Selection of evaluators and evaluation methods and systems for comprehensive performance appraisal

Abstract

The present invention proposes a method and system for selecting and evaluating evaluators for all-round performance appraisal, the method comprising: obtaining relationship data between the employee being appraised and any other employee; calculating the intimacy value between the employee being appraised and other employees based on the relationship data; confirming the evaluator based on the intimacy value between the employee being appraised and other employees; pushing a questionnaire to the evaluator to evaluate the employee being appraised. The present invention calculates the intimacy value between employees through the relationship data between the employees; then selects the employee who evaluates the employee being appraised based on the intimacy value, pushes the questionnaire to the employee, and evaluates the employee based on the answers to the questionnaire. Since the selection of evaluators is based on intimacy, rather than random or artificial selection, the evaluators selected by the present invention are more objective and reasonable, overcoming the problem of omissions when selecting personnel.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of computer technology, and in particular to a method and system for selecting and evaluating evaluators for all-round performance appraisal. Background Art

[0002] A questionnaire, also known as a survey form or an inquiry form, is a printed document that systematically records the survey content in the form of questions or scores. Questionnaires can be in the form of tables, cards, or bookkeeping. Currently, the main way to collect survey questionnaires is in the form of online questionnaire surveys, which is a new form of questionnaire survey that has developed with the popularization of the Internet.

[0003] The online questionnaire survey system is a software system. Software technicians usually pre-code several sets of questionnaires for different types of surveys. Users do not need software programming skills to edit and generate online questionnaires, distribute questionnaires, and collect answers. The online questionnaire survey system is an ideal tool platform for enterprises to conduct questionnaire surveys and collect information by themselves.

[0004] At present, many companies conduct performance appraisals on their employees through this online questionnaire survey system. However, when evaluating the work performance of the people being appraised, the existing questionnaire survey method cannot objectively select to whom to distribute the questionnaires, which is prone to unreasonable situations and omissions, thereby reducing the rationality of the performance appraisal.

[0005] Therefore, an objective and reasonable method for selecting questionnaire evaluators is urgently needed. Summary of the invention

[0006] The present invention provides an evaluator selection and evaluation method and system for all-round performance evaluation, the main purpose of which is to objectively select personnel to evaluate the employees being evaluated, effectively avoiding unreasonable or missing phenomena when selecting evaluators.

[0007] To achieve the above objectives, in a first aspect, the present invention provides a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal, comprising:

[0008] S1. Obtaining relationship data between the employee being assessed and any other employee, wherein the relationship data includes one or more of communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data;

[0009] S2. Calculate the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and other employees based on the relationship data;

[0010] S3. Confirm the evaluator based on the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and other employees;

[0011] S4. Send the questionnaire to the evaluator to evaluate the employee being evaluated.

[0012] Preferably, the relationship data includes organizational relationship data, and at least one of communication relationship data and collaborative work relationship data; the organizational relationship is an administrative organizational relationship between employees, including more than one type, and the step before S2 includes:

[0013] The organizational relationship between the employee being assessed and any other employee is deduplicated according to priority to form a unique type of organizational relationship.

[0014] Preferably, each type of organizational relationship includes at least one evaluation employee.

[0015] Preferably, the communication relationship data includes the number of chat records and chat days generated between employees through communication tools.

[0016] Preferably, the collaborative relationship data is the number of business requirements coordinated between the employee being assessed and any other employee.

[0017] Preferably, the organizational relationship data includes the type of organizational relationship between employees and the duration of the relationship.

[0018] Preferably, it also includes:

[0019] Depending on whether the number of evaluators reaches the threshold, the evaluation results of evaluators of each organizational relationship type will be displayed to the pusher in a differentiated manner.

[0020] In addition, to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, in a second aspect, the present invention also provides an evaluator selection and evaluation system for all-round performance appraisal, comprising:

[0021] A relationship data module, used to obtain relationship data between the employee being assessed and any other employee; the relationship data includes one or more of communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data;

[0022] An intimacy calculation module, used to calculate the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and other employees based on the relationship data;

[0023] A personnel selection module is used to confirm the evaluator according to the intimacy value between the employee being evaluated and other employees;

[0024] The evaluation module is used to push the questionnaire to the evaluator to evaluate the employee being evaluated.

[0025] In addition, to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, in a third aspect, the present invention also provides a computer device, which includes a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions, and when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the processor executes the steps of the evaluator selection and evaluation method for comprehensive performance appraisal provided in the first aspect.

