Program, device and method for displaying survey response results

Abstract

We provide a program that selects improvement items according to the elapsed time based on the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. [Solution] A program that causes a computer to accumulate expectations and satisfaction levels based on user questionnaire responses over multiple time periods for each evaluation item displays a graph on the display consisting of an expectation axis and a satisfaction axis, and causes the computer to function as a graph display means that plots each evaluation item for each period based on expectations and satisfaction levels and connects the plots with arrows pointing over time, and an improvement item selection means that selects improvement items from among the multiple evaluation items based on the direction of the arrows.

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a questionnaire technique for asking questions to a plurality of users. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, there is a technique for conducting a survey of employees regarding their expectations and satisfaction for each evaluation item (see, for example, Patent Document 1). According to this technique, for each evaluation item, items to be improved are extracted based on an evaluation score that is evaluated high when the difference between the expectations and satisfaction is small. [Prior art documents] [Non-patent literature]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Patent No. 7242089 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] However, when items to be improved are extracted based only on the difference between the expectation level and the satisfaction level, as in Patent Document 1, there is a problem in that only uniform evaluation items are always extracted. In response to this, the inventors of the present application first considered whether it would be possible to select improvement items according to the elapsed time from the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. Secondly, we wondered whether it would be possible to display the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item in a way that would be easy for operators to visually recognize. Thirdly, we considered whether it would be possible to derive an evaluation index that is easy for operators to understand from the expectations and satisfaction levels for each evaluation item. Fourthly, we considered whether it would be possible to display the distribution range of users' answers for each evaluation item in a way that would be easy for operators to visually recognize.

[0005] Therefore, a first object of the present invention is to provide a program, device, and method that can select improvement items according to the elapsed time from the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] <First aspect of the present invention> According to the first aspect of the present invention, there is provided a program for causing a computer to function that accumulates, for each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to questionnaires given to users over a plurality of periods, comprising: A graph consisting of an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction is displayed on the display, and each evaluation item is plotted for each period based on the expectation and satisfaction. A plot of the first expectation and the first satisfaction level in the first period, and the second expectation and the second satisfaction level in the second period. plot With Between 、 A graph display means that connects the time course with an arrow; Multiple Among the evaluation items for a number of items, The evaluation items with arrows pointing in the direction where the second expectation is higher than the first expectation and the second satisfaction is lower than the first satisfaction are Improvement items As Selection method for improvement items to be selected The present invention is characterized in that it causes a computer to function.

[0007] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The evaluation items are hierarchically organized questionnaire items for multiple users belonging to an organization or a service, Expectations and satisfaction are based on responses to organization- or service-based questions; The graph display means plots only the expectations and satisfaction levels for a plurality of evaluation items in a hierarchy designated by the manager. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0009] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The improvement item selection means selects, as an improvement item, an arrow that is within a predetermined angle from a central axis of 45 degrees, which represents high expectation and low satisfaction. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0010] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The improvement item selection means selects an improvement item from among a plurality of evaluation items based on the length of the arrow in addition to the direction of the arrow. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0011] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The improvement item selection means selects, as an improvement item, an evaluation item whose arrow has a length equal to or greater than a predetermined length, the arrow being oriented in such a way that the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0012] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The graph display means displays a first reference vertex of the highest expectation and the lowest satisfaction in a first color, and displays a gradation from the first reference vertex to a normalized line between the expectation and satisfaction in a second color. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0013] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The graph display means displays a normalized line between the expectation level and the satisfaction level in a third color, and displays the normalized line in a gradational manner from the third color to the second color or the fourth color toward a second reference vertex of the lowest expectation level and the highest satisfaction level. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0014] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, The graph display means assigns a color to each plotted portion for each evaluation item. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0015] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, an evaluation acquisition means for transmitting a prompt for further evaluation comments based on the expectation and satisfaction level for the selected evaluation item to a generation AI (Artificial Intelligence) server, receiving the evaluation comments for the evaluation item from the generation AI server, and displaying the evaluation comments; It is also preferable to make the computer function as follows.

[0016] According to another embodiment of the program of the first invention, a user attribute database that accumulates attribute information for each user; A target user extraction means for extracting only the expectation and satisfaction levels derived from only the target users having attribute information designated by an administrator; an item-specific answer calculation means for calculating the expectation and satisfaction level for each item from the expectations and satisfaction levels of the extracted multiple target users; It is also preferable to make the computer function as follows.

[0017] According to the first aspect of the present invention, in a management device that accumulates, for each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to questionnaires given to users over a plurality of periods, A graph consisting of an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction is displayed on the display, and each evaluation item is plotted for each period based on the expectation and satisfaction. A plot of the first expectation and the first satisfaction level in the first period, and the second expectation and the second satisfaction level in the second period. plot With Between 、 A graph display means that connects the time course with an arrow; Multiple Among the evaluation items for a number of items, The evaluation items with arrows pointing in the direction where the second expectation is higher than the first expectation and the second satisfaction is lower than the first satisfaction are Improvement items As Selection method for improvement items to be selected The present invention is characterized by having the following.

[0018] According to the first aspect of the present invention, in a display method for a device that accumulates expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to questionnaires given to users over a plurality of periods for each evaluation item, The device is A graph consisting of an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction is displayed on the display, and each evaluation item is plotted for each period based on the expectation and satisfaction. A plot of the first expectation and the first satisfaction level in the first period, and the second expectation and the second satisfaction level in the second period. plot With Between 、 The first step is connected by an arrow pointing to the time course, Multiple Among the evaluation items for a number of items, The evaluation items with arrows pointing in the direction where the second expectation is higher than the first expectation and the second satisfaction is lower than the first satisfaction are Improvement items As The second step is to select The present invention is characterized by carrying out the following steps.

