounting & Taxation (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Finance (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Technology Law (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The embodiment of the application provides a manager evaluation system, a manager evaluation method, electronic equipment and a storage medium, which are used for a trustee to select a proper manager according to the requirement of the trustee. The method comprises the following steps: the system comprises an acquisition module, a storage module and a management module, wherein the acquisition module is used for acquiring one or more kinds of ability information of a manager and the weight corresponding to each kind of ability information, and storing the acquired result into the storage module, the ability information is acquired by a manager evaluation system according to the requirements of a trustee, and the weight is used for indicating the importance degree of each kind of ability information; the first determination module is used for determining the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to the capability information stored in the storage module and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and storing the comprehensive evaluation result into the storage module, wherein the comprehensive evaluation result is used for indicating the degree of the administrator meeting the requirements of the trustee; and the second determining module is used for determining whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator according to the comprehensive evaluation result stored in the storage module.
Description
Technical Field
The present invention relates to the field of computers, and in particular, to a system and a method for evaluating a manager, an electronic device, and a storage medium.
Background
The enterprise annuity refers to a supplementary endowment insurance system which is voluntarily established by enterprises and workers on the basis of taking part in basic endowment insurance according to law. The occupational annuity refers to a supplementary endowment insurance system established by the institution and public institution and its staff on the basis of participating in the basic endowment insurance of the institution and public institution. The enterprise annuity and the occupational annuity are important supplements for the basic national endowment insurance, and are the perfect endowment insurance system in China. The annuity is generally managed by a special manager, wherein the enterprise annuity is generally entrusted to a consignee by an enterprise, the consignee selects a corresponding manager for management, the professional annuity is generally entrusted to an agent (such as an insurance agency) by a public institution and public institution to perform entrustment duty intensively, and then the agent selects the corresponding manager for management.
How to select a proper manager is a technical problem to be solved urgently at present.
Disclosure of Invention
The embodiment of the application provides a manager evaluation system, a manager evaluation method, electronic equipment and a storage medium, which are used for a trustee to select a proper manager according to the requirement of the trustee.
In a first aspect, there is provided a manager evaluation system comprising:
the acquiring module is used for acquiring one or more kinds of ability information of the administrator and the weight corresponding to each kind of ability information, and storing the acquired result into the storage module, wherein the ability information is acquired by the administrator evaluation system according to the requirements of the trustee, and the weight is used for indicating the importance degree of each kind of ability information;
the first determination module is used for determining a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to the capability information stored in the storage module and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and storing the comprehensive evaluation result into the storage module, wherein the comprehensive evaluation result is used for indicating the degree of the administrator meeting the requirements of the trustee;
and the second determining module is used for determining whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator according to the comprehensive evaluation result stored in the storage module.
Optionally, the first determining module includes a first calculating module and a second calculating module, the first calculating module is configured to calculate a product of each type of capability information and a corresponding weight, and the second calculating module is configured to sum up the products corresponding to each type of capability information to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
Optionally, the first calculating module is further configured to calculate a product of each index information included in each type of capability information and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and the second calculating module is further configured to sum up the products corresponding to all index information to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
Optionally, the first determining module further includes an evaluating module, configured to evaluate each item of index information included in each type of capability information according to a threshold range corresponding to each item of index information before the first calculating module calculates a product of each item of index information and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, so as to obtain an evaluation value, so that the first calculating module calculates a product of the evaluation value of each item of index information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information based on the evaluation value.
Optionally, the index information includes: first index information indicating the inherent attribute of the manager and second index information indicating the service capability of the manager.
Optionally, the second index information includes at least one of error rate, timeliness, compliance, or profitability; the error rate is a first ratio of the number of times of transmitting error data to the total number of times of transmitting data of the manager within a first preset time length; the timeliness is a second ratio of the number of tasks processed by the administrator in a second preset time period to the total number of tasks;
the compliance is the number of violation times of the administrator within a third preset time length;
the profitability is a third ratio of the total income of the manager in the N period to N, wherein N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.
Optionally, the first index information includes: the administrator's at least one of registered capital, size, whether a professional system is available, whether a disaster backup system is established, management team status, or information disclosure status score value.
In a second aspect, there is provided a manager evaluation method, the method comprising:
acquiring one or more kinds of ability information of the manager;
determining a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to a weight corresponding to the capability information, wherein the weight is used for indicating the importance degree of each type of capability information;
and determining whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator or not according to the comprehensive evaluation result.