[0026] In addition, to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, in a fourth aspect, the present invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium includes a program for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal, and when the program for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal is executed by a processor, any step in the method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal as described above is implemented.

[0027] This embodiment proposes a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for all-round performance appraisal. The intimacy value between employees is calculated through the communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data between employees, so as to judge the intimacy between employees; then, employees who evaluate the employees being evaluated are selected based on the intimacy value, questionnaires are pushed to them, and they are evaluated based on the answers to the questionnaires. Since the selection of evaluators is based on the intimacy between each employee and the employee being evaluated, rather than randomly or manually selecting the evaluators, compared with the prior art, the evaluators selected in this embodiment are more objective and reasonable, and the problem of omissions in selecting personnel is overcome. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0028] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of an application environment of a preferred embodiment of an evaluator selection and evaluation method for all-round performance appraisal of the present invention;

[0029] Figure 2 A flowchart of a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for a comprehensive performance appraisal provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0030] Figure 3 A flowchart of a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for a comprehensive performance appraisal provided by another embodiment of the present invention;

[0031] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of the structure of an evaluator selection and evaluation system for all-round performance appraisal provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0032] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of the structure of a computer device provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0033] The realization of the purpose, functional features and advantages of the present invention will be further explained in conjunction with embodiments and with reference to the accompanying drawings. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0034] It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only used to explain the present invention, and are not used to limit the present invention.

[0035] The present invention provides a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal, which is applied to a computer device 1. Figure 1 As shown, it is a schematic diagram of the application environment of a preferred embodiment of the selection of evaluators and the evaluation method for comprehensive performance appraisal of the present invention.

[0036] When the method is implemented, the server executes the selection of evaluators and the evaluation method of the comprehensive performance appraisal. After selecting the employees who will evaluate the employees being evaluated, the server pushes the questionnaire to the client where each evaluating employee is located. After the employee fills out the questionnaire, it sends it to the server. The server calculates the score of the employee being evaluated based on the questionnaire, thereby evaluating the employee being evaluated.

[0037] It should be noted that the client includes but is not limited to various personal computers, laptops, smart phones, tablet computers and portable wearable devices. The server can be an independent server or a service cluster composed of multiple servers.

[0038] The embodiment of the present invention provides a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal, which is applied on the server side, such as Figure 2 As shown, the method includes:

[0039] This embodiment involves a comprehensive performance appraisal, in which the evaluators of the person being appraised include the superiors, subordinates, peers (peers) and business parties (collaborative partners) of the person being appraised, and the person being appraised is evaluated from a 360-degree perspective, so that the final evaluation result is more objective, comprehensive and credible.

[0040] S1. Obtaining relationship data between the employee being assessed and any other employee, wherein the relationship data includes one or more of communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data;

[0041] In the embodiment of the present invention, the relationship data between the assessed employee and each other employee is first obtained. Here, the other employees can be the superior, subordinate, peer, or business partner of the assessed employee who completes a certain task together with the assessed employee.

[0042] The relationship data may be communication relationship data, coordination relationship data, organizational relationship data, or a combination of any two or three of the communication relationship data, coordination relationship data, and organizational relationship data.

[0043] Specifically, the communication relationship data includes the number of chat records and chat days generated between employees through communication tools. Chat records can be one or more of pictures, texts, files, emoticons, audio, video, and red envelopes, all of which are recorded as one chat record separately; chat days, if two employees send messages to each other within each natural day, one chat day is recorded. Among them, the communication relationship data can be obtained from the chat software. The communication relationship data indicates the frequency of communication between the assessed employee and other employees. Through the communication relationship data, it can be seen whether the assessed employee communicates frequently with other employees. It is easy to understand that employees who communicate more have a deeper understanding of each other, and are more objective and reasonable when evaluating.

[0044] Organizational relationship data refers to the administrative organizational relationship between employees, including the organizational relationship type and the duration of the relationship. Organizational relationship refers to the administrative organizational relationship between employees, including more than one type, such as superior-subordinate relationship, peer relationship, and business party relationship.

[0045] Sometimes, there are two types of administrative organizational relationships between employees. For example, employee P is the superior of employee Q. In a certain month, employee Q is promoted to the same level as employee P. In that month, there will be two types of organizational relationships between employee P and employee Q. Therefore, preferably, when obtaining organizational relationship data between the employee being assessed and any other employee, it is necessary to clarify the only type of organizational relationship between the two.

