Computer system, program and method for providing advice on communication

Abstract

To provide a computer system, a program and a method, which provide an advice on the communication, capable of remedying defects in the communication.SOLUTION: Provided is a computer system which provides an advice on communication. The computer system (100) of the present invention is constituted so as to perform the steps of: receiving characteristics of a plurality of users (S501); comparing the characteristics of two users among the plurality of users to each other (S502); and outputting an advice on the communication between two users based on comparison of the characteristics of the two users (S503).SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 5

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a computer system, a program, and a method for providing advice to a user, and more particularly to a computer system, a program, and a method for providing advice about communication. [Background technology]

[0002] A system is known that analyzes the status of members in an organization and provides advice on actions to improve the status of the members and the organization (Patent Document 1). This system provides advice on how members should act within the organization based on the difference between the status of the members and the status of the organization. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] International Publication No. 2011 / 125272 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] The inventors of the present invention have discovered that when giving advice about communication between multiple members working together in an organization, it is effective to give advice taking into account the differences in characteristics between each member and the other party in addition to, or instead of, the characteristics of the organization as a whole. By giving advice about communication that focuses on the differences in characteristics between each member and the other party, rather than averaging the characteristics of multiple members, the member receiving the advice can communicate while being aware of the differences between them and the other party, and problems in communication can be improved.

[0005] An object of the present invention is to provide a computer system, a program, and a method for providing advice on communication that can improve problems in communication.

[0006] Another object of the present invention is to provide a computer system, program, and method that provides communication advice based on objective analysis, rather than on uncertain variables such as empirical rules, intuition, or subjective perception.

[0007] Another object of the present invention is to provide a computer system, program, and method for evaluating communication between members using indicators that are easy to understand. [Means for solving the problem]

[0008] The present invention provides a computer system for providing advice about communication, the computer system comprising: a receiving means for receiving characteristics of a plurality of users; a comparing means for comparing the characteristics of two users among the plurality of users; and an output means for outputting advice about communication between the two users based on the comparison of the characteristics of the two users.

[0009] In one embodiment, the comparison means compares the characteristics of the two users with each other in at least four aspects.

[0010] In one embodiment, each of the at least four aspects is subdivided into a plurality of items, and the comparison means compares the characteristics of the two users with each other for each of the plurality of items.

[0011] In one embodiment, the output means outputs advice associated with at least one of the plurality of items that has the greatest difference between the two users.

[0012] In one embodiment, the output means graphically outputs the comparison result by the comparison means.

[0013] In one embodiment, the system further comprises a determining means for determining the characteristics of the plurality of users based on input data, and the receiving means receives the characteristics of the plurality of users from the determining means.

[0014] In one embodiment, the determining means determines the characteristic in terms of at least four aspects.

[0015] In one embodiment, the determining means determines the characteristics using a correspondence table that associates the input data with the at least four aspects.

[0016] In one embodiment, each of the at least four aspects is subdivided into a plurality of items, and the determining means determines the characteristic using a correspondence table that associates the input data with the plurality of items.

[0017] In one embodiment, the input data is data indicating answers to questions posed to the plurality of users.

[0018] In one embodiment, the input data is data indicative of actions of the plurality of users.

[0019] In one embodiment, the comparison means compares characteristics of an additional user among the plurality of users with characteristics of the two users, and the output means outputs advice regarding communication between the two users and the additional user based on a comparison of the characteristics of the two users and the characteristics of the additional user.

[0020] The present invention provides a program for providing advice about communication, the program being executed in a computer system having a processor unit, and when executed, the program causes the processor unit to perform processing including receiving characteristics of a plurality of users, comparing the characteristics of two users among the plurality of users with each other, and outputting advice about communication between the two users based on the comparison of the characteristics of the two users.

[0021] The present invention provides a method for providing advice about communication, the method being executed in a computer system, the method including receiving characteristics of a plurality of users, comparing characteristics of two users of the plurality of users with each other, and outputting advice about communication between the two users based on the comparison of the characteristics of the two users.

[0022] The present invention provides a computer system for providing advice on communication, the computer system comprising: a first receiving means for receiving characteristics of a user; a second receiving means for receiving a notification indicating that the user is in one of a plurality of situations; and an output means for outputting phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user based on the situation and the characteristics of the user.

[0023] In one embodiment, the second receiving means receives a notification indicating that the user is in a good situation and / or a notification indicating that the user is in a bad situation.

[0024] In one embodiment, the second receiving means receives the notification in response to an input from a user other than the user.

[0025] In one embodiment, the second receiving means receives the notification in response to an input from the user.

[0026] In one embodiment, the characteristics are subdivided into a plurality of items, each of the plurality of situations is associated with at least one of the plurality of items, and the output means outputs phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user based on at least one of the plurality of items associated with the situation among the characteristics of the user.

[0027] In one embodiment, the output means outputs the number and / or name of the user who made the input.

[0028] In one embodiment, the system further comprises a determining means for determining the characteristics of the plurality of users based on input data, and the first receiving means receives the characteristics of the users from the determining means.

[0029] In one embodiment, the determining means determines the characteristic in terms of at least four aspects.

[0030] In one embodiment, the determining means determines the characteristics using a correspondence table that associates the input data with the at least four aspects.

[0031] In one embodiment, each of the at least four aspects is subdivided into a plurality of items, and the determining means determines the characteristic using a correspondence table that associates the input data with the plurality of items.

[0032] In one embodiment, the input data is data indicating answers to questions posed to the plurality of users.

[0033] In one embodiment, the input data is data indicative of actions of the plurality of users.

[0034] The present invention provides a program for providing advice on communication, the program being executed in a computer system having a processor unit, and when executed, the program causes the processor unit to perform processing including receiving characteristics of a user, receiving a notification indicating that the user is in one of a plurality of situations, and outputting phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user based on the situation and the characteristics of the user.

[0035] The present invention provides a method for providing communication advice, the method being executed in a computer system, the method including receiving characteristics of a user, receiving a notification indicating that the user is in one of a plurality of situations, and outputting phrases to be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user based on the situation and the characteristics of the user.

[0036] The present invention provides a computer system for evaluating communication, the computer system comprising: a receiving means for receiving a first result in which a first user evaluates a communication conducted by the first user to a second user; and a second result in which the second user evaluates a communication conducted by the first user to the second user; and an output means for outputting, based on the first result and the second result, a degree of achievement of the communication between the first user and the second user and a difference in perception of the communication between the first user and the second user in a single index.

[0037] In one embodiment, the output means outputs the index using a correspondence table that associates the first result with the second result.

[0038] In one embodiment, the correspondence table is configured so that the higher the first result or the second result, the higher the index, and so that the smaller the difference between the first result and the second result, the higher the index.

[0039] In one embodiment, the output means outputs the index as a numerical value.

[0040] In one embodiment, the system further includes a second receiving means for receiving a third result in which a second user evaluates the communication that the second user has made to a first user, and a fourth result in which the first user evaluates the communication that the second user has made to the first user, and the output means outputs a single indicator representing the degree of achievement of the communication between the first user and the second user and the difference in perception of the communication between the first user and the second user based on the first result, the second result, the third result, and the fourth result.

[0041] In one embodiment, the output means outputs a single index representing the degree of communication achievement between the first user and the second user and the difference in perception of the communication between the first user and the second user by averaging a first index obtained based on the first result and the second result and a second index obtained based on the third result and the fourth result. The present invention provides a program for evaluating communication, which is executed in a computer system having a processor unit, and when executed, the program causes the processor unit to perform processing including receiving a first result in which a first user evaluates communication that the first user has conducted with a second user, and a second result in which the second user evaluates communication that the first user has conducted with the second user, and outputting a single indicator representing the degree of success of communication between the first user and the second user and the difference in perception of the communication between the first user and the second user based on the first result and the second result.

[0042] The present invention provides a method for providing advice about communication, the method being executed in a computer system, the method including receiving a first result in which a first user evaluates a communication that the first user has made to a second user, and a second result in which the second user evaluates a communication that the first user has made to the second user, and outputting a single indicator representing the degree of success of the communication between the first user and the second user and a difference in perception of the communication between the first user and the second user based on the first result and the second result. [Effects of the Invention]

[0043] According to the present invention, it is possible to provide a computer system, a program, and a method for providing advice on communication that can improve communication problems. This improves communication between members of an organization, promotes collaboration between members of the organization, and leads to increased efficiency. It is also possible to promote more effective management of the organization.

