JP2861633B2 - New product preparation status evaluation method and evaluation tool used for it - Google Patents

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION The present invention relates to a new product for a vehicle such as an automobile, that is, a new engine, a transmission, a suspension and the like which are newly adopted not only in a new vehicle but also in a conventional vehicle. The present invention relates to a method for evaluating the progress of a preparation operation when a unit or the like is prepared, and a preparation state evaluation tool used for implementing the method.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art When a new product, for example, an automobile, is prepared as a new product, preparation work as shown in FIG. 18 is usually performed. That is, in the example shown in the figure, the preparation period is calculated backward from 0 o'clock with the announcement of a new model vehicle, and the latter period is from 0 o'clock to n ₂ months before, and the previous period is from n ₂ months to n ₅ months before. Here, the values of n _{1 to} n ₅ are determined by the policies of the respective automobile companies, market trends, and the like.

[0003] and in its previous fiscal year, to develop the declaration to about n ₅ months in advance, to create a basic plan during the previous _four months about n ₅ months before ~n, of whether to which model to about n ₄ months ago makes a decision, made capital and parts of the arrangements for the trial lot while creating a production plan between about n ₄ months before ~n ₃ months in advance,
First in the development and design department between about n ₃ months ago and about n ₂ months ago
A prototype of the next prototype lot is produced, and a first factory prototype is also produced at the factory in parallel with the trial production.

In the latter period, about n ₂ months ago to about n ₁
Arrangement of equipment and parts for the second prototype lot and trial production of the second prototype lot in the development and design department within a month ago, and at the factory between about ₁ month and 0 o'clock, Factory trial production, first production trial production, and second production trial production are performed sequentially, and thereafter, production start-up and announcement at 0:00.

[0005] The evaluation of the progress of various operations in preparation for a new vehicle from the above-mentioned declaration of development to the start of production is based on the conventional method of producing the vehicle, forging, bodywork, painting, and so on.
The processes of assembling, resin and the like are individually performed, and the evaluation methods for those processes are not unified among the processes, and there are variations among persons and departments to be evaluated.

[0006]

However, according to the conventional evaluation method as described above, when an inconvenient point is found during the preparation work of a new car, it takes time to determine the cause of the inconvenience. Since the discovery of the inconvenient point is delayed and the countermeasure is delayed, it takes time and effort to resolve the inconvenient point, and it takes time, and the burden on the development design department and the factory department is excessive. There was a problem that could be.

[0007]

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION The present invention advantageously solves the problems of the conventional method of evaluating the state of preparation, enables a quantitative and objective evaluation, and efficiently starts up production in a short period of time. In order to achieve this object, in the method for evaluating the status of preparation for production of a new product according to the present invention, the entire period for preparing a new product is divided into a plurality of periods. At the same time, the preparation work is divided into a plurality of steps, and a definition table, a check sheet, an evaluation summary table, and an evaluation point calculation table for each of those steps are created, and an evaluation coefficient table and the evaluation point calculation table are created. Create an evaluation graph that allows you to list the results of the entry.

In each of the definition tables, a plurality of management items set for the process corresponding to the definition items and their contents are described, and one of a plurality of objectives set for each management item and a factor System or result system, and which of the plurality of times to perform, and one target value or a target value for each time period when there are a plurality of times of the execution. Each of the check sheets includes a plurality of management items described in the definition table for the process corresponding to the check sheet, and the purpose of each of the management items, whether the system is a factor system or a result system. And a target value corresponding to that time, and for each of the management items, a column for entering the actual value, and a target achievement rate calculated from the target value and the actual value are determined in a plurality of stages in advance. To Preferably provided a field to fill or corresponds to any stage of digits achievement rate evaluation.

[0009] In each of the evaluation summary tables, the factor system and the result system are divided into the respective factor systems and the result systems. A column for entering the total number for each purpose is provided, while the evaluation coefficient table describes the evaluation coefficients set for each stage of the achievement rate evaluation.

[0010] Further, the evaluation score calculation table is divided into the factor system and the result system, and at the same time, separately for each of the objectives. A column for entering a score calculated by multiplying the evaluation coefficient described in the evaluation coefficient table corresponding to that stage for each stage, a column for entering the total score obtained by summing the scores for all stages, A column to fill in the total of the basic points calculated by multiplying the total of the total number of the evaluation coefficient of the highest stage of the achievement rate evaluation described in the evaluation coefficient table, and the value obtained by dividing the total of the score by the total of the basic points A column for entering an evaluation score calculated by multiplying by a predetermined number is provided.

In the evaluation graph, the value of each evaluation point written in the evaluation point calculation table corresponding to the purpose is set as the two coordinate axes of the factor system and the result system orthogonal to each other. A purpose-based graph that allows the user to fill in a preparation status display indicator for each step as a position on the coordinate axis, and as the two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system,
For each of the processes, the value of each evaluation point entered in the evaluation point calculation table for each purpose corresponding to the process can be filled in with a preparation status display indicator for each purpose which is a position on the coordinate axis. Include at least one of the process graphs.

According to the present invention, at the time when each of the timings of the preparation work of the new product has elapsed, first, for each of the processes, the check sheet is provided with the actual values and the actual values of the respective management items. Enter the stage of the achievement rate evaluation, and then, in each column of the evaluation summary table, enter the total number of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation, and then, in each column of the evaluation point calculation table, And, the score total, the base point total, and the evaluation points are filled in, and then the preparation graph is filled in the evaluation graph, and then,
For all of the steps, a preparation status confirmation operation of evaluating the preparation status of the new product at that time from the position of the preparation status display mark on the evaluation graph is performed.

In the present invention, one of a plurality of importance levels is set for each of the management items, and the score and the basic point are subtotaled for each importance level. A point sum may be obtained.In addition, in addition to at least one of the purpose-based graph and the process-based graph, the evaluation system may use the factor system and the result system as two orthogonal coordinate axes. And a preparation status display indicator for each process in which the evaluation average point for each process obtained by averaging the evaluation points for all of the objectives entered in the evaluation point calculation table is set as a position on their coordinate axes. As an inter-process comparison graph and the two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system, the evaluation points for each type of the purpose written in the evaluation point calculation table are averaged for all of the plurality of processes. The purpose-specific rate Average may include at least one of the object between the compared graph adapted to fill the readiness display indicator for each type of object that is the position on their axes.

On the other hand, the new product preparation status evaluation tool of the present invention prepares a new product preparation operation for each of a plurality of processes, and sets a plurality of management items set for the process corresponding to the process and a plurality of management items. In addition to describing the contents, one of a plurality of objectives set for each of the management items, whether it is a factor-based or a result-based, and the whole period for preparing new products divided into a plurality of periods In which timing is performed, and a definition table that describes one target value or a target value for each timing when there are a plurality of timings of the execution, and is created for each of the processes, which corresponds to Describes the plurality of control items described in the definition table for the process and the purpose, each of the control items, whether it is a factor system or a result system, the execution time, and the target value corresponding to the time for each of those management items And each of the pipes For each item, there is provided a column for entering the actual value and a column for entering in which stage of the achievement ratio evaluation the target achievement ratio calculated from the target value and the actual value is divided into a plurality of stages in advance. Check sheet,
Equipped.