Optionally, the determining, according to the weight corresponding to the capability information, a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator includes:
determining a product of each capability information and the corresponding weight;
and summing the products corresponding to each type of capability information to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
Optionally, each piece of capability information includes one or more pieces of index information, and the determining a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to a weight corresponding to the capability information includes:
determining the product of each index information included in each type of capability information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information;
and summing the products corresponding to all the index information to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
Optionally, before determining a product of each index information included in each type of capability information and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, the method further includes:
evaluating each index information according to the threshold value range corresponding to each index information to obtain an evaluation value;
determining the product of each index information included in each type of capability information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information, including:
the product of the evaluation value of each index information and the weight corresponding to each capability information is determined.
Optionally, the index information includes: first index information indicating the inherent attribute of the manager and second index information indicating the service capability of the manager.
Optionally, the second index information includes at least one of error rate, timeliness, compliance, or profitability; the error rate is a first ratio of the number of times of transmitting error data to the total number of times of transmitting data of the manager within a first preset time length; the timeliness is a second ratio of the number of tasks processed by the administrator in a second preset time period to the total number of tasks;
the compliance is the number of violation times of the administrator within a third preset time length;
the profitability is a third ratio of the total income of the manager in the N period to N, wherein N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.
Optionally, the first index information includes: the administrator's at least one of registered capital, size, whether a professional system is available, whether a disaster backup system is established, management team status, or information disclosure status score value.
In a third aspect, an electronic device is provided, which includes:
a memory for storing program instructions;
a processor for calling the program instructions stored in the memory and executing the steps included in the method of any of the second aspect according to the obtained program instructions.
In a fourth aspect, there is provided a computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions for causing a computer to perform the steps included in the method of any one of the second aspects.
In a fifth aspect, a computer program product containing instructions is provided, which when run on a computer causes the computer to perform the administrator evaluation method described in the various possible implementations described above.
In the embodiment of the application, an obtaining module of a manager evaluation system obtains one or more kinds of capability information of a manager and a weight corresponding to each kind of capability information, a first determining module determines a comprehensive evaluation result of the manager according to the capability information obtained by the obtaining module and the weight corresponding to each kind of capability information, and a second determining module determines whether a trustee can establish an association relationship with the manager according to the evaluation result after the comprehensive evaluation result is obtained. That is to say, when the consignee selects the administrator, the consignee can only acquire the ability information in the aspect of paying more attention to the consignee, and then the administrator is comprehensively evaluated according to the weight corresponding to the acquired ability information, so that the consignee can select a proper administrator according to the requirement of the consignee.
It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory only and are not restrictive of the invention, as claimed.
Drawings
In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present application or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below, and it is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present application.
Fig. 1 is a flowchart of a manager evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present application;
fig. 2 is a block diagram illustrating a structure of a manager evaluation apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure;
fig. 3 is a schematic structural diagram of a computer device in an embodiment of the present invention.
Detailed Description
In order to make the objects, technical solutions and advantages of the present application more apparent, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application will be described clearly and completely with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present application, and it is obvious that the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present application, and not all of the embodiments. All other embodiments, which can be derived by a person skilled in the art from the embodiments given herein without making any creative effort, shall fall within the protection scope of the present application. In the present application, the embodiments and features of the embodiments may be arbitrarily combined with each other without conflict. Also, while a logical order is shown in the flow diagrams, in some cases, the steps shown or described may be performed in an order different than here.
The terms "first" and "second" in the description and claims of the present application and the above-described drawings are used for distinguishing between different objects and not for describing a particular order. Furthermore, the term "comprises" and any variations thereof, which are intended to cover non-exclusive protection. For example, a process, method, system, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of steps or elements is not limited to only those steps or elements listed, but may alternatively include other steps or elements not listed, or inherent to such process, method, article, or apparatus. The "plurality" in the present application may mean at least two, for example, two, three or more, and the embodiments of the present application are not limited.
In addition, the term "and/or" herein is only one kind of association relationship describing an associated object, and means that there may be three kinds of relationships, for example, a and/or B, which may mean: a exists alone, A and B exist simultaneously, and B exists alone. In addition, the character "/" in this document generally indicates that the preceding and following related objects are in an "or" relationship unless otherwise specified.
In order to facilitate understanding of the technical solutions provided by the embodiments of the present invention, some key terms used in the embodiments of the present invention are explained first.
Principals, enterprises/institutions and their staff.
The agent, the central national organ endowment insurance management center and the provincial level social insurance organization, and the agent client (organ and institution and staff) intensively exercise the client duty and take charge of the professional annuity fund account management business.
A consignee, a legal consignment organization that accepts entrustments from enterprises/agents and manages the enterprises/professional annuity funds.
The trustee receives the entrusted person and takes care of the bank organization of the enterprise/professional annuity fund property.
And the account manager is a professional organization which accepts the entrusted entrusts, manages the annual fund accounts of the enterprises and performs accounting.
And the administrator accepts the entrusted entrusts and invests and operates the enterprise/occupational annuals to realize the professional organization of asset increment.