[0019] <The second invention> According to the second aspect of the present invention, there is provided a program for causing a computer to function that accumulates, for each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to a questionnaire given to users, comprising: a graph display means for displaying a graph having an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction on a display, plotting each evaluation item based on the expectation and satisfaction, and displaying a first reference apex of the highest expectation and the lowest satisfaction in a first color, with the first color transitioning to a second color from the first reference apex toward a normalized line between the expectation and satisfaction; The present invention is characterized in that it causes a computer to function.

[0020] According to another embodiment of the second invention, The graph display means displays a normalized line between the expectation level and the satisfaction level in a third color, and displays the normalized line in a gradational manner from the third color to the second color or the fourth color toward a second reference vertex of the lowest expectation level and the highest satisfaction level. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0021] According to another embodiment of the second invention, The graph display means assigns a color to each plotted portion for each evaluation item. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0022] <The third aspect of the present invention> According to a third aspect of the present invention, there is provided a program for causing a computer to function that accumulates, for each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to a questionnaire given to users, comprising: an evaluation index calculation means for calculating, for each evaluation item, an evaluation index based on a value obtained by dividing the degree of satisfaction by the degree of expectation or by dividing the degree of expectation by the degree of satisfaction; an improvement item selection means for selecting an improvement item from among a plurality of evaluation items based on the evaluation index; The present invention is characterized in that it causes a computer to function.

[0023] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, The improvement item selection means selects, as improvement items, evaluation items in order of lowest satisfaction / expectation quotient and evaluation items in order of highest expectation / satisfaction quotient. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0024] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, The improvement item selection means selects, as improvement items, evaluation items having numerical values ​​outside a predetermined range from the median value 1.0 of the evaluation index. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0025] According to another embodiment of the third aspect of the present invention, a graph display means for displaying a graph on which the evaluation index is based on the display and plotting each evaluation item based on the evaluation index; It is also preferable to make the computer function as follows.

[0026] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, The evaluation index calculation means normalizes the distribution range of the evaluation index so that the range above and below the median of 1.0 is the same, and determines the evaluation index for each evaluation item. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0027] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, If the evaluation index is a quotient of satisfaction / expectation, the lowest evaluation index is the first color, and the first color is the lowest evaluation index, and the second color is the median value. If the evaluation index is the division of expectation / satisfaction, the highest evaluation index will be the first color, and from that highest evaluation index to the median, a graph display means for displaying a graph in which the colors of the evaluation indexes for each evaluation item are set in a gradation pattern that transitions from a first color to a second color; It is also preferable to make the computer function as follows.

[0028] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, The graph display means sets the color of the evaluation index for each evaluation item in a gradational manner in which the third color is the median value of the evaluation index and the third color is the second color or the fourth color from the median value to the highest evaluation index when the evaluation index is a divided value of the satisfaction level / expectation level, or from the median value to the lowest evaluation index when the evaluation index is a divided value of the expectation level / satisfaction level. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0029] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, For each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels are accumulated over multiple periods. The evaluation index calculation means calculates an evaluation index for each period, The graph display means plots the evaluation index for each evaluation item for each period and connects the plots with arrows pointing to the passage of time. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0030] According to another embodiment of the program of the third invention, The improvement item selection means selects, as an improvement item, an evaluation item whose arrow has a direction in which the evaluation index decreases when the evaluation index is a divided value of satisfaction level / expectation level, or whose arrow has a direction in which the evaluation index increases when the evaluation index is a divided value of expectation level / satisfaction level, and whose length is equal to or longer than a predetermined length. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0031] <The fourth invention> According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a program for causing a computer to function in which an evaluation index based on responses to a questionnaire given to users is accumulated for each evaluation item, the program comprising: a graph display means for displaying a graph on which the evaluation index is the axis on the display, specifying a distribution range of the evaluation indexes of a plurality of users for each evaluation item, connecting the highest evaluation index and the lowest evaluation index within the distribution range with a whisker line, and displaying the distribution range included in a predetermined deviation with the average value of the distribution range as a box line; The present invention is characterized in that it causes a computer to function.

[0032] According to another embodiment of the fourth aspect of the present invention, The graph display means sets the predetermined deviation to a value of ±1σ to ±2σ of the standard deviation. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0033] According to another embodiment of the fourth aspect of the present invention, The graph display means displays a mark indicating the median of the distribution range of the evaluation index within a box line displayed for each evaluation item. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0034] According to another embodiment of the fourth aspect of the present invention, For each evaluation item, we accumulate the expectations and satisfaction of each user based on their responses to a questionnaire. For each evaluation item, an evaluation index is calculated for each user based on the value obtained by dividing satisfaction by expectation, or the value obtained by dividing expectation by satisfaction. The evaluation indexes are normalized so that the distribution ranges of these evaluation indexes are the same above and below the median of 1.0, and an evaluation index for each evaluation item is determined. It is also preferable to function the computer in such a manner.