Further, the evaluation tool of the present invention is prepared for each of the above-mentioned steps, and is divided into the above-mentioned factor system and the result system.
An evaluation summary table provided with a column to be entered for each purpose for the total number of cases of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the check sheet for the process corresponding thereto, and each stage of the achievement ratio evaluation An evaluation coefficient table describing the set evaluation coefficients.

Further, the evaluation tool of the present invention is prepared for each of the steps, divided into the factor system and the result system, and at the same time, separately for each of the objectives, for each of the achievement rate evaluations entered in the evaluation summary table. Enter a score calculated by multiplying the total number of each stage by the evaluation coefficient described in the evaluation coefficient table corresponding to that stage, and enter a total score obtained by summing the scores for all stages. Column, a column for entering the total of the basic points calculated based on the total of the total number of the respective stages and the evaluation coefficient of the highest stage of the achievement rate evaluation described in the evaluation coefficient table, An evaluation score calculation table provided with a column for writing an evaluation score calculated by multiplying a value obtained by dividing the total score by a predetermined number.

The evaluation tool of the present invention uses the factor system and the result system as orthogonal two coordinate axes so that the results of entry into the evaluation point calculation table can be listed. A purpose-specific graph in which a preparation status display marker for each process can be entered with the value of each evaluation point entered in the corresponding evaluation point calculation table as a position on their coordinate axis, and the factor system and the result system Are prepared as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other, and the value of each evaluation point written in the evaluation point calculation table for each purpose corresponding to the process is set as a position on the coordinate axis for each process, and a preparation status display for each purpose is displayed. An evaluation graph including at least one of step-by-step graphs in which a mark can be entered is provided.

In the evaluation tool of the present invention, one of a plurality of importance levels set for each of the management items is described in the definition table, and the check sheet, the evaluation summary table, and the evaluation In the coefficient table and the evaluation point calculation table, an entry column for each importance is provided, and further in the evaluation point calculation table,
A column for entering the score and the basic point subtotal for each degree of importance may be provided. In addition to the at least one of the purpose-based graph and the process-based graph, the factor system and the result system may be included in the evaluation graph. And as two orthogonal coordinate axes, the process-specific evaluation average point obtained by averaging the evaluation points for all of the objectives entered in the evaluation point calculation table for each process is set as a position on the coordinate axis for each process. An inter-process comparison graph that allows a preparation status display marker to be entered, and the evaluation points for each type of the purpose entered in the evaluation point calculation table as two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system. Including at least one of the objective comparison graphs in which a preparation status display marker for each type of objective can be entered with the evaluation average point for each purpose averaged for all of the plurality of steps as a position on the coordinate axis thereof. And it may be.

Further, in the evaluation method of the present invention, the definition table, the check sheet, the evaluation summary table,
At least one of the evaluation point calculation table, the evaluation coefficient table, and the evaluation graph is stored in a memory of a computer, and displayed on a screen of a display device connected to the computer and the computer. Performing at least one of printing with a printer connected to the, the check sheet, the evaluation summary table, the evaluation point calculation table, and filling in at least one of the evaluation graph, to the computer, Calculation of the target achievement rate to be performed by input or filling in the check sheet, totaling of the number of cases of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation to be filled in the evaluation summary table, and calculation of the evaluation points to be filled in the evaluation point calculation table At least one of the calculations may be performed by the computer, in which case, the definition table of the evaluation tool of the present invention, And Ekkushito, and the evaluation schedule, and the evaluation point calculation table, and the evaluation coefficient table, at least for one of the evaluation graph may be one which is stored in the memory of the computer.

[0020]

According to the evaluation method of the present invention, at each point in time when the preparation work of a new product such as a new car or a new unit has passed, the actual value is entered in the check sheet based on the definition table for each process. In addition, based on that and the target value, write the stages of the successive achievement rate evaluation in the evaluation summary table, and then use the score obtained based on the evaluation coefficient table from the total number of cases in each stage and the basic score to reduce the number of cases. Regardless, the evaluation points calculated so as to accurately represent the achievement status are entered in the evaluation point calculation table, and based on the evaluation points entered in the evaluation point calculation table, the factor system and the result system are used as the coordinate axes, a graph for each purpose In addition, the preparation status display sign is entered in the evaluation graph including at least one of the process-by-process graphs, and the preparation status of the new vehicle at that time is evaluated from the position of the preparation status display sign on the evaluation graph. In each period of work, from the check sheet to the evaluation summary table, to the evaluation point calculation table from the evaluation summary table,
Then, by simply filling in the data sequentially from the evaluation score calculation table to the evaluation graph, the achievement status of the preparation work for each purpose in each process is objectively and comparatively divided into the factor system and the result system. It can be quantitatively and fairly evaluated.

Therefore, according to the present invention, not only a third party but also a person who is performing the preparation work themselves have an inconvenience at an early stage of the preparation work without causing variation between processes and evaluators. It is possible to easily find out what point is in what process and for what purpose, and to easily determine whether the cause is the factor system or the result system, and from the evaluation graph to the check sheet. Conversely, if you follow along, you can easily find a specific method to solve the inconvenience, and you can quickly take measures to eliminate the inconvenience, and therefore, It is possible to reduce the man-hours, labor and cost required for solving the problem, thereby reducing the burden on the development design department and the factory department, and also prevent the occurrence of major problems.

If importance is set for each management item, a score is obtained for each importance, and the scores are summed up for evaluation, a more strict and appropriate evaluation taking into account the importance of the management items is performed. In addition, as an evaluation graph, in addition to at least one of the purpose-based graph and the process-based graph, the factor system and the result system are written in the evaluation point calculation table for each process as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other. A process comparison graph that allows the user to enter a preparation status display indicator for each process, with the process-evaluated average point, which is the average of the evaluation points for all of the objectives, positioned on their coordinate axes, and a factor system and a result system For each type of purpose, the evaluation points for each type of purpose entered in the evaluation point calculation table are averaged for all of a plurality of processes, and the average point for each purpose is set as a position on those coordinate axes as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other. of By including at least one of the inter-object comparison graphs that can be filled with the equipment status indicator, comprehensive evaluation by at least one of the inter-process comparison and the inter-object comparison becomes possible, so finding inconvenient points, This makes it easier to determine whether the cause is a factor system or a result system.

According to the evaluation tool of the present invention, each of the above-described evaluation methods of the present invention can be implemented, and the effects of the methods can be reliably obtained.

