JP5979706B2 - Product manual evaluation system, its evaluation method and quality evaluation server - Google Patents

Description

  Embodiments described herein relate generally to a product manual evaluation system, an evaluation method thereof, and a quality evaluation server.

  Conventionally, when a product is put on the market, an instruction manual and a usage manual regarding the product are attached to the product. Product manuals, including instruction manuals and instructions for use, should meet various requirements for the product, including the validity of the product and precautions for use, as well as legal and standard requirements for the product. Must be listed.

  Specifically, it is necessary to comply with the laws and standards of the market where products are shipped, as well as understanding the target users such as gender, age group, whether they are beginners or experts, production technical requirements, and the purpose of the manual In addition to satisfying various requirements such as differentiation from competitors, safety requirements such as accident avoidance, etc., consider user requirements such as intelligibility and requirements on effectiveness (actual achievement of objectives) The product manual had to be created.

  In other words, the side that creates the product manual, for example, if the software is a product or a product for which there is no applicable law or standard, the description information elements (information to be communicated) and the content structure From the viewpoints of elements (configuration techniques that influence searchability), visual expression elements (visual expression means such as images and illustrations), sentence expression elements (word expression means), physical structure elements (information media form), etc. Judgment of conformity requirements.

  On the other hand, users of product manuals need to understand the appropriateness of information (useful), the accuracy of information (correct), the ease of searching for information (the information they want to know can be found immediately), and the understanding of sentence expressions. Ease of reading (easy to read), easy to understand visual expression (easy to see and understand), ease of handling information (according to usage environment and purpose), safety of information (considering user protection) , Judgment requirements were determined from the viewpoint of design (which is attractive).

  However, creating a product manual that satisfies these requirements tends to be cumbersome. In addition, product developers are often responsible for creating product manuals, and product developers have a lot of time to create product manuals that are different from the original tasks. It was.

  In this case, the person in charge of product development not only conforms to the laws and standards necessary for bringing the product to the market, such as specifications and ratings, but also requests for laws and standards required in the product manual. It is necessary to adapt to the above. However, creating a product manual so as to comply with the laws and standards would place an excessive burden on the person in charge of product development.

  In addition, there is no established method for quality evaluation of the product manual that has been created, and it may be done by one person in charge, which places a burden on that person. For this reason, some companies have evaluated the quality of product manuals by a plurality of people. In this case, however, the quality evaluation scales of product manuals varied.

  In addition, regarding the quality control of the product manual, it can be considered that if an experienced person in charge is responsible for creating the product manual of the product, it can cope with the quality control. However, such persons in charge are often busy with original product development, and often do not have time to create product manuals.

  In addition, quantitative and quantitative analysis of how manual quality has changed in the internal and external manual improvement efforts aimed at improving the quality of the manual and the revision of the standards and laws, product specifications, etc. There was no method that could be grasped visually.

  In addition, even when outsourcing manual quality improvement, there was no way to determine how much quality improvement could be achieved by actual improvement.

  Furthermore, the usability check of the product itself has been carried out by many companies, but there are few cases where the usability check of the product manual and the verification of effectiveness are carried out, and it is a case where it is carried out temporarily. However, it was not objective because it depended on the above-mentioned arbitrary evaluation of one person in charge.

  In this way, there is no method for objectively and quantitatively evaluating the quality of the created product manual from multiple viewpoints of the manual quality, and the quality evaluation is highly dependent on the subject-level subjectivity. There was no way to “visualize” the quality of the manual so that third parties could see it.

  Conventionally, in creating a product manual, it has been desired to create a product manual without eliminating variations in the quality evaluation scale of the product manual and without burdening the development staff. However, until now, no efforts have been made to meet these requirements. Therefore, an apparatus or system for objectively evaluating a created product manual while managing a certain quality required for the product manual has not been constructed.

  Therefore, the inventor according to the present application pays attention to these issues, centrally manages the requirements in creating the product manual, and product manuals that can easily and objectively and quantitatively evaluate and manage the quality of product manuals. An evaluation system, an evaluation method thereof, and a quality evaluation server have been found.

According to the present embodiment, the product manual evaluation system corresponds to the product manual registration device that registers the product manual information describing the handling of the product in the product manual storage database, and the product manual information registered in the product manual storage database. An evaluation input terminal for inputting evaluation information and a quality evaluation server for collecting and managing the input evaluation information, the quality evaluation server having a predetermined value for evaluating product manual information The evaluation item database storing the evaluation items, the product manual registration device using the product manual storage device, the registration receiving unit for receiving registration of the product manual information in the product manual storage database, and the product manual information received by the registration receiving unit are stored. Product manual storage database Evaluation target management means for managing product manual information stored in the product manual storage database in association with predetermined evaluation items stored in the evaluation item database, and inputting the evaluation items by the evaluation input terminal The evaluation result acquisition means for acquiring the evaluation information as an evaluation result, the evaluation results acquired by the evaluation result acquisition means, and a matching ratio quantitatively indicating the ratio of matching of the evaluation items, An evaluation report generating means for generating an evaluation report indicating the quality of the manual as the conformity based on the conformity quality qualitatively indicating the evaluation of the quality of the conforming portion, the evaluation report generating means, The conformity quality at the conformance location with respect to the conformance ratio is regarded as the conformity indicating the quality of the manual. Characterized by visually output the report.

The schematic block diagram which showed the structure of the outline of the product manual evaluation system which concerns on this embodiment. The sequence diagram which showed the whole operation | movement of the product manual evaluation system which concerns on this embodiment. The functional block diagram which showed the structure of the quality evaluation server which concerns on this embodiment. The hardware block diagram which showed the structure of the hardware of the quality evaluation server which concerns on this embodiment. The flowchart which showed the evaluation preparation process procedure for evaluating a product manual in the product manual evaluation system which concerns on this embodiment. The display screen example which showed an example of the menu screen for setting managers displayed on the manual registration terminal which concerns on this embodiment. The display screen example which showed an example of the manual registration screen displayed on the display screen of the display part of the manual registration terminal which concerns on this embodiment. The display screen example which showed an example at the time of displaying the law and standard classified into the evaluation category which concerns on this embodiment on the display screen of the display part of a manual registration terminal. The display screen example which showed an example at the time of displaying the detail display screen which displayed the detail of the evaluation item which concerns on this embodiment on the display screen of the display part of a manual registration terminal. The display screen example which showed an example at the time of displaying the evaluator registration screen which registers the evaluator who evaluates the product manual which concerns on this embodiment on the display screen of the display part of a manual registration terminal. The display screen example which showed an example at the time of displaying the account transmission screen which registers the account for evaluation with the evaluator of the product manual which concerns on this embodiment on the display screen of the display part of a manual registration terminal. The flowchart which showed the evaluation process sequence for evaluating the product manual of the product manual evaluation system which concerns on this embodiment. The display screen example which showed an example at the time of displaying the evaluation category selection screen which selects the evaluation category which concerns on this embodiment on a display screen. The display screen example which showed an example at the time of displaying the evaluation screen when the internal evaluation terminal which concerns on this embodiment selects the evaluation category of a law on the display screen of the display part of an internal evaluation terminal. The display screen which showed an example in the case of evaluating adaptability based on a conformity ratio and conformity quality when evaluating the evaluation item which concerns on this embodiment. Explanatory drawing which showed an example of the risk map which showed the distribution of conformity ratio and conformity quality based on the evaluation result which the quality evaluation server which concerns on this embodiment tabulated. Display example showing an example in which the average value of product manuals in the same product group is compared with the product manual to be evaluated and graphed based on the evaluation results tabulated by the quality evaluation server according to the present embodiment . An example in which the average value of the product manuals for all products registered in the quality evaluation server and the evaluation target manual are graphed based on the evaluation results tabulated by the quality evaluation server according to the present embodiment A display example showing Explanatory drawing which showed the weighted score in the case of weighting, when the quality evaluation server which concerns on this embodiment produces a risk map. Explanatory drawing which showed an example of the calculation method in which five evaluators evaluate arbitrary product manuals and calculate the evaluation score of each evaluator. The quality evaluation server which concerns on this embodiment is explanatory drawing which showed visually the degree of improvement by which the conformity ratio and conformity quality of a certain product manual were improved based on the risk map. The explanatory view which showed the rating of the evaluation according to the ratio which satisfy | filled the criteria of evaluation categories, such as laws and regulations, as a ranking of correspondence priority for each product manual.