[0035] According to another embodiment of the fourth aspect of the present invention, an improvement item selection means for selecting, from among the multiple evaluation items, an evaluation item based on a box line that is closest to the lowest evaluation index when the satisfaction level is divided by the expectation level, or an evaluation item based on a box line that is closest to the highest evaluation index when the expectation level is divided by the satisfaction level, as an improvement item; It is also preferable to make the computer function as follows. Effect of the Invention

[0036] According to the program, device and method of the present invention, firstly, improvement items can be selected according to the elapsed time from the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0037] [Figure 1] FIG. 2 is a diagram showing a basic functional configuration of a management device according to the first aspect of the present invention. [Diagram 2] FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram of a statistical database. [Diagram 3] 1 is a graph display screen according to the first aspect of the present invention. [Figure 4] FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram showing the direction of an arrow pointing from a first period to a second period. [Diagram 5] FIG. 11 is an optional functional configuration diagram of a management device according to the first aspect of the present invention. [Figure 6] FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram of a user attribute database. [Figure 7] FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a response database. [Figure 8] FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of an item-specific answer calculation unit. [Figure 9]FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram of an evaluation acquisition unit. [Figure 10] 13 is a graph display screen according to the second aspect of the present invention. [Figure 11] FIG. 13 is a functional configuration diagram of a management device according to the third aspect of the present invention. [Figure 12] FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of an evaluation index calculation unit. [Figure 13] 3 is a first screen of a graph display according to the third aspect of the present invention. [Figure 14] 3 is a second screen of a graph display according to the third aspect of the present invention. [Figure 15] FIG. 13 is an image showing intermediate items as evaluation items. [Figure 16] FIG. 13 is a functional configuration diagram of a management device according to the fourth aspect of the present invention. [Figure 17] 4 is a graph display screen according to the fourth aspect of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0038] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

[0039] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a basic functional configuration of a management device according to the first aspect of the present invention.

[0040] According to FIG. 1, a management device 1 displays the results of responses to a questionnaire from a plurality of users to an administrator. In recent years, emphasis has been placed on "engagement," which means "trust" and "goodwill" toward organizations and services. If the organization is, for example, a company, the manager corresponds to the business owner, and the user corresponds to the employee. If the service is, for example, a financial service, the manager corresponds to the customer manager, and the user corresponds to the customer user. For example, a manager can recognize areas in which the company should improve from the results of a survey of employees. Also, for example, a customer manager can recognize areas in which the service should be improved from the results of a survey of customer users. It is desirable for managers and customer managers to operate their organizations and services in such a way that the members of those organizations or services have a high level of engagement.

[0041] Let us consider as an example a system in which corporate management evaluates the engagement of its employees. Managers are required to maintain high levels of engagement so that employees can work together as a unit. However, even if managers try to improve the "work environment" for employees, in reality, employees may place more importance on "evaluation and compensation." In this case, improving the work environment is not an important issue for employees. This also varies depending on employees' organizational attributes (department, position, work location, years of service) and personal attributes (gender, age, educational background, family structure), and is also an issue that cannot be measured directly.

[0042] In response to this, there is a system that collects responses to survey questions based on members' "expectations" and "satisfaction." In this system, members are asked to answer their expectations and satisfaction with a value between 1 and 5, for example. By visualizing the expectations and satisfaction based on members' engagement, it becomes easier to recognize areas in the organization or service that need improvement.

[0043] According to FIG. 1, a management device 1 functions as a server for a website and has a web interface for a browser of an administrator terminal 2. The management device 1 functions as a server for a website and has a web interface for a browser of an administrator terminal 2. The management device 1 of the present invention has a statistical database 101, a graph display unit 11, and an improvement item selection unit 12. These functional components may be realized by executing a program that causes a computer installed in the device to function. The process flow of these functional components can also be understood as a method of displaying a graph.

[0044] [Statistics Database 101] FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram of the statistical database.

[0045] 2, the statistical database 101 classifies, for example, employee engagement in a company into a hierarchical structure of major items, medium items, and minor items. These items are hierarchically organized survey items for multiple users belonging to an organization or service. According to an embodiment of the present invention, an example will be described in which the "evaluation items" are medium items, but of course they may be major items or minor items.

[0046] According to Figure 2, assuming an organization such as a company, the major categories are divided into three categories: "Work content and environment," "Human relationships," and "Organizational policy and culture." The medium categories are further divided into four for a total of 12 categories. The minor categories are further divided into five for each medium category.

[0047] The administrator can freely edit the item categories and item names from the administrator terminal 2. In other words, the administrator can freely decide what viewpoints to focus on in order to improve the evaluation items. The content of the questions can also be freely changed in accordance with changes to the content and number of major, medium, and minor items.

[0048] 2, the expectations and satisfaction levels are based on answers to questions based on the organization or service, i.e., the expectations and satisfaction levels are statistical values ​​calculated from answers collected from multiple users. Specifically, for example, the expectation and satisfaction of each small item are statistical values ​​such as the average or median of the expectation and satisfaction collected from a plurality of users. Furthermore, the expectation and satisfaction of a medium item may be expressed as a statistical value such as the average or median of the expectation and satisfaction of all the small items belonging to that medium item. Similarly, the expectation and satisfaction of a major category may be expressed as statistical values ​​such as the average or median of the expectation and satisfaction of all the sub-categories belonging to that major category.

[0049] <Relationship between questions and responses regarding expectations and satisfaction> According to an embodiment of the present invention, the questions with defined expectations or satisfaction levels are not directly asked to the user, i.e., the answers are not based on answers directly obtained by questions such as: Expectations: "Do you have high expectations for...?" (answer 1 to 5) Satisfaction: "Are you satisfied with ~?" (answer 1 to 5) In contrast, according to an embodiment of the present invention, the question is created by sending a prompt to the generation AI server to create a question for the member. Furthermore, the expectation and satisfaction are obtained from the answer to the question using a machine learning model and the generation AI server. This makes it possible to derive the expectation and satisfaction even if a variety of answers are obtained from a variety of questions.

[0050] <First aspect of the present invention> FIG. 3 is a graph display screen according to the first aspect of the present invention.