[0046] Optionally, set priorities for organizational relationship types, remove duplicates according to the priorities, and form unique organizational relationships. For example, the organizational relationship types are prioritized from high to low as superior, subordinate, peer, and business partner relationships. In the above example, the relationship between employee P and employee Q is that employee P is the superior of employee Q.

[0047] The collaborative relationship data is the number of business requirements that are coordinated between the employee being assessed and any other employee. In this embodiment, the collaborative relationship data can be obtained from the company's internal ZenTao system, and the specific recording rules are: Since the execution of each individual requirement requires personnel including the person who raises the requirement, the person who creates the requirement, the person who develops the requirement, and the person who tests the requirement, assuming that the employee who raises the requirement is A, the employee who creates the requirement is B, the employee who develops the requirement is C, and the employee who tests the requirement is D, each time a requirement is completed, the number of requirements coordinated between employee A and employee B, employee B and employee C, and employee C and employee D is increased by 1, and the number of requirements coordinated between employees who do not cooperate with each other is not calculated. Since in the process of work coordination, the employees who cooperate with each other have a better understanding of each other's work ability, the evaluation answer is more real and objective through the evaluation of the employees who cooperate with the employee being assessed.

[0048] It should be noted that the communication relationship data, collaborative relationship data and organizational relationship data in the relationship data are automatically captured and calculated through internal work chat tools, development management tools and ERP management systems of the enterprise.

[0049] S2. Calculate the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and other employees based on the relationship data;

[0050] In an embodiment of the present invention, the intimacy value is used to measure the degree of intimacy between the assessed employee and each other employee. Since the relationship data includes communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data, the relationship between the assessed employee and each other employee is considered from various aspects, so that the calculated intimacy value also takes various aspects into consideration, which is more comprehensive and comprehensive.

[0051] Specifically, for any other employee, after obtaining the number of chats between the employee being assessed and the other employee, the number of chat days, the number of business needs completed with the employee being assessed, and the duration of the organizational relationship, the calculation formula for the intimacy between the employee being assessed and the other employee is as follows:

[0052] Q=M*0.01+T1*1+P*5+TX*0.01;

[0053] Among them, Q represents the intimacy value, M represents the number of chat records recorded by the chat software, T1 represents the number of chat days, P represents the number of business needs, and TX represents the duration of the employee organization relationship. It should be noted that the coefficients multiplied by the number of chat records M, the number of chat days T1, the number of business needs P, and the duration of the organizational relationship TX are the optimal coefficient values ​​obtained by testing based on multiple experimental data, and in other alternative embodiments, they can be set according to actual needs.

[0054] For example, within a natural month, the number of chats between employee A and employee B is 200, the number of chat days is 15, employee A has proposed 2 business requirements to employee B and has completed the 2 requirements, and the organizational relationship between employee A and employee B is a superior-subordinate relationship and lasts for 100 days.

[0055] The intimacy value between the two is Q=200*0.01+15*1+2*5+100*0.01=28, that is, the intimacy between employee A and employee B is 28.

[0056] S3. Confirm the evaluator based on the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and other employees;

[0057] In an embodiment, the employees being assessed are ranked from high to low according to the intimacy values ​​between the assessed employee and other employees, and at least one evaluator is selected from each type of organizational relationship.

[0058] Specifically, in this embodiment, according to the organizational relationship between the employee being assessed and other employees, all employees in each type of organizational relationship are sorted from high to low according to the intimacy value, and at least one employee is selected from each type of organizational relationship as an evaluator. For example, one evaluator is selected from the superiors of the employee being assessed, all employees are selected from the subordinates of the employee being assessed as evaluators, three evaluators are selected from the same level of the employee being assessed, and three evaluators are selected from the business party relationship of the employee being assessed, and all the selected persons are the evaluators of the employee being assessed.

[0059] It should be noted that for employees with a subordinate organizational relationship, only employees with direct subordinate relationships are selected, and subordinates at the next level are excluded.

[0060] Furthermore, if the organizational relationship is a business party relationship, the evaluation relationship is selected as one-way, that is, among the employees who cooperate with each other, only the business party can serve as the evaluator. The specific business party determination rules are: when completing a business requirement, the employee who proposes the requirement is the business party of the employee who creates the requirement, the employee who creates the requirement is the business party of the employee who develops the requirement, and the employee who develops the requirement is the business party of the employee who tests the requirement.

