Evaluation support device, control method for the same, and control program for the same

Abstract

To provide an evaluation support device capable of flexibly setting and updating evaluation items when performance is evaluated.SOLUTION: An evaluation support device that supports setting of an evaluation criterion for evaluating performance, includes: an acquisition unit that acquires a record in which target performance for which the evaluation criterion is set is recorded and a plurality of prior evaluation for the target performance; a screen output unit that displays the prior evaluation and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set; and a generation unit that generates the evaluation criterion using the evaluation items set in the setting area.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 2

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to an evaluation support device, a control method for an evaluation support device, and a control program for an evaluation support device. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, as a learning management system for efficiently improving the performance skills of a training recipient, a system has been known in which a trainer can provide evaluations and comments for each scene of content recorded from the training recipient's lectures, speeches, etc., and provide feedback to the training recipient. For example, the inventors of the present invention have provided a content evaluation device and the like that enables a viewer or listener to evaluate content while watching or listening to it, and then further appropriately extract a part of the content, record a detailed evaluation of that part, and share it (for example, Patent Document 1).

[0003] Furthermore, the inventors of the present invention have provided an evaluation support system that allows trainers to easily select evaluation items when evaluating trainees, enabling them to input simple and accurate evaluations (feedback) on the trainees' performance (e.g., Patent Document 2). [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0004] [Patent Document 1] Patent No. 6532015 [Patent Document 2] Patent No. 7359349 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0005] The evaluation items used in evaluating performance are uniform evaluation criteria that indicate the perspective from which the evaluation was made, but the evaluation items can change depending on the evaluator's policy, training objectives, etc. For this reason, there has been a demand for an evaluation support device that can flexibly set and update evaluation items in accordance with changes in the evaluator's situation. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] An evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention that supports the setting of evaluation criteria for evaluating performance includes an acquisition unit that acquires a record that records a target performance for which evaluation criteria are to be set and multiple prior evaluations of the target performance, a screen output unit that displays the prior evaluations and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set, and a generation unit that generates evaluation criteria using the evaluation items set in the setting area.

[0007] An evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention further includes a memory unit that stores, for each of a plurality of evaluation criteria, evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria, and the screen output unit displays, as setting areas, a selection area in which evaluation items can be selected from a plurality of evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria stored in the memory unit, and an additional area in which additional evaluation items can be added, and the generation unit may update the evaluation criteria stored in the memory unit with the additional evaluation items set in the additional area.

[0008] In an evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention, the acquisition unit may further acquire information relating to the time points at which multiple prior evaluations were made, and the screen output unit may display the multiple prior evaluations for the target performance by arranging them at positions on a time axis at which the multiple prior evaluations were made.

[0009] In an evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention, multiple prior evaluations may be made by multiple different users, and the screen output unit may, when displaying the multiple prior evaluations for a target performance by arranging them at positions on a time axis at which the multiple prior evaluations were made, display the users who made the prior evaluations in an identifiable manner.

[0010] An evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention may further include a selection unit that selects, from among a plurality of evaluation criteria stored in the memory unit, evaluation criteria including evaluation items to be displayed in the selection area based on a plurality of prior evaluations of the target performance.

[0011] In an evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention, the acquisition unit may further acquire a user's selection of evaluation criteria from among the multiple evaluation criteria stored in the memory unit, the evaluation criteria including evaluation items to be displayed in the selection area, and the screen output unit may display the evaluation items in the selection area based on the user's selection result.

[0012] The evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention may further include a recommendation unit that recommends additional evaluation items, and the screen output unit may display the evaluation items recommended by the recommendation unit in the additional area.

[0013] In the evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention, the generation unit may determine the consistency between the additional evaluation items added in the additional area and the evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria before the update.

[0014] The evaluation support device according to one embodiment of the present invention may further include an evaluation result output unit that outputs evaluation results of the target performance based on the evaluation items set in the setting area and into which the prior evaluations are classified.

[0015] According to one embodiment of the present invention, a control method for an evaluation support device that supports the setting of evaluation criteria for evaluating performance includes the steps of: acquiring a record of a target performance for which evaluation criteria are to be set and multiple prior evaluations of the target performance; displaying the prior evaluations and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set; and generating evaluation criteria using the evaluation items set in the setting area.