The technical background of the embodiments of the present invention will be described.
As described above, how to select a suitable administrator according to the self requirement is a technical problem to be solved urgently. At present, when a trustee selects a manager, the trustee usually selects according to indexes listed in an investment supervision item table, a corresponding score condition when each index is in what range is given in the table, after relevant information of the manager is manually input, a system automatically calculates and generates a total score, then ranks all the managers according to the scores, and finally selects the manager according to the ranking condition. However, all the trustees are selected according to the same standard, and the related information of each manager is provided by each manager, so that the finally selected managers are basically the same when all the trustees select the managers, and the trustees are difficult to check the authenticity of the information of each manager, thereby being difficult to select the managers meeting the personalized requirements of the trustees.
In order to select a suitable manager according to the own requirement, an embodiment of the present application provides a manager evaluation method, in which all indexes are managed according to the dimension of capability information, weights corresponding to different capability information are different, and the weight value can be set according to the own requirement of a trustee. When the trustee selects the manager, only one dimension of the capacity information can be selected according to the requirement of the trustee, the dimensions of a plurality of capacity information can also be selected, then the comprehensive evaluation result of the manager is determined according to the weight corresponding to each dimension of the capacity information, and the manager meeting the requirement of the trustee is finally selected.
After introducing the design concept of the embodiments of the present application, the administrator evaluation system provided by the embodiments of the present application is described below with reference to the drawings of the specification.
Referring to fig. 1, fig. 1 is a schematic structural diagram of a manager evaluation system provided in an embodiment of the present application, and the manager evaluation system 10 may be a hardware structure, a software module, or a hardware structure plus a software module. The administrator evaluation system 10 may be implemented by a chip system, which may be formed by a chip, or may include a chip and other discrete devices. Referring to fig. 1, the administrator evaluation system 10 includes an acquisition module 11, a first determination module 12, and a second determination module 13. Wherein:
the acquiring module 11 is configured to acquire one or more types of capability information of the administrator and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and store an acquired result in the storage module, where the capability information is acquired by the administrator evaluation system according to the requirements of the trustee, and the weight is used to indicate an importance degree of each type of capability information;
a first determining module 12, configured to determine a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to the capability information stored in the storage module and a weight corresponding to each of the capability information, and store the comprehensive evaluation result in the storage module, where the comprehensive evaluation result is used to indicate a degree to which the administrator meets the requirements of the trustee;
and a second determining module 13, configured to determine whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator according to the comprehensive evaluation result stored in the storage module.
In a possible implementation manner, the first determining module 12 includes a first calculating module and a second calculating module, the first calculating module is configured to calculate products of each type of capability information and corresponding weights, and the second calculating module is configured to sum up the products corresponding to each type of capability information to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
In a possible implementation manner, the first calculating module is further configured to calculate a product of each index information included in each type of capability information and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and the second calculating module is further configured to sum up the products corresponding to all index information to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
In a possible implementation, the first determining module 12 further includes an evaluating module, configured to evaluate each index information according to a threshold range corresponding to each index information before the first calculating module calculates a product of each index information included in each capability information and a weight corresponding to each capability information, to obtain an evaluation value, so that the first calculating module calculates a product of the evaluation value of each index information and the weight corresponding to each capability information based on the evaluation value.
In a possible embodiment, the index information includes: first index information indicating the inherent attribute of the manager and second index information indicating the service capability of the manager.
In one possible embodiment, the second indicator information includes at least one of error rate, timeliness, compliance, or profitability; the error rate is a first ratio of the number of times of transmitting error data to the total number of times of transmitting data of the manager within a first preset time length; the timeliness is a second ratio of the number of tasks processed by the administrator in a second preset time period to the total number of tasks;
the compliance is the number of violation times of the administrator within a third preset time length;
the profitability is a third ratio of the total income of the manager in the N period to N, wherein N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.
In one possible embodiment, the first index information includes: the administrator's at least one of registered capital, size, whether a professional system is available, whether a disaster backup system is established, management team status, or information disclosure status score value.
Based on the same inventive concept, please refer to fig. 2, an embodiment of the present application provides a manager evaluation method, and a flowchart of the method shown in fig. 2 is described as follows:
step 201: one or more types of ability information of the manager is acquired.
In this embodiment of the application, if the principal is an enterprise, the principal directly accepts the principal of the enterprise to manage the annual fund of the enterprise, and the manager may include a custodian, an account manager, and a management administrator. If the client is a public institution or staff thereof, the client does not directly receive the client's request, but receives the agent's request to manage the vocational annuity, and the manager at this time can include a trustee and a manager, and the agent plays a role in keeping accounts of fund accounts in the management of the vocational annuity.