[0051] [Graph display section 11] The graph display unit 11 displays a graph on the display of the manager terminal 2, the graph having an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction. According to the graph in FIG. 3, a "normalization line" is drawn between the axis of expectation and the axis of satisfaction. The normalization line extends diagonally upward to the right from the reference point. When the range of expectation and the range of satisfaction are the same, the normalization line is a straight line connecting expectation = satisfaction. Of course, when the range of expectation and the range of satisfaction are different, by normalizing within a predetermined range, the straight line connecting expectation = satisfaction becomes the normalization line.

[0052] The positions of the plots in the graph in Figure 3 have the following meanings: (1) High expectations and high satisfaction: Users have high expectations of the organization or service and are actually highly satisfied with it (ideal positive items) (2) High Expectations, Low Satisfaction: Users have high expectations of the organization or service, but are dissatisfied because their expectations are not met (area for improvement) (3) Low Expectations, High Satisfaction: The user had low expectations of the organization or service, but was more satisfied than expected (unnecessarily good item) (4) Low Expectations and Low Satisfaction: Users have no expectations of the organization or service and are not satisfied with it (items that are not given attention) According to these views, it is preferable that the plots of all evaluation items are located as far as possible in the upper right corner (where expectations are high and satisfaction is also high).

[0053] According to the graph in Figure 3, evaluation items that are plotted diagonally below the normalization line to the right indicate high expectations but low satisfaction. In this case, there is a risk that employees will quit due to declining motivation, or that service members will withdraw due to dissatisfaction. In other words, managers need to identify items that need improvement from among the evaluation items. For example, in the case of the plot for the second period (t2) of the evaluation item "internal communication," there is a large deviation from the normalization line, and it is assumed that this is an item that needs improvement.

[0054] Also, according to the graph in Figure 3, the evaluation items plotted diagonally above the normalization line indicate high satisfaction despite low expectations. In this case, the organization or service may be providing excessive facilities and costs to users. In other words, managers need to identify wasteful items among the evaluation items. For example, in the case of the plot for the second period (t2) of the evaluation item "organizational culture," there is a large deviation from the normalization line, and it is assumed to be an item that deserves attention.

[0055] On the other hand, according to the graph in Figure 3, the evaluation items plotted near the normalization line have a small difference between expectation and satisfaction, which means that the situation is moderate between the organization or service and the user. In this case, the satisfaction level is in line with the expectation, and the manager can recognize this as an appropriate situation. For example, the plot for the second period (t2) of the evaluation item "work environment" is assumed to be in a good (moderate) state.

[0056] According to the first aspect of the present invention, each evaluation item is plotted for each period based on the expectation and satisfaction level, as in the graph of FIG. 3, and the plots are connected by arrows pointing in the direction of time. For each evaluation item, the graph display unit 11 connects the plots of the first expectation level and first satisfaction level in the first period with the plots of the second expectation level and second satisfaction level in the second period with arrows pointing over time. This allows the administrator to recognize the change over time in the level of expectation and satisfaction for each evaluation item.

[0057] [Improvement item selection section 12] The improvement item selection unit 12 selects an improvement item from among the multiple evaluation items based on the direction of the arrow.

[0058] FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing the direction of an arrow pointing from a first period to a second period.

[0059] Regarding the expectations and satisfaction levels collected in the first and second periods, engagement in the evaluation items can be broadly categorized into eight categories as follows: According to Figure 4, the expectation and satisfaction level for a given evaluation item in a first period (t1) are plotted on a graph. An arrow pointing to the second period (t2) is drawn based on the coordinate point. (Direction a) Upward: Expectations remain the same, but satisfaction is increasing. (Orientation b) Diagonally upward to the right: Expectations are rising and so is satisfaction. (Orientation c) Right landscape: Expectations increased, but satisfaction remained unchanged. (Orientation d) Diagonally downward to the right: Expectations are higher, but satisfaction is lower. (Direction e) Downward: Expectations remain the same, but satisfaction is decreasing. (Orientation f) Diagonally downward to the left: Expectations are lower and satisfaction is also lower. (Orientation g) Left landscape: Expectations are lower, but satisfaction remains the same. (Orientation h) Diagonally upward to the left: Expectations are lower, but satisfaction is higher.

[0060] Here, the improvement item selection unit 12 selects, as an improvement item, an "arrow with direction d" in which the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level. In this case, the improvement item selection unit 12 may select an arrow that is within a specified angle (for example, 45 degrees) from the central axis (axis of direction d), which indicates high expectation and low satisfaction, as an improvement item.

[0061] Furthermore, the improvement item selection unit 12 may select an improvement item from among a plurality of evaluation items based on the "length" of the arrow in addition to the direction of the arrow. Specifically, the improvement item selection unit 12 selects as improvement items evaluation items for which the length of an arrow in the "direction d" where the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level is a predetermined length or longer.

[0062] FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an optional functional configuration of the management device in the first aspect of the present invention.

[0063] According to Fig. 5, in addition to the functional components of Fig. 1, it further includes a user attribute database 102, a response database 103, a target user extraction unit 13, an item-specific response calculation unit 14, and an evaluation acquisition unit 15. These functional components may be realized by executing a program that causes a computer mounted on the device to function. The process flow of these functional components can also be understood as a method of displaying a graph.

[0064] [User Attribute Database 102] FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram of the user attribute database.

[0065] The user attribute database 102 accumulates attribute information for each user. For example, in the case of an organization such as a company, there are organizational attributes and / or personal attributes. According to Fig. 6, for each user ID (identifier), organizational attributes such as "department," "job title," "work location," and "years of employment" are recorded, while personal attributes such as "gender," "age," "educational background," and "family structure" are recorded. Departments include, for example, the sales department, development department, and general affairs department. Job titles may include, for example, department manager, section manager, group leader, no job title, personnel evaluation rank, and so on.