In the above-described evaluation method according to the present invention, the management of the definition table and the check sheet, the entry of data into the check sheet and the like, and the calculation of the data to be entered are carried out by using a computer. The evaluation can be performed easily in a shorter time. In this case, if some or all of the components of the above-described evaluation tool of the present invention are stored in the memory of the computer, the evaluation method can be performed. It will be easier.

[0025]

Embodiments of the present invention will be described below in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is an explanatory view showing an outline of an embodiment in which the new product preparation state evaluation method of the present invention is applied to the preparation work of a new type of vehicle. In the method of this embodiment, a plurality of vehicles each producing a vehicle are manufactured. The minicomputers 3 provided at the domestic base 1 and a plurality of overseas bases 2 are connected to each other online and connected to a personal computer 4 serving as a host computer, and perform predetermined operations to be described later according to a program input in advance. With the assistance of the computers 3 and 4, the preparation status of the new model is evaluated.

Thus, as in the normal case, the preparation work of the new vehicle for performing the preparation status evaluation method of this embodiment is performed by backcalculating the preparation period with the time of announcement of the new vehicle being 0:00, as shown in FIG. as well as from the 0 o'clock preparatory steps up to n ₂ months before the late and year of preparation for the n ₂ months before to n ₅ months ago.

In the first half of the year, a declaration of development, creation of a basic plan, determination of a model, creation of a production plan, arrangement of equipment and parts for a prototype lot, trial production of a first prototype lot, and trial production of a first factory Is performed sequentially, and in the subsequent period, the second
Provision of equipment and parts for the next prototype lot, trial production of the second trial lot, trial production of the second factory, primary production trial and secondary production trial, and then start production and 0:00 To the announcement at.

In evaluating the progress of the preparatory work, the method of this embodiment preliminarily describes the entire period in which the preparatory work of a new model vehicle is performed, roughly, the time from the development declaration to the model decision, and thereafter, the manufacturing plan. Until the completion of the production of the first prototype lot and then the completion of the trial production of the first prototype lot and the trial production of the first factory.
The time until the trial production of the next prototype lot is completed, the time until the second factory trial production is completed, the time until the first production trial production is completed, and the second The time until the end of the next production prototype and the time until the additional subsequent rise are divided into eight periods, and each of those periods has passed, and each time indicated by a to h in FIG. 18 will be described later. Conduct a confirmation meeting.

In the method of this embodiment, the contents of the preparatory work are divided in advance into five steps of forging, car body, painting, assembling, and resin in a vehicle factory, and each of these steps is performed in accordance with the present invention. Definition Table 7, Check Sheet 8, Evaluation Summary Table, Evaluation Point Calculation Table 9, Evaluation Coefficient Table, Evaluation Point Calculation Table An evaluation graph 10 is created so that the results of filling in 9 can be listed, all of which are stored in the database 5 in the memory of the personal computer 4, and the definition table 7 and the check sheet 8 are The information is also sent online to the minicomputers 3 at the respective bases, and stored in the memories of the minicomputers 3.

In each of the definition tables 7, for example, as shown in FIGS. 3 to 5 for the definition table 7 of the forging process, the process corresponding to the definition table is performed at each time based on past experience and the like. A plurality of management items that are estimated to be necessary and the definitions of the items are set and described, and for each of those management items, a quality relationship (Q), a delivery date relationship (D), a cost relationship (C), One of the three objective categories, one of the three priorities of the highest priority (A), priority (B), and general (C), and one of causality and action to be taken. Whether the system is a factor system (結果) or a result system (印) related to the actually generated result, and which of the eight periods is to be implemented (the one shown in FIG. Because of the definition table, there are four periods: 2 work, 1 life, 2 life, and rising) Set and describe, and for each of those management items, past experience and results, standards based on laws and regulations such as security standards, balance with other processes and management items, and similar management items of other models If there is more than one target value, or if there are multiple implementation times, set and describe the target values for each period so that the company satisfies the predetermined level based on comparison with In addition to the description of the value, a calculation formula for evaluation on the check sheet 8 and its description are described, and remarks and the like are also described as necessary.

Here, the above management items include, for example, the number of repair man-hours, the number of important defective parts,
In addition to the management items specific to the process, such as determining the method of countermeasures for critical failure pressure type and the completion of correction of the countermeasures for critical failure pressure type, there are management items common to all processes.
In the first half of the above preparation period, create a list of troubleshooting measures for current vehicles, all of which are of importance A, create a master plan that determines the division of work among departments, grasp in-house production costs, provide feedback to the design department by studying models, Drawing of manufacturing plans, setting of target quality, and study of key defect measures, etc., all of which are of importance B, examination of equipment capacity, layout, construction method, drawing to check whether or not to meet design / manufacturing requirements, safety standards, etc. This includes checking the progress of the use of the checklist, confirming the adoption of new technologies and new construction methods, and determining the department that will respond to new technologies and new construction methods.

Further, as management items common to all processes,
In the latter half of the preparation period, the quality target achievement status confirmation of all the importance A, the preparation status confirmation of forms such as process schedules, inspection standards and standard work tables, the progress confirmation of the measures for important defects and the management of design change, Confirmation of the adoption of new technologies and new construction methods in actual products, confirmation of the preparation status of limit samples such as defects and coating quality, and confirmation of the preparation status of equipment and jigs. Confirmation of the achievement status of manufacturing costs is also included.

The above management items are arranged so that the contents of the management items of the factor system satisfy, improve, or eliminate the contents of the management items of the result system so that the factor system and the result system form a pair. Set. However, the number of management items of the factor system and the result system forming the pair need not necessarily be the same.

Each of the check sheets 8 in this case includes, for example, the check sheet 8 in the forging process shown in FIGS.
As shown in FIG. 9, particularly FIG. 7, a plurality of management items described therein are copied and described with reference to the above-mentioned definition table 7 for the corresponding process, and for each of those management items, Purpose, described in the above definition table,
Copy and describe the importance, whether it is a factor system or a result system, the time of implementation and the target value corresponding to that time, and further, for each of those management items, a column to fill in the actual value, The target achievement rate calculated from the target value and the actual value using the calculation formula described in the above definition table is, for example, as shown in Table 1, ◎ (100% or more), ○ (99 to 90%).
%), △ (89-70%), × (69-50%) and * (50%
An evaluation column is provided for entering which stage of the achievement rate evaluation is divided into the following five stages in advance. In addition, as shown in FIG. There will also be a column for entering details and remarks.

[0035]

[Table 1]

The evaluation stage table shown in Table 1 above is used to determine the stage of the achievement rate evaluation at each site during the preparation status evaluation described later, and to fill in the check sheet for the stage of the achievement ratio evaluation determined. In this embodiment, the data is stored in the database 5 in the memory (the storage means such as a hard disk or a floppy disk other than the IC memory) of the personal computer 4 in this embodiment.