(First embodiment)
Hereinafter, a product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.

  FIG. 1 is a schematic configuration diagram showing a schematic configuration of a product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment.

  As shown in FIG. 1, a product manual evaluation system 700 includes a manual creation terminal 100, a manual registration terminal (product manual registration device) 200, an in-house evaluation terminal (evaluation input terminal) 300, and a service provider terminal (evaluation input). Terminal) 400 and a quality evaluation server 500.

  The manual creation terminal 100, the manual registration terminal 200, and the in-house evaluation terminal 300 are assumed to belong to the company A corresponding to the client. Further, it is assumed that the service provider terminal 400 belongs to the company B that evaluates the product manual. Further, it is assumed that the quality evaluation server 500 belongs to a company C that provides a quality evaluation server for evaluating a product manual. Further, in the present embodiment, the manual creation terminal 100 and the manual registration terminal 200 may belong to company B which is a service providing company, and the case where company B and company C belong to the same company is also included.

  The manual creation terminal 100 is a product manual creation device used when a user creates a product manual for an arbitrary product. The manual creation terminal 100 has application software for creating a product manual as a document.

  The manual registration terminal 200 is a registration device for registering the product manual created by the manual creation terminal 100 in the quality evaluation server 500 via the network 600. In the present embodiment, the manual registration terminal 200 is connected to the quality evaluation server 500 via the network 600. The manual registration terminal 200 is also connected to the manual creation terminal 100 via the network 600. However, the present invention is not limited to this. For example, a product manual created by the manual creation terminal 100 may be a USB (Universal Serial Bus). The product manual stored in the USB may be registered in the quality evaluation server 500 by the manual registration terminal 200 by storing in the memory once and connecting the USB to the manual registration terminal 200.

  The in-house evaluation terminal 300 is a terminal of a company that created a product manual (that is, company A), and is an evaluation terminal of a department that evaluates the product manual registered by the manual registration terminal 200. In the present embodiment, the in-house evaluation terminal 300 belongs to the same company as the manual registration terminal 200, and the department to which it belongs is different. Note that the present embodiment is not limited to this. For example, a manual creator who creates a product manual and an evaluator in charge of evaluation are also used, and the person performs evaluation using the in-house evaluation terminal 300. Form may be sufficient. Further, the manual registration terminal 200 may be provided with the function of the in-house evaluation terminal 300, and the evaluator may evaluate the product manual using the manual registration terminal 200.

  Next, the service provider terminal 400 belonging to company B will be described.

  The service provider terminal 400 is an evaluation item registration terminal for inputting (registering) evaluation items, and is an evaluation terminal of a company that evaluates the product manual registered by the manual registration terminal 200. The service provider terminal 400 is an evaluator terminal for a company different from the company that created the product manual (Company A). The company of the service provider terminal 400 is assumed to be a company that provides product manual evaluation as a service. However, the present embodiment is not limited to this, and is a document creation company that creates a product manual, for example. Also good.

  The service provider terminal 400 may be a terminal (evaluation terminal) used by an external specialist such as a lawyer, a director of an external production company, a designer of an external design company, or a general monitor.

  In this case, when the service provider terminal 400 is configured by a terminal used by an external specialist or a general monitor, the product manual can be evaluated by a general monitor. Functions as an input terminal for input. Thereby, the service provider terminal 400 also functions as a collection of needs for accepting evaluations from the user side.

  The service provider terminal 400, the manual creation terminal 100, and the manual registration terminal 200 may be terminals provided by the company of the service provider terminal 400.

  Next, the quality evaluation server 500 belonging to company C will be described.

  The quality evaluation server 500 aggregates the evaluation information evaluated at the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the service provider terminal 400, and generates an evaluation report from the contents and results of the aggregation. The quality evaluation server 500 sends the evaluation report to the manual creation terminal 100, the manual registration terminal 200, or the in-house evaluation terminal 300.

  The network 600 connects a manual creation terminal 100, a manual registration terminal 200, an in-house evaluation terminal 300, a service provider terminal 400, and a quality evaluation server 500 to perform data communication with each other, such as the Internet. It is a net.

  The manual creation terminal 100, the manual registration terminal 200, the in-house evaluation terminal 300, the service provider terminal 400, and the quality evaluation server 500 each have a display unit.

  Next, the overall operation of the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 2 is a sequence diagram showing the overall operation of the product manual evaluation system 700 according to this embodiment.

  As shown in FIG. 2, the manual creation terminal 100 creates a product manual using application software for creating a document, and stores the created product manual in the manual registration terminal 200 as electronic data (product manual information). (Step S001). In this case, the manual creation terminal 100 may transmit a product manual via the network 600 and store it in the manual registration terminal 200, or store the product manual in the manual registration terminal 200 using a USB memory. May be.

  The manual registration terminal 200 registers the product manual acquired from the manual creation terminal 100 in the quality evaluation server 500 (step S003). When the quality evaluation server 500 receives the registration of the product manual, the quality evaluation server 500 notifies the manual registration terminal 200 that the registration has been accepted (step S005).

  Further, the quality evaluation server 500 notifies the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400 of a notification that the product manual has been received and an evaluation request for the registered product manual (steps S007 and S009). The quality evaluation server 500 can also cause the manual registration terminal 200 to select a notification destination for notifying the evaluation request and notify the evaluation request to either the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the service provider terminal 400.

  The in-house evaluation terminal 300 receives an evaluation request from the quality evaluation server 500, connects to the quality evaluation server 500 via the network 600, and evaluates a product manual stored in the quality evaluation server 500 (step S011). ).

  The service provider terminal 400 receives the evaluation request from the quality evaluation server 500, connects to the quality evaluation server 500 via the network 600, and evaluates the product manual stored in the quality evaluation server 500 (step) S013).