[0016] According to one embodiment of the present invention, a control program for an evaluation support device that supports the setting of evaluation criteria for evaluating performance enables the evaluation support device to perform the following functions: acquire a record of the target performance for which the evaluation criteria are to be set and multiple prior evaluations of the target performance; display the prior evaluations and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set; and generate evaluation criteria using the evaluation items set in the setting area. [Effects of the Invention]

[0017] According to one embodiment of the present invention, it is possible to provide an evaluation support device etc. that can flexibly set and update evaluation items, which are uniform evaluation criteria that indicate the perspective from which the evaluation was made when evaluating performance, in accordance with changes in the evaluator's situation. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0018] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the configuration of an evaluation support system according to one embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 2] FIG. 2 is an example of a block diagram of a server (information processing device) and an evaluator terminal (communication terminal) in an evaluation support system according to one embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 3] FIG. 3 is an example of a processing flow of a server according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 4] FIG. 4 is an example of an evaluation criteria table according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 5] FIG. 5 is an example of a content table according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 6] FIG. 6 is an example of an evaluation history table according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 7] FIG. 7 shows an example of a comprehensive evaluation execution screen according to one embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 8] FIG. 8 is an example of an evaluation criteria table according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 9] FIG. 9 is an example of a screen displaying an evaluation table according to one embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0019] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the invention according to the present disclosure (also referred to as the present invention) will be described using the drawings. Note that the drawings are merely examples, and the present invention is not limited to those shown in the drawings. For example, the number of servers, evaluator terminals, servers, and database servers, data sets (tables), flow diagrams, and display screens shown in the drawings are merely examples, and the present invention is not limited to these.

[0020] <System Overview> First, an overview of an evaluation support system according to one embodiment of the present invention will be described. FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of the evaluation support system according to one embodiment of the present invention. The evaluation support system 600 is an information processing system that provides an evaluation support service that supports evaluators 20 (20A, 20B) in evaluating (feedback on) the performance of an evaluation target (not shown). Here, the "evaluation target" refers to any user (evaluation target) who wishes to improve their performance skills, and may be, for example, an office worker, teacher, student, doctor, nurse, restaurant staff, fortune teller, dancer, etc. The "performance" refers to any activity that the evaluation target wishes to improve, and may include speech accompanied by body movements, speech only (voice only), or body movements only without speech. Performances accompanied by speech accompanied by body movements may, for example, be sales presentations or negotiations for office workers, or conversations with patients or case presentations for doctors. Performances accompanied by speech only (voice only) may include phone calls, narration, etc. Performances accompanied by body movements only without speech may include dancing, sign language, etc. Furthermore, the "evaluator" may be a so-called veteran user (trainer) who has a certain level or higher of skills, experience, and knowledge regarding performance and who can give advice to the evaluator. Alternatively, the "evaluator" is not limited to a veteran, but may be any user who evaluates performance. Note that in the evaluation support system 600 according to one embodiment of the present invention, the subject to be evaluated, the evaluator, and performance are not limited to the above examples. Furthermore, hereinafter, when there is no particular distinction between the evaluator and the subject to be evaluated, they may be collectively referred to as the "user."

[0021] According to the evaluation support system described in the prior art document, multiple evaluators 20 can evaluate the performance of an individual being evaluated in real time while watching the performance of the individual being evaluated in front of them or while watching the performance of the individual being evaluated distributed via a network 500. Here, making an evaluation may refer to inputting comments and ratings indicating the quality of the performance into the evaluator terminal 200 at the moment when the performance is to be evaluated. The input comments and ratings may be recorded in association with the position (time point) on the time axis of the performance at which the input was made. According to the evaluation support system described in the prior art document, the evaluations are not limited to real time, and may be recorded while watching a recorded performance. Hereinafter, evaluations input by evaluators while watching a performance will also be referred to as "advance evaluations."