[0044] Furthermore, the present invention provides a computer system, program, and method for providing advice about communication based on objective analysis, which eliminates advice based on uncertain variables such as experience, intuition, and subjective perception, thereby enabling appropriate communication with organizational members.

[0045] Furthermore, the present invention can provide a computer system, program, and method for evaluating communication between members using easily understandable indicators, which makes it possible to easily understand and compare the quality of communication between members of an organization, and to easily grasp the state of the organization. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0046] [Figure 1A] FIG. 1 shows an example of a questionnaire 10 for analyzing the characteristics of members in an organization. [Figure 1B] FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of a result display screen 20-1 that displays the results of analyzing the answers to the questionnaire 10 by the computer system of the present invention. [Figure 1C] FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of a result display screen 20-2 that displays the results of analyzing the answers to the questionnaire 10 by the computer system of the present invention. [Figure 1D] FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of a result display screen 30 that displays the results of analyzing the responses to a questionnaire 10 by the computer system of the present invention. [Figure 1E] FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of a result display screen 40 that displays the results of analyzing the responses to a questionnaire 10 by the computer system of the present invention. [Figure 2A] FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of a report screen 50 on which members of an organization use the computer system of the present invention to report the status of each member to a manager (administrator). [Figure 2B] FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a notification screen 60 for notifying that a member of an organization is in a negative situation. [Figure 3A] FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation screen 70-1 for an organization member to evaluate communication with other members in the organization using the computer system of the present invention. [Figure 3B] FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation screen 70-2 for an organization member to evaluate communication with other members in the organization using the computer system of the present invention. [Figure 3C] FIG. 8 shows a result display screen 80 that displays the results of an analysis of the quality of communication between members of an organization based on the evaluations entered on evaluation screens 70-1 and 70-2. [Figure 4A] 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a computer system 100 according to the present invention that can provide advice about communication or evaluate the quality of communication. [Figure 4B] FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a processor unit 120. [Figure 5] 5 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a process 500 performed in the computer system 100 for providing communication advice. [Figure 6] FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a correspondence table 600 for determining user characteristics. [Figure 7] 7 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a process 700 performed in the computer system 100 for providing communication advice. [Figure 8] 8 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a process 800 performed in the computer system 100 for evaluating a communication. [Figure 9] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a correspondence table 900 for determining an index. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0047] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0048] 1. Providing advice based on user characteristics analysis FIG. 1A shows an example of a questionnaire 10 used to analyze the characteristics of members in an organization.

[0049] The questionnaire 10 includes multiple questions, which generally involve questions about the actions to be taken in a given situation and questions about how to feel about a given situation. Each member of the organization answers each question in a multiple-choice format. For example, they answer by checking the right side of the questionnaire 10 and selecting the appropriate option.

[0050] This example explains the analysis of the characteristics of members in a work organization. A question ascertaining the behavior to choose in a given situation might be, "My boss has asked me to take on a new task that has never been done before in the company. The other members have not yet been assigned. What kind of task would you like to take on?", with responses from options such as, "A task that is likely to become a hot topic in the media," or "A task where I can utilize my experience and skills." A question ascertaining the behavior to choose in a given situation might be, "I have found that the team's performance goals are unlikely to be achieved. When it comes time to review your own goals, what will you do?" with responses from options such as, "I will work toward achieving my original goals," or "I will aim to exceed my original goals for the team."

[0051] A question asking how participants felt about a certain situation might be, for example, "Your boss talked to you about setting goals for this quarter. He said that the team will also have big goals this quarter, and that he would like you to set high goals as well. He said that you might not be sure if you can achieve them, but that we should work hard together. Do you think you can take on this challenge in a positive way?" and asked participants to respond using a five-point scale ranging from "I have no motivation at all" to "I can take on this challenge without any problems."

[0052] The questions and their options in the questionnaire 10 are merely examples, and other questions and options may be used. The number of options may be any number equal to or greater than two.

[0053] The responses to the questionnaire 10 by each member of the organization are input into the computer system of the present invention and analyzed.

[0054] 1B and 1C show examples of result display screens 20-1 and 20-2 that display the results of an analysis performed by the computer system of the present invention on the response results of the questionnaire 10. The result display screens 20-1 and 20-2 may be configured so that the result display screen 20-2 is displayed when the result display screen 20-1 is scrolled down, or may be displayed as separate screens.

[0055] As an example, the result display screens 20-1 and 20-2 display the results of analysis of the answers of person AAA who answered the questionnaire 10 by the computer system of the present invention.

[0056] The result display screen 20-1 includes, for example, a first display unit 21, a second display unit 22, and a third display unit 23. The first display unit 21 displays advice on what AAA should be aware of to demonstrate their abilities based on the characteristics of AAA determined from AAA's answers. The second display unit 22 displays the characteristics of AAA's desires determined from AAA's answers. Here, from the perspective of "desires at work," the characteristics of AAA's desires are displayed as a radar chart with items such as "I want to solve difficult problems," "I want to support others," "I want to exert influence," "I want to express my originality," "I want to be recognized," and "I want to achieve my goals." The third display unit 23 displays the characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters determined from AAA's answers. Here, from the perspective of "what kind of mood helps you work more efficiently," the characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters are displayed as a radar chart with items such as "when I feel I have to do it," "when I feel understood," "when I feel safe and secure," and "when I want to do it."

[0057] For example, the second display section 22 in Figure 1B shows that AAA has strong desires in his / her work, such as "wanting to exert influence," "wanting to be recognized," and "wanting to achieve goals," and the third display section 23 in Figure 1B shows that AAA works best when, for example, "he / she feels he / she has to do it" and "when he / she feels safe and secure."

[0058] For AAA who has such characteristics, the computer system of the present invention determines that AAA should be aware of, for example, "collecting information about the background, purpose, and significance of work and gaining a deep understanding," "sharing work results, progress methods, and ways of thinking with those around you," and "setting detailed work tasks and schedules and steadily achieving them" in order to demonstrate his or her abilities, and displays these on the first display unit 21. As a result, AAA can receive advice on what he or she should be aware of in order to demonstrate his or her abilities simply by answering the questionnaire 10.

[0059] The result display screen 20-2 includes, for example, a fourth display section 24, a fifth display section 25, and a sixth display section 26. The fourth display section 24 is a section that displays advice on what AAA should be aware of in order to work with less stress, based on AAA's characteristics determined from AAA's answers. The fifth display section 25 is a section that displays AAA's particular characteristics determined from AAA's answers. Here, AAA's particular characteristics are displayed as a line graph with the items "emotions," "connections," "teamwork," "progress management," "fact analysis," "perfection," and "scope of role" from the perspective of "things to consider when advancing work." The sixth display section 26 is a section that displays AAA's characteristics of how they perceive stress, determined from AAA's answers. Here, the characteristics of how AAA feels stress are displayed in an area graph with the following categories from the perspective of "points that cause stress": "qualitative goals," "quantitative goals," "attainable goals," "high goals," "unclear way of doing work," "unclear background or reasons," "reporting and consulting as needed," "frequent reporting and consulting," "plans change," "decided plans," "long-term work," "short-term work," "interacting with the same people," "interacting with new people," "involving others," and "taking action on your own."

[0060] For example, the fifth display section 25 in Figure 1C shows that AAA places importance on, for example, "perfection," "fact analysis," and "scope of role" when working, and the sixth display section 26 in Figure 1C shows that AAA feels stressed by, for example, "frequent reporting and consultations" and "changes in plans."

[0061] For AAA who has such characteristics, the computer system of the present invention determines that AAA should be aware of things to be aware of in order to work with less stress, such as "clarifying standards for work completion and sharing them with those around him," "consulting with his superior to set the frequency of reports and consultations according to the situation," and "understanding changes in the work situation and taking measures to anticipate such changes in advance," and displays these on the fourth display unit 24. Thus, by simply answering the questionnaire 10, AAA can receive advice on what he should be aware of in order to work with less stress.

[0062] In the above example, it was explained that the computer system of the present invention determines the characteristics of Mr. AAA and provides advice to Mr. AAA, but the computer system of the present invention can also determine the characteristics of each member of an organization other than Mr. AAA as shown in Figures 1B and 1C, and based on those characteristics, provide advice on what they should be aware of in order to demonstrate their strengths, and advice on what they should be aware of in order to work while reducing stress.