  The quality evaluation server 500 receives the evaluation of the product manual from the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400, and notifies the service provider terminal 400 of the suitability obtained by tabulating the evaluation (step S015). In addition, the quality evaluation server 500 notifies the in-house evaluation terminal 300 of the tabulated suitability (step S017). In addition, the quality evaluation server 500 notifies the manual registration terminal 200 of the calculated compatibility (step S019). Furthermore, the quality evaluation server 500 may also notify the manual creation terminal 100 of the tabulated compatibility (step S021).

  Note that the quality evaluation server 500 transmits the evaluation report based on the evaluation to the manual creation terminal 100, the manual registration terminal 200, and the in-house evaluation terminal 300 in a file format with regard to compatibility. In the present embodiment, the quality evaluation server 500 is not limited to transmission in a file format, and may be stored as a file in a predetermined storage location, or as suitability based on the evaluation result. You may make it display on a display part visually.

  Next, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 3 is a functional block diagram showing the configuration of the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment.

  As shown in FIG. 3, the quality evaluation server 500 includes a registration reception unit 510, a product manual storage database 520, an evaluation item database 530, an evaluation item registration reception unit 535, an evaluation object management unit 540, and an evaluation object storage. A database 550, an evaluation object notification unit 560, an evaluation result acquisition unit 570, an evaluation result database 580, and an evaluation report generation unit 590 are provided.

  The registration receiving unit 510 receives a registration request for product manual information (hereinafter also referred to as product manual information) received from the manual registration terminal 200 via the network 600. The registration receiving unit 510 stores the received product manual information in the product manual storage database 520.

  Product manual storage database 520 stores product manual information received by registration receiving unit 510.

  The evaluation item database 530 is an evaluation item database that receives and accumulates new evaluation items or revision information for evaluating the product manual information received by the registration receiving unit 510. The evaluation item database 530 includes, as predetermined evaluation items, manual quality such as laws and regulations to be complied with by product field and corresponding to each country, standards or other compliance items, and easy-to-understand. Yes.

  The evaluation item registration receiving unit 535 has a management function for acquiring evaluation items for evaluating product manual information and storing them in the evaluation item database 530.

  The evaluation object management unit 540 has a function of managing product manual information stored in the product manual storage database 520 in association with predetermined evaluation items stored in the evaluation item database 530. Details of this association will be described later.

  The evaluation target accumulation database 550 is a database that stores product manual information stored in the product manual storage database 520 in association with predetermined evaluation items accumulated in the evaluation item database 530.

  Based on the product manual information stored in the product manual storage database 520 and a predetermined evaluation item associated therewith, the evaluation target notification unit 560 transmits the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the service provider terminal 400 via the network 600. Has a function to notify the evaluation target. In this case, the evaluation target notification unit 560 notifies only the product manual information and the evaluation request for the predetermined evaluation item associated with the product manual information, and the quality evaluation server 500 performs in-house as ASP (Application Service Provider) or cloud computing. A service that allows the evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400 to evaluate product manual information is provided.

  In this embodiment, product manual information and a predetermined evaluation item associated therewith are accessed via the network 600 to the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400, and the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the service provider is accessed. The terminal 400 may display the product manual information and a predetermined evaluation item associated therewith for evaluation.

  The evaluation result acquisition unit 570 has a function of acquiring, as an evaluation result, evaluation information input by the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the service provider terminal 400 for a predetermined evaluation item stored in the evaluation item database 530. Yes. Further, the evaluation result acquisition unit 570 has a function of storing the acquired evaluation results in the evaluation result database 580.

  The evaluation result database 580 stores the evaluation results acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit 570.

  The evaluation report generation unit 590 aggregates the evaluation results stored in the evaluation result database 580 as the evaluation results collected from the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the service provider terminal 400, and generates an evaluation report from the calculated evaluation results. Has a function to create.

  Here, the evaluation report generation unit 590, from the aggregated evaluation information, the conformity ratio that quantitatively indicates the ratio of compliance conformance specified by law and the conformity that qualitatively indicates the quality evaluation of the conformity point. Based on the quality, create a visual evaluation report as the conformity of the product manual. The evaluation report generation unit 590 also has a function of transmitting the generated evaluation report (also referred to as total evaluation) to the manual registration terminal 200 and the in-house evaluation terminal 300 via the network 600.

  FIG. 4 is a hardware block diagram showing a hardware configuration of the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment.

  As shown in FIG. 4, the quality evaluation server 500 includes a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 501, a ROM (Real Only Memory) 502, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 503, a network interface unit 504, a display unit 505, And a storage unit 506.

  The CPU 501 can implement the functions of various programs by loading various programs stored in the ROM 502 into the RAM 503 and expanding the programs.

  The RAM 503 is used as a work area (working memory). The ROM 502 stores various programs. Various programs stored in the ROM 502 include programs for realizing the registration reception function, the evaluation object management function, the evaluation object notification function, the evaluation result acquisition function, the evaluation report generation function, and the like shown in FIG. Yes.

  The network interface unit 504 is an interface unit for connecting to the manual registration terminal 200, the in-house evaluation terminal 300, or the service provider terminal 400 via the network 600.

  The display unit 505 is a display device configured with, for example, a liquid crystal display (LCD).

  The storage unit 506 is a large-capacity nonvolatile storage device, and constitutes a product manual storage database 520, an evaluation item database 530, an evaluation object accumulation database 550, and an evaluation result database 580. Further, in the present embodiment, it is configured by a hard disk or RAM.

  Next, a preparation flow for evaluating a product manual in the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment will be described.

  FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing an evaluation preparation processing procedure for evaluating a product manual in the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment. 5, the case where the manual registration terminal 200 connects to the quality evaluation server 500 via the network 600 and performs the evaluation preparation processing procedure will be described below. However, even when the service provider terminal 400 is used, Similar processing can be performed.

  As shown in the flowchart of FIG. 5, the manual registration terminal 200 (FIG. 1) first connects to the quality evaluation server 500 and logs in via the network 600. When logging in, a user ID (Identification) and a password are used as a user account of company A, so that the connection from the manual registration terminal 200 of company A is authenticated. The manual registration terminal 200, when authenticated by the quality evaluation server 500 with the user ID and password, selects a menu from the services provided from the quality evaluation server 500 (step S101).

  Here, a menu screen for selecting a menu will be described with reference to an example.

  FIG. 6 is a display screen example showing an example of a setting manager menu screen displayed on the manual registration terminal 200 according to the present embodiment.

  On the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200 shown in FIG. 6, a display screen on which manual registration of the product manual or evaluator registration can be selected is displayed as an example of menu selection in step S101. In the present embodiment, it is assumed that manual registration is first selected and then the evaluator is registered.

  When manual registration is selected on the setting manager menu screen, the manual registration terminal 200 displays a manual registration screen for registering the product manual to be evaluated, and accepts registration of the product manual to be evaluated (step S103). .

  FIG. 7 is a display screen example illustrating an example of a manual registration screen displayed on the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200 according to the present embodiment.

