Assessment system

Abstract

An evaluation system (1) is provided with: a questionnaire generation unit (21) that generates a questionnaire for evaluating a plurality of evaluation items; a questionnaire result analysis unit (23) that analyzes answers to the questionnaire and determines the score of the evaluation item; and an analysis result display control unit (24) that displays an analysis result on the display (4), the analysis result display control unit (24) being configured so as to display the analysis result using a Wien map (8) displayed so that regions indicating the evaluation items overlap each other, and an evaluation mark (84) displayed on the Wien map (8). The analysis result display control unit (24) sets the display position of the evaluation mark (84) within the region of the evaluation item having the lowest or highest score, and the higher the lowest score among all the evaluation items, the farther the display position from the overlap center (O) at which all the regions in the Wien map (8) overlap each other.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to an assessment system. Background Art

[0002] In recent years, as a countermeasure against new viruses (such as coronaviruses), there has been a demand for evaluating and continuously improving the infection countermeasures of stores and public facilities, and a need for an evaluation system that evaluates and analyzes the infection countermeasures. As such an evaluation system, a system that conducts a questionnaire to managers and employees of stores, etc., and evaluates predetermined evaluation items such as closed, crowded, and close contact based on the answers to the questionnaire can be considered.

[0003] In addition, as prior art document information related to the invention of the present application, there is Patent Document 1, for example.

[0004] Prior art literature

[0005] Patent Literature

[0006] Patent Document 1: Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2022-030242 Summary of the invention

[0007] Problem that the invention aims to solve

[0008] In the above-mentioned evaluation system, it is of course required that the evaluation results be presented more clearly to the respondents of the questionnaire, and that the areas that should be improved be presented more clearly.

[0009] Therefore, an object of the present invention is to provide a rating system that can present evaluation results and improvement points more clearly.

[0010] Solutions for solving problems

[0011] An evaluation system according to one embodiment of the present invention comprises: a questionnaire generating unit, which generates a questionnaire for evaluating a plurality of evaluation items; a questionnaire display control unit, which displays the questionnaire generated by the questionnaire generating unit on a display; an input device, which is used to input answers to the questionnaire; a questionnaire result analyzing unit, which analyzes the answers to the questionnaire input by the input device to determine the scores of the evaluation items; and an analysis result display control unit, which displays the analysis results of the questionnaire result analyzing unit on the display, the analysis result display control unit being configured to display the analysis results using a Venn diagram in which areas representing the evaluation items overlap with each other, and an evaluation mark displayed in the Venn diagram, the analysis result display control unit setting the display position of the evaluation mark within the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest or highest score, and the higher the lowest score among all the evaluation items, the farther the display position is from the overlapping center where all the areas in the Venn diagram overlap with each other.

[0012] Effects of the Invention

[0013] According to the present invention, it is possible to provide a rating system that can present evaluation results and improvement points more clearly. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0014] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an evaluation system according to one embodiment of the present invention.

[0015] Figure 2 This is a diagram showing an example of a questionnaire database.

[0016] Figure 3A This is a diagram showing an example of a questionnaire display screen.

[0017] Figure 3B This is a diagram showing an example of a questionnaire display screen.

[0018] Figure 4 This is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation table.

[0019] Figure 5 It is a diagram showing an example of an analysis result display screen.

[0020] Figure 6 This is a diagram for explaining an example of the display position of the evaluation mark in the Venn diagram.

[0021] Figure 7 is a flowchart showing the control flow of the assessment system.

[0022] Figure 8 This is a flowchart of the analysis result display process.

[0023] Fig. 9 This is a diagram for explaining a modification of the display position of the evaluation mark in the Venn diagram. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0024] [Implementation Method]

[0025] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0026] (Schematic Structure of Evaluation System 1)

[0027] Figure 1 1 is a schematic diagram of an assessment system 1 according to the present embodiment. The assessment system 1 is a system for evaluating infection countermeasures of, for example, stores and public facilities, and is a system for evaluating predetermined assessment items based on the answers of respondents to a questionnaire.