[0063] The computer system of the present invention can further provide advice on what members should be aware of in order to work effectively together with each other, and advice on what members should be aware of in order to work with less stress, based on the characteristics determined for each member of the organization.

[0064] FIG. 1D shows an example of a result display screen 30 that displays the results of analyzing the responses to the questionnaire 10 using the computer system of the present invention.

[0065] As an example, the result display screen 30 displays the results of analysis of the answers of AAA and DDD who answered the questionnaire 10 by the computer system of the present invention.

[0066] The result display screen 30 includes, for example, a first display section 31, a second display section 32, and a third display section 33. The first display section 31 is a section that displays advice regarding what AAA and DDD should be aware of in order to demonstrate their respective strengths when working together, based on AAA's characteristics determined from AAA's answer results and DDD's characteristics determined from DDD's answer results.

[0067] The second display unit 32 displays the characteristics of AAA's desires determined from AAA's answers and the characteristics of DDD's desires determined from DDD's answers. The second display unit 32 displays the characteristics of AAA's desires and the characteristics of DDD's desires using a radar chart similar to that of the second display unit 21 in FIG. 1B. The characteristics of AAA's desires and the characteristics of DDD's desires may be displayed in different ways (e.g., different shades, colors, brightness, etc.), and overlapping portions of the characteristics of AAA's desires and the characteristics of DDD's desires may also be displayed in different ways. This allows the user to visually easily recognize the similarities and differences between the characteristics of AAA's desires and the characteristics of DDD's desires.

[0068] The third display unit 33 displays the characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters determined from AAA's answers and the characteristics of DDD's brain neurotransmitters determined from DDD's answers. The third display unit 33 displays the characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters and the characteristics of DDD's brain neurotransmitters using a radar chart similar to that of the third display unit 23 in FIG. 1B. The characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters and the characteristics of DDD's brain neurotransmitters may be displayed in different ways (e.g., different shades, colors, brightness, etc.), and overlapping portions of the characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters and the characteristics of DDD's brain neurotransmitters may also be displayed in different ways. This allows the user to visually easily recognize the similarities and differences between the characteristics of AAA's brain neurotransmitters and the characteristics of DDD's brain neurotransmitters.

[0069] For example, the second display section 32 in Fig. 1D shows that AAA and DDD share common work desires, such as "wanting to be recognized" and "wanting to solve difficult problems," but differ in their work desires, such as "wanting to achieve goals" and "wanting to have influence." The third display section 33 in Fig. 1D shows that AAA and DDD share common times when they work best, such as "when they feel safe and secure," but differ in times when they work best, such as "when they feel they have to do something."

[0070] For AAA and DDD, who have similarities and differences in these characteristics, the computer system of the present invention determines that AAA and DDD should be aware of things to help them work to their full potential, such as "setting roles that allow them to complement each other toward a common goal," "creating an atmosphere where they can freely express their thoughts and feelings," and "clarifying work objectives and deadlines and constantly checking them," and displays these on the first display unit 31. As a result, by simply answering the questionnaire 10, AAA and DDD can receive advice on what they should be aware of and how they should communicate in order to work to their full potential when working together.

[0071] Although not shown, the computer system of the present invention may display a result display screen including a fourth display unit, a fifth display unit, and a sixth display unit corresponding to the fourth display unit 24, the fifth display unit 25, and the sixth display unit 26 in FIG. 1C , and in this case, the fourth display unit, the fifth display unit, and the sixth display unit may display advice on what AAA and DDD should be aware of in order to work with less stress, the characteristics of AAA and DDD's preferences, and the characteristics of how AAA and DDD perceive stress. In this way, by simply answering Questionnaire 10, AAA and DDD can receive advice on what they should be aware of and how they should communicate in order to work together with less stress.

[0072] In the example shown in Figure 1D, advice is provided in the relationship between AAA and DDD, but by changing the pairing, advice can be provided in the relationship between any members in an organization.

[0073] The computer system of the present invention can further provide advice on what to be aware of in order to perform effectively when working in a team consisting of multiple members, and advice on what to be aware of in order to work with less stress, based on the characteristics determined for each member of the organization.

[0074] FIG. 1E shows an example of a result display screen 40 that displays the results of analyzing the responses to the questionnaire 10 using the computer system of the present invention.

[0075] As an example, the results display screen 40 displays the results of an analysis performed by the computer system of the present invention of the responses of AAA, BBB, FFF, and KKK who responded to questionnaire 10 for a team consisting of AAA, BBB, FFF, and KKK.

[0076] The result display screen 40 includes, for example, a first display section 41, a second display section 42, and a third display section 43. The first display section 31 is a section that displays advice regarding what each member of a team consisting of AAA, BBB, FFF, and KKK should be aware of in order to demonstrate their strengths when working as a team, based on the characteristics of AAA determined from the results of AAA's answers, the characteristics of BBB determined from the results of BBB's answers, the characteristics of FFF determined from the results of FFF's answers, and the characteristics of KKK determined from the results of KKK's answers.

[0077] The second display unit 42 displays the desire characteristics of AAA determined from AAA's answers, the desire characteristics of BBB determined from BBB's answers, the desire characteristics of FFF determined from FFF's answers, and the desire characteristics of KKK determined from KKK's answers. The second display unit 42 displays the desire characteristics of each team member using a radar chart similar to that of the second display unit 21 in FIG. 1B. The desire characteristics of each team member may be displayed in different ways (e.g., different shades, colors, brightness, etc.), and overlapping portions of the desire characteristics of each team member may also be displayed in different ways. This makes it easy to visually recognize the similarities and differences in the desire characteristics of each team member.

[0078] The third display unit 43 displays the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of AAA determined from AAA's answers, the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of BBB determined from BBB's answers, the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of FFF determined from FFF's answers, and the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of KKK determined from KKK's answers. The third display unit 43 displays the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of each team member using a radar chart similar to that of the third display unit 23 in FIG. 1B. The brain neurotransmitter characteristics of each team member may be displayed in different ways (e.g., different shades, colors, brightness, etc.), and overlapping portions of the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of each team member may also be displayed in different ways. This allows the team members to visually easily recognize similarities and differences in the brain neurotransmitter characteristics of each team member.

[0079] For example, the second display section 42 in Fig. 1E shows that there are large differences between team members in their desires for work, such as "wanting to solve difficult problems" and "wanting to achieve goals." The third display section 43 in Fig. 1B shows that there is a commonality between team members in the times when they feel most productive at work, such as "when they feel understood," but there are large differences between team members in the times when they feel most productive at work, such as "when they feel they have to do it."

[0080] For each member of a team who has similarities and differences in these characteristics, the computer system of the present invention determines that the team members should be aware of in order to demonstrate their abilities, for example, "aligning what they want to achieve by achieving the goal," "agreeing among members on the level of achievement they are aiming for in each task," and "sharing each other's situations and thoughts and having opportunities to discuss them on an ongoing basis," and displays these on the first display unit 41. Thus, by simply answering the questionnaire 10, each team member can receive advice on what they should be aware of or how they should communicate in order to demonstrate their abilities when working as a team.

[0081] Although not shown, the computer system of the present invention may display a result display screen including a fourth display unit, a fifth display unit, and a sixth display unit corresponding to the fourth display unit 24, the fifth display unit 25, and the sixth display unit 26 in FIG. 1C , and in this case, the fourth display unit, the fifth display unit, and the sixth display unit may display advice on what each team member should be aware of in order to work with less stress when working as a team, the characteristics of each team member's obsessions, and the characteristics of how each team member perceives stress. Thus, by simply answering the questionnaire 10, each team member can receive advice on what they should be aware of and how they should communicate with each other in order to work with less stress when working as a team.

[0082] In the example shown in Figure 1E, advice is provided to a team consisting of AAA, BBB, FFF, and KKK. However, by changing the members that make up the team, advice can be provided to a team consisting of any members in the organization.

[0083] FIG. 2A shows an example of a report screen 50 that allows members of an organization to report the status of each member to a manager (administrator) using the computer system of the present invention.

[0084] As an example, the report screen 50 displays a screen for AAA to report on the status of the team members.