[0061] This embodiment covers various types of organizational relationship personnel when selecting evaluators, thereby making the evaluation of the assessed personnel more comprehensive.

[0062] S4. Send the questionnaire to the evaluator to evaluate the employee being evaluated.

[0063] In this embodiment, the questionnaire is sent to the screened evaluators, so that the evaluation of the employee being evaluated is obtained after comprehensive analysis based on the survey results of the questionnaire.

[0064] In specific implementation, the questionnaire can be evaluated from multiple dimensions, such as dedication, professional ability, communication and collaboration, work efficiency, management ability, etc. After all the employees have been evaluated, the average score can be calculated for each relationship type according to different evaluation dimensions, and then the comprehensive score of the person being evaluated can be calculated according to the weight of different relationship types.

[0065] For example, the weights of the evaluation dimensions can be set as follows: dedication is 30%, professional ability is 20%, communication and collaboration is 10%, work efficiency is 20%, and management ability is 20%;

[0066] The weight values ​​of the organizational relationship type can be set as follows: 40% for superiors, 10% for subordinates, 20% for peers, and 30% for business parties.

[0067] The calculation formula for the employee's dedication and devotion ability is as follows:

[0068] JY = [(sum of superiors’ scores / number of superiors who score)*40%+(sum of subordinates’ scores / number of subordinates who score)*10%+(sum of peers’ scores / number of peers who score)*20%+(sum of business parties’ scores / number of business parties who score)*30%]*30%.

[0069] The calculation method for other evaluation dimensions is the same. The final score is the sum of the values ​​calculated for all evaluation dimensions. Here, only the dedication and devotion evaluation dimension is used as an example.

[0070] This embodiment proposes a method for selecting and evaluating evaluators for all-round performance appraisal. The intimacy value between employees is calculated through the communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data between employees, so as to judge the intimacy between employees; then, employees who evaluate the employees being evaluated are selected based on the intimacy value, questionnaires are pushed to them, and they are evaluated based on the answers to the questionnaires. Since the selection of evaluators is based on the intimacy between each employee and the employee being evaluated, and the selection of evaluators is not random, compared with the prior art, the evaluators selected in this embodiment are more objective and reasonable, and the problem of omissions in selecting personnel is overcome.

[0071] Based on the above embodiment, in another embodiment, Figure 3 As shown, the method also includes:

[0072] S5. Based on whether the number of evaluators reaches the threshold, the evaluation results of the evaluators of each organizational relationship type are displayed to the pusher in a differentiated manner.

[0073] Specifically, a threshold for the number of evaluators is set. If the total number of evaluators is greater than the threshold, the evaluation results of the organizational relationship types of peers and business parties are displayed to the pusher of the questionnaire, while the evaluation results of the organizational relationship types of superiors and subordinates are kept encrypted and not displayed to the pusher; if the total number of evaluators is less than the threshold, the evaluation results of each organizational relationship type of the corresponding assessed personnel are not displayed to the pusher. In this way, it can be prevented that the pusher of the questionnaire can infer the evaluation results of each organizational relationship type based on the displayed evaluation results.

[0074] When employees receive the evaluation questionnaire issued by the questionnaire system and answer it, the evaluation score data is encrypted and stored in the database to ensure data security.

[0075] In summary, the embodiment of the present invention uses the chat data between employees recorded by the internal chat software of the enterprise, the data of the personnel work cooperation relationship recorded by the enterprise software development management tool (ZenTao, etc.), and the personnel organization relationship data recorded in the company's ERP management system to calculate the closeness of the relationship between any two employees (hereinafter referred to as employee intimacy) through a certain algorithm, sort the intimacy, and select the people with high intimacy as the participating evaluators of the comprehensive performance appraisal to conduct performance appraisal on the employees being appraised, and divide different personnel relationships into four types of relationships according to the relationship with the appraised person: superior, subordinate, peer and business party, and evaluate them from five dimensions of dedication, professional ability, communication and collaboration, work efficiency and management ability, respectively. The five dimensions are respectively divided into five levels of very poor, unqualified, qualified, excellent and very excellent. In order to distinguish the pros and cons during the evaluation, the participating evaluators are set to 5-20 people for evaluation, and the maximum or minimum proportion of each level is set, and different weights are set for each dimension, and the sum of all weights is 100%. When all the participating evaluators have finished answering, the score of each relationship type is calculated according to the weight of different relationship types, and then the comprehensive score of the appraised person is calculated according to the weight of different dimensions.