[0022] The evaluation results for performance may be presented to the person being evaluated in the form of an evaluation table. Fig. 9 shows an example of an evaluation table. The evaluation table D20 contains information indicating the perspectives from which the performance was evaluated and the performance level, and may include, for example, a rating for each evaluation item, an overall rating, and a comprehensive rating. Note that "++", "+", "-", and "--" in the overall rating indicate the evaluation level of the performance included in the prior evaluation, and the numerical value may indicate the number of prior evaluations for each evaluation level for that evaluation item.

[0023] As described above, it is preferable to evaluate performance using uniform evaluation criteria based on pre-defined evaluation items. As will be described in detail later, the evaluation support system 600 according to one embodiment of the present invention can quickly classify the evaluations of performance submitted by various evaluators based on which evaluation items they are based, and can also set new evaluation criteria or update existing evaluation criteria based on the evaluations submitted by various evaluators. This makes it possible to reconcile the perspectives of multiple evaluators and appropriately update evaluation criteria in line with changes in the times and circumstances.

[0024] <System configuration> As shown in FIG. 1, the evaluation support system 600 includes a server (information processing device) 100, evaluator terminals (communication terminals) 200 (200A, 200B), and a database server 400.

[0025] The server 100 functions as a platform for providing evaluation support services and is connected to the evaluator terminals 200A and 200B via a network 500. The network 500 may include a wireless network or a wired network, such as a wireless LAN (WLAN), a wide area network (WAN), integrated service digital networks (ISDNs), wireless LANs, code division multiple access (CDMA), long term evolution (LTE), LTE-Advanced, fourth generation (4G), fifth generation (5G), sixth generation (6G) or later mobile communication systems. The network 500 is not limited to these examples and may also be a public switched telephone network (PSTN), Bluetooth (registered trademark), an optical fiber line, an asymmetric digital subscriber line (ADSL), a satellite communication network, or a combination thereof.

[0026] The server 100 may be any information processing device that can realize the functions described in each embodiment. The server 100 may include, for example, a server device, a computer (e.g., a desktop, a laptop, a tablet, etc.), or a communication platform. The server 100 may also be referred to as an information processing device.

[0027] 1 shows only one server 100, but the present invention is not limited to this. That is, each function described as being provided by the server 100 may be realized by a plurality of servers. Furthermore, the server 100 may be, for example, a distributed server system that cooperates by communicating via a network, or may be a so-called cloud server. That is, the server 100 is not limited to a physical server, and may also include a virtual server created by software.

[0028] The evaluator terminals 200A and 200B are communication terminals used by the evaluators 20A and 20B, respectively. Although only two evaluator terminals are shown in FIG. 1, the number of evaluator terminals may be equal to the number of evaluators who use the evaluation support service. Furthermore, when there is no particular need to distinguish between them, the evaluator terminals 200A and 200B and the evaluators 20A and 20B may be simply referred to as the evaluator terminals 200 and the evaluators 20, respectively.

[0029] An application for using the evaluation support service is installed on the evaluator terminal 200, and various information can be transmitted and received between the terminal 200 and the server 100. Alternatively, it is not necessary to install an application on the terminal 200, and the evaluator 20 may access a web page for using the evaluation support service provided by the server 100 from the terminal 200 via a web browser or the like, and transmit and receive various information to and from the server 100.

[0030] 1 shows a laptop computer as the evaluator terminal 200, but any terminal capable of implementing the functions described below may be used as the evaluator terminal 200. For example, the evaluator terminal 200 may be a computer (e.g., a tablet terminal or a desktop PC), a smartphone, etc.

[0031] The database server 400 stores various information (data) used in the evaluation support system 600. The database server 400 stores, for example, user information of users who use the evaluation support system 600. Note that the user information is user information associated with identification information or accounts used by the users in the evaluation support system 600. The user information may be, for example, but is not limited to, the user's name, user identifier (ID), user type (evaluator or evaluation target), email address, etc. Furthermore, the database server 400 functions as a storage unit that stores, for each of a plurality of evaluation criteria, evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria.

[0032] An example of a dataset of evaluation items (evaluation criteria table) is shown in Fig. 4. Note that the diagram is just an example, and the information stored in the evaluation criteria tables TB10, TB11, and TB12 is not limited to this, and may be more or less than this.