When the trustee selects the manager, one or more kinds of capability information can be acquired from all the capability information of the manager according to the requirement of the trustee. Wherein the capability information is a dimension after classifying the index of the evaluation manager. For example, if the a-assignee compares the parameter information corresponding to the ability information 1 concerning the ledger and considers that other reference criteria are not important, it is possible to acquire only the ability information 1 of all the ledgers when the a-assignee is selecting the ledger. For another example, if the B consignee compares the ability information 1 and the ability information 2 concerning the custodian, then when the B consignee selects the custodian, the parameter information corresponding to the ability information 1 and the ability information 2 of all the administrating persons can be acquired. Thus, the trustee can select a proper manager according to the demand of the trustee in a personalized way.
In one possible embodiment, the delegate also needs to establish a library of indices for respectively different managers in the manager evaluation system before acquiring one or more capabilities information of the manager. For example, a custodian index library is established for a custodian, an account administrator index library is established for an account administrator, and an administrator index library is established for an administrator. In the index library, all indexes are managed by capacity information (for example, they may be referred to as index dimensions), and different weights are assigned to different capacity information. The weight can be determined according to the condition of the trustee, different trustees can configure different weights for the same ability information, and different weights can be configured for the same ability information of the same trustee in different index libraries.
For example, 4 pieces of ability information are present in the administrator index library, and the weight assigned to the person under test a in the administrator index library for the ability information 1 is 20%, the weight assigned to the ability information 2 is 40%, the weight assigned to the ability information 3 is 25%, and the weight assigned to the ability information 4 is 15%. The weight assigned to the person under test B for the capability information 1 is 15%, the weight assigned to the capability information 2 is 40%, the weight assigned to the capability information 3 is 20%, and the weight assigned to the capability information 4 is 25%, and it can be seen that different persons under test have different standpoints for different capability information. Thus, different trustees can configure weights for different capability information according to their own conditions and importance degrees.
For another example, the custodian index library and the ledger index library both have the same 3 kinds of capability information, and the weight allocated to the capability information 1 by the consignee in the custodian index library is 30%, the weight allocated to the capability information 2 is 40%, the weight allocated to the capability information 3 is 30%, the weight allocated to the capability information 1 in the ledger index library is 30%, the weight allocated to the capability information 2 is 30%, and the weight allocated to the capability information 3 is 40%. It can be seen that the consignee considers that the most important capability information is capability information 2 for the selection of the custodian and capability information 3 for the selection of the ledger. Therefore, the consignee can flexibly adjust the importance degree of the capacity information when selecting different managers so as to select the most appropriate manager.
Step 202: and determining the comprehensive evaluation result of the manager according to the weight corresponding to the capability information.
As described above, the magnitude of the weight represents the degree of importance of each kind of capability information. After acquiring the capability information of the manager, the manager evaluation system determines the weight corresponding to each type of capability information according to the acquired capability information, and then determines the comprehensive evaluation result of the manager.
In one possible embodiment, when determining the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to the weight corresponding to the capability information, after determining the weight corresponding to each type of capability information, multiplying each type of capability information by the corresponding weight, and then summing the multiplication results of each type of capability information and the corresponding weight to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator. For example, if the weight of capability information 1 is 20%, the weight of capability information 2 is 50%, and the weight of capability information 3 is 30%, the result of the comprehensive evaluation on the administrator is: capability information 1 × 20% + capability information 2 × 50% + capability information 3 × 30%.
In another possible embodiment, each capability information includes at least one index information. As described above, when the manager index library is constructed, all the indexes in the index library are managed according to the capability information, that is, all the indexes can be classified and managed when the index library is constructed. When the index information is classified, for example, according to the attribute of each index information, all the indexes are divided into first index information for indicating the inherent attribute of the manager and second index information for indicating the service capability of the manager, wherein the first index information is manually input by a worker, and the second index information is determined by the manager evaluation system according to the historical data. For example, the indexes may be classified according to their importance levels, and the indexes having the same importance level may be classified into one class (i.e., classified into the same capability information for management). Or all the index information can be classified according to two dimensions of the attribute and the importance degree of each index information, and the like. In the embodiment of the present application, there may be a plurality of classification methods for classifying all the indexes, and the classification methods are not specifically limited herein.
When the classification is performed according to the attribute of each index information, the first index information includes at least one of registered capital, scale, whether a professional system is provided, whether a disaster backup system is established, a management team situation score value or an information disclosure situation score value of a manager.