[0085] The report screen 50 includes a member display section 51, a selection button 52, and a "Nothing in particular at the moment" button 53. The member display section 51 is a section that displays the members of the organization. All members of the organization may be displayed, or only some members, for example, members excluding managers, may be displayed.

[0086] AAA selects a member for whom he / she wishes to report on the status from the member display section 51. Next, AAA selects one of multiple statuses for that member's status and selects whether the status is positive (good) or negative (bad). For example, if AAA feels that CCC is having trouble with the way he / she is doing or progressing with his / her work, he / she can report this to his / her manager by selecting CCC from the member display section 51 and selecting the "Seems to be having trouble!" button in the "How he / she is doing or progressing with his / her work" column of the selection buttons 52. For example, if AAA feels that LLL is becoming more positive about continuing his / her current job, he / she can report this to his / her manager by selecting LLL from the member display section 51 and selecting the "Becoming more positive!" button in the "Continuing with his / her current job" column of the selection buttons 52. For example, AAA may report his / her own status by self-reporting. In this case, he / she selects AAA from the member display section 51 and selects the appropriate button from the selection buttons 52. For example, if AAA is not feeling anything at the moment, he or she can close the report screen 50 by selecting the "Nothing in particular right now" button 53.

[0087] The multiple situations displayed on the report screen 50 are merely an example, and other situations may be used. Also, the number of options is not limited to two options, good or bad, and may be any number greater than or equal to two, and the situation may be evaluated and reported in multiple stages.

[0088] A report that a certain member of an organization is in a positive state (good state) can be notified to the manager (supervisor) and the member. This allows the manager to understand the member's state of affairs in the organization and also increases the member's motivation. A report that a certain member of an organization is in a negative state (bad state) can be notified to the manager (supervisor) without notifying the member.

[0089] FIG. 2B shows an example of a notification screen 60 for notifying a member in an organization that he or she is in a negative situation.

[0090] As an example, the notification screen 60 displays a screen for notifying that AAA is in a situation where he or she is having difficulty proceeding with his or her work as planned. The notification screen 60 may be displayed, for example, in response to a report on the report screen 50 that AAA is in a negative situation. The notification screen 60 may be viewable only by a person who has the authority to manage the organization, such as a manager.

[0091] The notification screen 60 includes a reporter display section 61, a first phrase display section 62, and a second phrase display section 63.

[0092] The reporter display section 61 displays the people who reported that AAA seems to be having trouble proceeding with the work as planned. Here, three members (BBB, FFF, and KKK) are displayed. The reporter display section 61 may, for example, display only the number of people who made reports, or may display the names of the people who made reports and the times when they made reports.

[0093] Taking into account the characteristics of AAA, phrases that are effective for AAA in the current situation or phrases that should be conveyed to AAA are displayed in the first phrase display section 62. Phrases that are effective for AAA in the current situation could be, for example, "People have high expectations of you," "You must be lucky that so many people are worried about you," "You'll have another chance because this is a company that values ​​you now," etc.

[0094] In consideration of the characteristics of AAA, phrases that are ineffective for AAA in the current situation or phrases that should not be conveyed to AAA are displayed in the second phrase display section 63. Phrases that are ineffective for AAA in the current situation could be, for example, "This is a difficult job for me to do alone, so could you help me?", "I've been doing well lately, so why don't I try this next time?", "Your work the other day was great, so I'd like you to do it again next time", etc.

[0095] The effective phrases displayed in the first phrase display area 62 and the ineffective phrases displayed in the second phrase display area 63 change depending on the characteristics of AAA and the situation of AAA. As a result, the effective phrases and ineffective phrases match the characteristics of the person and the current situation, and the manager can provide advice that matches the characteristics of the person and the current situation, rather than advice based on rules of thumb or intuition.

[0096] (Evaluation of the quality of communication between users) 3A and 3B show examples of evaluation screens 70-1 and 70-2 for an organization member to evaluate communication with other members in the organization using the computer system of the present invention.

[0097] As an example, the evaluation screens 70-1 and 70-2 display screens on which AAA evaluates communication with other members in the organization. The evaluation screen 70-1 is a screen on which AAA evaluates communication that AAA has had with other members in the organization, and the evaluation screen 70-2 is a screen on which AAA evaluates communication that other members in the organization have had with AAA.

[0098] The evaluation screen 70-1 includes an evaluation target display section 71 and an evaluation selection button 72. The evaluation target display section 71 displays members of the organization who may be evaluation targets. The evaluation target display section 71 may display all members of the organization, or may display only a portion of the members, for example, members excluding management. The evaluation target display section 71 displays the person whose communication AAA will evaluate. The evaluation targets may be displayed, for example, by selecting a specific person from among candidates, or may be displayed in order starting with BBB at the top. The evaluation selection button 72 is a button for AAA to evaluate the communication conducted with the evaluation target. AAA can evaluate the communication conducted with the evaluation target by selecting the appropriate button from nine levels ranging from "I don't think I was able to communicate at all" to "I think I was able to communicate very well" while being mindful of differences between the other person. Note that although a nine-level evaluation has been described as an example, two-level, three-level, four-level evaluation, etc., may also be used, and any number of evaluation levels may be used. Alternatively, the scale may be a simple numerical scale such as "-3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3."

[0099] For example, when AAA feels that he / she did not communicate with BBB in a way that took into consideration the differences between them, he / she displays BBB in the evaluation target display section 71 and selects “I think I did not do it” in the evaluation selection button 72. For example, when AAA feels that he / she did not communicate with EEE in a way that took into consideration the differences between them, he / she displays EEE in the evaluation target display section 71 and selects “There was almost no communication” in the evaluation selection button 72.

[0100] The evaluation screen 70-2 includes an evaluation target display section 73 and an evaluation selection button 74. The evaluation target display section 73 displays members of the organization who may be evaluation targets. The evaluation target display section 73 may display all members of the organization, or may display only some members, for example, members excluding management. The evaluation target display section 73 displays the person whose communication AAA will evaluate. The evaluation targets may be displayed, for example, by selecting a specific person from among candidates, or may be displayed in order starting with BBB at the top. The evaluation selection button 74 is a button for evaluating the communication between the evaluation target and AAA. The evaluation target can evaluate the communication between the evaluation target and AAA by selecting the appropriate button from eight levels ranging from "not at all" to "very much" as to whether the evaluation target communicated with AAA while being conscious of differences between them. Note that although an eight-level evaluation has been described as an example, two-level, three-level, four-level evaluation, etc., may also be used, and any number of evaluation levels may be used. Alternatively, the scale may be a simple numerical scale such as "-3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3."

[0101] For example, when AAA feels that BBB did not communicate with AAA with an awareness of the difference between them, he / she will display BBB in the evaluation target display section 73 and select "I don't feel that way" using the evaluation selection button 74. For example, when AAA feels that EEE communicated with AAA with an awareness of the difference between them, he / she will display EEE in the evaluation target display section 73 and select "I feel that way very much" using the evaluation selection button 74.

[0102] In this way, AAA's subjective and objective evaluations of communication between AAA and other members in the organization are input.

[0103] In the example above, we explained that AAA evaluates the communication between the members of the organization, but other members of the organization can also evaluate the communication between the members of the organization subjectively and objectively. This will clarify each member's perception of the communication between the members.

[0104] FIG. 3C shows a result display screen 80 that displays the results of an analysis of the quality of communication between each member of the organization based on the evaluations entered on the evaluation screens 70-1 and 70-2.

[0105] The result display screen 80 can be viewable only by a person who has the authority to manage the organization, such as a manager. The result display screen 80 includes a first display unit 81 and a second display unit 82. The first display unit 81 displays the quality of communication between each member of the organization as a score from 0 to 100 points. 0 points indicates the worst quality of communication, and 100 points indicates the best quality of communication. The second display unit 82 displays the quality of communication between each individual as a score from 0 to 100 points. The quality of communication between an individual can be determined according to the quality of communication between the individual and each member of the organization.

[0106] The lower the quality of communication, the darker the color of the score displayed on the result display screen 80. This allows a viewer of the result display screen 80 to easily visually recognize information about the poor communication between people.

[0107] The result display screen 80 also displays the quality of communication between the manager of the organization and the manager and each member, allowing those viewing the result display screen 80 to quantitatively grasp not only the relationships between the members of the organization but also the relationships between the members of the organization and the manager, and to objectively grasp the situation of the organization.