[0028] like Figure 1 As shown, the assessment system 1 includes a control unit 2, a storage unit 3, a display 4 and an input device 5. The assessment system 1 is composed of a portable terminal device such as a smart phone, a tablet computer or a laptop computer. In addition, the functions of each part of the control unit 2 and the storage unit 3 can also be mounted on a server, etc., and can also be configured so that the server and the terminal device such as a smart phone can communicate with each other. In other words, at least the display 4 and the input device 5 are composed of a portable terminal device. As a result, the respondent can easily answer the questionnaire when he or she has free time, and it is easy to continue to use the assessment system 1. In addition, the assessment system 1 may not be a portable terminal device, for example, it may be composed of a fixed personal computer.

[0029] The control unit 2 is realized by appropriately combining computing elements such as a CPU, a memory, an interface, software, a storage device, etc. In this embodiment, the control unit 2 includes a questionnaire generating unit 21, a questionnaire display control unit 22, a questionnaire result analyzing unit 23, and an analysis result display control unit 24. The details of each unit will be described later.

[0030] The storage unit 3 is implemented by a predetermined storage area of ​​a memory or storage device. The display 4 is used to display the questionnaire and the evaluation results, and is composed of a display device such as a liquid crystal display. The input device 5 is a device for inputting answers to the questionnaire. In the case where the assessment system 1 is a smart phone or a tablet computer, the display 4 can be composed of a touch panel display, and the display 4 is set to also serve as the input device 5. In addition, in the case where the assessment system 1 is a laptop computer, the input device 5 can be, for example, a keyboard, a mouse, a touch pad, etc.

[0031] (About the evaluation items)

[0032] In this embodiment, infection countermeasures are evaluated. Therefore, here, the evaluation is performed on three evaluation items (the so-called three closes): "closed", "dense", and "close contact". In addition, the evaluation object is not limited to infection countermeasures, and the evaluation items can also be appropriately set. However, although the details will be described later, in this embodiment, in order to display the evaluation results through a Venn diagram, the evaluation items need to be set to multiple, and preferably to 2 or 3.

[0033] (Control Unit 2)

[0034] (Questionnaire Generating Unit 21)

[0035] The questionnaire generation unit 21 performs a questionnaire generation process to generate a questionnaire for evaluating a predetermined evaluation item. In the questionnaire generation process, the questionnaire is generated based on the questionnaire database 31 pre-stored in the storage unit 3. In the present embodiment, the questionnaire database 31 is set with a plurality of questions for one evaluation item, and a plurality of variations are set for each question. Furthermore, the questionnaire generation unit 21 is configured to randomly extract each question from a plurality of variations based on the questionnaire database 31 to generate a questionnaire.

[0036] Figure 2 FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of the questionnaire database 31. Figure 2 In FIG. 3 , a questionnaire database 31 for accommodation facilities such as hotels is shown as an example. Figure 2 As shown, the questionnaire database 31 is set with questions about three evaluation items (i.e., "enclosed", "dense" and "close contact") for each place that becomes the evaluation object. In the illustrated example, a large question (or title) and corresponding small questions (or inspection items) are set. In addition, in the illustrated example, three variants are set for the large question, and two variants are set for each small question. In addition, the number of variants is not limited to the illustrated example and can be set appropriately. The questionnaire generation unit 21 uses a random number table (i.e., a random number generation function) and the like to repeatedly make random selections about which variant to use for each large question and each small question to generate a questionnaire. In this way, it is possible to avoid a situation where the respondent has to repeatedly answer exactly the same questions every time the questionnaire is conducted, and the so-called stereotyped nature can be suppressed.

[0037] The questionnaire generation unit 21 can randomly determine the order of questions. For example, the above-mentioned large questions can always be set to the same order, and the order of small questions can be set to random. In addition, of course, the order of large questions can also be set to random. Thus, the above-mentioned stereotyped can be further suppressed.