In each of the evaluation summary tables, for example, as shown in the lower part of FIG. 6 and FIG. 9, the above-mentioned check sheet 8 for the corresponding process is divided into the above-mentioned factor system and the result system. Enter the total number of cases of each stage (◎, ○, △, ×, *) of the completed achievement rate evaluation for each of the above purposes (Q, D, C) and for each importance (A, B, C) A column is provided, and a column is preferably provided for each of the above-mentioned levels of the total number of cases in each stage of the above-mentioned achievement rate evaluation totaled for all purposes. For example, as in the case of this embodiment, the evaluation summary sheet is attached to the evaluation summary table for the section Q below the check sheet 8 for the target category Q in the three-sheet check sheet 8 as in this embodiment. In addition, it is preferable to provide them together below the check sheet 8 because it is easy to enter the total number.
It may be created separately from the check sheet. If a column is provided below the check sheet 8 for copying and entering various evaluation points entered in an evaluation point calculation table to be described later, it is possible to find out the cause of the inconvenience point and work to solve it later. It is more preferable because it becomes easy.

Further, in the evaluation coefficient table here, as shown in Table 2, for example, evaluation coefficients set for the respective levels of importance in each stage of the above-mentioned achievement rate evaluation are described. In addition,
In this example, the evaluation coefficients shown in Table 2 are common to each step, and the coefficients at each stage of the above-described achievement rate evaluation are as follows: は: 1.0, ○:
0.9, △ is 0.7, × is 0.5, * is 0, and each coefficient of the above importance is A, 1.0, B is 0.8, and C is
For example, when the achievement rate evaluation is ○ and the importance is B, the coefficient at the corresponding stage is multiplied by the coefficient of the importance, such as 0.9 × 0.8 ≒ 0.7.

[0039]

[Table 2]

The evaluation score calculation table 9 here is provided with a performance evaluation number column for copying and filling in the contents of the evaluation summary table as shown in FIG. 10, for example. And at the same time, for each of the objectives (Q, D, C), and for each of them, the total number of achievement level evaluations entered in the above evaluation summary table corresponds to the evaluation coefficient table ( The score calculated by multiplying by the evaluation coefficient described in Table 2) is assigned to the above-mentioned stage (◎, ○, △,
×, *) and the column for each of the importance levels (A, B, C), and in this example, the column for subtotaling the score for each of the stages for each of the importance levels, and the column for the score. A score column including both a column for subtotaling all the degrees of importance for each stage and a total score column for totaling the scores obtained by summing the scores for all stages and all degrees of importance are provided.

In the evaluation score calculation table 9, the above-mentioned evaluation coefficient is added to the total of the total numbers of all stages corresponding to the importance for each of the above-mentioned factor systems and result systems. The column to enter the basic point subtotal calculated by multiplying the highest stage evaluation coefficient (1.0 for A, 0.8 for B, 0.6 for C) described in the table, and the above basic point subtotal A basic score total column for entering the total of the basic scores totaled for all of the importance levels, and a value obtained by dividing the above-mentioned total score by the total of the above-mentioned basic scores and multiplying by a predetermined number, for example, 100 such that 100 points is a perfect score in this embodiment. There is provided an evaluation point column in which the evaluation points calculated by the calculation are entered. That is, the evaluation point here is calculated by the following equation,
Therefore, if the stage of the achievement rate of all the management items is ◎, even if those management items have various importance, the evaluation point will be 100 points regardless of the importance.

[0042]

(Equation 1)

In the evaluation point calculation table 9, in this embodiment, further, in order to facilitate entry into the evaluation graph,
A column (shown in the lower part of FIG. 10) in which the average score of the factor system and the result system is averaged for each purpose described above (shown in the lower part of FIG. 10). A column for entering the averaged causal process evaluation points (shown on the right in FIG. 10) and a column for entering those average evaluation points or the average process evaluation points obtained by further averaging the process evaluation points (in the lower right corner in FIG. 10). Are shown).

In the evaluation graph 10 shown here, for example, as shown in FIGS. 11 to 13, particularly FIG. 12, the above-described factor system and result system are defined as two orthogonal coordinate axes, and the objectives (Q, D,
For each C), a preparation status display sign for each process in which the value of each evaluation point entered in the above-mentioned evaluation point calculation table corresponding to the purpose is set as a position on the coordinate axis (for example, in this embodiment, the heading is Δ, The purpose-specific graphs 10Q, 10D, and 10C, which allow the body to indicate ▲, painting ▼, assembly ◆, and resin ★), are also included as two coordinate axes orthogonal to the above factor system and result system. The evaluation average score for each purpose (all process evaluation values) obtained by averaging the evaluation points for each of the objectives (Q, D, C) entered in the evaluation score calculation table 9 for all processes, and the average evaluation score for each objective A preparation status indicator (for example, in the present embodiment, the whole is ●, Q is ○, D is △, and C is △) can be entered for each purpose, with the overall evaluation points averaged for all purposes taken as positions on those coordinate axes. The objective comparison graph 10A and the factor system and result system As the two coordinate axes, the process-based evaluation average points (process evaluation points) obtained by averaging the evaluation points for all of the objectives entered in the evaluation point calculation table 9 for each process are set as positions on those coordinate axes. Comparison graph 10B that allows the user to fill in the preparation status indicator
Include a comprehensive evaluation graph consisting of

It is preferable that the evaluation graph 10 be provided with a list of evaluation points beside it as shown in FIG. 13 because entry of the evaluation graph is facilitated. Evaluation score of each process entered in evaluation score calculation table 9,
It is possible to copy and write the evaluation average score for each purpose (all process evaluation values) obtained by averaging the evaluation points for each type of purpose for all processes and used for filling in the above-mentioned inter-purpose comparison graph 10A. .

The definition table 7, the check sheet 8,
An evaluation summary table, an evaluation point calculation table 9, an evaluation coefficient table, and an evaluation graph 10 are created, all of which are stored in the memory of the personal computer 4, and the definition table 7 and the check sheet 8 If the data is sent to the minicomputers 3 of the above-mentioned bases online and stored in the memories of the minicomputers 3, the preparation for the preparation status evaluation by the method of this embodiment is completed. As shown in FIG. 1, at each time point a to h after each of the above-mentioned respective times of the preparation work of the new car,
Printer 6 connected to minicomputer 3 at each of the above locations
The definition table 7 and check sheet 8 for each of the above processes
Is printed on the check sheet 8 and the actual value of the preparation work at that time is entered for each management item described therein at each site based on the definition table 7 on the check sheet 8.