In a specific implementation process, when the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator is determined according to the weight corresponding to the capability information, each index information included in each type of capability information may be multiplied by the weight of the corresponding capability information, and then the multiplication results of each index information and the corresponding weight are summed to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
For example, the index information included in the capability information 1 includes an index a and an index b, the index information included in the capability information 2 includes an index c, and the index information included in the capability information 3 includes an index d, an index e, and an index f. Wherein the weights corresponding to capability information 1, capability information 2, and capability information 3 are 25%, 45%, and 30%, respectively. The comprehensive evaluation result for the administrator is: index a × 25% + index b × 25% + index c × 45% + index d × 30% + index e × 30% + index f × 30%.
In one possible implementation, before the product of each index information included in each type of capability information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information is calculated, each index information is evaluated according to the threshold value range corresponding to each index information, and the evaluation value of each index information is obtained, so that when the product of each index information included in each type of capability information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information is calculated, the evaluation value of each index information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information can be multiplied. Thus, the score of each manager in each index information can be obtained, so that a specific total score can be obtained when a comprehensive evaluation result is determined, and a trustee can obtain a more intuitive evaluation result so as to select a proper manager according to the evaluation result.
As described above, when all the index information is classified by attribute, all the index information may be divided into first index information indicating an attribute inherent to a manager and second index information indicating a service capability of the manager. In one possible embodiment, when the capability information is used to embody the administrator's managed service capability (i.e., the delegate is selecting a manager), the service capability indicator information includes one of error rate, timeliness, compliance, or profitability. The error rate is that after the administrator evaluation system receives the administrator interface data, whether the data transmitted by the administrator is accurate (such as mandatory item check) is judged, and the secondary judgment result and the related time information are recorded. The timeliness is a second ratio of the number of tasks processed by the administrator and the total task amount within the obtained second preset time length, or the total time required by the administrator evaluation system to finish the business processing of the administrator after the administrator evaluation system records the business instruction sent to the administrator can be used for determining the work efficiency of the administrator. The compliance is that the custodian supervises the investment of the administrator according to the contents of the investment supervision item table, if the investment operation violates the relevant regulations, a notice is sent to the administrator evaluation system, the administrator evaluation system records the notice, and the number of violation times of the administrator within the third preset time duration is obtained when the administrator evaluates, so that the notice can be used for determining the action principle of the administrator. The profitability is that the administrator sends asset valuation information to the administrator on each set pricing day, the administrator calculates the profitability of the administrator and then sends the profitability to the administrator evaluation system, and when the administrator evaluates, a third ratio of the total income of the administrator in the N period to N is obtained, wherein N is an integer greater than 2 and can be used for determining the investment capacity of the administrator. Therefore, the service ability index information of the administrator is acquired through the system, the limitation that the trustee is difficult to investigate the reliability of the data provided by the administrator because only the data provided by the administrator can be adopted can be effectively avoided, and the trustee can better select the administrator suitable for the trustee.
In the embodiment of the present application, the recipient is taken as an example to select a tube-casting person. The ability information of the administrator in the administrator index library includes company strength, administration service ability, system construction ability and operation management ability. The weight configured for each kind of capability information in the administrator index library, the index information included in each kind of capability information, the threshold range corresponding to each item of index information, and the score value corresponding to each threshold range are shown in the following table.
TABLE 1 company strength (total 10 points, weight 20%)
Table 2 hosting service capability (total 10 points, weight 40%)
TABLE 3 System construction Capacity (total 10 points, weight 20%)
TABLE 4 operation management Capacity (total 10 points, weight 20%)
When the recipient evaluates the administrator, for example, index information corresponding to all the above capability information of the administrator is obtained. At this time, the acquired registered capital of the administrator 1 is 450 hundred million, the company scale is 8 provinces and cities, the error rate is 11%, the timeliness is 0.4 days, the number of violations is 0, the yield is 4.5%, a professional system and a disaster backup system are provided, the management condition of a management team is good, the information disclosure condition is accurate, and then the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator 1 is (3+0) × 20% + (1+3+2+1) × 40% + (5+5) × 20% + (2+6) × 20% × 5.2. The acquired registered capital of the administrator 2 is 200 billion, the company scale is 13 provinces, the error rate is 13%, the timeliness is 0.7 day, the number of violations is 1, the yield is 3%, a professional system and a disaster backup system are provided, the management condition of a management team is good, the information disclosure condition is basically accurate, and then the comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator 2 is (3+3) × 20% + (1+1+ 1) × 40% + (5+5) × 20% + (2+3) × 20% < 4 >.
In a specific implementation process, the evaluation result manually input and the evaluation result automatically obtained by the system are integrated according to the weight to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result of the manager, so that the selected manager has higher reliability, and the selection of the manager by the trustee is more intelligent.
Step 203: and determining whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator or not according to the comprehensive evaluation result.
In the embodiment of the application, when the trustee selects the manager, a plurality of managers can be selected according to the comprehensive evaluation result to establish the management relationship with the manager, or only one manager can be selected to establish the association relationship with the manager.
