Evaluation support system, information processing method and program

Abstract

To provide an information processing system, etc. capable of improving quality of multilateral evaluation by various persons concerned.SOLUTION: There is provided an evaluation support system. The evaluation support system includes a processor. The processor executes: a receiving step of receiving input for extracting an evaluator who evaluates an evaluation object person; and a relationship display step of displaying the evaluator extracted by the input in a first mode according to a relationship with the evaluation object person.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] The present invention relates to an evaluation support system, an information processing method, and a program. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, techniques have been proposed for supporting multifaceted evaluation (also called 360-degree evaluation) of an evaluation target by various parties (for example, Patent Document 1). [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] JP 2010-55327 A Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] Here, if the evaluator has a biased relationship with the person being evaluated when deciding on the evaluator, a multifaceted evaluation cannot be made, and the quality of the evaluation may deteriorate.

[0005] In view of the above circumstances, the present invention provides an information processing system and the like that can improve the quality of multifaceted evaluations by various parties involved. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] According to one aspect of the present invention, there is provided an evaluation support system, which includes a processor, and in a receiving step, the processor receives an input for extracting an evaluator who will evaluate the person to be evaluated. In a relationship display step, the processor displays the evaluator extracted by the input in a first manner according to the relationship with the person to be evaluated.

[0007] According to this embodiment, it is possible to improve the quality of multifaceted evaluations by various parties. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0008] [Figure 1] 1 is a diagram showing an overall configuration of an evaluation support system 1. FIG. [Diagram 2] FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of a server device 10. [Diagram 3] FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of an administrator terminal 20. [Figure 4] FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a functional configuration of a control unit of each device. [Diagram 5] FIG. 11 is an activity diagram showing an example of an evaluation support process. [Figure 6] FIG. 13 illustrates an example of a setting screen. [Figure 7] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of an image for adding an evaluator. [Figure 8] FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of an employee DB. [Figure 9] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed search result. [Figure 10] FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of an evaluation DB. [Figure 11] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed evaluation request. [Figure 12] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed progress screen. [Figure 13] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed detailed situation. [Figure 14] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing another example of a displayed detailed situation. [Figure 15] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed evaluation result. [Figure 16] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing another example of a displayed search result. [Figure 17] 4 is a diagram illustrating another example of the functional configuration of the control unit 11 of the server device 10. FIG. [Figure 18] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a first notification. [Figure 19] FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an example of a second notification. [Figure 20] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed list of evaluators. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0009] DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. Various characteristic features shown in the following embodiments can be combined with each other.

[0010] Incidentally, the program for realizing the software appearing in this embodiment may be provided as a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium, or may be provided so as to be downloadable from an external server, or may be provided so that the program is started on an external computer and its functions are realized on a client terminal (so-called cloud computing).

[0011] In addition, in this embodiment, the term "unit" may include, for example, a combination of hardware resources implemented by a circuit in the broad sense and software information processing that can be specifically realized by these hardware resources. In addition, in this embodiment, various information is handled, and this information is represented, for example, by physical values ​​of signal values ​​representing voltage and current, high and low signal values ​​as a binary bit group consisting of 0 or 1, or quantum superposition (so-called quantum bits), and communication and calculation can be performed on the circuit in the broad sense.

[0012] In addition, a circuit in the broad sense is a circuit realized by at least appropriately combining a circuit, circuitry, a processor, a memory, etc. In other words, it includes an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a programmable logic device (e.g., a simple programmable logic device (SPLD), a complex programmable logic device (CPLD), and a field programmable gate array (FPGA)), etc.

[0013] 1. Hardware Configuration In this section, the hardware configuration of the evaluation support system according to this embodiment will be described.

[0014] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing the overall configuration of an evaluation support system 1. FIG. 1 shows an overview of each device provided in the evaluation support system 1 and users who use those devices. Each overview will be explained from time to time with reference to other figures. The evaluation support system 1 is an information processing system that executes an evaluation support process, which is information processing for supporting the activity of evaluating an evaluation target. The evaluation support system 1 supports a multifaceted evaluation, known as a 360-degree evaluation, in which multiple people evaluate one evaluation target as evaluators.

[0015] The evaluation support system 1 includes a communication line 2, a server device 10, an administrator terminal 20, a plurality of evaluator terminals 30, and a subject terminal 40. The communication line 2 may be configured by the Internet, although it is not particularly limited thereto. The communication line 2 may include a local area network, a mobile communication network, or a VPN (Virtual Private Network), etc. The communication line 2 mediates data exchange between devices connected to the communication line. The server device 10 is connected to the communication line 2 by wire, and each terminal, such as the administrator terminal 20, is connected wirelessly. The connection of each device to the communication line 2 may be wired or wireless.

[0016] The server device 10 is an information processing device that executes the evaluation support process while exchanging data with each terminal via the communication line 2. The administrator terminal 20 is a terminal that uses the administrator as a user. The administrator is a person who manages the implementation of the 360-degree evaluation. Each of the multiple evaluator terminals 30 is a terminal that uses the evaluator as a user. The subject terminal 40 is a terminal that uses the subject to be evaluated as a user. In this embodiment, the administrator, the evaluator, and the subject to be evaluated are all employees belonging to the same organization. The organization referred to here includes all organizations, such as organizations with legal personality such as a company and a foundation, and organizations without legal personality such as a union and an association. The administrator terminal 20, the evaluator terminal 30, and the subject terminal 40 are smartphones, tablet terminals, personal computers, etc.

[0017] 2 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration of server device 10. Server device 10 includes a control unit 11, a storage unit 12, a communication unit 13, and a bus 14. Bus 14 electrically connects each unit included in server device 10.

[0018] (Control unit 11) The control unit 11 may include at least one processor. The at least one processor may be configured, for example, by a central processing unit (CPU), a micro processing unit (MPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), one or more integrated circuits, one or more discrete circuits, or a combination of these (not shown).

[0019] The control unit 11 is a computer that realizes various functions related to the evaluation support system 1 by reading out a predetermined program stored in the storage unit 12. That is, information processing by the software stored in the storage unit 12 is specifically realized by the control unit 11, which is an example of hardware, and can be executed as each functional unit included in the control unit 11. These will be described in more detail in the next section. Note that the control unit 11 is not limited to being single, and it may be implemented by having multiple control units 11 for each function. It may also be a combination of these.