[0038] Although the details will be described later, in this embodiment, each evaluation item is evaluated with 5 levels (that is, 5 points is the full score). Therefore, the questionnaire generation unit 21 can be configured to set at least 5 questions (or small questions) for each evaluation item. In this embodiment, accommodation facilities such as hotels are used as evaluation objects. Since there are multiple places that become evaluation objects, the questionnaire generation unit 21 is configured to set 5 questions for each evaluation item (here, "enclosed", "dense" and "close contact") for each place.

[0039] In addition, in the present embodiment, the questionnaire generation unit 21 is configured to generate a questionnaire including questions for answering the low-evaluation items with the lowest evaluation (subjective evaluation) of the respondents among the evaluation items (here, "closed", "dense", and "closely connected"). This is to use the low-evaluation items as the answers to the questions for displaying the evaluation results using the Venn diagram described later. The details of this will be described later.

[0040] (Questionnaire display control unit 22)

[0041] The questionnaire display control unit 22 performs questionnaire display processing to display the questionnaire generated by the questionnaire generation unit 21 on the display 4. Figure 2 When both the large question and the small question are selected in the first variant, the questionnaire display screen 6 becomes as follows: Figure 3A The respondent inputs answers to the questionnaire through the input device 5 (a touch panel display in the example shown in the figure) while viewing the questionnaire display screen 6. The input answers to the questionnaire are stored in the storage unit 3 as questionnaire answer data 32.

[0042] The questionnaire display control unit 22 may be configured to display the questionnaire based on the questionnaire answer data 32 in a state where answers have been input to the questions that have been answered. Figure 3B As shown in the figure, when the second small question has been answered, the questionnaire display screen 6 can also be displayed in a state where the answer stored in the questionnaire answer data 32 has been input as the answer to the question. In addition, since there may be a case where the answer changes, it is desirable to display a change button 6a that can change the answer so that the answer can be changed. In this way, the time for inputting the questions that have been answered can be saved, and the time of the respondent can be saved, making the questionnaire input time (i.e., the constraint time for inputting the questionnaire) shorter.

[0043] In addition, the questionnaire display control unit 22 can also be configured to not display questions that have been answered. However, since it is conceivable that the respondent may change, or that the answers to questions that have been answered may change if a period of time has passed since the last questionnaire, it is desirable to take some countermeasures, such as configuring the questionnaire to require the respondent to be input, and not omitting questions when the respondent has changed from the last questionnaire.

[0044] (Questionnaire result analysis unit 23)

[0045] The questionnaire result analysis unit 23 performs questionnaire result analysis processing, analyzes the answers to the questionnaire inputted by the input device 5, and determines the score of each evaluation item. In the present embodiment, the score of each evaluation item is evaluated in 5 levels. For example, the score of each evaluation item is determined for each place, such as "enclosed" of the entrance is 4 points, "dense" is 4 points, and "close contact" is 4 points.

[0046] In the present embodiment, the questionnaire result parsing unit 23 determines the score of each evaluation item by taking into account the subjective evaluation of the respondent. More specifically, the questionnaire generating unit 21 generates a questionnaire in a manner that includes questions for answering the respondent's subjective evaluation level for each evaluation item, and in the questionnaire result parsing unit 23, the score of each evaluation item is determined based on the answers to the questionnaire on the evaluation item and the evaluation level of the evaluation item. Here, it is assumed that the respondent's subjective evaluation level is input in 5 levels in the questionnaire, and it is assumed that the number of good answers to the 5-question questionnaire (i.e., the number of answers judged to be good for the evaluation item) is used as the basis. Figure 4 The score of each evaluation item is determined using the evaluation table 33 shown in FIG. 33. For example, regarding the "sealing" of the entrance, if the subjective evaluation level of the respondent is 3 and the number of good answers in the questionnaire is 4, the score of each evaluation item is determined according to the table 33. Figure 4 The evaluation table 33 has a score of 4 points for the evaluation item. The evaluation table 33 can be set in advance and stored in the storage unit 3. The score of each evaluation item for each location obtained by the questionnaire result analysis unit 23 is stored in the storage unit 3 as analysis data 34.