[0108] In the above example, an evaluation is made to see whether communication was conducted with the other party in mind, but the present invention is not limited to this. It is also within the scope of the present invention to evaluate communication conducted with the other party from any viewpoint. For example, an evaluation may be made to see whether communication was conducted with the TPO in mind, or a vague evaluation may be made to see whether communication was conducted.

[0109] In the above example, the characteristics of members in a work organization are analyzed to provide advice on work communication and evaluate the quality of work communication. However, the present invention is not limited to this. The characteristics of members in any organization can be analyzed to provide advice on communication in any situation and evaluate the quality of communication in any situation. For example, the characteristics of members in a sports team can be analyzed to provide advice on communication at a sports game or practice and evaluate the quality of communication at a sports game or practice. For example, the characteristics of members in a school class can be analyzed to provide advice on communication in school life and evaluate the quality of communication in school life.

[0110] In the following, a computer system 100 of the present invention that can provide advice about communication or evaluate the quality of communication as described above will be described.

[0111] 2. Configuration of Computer System 100 FIG. 4A shows an example of the configuration of a computer system 100 of the present invention that can provide advice about communication or evaluate the quality of communication.

[0112] The computer system 100 includes an interface unit 110, a processor unit 120, and a memory unit 130. The computer system 100 is connected to a database unit 200.

[0113] The interface unit 110 exchanges information with the outside of the computer system 100. The processor unit 120 of the computer system 100 can receive information from the outside of the computer system 100 and can send information to the outside of the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110. The interface unit 110 can exchange information in any format.

[0114] The interface unit 110 includes, for example, an input unit that enables information to be input to the computer system 100. It does not matter how the input unit enables information to be input to the computer system 100. For example, if the input unit is a touch panel, the user may input information by touching the touch panel. Alternatively, if the input unit is a mouse, the user may input information by operating the mouse. Alternatively, if the input unit is a keyboard, the user may input information by pressing keys on the keyboard. Alternatively, if the input unit is a microphone, the user may input information by speaking into the microphone. Alternatively, if the input unit is a camera, the user may input information captured by the camera. Alternatively, if the input unit is a data reader, the user may input information by reading information from a storage medium connected to the computer system 100. Alternatively, if the input unit is a receiver, the receiver may input information from outside the computer system 100 via a network. In this case, the type of network does not matter. For example, the receiver may receive information via the Internet or a LAN.

[0115] The interface unit 110 includes, for example, an output unit that enables information to be output from the computer system 100. It does not matter how the output unit enables information to be output from the computer system 100. For example, if the output unit is a display screen, the information may be output on the display screen. Alternatively, if the output unit is a speaker, the information may be output as audio from the speaker. Alternatively, if the output unit is a data writing device, the information may be output by writing the information to a storage medium connected to the computer system 100. Alternatively, if the output unit is a transmitter, the transmitter may output the information by transmitting it to an external device outside the computer system 100 via a network. In this case, the type of network does not matter. For example, the transmitter may transmit information via the Internet or via a LAN.

[0116] The processor unit 120 executes the processing of the computer system 100 and controls the overall operation of the computer system 100. The processor unit 120 reads and executes programs stored in the memory unit 130. This allows the computer system 100 to function as a system that executes desired steps. The processor unit 120 may be implemented by a single processor or by multiple processors.

[0117] The memory unit 130 stores programs required to execute the processes of the computer system 100, data required to execute the programs, and the like. The memory unit 130 may store a program for causing the processor unit 120 to execute a process for providing advice about communication or a process for evaluating communication (for example, a program for implementing the processes shown in FIGS. 5, 7, and 8, which will be described later). Here, how the program is stored in the memory unit 130 is not important. For example, the program may be pre-installed in the memory unit 130. Alternatively, the program may be installed in the memory unit 130 by being downloaded via a network. In this case, the type of network is not important. The memory unit 130 may be implemented by any storage means.

[0118] The database unit 200 stores, for example, advice to be provided to a user. The advice to be provided to a user may be stored, for example, in association with the user's characteristics. For example, if the user's characteristics include at least four perspectives, the advice to be provided to a user may be stored in association with at least one of the at least four perspectives. For example, the database unit 200 may store, for each perspective, advice for users with a low value for that perspective, advice for users with a medium value for that perspective, advice for users with a high value for that perspective, etc. For example, the database unit 200 may store, for each perspective, advice for users / teams with a large difference in the value of that perspective, advice for users / teams with a small difference in the value of that perspective, etc. For example, if each of the at least four perspectives is subdivided into multiple items, the advice to be provided to a user may be stored in association with at least one of the multiple items for each of the at least four perspectives. For example, the database unit 200 may store, for each of the multiple items for each perspective, advice for users with a low value for that item, advice for users with a medium value for that item, advice for users with a high value for that item, etc. For example, the database unit 200 may store, for each of a plurality of items in each perspective, advice for users / teams with a large difference in the value of that item, advice for users / teams with a small difference in the value of that item, etc.

[0119] In the example shown in FIG. 4A , the database unit 200 is provided outside the computer system 100, but the present invention is not limited to this. The database unit 200 can also be provided inside the computer system 100. In this case, the database unit 200 may be implemented by the same storage means as the storage means that implements the memory unit 130, or by a storage means separate from the storage means that implements the memory unit 130. In either case, the database unit 200 is configured as a storage unit for the computer system 100. The configuration of the database unit 200 is not limited to a specific hardware configuration. For example, the database unit 200 may be configured as a single hardware component or multiple hardware components. For example, the database unit 200 may be configured as an external hard disk drive for the computer system 100, or as cloud storage connected via a network.

[0120] FIG. 4B shows an example of the configuration of the processor unit 120.

[0121] The processor unit 120 includes at least a receiving unit 121 and an output unit 122 .

[0122] The receiving means 121 may include a first receiving means 1211 that receives characteristics of at least one user. For example, the first receiving means 1211 may receive, from the interface unit 110, a user characteristic that has been input to the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110, or may receive, from the determination means 123, a user characteristic that has been determined by the determination means 123 that may be included in the processor unit 120. In this case, the determination means 123 may receive, from the interface unit 110, data that has been input to the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110.

[0123] The receiving means 121 may include a second receiving means 1212 that receives a notification indicating that the user is in one of a plurality of situations. The second receiving means 1212 may receive the notification in response to data input to the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110, for example. The notification indicating that the user is in one of a plurality of situations includes, for example, a notification indicating that the user is in a good situation and a notification indicating that the user is in a bad situation. The plurality of situations may be, for example, a plurality of situations faced in the course of work, and may include, but are not limited to, "a situation in which the user is having difficulty in proceeding with work as planned," "a situation in which the user is progressing smoothly in proceeding with work as planned," "a situation in which the user is having difficulty in the way or manner of doing work," and "a situation in which the user is progressing smoothly in the way or manner of doing work," as shown in FIG. 2A .

[0124] The receiving means 121 may include a third receiving means 1213 that receives the results of evaluations of communications between users. The third receiving means 1213 may receive the results of evaluations of communications between users in response to, for example, input provided to the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110. The results of evaluations of communications between users include, for example, the results of a user's own evaluation of communications made to others and the results of a user's own evaluation of communications made to the user by others. The third receiving means 1213 may receive the results of a user's own evaluation of communications made to others and the results of a user's own evaluation of communications made to the user together, or may receive them separately. When receiving them separately, the third receiving means 1213 may be configured to include multiple receiving means.

[0125] The first receiving means 1211, the second receiving means 1212, and the third receiving means 1213 of the receiving means 121 may be configured by the same receiving means, or may be configured by a plurality of receiving means.

[0126] The output unit 122 processes information and provides a specific output, which can be output to the outside of the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110.

[0127] The output means 122 provides an output based on the comparison result provided by the comparison means 124 that may be included in the processor unit 120, for example. At this time, the output means 122 may output advice about communication between the two users based on the difference in the characteristics of the two users provided by the comparison means 124, or may output advice about communication between the two users based on the commonalities in the characteristics of the two users provided by the comparison means 124. The output means 122 may output the comparison result provided by the comparison means 124, for example. At this time, the output means 122 may output the comparison result via the interface unit 110, for example, graphically, as text, or as audio.