In a possible implementation mode, after the comprehensive evaluation results of all managers are obtained, the managers can be ranked according to the comprehensive scores, and the comprehensive evaluation results of all the managers can be drawn into a chart form, so that the trustee can more intuitively view the actual situation of the managers.
All relevant contents of the functional descriptions of the functional modules related to the embodiment of the administrator evaluation system can be cited to the steps corresponding to the administrator evaluation method in the embodiment of the present application, and are not described herein again.
The division of the modules in the embodiments of the present application is schematic, and only one logical function division is provided, and in actual implementation, there may be another division manner, and in addition, each functional module in each embodiment of the present application may be integrated in one processor, may also exist alone physically, or may also be integrated in one module by two or more modules. The integrated module can be realized in a hardware mode, and can also be realized in a software functional module mode.
Based on the same inventive concept, the embodiment of the application provides electronic equipment. Referring to fig. 3, the electronic device includes at least one processor 301 and a memory 302 connected to the at least one processor, in this embodiment, a specific connection medium between the processor 301 and the memory 302 is not limited in this application, in fig. 3, the processor 301 and the memory 302 are connected through a bus 300 as an example, the bus 300 is represented by a thick line in fig. 3, and a connection manner between other components is only schematically illustrated and is not limited. The bus 300 may be divided into an address bus, a data bus, a control bus, etc., and is shown with only one thick line in fig. 3 for ease of illustration, but does not represent only one bus or type of bus.
In the embodiment of the present application, the memory 302 stores instructions executable by the at least one processor 301, and the at least one processor 301 may execute the steps included in the foregoing administrator evaluation method by executing the instructions stored in the memory 302.
The processor 301 is a control center of the electronic device, and may connect various portions of the electronic device through various interfaces and lines, and perform various functions and process data of the electronic device by operating or executing instructions stored in the memory 302 and calling data stored in the memory 302, thereby performing overall monitoring on the electronic device. Optionally, the processor 301 may include one or more processing units, and the processor 301 may integrate an application processor and a modem processor, wherein the application processor mainly handles operating systems, application programs, and the like, and the modem processor mainly handles wireless communication. It will be appreciated that the modem processor described above may not be integrated into the processor 301. In some embodiments, the processor 301 and the memory 302 may be implemented on the same chip, or in some embodiments, they may be implemented separately on separate chips.
The processor 301 may be a general-purpose processor, such as a Central Processing Unit (CPU), digital signal processor, application specific integrated circuit, field programmable gate array or other programmable logic device, discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components, or the like, that may implement or perform the methods, steps, and logic blocks disclosed in embodiments of the present application. A general purpose processor may be a microprocessor or any conventional processor or the like. The steps of the administrator evaluation method disclosed in connection with the embodiments of the present application may be directly implemented by a hardware processor, or implemented by a combination of hardware and software modules in the processor.
By programming the processor 301, the code corresponding to the administrator evaluation method described in the foregoing embodiment may be solidified into the chip, so that the chip can execute the steps of the administrator evaluation method when running, and how to program the processor 301 is a technique known by those skilled in the art, and is not described herein again.
Based on the same inventive concept, the embodiment of the present application further provides a computer-readable storage medium, which stores computer instructions, and when the computer instructions are executed on a computer, the computer is caused to execute the steps of the administrator evaluation method as described above.
In some possible embodiments, the various aspects of the administrator evaluation method provided by the present application may also be implemented in the form of a program product comprising program code for causing a detection device to perform the steps in the administrator evaluation method according to various exemplary embodiments of the present application described above in this specification, when the program product is run on an electronic device.
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, embodiments of the present application may be provided as a method, system, or computer program product. Accordingly, the present application may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, the present application may take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including, but not limited to, disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, and the like) having computer-usable program code embodied therein.
The present application is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to the application. It will be understood that each flow and/or block of the flow diagrams and/or block diagrams, and combinations of flows and/or blocks in the flow diagrams and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, embedded processor, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart flow or flows and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce an article of manufacture including instruction means which implement the function specified in the flowchart flow or flows and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functions specified in the flowchart flow or flows and/or block diagram block or blocks.
It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various changes and modifications may be made in the present application without departing from the spirit and scope of the application. Thus, if such modifications and variations of the present application fall within the scope of the claims of the present application and their equivalents, the present application is intended to include such modifications and variations as well.