[0047] (Analysis result display control unit 24)

[0048] The analysis result display control unit 24 performs analysis result display processing to display the analysis result of the questionnaire result analysis unit 23 on the display 4. In the present embodiment, the analysis result display control unit 24 displays the individual evaluation of each location (i.e., analysis result) using a radar chart, and displays the overall evaluation (i.e., analysis result) using a Venn diagram.

[0049] Figure 5 is a diagram showing an example of the analysis result display screen 7. In addition, Figure 5 The analysis result display screen 7 is only an example, and its layout, display items, etc. are not limited to the example shown in the figure. Figure 5 As shown, the analysis result display screen 7 is generally divided into three areas: an overall survey result area 71, a general evaluation area 72, and a result and suggestion area 73. The overall survey result area 71 is an area that displays the analysis result (i.e., evaluation result) of the facility as a whole taking into account the evaluation of each location. Here, the average of the scores of each evaluation item in all locations is regarded as the score of each evaluation item of the facility as a whole. The details of the display of the overall survey result area 71 will be described later.

[0050] The overall review area 72 is an area for displaying the overall review based on the scores of each evaluation item of the overall facility. There is no particular limitation on the method for displaying the content of the overall review. For example, the review content of the overall review for the scores of each evaluation item of the overall facility can be stored in a database in advance in the storage unit 3. Based on the database, the control unit 2 extracts the review content of the overall review corresponding to the scores of each evaluation item of the overall facility and displays it in the overall review area 72.

[0051] The result and suggestion area 73 is an area showing the score and comments of each evaluation item for each place to be evaluated (e.g., entrance, dining area, guest seats, backyard, etc.). In this embodiment, the score of each evaluation item for each place is displayed as a radar chart in the result and suggestion area 73. The comments in the result and suggestion area 73 can be displayed in the same way as the above-mentioned overall evaluation, for example.

[0052] (Details of the display in the overall survey result area 71)

[0053] Figure 6 This is the Venn diagram showing the overall survey results area 71. Figure 8 FIG. 8 is a diagram for explaining the display position of the evaluation mark 84 in FIG. Figure 6 As shown in the present embodiment, the analysis result of the entire facility is displayed using a Venn diagram in which regions 81 to 83 representing each evaluation item are overlapped with each other. Figure 8 , and shown in Venn Figure 8 The evaluation mark 84 in the diagram is displayed. The regions 81 to 83 representing the evaluation items are represented by circles of the same diameter, and are arranged at positions that are 120° rotationally symmetrical with respect to the overlap center O. The overlap center O is the position where all the regions 81 to 83 overlap with each other and is the position where the regions 81 to 83 are rotationally symmetrical. Figure 8In Venn, you need to set multiple evaluation items. Figure 8 If there are too many evaluation items, it will be difficult to display all the areas overlapping each other. Therefore, although the number of evaluation items can be set to more than 4, it is more desirable to set it to 2 or 3. Figure 6 In the figure, the three evaluation items of "closed", "dense" and "close contact" are shown. Figure 8 The area in which denoted as closed is referred to as a closed area 81 , the area in which denoted as dense is referred to as a dense area 82 , and the area in which denoted as close contact is referred to as a close contact area 83 .

[0054] In this embodiment, by showing the Figure 8 By looking at the position of the evaluation mark 84 on the screen, the evaluation item that is desired to be improved can be understood. The position of the evaluation mark 84 is determined by the score of each evaluation item. In addition, the score of the evaluation item of the entire facility can be the average value of the same evaluation item of each location.