  On the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200 shown in FIG. 7, as an example of manual registration in step S <b> 103, the product field, product shipping country, evaluation for the product manual (Abc control operation manual) to be evaluated. A category is selected in a pull-down format, and a display screen for selecting a file name to be registered in the quality evaluation server 500 and registering an evaluation period is displayed.

  Specifically, industrial machinery, medical equipment, semiconductor equipment, consumer products or toys can be selected as product fields, and EU (European Union), US, China or Japan can be selected as product shipping countries. You can choose. Regarding the evaluation category, corresponding to the items selected in the product field and the product shipping country, the laws and regulations applicable to the product manual, standards, other compliance items, and other product manual quality essentials can be selected. It has become. Specifically, machine instructions 2006 / AA / AA, ISO-NNNN1, ISO-NNNN2, quality evaluation checklist A, quality evaluation checklist B, and the like are applicable.

  The file to be registered is stored in the storage area of the manual registration terminal 200, and the user specifies a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) indicating the location where the product manual (file to be registered) is stored. Thereby, the quality evaluation server 500 receives registration of the product manual (step S103). In FIG. 7, the Abc control operation manual. pdf is specified.

  When the product manual is registered using the service provider terminal 400, the display screen example shown in FIG. 7 is displayed on the display screen of the display unit of the service provider terminal 400.

  FIG. 8 is an example of a display screen showing an example in which laws and standards classified in the evaluation category according to the present embodiment are displayed on the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200.

  On the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200 illustrated in FIG. 8, an example of evaluation items corresponding to laws and regulations such as a machine command is displayed. In this evaluation item, for example, essential requirements for confirming the attachment of various instruction manuals and the attachment of translations are described.

  FIG. 9 is a display screen example showing an example in which a detailed display screen displaying details of evaluation items according to the present embodiment is displayed on the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200.

  The detailed display screen shown in FIG. 9 displays a detailed description of the evaluation item and a column “input of control” for performing control on a place where doubt is caused. This column is a column in which the registrant of the manual registration terminal 200 can register what evaluation items and what evaluation contents (evaluation criteria) are evaluated when the product manual is evaluated. In addition, the registrant of the manual registration terminal 200 inputs information as evaluation criteria (guidelines, evaluation scales, specific examples, etc.) of the compatibility check in the control input field of the detailed display screen in FIG. By pressing a certain confirmation button, control information as an evaluation standard can be registered.

  Further, the registrant of the manual registration terminal 200 selects the confirmation button at the lower right of the manual registration screen in FIG. 7 to confirm the product field, the product shipping country, the evaluation category, and the product for the manual to be evaluated. You can upload a manual.

  When the product manual is registered using the service provider terminal 400, the display screen examples shown in FIGS. 8 and 9 are displayed on the display screen of the display unit of the service provider terminal 400.

  Next, the manual registration terminal 200 registers an evaluator who evaluates the product manual registered in the quality evaluation server 500 (step S105).

  FIG. 10 is a display screen example showing an example when an evaluator registration screen for registering an evaluator who evaluates the product manual according to the present embodiment is displayed on the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200. is there.

  In the evaluator registration screen shown in FIG. 10, the evaluation target manual name, the product field, the company name, and the evaluation period are described, and the evaluator list file in which the list of evaluators is described is selected. It is displayed. In the present embodiment, the Abc control operation manual is specified as the evaluation target file name, the industrial machine is described as the product field, and XYZ Corporation is described as the company name. The evaluation period is designated as 2011-10-01 to 2011-10-12.

  The evaluator list file is stored in advance in the storage area of the manual registration terminal 200 or the service provider terminal 400, and the user selects the evaluator list file in the evaluator registration of FIG. By pressing, the evaluator list can be imported and displayed.

  FIG. 11 shows a display example when an account transmission screen for registering an account for evaluation to the evaluator of the product manual according to the present embodiment is displayed on the display screen of the display unit 201 of the manual registration terminal 200. It is an example of a screen.

  In the account transmission screen shown in FIG. 11, the names, company names, department names, e-mail addresses, user IDs, and passwords of the four evaluators are described. In this embodiment, “A river B1”, “A field B2”, and “A village B3” belong to the A company, and “A mountain B4” belongs to the B company. Thus, the evaluation request can register the evaluation request destination for the evaluation object regardless of the company. Also, a lawyer, designer or production director of another company described above may be registered as an evaluator. In addition, when collecting needs for general users, age, sex, attributes (hobbies and classifications), etc. may be registered instead of company names and department names.

  When the user presses the completion button displayed on the account transmission screen shown in FIG. 11, the quality evaluation server 500 accepts the evaluator registration (step S105), and the registered evaluator receives Notify each user ID and password. When the completion button is pressed by the above operation, the quality evaluation server 500 ends the evaluation preparation processing procedure.

  When the evaluator is registered using the service provider terminal 400, the display screen examples shown in FIGS. 10 and 11 are displayed on the display screen of the display unit of the service provider terminal 400.

  Next, an evaluation processing procedure for evaluating a product manual in the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment will be described.

  FIG. 12 is a flowchart showing an evaluation processing procedure for evaluating a product manual in the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment.

  As shown in the flowchart of FIG. 12, the person in charge of evaluation evaluates the quality via the network 600 from the manual creation terminal 100, the company evaluation terminal 300 of company A which is the terminal of the person in charge of evaluation, and the service provider terminal 400 of company B. Log in to the evaluation server 500. When the person in charge of evaluation selects the evaluation category, the quality evaluation server 500 accepts selection of the evaluation category (step S201).

  Here, a case where the person in charge of evaluation of company A evaluates the product manual using the in-house evaluation terminal 300 will be described. Even if the person in charge of evaluation of company B evaluates the product manual using the service provider terminal 400, the same processing procedure is used.

  FIG. 13 is a display screen example showing an example when an evaluation category selection screen for selecting an evaluation category according to the present embodiment is displayed on the display screen.

  As shown in FIG. 13, four evaluation categories are displayed on the display screen of the display unit 301 of the in-house evaluation terminal 300. Specifically, laws, standards, guidelines, and others (other manual quality evaluation categories) are displayed. The in-house evaluation terminal 300 receives an evaluation request from an evaluation person and receives a plurality of evaluation categories. Here, it is assumed that the in-house evaluation terminal 300 accepts a selection for performing only legal evaluation from an evaluation person in charge.

  FIG. 14 is a display screen showing an example in which the evaluation screen when the in-house evaluation terminal 300 according to the present embodiment evaluates the legal evaluation category is displayed on the display screen of the display unit 301 of the in-house evaluation terminal 300. It is an example.

  In the evaluation screen shown in FIG. 14, evaluation items associated with the product manual are listed, and a check list is configured. That is, in the evaluation screen shown in FIG. 14, the evaluation items shown in FIG. 8 are displayed as a check list. When the person in charge of the evaluation presses the evaluation button at the left end of the evaluation item, the evaluation person can open a check sheet for evaluating the item.