[0066] [Response Database 103] FIG. 7 is an explanatory diagram of the response database.

[0067] According to FIG. 7, the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item (eg, subitem) for each period are recorded for each user. For each period (for example, the first and second halves of the year), for example, regarding minor items based on major and medium items, a number of questions as shown in FIG. 2 described above are presented to the user, and answers to those questions are collected. Then, from the collected answers, the expectation level and the satisfaction level are derived for each evaluation item and / or each subitem and recorded in the answer database 103. The expectation level and the satisfaction level may be expressed as a numerical value from 1 to 5, for example. For example, multiple answers may be obtained from multiple questions regarding the major item "job content and environment," the medium item "job characteristics," and the small item "clarity of roles and responsibilities," and expectations and satisfaction levels are derived from those answers.

[0068] [Target user extraction part 13] The target user extraction unit 13 refers to the user attribute database 102 to extract only the expectation and satisfaction levels derived from only the target users having the "attribute information" specified by the administrator. For example, the target users may be "all employees." This allows you to select improvement items for all employees in the company. Also, for example, it is possible to extract "only employees with three years or less of service" as target users, or "only those with the title of section manager" as target users. The extracted target users (for example, IDs) are output to the item-specific answer calculation unit 14.

[0069] [Item-specific answer calculation section 14] FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram of the item-specific answer calculation unit.

[0070] The item-specific answer calculation unit 14 calculates the degree of expectation and the degree of satisfaction for each item from the degrees of expectation and the degree of satisfaction of the multiple target users extracted by the target user extraction unit 13. According to Fig. 8, a data group is created for only the target user to be accumulated in the statistical database 101 of Fig. 2. This allows the graph display unit 11 to plot only the expectation and satisfaction levels for multiple evaluation items in the hierarchy specified by the administrator.

[0071] [Evaluation Acquisition Department 15] FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram of the evaluation acquisition unit.

[0072] The evaluation acquisition unit 15 sends a “prompt” to the generation AI server 3 requesting further evaluation comments based on the expectation and satisfaction levels for the selected evaluation items or for all evaluation items. The evaluation acquisition unit 15 sends a prompt such as the following to the generation AI server 3. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Based on {company_profile}, Regarding the main item "Work content and environment" and the sub-item "Work characteristics" Clarity of roles and responsibilities:<Expectations><Satisfaction> Meaning of work:<Expectations><Satisfaction> Skills Utilization:<Expectations><Satisfaction> .................................................................................................................................... Please create your evaluation comment from here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- {company_profile}: Organization profile information

[0073] Then, the evaluation acquisition unit 15 receives the "evaluation comment" for the evaluation item from the generation AI server 3 and displays the evaluation comment. The evaluation comment is presented to the manager as an AI insight for encouraging the current situation and improvement.

[0074] [Generation AI Server 3] The generative artificial intelligence (AI) server 3 understands the context of a question and generates a sentence in natural language. Examples include ChatGPT (registered trademark) from OpenAI, Claude (registered trademark) from Anthropic, Gemini (registered trademark) from Google, and Llama (registered trademark) from Meta. These are pre-trained with general language knowledge from a large-scale text corpus. In addition, the generative AI server 3 can improve the accuracy of evaluation comments by repeating fine tuning.

[0075] <Second Invention> FIG. 10 is a graph display screen according to the second aspect of the present invention.

[0076] According to the second aspect of the present invention, the manager is allowed to intuitively visually recognize the strength of improvement items among the evaluation items. According to FIG. 10, the graph display unit 11 displays the first reference vertex, which is the highest expectation and lowest satisfaction level, in a first color, and then displays a gradation from the first color to a second color from the first reference vertex toward the normalization line between expectation and satisfaction levels. For example, you can use "red" as the first color and "white" as the second color. This allows you to intuitively see the strength of the improvement items, with stronger red indicating higher expectations and lower satisfaction.

[0077] It is also preferable that the graph display unit 11 displays the normalized line between expectation and satisfaction in a third color, and in a gradational manner that transitions from the third color to the second or fourth color from the normalized line toward the second reference vertex of the lowest expectation and highest satisfaction. For example, "blue" may be used as the third color and "white" as the second color. Of course, "yellow" may be used as the fourth color. This allows the user to intuitively see that the stronger the blue color of an evaluation item, the closer it is to the normalization line, and the closer the expectation level and satisfaction level are to each other.

[0078] The graph display unit 11 may assign a color to each plotted portion for each evaluation item. The "color" assigned to an evaluation item represents an evaluation level obtained from the expectation and satisfaction for that evaluation item. That is, when the evaluation items are displayed, they are displayed in their "colors." This allows the user to intuitively visually recognize the relationship between the values ​​of expectation and satisfaction level based on the color in which the evaluation items are displayed.

[0079] <The third aspect of the present invention> FIG. 11 is a functional configuration diagram of a management device according to the third aspect of the present invention.

[0080] According to the third aspect of the present invention, an evaluation index is calculated for each evaluation item, and improvement items are selected based on the evaluation index. According to Fig. 11, the management device 1 has an evaluation index calculation unit 16 in addition to the functional configuration units in Fig. 1. Accordingly, the functions of the graph display unit 11 and the improvement item selection unit 12 are also partially different. According to the third aspect of the present invention, the statistical database 101 may store the expectation and satisfaction levels in responses to a questionnaire conducted during at least one period.

[0081] [Evaluation Index Calculation Part 16] FIG. 12 is an explanatory diagram of the evaluation index calculation unit.