Next, here, the check sheet 8 on which the above-mentioned actual values are entered is transferred from each of the above-mentioned bases to a place where the above-mentioned personal computer 4 is installed in this embodiment by a facsimile machine, etc. By collecting and collecting the check sheets 8, a confirmation meeting is performed to evaluate the overall progress of each step of the preparatory work at that time.

FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing an evaluation procedure at the above-mentioned confirmation meeting.
In step 11, check sheets 8 collected from each of the above bases
The actual value entered in the personal computer 4
Then, input using an input means such as a keyboard, an optical reader, and a digitizer (not shown), and then in step 12,
The personal computer 4 retrieves the target value and the achievement rate calculation formula in the definition table 7 and Table 1 from the database 5 in the memory into the work area in the computer, and uses the target value and the achievement rate calculation formula in the computer. After calculating the achievement rate from the actual value input above, in step 13,
Using the evaluation stage table of Table 1, it is determined which stage the calculated achievement rate evaluation is, and the determined stage is shown in the evaluation column of the corresponding check sheet 8 taken out from the database 5 into the work area, for example, as shown in FIG. Fill in as shown.

After entry of the stage of the achievement rate is performed for each management item of the check sheet 8 of each process, the personal computer 4 next proceeds to step 14 for each of the processes extracted from the database 5 to the work area. In each column of the evaluation summary table, read out and enter the total number of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the evaluation column of each check sheet 8 in step 13 above, and then in step 15, for example, in FIG. As shown in the figure, each column of the number of actual evaluations column of the evaluation score calculation table 9 for each of the above-mentioned processes taken out from the database 5 into the work area is filled in the corresponding column of the evaluation summary table previously entered. After copying and entering the total number of each stage, this is also used for each column of the actual evaluation number column by using the evaluation coefficient table of Table 2 extracted from the database 5 to the work area. From the values, the each score, and the score subtotal, and the total score, and the basic points subtotal, and the total respective basic point, and each evaluation point, and the average evaluation score and the process evaluation points,
The average process evaluation points are calculated, and they are entered in the corresponding columns of the evaluation point calculation table 9 for each of the above processes.

Next, the personal computer 4
Proceeding to step 16, the evaluation points and average evaluations entered in the respective columns of the evaluation point calculation table 9 are displayed in the purpose-specific graphs 10Q, 10D, 10C and the comprehensive evaluation graphs 10A, 10B of the evaluation graph 10 extracted from the database 5. For the purpose-specific graphs 10Q, 10D, and 10C, for example,
As shown in FIG. 14, the above-mentioned preparation status display sign for each process, and for the inter-process comparison graph 10B, for example, as shown in FIG.
For the inter-object comparison graph 10A, for example, as shown in FIG. 16, the above-mentioned preparation status display markers for each object and for the whole are entered, and the evaluation point calculation table 9 is also provided in each column of the evaluation point list. Enter the evaluation points, average evaluation points, and process evaluation points entered in each column of, and all the process evaluation values and all purpose all process evaluation values calculated from them, and then fill in the evaluation graph 10 and the first. The check sheet 8 with the evaluation summary table and the evaluation score calculation table (form) 9 are printed and output by a printer (not shown).

Thereafter, in step 17, the person in charge of the evaluation of each process (the section manager or the person in charge of the preparation work) attending the above-mentioned confirmation meeting is referred to the above-mentioned evaluation graph 10 and check sheet, respectively. 8 and the evaluation score calculation table (form) 9, examine the position of each preparation status display sign entered in the evaluation graph 10, and exchange opinions with the person in charge of evaluation of other processes with each other. Assess readiness at the time. Here, the criterion for evaluating the position of each preparation status display mark entered in the evaluation graph 10 is determined as shown in FIGS. 12 and 17 in this embodiment, for example.

In other words, in FIG. 12 and FIG. 17A, a position where the evaluation point, the average evaluation point, or the process evaluation point is 100 in both the factor system and the result system is set as the target point, and the evaluation points and the like are set. Is a management OK zone (OK) in which the preparation work is evaluated as being successful, with a range of 90 points or more for both the factor system and the result system, and the evaluation points etc. are 80 points for both the factor system and the result system The range excluding the management OK zone is a caution zone (CAUTION) for evaluating that the progress of the preparatory work requires attention, and the evaluation score of one or both of the factor system and the result system is 80. An NG zone (NG) that evaluates the progress of the preparatory work as insufficient in the range below the point
And

Therefore, the above-mentioned evaluators mutually evaluate the evaluation graph 10 for the process they are in charge of and the other processes.
Comprehensive evaluation graph 10A, 10B graph to objective graph 10Q, 1
Considering the order of 0D and 10C sequentially, if there is a process or purpose to be improved in each of which the sign is in the caution zone or NG zone, grasp them, and further check the process to be improved up to check sheet 8. Looking back and searching for management items that have inconvenient points based on the stages entered in the target value achievement rate evaluation column, and stating that improvements are requested in the improvement request comment column for that management item And provide guidelines for improvement. Even if the sign is in the management OK zone, enter an opinion in the comment sheet for improvement on the check sheet 8 to call attention until all the evaluation points etc. reach 100 points.

The criterion for evaluating the position of each preparation status display mark entered in the evaluation graph 10 can be determined as shown in FIG. 17 (b). In other words, for the process or purpose described in the evaluation graph 10, if there is a sign in the above management OK zone, it can be evaluated that the management is performed normally, but the evaluation score of the result system is 90 points or more. If there is a sign in the range of less than 90 points for the factor system, etc., no measures have been taken, but results were obtained in a shelving manner, or the target value of the result system was inappropriate and easily exceeded. Can be evaluated as having achieved
If there is a sign in the range of 90 points or more but the evaluation score etc. of the result system is less than 90 points, the measures have been taken, but the measures are still insufficient or inappropriate, or the target value of the factor system Can be evaluated as inappropriate and easily achieved, and if there is a sign in the range of less than 90 points in both the factor system and the result system, it is evaluated as insufficient management be able to.

If these two types of evaluation criteria are used together, it is possible to more easily and quickly grasp the problem when the sign is in the caution zone, and to review the suitability of setting the target value. Can also.

As a result of the evaluation at the confirmation meeting in step 17 described above, if all of the signs described in the evaluation graph 10 are at the above-mentioned target point of 100 in both the factor system and the result system, the evaluation result is obtained. Is good (OK), the process proceeds to step 18, and the preparation status evaluation at that time ends. On the other hand, if at least one of the signs described in the evaluation graph 10 is out of the target point, the evaluation result is not good (N
G) In the process where the target points could not be achieved, the points where there were inconveniences were improved, and at the next confirmation meeting, the results of the improvement in the process that was previously NG were confirmed (follow).