[0055] In this embodiment, the analysis result display control unit 24 sets the display position of the evaluation mark 84 to the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest score, and the higher the lowest score among all the evaluation items, the closer to the Venn diagram. Figure 8 The farther the position of the evaluation mark 84 is from the overlapping center O, the more the evaluation item should be improved. Therefore, the position of the evaluation mark 84 indicates the evaluation item that should be improved, and the improvement point becomes easy to understand. Moreover, according to how far the position of the evaluation mark 84 is from the overlapping center O, the comprehensive evaluation of the evaluation item can be confirmed at a glance.

[0056] In addition, when the scores of all evaluation items are the same, the analysis result display control unit 24 displays the evaluation mark 84 in the area of ​​the low-evaluation item input in the questionnaire (i.e., the item that the respondent subjectively rated low). It can be imagined that the items that the respondent subjectively rated low are mostly due to factors that cannot be evaluated by the questionnaire alone and are expected to be improved. Therefore, by displaying the evaluation mark 84 on the low-evaluation item that the respondent subjectively rated low, the improvement point is clearly displayed, which can promote further infection countermeasures, etc.

[0057] In more detail, Figure 6 As shown in the upper part of , set imaginary circles A to C with the overlapping center O as the center. Circle A has the smallest diameter, and circle C has the largest diameter and is Wien Figure 8 The circumscribed circle of circle A is circle B, and circle B is the diameter between circle A and circle C. In the present embodiment, when the lowest score of the three evaluation items is 3 points or less, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on circle A or on the overlapping center O, when the lowest score is 4 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on circle B, and when the lowest score is 5 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on circle C.

[0058] Specifically, if Figure 6 As shown in the lower part of , when all three evaluation items are less than 3 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed at a position overlapping with the overlapping center O. When two of the three evaluation items are less than 3 points and one is more than 4 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on the illustrated circle A at a position where two areas with scores less than 3 points overlap. For example, when the closed and close contact is 3 points and the dense is 4 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed at a position where the closed area 81 on the circle A overlaps with the close contact area 83. And, when one of the three evaluation items is less than 3 points and two are more than 4 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on the illustrated circle A at the center of the area with scores less than 3 points. For example, when the closed and close contact is 4 points and the dense is 3 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed at the center of the dense area 82 on the circle A (that is, the center of the arc in the circle A that overlaps with the dense area 82).

[0059] When all three evaluation items are 4 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on the circle B and in the center of the low evaluation item entered in the questionnaire (that is, the center of the arc in the circle B that overlaps with the low evaluation item). When two of the three evaluation items are 4 points and one is 5 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on the illustrated circle B and in the position where the two areas with a score of 4 points overlap. And, when one of the three evaluation items is 4 points and two are 5 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on the illustrated circle B and in the center of the area with a score of 4 points. When all three evaluation items are 5 points, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed on the circle C and in the center of the low evaluation item entered in the questionnaire (in the illustrated example, it is the point where the area of ​​the low evaluation item intersects with the circle C).

[0060] (Control Flow)

[0061] Figure 7 is a flow chart showing the control flow of the evaluation system 1. Figure 7 As shown, when evaluating infection countermeasures and the like by the evaluation system 1, first, in step S1, a questionnaire generation process is performed. In the questionnaire generation process, a questionnaire is generated based on the questionnaire database 31 pre-stored in the storage unit 3. At this time, it is desirable that the questionnaire generation unit 21 randomly extracts from the variants of questions set in the questionnaire database 31, and then randomly changes the order of questions to generate a questionnaire. In addition, in the questionnaire generation process, a questionnaire is generated in a manner that includes questions asking about low evaluation items for each location, and questions asking the respondent to answer the subjective evaluation level for each location and each evaluation item.

[0062] Then, in step S2, the questionnaire display process is performed, and the questionnaire generated in step S1 is displayed on the display 4. At this time, the questionnaire display control unit 22 can also display the questionnaire in a state where the answers to the questions that have been answered have been input. Then, in step S3, the control unit 2 determines whether the questionnaire has been input. If it is determined to be no (N), step S3 is repeated, and if it is determined to be yes (Y), the process proceeds to step S4.