[0020] (Storage unit 12) The storage unit 12 stores various information defined by the above description. This can be implemented, for example, as a storage device such as a solid state drive (SSD) or a hard disk drive (HDD) that stores various programs and the like related to the evaluation support system 1 executed by the control unit 11, or as a memory such as a random access memory (RAM) that stores temporarily required information (arguments, arrays, etc.) related to the program calculations. The storage unit 12 stores various programs, variables, etc. related to the evaluation support system 1 executed by the control unit 11.

[0021] (Communications Department 13) The communication unit 13 is configured by a communication module. The communication module may be a wireless communication module conforming to standards such as IEEE802.11a / b / g / n / ac / ax, LTE, 5G, and 6G, or may be a wired communication module conforming to standards such as IEEE802.3. The communication unit 13 is configured to be capable of transmitting various electrical signals from the server device 10 to external components. The communication unit 13 is also configured to be capable of receiving various electrical signals from the external components to the server device 10. More preferably, the communication unit 13 has a network communication function, and may be implemented so that various information can be communicated between the server device 10 and an external device via the communication line 2.

[0022] Fig. 3 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration of the administrator terminal 20. The administrator terminal 20 includes a control unit 21, a storage unit 22, a communication unit 23, an input unit 24, an output unit 25, and a bus 26. The bus 26 electrically connects the various units included in the administrator terminal 20. The control unit 21, the storage unit 22, and the communication unit 23 are similar hardware to the control unit 11, the storage unit 12, and the communication unit 13 shown in Fig. 2, although the specifications, model, etc. may be different.

[0023] (Input section 24) The input unit 24 has keys, buttons, a touch screen, a mouse, etc., and receives input from the user. The input unit 24 may also have a microphone and receive voice input from the user.

[0024] (Output section 25) The output unit 25 has a display, a speaker, and the like, and displays visual information generated in a manner that is visible to the user, such as screens, images, icons, text, and the like, on the display surface of the display, and outputs sounds including voice.

[0025] The evaluator terminal 30 and the subject terminal 40 have the same hardware configuration as the manager terminal 20. For the evaluator terminal 30, only the control unit 31 will be described with a different reference number from the control unit 21 of the manager terminal 20. The subject terminal 40 has the same hardware configuration as the manager terminal 20. For the subject terminal 40, only the control unit 41 will be described with a different reference number from the control unit 21 of the manager terminal 20.

[0026] 2. Functional configuration In this section, the functional configuration of the present embodiment will be described. As described above, information processing by software stored in the storage unit of each device is specifically realized by a control unit, which is an example of hardware, so that each functional unit included in the control unit can be executed.

[0027] 4 is a diagram showing an example of the functional configuration of the control unit of each device. The control unit 11 of the server device 10 includes a server display unit 111, a memory control unit 112, an evaluator extraction unit 113, a relationship determination unit 114, an evaluator determination unit 115, and an evaluation request unit 116. The control unit 21 of the manager terminal 20 includes a user display unit 211 and an operation reception unit 212. The control unit 31 of the evaluator terminal 30 includes a user display unit 311 and an operation reception unit 312. The control unit 41 of the target terminal 40 includes a user display unit 411 and an operation reception unit 412.

[0028] The server display unit 111 executes processing for displaying on each terminal a system screen related to the evaluation support system 1. For example, the server display unit 111 performs processing such as generating and transmitting an HTML (Hyper Text Markup Language) file, and displays a web page showing the system screen on the administrator terminal 20. The server display unit 111 may also perform processing such as generating and transmitting display data for an application for using the evaluation support system 1.

[0029] The memory control unit 112 controls the memory unit 12 of the device itself, and writes and reads data to and from the memory unit 12. The evaluator extraction unit 113 extracts evaluators as candidates for evaluating the person to be evaluated. The relationship determination unit 114 determines the relationship between the person to be evaluated and the extracted evaluator candidates. The evaluator determination unit 115 determines the evaluator who will actually evaluate the person to be evaluated from the extracted candidates. The evaluation request unit 116 requests the determined evaluator to evaluate the person to be evaluated.

[0030] The user display unit 211 of the administrator terminal 20 displays a system screen related to the evaluation support system 1 indicated by the screen data transmitted from the server device 10. The operation reception unit 212 receives operations by a user who uses the administrator terminal 20. The user display unit 311 and the user display unit 411 perform the same operation as the user display unit 211. The operation reception unit 312 and the operation reception unit 412 perform the same operation as the operation reception unit 212.

[0031] When the administrator, the evaluator, and the person being evaluated operate their own terminals as users to use the evaluation support system 1, they log in by inputting a user ID (Identification) and a password. This allows the user ID to be associated with information generated at each terminal, making it possible to know which user the information pertains to.

[0032] 3. Information Processing In this section, in this embodiment, an explanation will be given of information processing (assessment support processing) that causes a computer that controls the assessment support system 1 to execute a program. The assessment support system 1 includes a processor that can execute a program so as to perform each step shown in the following FIG. 5 and the like.

[0033] Fig. 5 is an activity diagram showing an example of the evaluation support process. The evaluation support process shown in Fig. 5 is started when the administrator performs an operation to display a setting screen for setting an evaluator for the person to be evaluated. First, the administrator terminal 20 receives an operation to display the setting screen by the operation receiving unit 212 (A11). The operation receiving unit 212 transmits first request data requesting the display of the setting screen to the server device 10.

[0034] The server device 10 generates search screen data indicating the setting screen requested by the transmitted first request data through the server display unit 111 (A12). The server display unit 111 transmits the generated setting screen data to the administrator terminal 20. The administrator terminal 20 displays the setting screen indicated by the transmitted setting screen data through the user display unit 211 (A13).

[0035] Fig. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a setting screen. In the example of Fig. 6, the user display unit 211 displays an evaluation support system screen G1. The evaluation support system screen G1 displays a character string "Setting of evaluation target and evaluator", an input field C1 for setting information, a previous page button B12, and a next page button B13. The input field C1 includes an input field C11 for evaluation target, a display field C12 for the number of evaluators for each evaluation target, an input field C13 for evaluators, and an add evaluator button B11.

[0036] The persons to be evaluated and the evaluators displayed in the input field C1 are only a portion of the total, and other persons to be evaluated and the evaluators are displayed by operating the previous page button B12 and the next page button B13. The administrator may input a new person to be evaluated in the input field C1, or a predetermined person to be evaluated may be input. When the administrator sets an evaluator for a person to be evaluated, the administrator operates the Add Evaluator button B11 displayed in a position corresponding to the person to be evaluated. When the Add button B11 is operated, the user display unit 211 displays an image for adding an evaluator.

