Method to process performance measurement

• US 20040199416A1
• Filed: 04/01/2003
• Published: 10/07/2004
• Est. Priority Date: 04/01/2003
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Infineon Technologies AG
• Original Assignee: Infineon Technologies AG
• Inventors: Bastian, Klaus-Peter, Heina, Juergen, Noll, Jan-Oliver
• Application Number:
  US10/402,971
• Publication Number:
  US 20040199416A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 702/182
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling

Abstract

A method measures and monitors performance of processes across different organizational units within a system process. The method assigns first weight factors to organizational units at a first-level division of the system process, receives actual performance data for each of the organizational units at the first-level division, compares the actual performance data against a target to produce a deviation for each of the organizational units, assigns a number of points corresponding to the deviation of each of the organizational units, and determines a first process performance indicator for the first-level division based on the first weight factor and the number points of the organizational units. The method assigns a second weight factor to an organizational unit at a second-level division of the system process, and determines a second process performance indicator for the second-level division based on the second weight factor and the first process performance indicator.

Claims

1. A method to measure performance and to monitor performance of processes across different organizational units within a system process, comprising:

assigning first weight factors to organizational units at a first-level division of the system process;

receiving actual performance data for each of the organizational units at the first-level division;

comparing the actual performance data against a target to produce a deviation for each of the organizational units;

assigning a number of points corresponding to the deviation of each of the organizational units; and

determining a first process performance indicator for the first-level division based on the first weight factor and the number points of the organizational units.

2. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

assigning a second weight factor to an organizational unit at a second-level division of the system process, wherein the second-level division is above the first-level division; and

determining a second process performance indicator for the second-level division based on the second weight factor and the first process performance indicator of the first-level division.

3. The method as recited in claim 2, wherein the first process performance indicator is calculated using the following relationship:

4. The method as recited in claim 2, wherein the second process performance indicator is calculated using the following relationship:

5. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the organizational units are individually assigned the first weight factors.

6. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the deviation is equal to the target minus the actual performance data.

7. The method as recited in claim 6, wherein if the deviation of an organizational unit is less than or equal to zero, the organizational unit is assigned 0 points, if the deviation is equal to or greater than one but less than a predetermined number, the organizational unit is assigned 50 points, and if the deviation is greater than the predetermined number, then the organizational unit is assigned 100 points.

8. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

determining a traffic light indicator for each of the organizational units, where the traffic light indicator corresponds to the number of points assigned to each of the organizational units.

9. The method as recited in claim 8, wherein if an organizational unit of the first-level division is assigned 0 points, the traffic light indicator is green, if the organizational unit is assigned 50 points, the traffic light indicator is yellow, and if the organizational unit is assigned 100 points, the traffic light indicator is red.

10. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

displaying performance cards providing information of the first process performance indicator for the first-level division to identify at least one of the organizational units that is under performing or meeting set goals.

11. The method as recited in claim 10, further comprising:

providing a web-based portal allowing a user to access multiple screens, which comprise a login screen, a process framework overview screen, process performance cards screen, sub-process performance cards screen, graphs and data sheets displaying the information.

12. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the first process performance indicator is dimensionless.

13. The method as recited in claim 2, further comprising:

assigning a target for the second-level division;

comparing the first process performance indicator against the target of the second-level division; and

assigning a traffic light indicator to the organizational unit at the second-level division, the traffic light indicator varying depending on an amount of deviation between the target and the first process performance indicator.

14. The method as recited in claim 13, wherein the target of the second-level division comprises a minimum range, an intermediate range, and a maximum range.

15. The method as recited in claim 14, wherein if second level indicator is within the minimum target range, a green color is assigned thereto, if the first process performance indicator of the organizational unit at the second-level division is at an intermediate range, a yellow color is assigned thereto, and if the first process performance indicator of the organizational unit at the second-level division is at a maximum range, a red color is assigned thereto.

16. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

displaying performance cards providing information of the second process performance indicator for the second-level division to identify the organizational unit that is under performing or meeting set goals.

17. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the second process performance indicator is dimensionless.

18. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the target comprises a number of days a cycle time for an order entry, a reliability value, or a quality level.

19. A method for evaluating achievement of a goal, comprising:

for a first aspect of a goal, comparing a first actual performance data against a first target to produce a first deviation;

for the first aspect of the goal, if the first actual performance is less than the first target, assigning a first grading relating to a first amount of under performance;

for a second aspect of the goal, comparing a second actual performance data against a second target to produce a second deviation;

for the second aspect of the goal, if the second actual performance is less than the second target performance, assigning a second grading relating to a second amount of under performance;

weighting a relative importance of the first and second aspects of the goal to produce a first weighted grading and a second weighted grading; and

adding the first weighted grading and the second weighted grading to produce an indicator relating to achievement of the goal.

20. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein a relatively high indicator is associated with a relative lack of success in achieving the goal.

21. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein

a plurality of goals are evaluated,

a plurality of indicators are associated respectively to the plurality of goals,

each of the indicators is weighted according to an importance of the associated goal relative to other goals, and

a sum of weighted indicators is divided by a sum of weightings used for the indicators to produce an evaluation factor to collectively evaluate an accomplishment of the plurality of goals.

22. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein the first and second gradings are assigned where if a goal is accomplished, then the goal is assigned 0 points, and if the goal is not-at-all accomplished, then the goal is assigned 100 points.

23. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein the first and second aspects are both weighted with a weighting of “

1.”

24. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein the first target performance data is the same as the second target performance data.

25. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein, in order to weight the first and second aspects of the goal, weightings are used, which directly correspond to the relative importance of the first and second aspects of the goal such that if the weighting of the first aspect is twice the weighting of the second aspect, the first aspect was judged to be twice as important as the second aspect.

26. The method as recited in claim 19, wherein the first and second deviations for the first and second aspects, respectively, of the goal have different units.

27. A computer readable storage medium controlling a computer to perform a process comprising:

assigning first weight factors to organizational units at a first-level division of a system process;

receiving actual performance data for each of the organizational units at the first-level division;

comparing the actual performance data against a target to produce a deviation for each of the organizational units;

assigning a number of points corresponding to the deviation of each of the organizational units; and

determining a first process performance indicator for the first-level division based on the first weight factor and the number points of the organizational units.

28. The computer readable storage medium as recited in claim 27, further comprising:

assigning a second weight factor to an organizational unit at a second-level division of the system process, wherein the second-level division is above the first-level division; and

determining a second process performance indicator for the second-level division based on the second weight factor and the first process performance indicator of the first-level division.