[0082] The evaluation index calculation unit 16 calculates an "evaluation index" based on the value obtained by dividing the "satisfaction level by the expectation level" or the "expectation level by the satisfaction level" for each evaluation item. Evaluation index = Satisfaction / Expectation or =Expectations / Satisfaction The evaluation index may be the division value of the expectation level and the satisfaction level, but is preferably a normalized value of the division value.

[0083] That is, according to the embodiment of the present invention, an evaluation index is not calculated based on the difference between the expectation level and the satisfaction level, but rather an evaluation index that is highly evaluated when the difference between the expectation level and the satisfaction level is small for each evaluation item is not calculated.

[0084] In the third embodiment of the present invention, the numerical range of the expectation level and the numerical range of the satisfaction level are explained as being the same as 1 to 5, but the numerical range of the expectation level and the numerical range of the satisfaction level may be different. In that case, the evaluation index calculation unit 16 normalizes the distribution range of the expectation level and the distribution range of the satisfaction level so that they are in the same numerical range.

[0085] According to the example of FIG. 12, if the numerical range of the expectation level and the numerical range of the satisfaction level are 1 to 5, the division value is as follows: <Expectation><Satisfaction> <Division> (Satisfaction / Expectations)(Satisfaction / Expectations) 5 1 1 / 5=0.20 5 / 1=5.00 5 2 2 / 5=0.40 5 / 2=2.50 5 3 3 / 5=0.60 5 / 3=1.66 5 4 4 / 5=0.80 5 / 4=1.25 5 5 5 / 5=1.00 5 / 5=1.00 4 1 1 / 4=0.25 4 / 1=4.00 4 2 2 / 4=0.50 4 / 2=2.00 4 3 3 / 4=0.75 4 / 3=1.33 4 4 4 / 4=1.00 4 / 4=1.00 4 5 5 / 4=1.25 4 / 5=0.80 .................................................................................................................................... 1 1 1 / 1=1.00 1 / 1=1.00 1 2 2 / 1=2.00 1 / 2=0.50 1 3 3 / 1=3.00 1 / 3=0.33 1 4 4 / 1=4.00 1 / 4=0.25 1 5 5 / 1=5.00 1 / 5=0.20

[0086] Also, according to FIG. 12, the evaluation index calculation unit 16 normalizes the distribution range of the divided values ​​so that the ranges above and below the median of 1.0 are the same, and determines the evaluation index for each evaluation item. Specifically, the distribution range of the evaluation index is normalized to a range from a minimum evaluation index of 20% to a maximum evaluation index of 180% (80% above and below the median of 100%).

[0087] If it is a quotient of satisfaction / expectation, normalize it as follows: <Satisfaction / Expectations> <Evaluation Index> 1 / 5=0.20 20% 2 / 5=0.40 40% 3 / 5=0.60 60% 4 / 5=0.80 80% 5 / 5=1.00 100% (median) 1 / 4=0.25 25% 2 / 4=0.50 50% 3 / 4=0.75 75% 4 / 4=1.00 100% (median) 5 / 4=1.25 110% .................................................................................................................................... 1 / 1=1.00 100% (median) 2 / 1=2.00 120% 3 / 1=3.00 140% 4 / 1=4.00 160% 5 / 1=5.00 180% According to this example, the division values ​​from 0.20 to 5.00 (median 1.00) fall within the evaluation index range of 20% to 180% (median 100%).

[0088] Also, if it is a division value of expectation / satisfaction, it is normalized as follows: <Expectations / Satisfaction> <Evaluation Index> 5 / 1=5.00 20% 5 / 2=2.50 40% 5 / 3=1.66 60% 5 / 4=1.25 80% 5 / 5=1.00 100% (median) 4 / 1=4.00 25% 4 / 2=2.00 50% 4 / 3=1.33 75% 4 / 4=1.00 100% (median) 4 / 5=0.80 110% .................................................................................................................................... 1 / 1=1.00 100% (median) 1 / 2=0.50 120% 1 / 3=0.33 140% 1 / 4=0.25 160% 1 / 5=0.20 180% According to this example, the divisor values ​​between 5.00 and 0.20 (median 1.00) fall within the evaluation index range of 20% to 180% (median 100%).

[0089] Here, the meaning of the evaluation index is as follows. (1) The closer to the lowest evaluation index of 20%, the higher the expectations and the lower the satisfaction level. In other words, it means that the evaluation item should be selected as an improvement item. (2) The closer to the median of 100%, the more appropriate the relationship between expectations and satisfaction is. In other words, it means that the item is in a good condition. (3) The closer to the highest evaluation index of 180%, the lower the expectations and the higher the satisfaction level. In other words, it means that the evaluation item is unnecessarily comprehensive.

[0090] [Improvement item selection section 12] The improvement item selection unit 12 in FIG. 11 selects an improvement item from among a plurality of evaluation items based on the evaluation index. The improvement item selection unit 12 selects the evaluation items to be improved in ascending order of evaluation index. In the case of non-normalized divided values, the improvement items are selected in the following order: -Sorted by lowest satisfaction / expectation quotient -Sorted by highest expectation / satisfaction ratio

[0091] The improvement item selection unit 12 may select as improvement items evaluation items whose numerical values ​​are outside a predetermined range from 100% (median 1.0) of the evaluation index. In this case, evaluation items whose evaluation index is relatively high will also be selected as improvement items. This will result in the extraction of evaluation items with unnecessarily high satisfaction levels.

[0092] FIG. 13 is a first screen of a graph display according to the third aspect of the present invention.