[0076] The embodiment of the present invention provides a system for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal, such as Figure 4 As shown, the system includes a relationship data module 610, an intimacy calculation module 620, a personnel selection module 630 and an evaluation module 640, wherein:

[0077] The relationship data module 610 is used to obtain the relationship data between the employee being assessed and any other employee; the relationship data includes one or more of communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data;

[0078] The intimacy calculation module 620 is used to calculate the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and other employees based on the relationship data;

[0079] The personnel selection module 630 is used to confirm the evaluation personnel according to the intimacy values ​​between the employee being evaluated and other employees;

[0080] The evaluation module 640 is used to push the questionnaire to the evaluator to evaluate the employee being evaluated.

[0081] This embodiment is a system embodiment corresponding to the above method, and its specific implementation process is consistent with the above method. For details, please refer to the above embodiment, and this embodiment will not be repeated here.

[0082] Each module in the above-mentioned all-round performance appraisal evaluator selection and evaluation system can be implemented in whole or in part through software, hardware and their combination. The above-mentioned modules can be embedded in or independent of the processor in the computer device in the form of hardware, or can be stored in the memory of the computer device in the form of software, so that the processor can call and execute the corresponding operations of each of the above modules.

[0083] In one embodiment, a computer device is provided. The computer device may be a server, and its internal structure diagram may be as follows: Figure 5 As shown. The computer device includes a processor, a memory, a network interface and a database connected through a system bus. Among them, the processor of the computer device is used to provide computing and control capabilities. The memory of the computer device includes a computer storage medium and an internal memory. The computer storage medium stores an operating system, a computer program and a database. The internal memory provides an environment for the operation of the operating system and the computer program in the computer storage medium. The database of the computer device is used to store data generated or obtained during the selection of evaluators and the evaluation method for performing a comprehensive performance appraisal. The network interface of the computer device is used to communicate with an external terminal through a network connection. When the computer program is executed by the processor, a selection of evaluators and an evaluation method for a comprehensive performance appraisal is implemented.

[0084] In one embodiment, a computer device is provided, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the computer program, the steps of selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal in the above-mentioned embodiment are implemented, for example: Figure 2 Steps S1-S4 shown, or Figure 3 Alternatively, when the processor executes the computer program, the functions of each module / unit in the embodiment of the system for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal are realized, for example Figure 4 The functions of the modules / units shown are not described here in detail to avoid repetition.

[0085] In one embodiment, a computer storage medium is provided, on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of selecting and evaluating evaluators for the comprehensive performance appraisal in the above embodiment are implemented, such as Figure 2 Steps S1-S4 shown, or Figure 3 Alternatively, when the computer program is executed by a processor, the functions of each module / unit in the embodiment of the above-mentioned system for selecting and evaluating evaluators for comprehensive performance appraisal are realized, for example Figure 4 The functions of the modules / units shown are not described here in detail to avoid repetition.

[0086] Those skilled in the art can understand that all or part of the processes in the above-mentioned embodiment methods can be completed by instructing the relevant hardware through a computer program, and the computer program can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium. When the computer program is executed, it can include the processes of the embodiments of the above-mentioned methods. Among them, any reference to memory, storage, database or other media used in the embodiments provided in this application can include non-volatile and / or volatile memory. Non-volatile memory can include read-only memory (ROM), programmable ROM (PROM), electrically programmable ROM (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable ROM (EEPROM) or flash memory. Volatile memory can include random access memory (RAM) or external cache memory. As an illustration and not limitation, RAM is available in many forms, such as static RAM (SRAM), dynamic RAM (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), double data rate SDRAM (DDRSDRAM), enhanced SDRAM (ESDRAM), synchronous link (Synchlink) DRAM (SLDRAM), memory bus (Rambus) direct RAM (RDRAM), direct memory bus dynamic RAM (DRDRAM), and memory bus dynamic RAM (RDRAM).

[0087] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that for the convenience and simplicity of description, only the division of the above-mentioned functional units and modules is used as an example. In actual applications, the above-mentioned functions can be distributed and completed by different functional units and modules as needed, that is, the internal structure of the device can be divided into different functional units or modules to complete all or part of the functions described above.

