Method of business analysis

A method is taught for processing performance data in a data reporting system ( 100 ) having a plurality of business entities ( 600 ) and a report center ( 100 ) in communications with the plurality of business entities ( 600 ). The method includes transmitting by the plurality of business entities ( 600 ) to the report center ( 100 ) customer performance data indicative of the operation of the business entities ( 600 ) during a first day and processing of the customer performance data by the report center ( 100 ) to provide processed performance data. Availability of the processed performance data is provided to a select business entity ( 600 ) during a second day wherein the time difference between the first day and the second day is less than eleven days. The processed performance data includes processed occupancy data, processed average daily rate data and processed Rev PAR data. The method further includes determining price information in accordance with the processed performance data, pricing a product by selected business entity ( 600 ) in accordance with determined price information, and selling the product according to the pricing. The processed performance data can be requested by the selected business entity ( 600 ) prior to providing availability of the processed performance data. Data can be transmitted by way of a network data connection and an internet connection.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS Referring to FIG. 1 , there is shown a block diagram that conceptually represents an operating business. The business is made up of a number of operating units. The number of operating units will depend on the size and nature of the business. To effectively work the invention the business should be completely described by the operating units. Operating units may be physical, financial, or other. In the specific example discussed below the business is a power generation utility with a power station as one physical unit and the share register as another financial unit. Each operating unit is further described in detail as consisting of multiple components, which may be further broken down to sub-components. The performance of the business is measured against a range of key performance indicators (KPI) that apply at the lowest level of the business. Each component (or sub-component) will, have a number of associated key performance indicators that are designed to provide measures of the health of the business. There may also be additional key performance indicators that are calculated at a macro level for components and units. Another representation of the same structure is shown in FIG. 2 , but highlighting the hierarchical structure of a business. The performance measured by each KPI is an accumulative measure of the overall performance of the business. Thus, referring to FIG. 3 , for each KPI the actual output Z i is monitored relative to the actual input X i . A budget value B i is calculated from the actual input X i for each KPI. The difference between the budget value B i and the actual output value Z i is an indication of the efficiency. The budget value is calculated using suitable models for the particular KPI applicable to the sub-component, component or unit. The selected key performance indicators are peripheral to the method of the invention. Persons skilled in the art will be aware of models and management systems based on the key performance indicator concept. This invention is not concerned directly with the key performance indicators, but rather a method of using the key performance indicators to analyze the overall performance of the business at a global level while maintaining information at a local level for detailed analysis. The actual value and the deviation between the actual and budget values are recorded by the method. The values are summed across the hierarchy to provide the global measure and intermediate values. The method is described in greater detail in FIG. 4 . As shown in FIG. 4 , the method commences with the measurement of the actual input values X i . The input values X i will have units appropriate for the KPI. For example, a financial unit will have KPI's measured in dollars whereas a physical unit will have KPI's measured in, for example, Megawatts or kilograms of produce, etc. In order to allow comparison (; between units and summation of global indicators it is necessary to convert the X i values to a common value base. The inventors have found that a financial basis is most appropriate. Therefore, the X i values are converted to Y i values measured in dollars. Although financial units provide an appropriate common basis for implementing the invention it should be understood that the invention is not limited to conversion of measured values to financial units. Any other basis is acceptable if conversion to the selected common units is possible. For those units already using the selected common units the conversion process will be unity process (no conversion or multiplication by one). The converted input values Y, may be summed across KPI's to give a sub-component input value, which may in turn be summed to give a component input value, a unit input value and a total business input value, Y i.tot . The actual output Z i from each KPI is measured and converted to the same common units to give a converted value W i . The converted values W i may be summed to give total values W i.tot at the sub-component, component, unit, and business level. At each level the total measured output values W i.tot and the total input values Y i.tot can be compared to give a first indication of the performance of the business. By systematically changing controllable parameters P c and determining the influence on W i.tot , local and global optimization is possible from within the same analysis structure. By systematically changing the uncontrollable parameters P u and determining the influence on W i.tot , the risk that the business is exposed to due to uncontrollable influences can be estimated from within the same analysis structure. As seen in FIG. 4 , the measured inputs X i are used to calculate budget outputs B i . The budget outputs are expressed in the selected common unit. The calculation of the budget input will normally require conversion of the measured inputs to the appropriate units. A budget output (target performance) for an engineering component may be based on the design performance of the component, a non-engineering component target performance may be based on other performance indicators like rate of return, earnings before interest, or earnings before tax. A local deviation D i for each KPI is calculated by comparing the converted actual output W i with the calculated budget output B i . The local deviations D i are stored and summed to provide total deviations D i.tot at the sub-component, component, unit, or and business level. At the business level the total deviation D i.tot is compared to a threshold T to determine if the business is operating within acceptable limits. A deviation greater than the acceptable threshold is an indication of some aspect of the business performing at an unacceptably inefficient level. The stored data is mined through the hierarchical structure depicted in FIG. 2 to determine the