[0037] Fig. 7 is a diagram showing an example of an image for adding an evaluator. In the example of Fig. 7, the user display unit 211 displays an image C2 for adding an evaluator on the evaluation support system screen G1. The image C2 for adding displays a character string "Add evaluator", a search bar C21, and a search button B21. The administrator inputs a keyword for searching for a candidate evaluator in the search bar C21. For example, a family name, a first name, a department name, etc. are used as the keyword.

[0038] The manager terminal 20 receives a search operation for the image C2 for adding an evaluator through the operation receiving unit 212 (A21). The search operation is an input operation into the search bar C21 and an operation on the search button B21. When the operation receiving unit 212 receives the search operation, it transmits search data indicating the input keyword to the server device 10. It is assumed that the server device 10 stores in advance an employee DB (database) that stores information about employees.

[0039] Fig. 8 is a diagram showing an example of an employee DB. The example in Fig. 8 shows an employee DB1 that stores employee information in which employee IDs, names, ages, departments, job titles, projects, customers, etc. are associated with each other. The server device 10 uses the evaluator extraction unit 113 to search for employees whose employee information includes the keywords indicated by the transmitted search data as evaluator candidates (A22). Next, the server device 10 uses the relationship determination unit 114 to determine the relationship between the searched evaluator candidates and the person to be evaluated (A23).

[0040] The relationship determination unit 114, for example, determines the relationship of the evaluator candidate as a superior, subordinate, colleague, or any other relationship. For example, when the evaluator candidates are in the same department and have a hierarchical relationship between their job titles (such as a manager and a section chief, or a section chief and a section chief), the relationship determination unit 114 determines that the superior is the one with the higher job title, and determines that the subordinate is the one with the lower job title. In addition, the relationship determination unit 114 determines that the evaluator candidates are colleagues when they are in the same department and have the same job title. In addition, the relationship determination unit 114 determines that the evaluator candidates are colleagues when they are in different departments and have the same project or client, for example. In addition, the relationship determination unit 114 determines that the evaluator candidates are others when they are in different departments and have different projects and clients. Note that these determination methods are merely examples, and there are cases where these determination methods cannot be used depending on the relationship between the evaluation subject and the superior, etc., and in such cases, a determination method according to each relationship may be used.

[0041] Next, the server device 10 generates result data indicating the search results by the server display unit 111 (A24). The server display unit 111 generates search result data by assigning the determined relationship between the searched evaluator candidate and the person being evaluated to the searched evaluator candidate. The server display unit 111 transmits the generated search result data to the administrator terminal 20. The administrator terminal 20 displays the search result indicated by the transmitted search result data by the user display unit 211 (A25).

[0042] Fig. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed search result. In the example of Fig. 9, the user display unit 211 displays a search result C3 in the image C2 for adding an evaluator. The search result C3 shows a display column C31 for the evaluator candidates, a display column C32 for the departments, a display column C33 for the relationships, and a selection button B31. The display columns C31 and C32 display the names and department names of the evaluator candidates, respectively. The display column C33 displays the relationship between the evaluator candidates and the person being evaluated.

[0043] A save button B32 is displayed on the addition image C2. After selecting an evaluator from the evaluator candidates, the administrator operates the selection button B31 of the evaluator candidate and then operates the save button B32. The administrator terminal 20 accepts these operations as an evaluator selection operation by the operation acceptance unit 212 (A26). The operation acceptance unit 212 transmits selection data indicating the person to be evaluated and the evaluator selected for that person to be evaluated to the server device 10. The server device 10 pre-stores an evaluation DB that stores information related to 360-degree evaluations.

[0044] Fig. 10 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation DB. In the example of Fig. 10, an evaluation DB2 is shown in which the name, relationship, and evaluation data of each evaluator are associated with the person to be evaluated. The server device 10 stores information (name and relationship) about the evaluator indicated by the selection data transmitted by the evaluator determination unit 115 in association with the person to be evaluated indicated by the selection data (A27). The evaluator determination unit 115 stores this information in the evaluation DB2, thereby determining the evaluator who will evaluate the person to be evaluated.

[0045] In the administrator terminal 20, after accepting the evaluator selection operation in A26, if the evaluator selection is to be continued, the operation returns to A13 (display of the setting screen) and is performed. At that time, the user display unit 211 displays the evaluator selected in A26 in the evaluator input field C13 shown in FIG. 6. The administrator repeatedly executes the operations from A21 to A27, and when the setting of the necessary evaluators is completed, the operation of evaluator setting is terminated. Note that in A26, the operation acceptance unit 212 may accept an operation to select multiple evaluators. This makes it possible to determine multiple evaluators at once, reduce the number of times the above operations are repeated, or complete the setting in one operation.

[0046] Next, when a predetermined time arrives, the server device 10 generates request data for requesting the evaluator to evaluate the person to be evaluated by the evaluation request unit 116 (A31). The evaluation request unit 116 transmits the generated request data to the evaluator terminal 30 of the evaluator registered in the evaluation DB. The evaluator terminal 30 displays the evaluation request indicated by the transmitted request data on the user display unit 311 (A32).

[0047] Fig. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed evaluation request. In the example of Fig. 11, the user display unit 311 displays an evaluation support system screen G4. On the evaluation support system screen G4, a character string "Please evaluate the person being evaluated", a display field C41 for the person being evaluated, an input field C42 for the evaluation, a save button B41, a send button B42, and a next person being evaluated button B43 are displayed. The input field C42 is an area for inputting evaluation items 1 to 5, etc.

[0048] The Save button B41 is a button for temporarily saving the input evaluation items. The Send button B42 is a button for sending the input evaluation to the server device 10, and becomes operable when all evaluation items have been input. The Next Evaluation Target button B43 is a button for displaying the next evaluation target that the evaluator, who is the user of the evaluator terminal 30, is set to evaluate.

[0049] The evaluator terminal 30 receives an input of an evaluation of the evaluation target by the evaluator through the operation receiving unit 312 (A33). Next, the evaluator terminal 30 generates result data indicating the input evaluation result through the operation receiving unit 312, and transmits the result data to the server device 10 (A34). The server device 10 stores the evaluation result indicated by the transmitted result data through the evaluation request unit 116 in the evaluation DB 2 shown in FIG. 10 (A35).