  FIG. 15 is a display screen showing an example of evaluation based on the matching ratio RT and the matching quality QC when the evaluation items according to the present embodiment are evaluated. FIG. 15 shows an example of a display screen when the evaluation category standard is selected.

  As shown in FIG. 15, on the display screen of the display unit 301 of the in-house evaluation terminal 300, each of the conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC is evaluated in six stages in the evaluation items. For example, in the case of conformance ratio RT, input the evaluation of not conforming to the requirement, partially conforming, almost conforming, conforming, not applicable, not knowing / not sure can do. On the other hand, in the case of conformity quality QC, it is possible to input an evaluation that the quality of conformance is very good, good, normal, bad, very bad, or not applicable / not sure / confirmed (step S203). .

  Here, the conformity ratio RT is a quantitative evaluation of the degree (ratio) that conforms to the quality of laws and regulations, standards, guidelines, and other product manuals. The conformance quality QC refers to laws and regulations, standards, etc. Qualitatively evaluates whether the conformity is good (easy to understand) or not. Each of the conformance ratio RT and the conformance quality QC includes an evaluation that it is not known, so it can be determined as a five-step evaluation. Further, the number of divisions is not limited to five levels or six levels. That is, the evaluation can be set with an arbitrary number of stages of the user.

  Further, the evaluation screen shown in FIG. 14 has an item “Display PDF” at the upper right of the display screen, and this item is linked to the file uploaded in FIG. Thereby, when the user wants to see the product manual, the user can browse the corresponding product manual by pressing the “Display PDF” button.

  When the in-house evaluation terminal 300 evaluates the conformity ratio RT and conformance quality QC for each evaluation item (step S203), the quality evaluation server 500 determines whether the evaluation of all the evaluation items has been completed. (Step S205) When there is an unevaluated evaluation item (No in Step S205), the unevaluated evaluation item is evaluated. And when evaluation of all the evaluation items is completed (Yes in step S205), the evaluation processing procedure is ended.

  Note that the end of the evaluation processing procedure is not limited to the case where the evaluation of all the evaluation items is completed. The evaluation person in the in-house evaluation terminal 300 performs the evaluation halfway and the evaluation You may make it preserve | save in a state and you may make it complete | finish suitably.

  Further, when the evaluation for the evaluation category selected in step S201 is completed, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment causes the in-house evaluation terminal 300 to continuously evaluate other evaluation categories (for example, standards and guidelines). Alternatively, every time evaluation is completed, the progress of evaluation in the entire evaluation category may be indicated.

  The quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment is configured to tabulate evaluation results from the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400, and has a function of generating an evaluation report from the tabulated evaluation results. Note that the output destination of the generated evaluation report is not limited to the evaluation terminal possessed by the evaluator, but may be stored in a predetermined storage area of the manual registration terminal 200 or the quality evaluation server 500.

  The evaluation report is not limited to being output to a file as electronic data. For example, the evaluation report may be displayed on the display screen of the quality evaluation server 500. Next, contents that can be output by the evaluation report will be described.

  The quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can output the conformity ratio RT and the conformity quality QC distribution as a risk map based on the aggregated evaluation results. This can visually show the distribution of the evaluation results to the user based on the evaluation results evaluated for each evaluation item by the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400.

  FIG. 16 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a risk map showing the distribution of the conformance ratio RT and the conformance quality QC based on the evaluation results tabulated by the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment.

  In the risk map shown in FIG. 16, the horizontal axis represents the degree of conformance RT, and the vertical axis represents the degree of conformance QC. Therefore, it indicates that the conformity ratio RT is non-conforming as it goes to the right with respect to the horizontal axis, and that the conforming quality QC is worse as it goes upward with respect to the vertical axis. That is, the risk map shown in FIG. 16 indicates that the conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC of the product manual are lower toward the upper right, and the conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC of the product manual are higher toward the lower left.

  Further, as shown in FIG. 16, by performing plotting for each evaluation item, it is possible to visually recognize the evaluation tendency of the product manual that was the evaluation target. That is, the quality evaluation server 500 can objectively and visually display the evaluation variation of the plurality of evaluators obtained from the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400. In particular, it is possible to quantitatively grasp the conformity ratio RT to laws and standards, and qualitatively recognize the comprehensibility of text and visual expressions as conformance quality QC while conforming to laws and regulations. Can be made.

  As described above, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment converts the product manual registered by the manual registration terminal 200 into a product manual based on a plurality of evaluation results composed of the conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC. Since objective evaluation and analysis can be performed, the user can easily perform quality control when creating a product manual.

  FIG. 17 shows an example in which the average value of product manuals in the same product group is compared with the product manual to be evaluated and graphed based on the evaluation results tabulated by the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment. Is a display example (this is also referred to as a radar chart).

  As shown in FIG. 17, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can register a plurality of product manuals and can calculate the average value of product manuals in the same product group. The average value of the product manuals in the group and the product manual to be evaluated can be relatively compared and illustrated in a graph.

  FIG. 18 compares the average value of product manuals for all products registered in the quality evaluation server 500 with the evaluation target manual based on the evaluation results tabulated by the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment. It is the example of a display which showed an example at the time of graphing.

  As shown in FIG. 18, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can register a plurality of product manuals as in the graph of FIG. 17, and products in all products registered in the quality evaluation server 500. Since the average value of the manual can be calculated, the average value of the product manual for all products registered in the quality evaluation server 500 is relatively compared with the product manual of the evaluation target, and the graph is shown in a graph. Can do.

  As described above, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment can easily compare the conformity status of laws and standards and other manual qualities, and the conformity and quality of the product manual to be evaluated. Vulnerability can be easily determined.

  In FIG. 17 and FIG. 18, comparison is performed based on requirements such as law A, standard A, standard B, market needs, production technology, and user requirements (including effectiveness) as relatively compared items. The present embodiment is not limited to this, and the user can make a relative comparison as appropriate by making settings in the quality evaluation server 500.

  For example, specializing in user requirements, the appropriateness of information, the accuracy of information, the ease of searching for information, the ease of reading text, the ease of visual expression, the ease of handling information, the safety of information The graph may be created by extracting relatively compared items from the viewpoint of design and the like. Thereby, since evaluation from a user viewpoint can be performed, an evaluation result can be analyzed objectively and visually also when needs are collected.

  In this embodiment, a graph is created from the average value of the same product group and the average value of all products registered in the quality evaluation server 500, and is compared with the product manual of the evaluation target. The present embodiment is not limited to this, and an average value of product groups including other companies in the same industry and an average value of product groups including all industries may be calculated to create a graph for comparison.

  Further, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment does not simply plot the conformance ratio RT and the conformance quality QC when creating the risk map shown in FIG. By weighting each, the plot points are dispersed and the ease of graphing is improved.

  FIG. 19 is an explanatory diagram showing weighted points when weighting is performed when the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment creates a risk map.