Claims (10)
1. A system for evaluating a manager, wherein the manager includes an organization with which an associated relationship with a delegate may exist, comprising:
the acquiring module is used for acquiring one or more kinds of ability information of the administrator and the weight corresponding to each kind of ability information, and storing the acquired result into the storage module, wherein the ability information is acquired by the administrator evaluation system according to the requirements of the trustee, and the weight is used for indicating the importance degree of each kind of ability information;
the first determination module is used for determining a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to the capability information stored in the storage module and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and storing the comprehensive evaluation result into the storage module, wherein the comprehensive evaluation result is used for indicating the degree of the administrator meeting the requirements of the trustee;
and the second determining module is used for determining whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator according to the comprehensive evaluation result stored in the storage module.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the first determining module comprises a first calculating module for calculating products of each capability information and corresponding weights, and a second calculating module for summing the products of each capability information to obtain the comprehensive assessment result of the administrator.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the first calculating module is further configured to calculate a product of each index information included in each type of capability information and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, and the second calculating module is further configured to sum up the products corresponding to all index information to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator.
4. The system according to claim 3, wherein the first determination module further includes an evaluation module configured to evaluate each item of index information included in each type of capability information according to a threshold range corresponding to each item of index information to obtain an evaluation value before the first calculation module calculates a product of the evaluation value of each item of index information and a weight corresponding to each type of capability information, so that the first calculation module calculates a product of the evaluation value of each item of index information and the weight corresponding to each type of capability information based on the evaluation value.
5. The system of claim 3, wherein the metric information comprises: first index information indicating the inherent attribute of the manager and second index information indicating the service capability of the manager.
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the second indicator information includes at least one of error rate, timeliness, compliance, or profitability; the error rate is a first ratio of the number of times of transmitting error data to the total number of times of transmitting data of the manager within a first preset time length; the timeliness is a second ratio of the number of tasks processed by the administrator in a second preset time period to the total number of tasks;
the compliance is the number of violation times of the administrator within a third preset time length;
the profitability is a third ratio of the total income of the manager in the N period to N, wherein N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.
7. The system of claim 5, wherein the first metric information comprises: the administrator's at least one of registered capital, size, whether a professional system is available, whether a disaster backup system is established, management team status, or information disclosure status score value.
8. A method for supervisor evaluation, the method comprising:
acquiring one or more kinds of ability information of the manager;
determining a comprehensive evaluation result of the administrator according to a weight corresponding to the capability information, wherein the weight is used for indicating the importance degree of each type of capability information;
and determining whether to establish an association relationship with the administrator or not according to the comprehensive evaluation result.
9. An electronic device, comprising:
a memory for storing program instructions;
a processor for calling program instructions stored in said memory and for executing the steps comprised in the method of claim 8 in accordance with the obtained program instructions.
10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that the computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program comprising program instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method of claim 8.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010468253.7A CN111652492A (en) | 2020-05-28 | 2020-05-28 | Administrator evaluation system, method, electronic device and storage medium |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010468253.7A CN111652492A (en) | 2020-05-28 | 2020-05-28 | Administrator evaluation system, method, electronic device and storage medium |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN111652492A true CN111652492A (en) | 2020-09-11 |
Family
ID=72346955
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010468253.7A Pending CN111652492A (en) | 2020-05-28 | 2020-05-28 | Administrator evaluation system, method, electronic device and storage medium |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN111652492A (en) |
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113726781A (en) * | 2021-08-31 | 2021-11-30 | 平安养老保险股份有限公司 | Message information processing method and device, computer equipment and storage medium |
| CN114708112A (en) * | 2022-04-26 | 2022-07-05 | 泰康保险集团股份有限公司 | Blockchain-based business evaluation method, device, equipment and medium |
Citations (9)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2005128703A (en) * | 2003-10-22 | 2005-05-19 | Ueno Business Consultants:Kk | Personnel evaluation method, program for personnel evaluation system, server device for personnel evaluation system, terminal device for personnel evaluation system, and personnel evaluation system |