The evaluation graph 10, the check sheet 8, and the evaluation score calculation table (form) 9 in which the data is entered in the above-mentioned preparation status evaluation are used to improve the above-mentioned disadvantages, and also in Japan and overseas. After the completion of the above-mentioned preparation status evaluation, the results were OK, NG at each of the bases 1 and 2 to understand the overall preparation status and individual processes of each process and to add them to the database for further improvement. In either case, as shown in FIG. 1, it is sent online to the personal computer 3 at each of the bases 1 and 2.

As described above, according to the evaluation method of this embodiment, at each stage of the preparatory work, the actual value is simply entered on the check sheet 8 and input to the personal computer 4, and the personal computer 4 Calculates the data based on the actual values to the evaluation summary table, from the evaluation summary table to the evaluation point calculation table 9, and from the evaluation point calculation table 9 to the evaluation graph.
10 and print out the evaluation graph 10 etc., and the evaluation staff examines them.The achievement status of the preparation work for each purpose in each process is indicated by the factor system and the result system. It is possible to objectively, quantitatively, and fairly evaluate while comparing and separately performing the evaluation, and the evaluation can be easily performed in a short time.

Therefore, according to the evaluation method of this embodiment, the preparation work can be performed quickly without causing a variation between the processes and the persons in charge, not only in the process in which each person in charge of evaluation but also in other processes. At this time, it is easy to find out which inconvenience is in which process and for which purpose, and it is easy to judge whether the cause is caused by the factor system or the result system. To check sheet 8 in reverse, it is also possible to easily find a specific method for resolving the inconvenience, and take prompt measures to eliminate the inconvenience. Therefore, it is possible to reduce the man-hour, labor and cost required to solve the problem, thereby reducing the burden on the development and design department and the factory department, and preventing the occurrence of major problems Rukoto can also.

In this embodiment, the importance is set for each management item, and the scores obtained for each importance are summed and evaluated. Therefore, a strict and appropriate evaluation taking into account the importance of the management item is performed. Since both the inter-process comparison graph and the inter-purpose comparison graph are used in addition to the purpose-specific graph, comprehensive evaluation can be performed by comparing between the processes and between the objectives. The discovery and the determination as to whether the cause is a factor system or a result system can be further facilitated.

On the other hand, according to the evaluation tool used in the method of the above-described embodiment, the evaluation method of the embodiment can be implemented, and the operation and effect of the method can be surely brought about. Since the components are stored in the memory of the personal computer 4, the method of the above embodiment can be more easily implemented. .

Although the present invention has been described with reference to the illustrated examples, the present invention is not limited to the above examples. For example, each management item may be evaluated equally without setting the importance. In addition, in addition to or instead of the purpose-based graph, the evaluation graph includes, as two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system, an evaluation point calculation table for each purpose corresponding to the process for each process. May include a process-by-process graph in which the value of each evaluation point entered in the column can be filled with a preparation status display indicator for each purpose with the position on the coordinate axis. A similar effect can be obtained.On the other hand, it is also possible to omit one or both of the inter-step comparison graph and the inter-object comparison graph and perform the evaluation using only one or both of the purpose-based graph and the step-based graph. it can.

In the present invention, instead of using the personal computer 4, the above various calculations are performed by using an electronic desk calculator (calculator) or by manual calculation, and the results are printed on a paper. A sheet, an evaluation summary table, an evaluation point calculation table, and an evaluation graph may be entered. On the other hand, a display device is connected to the personal computer 4, and the check sheet, the evaluation summary table, and the evaluation points are displayed on the screen. The calculation table and the evaluation graph may be displayed sequentially or superimposed, and data such as target values may be input while looking at the check sheet or the like, and the personal computer 4 may perform the above-described entry. In the present invention, if necessary, the definition table, the check sheet, the evaluation summary table, the evaluation point calculation table, the evaluation coefficient table, and not all of the evaluation graph but a part of them, for example, only the definition table and the check sheet are computer-readable. May be used after being stored, or only calculations may be performed by a computer.

Further, the process in the present invention includes the process of a subcontractor or a cooperating manufacturer in addition to the base of an in-house factory or the like. For example, in the case of a unit factory, casting, forging, machining, heat treatment, assembly, and firing are performed. It can be divided into knotting and forging. In addition, the present invention can be applied to the evaluation of the preparation status of new products such as new engines, transmissions, suspensions and other units that are newly adopted not only for new vehicles but also for conventional vehicles. Needless to say.

[0065]

Thus, according to the evaluation method of the present invention, at each stage of the preparation work of a new product, the check sheet is converted into the evaluation summary table, the evaluation summary table is evaluated, and the evaluation point calculation table is evaluated. Just fill in the data sequentially on the graph, and objectively and quantitatively and fairly evaluate the achievement status of the preparatory work for each purpose in each process while comparing it separately for the factor system and the result system Because you can
Not only third parties but also those who are preparing for it,
The inconvenience can be easily identified at an early stage of the preparatory work without any variation between processes and evaluators, and the cause can be easily identified. You can easily determine which one is located, and if you go back from the evaluation graph to the check sheet, you can easily find a specific method to resolve the inconvenience, Measures can be taken promptly to eliminate the inconveniences, thus reducing the man-hours, labor and cost required for the solution, and reducing the burden on the development design department and factory department. It is also possible to prevent a major problem from occurring.

It is to be noted that if the importance is set for each management item, a score is obtained for each importance, and the scores are totaled for evaluation, a more strict and appropriate evaluation taking into account the importance of the management item is performed. In addition, as an evaluation graph, in addition to at least one of the purpose-based graph and the process-based graph, the factor system and the result system are written in the evaluation point calculation table for each process as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other. A process comparison graph that allows the user to enter a preparation status display indicator for each process, with the process-evaluated average point, which is the average of the evaluation points for all of the objectives, positioned on their coordinate axes, and a factor system and a result system For each type of purpose, the evaluation points for each type of purpose entered in the evaluation point calculation table are averaged for all of a plurality of processes, and the average point for each purpose is set as a position on those coordinate axes as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other. of By including at least one of the inter-object comparison graphs that can be filled with the equipment status indicator, comprehensive evaluation by at least one of the inter-process comparison and the inter-object comparison becomes possible, so finding inconvenient points, This makes it easier to determine whether the cause is a factor system or a result system.

According to the evaluation tool of the present invention, each of the above-described evaluation methods of the present invention can be implemented, and the effects of the methods can be reliably obtained.

In the above-described evaluation method according to the present invention, the management of the definition table and the check sheet, the entry of data into the check sheet, and the calculation of the data to be entered are performed using a computer. The evaluation can be performed easily in a shorter time. In this case, if some or all of the components of the above-described evaluation tool of the present invention are stored in the memory of the computer, the evaluation method can be performed. It will be easier.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing an outline of an embodiment in which a new product preparation state evaluation method of the present invention is applied to a preparation work of a new type of automobile.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing a procedure for executing a confirmation meeting in the method of the embodiment.