[0033] In one embodiment of the present invention, an "evaluation item" indicates the viewpoint or criteria used by the evaluator when evaluating a performance, and serves as an indicator of the viewpoint from which the evaluator should evaluate the performance. For example, an "evaluation item" may evaluate whether the person being evaluated is able to perform an action or behavior recommended for the person being evaluated. An "evaluation criterion" may be a set of evaluation items consisting of at least one "evaluation item" and used depending on the type of performance. Referring to FIG. 4 , for example, the evaluation criterion table TB10 includes a major category and a minor category of evaluation items for the evaluation criterion "Negotiation Skills Part 1." The minor category evaluation items may be classified into multiple evaluation levels. The evaluation items do not necessarily need to be classified into major categories and minor categories; only the minor category evaluation items may be stored, or the evaluation items may be classified more finely. The "evaluation level" indicates the degree of goodness or badness of the performance and is input as the evaluator 20's intuitive evaluation (preliminary evaluation) of the performance. As will be described in detail later, evaluation items included in the evaluation criterion table based on the performance theme may be displayed in the evaluation item selection area on the overall evaluation execution screen.

[0034] Note that for a certain "evaluation item," evaluation may be performed in terms of a pair of "done" (++,+) and "not done" (--,-), but depending on the "evaluation item," such a pair may not exist. For example, in the example in Figure 4, for the major category "Communicating information, measures, and value," "Communication started at a stage when people should still listen" is stored as an evaluation item with an evaluation level of "--,-," but if there is no evaluation item with a paired evaluation level of "++,+," it does not need to be stored in the evaluation criteria table.

[0035] For example, the evaluation criteria table may store multiple types of evaluation criteria according to performance themes, skill levels, etc., as in the example of "negotiating ability 1," "negotiating ability 2," "negotiating ability 3," etc. in FIG. 4. The evaluation criteria table may be preset by the evaluator when using the evaluation support service, or may be prepared by the service provider providing the evaluation support service. Furthermore, as will be described later, according to one embodiment of the present invention, the evaluation criteria table may be appropriately updated, such as by adding new evaluation items or modifying stored evaluation items.

[0036] 1, only one database server 400 is shown, separate from the server 100, but the database server 400 may be integrated into the server 100. That is, the database server 400 may be a volatile memory or a non-volatile memory of the server 100. The database server 400 may also be composed of multiple database servers. The database server 400 may be connected to the server 100 via a dedicated internal network different from the network 500, or may be connected to the server 100 via the network 500.

[0037] Next, the hardware configuration and functional configuration of the server 100 and the evaluator terminal 200 according to one embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to Figure 2. First, a brief description of the typical operation of each functional unit will be given, and details will be provided later using flow charts, display screen examples, etc.

[0038] <Evaluator's terminal> First, the evaluator terminal 200 according to one embodiment of the present invention will be described.

[0039] (1) Hardware configuration of the evaluator's terminal The evaluator terminal 200 includes a control unit 210 , a communication unit 220 , a display unit 230 , an input / output unit 240 , and a storage unit 270 .

[0040] The control unit 210 is typically a processor, and includes a central processing unit (CPU), a microprocessing unit (MPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), a microprocessor, a processor core, a multiprocessor, etc. The control unit 210 may execute the functions and methods described in each embodiment by reading a program stored in the storage unit 270 and executing code or instructions included in the read program.

[0041] The storage unit 270 stores various programs and data required for the operation of the evaluator terminal 200. That is, the storage unit 270 may store a program related to an application of the evaluation support service. The storage unit 270 may include, for example, a flash memory or a memory (RAM, ROM, etc.) that provides a working area for the control unit 210.

[0042] The communication unit 220 may be implemented as hardware such as a network adapter, communication software, or a combination of these. The communication unit 220 may transmit and receive various data to and from the server 100 via the network 500 using any communication protocol. Note that when the communication unit 220 is configured as a physically structured circuit, it may also be expressed as a communication circuit.

[0043] The display unit 230 is a monitor that displays data in accordance with the display data written in the frame buffer, and may be, for example, a touch panel, a touch display, or the like.