[0063] In step S4, the control unit 2 stores the input answers to the questionnaire as questionnaire answer data 32 in the storage unit 3. Thereafter, in step S5, the questionnaire analysis process is performed. In the questionnaire analysis process, the number of good answers and the evaluation level are totaled for each location and each evaluation item, and the score is determined using the evaluation table 33. The determined score for each location and each evaluation item is stored in the storage unit 3 as analysis data 34.

[0064] Then, in step S6, the analysis result display process is performed. In the analysis result display process, as shown in FIG. Figure 8 As shown, first, in step S61, based on the analysis data 34 obtained in step S5, the average values ​​of the three evaluation items of closed, dense, and close contact are calculated. Then, in step S62, based on the average values ​​of the obtained evaluation items, it is determined to display the Venn diagram. Figure 8 The position of the evaluation mark 84 in the example is as follows. Figure 6 As described.

[0065] Then, in step S63, a Venn diagram including the evaluation mark 84 is generated. Figure 8 , and radar charts for each location, and after extracting the overall rating, comments for each location, etc. in step S64, each item is displayed on the display 4 (refer to Figure 5 ). Afterwards, return (return to Figure 7 ) and ends the processing.

[0066] (Functions and Effects of Implementation Methods)

[0067] As described above, in the evaluation system 1 of the present embodiment, the analysis result display control unit 24 is configured to use the Venn diagram displayed on the display. Figure 8 The analysis result is displayed by using the evaluation mark 84 in the image, and the display position of the evaluation mark 84 is set in the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest score, and the higher the lowest score among all the evaluation items, the farther the display position is from the overlapping center O. In this way, the improvement points and the overall evaluation can be judged at a glance, and the evaluation system 1 that presents the evaluation results and improvement points more clearly can be realized.

[0068] (Variation Example)

[0069] In the above embodiment, in order to make the evaluation items to be improved clear, the evaluation mark 84 is displayed in the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest score, but it is not limited to this. On the contrary, the evaluation mark 84 can be displayed in the area of ​​the evaluation item with the highest score. In this case, the display position of the evaluation mark 84 becomes a mark indicating the evaluation item for which the best countermeasures have been taken. In this case, as long as the questionnaire is generated in a manner including questions to answer the high evaluation items with the highest evaluation among the evaluation items, when the scores of all the evaluation items are the same, the evaluation mark 84 can be displayed in the area of ​​the high evaluation items.

[0070] Furthermore, the evaluation mark 84 indicating the evaluation item for which the best measure has been taken and the evaluation mark 84 indicating the evaluation item to be improved described in the above embodiment may both be displayed on the Venn diagram. Figure 8 In this case, it is sufficient that the colors, shapes, etc. of the two evaluation marks 84 are changed so that it is identifiable what the two evaluation marks 84 represent.

[0071] In addition, although not mentioned in the above embodiment, the control unit 2 of the assessment system 1 may also have a function of outputting a notification reminding the user to input a questionnaire. For example, it may be configured to output a notification reminding the user to input a questionnaire when a preset number of days have passed since the last questionnaire answering date. In addition, for example, it may be configured to output a notification reminding the user to input a questionnaire when the infectious disease alert level rises, when the number of infected persons increases for a specified number of consecutive days, when an epidemic of certain infectious diseases occurs, etc. For example, the control unit 2 may be configured to obtain information on the infectious disease alert level and the number of infected persons via the Internet, or it may be configured to determine that an epidemic of certain infectious diseases has occurred when the number of hits when searching for news on the Internet with a specified keyword (such as "infectious disease" etc.) is above a specified threshold. In addition, the notification reminding the user to input a questionnaire may also be implemented using the notification function of a smartphone or tablet computer.