FIG. 3 is a configuration diagram showing an entire definition table in one embodiment of a new product preparation status evaluation tool of the present invention used for carrying out the method of the above embodiment.

FIG. 4 is a configuration diagram showing an upper left portion of the definition table.

FIG. 5 is a configuration diagram showing an upper right part of the definition table.

FIG. 6 is a configuration diagram showing an entire check sheet and an evaluation summary table in an embodiment of the new product preparation status evaluation tool of the present invention used for carrying out the method of the above embodiment.

FIG. 7 is a configuration diagram showing an upper left portion of the check sheet.

FIG. 8 is a configuration diagram showing an upper right portion of the check sheet.

FIG. 9 is a configuration diagram showing a part of an evaluation summary table attached below the check sheet.

FIG. 10 is a configuration diagram showing an evaluation score calculation table in one embodiment of the new product preparation status evaluation tool of the present invention used for carrying out the method of the above embodiment.

FIG. 11 is a configuration diagram showing an entire evaluation graph of an embodiment of the new product preparation status evaluation tool of the present invention used for carrying out the method of the above embodiment.

FIG. 12 is a configuration diagram showing a left half of the evaluation graph.

FIG. 13 is a configuration diagram showing a right half of the evaluation graph.

FIG. 14 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of entry of a purpose-specific graph in the evaluation graph.

FIG. 15 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of filling in an inter-process comparison graph in the evaluation graph.

FIG. 16 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of entry of a comparison graph between objectives in the evaluation graph.

FIGS. 17 (a) and (b) are explanatory diagrams respectively showing examples of evaluation criteria for the position of a preparation status display sign entered in the evaluation graph.

FIG. 18 is an explanatory diagram showing the contents of a normal new vehicle preparation operation with time.

[Explanation of symbols]

 1 Domestic base 2 Overseas base 3 Mini computer 4 Personal computer 5 Database 6 Printer 7 Definition table 8 Check sheet with evaluation summary table 9 Evaluation point calculation table 10 Evaluation graph

──────────────────────────────────────────────────続 き Continued on front page (58) Field surveyed (Int.Cl. ⁶ , DB name) G07C 11/00 G07F 17/60

Claims (10)