[0088] It should be noted that, in this article, the terms "include", "comprises" or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that a process, device, article or method including a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also includes other elements not explicitly listed, or also includes elements inherent to such process, device, article or method. In the absence of further restrictions, an element defined by the sentence "comprises a ..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, device, article or method including the element.

[0089] The serial numbers of the above embodiments of the present invention are only for description and do not represent the advantages and disadvantages of the embodiments. Through the description of the above implementation modes, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that the above embodiment methods can be implemented by means of software plus a necessary general hardware platform, and of course, by hardware, but in many cases the former is a better implementation mode. Based on such an understanding, the technical solution of the present invention, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product, which is stored in a storage medium (such as ROM / RAM, magnetic disk, optical disk) as described above, and includes a number of instructions for enabling a terminal device (which can be a mobile phone, a computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in each embodiment of the present invention.

[0090] The above are only preferred embodiments of the present invention, and are not intended to limit the patent scope of the present invention. Any equivalent structure or equivalent process transformation made using the contents of the present invention specification and drawings, or directly or indirectly applied in other related technical fields, are also included in the patent protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A comprehensive performance evaluation method, applied to the server, characterized in that: include: S1. Obtain the relationship data between the employee being assessed and other employees sent by the client, wherein the relationship data includes communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data. The communication relationship data includes the number of chat records and chat days generated between employees through communication tools. The collaborative relationship data is the number of business needs coordinated between the employee being assessed and any other employee. The organizational relationship data includes the type of organizational relationship between employees and the duration of the relationship. S2. Calculate the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and the other employees based on the relationship data. The intimacy value is calculated as follows: Q=M*0.01+T1*1+P*5+TX*0.01, where Q represents the intimacy value, M represents the number of chat records recorded by the chat software, T1 represents the number of chat days, P represents the number of business needs, and TX represents the duration of the employee organization relationship; S3. Confirm an evaluator based on the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and the other employees, and send the evaluator to the client; S4, pushing the questionnaire to the evaluator on the client to evaluate the employee being assessed; The organizational relationship described is the administrative organizational relationship between employees, including more than one type; The step S2 includes: The organizational relationships between the employee being assessed and the other employees are deduplicated according to priority to form a unique type of organizational relationship.

2. The evaluation method for comprehensive performance appraisal according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Each type of organizational relationship includes at least one evaluator employee.

3. The evaluation method for comprehensive performance appraisal according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Also includes: Depending on whether the number of evaluators reaches the threshold, the evaluation results of evaluators of each organizational relationship type will be displayed to the pusher in a differentiated manner.

4. An all-round performance evaluation system, applied to the server, characterized in that: include: Relationship data module, used to obtain the relationship data between the employee being assessed and any other employees sent by the client; The relationship data includes one or more of communication relationship data, collaborative work relationship data and organizational relationship data. The communication relationship data includes the number of chat records and chat days generated between employees through communication tools. The collaborative relationship data is the number of business needs coordinated between the employee being assessed and any other employee. The organizational relationship data includes the type of organizational relationship between employees and the duration of the relationship. The organizational relationship is the administrative organizational relationship between employees, including more than one type. The intimacy calculation module is used to remove duplicates of the organizational relationships between the employee being assessed and the other employees according to the priority to form a unique type of organizational relationship, and calculate the intimacy value between the employee being assessed and the other employees based on the relationship data. The calculation method of the intimacy value is as follows: Q=M*0.01+T1*1+P*5+TX*0.01, where Q represents the intimacy value, M represents the number of chat records recorded by the chat software, T1 represents the number of chat days, P represents the number of business needs, and TX represents the duration of the employee organization relationship; A personnel selection module is used to confirm the evaluator according to the intimacy value between the employee being evaluated and other employees, and send the evaluator to the client; The evaluation module is used to push the questionnaire to the evaluator on the client to evaluate the employee.

5. A computer device, characterized in that: It comprises a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions, and when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the processor executes the steps of the evaluation method of comprehensive performance appraisal as described in any one of claims 1 to 3.

6. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The computer-readable storage medium includes an evaluator selection and evaluation program for comprehensive performance appraisal. When the evaluator selection and evaluation program for comprehensive performance appraisal is executed by a processor, the steps of the comprehensive performance appraisal evaluation method as described in any one of claims 1 to 3 are implemented.

Images