[0128] The output means 122 provides an output based on, for example, the situation indicated in the notification provided from the receiving means 121 and the user characteristics provided from the receiving means 121. At this time, the output means 122 may output phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user in the situation indicated in the notification provided from the receiving means 121. The output means 122 may output information about the user who made the input that triggered the notification, which is indicated in the notification provided from the receiving means 121, such as the number of users and the names of the users.

[0129] The output means 122 provides an output based on, for example, the result of evaluating the communication between users provided from the receiving means 121. At this time, the output means 122 outputs the degree of achievement of the communication between users and the difference in the users' perception of the communication as a single index. The single index may be, for example, a numerical value from 0 to 100, or may be a symbol representing a level such as ◎○△●×, but is preferably a numerical value from 0 to 100. This is because the high and low levels of the index can be easily recognized. The single index represents the quality of the communication between users.

[0130] As mentioned above, the processor section 120 may comprise a determining means 123 and a comparing means 124 .

[0131] The determination means 123 receives data input to the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110 from the interface unit 110 and determines the user's characteristics from the data. The determination means 123 determines the user's characteristics from at least four perspectives, for example. The four perspectives may be, for example, the characteristics of desires, the characteristics of brain neurotransmitters, the characteristics of obsessions, and the characteristics of how stress is perceived, as described above with reference to FIGS. 1B and 1C. The determination means 123 may determine the user's characteristics from other perspectives instead of or in addition to the above four perspectives.

[0132] The data provided to the determination means 123 may be, for example, data indicating the answer result to a question posed to the user as shown in FIG. 1A, or may be, for example, data indicating the user's actions. The data indicating the user's actions may be extracted from data captured by a camera or a microphone, for example. The technique for extracting the data indicating the user's actions from the data captured by a camera or a microphone may be achieved using, for example, known action recognition technology or voice recognition technology.

[0133] The comparison means 124 compares the characteristics of at least two users provided from the receiving means 121 with each other. The comparison means 124 compares the characteristics of at least two users with each other, for example, from at least four perspectives. The four perspectives may be, for example, the characteristics of desires, the characteristics of brain neurotransmitters, the characteristics of obsessions, and the characteristics of how stress is felt, as described above with reference to FIGS. 1B and 1C. The comparison means 124 may, for example, identify commonalities between the characteristics of at least two users, or may identify differences between the characteristics of at least two users. The comparison means 124 may, for example, calculate the degree to which the characteristics of at least two users are similar, or may calculate the degree to which the characteristics of at least two users are different.

[0134] Each component of the computer system 100 described above may be composed of a single hardware component or multiple hardware components. When composed of multiple hardware components, the manner in which the hardware components are connected does not matter. The hardware components may be connected wirelessly or by wire. The computer system 100 of the present invention is not limited to a specific hardware configuration. It is also within the scope of the present invention for the processor unit 120 to be configured using analog circuits rather than digital circuits. The configuration of the computer system 100 of the present invention is not limited to the one described above as long as it can realize its functions.

[0135] 3. Processing by Computer System 100 5 shows an example of a process 500 for providing advice about communication, which is performed in computer system 100. By performing process 500, computer system 100 can provide advice on how two users should communicate. The advice can be provided to the two users or an administrator of an organization, for example.

[0136] In step S501, the receiving means 121 of the processor unit 120 receives the characteristics of a plurality of users. The receiving means 121 may receive the characteristics of a plurality of users input via the interface unit 110, or the receiving means 121 may receive the characteristics of a plurality of users determined by the determining means 123 based on the data input via the interface unit 110.

[0137] The user's characteristics may have at least four aspects, for example. The four aspects may be, for example, a desire characteristic, a brain neurotransmitter characteristic, an obsession characteristic, and a stress perception characteristic. The user's characteristics may be input via the interface unit 110 for at least four aspects, or may be determined by the determination means 123 for at least four aspects. The determination means 123 determines the user's characteristics, for example, using a correspondence table that associates the data input via the interface unit 110 with the at least four aspects.

[0138] FIG. 6 is an example of a correspondence table 600 for determining user characteristics.

[0139] The correspondence table 600 associates the options for each question in the questionnaire 10 shown in Fig. 1A with user characteristics from four perspectives. The options for each question are shown in the vertical columns, and the user characteristics from the four perspectives are shown in the horizontal columns.

[0140] Each of the four perspectives is subdivided into multiple items. For example, the characteristic of desire is subdivided into six items such as "wanting to achieve goals" and "wanting to solve difficult problems." For example, the characteristic of obsession is subdivided into seven items such as "feelings" and "connections." These items may correspond to the items displayed on the second display unit 22, the third display unit 23, the fifth display unit 25, and the sixth display unit 26 in FIGS. 1B and 1C.

[0141] In the correspondence table 600, raw points are assigned to each option for each question, and raw points are added to each item according to the option for each question. For example, if a user answers "A case likely to become a media topic" to question 1, the raw points assigned to the option "A case likely to become a media topic" are added to each item. If a user answers "Suggest a strategy meeting within the team" to question 2, the raw points assigned to the option "Suggest a strategy meeting within the team" are added to each item. In this way, the raw points assigned to the options answered for all questions are added to calculate the score for that item, and the user's characteristics can be determined based on the score distribution for each item. Note that when adding raw points, weighting can be performed taking into account the likelihood of receiving points, allowing for more accurate score calculations. Furthermore, multiple items are associated with each option for each question and assigned raw points. This reduces biased answers, such as users who tend to answer based on reasonable or recommended answers, and allows for more accurate determination of the user's characteristics.

[0142] The allocation of raw scores in the correspondence table 600 may be changed for each organization or may remain unchanged for each organization. Also, the allocation may vary depending on the situation of the organization or over time, or may remain unchanged. Care should be taken to allocate raw scores so that the question options and each item are appropriately correlated.

[0143] In the example shown in FIG. 6, the options for each question in the questionnaire 10 shown in FIG. 1A are associated with four perspectives. However, the objects associated with the four perspectives are not limited to the options for each question. The objects associated with the four perspectives may be any objects as long as the user's characteristics can be determined from data that can be input via the interface unit 110. For example, the user's actions may be associated with the four perspectives. For example, a raw score for each item may be assigned to a specific utterance, a specific gesture, or the like of the user. In this way, for example, the user may be observed using a camera and a microphone. When a specific utterance is recognized, the raw score assigned to the specific utterance is added, and when a specific gesture is recognized, the raw score assigned to the specific gesture is added. This calculates the score for that item, and the user's characteristics can be determined based on the score distribution for each item.

[0144] 5 again, when the receiving means 121 receives the characteristics of the plurality of users, then in step S502, the comparing means 124 of the processor unit 120 compares the characteristics of two users among the plurality of users with each other. The comparing means 124 compares the characteristics of the two users with each other, for example, with respect to at least four aspects. Here, the at least four aspects may be the same as or different from the at least four aspects of the user characteristics determined by the determining means 123. Each of the at least four aspects may be subdivided into a plurality of items.

[0145] The comparison means 124 may, for example, compare two users for each of at least four perspectives, or may compare two users for each of a plurality of items for each of at least four perspectives. If each of a plurality of items for each of at least four perspectives is scored as in the case where the user characteristics are determined using the correspondence table 600, the scores can be simply compared, making the comparison easy.

[0146] For example, the comparison means 124 may determine the perspective with the greatest difference between the two users among the at least four perspectives and also determine the degree of difference, or may determine the item with the greatest difference between the two users among multiple items for each of the at least four perspectives and also determine the degree of difference. For example, the comparison means 124 may determine the perspective with a difference exceeding a predetermined threshold among the at least four perspectives, or may determine the perspective with a difference exceeding a predetermined threshold among multiple items for at least one of the at least four perspectives. The comparison means 124 may rank the at least four perspectives in descending order of difference, or may rank the multiple items in descending order of difference for at least one of the at least four perspectives. For example, the comparison means 124 may determine the perspective with the greatest commonality between the two users among the at least four perspectives and also determine the degree of commonality, or may determine the item with the greatest commonality between the two users among multiple items for each of the at least four perspectives and also determine the degree of commonality. For example, the comparison means 124 may determine a viewpoint from among the at least four viewpoints that has a degree of commonality that exceeds a predetermined threshold, or may determine a viewpoint from among a plurality of items for each of the at least four viewpoints that has a degree of commonality that exceeds a predetermined threshold. The comparison means 124 may rank the at least four viewpoints in descending order of commonality, or may rank a plurality of items in descending order of commonality for at least one of the at least four viewpoints.