[0072] Furthermore, although not mentioned in the above embodiment, in order to prevent the respondent from answering without reading the question, the control unit 2 may be configured not to proceed to the next question (to make it impossible to input the next question) when the answer speed is too fast. For example, the control unit 2 may be configured to invalidate the input of the answer to the next question when the answer time to one question is less than 1 second (that is, when the time from the input of the previous question to the input of the next question is less than 1 second). In addition, it may be configured to display an alarm on the display 5 when the answer is too fast.

[0073] Moreover, in Figure 5 In the analysis result display screen of , the case where the current analysis result is displayed is described. However, if there is data of past analysis results, the previous and current analysis results may be displayed in a comparable manner.

[0074] (Summary of Implementation Methods)

[0075] Next, the technical ideas grasped from the above-described embodiments are described by referring to the reference numerals in the embodiments. However, the reference numerals in the following description do not limit the constituent elements in the claims to the members specifically shown in the embodiments.

[0076] [1] An evaluation system (1) comprises: a questionnaire generating unit (21) for generating a questionnaire for evaluating a plurality of evaluation items; a questionnaire display control unit (22) for displaying the questionnaire generated by the questionnaire generating unit (21) on a display (4); an input device (5) for inputting answers to the questionnaire; a questionnaire result analyzing unit (23) for analyzing the answers to the questionnaire input by the input device (5) to determine the scores of the evaluation items; and an analysis result display control unit (24) for displaying the analysis results of the questionnaire result analyzing unit (23) on a display (4). The display (4) is configured to display the analysis result using a Venn diagram (8) in which areas representing the evaluation items overlap with each other, and an evaluation mark (84) displayed in the Venn diagram (8), wherein the analysis result display control unit (24) sets the display position of the evaluation mark (84) within the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest or highest score, and the higher the lowest score among all the evaluation items, the farther the display position is from the overlapping center where all the areas in the Venn diagram (8) overlap with each other.

[0077] [2] According to the rating system (1) described in [1], the analysis result display control unit (24) is configured to set the display position of the evaluation mark (84) within the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest score, and the questionnaire generation unit (21) is configured to generate the questionnaire in a manner including questions for answering the low-evaluation item with the lowest evaluation among the evaluation items, and the analysis result display control unit (24) displays the evaluation mark (84) in the area of ​​the low-evaluation item when the scores of all the evaluation items are the same.

[0078] [3] According to the rating system (1) described in [1], the analysis result display control unit (24) is configured to set the display position of the evaluation mark (84) within the area of ​​the evaluation item with the highest score, and the questionnaire generation unit (21) is configured to generate the questionnaire in a manner including questions to answer the highest-evaluated item among the evaluation items that the respondent has evaluated highest, and the analysis result display control unit (24) displays the evaluation mark (84) in the area of ​​the high-evaluated item when the scores of all the evaluation items are the same.

[0079] [4] The evaluation system (1) according to [1], wherein at least the display (4) and the input device (5) are constituted by a portable terminal device.

[0080] [5] According to the assessment system (1) described in [1], there is a questionnaire database (31) in which a plurality of questions are set for one of the evaluation items and a plurality of variants are set for each of the questions, and the questionnaire generation unit (21) generates the questionnaire by randomly extracting each question from the plurality of variants based on the questionnaire database (31).

[0081] [6] The rating system (1) according to [5], wherein the questionnaire generation unit (21) randomly determines the order of the questions.

[0082] [7] According to the assessment system (1) described in [1], the questionnaire generation unit (21) is configured to generate the questionnaire in a manner that includes questions regarding each evaluation item and includes answers to the respondent's subjective evaluation level, and the questionnaire result analysis unit (23) determines the score of each evaluation item based on the answers to the questionnaire regarding the evaluation item and the evaluation level of the evaluation item.

