458 lines
7.8 KiB
Markdown
458 lines
7.8 KiB
Markdown
Ниже — единая цифровая операционная модель AegisOne Engineering в формате .md.
|
||
|
||
Это не просто документация — это “скелет системы”, который можно отдать разработчику, внедрить в Notion/Bitrix/1C/веб-CRM или развернуть как внутренний продукт.
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# AegisOne Engineering
|
||
## Unified Digital Operating System (UDOS)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# 0. СУТЬ СИСТЕМЫ
|
||
|
||
AegisOne UDOS — это единая цифровая система управления инженерной эксплуатацией объектов безопасности.
|
||
|
||
Она объединяет:
|
||
|
||
- CRM (клиенты и сделки)
|
||
- SLA (контракты и обслуживание)
|
||
- KPI инженеров (исполнение)
|
||
- SHS (здоровье бизнеса)
|
||
- Финансовую модель
|
||
- Операционный дашборд
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# 1. АРХИТЕКТУРА СИСТЕМЫ
|
||
|
||
┌──────────────────────┐
|
||
│ LEADS / CRM │
|
||
└─────────┬────────────┘
|
||
↓
|
||
┌──────────────────────┐
|
||
│ AUDIT SYSTEM │
|
||
└─────────┬────────────┘
|
||
↓
|
||
┌──────────────────────┐
|
||
│ SLA CONTRACTS │
|
||
└─────────┬────────────┘
|
||
↓
|
||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||
│ OPERATIONS (ENGINEERS) │
|
||
└─────────┬───────────────┬──────────────┘
|
||
↓ ↓
|
||
┌──────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────┐
|
||
│ KPI ENGINEERS │ │ INCIDENT SYSTEM │
|
||
└──────┬───────┘ └─────────┬───────────┘
|
||
↓ ↓
|
||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||
│ SHS ENGINE │
|
||
└──────────────┬──────────────────────────┘
|
||
↓
|
||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||
│ CEO DASHBOARD │
|
||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# 2. CRM СИСТЕМА
|
||
|
||
## 2.1 Структура клиента
|
||
|
||
```json
|
||
Client {
|
||
id,
|
||
company_name,
|
||
object_type,
|
||
location,
|
||
contact_person,
|
||
decision_maker,
|
||
number_of_objects,
|
||
systems: {
|
||
video: int,
|
||
access_control: int,
|
||
fire_alarm: bool,
|
||
it_infrastructure: bool
|
||
},
|
||
current_provider,
|
||
pain_points[],
|
||
budget_level,
|
||
status: [lead, qualified, audit, offer, sla, lost]
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
2.2 Воронка CRM
|
||
|
||
Lead
|
||
↓
|
||
Qualification
|
||
↓
|
||
Technical Audit
|
||
↓
|
||
Risk Report
|
||
↓
|
||
SLA Offer
|
||
↓
|
||
Contract
|
||
↓
|
||
Active SLA
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
3. AUDIT SYSTEM (ИНЖЕНЕРНЫЙ ВХОД)
|
||
|
||
3.1 Формирование Risk Score
|
||
|
||
Risk Score =
|
||
missing_archive (25)
|
||
+ no_power_backup (20)
|
||
+ no_regulations (15)
|
||
+ system_failures (20)
|
||
+ no_documentation (10)
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
3.2 Output аудита
|
||
|
||
Audit Report:
|
||
- Risk Score
|
||
- System condition
|
||
- Critical vulnerabilities
|
||
- SLA recommendation
|
||
- Cost estimation
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
4. SLA СИСТЕМА
|
||
|
||
4.1 Формула стоимости
|
||
|
||
SLA Price =
|
||
Base Cost × Object Index × Region Factor × Risk Multiplier
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
4.2 Object Index
|
||
|
||
Object Index =
|
||
(Risk × 0.4)
|
||
+ (Complexity × 0.3)
|
||
+ (Infrastructure × 0.2)
|
||
+ (Service History × 0.1)
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
4.3 SLA уровни
|
||
|
||
Class Index Description
|
||
|
||
A 0–30 simple SLA
|
||
B 31–60 standard SLA
|
||
C 61–90 complex SLA
|
||
D 90+ enterprise SLA
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
4.4 SLA метрики
|
||
|
||
Response Time
|
||
|
||
Resolution Time
|
||
|
||
Uptime %
|
||
|
||
Incident Rate
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
5. KPI СИСТЕМА ИНЖЕНЕРОВ
|
||
|
||
5.1 Engineer Score
|
||
|
||
ES =
|
||
(0.25 × SLA Compliance)
|
||
+ (0.20 × Response Time Score)
|
||
+ (0.20 × Resolution Time Score)
|
||
+ (0.15 × Diagnosis Accuracy)
|
||
+ (0.10 × Reopen Rate Score)
|
||
+ (0.10 × Documentation Quality)
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
5.2 KPI метрики
|
||
|
||
SLA Compliance
|
||
|
||
closed_in_SLA / total_requests
|
||
|
||
Reopen Rate
|
||
|
||
reopened_requests / total_requests
|
||
|
||
Diagnosis Accuracy
|
||
|
||
confirmed_faults / found_faults
|
||
|