[0147] In step S503, the output means 122 of the processor unit 120 outputs advice about communication between the two users based on the comparison in step S502. The output means 122 references the advice stored in the database unit 200 and outputs the advice about communication between the two users. The output means 122 can output the advice to the outside of the computer system 100, for example, via the interface unit 110.

[0148] For example, the output means 122 acquires from the database unit 200 advice associated with the perspective determined in step S502 to be the largest difference between the two users or the perspective determined to have a degree of difference exceeding a predetermined threshold, and outputs the advice. For example, the output means 122 acquires from the database unit 200 advice associated with the item determined in step S502 to be the largest difference between the two users or the item determined to have a degree of difference exceeding a predetermined threshold, for at least one of the at least four perspectives, and outputs the advice. For example, the output means 122 acquires from the database unit 200 advice associated with the perspective determined in step S502 to be the largest commonality between the two users or the perspective determined to have a degree of commonality exceeding a predetermined threshold, and outputs the advice. For example, the output means 122 acquires from the database unit 200 advice associated with the item determined in step S502 to be the largest commonality between the two users or the item determined to have a degree of commonality exceeding a predetermined threshold, for at least one of the at least four perspectives, and outputs the advice.

[0149] For example, the output means 122 may acquire and output advice associated with a combination of multiple perspectives that have been determined to have a large difference between the two users in step S502, or advice associated with a combination of multiple items that have been determined to have a large difference between the two users in step S502, from the database unit 200. For example, the output means 122 may acquire and output advice associated with a combination of multiple perspectives that have been determined to have a large degree of commonality between the two users in step S502, or advice associated with a combination of multiple items that have been determined to have a large degree of commonality between the two users in step S502, from the database unit 200.

[0150] The advice output in this manner may be displayed, for example, on the first display unit 31 of the result display screen 30 shown in Fig. 1D or on a fourth display unit (not shown). The comparison result in step S502 may be displayed, for example, on the second display unit 32 or the third display unit 33 of the result display screen 30 shown in Fig. 1D or on a fifth display unit or a sixth display unit (not shown). The comparison result in step S502 may be displayed in any representation method, for example, a graphical representation such as a radar chart, a line graph, an area graph, a bar graph, a pie chart, or the like, a text representation, an audio representation, or the like.

[0151] In this way, by comparing the characteristics of two users and providing advice based on the comparison, the two users can communicate while being aware of their similarities and differences. This facilitates smooth communication between the two users, promotes collaboration between the two users, and ultimately leads to improved efficiency. It can also promote more effective organizational management.

[0152] In the above example, the characteristics of two users are compared in step S502 and advice about communication between the two users is output in step S503. However, the present invention is not limited to this. For example, it is also within the scope of the present invention to compare the characteristics of three or more users and output advice about communication between the three or more users. For example, in step S502′ instead of step S502, the comparison means 124 of the processor unit 120 may compare the characteristics of an additional user among the multiple users with the characteristics of two users, and in step S503′ instead of step S503, the output means 122 of the processor unit 120 may output advice about communication between the two users and the additional user based on the comparison in step S502′. The advice output in this manner may be displayed, for example, on the first display unit 41 of the result display screen 40 shown in FIG. 1E or a fourth display unit (not shown). The comparison result in step S502' may be displayed, for example, on the second display unit 42, the third display unit 43, or the fifth display unit or the sixth display unit (not shown) of the result display screen 40 shown in Fig. 1E. The comparison result in step S502' may be displayed in any representation method, for example, a graphical representation such as a radar chart, a line graph, an area graph, a bar graph, a pie chart, a text representation, an audio representation, or the like.

[0153] 7 shows an example of a process 700 for providing advice about communication, which is performed in computer system 100. By performing process 700, computer system 100 can provide advice about what communication should be performed to a user in a specific situation. The advice can be provided to an administrator of an organization, such as a manager, for example.

[0154] In step S701, the receiving means 121 of the processor unit 120 receives the user characteristics. The receiving means 121 may receive the user characteristics input via the interface unit 110, or the receiving means 121 may receive the user characteristics determined by the determining means 123 based on data input via the interface unit 110. The processing of step S701 is similar to the processing of step S501.

[0155] When a report that the user is in one of a plurality of situations is input to the computer system 100 via the interface unit 110, in step S702, the receiving means 121 of the processor unit 120 receives a notification indicating that the user is in one of a plurality of situations.

[0156] A report that a user is in one of a number of situations may be entered, for example, by selecting the selection button 52 on the report screen 50 shown in Figure 2. As discussed above with reference to Figure 2, the report may be about another member of the organization or about the user themselves.

[0157] A notification indicating that a user is in one of a number of conditions may include, for example, information about the condition, information about the user who submitted the report (e.g., number of users, name of user), etc.

[0158] In step S703, the output means 122 of the processor unit 120 outputs phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user based on the situation and the user's characteristics. The output means 122 references advice stored in the database unit 200 and outputs phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user. The output means 122 can output the phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user to the outside of the computer system 100, for example, via the interface unit 110.

[0159] For example, each of the multiple situations is associated with a user characteristic, and advice associated with the user characteristic associated with the user situation indicated by the notification received in step S502 is obtained from the database unit 200 and output as phrases to be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user. If the user characteristic is subdivided into multiple items as described above, for example, at least one of the multiple items of the user characteristic may be associated with each of the multiple situations, and advice associated with at least one of the multiple items associated with the user situation indicated by the notification received in step S502 is obtained from the database unit 200 and output as phrases to be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user. Note that it is preferable that each of the multiple situations is associated with two or more items of the multiple items of the user characteristic. This is because it is possible to obtain advice associated with a combination of two or more items, making it possible to provide advice that is more suited to the user's characteristics.

[0160] For example, a situation in which the user is having difficulty proceeding with work as planned may be associated with the following items among the user's characteristics: "Want to achieve goals" in the desire characteristics, "Progress management" in the commitment characteristics, "Perfection" in the commitment characteristics, "Determined plan" in the stress perception characteristics, and "Frequent reporting and consultation" in the stress perception characteristics. If the user's situation indicated by the notification received in step S502 is a situation in which the user is having difficulty proceeding with work as planned, the values ​​of the following items among the user's characteristics are referenced: "Want to achieve goals" in the desire characteristics, "Progress management" in the commitment characteristics, "Perfection" in the commitment characteristics, "Determined plan" in the stress perception characteristics, and "Frequent reporting and consultation" in the stress perception characteristics. Advice associated with the values ​​of each item can be obtained from the database unit 200, and output as phrases to be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user.

[0161] The advice output in this manner may be displayed, for example, in the first phrase display area 62 and the second phrase display area 63 of the notification screen 60 shown in Fig. 2B. The user information indicated by the notification received in step S502 may be displayed, for example, in the reporter display area 61 of the notification screen 60 shown in Fig. 2B.

[0162] In this way, by providing advice based on the user's situation and characteristics, it is possible to provide advice on how to communicate with the user in a specific situation. By receiving advice based on objective analysis rather than on uncertain variables such as rules of thumb, intuition, or subjective perception, organizational managers can communicate appropriately with organizational members. This facilitates smooth communication between organizational managers and members, promotes collaboration among organizational members, and ultimately leads to improved efficiency. It can also promote effective organizational management.

[0163] In the process 700, step S702 is performed after step S701, but the order of steps S701 and S702 is not limited to this, and step S701 may be performed after step S702.

[0164] In the above example, two types of phrases, phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user, are output in step S703. However, the present invention is not limited to this. Other phrases may be output in addition to these phrases, or these phrases may be subdivided and output. For example, in step S703, phrases that should be conveyed to the user and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user may be output. For example, in step S703, phrases that should be conveyed to the user to enable the user to demonstrate their abilities, phrases that should be conveyed to the user to enable the user to work with reduced stress, phrases that should not be conveyed to the user to enable the user to demonstrate their abilities, and phrases that should not be conveyed to the user to enable the user to work with reduced stress may be output.

[0165] 8 shows an example of a process 800 for evaluating communication that is performed in computer system 100. Computer system 100 can evaluate the quality of communication between users by performing process 800. The evaluation results of the communication quality can be provided to, for example, an administrator of an organization.