[0050] Next, the server device 10 generates progress screen data showing the progress of the evaluation by the server display unit 111 (A41). The server display unit 111 transmits the generated progress screen data to the administrator terminal 20. The administrator terminal 20 displays, by the user display unit 211, the progress screen shown in the transmitted progress screen data (A42).

[0051] Fig. 12 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed progress screen. In the example of Fig. 12, the user display unit 211 displays an evaluation support system screen G5. The evaluation support system screen G5 displays a character string "Evaluation status by evaluator", a display field C5 of the evaluation status of each user, a previous page button B51 and a next page button B52 (buttons for switching the displayed user). The display field C5 shows the user name, department name, completion status C51, progress information as the evaluation subject C52, completion status C53, and progress information as the evaluator C54.

[0052] The completion status C51 indicates the completion status of the evaluation when the user (the user whose user name is indicated) is the subject of evaluation. The progress information C52 indicates the number of evaluators who have the user as the subject of evaluation and the number of evaluators who have completed the evaluation. For example, in the case of "User A," evaluations from six evaluators have been set, and evaluations from all six have been completed, so the status is "Completed." In the case of "User B," evaluations from five evaluators have been set, and evaluations from only three of them have been completed, so the status is "Incomplete."

[0053] The completion status C53 indicates the completion status of the evaluation when the user (the user whose user name is indicated) is the evaluator. The progress information C54 indicates the number of people to be evaluated by the user and the number of people who have been evaluated. For example, in the case of "User A," seven people have been set as people to be evaluated, but only four of them have been evaluated, so it is "Incomplete." In the case of "User C," three people have been set as people to be evaluated, but all three have been evaluated, so it is "Completed."

[0054] Next, the administrator terminal 20 displays the details of the evaluation status of each user (A43) on the user display unit 211. For example, when an operation is performed on the completion status C51 or progress information C52 of each user, the user display unit 211 displays the detailed status of the evaluation in the case where the user is a subject to evaluation.

[0055] Fig. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed detailed status. In the example of Fig. 13, the user display unit 211 displays the detailed status C61 on the evaluation support system screen G5. The detailed status C61 is a detailed status that is displayed when the progress information C52 of user B is operated. The detailed status C61 displays the user name, department name, evaluation status, and request column. There are five evaluators who have user B as the evaluation target, users E, G, J, W, and Y, and the evaluations of users E, J, and Y are completed, while the evaluations of users G and W are incomplete.

[0056] For users G and W who have not yet completed the evaluation, request execution buttons B61 and B62 are displayed. When the operation reception unit 212 of the manager terminal 20 receives an operation on these execution buttons as an operation to request an evaluation (A44), the manager terminal 20 transmits operation data indicating the subject and evaluator for whom an evaluation has been requested to the server device 10. The server device 10 generates, via the evaluation request unit 116, request data for requesting an evaluation of the subject by the evaluator indicated in the transmitted operation data (A45).

[0057] The evaluation request unit 116 transmits the generated request data to the evaluator terminal 30 of the evaluator indicated by the operation data. After that, when the operations from A32 (display of evaluation request) to A35 (storage of evaluation result) shown in Fig. 5 are performed, the incomplete evaluation is completed.

[0058] Furthermore, when an operation is performed on the completion status C53 or progress information C54 of each user, the user display unit 211 displays the detailed status of the evaluation that the user, as an evaluator, makes on the evaluation target. Fig. 14 is a diagram showing another example of a displayed detailed situation. In the example of Fig. 14, the user display unit 211 displays a detailed situation C62 on the evaluation support system screen G5. The detailed situation C62 is a detailed situation that is displayed when the progress information C54 of user A is operated.

[0059] The detailed status C62 displays the user name, department name, evaluation status, and request columns. The seven people being evaluated by user A are users B, E, G, J, K, P, and R, and the evaluations of users B, G, J, and K have been completed, while the evaluations of users E, P, and R have not been completed. Request execution buttons B63, B64, and B65 are displayed for users E, P, and R who have not yet completed their evaluations. When these execution buttons are operated, the evaluator (in this case, all users A) is requested to evaluate the people being evaluated, as in the example of FIG. 13.

[0060] The administrator checks the evaluation status as necessary based on the detailed status shown in Figures 13 and 14, requests evaluations from evaluators who are lagging behind, and manages the overall progress so that the 360-degree evaluation is completed.

[0061] Next, it is assumed that the person to be evaluated performs an operation to display his / her own evaluation result. The evaluation result display operation is received by the operation receiving unit 412 of the evaluation person terminal 40 (A51). The operation receiving unit 412 transmits request data requesting the evaluation result of the person to be evaluated to the server device 10. The server device 10 reads, by the storage control unit 112, the evaluation result of the person to be evaluated indicated by the transmitted request data from the evaluation DB 2 (A52).

[0062] Next, the server device 10 generates screen data of a result screen showing the read evaluation result by the server display unit 111 (A53). The server display unit 111 transmits the generated screen data to the subject terminal 40. The subject terminal 40 displays the evaluation result shown by the transmitted screen data by the user display unit 411 (A54).

[0063] FIG. 15 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed evaluation result. In the example of FIG. 15, the user display unit 411 displays the evaluation result C8 of the evaluation target on the evaluation support system screen G8. The evaluation result C8 includes evaluation target information C81 and evaluation information C82 for each evaluation item. The evaluation target information C81 indicates the name of the evaluation target. The evaluation information C82 indicates a comprehensive evaluation for each evaluation item that is a compilation of the evaluations by each evaluator. By viewing the evaluation result in this way, the evaluation target can understand his / her good points, bad points, good points, and bad points, etc., as seen by various related parties, and can use this information to improve his / her activities, etc.

[0064] As described above, in the evaluation support system 1, the evaluator extraction unit 113 functions as an example of a receiving unit that receives an input for extracting an evaluator who evaluates the evaluation target. The evaluator extraction unit 113 receives, for example, a keyword input to a search bar C21 shown in Fig. 7 as an input for extracting an evaluator. Note that the input for extracting an evaluator is not limited to a keyword, i.e., a character string, and may be, for example, an input of selecting information on an evaluator to be extracted from a list of information that can be used as an extraction condition (for example, an organization name or a name of a relationship with the evaluation target, etc.).

[0065] The server display unit 111 functions as an example of a relationship display unit that displays an evaluator extracted by the input received by the evaluator extraction unit 113 in a first manner according to the relationship between the evaluator and the person being evaluated (hereinafter referred to as "mutual relationship"). In this embodiment, the first manner is a manner in which the evaluator ("evaluator candidate") and character strings indicating the mutual relationship ("supervisor" and "colleague") are displayed together, as shown in Fig. 9.

