Introduction: The enterprise standard “responsible” is based on the system of public and supervisory self-statement of enterprise standards, with a comparative assessment of open standard indicators, setting a marker and standardizing system innovations that drive the transformation of industries. The year 2021 was the third year of full implementation of the enterprise standard “backers” system. Based on the list of focus areas identified in the General Market Regulation Bulletin on the Publication of the Business Standards “Roads” Focus Area (No. 22 of 2021), this year’s enterprise standard “sailors” focus area and coverage of products, service categories are of up to three years and will provide comprehensive and effective support for the implementation of national food-saving derogations, rural revitalization, industrial digitization and smart transformation development.

The Chinese Institute for Standardization, as a working agency of the enterprise standard “responsibility” organization, conducts the 2021 business standard “responsibility” assessment programme (hereinafter referred to as the “assessment programme”) and the collection of assessment agencies. In order to guide the assessment bodies in the preparation of the assessment programme, the China Institute for Standardization’s branch of the Institute organized, from 29 to 30 June 2021, two training sessions on enterprise standard “people’s assessment programming” for 2021. Nearly 600 participants from industry associations, testing agencies, scientific institutes and local standardization departments participated. The training is based on the enterprise standard “shelter” system and the promotion of the standard evaluation requirements of the occupants’ group, the 2021 pilot focus area, the enterprise standard “sailor” assessment programming requirements, the business standard “sailor” management information platform operation, the self-statement of the business standard self-statement process and the use of five parts of the management account of the public service appraisal system for enterprise standard information, the feedback of the relevant staff of the lead agency to the delegates and the collation and harmonization of responses to nearly 40 issues of general interest to the delegates.

Does the evaluation body submit an annual assessment programme?

The 2020 assessment body has issued a roster of runrs and intends to continue to undertake this type of assessment, which could continue to select for submission of the programme in the form of a reservation/revised/full (three-stage) option; the new body could also select the type of submission of the evaluation body that has been in place last year. Programmes such as those submitted by new agencies are more advanced than last year’s institutional evaluation programme and more reflective of the level of industrial development; both agencies will enter the expert evaluation phase. If last year the agency had been run, the former evaluation body was encouraged in principle to update the evaluation programme, with a view to continuing the evaluation.

The programmes submitted by the evaluation bodies could be retained for several years?

Last year’s assessment body could choose to retain its original programme, and specific time for reservations could be determined by the evaluation body itself. However, if other agencies propose more rational and operational programmes, they may be replaced with expert reviews. It should be noted here that there is a standard category of products or services for run-off, and that the evaluation programme needs to be revised accordingly if the criteria for the pilot are revised.

Assessment of whether changes could be made to the classification of indicators in the programme assessment indicator system, the level of submission?

Formal reviews and expert reviews will be conducted after the evaluation programme is submitted and, if modified in the process, the evaluation body will need to adjust the evaluation programme accordingly and again submit the final draft of the programme. In addition, the assessment body may apply to the work agency for an adjustment of the evaluation programme, subject to modifications that are necessary for the accuracy of the project, on the basis of the actual business standards, for example, if it finds that there is a comparable actual business standard, where some of the indicators in the evaluation programme are missing or problematic, and if it is necessary to make adjustments to the programme, the programme may be adjusted to the extent that it is necessary for the accuracy of the project, but it needs to become an evaluation body once again after the expert review team has passed.

Does the assessment indicators in the evaluation programme have to be quantified?

Quantitative and quantitative indicators may exist for assessing indicators in the assessment programme. Basic indicators may include qualitative or quantitative indicators, generally related to mandatory standards; core indicators should be quantifiable and generally quantifiable and measurable in product standards; and innovative indicators may be quantified or not quantified, encouraging the use of quantifiable detectable indicators to the extent possible. A system of qualitative and quantitative assessment indicators is recommended for service pilot assessment. It is also important to note that the indicators for performance are comparable to those for graduation and for the development of enterprise standard classification lists, and that they should be targeted for individual indicators that are quantifiable, disaggregated and of high market interest.

How can innovative indicators in evaluation programmes be set?

Innovative indicators are, in principle, not covered by existing product standards, but reflect technological advances, new market concerns, new consumption hot spots, and product innovation and functionality indicators.

Are there quantitative constraints to the assessment of baseline, core and innovative indicators in the indicator system?

The assessment indicators do not contain quantitative requirements, but in principle the number of core indicators is not less than three, and since the core indicators are quantifiable grading indicators, more than three are available for distribution. However, it needs to be noted that basic indicators are generally required in mandatory standards or are not quantifiable, as well as relevant qualitative requirements in product standards. Core indicators need to cover all quantifiable targets in existing corresponding product standards and, in the absence of product criteria, not less than three quantifiable indicators that reflect the essential functions and performance of products need to be identified as core indicators.

How do assessment bodies undertake assessments?

The assessment body began with the use of the enterprise criteria for the search of the public account number of bids authorized by the work agency, the initial removal of all retrieved standards, the removal of non-product quality standards, such as operating guidelines, process processes, and non-compliance criteria, the comparison and evaluation of the evaluation programme, and the formation of single indicator slots and the rounding list of runrs, respectively. After the run-off list has been formed, the assessment body is required to communicate with the occupier, to provide the relevant supporting material by the enterprise and to confirm the authenticity and validity of the material, to publish the current year’s occupier’s list on the business standard management information platform.

Are there operational guidelines for the management information platform of business standards, “backers”?

Yes. Access to the business standard “sailors” management information platform (https:/