| US20140278730A1 (en) * | 2013-03-14 | 2014-09-18 | Memorial Healthcare System | Vendor management system and method for vendor risk profile and risk relationship generation |
| US20160155070A1 (en) * | 2011-06-08 | 2016-06-02 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Decision tree machine learning |
| CN107464047A (en) * | 2017-07-25 | 2017-12-12 | 国网福建省电力有限公司 | Construction enterprises carry distribution network engineering integration capability appraisal procedure |
| CN108537623A (en) * | 2018-03-07 | 2018-09-14 | 中国电能成套设备有限公司 | Supplier recommends method and system in a kind of e-commerce |
| US20180330296A1 (en) * | 2015-12-31 | 2018-11-15 | Sangho Park | System and method for selecting research and development project through autonomous proposals of evaluation indicators |
| CN109377114A (en) * | 2018-12-14 | 2019-02-22 | 万翼科技有限公司 | Appraisal procedure, server and the storage medium of supplier |
| CN110135684A (en) * | 2019-04-03 | 2019-08-16 | 平安科技（深圳）有限公司 | A kind of capability comparison method, capability comparison device and terminal device |
| CN110751543A (en) * | 2019-09-20 | 2020-02-04 | 国家电网有限公司 | Bidding method, system and terminal equipment for multi-party comprehensive evaluation |
-
2020
- 2020-05-28 CN CN202010468253.7A patent/CN111652492A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (9)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2005128703A (en) * | 2003-10-22 | 2005-05-19 | Ueno Business Consultants:Kk | Personnel evaluation method, program for personnel evaluation system, server device for personnel evaluation system, terminal device for personnel evaluation system, and personnel evaluation system |
| US20160155070A1 (en) * | 2011-06-08 | 2016-06-02 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Decision tree machine learning |
| US20140278730A1 (en) * | 2013-03-14 | 2014-09-18 | Memorial Healthcare System | Vendor management system and method for vendor risk profile and risk relationship generation |
| US20180330296A1 (en) * | 2015-12-31 | 2018-11-15 | Sangho Park | System and method for selecting research and development project through autonomous proposals of evaluation indicators |
| CN107464047A (en) * | 2017-07-25 | 2017-12-12 | 国网福建省电力有限公司 | Construction enterprises carry distribution network engineering integration capability appraisal procedure |
| CN108537623A (en) * | 2018-03-07 | 2018-09-14 | 中国电能成套设备有限公司 | Supplier recommends method and system in a kind of e-commerce |
| CN109377114A (en) * | 2018-12-14 | 2019-02-22 | 万翼科技有限公司 | Appraisal procedure, server and the storage medium of supplier |
| CN110135684A (en) * | 2019-04-03 | 2019-08-16 | 平安科技（深圳）有限公司 | A kind of capability comparison method, capability comparison device and terminal device |
| CN110751543A (en) * | 2019-09-20 | 2020-02-04 | 国家电网有限公司 | Bidding method, system and terminal equipment for multi-party comprehensive evaluation |
Cited By (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN113726781A (en) * | 2021-08-31 | 2021-11-30 | 平安养老保险股份有限公司 | Message information processing method and device, computer equipment and storage medium |
| CN113726781B (en) * | 2021-08-31 | 2023-05-16 | 平安养老保险股份有限公司 | Message information processing method, device, computer equipment and storage medium |
| CN114708112A (en) * | 2022-04-26 | 2022-07-05 | 泰康保险集团股份有限公司 | Blockchain-based business evaluation method, device, equipment and medium |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN108415921B (en) | Supplier recommendation method and device and computer-readable storage medium | |
| US8577775B1 (en) | Systems and methods for managing investments | |
| US10140661B2 (en) | Systems and methods for managing investments | |
| CN112199359B (en) | Data checking method, device, electronic equipment and storage medium | |
| CN108921456A (en) | Methods of risk assessment, device and computer readable storage medium | |
| CN114004542B (en) | Enterprise task management method, system, computer equipment and storage medium | |
| CN110764999A (en) | Automatic testing method and device, computer device and storage medium | |
| Papasotiriou et al. | Ai in investment analysis: Llms for equity stock ratings | |
| CN111882417A (en) | Financial analysis method and device | |
| CN111652492A (en) | Administrator evaluation system, method, electronic device and storage medium | |
| CN117196270B (en) | Method, system, equipment and medium for issuing work supervision information | |
| CN119444378A (en) | Tender data review processing method, system and readable storage medium | |
| CN115033456A (en) | Method and device for monitoring performance of front end of intranet, computer equipment and storage medium | |
| CN111091245A (en) | Method and device for determining participation in ordered energy utilization enterprises | |
| US20140096104A1 (en) | Comparing Target Effort to Actual Effort for Software Development Requirements | |
| CN109857501A (en) | A kind of page display method of APP, device, storage medium and server | |
| CA3104596A1 (en) | System and method for reconciliation of electronic data processes | |
| CN119886635A (en) | Task processing method based on dynamic allocation and related equipment | |
| CN119443962A (en) | Supplier evaluation method, equipment and medium based on data sharing mechanism | |
| US10235719B2 (en) | Centralized GAAP approach for multidimensional accounting to reduce data volume and data reconciliation processing costs | |
| Chen et al. | Mutual fund performance evaluation–application of system BCC model | |
| CN110706122A (en) | Method, device and readable medium for improving social security agent efficiency based on big data analysis | |
| US8606668B2 (en) | Parallel availability control checks in financial management system | |
| CN119204767A (en) | Inventory management evaluation method, apparatus, device, medium and program product | |
| CN115310812A (en) | Project management method, device and equipment and computer readable storage medium |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| RJ01 | Rejection of invention patent application after publication | ||
| RJ01 | Rejection of invention patent application after publication |
Application publication date: 20200911 |