[0066] By listing the evaluators side by side as described above, the relationship between the evaluator and the person being evaluated can be easily understood compared to the case where the relationship between the evaluator and the person being evaluated is not listed. Also, by displaying the evaluators in the first manner according to the relationship, it becomes easier to select an evaluator so that the relationship with the person being evaluated is not biased compared to the case where the display manner of the evaluators is uniform regardless of the relationship, and the quality of multifaceted evaluation by various parties such as 360-degree evaluation can be improved.

[0067] In this embodiment, the relationship between the subject to be evaluated and the evaluator includes one or more of the relationships of superior, subordinate, and colleague of the subject to be evaluated. A superior is, for example, a person in a higher reporting line than the subject to be evaluated, and a subordinate is, for example, a person in a lower reporting line than the subject to be evaluated. A reporting line is a reporting route along a chain of command for business reporting and communication, and the reporting line may be two or more levels away from the subject to be evaluated.

[0068] A colleague is, for example, a person who has no hierarchical relationship with the person being evaluated and has a business relationship with the person being evaluated. Business relationships include, for example, participation in the same project, being in charge of the same client, or an upstream-downstream relationship in a business flow. By defining each relationship in this way, the relationship with the person being evaluated can be clearly determined. Furthermore, by using mutual relationships such as a superior who has a relatively deep relationship with the person being evaluated within an organization, it becomes easier to select an evaluator who knows the person being evaluated better than when those mutual relationships are not used, and the quality of the evaluation can be improved.

[0069] The term "superior" may include not only those who are higher in the direct reporting line of the person to be evaluated, but also those who are higher in position than the person to be evaluated in a department that has some kind of relationship with the person to be evaluated, such as a department adjacent to the department to which the person to be evaluated belongs or another department working on the same project as the person to be evaluated. Similarly, the term "subordinate" may include not only those who are lower in the direct reporting line of the person to be evaluated, but also those who are lower in position than the person to be evaluated in a department that has some kind of relationship with the person to be evaluated.

[0070] It should be noted that all relationships include past relationships. For example, the relationship determination unit 114 also determines that a person who was the superior of the person being evaluated within a predetermined period of time in the past (such as one year) is also a "superior." This is because, if a certain period of time has passed since the end of the relationship, it is possible to recall and evaluate the achievements at the time of the relationship, but if a certain period of time has passed since the end of the relationship, it is difficult to recall the achievements at that time, and there is a possibility that a correct evaluation cannot be made.

[0071] In addition, the relationship determination unit 114 prioritizes organizational relationships in judgment when there is an evaluator candidate who is both a superior and a colleague (for example, two relationships exist simultaneously, such as a superior-subordinate relationship in the department to which they belong, but at the same level in the project team). This is because organizational relationships tend to have a higher communication density and a higher probability of knowing the evaluator more deeply than temporary work relationships such as projects.

[0072] In addition, when the person to be evaluated is transferred, the relationship determination unit 114 may determine that the superior, subordinate, or colleague before the transfer and the superior, subordinate, or colleague after the transfer are the superior, subordinate, or colleague of the person to be evaluated, respectively. In this case, the server display unit 111 displays not only the superior, subordinate, or colleague after the transfer but also the superior, subordinate, or colleague before the transfer among the searched evaluator candidates, as shown in Fig. 9, by associating the relationship of superior, subordinate, or colleague, respectively. The administrator may set the person with the same relationship both before and after the transfer as the evaluator, or may set only one of them as the evaluator.

[0073] In the evaluation support system 1, the server display unit 111 functions as an example of a first display unit that displays the evaluation progress for each evaluation target person collectively. For example, in the example of Fig. 12, the server display unit 111 displays the evaluation progress for the user shown in the "user name" column as the evaluation target in the progress information C52 by the number of evaluators and the number of evaluators who have completed evaluation. According to this embodiment, the evaluation progress for each evaluation target person can be easily grasped.

[0074] The server display unit 111 also functions as an example of a second display unit that displays the progress of the evaluation by each evaluator together. For example, in the example of FIG. 12, the server display unit 111 displays the progress of the evaluation in the progress information C54 in the case where the user shown in the "user name" field is the evaluator, by the number of evaluation targets and the number of evaluation targets who have been evaluated. According to this embodiment, it is possible to grasp the progress of the evaluation for each evaluator. Also, it is possible to easily grasp that a relatively large burden is imposed on a specific evaluator (for example, user G who is set to have 10 evaluation targets in the example of FIG. 12).

[0075] <Other embodiments> The relationship between the evaluator and the person being evaluated is not limited to the above-mentioned relationships of superior, subordinate, and colleague, but may also be, for example, leader, advisor, mentor, peer, etc. Furthermore, the character string indicating the relationship is not limited to a character string indicating a word such as "superior," but may be a character string indicating an abbreviation or symbol, etc., as long as it is clear which relationship is being indicated.

[0076] Furthermore, the first mode according to the interrelationship is not limited to a mode in which a character string is displayed side by side, and may be, for example, a mode in which an evaluator and an image indicating the interrelationship are displayed side by side. The image indicating the interrelationship is, for example, an image such as a character, avatar, or icon representing a superior, subordinate, colleague, etc. The first mode may also be a mode in which the evaluator is displayed in an area defined for each interrelationship (for example, an evaluator displayed in the "superior area" indicates a superior, and an evaluator displayed in the "subordinate area" indicates a subordinate).

[0077] <Evaluation progress> In the embodiment, the server display unit 111 indicates the progress of the evaluation by the number of evaluators and the number of evaluators who have completed evaluation, but this is not limited to this. The server display unit 111 may indicate the progress of the evaluation by, for example, the number of people who have not yet been evaluated or the ratio of the number of people who have completed evaluation. Furthermore, the server display unit 111 may indicate the progress of the evaluation by letters (A, B, C, etc.), symbols, graphs, etc., instead of numerical values. In short, it is sufficient for the server display unit 111 to indicate the progress of the evaluation by information that indicates the progress of the evaluation.