  The explanatory diagram shown in FIG. 19 shows the weighting points with respect to the matching ratio RT and the matching quality QC, with the maximum score that is not evaluated well as a maximum of 1000 points. Specifically, 1 point is applied when the evaluation level of the adaptation ratio RT is d, 12 points are applied for the c point, 24 points are applied for the b point, and 36 is applied for the a point. Also, if the evaluation level of the conforming quality QC is 1, 1 point is given, 2 is 9 points, 3 is 18 points, 4 is 27 points, and 5 is 36. It has become so.

In this example, the maximum value of the weighted score is 36 points, and the number of product manuals to be evaluated (how much ratio) is converted within the poorly evaluated range. It has become. Specifically, it can be expressed by the following formula (1).
[Equation 1]
(Weighted score for evaluation) ÷ (Maximum weighted score: 36 points) x 1000 (1)

  With this calculation method, an evaluation score (converted value) by the evaluator is calculated, and an evaluation score of the conformance ratio RT and the conformance quality QC for each evaluator is calculated to calculate a score for comprehensive evaluation. In this case, for example, the average of the evaluation points of the conformance ratio RT and the evaluation score of the conformance quality QC is calculated using a simple average, and the evaluation scores of the conformance ratio RT and the conformance quality QC are added together to obtain a total for each evaluator. An evaluation score can be calculated.

  Next, a specific calculation example is illustrated with reference to the explanatory diagram of the weighted points shown in FIG.

  FIG. 20 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a calculation method in which five evaluators evaluate an arbitrary product manual and calculate the evaluation score of each evaluator.

  As shown in FIG. 20, there are five evaluator evaluation columns from evaluator A to evaluator E, and the evaluation results of conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC by each evaluator are entered in the upper row. Has been. Specifically, regarding the conformity ratio RT, the evaluator A is “c”, the evaluator B is “b”, the evaluator C is “c”, the evaluator D is “c”, and the evaluator E is “B” indicates that the evaluation was made. As for the conforming quality QC, the evaluator A is “1”, the evaluator B is “2”, the evaluator C is “1”, the evaluator D is “3”, and the evaluator E is “2”. ”Is entered.

  In the middle of FIG. 20, the weighted points shown in FIG. 19 are weighted according to the evaluation results. That is, for the conformity ratio RT, the evaluation result of the evaluator A is weighted to “12”, the evaluation result of the evaluator B is weighted to “24”, and the evaluation result of the evaluator C is weighted to “12”. The evaluation result of the evaluator D is weighted to “12”, and the evaluation result of the evaluator E is weighted to “24”. For the conforming quality QC, the evaluation result of the evaluator A is weighted to “1”, the evaluation result of the evaluator B is weighted to “9”, the evaluation result of the evaluator C is weighted to “1”, The evaluation result of the evaluator D is weighted to “18”, and the evaluation result of the evaluator E is weighted to “9”.

  In the lower part of FIG. 20, a conversion value (evaluation point) converted using the above-described equation (1) is described. Specifically, for the conformance ratio RT, the evaluator A is “333”, the evaluator B is “667”, the evaluator C is “333”, and the evaluator D is “333”. The evaluator E is entered as “667”. In addition, regarding the conforming quality QC, the evaluator A is “28”, the evaluator B is “250”, the evaluator C is “28”, the evaluator D is “500”, and the evaluator It is entered that E is “250”. The numbers after the decimal point shall be rounded off.

  Therefore, the average of the converted values (conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC) can be taken for each evaluator, and this value can be used as a comprehensive evaluation score for each evaluator. Specifically, the evaluator A is “181”, the evaluator B is “459”, the evaluator C is “181”, the evaluator D is “417”, and the evaluator E is “ 459 ". Also, on the right end, the evaluation point (average) “467” of the conversion value of the conformity ratio RT, the evaluation point (average) “211” of the conversion value of the conformance quality QC, and the evaluation point (average) “339” of the evaluator "Is shown by a simple average.

  In this way, since the risk map shown in FIG. 16 is weighted to each of the conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC, the characteristics (trends) of the product manual evaluated from the evaluation results plotted in the risk map Can know.

  Further, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment outputs the risk map to the manual registration terminal 200, the in-house evaluation terminal 300, etc., so that the product manual can be efficiently transmitted to the product manual creator and the evaluator. It can be revised. Specifically, since each plot (evaluation point) of the risk map shown in FIG. 16 indicates an evaluation point for each evaluation item, a plurality of plots are concentrated on a certain evaluation item. It is possible to recognize the conforming ratio RT and conforming quality QC to be improved in the product manual.

  Therefore, for example, the manual creator who created the product manual can revise the product manual reflecting the evaluation tendency made by a plurality of persons by revising the product manual according to the tendency indicated by the plot. That is, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment can revise the quality of the product manual accurately and surely by performing the work of revising the product manual by reflecting the evaluation result of the risk map.

  In addition, when the product manual is revised, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment can perform the re-evaluation on the revised product manual and aggregate the revised evaluation results again. Yes. For example, the revised product manual can be realized by performing evaluation processing similar to the initial evaluation processing by a plurality of evaluation staff.

  FIG. 21 is an explanatory diagram in which the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment visually shows the degree of improvement in which the conformance ratio RT and conformance quality QC of a certain product manual are improved based on the risk map.

  As shown in FIG. 21, each evaluation point of the risk map shown in FIG. 16 moves in the lower left direction on FIG. 21, and the conformity ratio RT increases the proportion that conforms to laws and regulations. The quality QC indicates that the text is easier to read.

  Further, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can store the evaluation result before the revision and the evaluation result after the revision in the evaluation result database 580, so that the evaluation result before the revision and the evaluation result after the revision are At the same time, it can be displayed as a radar chart by graphing similarly to the risk map and FIG. 17 and FIG.

  As described above, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can see the evaluation result after the revision at the same time as the evaluation result before the revision, so that the degree of improvement improved by the revision and the suitability of the improvement can be seen. Can be recognized visually and easily.

  Further, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can perform rating for each product manual based on the evaluation result, and can perform ranking display of each product manual as an absolute evaluation.

  FIG. 22 is an explanatory diagram showing, in a ranking display, the rating of evaluation according to the ratio satisfying the criteria of the evaluation category such as laws and standards as the corresponding priority ranking for each product manual.

  As shown in FIG. 22, the evaluated product manual is evaluated based on the relevance ratio for each item of the evaluation category. For example, “◎” when all evaluation items are satisfied, “○” when almost all evaluation items are satisfied (one or more conformances, all other conformances), “○”, when some evaluation items are satisfied “△” is attached to “one or more conformances, others are conforming or almost conforming”, and “x” is attached to evaluation items that are not conforming (one or more conformances).

  The evaluation column displays the evaluation of each evaluation category in alphabetical order. Here, the first column indicates the evaluation of laws and regulations, the second column indicates the evaluation of the standard, and the third column. The eyes represent other evaluations. Therefore, as in the order shown in FIG. 22, the alphabets are described in the order of evaluation category from the alphabetical order A.

  For example, the evaluation of the product manual XXX is “Abc”, the evaluation of the product manual YYY is “Bab”, the evaluation of the product manual ZZZ is “Caa”, etc. An absolute evaluation can be made for each.