[0044] The input / output unit 240 may include an input device for inputting various operations to the evaluator terminal 200, and an output device for outputting processing results processed by the evaluator terminal 200. The input device may be realized by any of all types of devices that can accept input operations from the evaluator and transmit information related to the input to the control unit 210, or a combination thereof. The input device may include, for example, a touch panel, a touch display, a keyboard, a camera, and a microphone. The output device may output processing results processed by the control unit 210. The output device may include, for example, a touch panel, a speaker, etc.

[0045] (2) Functional configuration of the evaluator's terminal The evaluator terminal 200 may include, as functions realized by the control unit 210, an acquisition unit 211, a display processing unit 212, an evaluation item selection receiving unit 213, and an evaluation item input receiving unit 214. Of the functional units shown in FIG. 2 , those that are not essential for the embodiments described below may be omitted. Furthermore, the functions or processes of each functional unit may be realized by machine learning or AI (artificial intelligence) to the extent feasible. Note that some of the various processes described below as being executed by the evaluator terminal 200 may also be executed by the server 100. Details will be provided below, but the operation of each functional unit will be briefly described.

[0046] The acquisition unit 211 may acquire various data from the server 100 via the communication unit 220. For example, the acquisition unit 211 may acquire display information for causing the display unit 230 to display various screens.

[0047] The display processing unit 212 may control the display of data on the display unit 230. For example, the display processing unit 212 may cause the display unit 230 to display a comprehensive evaluation execution screen or an evaluation result screen (evaluation table) in accordance with display information output from the output unit 112 of the server 100. The display processing unit 212 may also cause the display unit 230 to display a video of the target performance to be evaluated, which is acquired from the server 100. These screens will be described later.

[0048] The evaluation item selection receiving unit 213 may receive, on the comprehensive evaluation execution screen, the selection of evaluation items by the evaluator 20 to classify the prior evaluation of the target performance. Furthermore, the evaluation item input receiving unit 214 may receive, on the comprehensive evaluation execution screen, the input of new evaluation items by the evaluator 20 to classify the prior evaluation of the target performance.

[0049] <server> (1) Server hardware configuration The server 100 includes a control unit 110, a communication unit 120, and a storage unit 170.

[0050] The control unit 110 is typically a central processing unit (CPU) that reads a program stored in the storage unit 170 and executes the code or instructions included in the read program to perform the functions and methods described in each embodiment. The control unit 110 may also include an MPU, a GPU, a microprocessor, a processor core, a multiprocessor, etc.

[0051] The storage unit 170 stores various programs and various data required for the operation of the server 100. The storage unit 170 may include, for example, a hard disk drive (HDD), a solid state drive (SSD), a flash memory, etc. The storage unit 170 may also include a memory that provides a working area for the control unit 110.

[0052] The communication unit 120 is implemented as hardware such as a network adapter, communication software, or a combination of these, and transmits and receives various data to and from the evaluator terminal 200 and the database server 400 via the network 500 .

[0053] (2) Server functional configuration The server 100 also includes an acquisition unit 111, an output unit 112, a generation unit 113, a selection unit 114, and a recommendation unit 115 as functions realized by the control unit 110. Of the functional units shown in FIG. 2, functional units that are not essential in the embodiments described below may be omitted. Furthermore, the function or processing of each functional unit may be realized by machine learning or AI to the extent feasible. Details will be described later, but the operation of each functional unit will be briefly described below.

[0054] The acquiring unit 111 may acquire various data from the database server 400 or the evaluator terminal 200. For example, the acquiring unit 111 may acquire an evaluation history (previous evaluation), video or audio (records) that are content recording the target performance, evaluation criteria, etc. from the database server 400. Furthermore, the acquiring unit 111 may acquire information that has been input or selected by the evaluator 20 on the evaluator terminal 200 from the evaluator terminal 200.

[0055] The output unit 112 outputs various data to the evaluator terminal 200. For example, the output unit 112 may function as a screen output unit that outputs display information for displaying various screens on the evaluator terminal 200. The output unit 112 may also function as an evaluation result output unit that displays evaluation results on the evaluator terminal 200. The generation unit 113 sets or updates evaluation criteria based on information input at the evaluator terminal 200. The selection unit 114 selects evaluation criteria including evaluation items to be displayed on the evaluator terminal 200. The recommendation unit 115 recommends new evaluation items to be added when setting or updating the evaluation criteria.