[0078] <Promotion of evaluation> In the embodiment, when there is an evaluator who has not yet evaluated the set evaluation target, an operation is performed on the execution button for the evaluation request shown in FIG. 13, and the request data is sent to the evaluator terminal 30 of the unrated evaluator, thereby promoting the evaluation, but the method of promoting the evaluation is not limited to this. For example, when the administrator selects an unrated evaluator, the server device 10 may instruct the administrator terminal 20 to start an application for contacting the selected evaluator (by phone, email, SNS (Social Networking Service), etc.). Furthermore, the server device 10 may transmit the evaluation request data to the evaluator terminal 30 of the unrated evaluator at, for example, a predetermined time interval or a predetermined time, regardless of the operation of the administrator.

[0079] <Second aspect> In the embodiment, the server display unit 111 displays the evaluator in a first manner, but may display the evaluator in a different manner. The server display unit 111 displays the evaluator extracted by the input accepted by the evaluator extraction unit 113 in a second manner according to the period (hereinafter referred to as the "elapsed period") since the evaluation subject and the evaluator became mutually related.

[0080] Fig. 16 is a diagram showing another example of a displayed search result. In the example of Fig. 16, the user display unit 211 displays a search result C7. The search result C7 shows a display column C71 for the evaluator candidate, a display column C72 for the department, a display column C73 for the relationship (mutual relationship), and a display column C74 for the elapsed period. The display column C74 shows the elapsed period between the evaluator candidate and the person being evaluated (the period that has elapsed since the mutual relationship shown in the display column C73 was established).

[0081] In the example of FIG. 16, the server display unit 111 displays the evaluator (evaluator candidate) in a second mode in which a character string indicating the elapsed time is also displayed. According to this mode, the administrator can select an evaluator taking into consideration the depth of the relationship with the person to be evaluated. Specifically, for example, in the example of FIG. 16, the evaluator candidates "User H" and "User J" who are in a "colleague" relationship have elapsed times of "1 month" and "1 year 6 months," respectively. When the administrator is to select one of the evaluator candidates who has a "colleague" relationship as an evaluator, he or she can select "User J" who has been in a long period of time and is likely to know the person to be evaluated better.

[0082] The second mode is not limited to the mode shown in Fig. 16. The second mode may be, for example, a mode in which an image showing the elapsed period (for example, an image in which figures showing one year are arranged in a number corresponding to the elapsed period) is also displayed, or a mode in which the settings (size, color, background color, etc.) of the characters showing the evaluator are changed depending on the elapsed period. In either case, the administrator can select the evaluator in consideration of the depth of the relationship with the person being evaluated.

[0083] <Support for selecting evaluators> The evaluation support system 1 may perform a process of supporting the administrator in selecting a more appropriate evaluator when the administrator selects an evaluator from among evaluator candidates.

[0084] Fig. 17 is a diagram showing another example of the functional configuration of the control unit 11 of the server device 10. The control unit 11 includes a first notification unit 117 and a second notification unit 118 in addition to the units shown in Fig. 4. The first notification unit 117 issues the first notification when the period (elapsed period) since the evaluation target and the evaluator entered into a mutual relationship is less than a threshold value. The first notification unit 117 issues the first notification, for example, when the administrator is performing an operation to add an evaluator for each evaluation target.

[0085] Fig. 18 is a diagram showing an example of the first notification. In the example of Fig. 18, the search result C7 shown in Fig. 16 is shown, and it is assumed that the administrator has just selected "User H" from the evaluator candidates and operated the save button B72. When the save button B72 is operated, the operation reception unit 212 of the administrator terminal 20 transmits to the server device 10 operation data indicating the person to be evaluated, the selected user (in this case, "User H"), the mutual relationship between the users, and the elapsed period (in this case, "Colleague" and "January").

[0086] The first notification unit 117 judges whether the elapsed period of the user indicated by the transmitted operation data is equal to or greater than a threshold. If the first notification unit 117 judges that the elapsed period is equal to or greater than the threshold, it ends the process, and if it judges that the elapsed period is less than the threshold, it generates first notification data indicating a first notification. The first notification unit 117 transmits the generated first notification data to the administrator terminal 20. The user display unit 211 of the administrator terminal 20 displays the first notification indicated by the transmitted first notification data.

[0087] In the example of FIG. 18, the user display unit 211 displays the first notification D8. The first notification D8 is a speech bubble image indicating the elapsed time of the selected evaluator candidate, and shows the character string "User H, who has been a colleague of the evaluation target for less than six months, has been selected. Is this OK?" In this example, it is assumed that "six months" is used as the threshold value. In this way, the first notification unit 117 creates a notification text using, for example, the user, the mutual relationship, and the elapsed time indicated by the operation data, and generates data indicating the created text as the first notification data.

[0088] The form of the first notification is not limited to this. For example, instead of the above-mentioned sentence including the user and the mutual relationship, a fixed sentence may be used. Also, the sentence may be simpler, such as "The elapsed period is too short," or a predetermined image may be displayed as the first notification. Also, the first notification may be read out by voice. Also, a voice or a buzzer sound may be emitted as the first notification. In either case, it is possible to suppress those who have a shallow relationship with the person to be evaluated from making an evaluation, compared to the case where the first notification is not performed.

[0089] Next, the second notification unit 118 will be described. When there is a bias in the interrelationships of the selected evaluators, the second notification unit 118 issues a second notification indicating the existence of such a bias. For example, like the first notification unit 117, the second notification unit 118 issues the second notification when the administrator is performing the task of adding an evaluator for each evaluation target. When the second notification unit 118 receives the operation data described in Fig. 18, it refers to the evaluation DB2 shown in Fig. 10 and reads out the evaluators and interrelationships of the evaluation target indicated by the received operation data.

[0090] When the second notification unit 118 adds the evaluator indicated by the operation data to the read-out evaluators (already selected evaluators), it judges whether or not there is a bias in the interrelationships of the selected evaluators. For example, the second notification unit 118 calculates the variance of the number of evaluators in each interrelationship, and judges that there is a bias when the calculated variance is equal to or greater than a threshold. Note that the method of judging the bias is not limited to this, and the second notification unit 118 may judge based on the difference from the average value of the number of evaluators in each interrelationship, or based on the difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​of the number of evaluators.

[0091] If the second notification unit 118 determines that there is no bias, it ends the process, and if it determines that there is bias, it generates second notification data indicating the second notification. The second notification unit 118 transmits the generated second notification data to the manager terminal 20. The user display unit 211 of the manager terminal 20 displays the second notification indicated by the transmitted second notification data.