  In this way, the evaluator can attach an evaluation for each product manual, so that the ranking display according to the necessity can be performed. For example, if the evaluation indicating the law in the evaluation column is other than “A”, the product manual is determined to be nonconforming (failed), and the product manual has a high necessity for correspondence (response priority). You may make it extract as a product manual. The ranking display is output as a comprehensive evaluation report in a file.

  As described above, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can attach the corresponding priority ranking to the product manual, so that the user can immediately and easily recognize the evaluation content of the product manual. Also, as shown in FIG. 22, as an example of evaluation display, uppercase letters and lowercase letters are used separately, laws with high importance are indicated in uppercase letters, and others are indicated in lowercase letters. The evaluation result can be easily recognized according to

  Furthermore, the corresponding priority ranking shown in FIG. 22 can subdivide the request level in each category, and can assign importance to each subdivided request level. In this case, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment attaches importance to each request level, and extracts priority items to be dealt with based on the importance at the request level and the evaluation result. Items can be ranked.

  Specifically, when the evaluation category is statute or standard, the required level of importance or recommendation based on the auxiliary verb used (must, shall / do / be, should / recommend, may / can) Can be attached. The quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment obtains evaluation results such as “conforming”, “partly conforming”, “substantially conforming” from the evaluation result and importance of the required level. They are sorted in descending order of importance, and request levels and evaluation items with poor evaluation results are extracted from them and displayed in ranking.

  Thereby, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment ranks the required levels and evaluation items that should correspond to the quality improvement in descending order of importance corresponding to the required levels and evaluation items (that is, in descending order of priority). Since the information can be displayed, it is possible to clearly notify the user who performs quality control of the result of the appropriate conformity evaluation and the quality improvement work without waste.

  Further, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment obtains a deviation value by using not only the ranking display based on the absolute evaluation by the evaluator described in FIG. The ranking display by relative evaluation using the deviation value can also be performed.

  These standard deviations and deviation values are calculated when the deviation value is obtained from the product manual group of the similar product group or the deviation value is obtained from the product manual group of all products in one company. A relative comparison can be made by various variations such as obtaining a deviation value from a product manual group of a plurality of products from a plurality of companies.

  That is, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can evaluate and compare product manuals as relative evaluations as well as absolute evaluations. Gender can be evaluated and rated.

  In addition, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment can centrally manage the requirements for conformity evaluation, and can also manage the quality management for these requirements in a unified manner. Can be realized easily without waste.

  Further, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment repeats the product manual that has already been evaluated by the in-house evaluation terminal 300 or the like when the evaluation item database 530 (FIG. 3) of the quality evaluation server 500 is updated. An evaluation can be made. That is, for example, when the application or specific contents of laws and regulations or standards are changed, how well the product manual conforms to the revised laws and regulations etc. The person in charge of evaluation can be evaluated.

  In this case, the evaluation item database 530 is updated every year so that the national laws of each country are applied with the latest laws, or updated whenever the laws are revised. If applicable, it can be applied. For example, the evaluation item database 530 updates, through the network 600, an evaluation item revised for each revision of the law by downloading it from the terminal of the service provider having the latest law evaluation item, A person in charge or a manual registrant may update the evaluation items manually.

  In addition, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment includes a result determination unit in the evaluation report generation unit 590, and when an evaluation performed based on a plurality of evaluation results falls within a predetermined evaluation range, A list of relevant product manuals may be output. In this case, a predetermined evaluation range output by the conformance ratio RT and the conformance quality QC may be set, and a predetermined range output by the correspondence necessity ranking (correspondence priority ranking) may be set. May be.

  Specifically, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment extracts product manuals in which three or more evaluation items that do not conform are applicable, or the conformity rate of the correspondence necessity ranking is “x” or A product manual having an item “Δ” can also be extracted.

(Second Embodiment)
In addition to the first embodiment described above, in the second embodiment, when the second and subsequent evaluations are performed, the specific policy of the evaluation method is unknown in the first evaluation and the interpretation is questionable. However, guide information is provided, and the evaluation can be controlled (providing control information) so that the unknown evaluation method becomes clear.

  For example, an item for inputting evaluation control (control input) can be provided on the detailed display screen displaying the evaluation items shown in FIG. 9, and a guideline for judgment when performing the specific evaluation can be input. In the example of FIG. 9, it is described that “general education and knowledge assume the skill level of our operator”.

  Further, as in the screen for evaluating the evaluation items shown in FIG. 15, in order to make the evaluation determination method concretely easy to understand, it is possible to provide an evaluation content item and input an evaluation method guideline. In this way, in the evaluation items and evaluation methods, by providing guide information that allows the evaluator to confirm unknown evaluation methods during evaluation, the evaluation evaluator's evaluation variation is suppressed and the evaluation uniformity is ensured. can do.

  The guide information may be provided in advance, or the guide information may be added or the content of the guide information may be changed with respect to the evaluation item that hindered the evaluation at the first evaluation. . In addition, for the actual evaluation, it is possible to extract only items such as not applicable / unknown / necessary confirmation without performing evaluation of all items, and perform evaluation to create an evaluation report.

(Third embodiment)
In addition to the first and second embodiments described above, in the third embodiment, when an evaluator or product manual registrant revises or updates a product manual, the product updated by the revision or update is updated. It is possible to quantify the rate of change of the manual and visually grasp the rate of change of the quality of the product manual.

  For example, based on the risk map shown in FIG. 21, the transition of the evaluation score is calculated before and after the product manual is changed. Specifically, the quality evaluation server 500 according to the present embodiment evaluates the product manual twice or more based on the weighted points described in FIG. 19 and FIG. 20, and performs comprehensive evaluation points before and after the change of the product manual (FIG. 20). ) Is calculated.

  Here, if the overall evaluation score after the change of the product manual increases, it is judged from the evaluation items after the change that the product manual has deteriorated in conformity with the change or the quality of the product manual has deteriorated. be able to. For example, when the average score of the comprehensive evaluation after the change shown in FIG. 20 decreases, it can be determined that the quality and suitability of the product manual are improved (improved).

  Judgment of revision (change) of the product manual due to the rate of change is based on the characteristics of the evaluation items, for example, the compatibility deteriorates, the quality of the product manual deteriorates, the compatibility does not change, and the quality of the product manual does not change. There is no change, compatibility is improved, product manual quality is improved, etc., and it is possible to cope with each change rate.

  As described above, the product manual evaluation system 700 according to the present embodiment can be used to revise a product manual for the purpose of changing the conformity to requirements associated with revisions to laws and regulations, changing product specifications, and improving quality. The change in the quality of the product manual that accompanies it can be quantified as the rate of change, and the items that have deteriorated and the items that have improved can be easily grasped visually.

  In the first to third embodiments, the in-house evaluation terminal 300 and the service provider terminal 400 are distinguished from each other. However, the present embodiment is not limited to this, and evaluation by a plurality of persons is possible. What is necessary is just to be able to acquire a result. That is, in one evaluation terminal (for example, in-house evaluation terminal 300), the quality evaluation server 500 may acquire the evaluation results of a plurality of users by using the respective user IDs.