[0056] <Server processing flow> Hereinafter, the functional units of the server 100 will be described in detail, and the processing flow of the server 100 according to one embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.

[0057] First, in the flowchart of FIG. 3, the acquisition unit 111 acquires a record recording a target performance for which evaluation criteria are to be set, and multiple prior evaluations of the target performance (step S11). The record may be at least one of a video and audio recording of the target performance. As described above, the prior evaluations are comments and ratings made by multiple evaluators on the target performance. FIG. 5 shows an example of a record table related to records stored in the database server 400. The record table TB20 may store the recording date and time, the evaluation target ID, and the record content in association with a record ID that uniquely identifies each record. The record content is information indicating the theme of the performance and the purpose of improving the skills, and may be used, for example, as a search index.

[0058] FIG. 6 shows an example of a performance evaluation history recorded in the database server 400. The evaluation history table TB30 may store the time period in which the prior evaluation was entered, the evaluation level of the prior evaluation, comments, and an evaluator ID identifying the evaluator who made the prior evaluation, in association with a record ID and an evaluator ID identifying the evaluator. The example in FIG. 6 is a record with record ID "cont_001" by an evaluator identified by evaluator ID "user_30X." The performance during the time period "0:32-1:00" after the start of the performance was evaluated as a "++" by an evaluator with evaluator ID "user_20A," and a comment was recorded. The performance during the time period "3:20-3:25" after the start of the performance was evaluated as a "++" by an evaluator with evaluator ID "user_20B," and a comment was recorded. Note that the figure is merely an example, and the data stored in the evaluation history may be more or less than this. For example, if an evaluation item is associated in the previous evaluation, the associated evaluation item may also be stored.

[0059] Returning to the flowchart of FIG. 3, the output unit 112 displays the prior evaluation and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set on the user's terminal (step S12).

[0060] FIG. 7 shows an example of a comprehensive evaluation execution screen including a preliminary evaluation and setting area. Note that this figure is merely an example, and the present invention is not limited thereto. The comprehensive evaluation execution screen D10 includes a display area 51 for a record of the target performance and a timeline area 52 for displaying multiple preliminary evaluations for the target performance and information regarding the time points at which the multiple preliminary evaluations were made. Based on the evaluation history shown in FIG. 6, the timeline area 52 displays icons 53 indicating the time periods to which the preliminary evaluations are associated by the evaluators and the evaluation levels of the preliminary evaluations, positioned for each of the multiple evaluators. In other words, the output unit 112 may display multiple preliminary evaluations for the target performance in the timeline area 52, arranging them on the time axis at which the multiple preliminary evaluations were made. Note that the timeline area 52 is also referred to as a "distribution graph." In the timeline area 52, within the area separated by a thick central line indicating the elapsed time since the start of the target performance, the right side displays the prior evaluation associated with the evaluation level "Good (+ or ++)", and the left side displays the prior evaluation associated with the evaluation level "Can be improved (- or --)".

[0061] In the display area 51, video and audio of the performance may be played at a position corresponding to the icon 53 selected in the timeline area 52.

[0062] Thus, according to one embodiment of the present invention, the distribution of evaluations for a performance is displayed on a timeline, allowing the person being evaluated and the evaluator to immediately recognize at what point the evaluation was good or bad, and further, at what point the performance attracted more attention.

[0063] In addition, when multiple advance evaluations are made by multiple different users, the output unit 112 may display multiple advance evaluations for the target performance in the timeline area 52 in a manner that allows the users who made the advance evaluations to be identified, as shown in Fig. 7. In the example shown in the figure, the timeline is divided into columns for each evaluator 20, and advance evaluation icons 53 are displayed in the corresponding columns. Furthermore, as shown in Fig. 7, the number of advance evaluations by each evaluator 20 may be displayed. Note that the figure is an example, and the timeline may be divided into rows for each evaluator 20, and advance evaluation icons 53 are displayed in the corresponding rows.

[0064] The comprehensive evaluation execution screen D10 may further include a selection area 41 for a record used to set an evaluation item, and an addition area 42 for a record.