||
Utilization
|
||
|
||
working_hours / available_hours
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
5.3 Грейды инженеров
|
||
|
||
Score Level
|
||
|
||
90–100 Senior
|
||
80–89 Strong
|
||
70–79 Middle
|
||
<70 Junior
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
6. SHS (SYSTEM HEALTH SCORE)
|
||
|
||
6.1 Формула SHS
|
||
|
||
SHS =
|
||
(0.22 × SLA Stability)
|
||
+ (0.18 × Revenue Stability)
|
||
+ (0.18 × Retention)
|
||
+ (0.15 × Engineer Performance)
|
||
+ (0.12 × Incident Stability)
|
||
+ (0.10 × Sales Flow)
|
||
+ (0.05 × Operational Efficiency)
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
6.2 Интерпретация
|
||
|
||
SHS Status
|
||
|
||
85–100 Growth
|
||
70–85 Stable
|
||
50–70 Risk
|
||
<50 Crisis
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
6.3 Alert System
|
||
|
||
SHS ↓ 5% weekly → Warning
|
||
|
||
SHS ↓ 10% → Critical
|
||
|
||
Retention drop → Immediate audit trigger
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
7. INCIDENT SYSTEM
|
||
|
||
7.1 Incident Classification
|
||
|
||
Level Description
|
||
|
||
P1 critical system failure
|
||
P2 partial failure
|
||
P3 minor issue
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
7.2 Incident Rate
|
||
|
||
IR = incidents / number_of_objects
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
7.3 SLA breach tracking
|
||
|
||
breach_rate = failed_SLA_cases / total_cases
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
8. FINANCIAL LAYER
|
||
|
||
8.1 MRR
|
||
|
||
MRR = Σ SLA contracts / 12
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
8.2 Revenue per Engineer
|
||
|
||
RPE = SLA Revenue / number_of_engineers
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
8.3 Cost per Object
|
||
|
||
CPO = total_operational_cost / number_of_objects
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
9. CEO DASHBOARD
|
||
|
||
9.1 Main indicators
|
||
|
||
SHS (system health)
|
||
|
||
MRR (monthly recurring revenue)
|
||
|
||
SLA Compliance
|
||
|
||
Retention
|
||
|
||
Incident Rate
|
||
|
||
Engineer Score Avg
|
||
|
||
Sales Conversion
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
9.2 Dashboard visualization blocks
|
||
|
||
1. SHS Line Chart
|
||
|
||
trend over time
|
||
|
||
|
||
2. SLA Heatmap
|
||
|
||
engineers vs performance
|
||
|
||
|
||
3. MRR Growth Curve
|
||
|
||
monthly recurring revenue
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. Client Retention Funnel
|
||
|
||
drop-off points
|
||
|
||
|
||
5. Incident Map
|
||
|
||
problematic objects
|
||
|
||
|
||
6. Engineer Ranking Table
|
||
|
||
top/bottom performers
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
10. AUTOMATION RULES
|
||
|
||
10.1 If SHS drops
|
||
|
||
IF SHS < 70:
|
||
reduce new sales
|
||
trigger audit cycle
|
||
reassign engineers
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
10.2 If SLA compliance drops
|
||
|
||
IF SLA < 90%:
|
||
freeze non-critical projects
|
||
increase inspection frequency
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
10.3 If retention drops
|
||
|
||
IF retention < 90%:
|
||
mandatory client audit
|
||
review engineer assignments
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
11. SYSTEM BEHAVIOR MODEL
|
||
|
||
DATA → KPI → SHS → DECISION → ACTION → FEEDBACK LOOP
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
12. STRATEGIC PRINCIPLE
|
||
|
||
AegisOne Engineering is not a service company.
|
||
|
||
It is:
|
||
|
||
> an operating system for managing engineering risk in physical infrastructure.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
13. END STATE MODEL
|
||
|
||
The system evolves into:
|
||
|
||
predictive SLA risk detection
|
||
|
||
automated pricing
|
||
|
||
engineer auto-allocation
|
||
|
||
client churn prediction
|
||
|
||
MRR forecasting
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
END OF SYSTEM
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
Если хочешь следующий уровень, я могу собрать тебе:
|
||
|
||
1) визуальный UI дашборда (как он должен выглядеть как продукт)
|
||
2) структуру базы данных (SQL / 1C / Bitrix schema)
|
||
3) алгоритм “предикта потери клиента за 14 дней”
|
||
4) или автоматический генератор КП + SLA из этой системы
|
||
|
||
Это уже уровень **enterprise SaaS, а не просто инженерной компании**. |