  Although several embodiments of the present invention have been described, these embodiments are presented by way of example and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. These embodiments can be implemented in various other forms, and various omissions, replacements, and changes can be made without departing from the spirit of the invention. These embodiments and their modifications are included in the scope and gist of the invention, and are also included in the invention described in the claims and the equivalents thereof.

  Further, in the embodiment of the present invention, each step of the flowchart shows an example of processing that is performed in time series in the order described. The process to be executed is also included.

100 Manual creation terminal 200 Manual registration terminal (Product manual registration device)
201 Display unit 300 In-house evaluation terminal (evaluation input terminal)
301 Display 400 Service Provider Terminal (Evaluation Input Terminal)
500 Quality evaluation server 504 Network interface unit 505 Display unit 506 Storage unit 510 Registration reception unit (registration reception unit)
520 Product manual storage database 530 Evaluation item database 535 Evaluation item registration reception unit 540 Evaluation object management unit (evaluation object management means)
550 Evaluation Target Accumulation Database 560 Evaluation Target Notification Unit (Evaluation Target Notification Unit)
570 evaluation result acquisition unit (evaluation result acquisition means)
580 Evaluation result database 590 Evaluation report generator (Evaluation report generator)
600 Network 700 Product Manual Evaluation System QC Conformity Quality RT Conformance Ratio

Claims (12)

A product manual registration device that registers product manual information describing product handling in the product manual storage database;
An evaluation input terminal for inputting evaluation information for evaluation items corresponding to product manual information registered in the product manual storage database;
A quality evaluation server that aggregates and manages the input evaluation information,
The quality evaluation server
An evaluation item database that accumulates predetermined evaluation items for evaluating product manual information;
Registration acceptance means for accepting registration of the product manual information in the product manual storage database by the product manual registration device;
The product manual storage database for storing product manual information received by the registration receiving means;
An evaluation object management means for managing product manual information stored in the product manual storage database in association with predetermined evaluation items accumulated in the evaluation item database;
Evaluation result acquisition means for acquiring the evaluation information input by the evaluation input terminal for the evaluation item as an evaluation result;
Summarizing the evaluation results acquired by the evaluation result acquisition means, based on the conformity ratio that quantitatively indicates the proportion of conformity of the evaluation item and the conformity quality that qualitatively indicates the evaluation of the quality of the conformity point, An evaluation report generating means for generating an evaluation report indicating the quality of the manual as conformity ,
The evaluation report generation means includes:
The conformity quality at the conformance location with respect to the conformance ratio is visually output to the evaluation report as the conformity indicating the quality of the manual
Product manual evaluation system characterized by that. Based on the stored product manual information and the associated predetermined evaluation item, further comprising an evaluation object notification means for notifying an evaluation object to the plurality of evaluation input terminals,
The evaluation result acquisition means includes
A plurality of the evaluation information is acquired by the plurality of evaluation input terminals,
The evaluation report generation means includes:
The product manual evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the evaluation results are aggregated, and the evaluation report is generated based on the conformance ratio and the conformance quality. The predetermined evaluation items accumulated in the evaluation item database are:
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the product includes any of laws and regulations to be complied with according to each product field and corresponding to each country, standards compliance items, and items for evaluating the quality of product manual information. Product manual evaluation system described in. The evaluation report generation means includes:
In the predetermined evaluation item, an auxiliary verb is attached with an importance and evaluated, and based on the evaluation result, an evaluation item having a high priority for quality improvement is extracted and the evaluation report is generated. The product manual evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 3. The evaluation report generation means includes:
The product manual evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the evaluation report is generated by weighting the conformance ratio and the conformance quality. The evaluation item database is:
The product manual evaluation system according to claim 3, wherein the product manual evaluation system is updated in accordance with the law to be complied with, revision of compliance matters of the standard, or change of the product manual information. The evaluation report generation means includes:
Concerning the suitability of the product manual information, the average value for each evaluation category of the product manual to be evaluated is compared with the average value in the product group or the average value of the registered products, and the difference is output. The product manual evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein: The evaluation report generation means includes:
Concerning the suitability of the product manual information, the average value for each evaluation category of the product manual to be evaluated is the average value of product manuals in similar product categories including other companies in the same industry, or the product manuals of other companies' products other than their own products. The product manual evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 7, wherein the difference is output in comparison with an average value of the product. The evaluation report generation means includes:
The conformity of the product manual information is the same product manual information to be evaluated, and the revision of the product manual information has changed the conformity of the product manual information before and after the change of the product manual information The product manual evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the change is output. The evaluation report generation means includes:
The product manual evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 9, wherein a relative evaluation is performed on the suitability of the product manual information based on a deviation value based on a standard deviation for each evaluation category. A product manual registration device that registers product manual information describing product handling in the product manual storage database;
An evaluation input terminal for inputting evaluation information for evaluation items corresponding to product manual information registered in the product manual storage database;
A product manual evaluation method in a product manual evaluation system comprising a quality evaluation server for collecting and managing the input evaluation information,
The quality evaluation server
An evaluation item database that accumulates predetermined evaluation items for evaluating product manual information;
The product manual storage database storing the product manual information by the product manual registration device,
A registration acceptance step for accepting registration of the product manual information in the product manual storage database by the product manual registration device;
An evaluation object management step for managing product manual information stored in the product manual storage database in association with predetermined evaluation items accumulated in the evaluation item database;
An evaluation result acquisition step for acquiring the evaluation information input by the evaluation input terminal for the evaluation item as an evaluation result;
Summarize the evaluation results acquired in the evaluation result acquisition step, based on the conformity ratio that quantitatively indicates the proportion of conformity of the evaluation item and the conformity quality that qualitatively indicates the evaluation of the quality of the conformity point, An evaluation report generation step for generating an evaluation report for generating an evaluation report indicating the quality of the manual as relevant;
Only including,
The evaluation report generation step includes:
The product manual evaluation method characterized in that the conformity quality at the conformance location with respect to the conformance ratio is visually output to the evaluation report as the conformity indicating the quality of the manual. An evaluation item database that accumulates predetermined evaluation items for evaluating product manual information;
Registration accepting means for accepting registration of the product manual information in the product manual storage database by an external device;
The product manual storage database for storing product manual information received by the registration receiving means;
An evaluation object management means for managing product manual information stored in the product manual storage database in association with predetermined evaluation items accumulated in the evaluation item database;
Evaluation result acquisition means for acquiring evaluation information input by the evaluation terminal for the evaluation item as an evaluation result;
Summarizing the evaluation results acquired by the evaluation result acquisition means, based on the conformity ratio that quantitatively indicates the proportion of conformity of the evaluation item and the conformity quality that qualitatively indicates the evaluation of the quality of the conformity point, An evaluation report generating means for generating an evaluation report indicating the quality of the manual as conformity;
Equipped with,
The evaluation report generation means includes:
The conformity quality at the conformance location with respect to the conformance ratio is visually output to the evaluation report as the conformity indicating the quality of the manual.
A quality evaluation server characterized by that.

Images