[0093] According to FIG. 13, the graph display unit 11 displays a graph on the display with the evaluation index as the axis, and plots each evaluation item based on the evaluation index. 13, the evaluation items are listed on the vertical axis, and the evaluation index for each evaluation item is on the horizontal axis. As described above, the evaluation index is within the range of 20% to 180%, for example.

[0094] As another embodiment of the third invention, a graph is displayed in which a color is set for the evaluation index for each evaluation item. Specifically, the graph display unit 11 sets the color for each evaluation item in a gradational manner from the lowest evaluation index to the first color, and from the lowest evaluation index to the median value, the first color changes to the second color. For example, "red" may be used as the first color and "white" as the second color. This allows the evaluation items with stronger red colors to be improved, making it possible to intuitively visually recognize the strength of the improvement items.

[0095] In addition, the graph display unit 11 sets the color of the evaluation index for each evaluation item in a gradational manner, with the median value of the evaluation index being the third color and transitioning from the third color to the second color or the fourth color from the median value toward the highest evaluation index. For example, "blue" may be used as the third color and "white" as the second color. Of course, "yellow" may be used as the fourth color. This allows the user to intuitively recognize that the stronger the blue color of an evaluation item, the better the item.

[0096] FIG. 14 is a second screen of the graph display in the third aspect of the present invention.

[0097] As another embodiment of the third invention, like the first invention, the expectation and satisfaction level may be accumulated for each evaluation item for a plurality of periods. In that case, the evaluation index calculation unit 16 calculates the evaluation index for each period. According to FIG. 14, the graph display unit 11 plots the evaluation index for each evaluation item for each period, and connects the plots with arrows pointing in the direction of time.

[0098] Then, the improvement item selection unit 12 selects, as an improvement item, an evaluation item whose arrow has a decreasing evaluation index and whose length (amount of displacement) is equal to or greater than a predetermined length. The length of the arrow may be the number of pixels in the extension direction, or may be in cm or mm.

[0099] FIG. 15 is an image showing intermediate items as evaluation items.

[0100] According to FIG. 15, the following items are displayed in a hierarchical manner: Major item [Work content and environment] ->Sub-item [Work characteristics] -> Sub-item [Clarity of roles and responsibilities] [Meaning of work] [Skill Utilization] [Opportunities for growth] Here, when a medium-level item is selected by the administrator, multiple small items belonging to that medium-level item are displayed. At this time, "expectation level," "satisfaction level," and "evaluation index (value index)" are displayed for each medium-level item and each small item. The evaluation index shown to the administrator does not include the difference between expectation level and satisfaction level, but displays a normalized value within a specified range (for example, 20% to 180%). The lower the evaluation index, the more it can be recognized that the evaluation item needs improvement. On the other hand, the higher the evaluation index, the more it can be recognized that the evaluation item is unnecessarily fulfilling.

[0101] <The fourth invention> According to the fourth aspect of the present invention, the management device 1 accumulates an evaluation index for each evaluation item based on the answers to a questionnaire given to users. That is, an evaluation index is accumulated for each user. The evaluation index here may be based on the divided value of the expectation and satisfaction levels as described above, or may be based on other answers.

[0102] FIG. 16 is a functional configuration diagram of a management device in the fourth aspect of the present invention.

[0103] 16, the management device 1 has a graph display unit 11 and an improvement item selection unit 12, similar to the above-mentioned FIG. 12. The evaluation index for each user input to the graph display unit 11 is derived by the answer database 103 and the evaluation index calculation unit 16.

[0104] [Graph display section 11] FIG. 17 shows a graph display screen in the fourth aspect of the present invention.

[0105] The graph display unit 11 in FIG. 17 displays a graph on which the evaluation index is plotted as an axis, similar to the above-described FIGS. 13 and 14. Here, while the third aspect of the present invention displays the evaluation indexes of multiple users for each evaluation item, the fourth aspect of the present invention displays the distribution range of the evaluation indexes of multiple users for each evaluation item.

[0106] Then, the graph display unit 11 connects the highest evaluation index and the lowest evaluation index with a "whiskers" within the distribution range of the evaluation index for each evaluation item. The whiskers allow the presence of a user with the highest evaluation index and a user with the lowest evaluation index to be visually recognized at a glance.

[0107] Furthermore, the graph display unit 11 displays the distribution range included in the predetermined deviation with the average value of the distribution range as a "box line". The predetermined deviation is preferably set to a value of ±1σ to ±2σ of the standard deviation, for example. Specifically, it may be set to a range that includes 75% of the standard deviation. The box line allows the distribution of the evaluation indexes of the user group that is included in the predetermined deviation from the average value to be visually recognized at a glance.

[0108] Furthermore, the graph display unit 11 displays a "mark" indicating the median of the distribution range of the evaluation index within the box line displayed for each evaluation item. When viewed from the median, it is immediately visible whether the box line or the whiskers are biased toward the high or low side of the evaluation index.

[0109] The response database 103 accumulates the expectation and satisfaction levels based on the responses to questionnaires given to each user for each evaluation item.

[0110] The evaluation index calculation unit 16 refers to the response database 103 and calculates an evaluation index for each user for each evaluation item. The evaluation index is based on the third aspect of the invention described above and is calculated for each user for each evaluation item. Then, the evaluation index calculation unit 16 normalizes the distribution range of these evaluation indexes so that the range above and below 100% (median 1.0) is the same. As a result, the evaluation index of each user for each evaluation item is input to the graph display unit 11.