[0092] Fig. 19 is a diagram showing an example of the second notification. In the example of Fig. 19, the search result C7 shown in Fig. 16 is shown, and the second notification D9 is displayed when the administrator selects "User J" from the evaluator candidates and operates the save button B72. The second notification D9 is a balloon-shaped image indicating the interrelationships of the selected evaluator candidates, and shows a character string saying "There is a bias in the interrelationships of the evaluators. Do you want to add them as is?" and a bar graph D91 showing the number of evaluators in each interrelationship.

[0093] In the example of FIG. 19, the bar graph D91 indicates that there are two superiors, one subordinate, and four colleagues including "user J." The administrator can see from the display of the second notification D9 that selecting user J will increase the bias, and can reselect a user with a different relationship as the evaluator to reduce the bias. In this way, the second notification can correct the bias in the relationships of the selected evaluator.

[0094] In the example of FIG. 19, the second notification unit 118 displays bias information indicating the state of bias in the relationships as the second notification. The bias information is, for example, a graph indicating the ratio of the number of evaluators in each relationship, and in the example of FIG. 19, it is a bar graph D91. Note that the bias information is not limited to this, and may be, for example, information indicating a suggestion to improve the bias (such as a sentence recommending the selection of a superior when there are few superiors). According to this aspect, it is possible to suppress the setting of evaluators with bias in the relationships, compared to the case where the second notification is not performed.

[0095] The form of the second notification is not limited to this. For example, the second notification may use a fixed sentence as in the example of FIG. 19, or may use a non-fixed sentence in which the user, the interrelationship, or the number of users changes. Also, a fixed image may be displayed as the second notification, or the second notification may be read out by voice. In either case, it is sufficient that the form is such that the user is informed that there is a bias in the interrelationships of the selected evaluators.

[0096] Furthermore, the timing at which the first notification and the second notification are made is not limited to the above timing (when the save button is operated) and may be, for example, the timing at which a candidate evaluator is selected. Furthermore, the need for notification may be determined at a predetermined time interval or at a predetermined time, and the first notification and the second notification may be made. Furthermore, the timing of the first notification and the second notification may be different. Furthermore, the first notification unit 117 and the second notification unit 118 may be a single notification unit.

[0097] <Evaluation result output> In the embodiment, the server display unit 111 functions as an example of an output unit that outputs an evaluation result when the evaluation subject performs a display operation. Here, the server display unit 111 may control the output timing of this evaluation result. Specifically, when the evaluation subject and the evaluator evaluate each other, the server display unit 111 outputs the evaluation result after both parties have completed their evaluations.

[0098] When request data for evaluation results is sent from the subject terminal 40, the memory control unit 112 refers to the evaluation DB2 and determines whether there is an evaluator who will mutually evaluate the subject indicated by the request data. If there is such an evaluator, the memory control unit 112 determines whether the mutual evaluations have been completed. If the memory control unit 112 determines that the mutual evaluations have not been completed, it does not read out the evaluation results.

[0099] The storage control unit 112 reads out the evaluation results when the subject of evaluation and the evaluator who evaluate each other are present and the evaluations of each other are completed. As a result, the server display unit 111 does not output the results of the evaluation until the subject of evaluation and the evaluator have completed their evaluations of each other. For example, when the subject of evaluation and the evaluator evaluate each other, if the other knows that the other has given a bad evaluation, the evaluator may want to give the other a bad evaluation, which may result in an unfair evaluation. Therefore, by adopting the above-mentioned mode, the evaluations of each other are not output until the evaluations of each other are completed, so that it is possible to prevent the evaluation of the other person that one has given from affecting the other person's evaluation.

[0100] <Display list of evaluator candidates> In the embodiment, the server display unit 111 displays the searched evaluator candidates as shown in Fig. 9, but the method of displaying the evaluator candidates is not limited to this. The server display unit 111 may function as an example of a list display unit that displays a list of evaluators who have the same interrelationship, for example.

[0101] Fig. 20 is a diagram showing an example of a displayed list of evaluators. In the example of Fig. 20, the user display unit 211 displays an addition image C10 for adding an evaluator. The addition image C10 shows an input field C101 for inputting a relationship with an evaluator candidate, and a list of evaluators C102. When a relationship (mutual relationship) with the person to be evaluated is input in the input field C101, the storage control unit 112 reads out the evaluator candidates who have the input mutual relationship with the person to be evaluated, and the server display unit 111 displays the read out list of evaluator candidates on the administrator terminal 20.

[0102] 20, a list of "colleagues" is displayed, but if "superior" is entered in the input field C101, a list of superiors is displayed, and if "subordinate" is entered, a list of subordinates is displayed. According to this embodiment, it is easier to select multiple evaluators with the same relationship than when a list of evaluators with the same relationship is not displayed.

[0103] <Configuration variations> The configuration shown in FIG. 1 and the like is an example, and other aspects may be adopted as long as there is no inconvenience in implementation. For example, one device may be distributed to two or more devices, or may be replaced by a cloud computing system. Furthermore, the functions of one device may be distributed and realized to two or more devices, or the functions of two or more devices may be concentrated and realized by one device. Furthermore, the operation performed by one function may be distributed to two or more functions, or two or more functions may be integrated into one function. In short, as long as each function required for the entire evaluation support system 1 is realized, the devices that realize those functions may have any configuration.

[0104] The above-described aspects of the embodiment are an information processing device such as the server device 10, and an information processing system such as the evaluation support system 1 including the server device 10, but may also be an information processing method. The information processing method includes each step executed by the evaluation support system. The above-described aspects of the embodiment may also be a program. The program causes a computer to execute each step executed by the evaluation support system.

[0105] <Other variations> The output destination of information or data (hereinafter referred to as "information, etc.") may be another device, a display, a memory unit (including a built-in memory unit and an external memory unit), etc. Acquisition of information, etc. includes acquiring information, etc. generated by the device itself, in addition to acquiring information, etc. transmitted from another device. The table in which parameters are associated is not limited to the table shown in the figure, and the number of parameters may be reduced or increased. Furthermore, information, etc. corresponding to parameters may be obtained by a formula, a conditional formula, etc., without using a table.

[0106] <Additional Notes> Furthermore, it may be provided in the following aspects:

[0107] (1) An evaluation support system comprising a processor, in a receiving step, the processor receives input for extracting an evaluator who will evaluate an individual to be evaluated, and in a relationship display step, displays the evaluator extracted by the input in a first manner corresponding to the relationship with the individual to be evaluated.

[0108] According to this embodiment, it is possible to improve the quality of multifaceted evaluations by various parties.