(57) [Claims] At first, the whole period for preparing a new product is divided into a plurality of periods, and at the same time, the preparation is divided into a plurality of steps, and a definition table, a check sheet, and an evaluation tabulation for each of those steps are obtained. In addition to creating a table and an evaluation point calculation table, an evaluation coefficient table and an evaluation graph for listing the results of entry in the evaluation point calculation table are created. In addition to describing the multiple control items set for the process and their contents,
One of a plurality of objectives set for each of the management items, whether it is a factor system or a result system, and which of the plurality of periods is to be implemented, and one target value or one of the target values In the case where there are a plurality of execution times, a target value for each time is described, and in each of the check sheets, the plurality of management items described in the definition table for the process corresponding to the check sheet and their management For each of the items, the purpose, whether it is a factor system or a result system, the execution time and the target value corresponding to the time are described, and for each of the management items,
A column for entering the actual value and a column for entering in which stage of the achievement rate evaluation the target achievement rate calculated from the target value and the actual value is divided into a plurality of stages in advance are provided, In each of the evaluation summary tables, the factor system and the result system are divided into the respective factor systems and the result systems. A column to be filled in is provided for each, the evaluation coefficient table describes the evaluation coefficient set for each stage of the achievement rate evaluation, and the evaluation point calculation table includes the factor system and the result system. At the same time, each of the objectives is divided by the purpose and calculated by multiplying the total number of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the evaluation summary table by the evaluation coefficient described in the evaluation coefficient table corresponding to that stage. Score In the column to fill in, the column to enter the total score obtained by summing the scores for all stages, the total of the total number of each stage and the evaluation coefficient of the highest stage of the achievement rate evaluation described in the evaluation coefficient table A column is provided for entering a total of the basic points calculated based on the score, and a column is provided for entering an evaluation score calculated by multiplying a value obtained by dividing the total score by the total of the basic points by a predetermined number. As the two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system, the value of each evaluation point entered in the evaluation point calculation table corresponding to the purpose for each purpose is set as a position on the coordinate axis for each process. A purpose-specific graph in which a preparation status display sign can be entered, and the factor system and the result system as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other, are entered in the evaluation point calculation table for each purpose corresponding to the process for each process. The value of each evaluated score At least one of the step-by-step graphs that can be filled with the preparation status display sign for each purpose as a position on the coordinate axis, at the time when each of the timings of the preparation work of the new product has elapsed, First, on the check sheet, for each of the management items, write the actual value and the stage of the achievement rate evaluation, and then, in each column of the evaluation summary table, Enter the total number, and then, in each column of the evaluation score calculation table, enter the score, the total score, the total basic score, and the evaluation score. A preparation state confirmation work is performed in which a display sign is filled in, and thereafter, for all of the steps, the preparation state of the new product at that time is evaluated from the position of the preparation state display sign on the evaluation graph. And performing, new product readiness evaluation method. 2. When preparing the definition table, check sheet, evaluation summary table, evaluation point calculation table, and evaluation coefficient table, each of the definition tables includes a plurality of importance levels set for each of the management items. In each of the check sheets, a column for describing the importance of each of the management items is also provided, and in each of the evaluation summary tables, the factor system and the result system are included. Separately, a column is provided for each of the objectives and the importance levels for the total number of cases of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the check sheet for the process corresponding thereto, In the evaluation coefficient table, the evaluation coefficient set for each importance level for each stage of the achievement rate evaluation is described, and the evaluation point calculation table is divided into the factor system and the result system, and at the same time, Divided by each In each case, the score calculated by multiplying the total number of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the evaluation summary table by the evaluation coefficient described in the evaluation coefficient table corresponding to the stage is calculated for each of the stages and the score. At least a column to fill in for each importance, a column to enter the score by subtotaling all of the stages for each importance, and a column to enter the score by subtotaling all of the importance at each stage On the other hand, a column for entering a total score obtained by summing the scores for all stages and all importance levels, and a total of the total number of all stages corresponding to the importance levels for each of the importance levels are described in the evaluation coefficient table. A column to fill in the basic point subtotal calculated by multiplying the evaluation coefficient of the highest stage of the achievement rate evaluation, a column to fill in the basic point total sum of the basic point subtotal for all of the importance, and the score total In total base points And a column for entering an evaluation score calculated by multiplying the calculated value by a predetermined number, and when filling in the evaluation score calculation table, further enter the subtotal of the score and the basic point subtotal. Characterized in that
The method for evaluating a new product preparation status according to claim 1. 3. The evaluation score calculation table for each of the processes, wherein the evaluation graph for the previous period includes, in addition to at least one of the graph for each purpose and the graph for each process, two orthogonal axes of the factor system and the result system. An inter-process comparison graph in which a preparation status display indicator for each process, in which an evaluation average point for each process obtained by averaging the evaluation points for all of the objectives entered on the coordinate axis, can be entered, As two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system, the evaluation points for each purpose obtained by averaging the evaluation points for each purpose written in the evaluation point calculation table for all of the plurality of processes are displayed on the coordinate axes. 3. The new product preparation status evaluation method according to claim 1, further comprising at least one of an inter-purpose comparison graph in which a preparation status display marker for each purpose at the position of (a) can be entered. 4. The definition table, the check sheet,
The evaluation summary table, the evaluation point calculation table, the evaluation coefficient table, and at least one of the evaluation graphs,
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein the information is stored in a memory of a computer, and at least one of display on a screen of a display device connected to the computer and printing by a printer connected to the computer is performed. 3. The new product preparation status evaluation method according to any one of 3. 5. The method according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the check sheet, the evaluation summary table, the evaluation point calculation table, and the evaluation graph is entered into the computer. Item 4. The new product preparation status evaluation method according to item 4. 6. A calculation of a target achievement rate to be entered in the check sheet, a total of the number of cases of the achievement rate evaluation to be entered in the evaluation summary table, and a calculation of the evaluation points to be entered in the evaluation score calculation table. The new product preparation status evaluation method according to claim 4, wherein at least one of the calculations is performed by the computer. 7. A new product preparation work is created for each process divided into a plurality of processes, and a plurality of management items set for the corresponding processes and the contents thereof are described.
One of a plurality of objectives set for each of the management items, whether it is a factor-based or a result-based, and at which one of a plurality of times the entire period for preparing a new product is divided into a plurality of times And a definition table (7) in which one target value or a target value for each period when there are a plurality of times of execution is prepared for each process, A description is given of the plurality of management items described in the definition table, the objectives for each of those management items, whether the system is a factor system or a result system, an execution time, and a target value corresponding to the time. At the same time, for each of the management items, a column for entering the actual value and a stage to which the target achievement ratio calculated from the target value and the actual value corresponds to the achievement ratio evaluation divided into a plurality of stages in advance are entered. Check sheet with columns (8) And, for each of the steps, divided into the factor system and the result system, and for each, the total number of cases of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the check sheet for the corresponding process An evaluation summary table provided with a column to be filled in for each purpose, an evaluation coefficient table describing evaluation coefficients set for each stage of the achievement rate evaluation, created for each process, the factor system and the result system At the same time, each of the objectives is divided by the purpose and calculated by multiplying the total number of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the evaluation summary table by the evaluation coefficient described in the evaluation coefficient table corresponding to that stage. A column for entering the obtained score for each stage, a column for entering the total score obtained by summing the scores for all stages, the total of the total number of each stage and the highest of the achievement rate evaluation described in the evaluation coefficient table To grade evaluation coefficient Evaluation score calculation table (9) provided with a column for entering the calculated basic score total and a column for entering an evaluation score calculated by multiplying a value obtained by dividing the total score by the basic score total by a predetermined number. And, in order to be able to list the entry results in the evaluation point calculation table, the factor system and the result system are entered in the evaluation point calculation table corresponding to the purpose for each purpose as two coordinate axes orthogonal to each other. The purpose-specific graphs (10Q, 10D, 10C) that allow the user to fill in the preparation status display indicators for each process with the values of the respective evaluation points as the positions on the coordinate axes, and orthogonalize the factor system and the result system As the two coordinate axes, for each of the steps, a preparation status display indicator for each purpose is set, in which the value of each evaluation point written in the evaluation point calculation table for each purpose corresponding to the process is a position on the coordinate axis. At least one of the graphs for each process And evaluation graph (10) comprising, consisting comprises a new product readiness evaluation tool for use in the evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 3. 8. The definition table of each process describes a plurality of management items set for a process corresponding to the process and the contents thereof, and includes one of a plurality of purposes set for each of the management items. One of the multiple levels of importance, whether it is a factor system or a result system, and which of the multiple product preparation periods for the new product If there are a plurality of target values or their implementation timings, describe the target values for each timing. The check sheet for each of the processes is created for each of the processes, and the definition table for the corresponding process is created. , The purpose, the importance, the distinction between the factor system and the result system, the execution time, and the target value corresponding to the time are described for each of the plurality of management items described in the above section. Along with each of the management items, A column for entering the actual value of the target value, and a column for entering in which stage of the achievement ratio evaluation the target achievement ratio calculated from the target value and the actual value is divided into a plurality of stages in advance, The evaluation summary table is divided into the factor system and the result system, and for each of the objectives, the total number of cases of each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the check sheet for the process corresponding to the And a column to be entered for each of the importance levels is provided. The evaluation coefficient table describes the evaluation coefficients set for each of the importance levels for each stage of the achievement rate evaluation. System and result system, and at the same time, for each of the objectives, the number of achievements in each stage of the achievement rate evaluation entered in the evaluation summary table, the evaluation described in the evaluation coefficient table corresponding to that stage. Multiplied by a coefficient A column for entering the score for each of the stages and for each of the importance levels, and a column for subtotaling and entering the score for all of the stages for each of the importance levels and the score for all of the importance levels for each of the stages At least one of the columns to be entered by subtotaling, the column for entering the total score obtained by summing the scores for all stages and all the degrees of importance, and the total number of totals of all stages corresponding to the importance for each of the importance levels A column for entering a basic point subtotal calculated by multiplying the evaluation coefficient at the highest stage of the achievement rate evaluation described in the evaluation coefficient table, and a basic point total for all the importance levels of the basic point subtotal are entered. 8. A new product preparation status evaluation tool according to claim 7, wherein a column and a column for entering an evaluation score calculated by multiplying a value obtained by dividing the total score by the total basic score by a predetermined number are provided. . 9. The evaluation point calculation table for each of the steps, in addition to at least one of the purpose-based graph and the step-based graph, as two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system. An inter-process comparison graph (10B) in which a preparation status display indicator for each process can be entered, with the evaluation average point for each process, which is the average of the evaluation points for all of the entered objectives, taken as the position on their coordinate axes. And, as the two coordinate axes orthogonal to the factor system and the result system, the evaluation points for each purpose obtained by averaging the evaluation points for each purpose written in the evaluation point calculation table for all of the plurality of steps are calculated. 9. The new product preparation status according to claim 7 or 8, further comprising at least one of a purpose-to-purpose comparison graph (10A) in which a preparation status display sign for each purpose set as a position on a coordinate axis can be entered. Value tool. 10. A computer (3, 4), wherein at least one of the definition table, the check sheet, the evaluation summary table, the evaluation point calculation table, the evaluation coefficient table, and the evaluation graph is 10. The new product preparation status evaluation tool according to claim 7, wherein the tool is stored in the memory of (1).