specific sub-component that is under-performing. Corrective action may then be taken. The method depicted in FIG. 4 also provides for a global measure of efficiency G to be determined by calculating the difference between the summed total B i.tot of the individual budget outputs B i and the summed total W i.tot of the converted actual outputs W i . The global efficiency value G is compared to a threshold T which may be the same threshold as discussed above. If the value G is greater than the threshold T the stored deviation data is mined to identify the problem component or sub-component. Efficiency values G can be determined at each level within the business, depending on the level of management adopted. As indicated in FIG. 4 , the method leads to adjustment of performance to correct or improve the deviation. How performance is adjusted does not form part of the invention. Persons skilled in management of individual business units will appreciate the manner in which correction of operating conditions in a component can impact on the overall performance of a business. The invention quantifies the impact of the improvement The method described above facilitates simple evaluation of the performance of a business yet maintains detailed information on performance at all levels of a business. It therefore substantially overcomes the data compression problems discussed earlier. Furthermore, it greatly reduces the amount of analysis, and therefore time, required to identify the cause of a deviation from budget and to seek improvements available from changes to controllable parameters. The method provides a structured mechanism to allocate limited resources to rectification of performance deviations and provide performance improvements across an entire business structure to the greatest benefit of the business. As the method is component based a business can change its portfolio of components without changing the method. Individual components, and the parts of the hierarchy below that component, can be activated and deactivated to reflect the changes in the business. This makes maintenance of the method a straightforward task. In complex businesses, the strict hierarchical structure shown in FIG. 2 may be difficult to establish. Some units may involve inputs from components or sub-components used in other units. The method provides links between common components to pass output values between components since a common system of units, eg dollars, is used throughout the system. A specific example of the working of the method for a power generation utility is shown in FIG. 5 . In a hierarchical structure the utility is considered as formed from two units, a power station and shares. The power station has two power unit components, power unit A and power unit B. Each component contains a number of sub-components, which are shown in FIG. 5 for power unit B. Power unit A will have a similar structure. Each component is modeled to provide a budgeted output for a given input. The specific values for the generator sub-component are shown. The input cost is $4.25 for an actual output value of $5.3333 and a budgeted output of $5.423. This represents a deviation of $0.0897. This deviation is shown in FIG. 5 in dollar terms. The actual generator model is likely to be constructed on the basis of a mass balance or an energy balance. All inputs and outputs can be given a dollar value to calculate the net dollar value of inputs and the net dollar value of outputs so that the values can be passed to the next component and the deviation value can be passed up the hierarchy. Similar detail is calculated for each sub-component to obtain the deviations shown. The sub-component deviations are summed to obtain a component deviation, D i.tot of $0.6667. Similarly the power unit A deviation is calculated as $0.3333. These component variations are summed to obtain a unit deviation of D i.tot &equals;$1.00. The shares are considered in two packets, packet A and packet B. As shown in FIG. 5 the component variations sum to a unit variation of −$0.1. The total deviation for the power utility is $0.90. If this deviation is unacceptable the data can be mined to determine that the major cause of the deviation is the poor efficiency of the condenser and turbine in power unit B. A suitable environment for working the invention is depicted in FIG. 6 . The performance of each component or sub-component is modeled analytically in software that runs on a computer, which in many cases will be a desktop computer, such as 1 . The modeling would have three modes of operation within the same analysis structure namely monitoring, optimization and risk assessment. In monitoring mode the actual inputs are used. In optimization mode the controllable parameters are systematically changed and in risk assessment mode, the uncontrolable parameters are systematically changed. The desktop computer 1 will have processing means 1 a that receives a measure of the input values, X i for calculation of the key performance indicator KPI i . The input values X i may be converted to corresponding input values W i in the processing means 1 a . The target output value B i is calculated by the processing means 1 a and may be displayed locally on display means 1 b . The actual output Z i is also measured and received by the computer 1 , and may be converted to corresponding output value Y, in the processing means 1 a . The target output B i , corresponding actual output Y i , and calculated deviation D i are displayed on the display means 1 b . These values, as well as the raw data, are stored in a local storage device in the computer 1 . There may be a separate computer, such as 2 , for each component or sub-component. In some circumstances it may be possible for a single computer, such as 3 , to monitor two or more key performance indicators. Each of the computers 1 , 2 , 3 are connected by a local area network 4 to a unit server 5 which collates the deviations D i of each component or sub-component within the unit, as well as calculates a total input, total output, and total budget for the unit. As mentioned above, a business may consist of multiple units so the arrangement may be repeated, such as 6 and 7 . The various user servers are connected by a wide area network 8 to a business server 9 that sums the deviations D i across the business to obtain D i.tot , and calculates Y i.tot , B i.tot , and W i.tot , as described earlier. The business server 9 also calculates the global deviation G and displays the various measures and deviations on display means 10 . The display may be graphical and contain time sequences of data against a suitable time base. The raw data may be stored at the business server 9 or in the unit server, such as 5 . The business server may 9 be configured to operate semi-automatically to indicate an alarm if the global deviation G exceeds the threshold T. In this case the user can mine the stored data to identify the component or sub-component that is performing with significant deviation from the target key performance indicator. Communication throughout the system shown in FIG. 6 is therefore two way. Throughout the specification the aim has been to describe the invention without limiting the invention to any particular combination of alternate features.