[0083] [8] According to the assessment system (1) described in [1], there is a storage unit (3) for storing the answer results of the questionnaire as questionnaire answer data (32), and the questionnaire display control unit (22) displays the questionnaire based on the questionnaire answer data (32) in a state where answers have been entered for the questions that have been answered.

[0084] The above describes the embodiments of the present invention, but the embodiments described above do not limit the invention involved in the claims. In addition, it should be noted that all combinations of the features described in the embodiments are not necessarily required for the solution to the problem of the invention. In addition, the present invention can be appropriately modified and implemented within the scope of its purpose.

[0085] Description of Reference Numerals

[0086] 1… Rating system

[0087] 2…Control Unit

[0088] 21…Questionnaire Generation Department

[0089] 22…Questionnaire display control unit

[0090] 23…Questionnaire results analysis department

[0091] 24…Analysis result display control unit

[0092] 3… Storage

[0093] 31…Questionnaire database

[0094] 32…Questionnaire answer data

[0095] 33…Evaluation form

[0096] 34…Parsing the data

[0097] 4…Display

[0098] 5…Input device

[0099] 8…Venn Diagram

[0100] 84…evaluation marks.

Claims

1. An assessment system, characterized in that: have: A questionnaire generating unit that generates a questionnaire for evaluating a plurality of evaluation items; a questionnaire display control unit, which displays the questionnaire generated by the questionnaire generation unit on a display; An input device for inputting answers to the questionnaire; a questionnaire result analyzing unit that analyzes the answers to the questionnaire inputted by the input device and determines the scores of the evaluation items; as well as an analysis result display control unit, which displays the analysis result of the questionnaire result analysis unit on the display, The analysis result display control unit is configured to display the analysis result using a Venn diagram displayed in a manner in which regions representing the respective evaluation items overlap with each other, and an evaluation mark displayed in the Venn diagram. The analysis result display control unit sets the display position of the evaluation mark within the area of ​​the evaluation item with the lowest or highest score, and the higher the lowest score among all the evaluation items, the farther the display position of the evaluation mark is from the overlapping center where all the areas in the Venn diagram overlap with each other.

2. The evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein: The analysis result display control unit is configured to set the display position of the evaluation mark within the region of the evaluation item having the lowest score, The questionnaire generating unit is configured to generate the questionnaire in a manner including questions for answering low evaluation items that are lowest evaluated by the respondent among the evaluation items. The analysis result display control unit displays the evaluation mark in the region of the low-evaluation item when the scores of all the evaluation items are the same.

3. The assessment system according to claim 1, wherein: The analysis result display control unit is configured to set the display position of the evaluation mark within the region of the evaluation item having the highest score, The questionnaire generation unit is configured to generate the questionnaire so as to include questions for answering high-evaluation items that are the highest evaluated by the respondent among the evaluation items. The analysis result display control unit displays the evaluation mark in the region of the high-evaluation item when the scores of all the evaluation items are the same.

4. The assessment system according to claim 1, wherein: At least the display and the input device are constituted by a portable terminal device.

5. The assessment system according to claim 1, wherein: A questionnaire database is provided in which a plurality of questions are set for one of the evaluation items and a plurality of variations are set for each of the questions. The questionnaire generation unit determines each question by arbitrarily extracting the questions from the plurality of variations based on the questionnaire database, and generates the questionnaire.

6. The assessment system according to claim 5, wherein: The questionnaire generating unit randomly determines the order of the questions.

7. The assessment system according to claim 1, wherein: The questionnaire generating unit is configured to generate the questionnaire in a manner including questions for answering a subjective evaluation level of a respondent with respect to each of the evaluation items. The questionnaire result analysis unit determines a score for each evaluation item based on an answer to the questionnaire regarding the evaluation item and an evaluation level of the evaluation item.

8. The assessment system according to claim 1, wherein: A storage unit is provided for storing the answer results of the questionnaire as questionnaire answer data, The questionnaire display control unit displays the questionnaire in a state where answers have been input to answered questions based on the questionnaire answer data.

Images