[0111] The improvement item selection unit 12 refers to the graph of FIG. 15 displayed by the graph display unit 11, and selects improvement items from among a plurality of evaluation items. For the satisfaction / expectation division, the evaluation item based on the box line closest to the lowest evaluation index is selected as the improvement item. For the expectation / satisfaction division, the evaluation item based on the box line closest to the highest evaluation index is selected as the improvement item.

[0112] As described above in detail, according to the program, device and method of the first aspect of the present invention, improvement items can be selected according to the elapsed time from the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. Furthermore, according to the program, device, and method of the second aspect of the present invention, the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item can be displayed in a manner that allows the operator to easily visually recognize the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. Furthermore, according to the program, device and method of the third aspect of the present invention, an evaluation index that is easily understandable to an operator can be derived from the expectation and satisfaction level for each evaluation item. Furthermore, according to the program, device and method of the fourth invention, the distribution range of user answers for each evaluation item can be displayed in a manner that allows the operator to easily visually recognize it.

[0113] Regarding the various embodiments of the present invention described above, various changes, modifications, and omissions within the scope of the technical idea and perspective of the present invention can be easily made by those skilled in the art. The above description is merely an example and is not intended to be restrictive in any way. The present invention is limited only by the scope of the claims and their equivalents. [Explanation of symbols]

[0114] 1 Management device 101 Statistical Database 102 User Attribute Database 103 Answer Database 11 Graph display section 12 Improvement item selection section 13 Target user extraction section 14 Item-specific answer calculation section 15 Evaluation Department 16 Evaluation index calculation section 2. Administrator terminal 3. Generative AI Server

Claims

1. A program for causing a computer to function that accumulates, for each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to questionnaires given to users over a plurality of periods, a graph display means for displaying a graph having an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction on a display, plotting each evaluation item for each period based on the degree of expectation and the degree of satisfaction, and connecting the plot of the first degree of expectation and the first degree of satisfaction in a first period with the plot of the second degree of expectation and the second degree of satisfaction in a second period with an arrow pointing in the direction of time; an improvement item selection means for selecting, from among the plurality of evaluation items, an evaluation item having an arrow pointing in a direction such that the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level, as an improvement item; A program for causing a computer to function.

2. The evaluation items are hierarchically organized questionnaire items for multiple users belonging to an organization or a service, Expectations and satisfaction are based on responses to organization- or service-based questions; The graph display means plots only the expectations and satisfaction levels for a plurality of evaluation items in a hierarchy designated by the manager.

2. The program according to claim 1, which causes a computer to function as described above.

3. The improvement item selection means selects, as an improvement item, an arrow that is within a predetermined angle from a central axis of 45 degrees, which represents high expectation and low satisfaction.

2. The program according to claim 1, which causes a computer to function as described above.

4. The improvement item selection means selects an improvement item from among a plurality of evaluation items based on the length of the arrow in addition to the direction of the arrow.

2. The program according to claim 1, which causes a computer to function as described above.

5. The improvement item selection means selects, as an improvement item, an evaluation item whose arrow has a length equal to or greater than a predetermined length, the arrow being oriented in such a way that the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level.

5. The program according to claim 4, which causes a computer to function as described above.

6. The graph display means displays a first reference vertex of the highest expectation and the lowest satisfaction in a first color, and displays a gradation from the first color to a second color from the first reference vertex toward a normalized line between the expectation and satisfaction.

2. The program according to claim 1, which causes a computer to function as described above.

7. The graph display means displays a normalized line between the expectation level and the satisfaction level in a third color, and displays a gradation from the normalized line to the second or fourth color toward a second reference vertex of the lowest expectation level and the highest satisfaction level.

7. The program according to claim 6, which causes a computer to function as described above.

8. The graph display means assigns a color to each plotted portion for each evaluation item.

8. The program according to claim 6 or 7, which causes a computer to function as described above.

9. an evaluation acquisition means for transmitting a prompt for further evaluation comments based on the expectation and satisfaction level for the selected evaluation item to a generation AI (Artificial Intelligence) server, receiving the evaluation comments for the evaluation item from the generation AI server, and displaying the evaluation comments; 2. The program according to claim 1, further comprising:

10. a user attribute database that accumulates attribute information for each user; A target user extraction means for extracting only the expectation and satisfaction levels derived from only the target users having attribute information designated by an administrator; an item-specific answer calculation means for calculating the expectation and satisfaction level for each item from the expectations and satisfaction levels of the extracted multiple target users; 2. The program according to claim 1, further comprising:

11. In a management device that accumulates, for each evaluation item, expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to questionnaires given to users over a plurality of periods, a graph display means for displaying a graph having an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction on a display, plotting each evaluation item for each period based on the degree of expectation and the degree of satisfaction, and connecting the plot of the first degree of expectation and the first degree of satisfaction in a first period with the plot of the second degree of expectation and the second degree of satisfaction in a second period with an arrow pointing in the direction of time; an improvement item selection means for selecting, from among the plurality of evaluation items, an evaluation item having an arrow pointing in a direction such that the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level, as an improvement item; A management device comprising:

12. 1. A method for displaying a device that accumulates expectations and satisfaction levels based on responses to questionnaires given to users over a plurality of periods for each evaluation item, comprising: The device is a first step of displaying a graph having an axis of expectation and an axis of satisfaction on a display, plotting each evaluation item for each period based on the expectation and the satisfaction, and connecting the plot of the first expectation and the first satisfaction in the first period with the plot of the second expectation and the second satisfaction in the second period with an arrow pointing in the direction of time; a second step of selecting, from among the multiple evaluation items, an evaluation item having an arrow pointing in a direction such that the second expectation level is higher than the first expectation level and the second satisfaction level is lower than the first satisfaction level, as an improvement item; A method for displaying an apparatus, comprising:

Images