[0166] In step S801, the receiving means 121 of the processor unit 120 receives a first result in which the first user has rated a communication that the first user has made to a second user, and a second result in which the second user has rated a communication that the first user has made to the second user. The receiving means 121 receives the first result and the second result input via the interface unit 110. The first result can be input, for example, by selecting the rating selection button 72 on the rating screen 70-1 for the first user (Mr. AAA) shown in FIG. 3A. The second result can be input, for example, by selecting the rating selection button on the rating screen for the second user (Mr. BBB) corresponding to the rating screen 70-2 shown in FIG. 3B.

[0167] When the first result and the second result are received, in step S802, the output means 122 of the processor unit 120 outputs a single index representing the degree of communication achievement between the first user and the second user and the difference in perception of the communication between the first user and the second user based on the first result and the second result. The output means 122 can output the index to the outside of the computer system 100, for example, via the interface unit 110.

[0168] The output means 122 determines the index, for example, so that the higher the first result or the second result, the higher the index, and the smaller the difference between the first result and the second result, the higher the index. This is because the higher the first result or the second result, the higher the degree of communication achievement between the first user and the second user, and the smaller the difference between the first result and the second result, the smaller the difference in perception of communication between the first user and the second user. The higher the degree of communication achievement between the first user and the second user, and the smaller the difference in perception of communication between the first user and the second user, the higher the quality of communication. The output means can determine and output the index, for example, using a correspondence table that associates the first result with the second result according to the above-mentioned relationship.

[0169] FIG. 9 shows an example of a correspondence table 900 for determining the index.

[0170] The correspondence table 900 associates first results with second results. The vertical columns show first results (results evaluated by the first user), and the horizontal columns show second results (results evaluated by the second user). The values ​​in the table indicate an index determined by the combination of the first and second results. The correspondence table 900 is configured so that the higher the first result, the higher the index; the higher the second result, the higher the index; and the smaller the difference between the first and second results, the higher the index. Note that a first or second result of 0 indicates no communication and is not worthy of evaluation, so an intentionally low index is used. Furthermore, a first and second result of 0 indicates no communication at all, and is left blank because the communication cannot be evaluated.

[0171] For example, in step S801, if the first user rates the communication that the first user has made with the second user as -1 out of 11 levels from -5 to +5, and the second user rates the communication that the first user has made with the second user as +4, the first result -1 and the second result +4 are received. In this case, since the value corresponding to (first result, second result) = (-1, +4) in the correspondence table 900 is 42, the index is determined to be 42 and output.

[0172] The index thus output may be displayed, for example, in the first display section 81 of the result display screen 80 shown in Fig. 3C. This index may represent the quality of communication between the first user and the second user.

[0173] In the above example, an index is output based on the result of the first user or the second user's evaluation of the communication conducted by the first user with the second user, but an index may be output based on the result of the first user or the second user's evaluation of the communication conducted by the second user with the first user, in addition to the result of the first user or the second user's evaluation of the communication conducted by the first user with the second user. Since an index is output based on the evaluation of two-way communication, the accuracy of the output index can be improved.

[0174] In this case, in step S801' instead of step S801, in addition to receiving the first and second results, the receiving means 121 receives a third result in which the second user has rated the communication that the second user has made to the first user, and a fourth result in which the first user has rated the communication that the second user has made to the first user. The receiving means 121 receives the third and fourth results input via the interface unit 110. The third result can be input, for example, by selecting the rating selection button for the second user (BBB) ​​corresponding to the rating screen 70-1 shown in FIG. 3A. The fourth result can be input, for example, by selecting the rating selection button 74 on the rating screen 70-2 shown in FIG. 3B.

[0175] When the third and fourth results are received in addition to the first and second results, in step S802' instead of step S802, the output means 122 of the processor unit 120 outputs a single index representing the degree of communication achievement between the first and second users and the difference in perception of the communication between the first and second users based on the first, second, third, and fourth results. The output means 122 can output the index to the outside of the computer system 100, for example, via the interface unit 110. The output means 122 can determine and output the index using, for example, the correspondence table 900 described above.

[0176] For example, in step S801', if the first user rates the communication made by the first user to the second user as -3 on an 11-point scale from -5 to +5, the second user rates the communication made by the first user to the second user as -2, the second user rates the communication made by the second user to the first user as +2, and the first user rates the communication made by the second user to the first user as +1, then the first result -3, the second result -2, the third result +2, and the fourth result +1 are received. At this time, in correspondence table 900, the value corresponding to (first result, second result) = (-3, -2) is 43, so the first index based on the first result and the second result is determined to be 43. Also, in correspondence table 900, the value corresponding to (third result, fourth result) = (+2, +1) is 68, so the second index based on the third result and the fourth result is determined to be 68.

[0177] The output means 122 determines an index based on the determined first index and second index. For example, the output means 122 may determine the index by averaging the first index and the second index. Alternatively, the output means 122 may determine the larger or smaller of the first index and the second index as the index. For example, in the above example, the output means 122 may average the first index 43 and the second index 68 to determine the index to be 56, or may determine the index to be 43 or 68.

[0178] The index thus output may represent the quality of communication between the first user and the second user, and may be displayed, for example, in a first display section 81 of a result display screen 80 shown in Fig. 3C. For one user, the average of the indexes with each user represents the quality of communication for that person, and may be displayed in a second display section 82 of the result display screen 80 shown in Fig. 3C.

[0179] In the above example, we explained how to output an index representing the quality of communication between a first user and a second user, but by having other members in the organization evaluate the communication and processing the evaluation results, it is possible to output an index representing the quality of communication between other members in the organization.

[0180] In this way, by outputting the quality of communication between users in an organization using a single indicator, the need to compare multiple results to make a judgment is eliminated, making it easier to understand who within the organization is not communicating well with whom. Furthermore, by outputting the quality of communication between users using a single indicator and as a score, it becomes easier to calculate the score for the entire team, compare the scores of members with each other, compare the scores of members with their managers, and make relative comparisons with other teams. This allows organizational managers to easily grasp the state of the organization and take measures such as providing priority advice to those who are not communicating well. It can also encourage more effective organizational management.

[0181] At least two of the above-described processes 500, 700, and 800 may be performed independently of each other, or may be performed in parallel or successively. For example, when processes 500 and 700 are performed in parallel or successively, step S501 and step S701 may be integrated into one step.

[0182] For example, when process 500 or process 700 and process 800 are performed in parallel or successively, an optimal combination of members in an organization can be derived based on the user characteristics received in step S501 or step S701 of process 500 or process 700 and the index output in step S802 of process 800. For example, when determining team members for forming a team, regression analysis or the like can be performed to derive a combination of members in which the members have more common characteristics and the index between them is higher. For example, when determining a team manager, regression analysis or the like can be performed to derive a member who has more common characteristics with other team members and who will have higher index between them. For example, when transferring a member to a certain manager, regression analysis or the like can be performed to derive a member who has more common characteristics with the manager and who will have higher index between them.

[0183] Thus, the results of the processes 500, 700, and 800 can be applied to appropriate organizational arrangements.

[0184] In the examples described above with reference to Figures 5, 7, and 8, it has been explained that the processing of each step shown in Figures 5, 7, and 8 is realized by the processor unit 120 and a program stored in the memory unit 130, but the present invention is not limited to this. At least one of the processing of each step shown in Figures 5, 7, and 8 may be realized by a hardware configuration such as a control circuit.

[0185] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments. It is understood that the scope of the present invention should be interpreted only by the claims. It is understood that a person skilled in the art can implement an equivalent scope based on the description of the present invention and common technical knowledge from the description of specific preferred embodiments of the present invention. [Industrial Applicability]

[0186] The present invention is useful for providing a computer system, program, and method that provides advice about communication that can improve communication problems, and for providing a computer system, program, and method that evaluates communication between members using easy-to-understand indicators. [Explanation of symbols]

[0187] 10 Questionnaire 20-1, 20-2 Result display screen 30 Results display screen 40 Results display screen 50 Report screen 60 Notification screen 70-1, 70-2 evaluation screen 80 Results display screen 100 Computer Systems 110 Interface section 110 120 processor unit 120 121 Receiving means 122 Output Method 123 Decision-making means 124 Means of comparison 130 Memory section 200 Database Department

Claims

[Claim 1] A computer system that provides communication advice.

Images