[0109] (2) In the evaluation support system described in (1) above, the first aspect includes an aspect in which the evaluator and a character string or an image indicating the relationship are displayed together.

[0110] According to this embodiment, the relationship with the person being evaluated can be immediately understood.

[0111] (3) In the evaluation support system described in (1) or (2) above, the relationships include one or more of relationships between the person being evaluated and a superior, subordinate, or colleague.

[0112] According to this embodiment, it is possible to easily select an evaluator who knows the person being evaluated better.

[0113] (4) In the evaluation support system described in (3) above, the superior is a person in a higher reporting line than the person being evaluated, the subordinate is a person in a lower reporting line than the person being evaluated, and the colleague is a person who has no hierarchical relationship with the person being evaluated and has a business relationship with the person being evaluated.

[0114] According to this embodiment, the relationship with the person being evaluated can be clearly determined.

[0115] (5) In the evaluation support system described in any one of (1) to (4) above, in the relationship display step, the processor displays the relationship between the subject of evaluation and the evaluator in a second manner corresponding to the period of time since the relationship was established between the subject of evaluation and the evaluator.

[0116] According to this embodiment, the evaluator can be selected taking into consideration the depth of the relationship with the person to be evaluated.

[0117] (6) In the evaluation support system described in any one of (1) to (5) above, in the first notification step, the processor makes a first notification when the period since the evaluation subject and the evaluator established the relationship is less than a threshold value.

[0118] According to this aspect, it is possible to prevent people with a short relationship with the person being evaluated from making an evaluation.

[0119] (7) In the evaluation support system described in any one of (1) to (6) above, in the second notification step, if there is a bias in the relationship of the selected evaluator, the processor displays bias information indicating the state of the bias in the relationship as a second notification indicating the existence of the bias.

[0120] According to this embodiment, it is possible to correct the imbalance in the relationship.

[0121] (8) In the evaluation support system described in any one of (1) to (7) above, in the first display step, the processor displays the progress of the evaluation for each of the evaluation subjects in a summary.

[0122] According to this embodiment, it is possible to grasp the progress of the evaluation for each person to be evaluated.

[0123] (9) In the evaluation support system according to any one of (1) to (7) above, in the second display step, the processor causes the progress of the evaluation by each evaluator to be displayed collectively for each evaluator.

[0124] According to this embodiment, it is possible to grasp the progress of the evaluation for each evaluator.

[0125] (10) In the evaluation support system described in any one of (1) to (9) above, in the output step, when the subject of evaluation and the evaluator evaluate each other, the processor outputs the results of the evaluation after both parties have completed their evaluation.

[0126] According to this embodiment, it is possible to prevent one's evaluation of another person from affecting that person's evaluation.

[0127] (11) In the evaluation support system according to any one of (1) to (10) above, in the list display step, the processor displays a list of the evaluators who have the same relationship.

[0128] According to this embodiment, it is possible to easily select multiple evaluators who have the same relationship.

[0129] (12) An information processing method comprising the steps of the evaluation support system according to any one of (1) to (11) above.

[0130] (13) A program for causing a computer to execute each step of the evaluation support system according to any one of (1) to (11) above. Of course, this is not the case. Furthermore, the above-described embodiments and modifications may be combined in any desired manner.

[0131] Finally, although various embodiments of the present invention have been described, these are presented as examples and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. The new embodiments can be implemented in various other forms, and various omissions, substitutions, and modifications can be made without departing from the spirit of the invention. The embodiments and their modifications are within the scope and spirit of the invention, and are included in the scope of the invention and its equivalents described in the claims. [Explanation of symbols]

[0132] 1: Evaluation support system 10: Server device 11: Control section 20: Administrator terminal 30: Evaluator terminal 40: Target device 111: Server display section 112: Memory control unit 113: Evaluator Extraction Unit 114: Relationship determination section 115: Evaluator Determination Division 116: Evaluation Request Department 117: First Notification Department 118:Second Notification Department 211: User display section 212: Operation reception section 311: User display section 312: Operation reception section 411: User display section 412: Operation reception section

Claims

1. It is an evaluation support system, A processor is provided, and the processor is The registration step accepts input to extract evaluators who will evaluate the person being evaluated. In a specific step, the relationship between the person being evaluated and the evaluator, and the period since that relationship was established, are identified. The aforementioned processor further, In the relationship display step, the evaluators extracted by the input are displayed in a manner corresponding to the period since the relationship between the person being evaluated and the evaluator was established, and / or In the notification step, a notification is given if the period since the relationship between the person being evaluated and the evaluator has been established is less than the threshold. Evaluation support system.

2. In the evaluation support system described in claim 1, The aforementioned relationship includes one or more relationships among the superior, subordinate, or colleague of the person being evaluated. Evaluation support system.

3. In the evaluation support system described in claim 2, The aforementioned supervisor is in a higher reporting line than the person being evaluated. The aforementioned subordinate is located in a lower reporting line to the person being evaluated. The aforementioned colleague is someone who has no hierarchical relationship with the person being evaluated and who has a work-related relationship with them. Evaluation support system.

4. In the evaluation support system according to Claim 1, The aforementioned processor, As part of the notification step, a notification document is created using the relationship and period, and data indicating the created document is notified as notification data. Evaluation support system.

5. In the evaluation support system according to Claim 1, The aforementioned processor, As part of the relationship display step, a plurality of candidates for the evaluator are displayed, and each of the plurality of evaluators is displayed in a manner corresponding to the period. Evaluation support system.

6. In the evaluation support system described in claim 1, The aforementioned processor, In the bias notification step, if there is a bias in the relationship of the selected evaluator, bias information indicating the state of bias in the relationship is displayed as a notification indicating that there is a bias. Evaluation support system.

7. In the evaluation support system described in claim 1, The aforementioned processor, In the display step, the progress of the evaluation is displayed for each evaluator or each person being evaluated. Evaluation support system.

8. In the evaluation support system described in claim 1, The aforementioned processor, In the output step, if the person being evaluated and the evaluator evaluate each other, the results of the evaluation are output after both evaluations are completed. Evaluation support system.

9. In the evaluation support system described in claim 1, The aforementioned processor, In the list display step, a list of evaluators who share the same relationship is displayed. Evaluation support system.

10. Information processing method, The system comprises each step of the evaluation support system described in any one of claims 1 to 9. Information processing methods.

11. It is a program, The computer is made to perform each step of the evaluation support system described in any one of claims 1 to 9. program.

Images