[0065] The comprehensive evaluation execution screen D10 also includes a classification area 60 in which evaluation items for the prior evaluation of the target performance can be classified. The classification area 60 includes at least a prior evaluation display area 61 and a setting area 62 in which evaluation items can be set based on the prior evaluation displayed in the prior evaluation display area 61. The setting area 62 also includes a selection area 63 and an addition area 64. The selection area 63 is an area in which evaluation items for the prior evaluation of the target performance can be selected from multiple evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria stored in the database server 400. Note that classifying evaluation items into the prior evaluation is not required; as indicated by button 65 in the setting area 62, it is possible to select not to classify evaluation items. The addition area 64 is an area in which additional evaluation items can be added, and in the example of FIG. 7, a "+" is displayed. Furthermore, the prior evaluation display area 61 displays the content of the prior evaluation associated with a selected icon from the prior evaluation icons displayed in the timeline area 52. Note that the example shown in the figure shows the case in which the prior evaluation icon 53 in the timeline area 52 is selected. However, in one embodiment of the present invention, the display of the record display area 51 and the timeline area 52 described above is not essential, and the evaluator terminal 200 may display only the evaluation item classification area 60.

[0066] The selection area 63 of the setting area 62 may display evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria stored in the database server 400 in advance. This may be achieved, for example, by the selection unit 114 selecting evaluation criteria to be displayed in the setting area 62 from multiple evaluation criteria stored in the database server 400 based on the prior evaluation of the target performance. Alternatively, the evaluation criteria displayed in the selection area 63 may be based on the selection result by the user. FIG. 7 shows an example in which "Negotiation Ability Part 1" shown in TB10 of FIG. 4 is selected as the evaluation criterion. The evaluator 20 can associate evaluation items to be associated with the prior evaluation by selecting, from the selection area 63, evaluation items that classify the prior evaluation displayed in the prior evaluation display area 61.

[0067] In this way, according to one embodiment of the present invention, by associating evaluation items with prior evaluations, it is possible to evaluate target performance based on uniform evaluation criteria when generating evaluation results such as evaluation tables. Note that for prior evaluations for which classification of evaluation items has been completed in classification area 60, a check icon 54 indicating that classification is complete may be displayed in the icon in timeline area 52.

[0068] Note that, depending on the prior evaluation, there may be some evaluation items that do not apply to the evaluation items displayed in the selection area 63. In this case, the evaluator 20 can select the addition area 64 in the major category to which the evaluation item is to be added and input the new evaluation item. Furthermore, the user can input new evaluation items without being limited to associating them with the prior evaluation by referring to the prior evaluation.

[0069] The generation unit 113 generates evaluation criteria using the evaluation items set in the setting area 62 (step S13). For example, in response to a new evaluation item being input in the addition area 64, the generation unit 113 updates the evaluation criteria table TB10 related to the target performance.

[0070] Figure 8 shows an example of the dataset TB10' of updated evaluation items. As shown in the figure, for the major category "Getting to know the customer / checking the issues," the following evaluation items have been added: "Able to dig deeper into customer reactions" as an evaluation item with an evaluation level of "Good," and evaluation item 70 "Missed an opportunity to dig deeper" as an evaluation item with an evaluation level of "Possible for improvement." Note that while the example in the figure shows an example in which evaluation items have been added as pairs of evaluation levels, the added evaluation items do not necessarily have to be pairs.

[0071] In this way, according to one embodiment of the present invention, it is possible to add evaluation items made by evaluators from new perspectives and upload evaluation criteria as appropriate.

[0072] Here, the generation unit 113 may determine the consistency between the additional evaluation items entered in the addition area 64 and the evaluation items included in the dataset of evaluation items before the update. If the wording used in the added evaluation items differs from the wording used in the evaluation items before the update, discrepancies may occur between the evaluation table based on the evaluation items before the update. For this reason, according to one embodiment of the present invention, the consistency of wording before and after the update of the evaluation items may be determined using a natural language processing method such as morphological analysis. Then, depending on the result of the determination, the user may be suggested to modify the wording of the evaluation items or delete existing evaluation items. The generation unit 113 may update the evaluation criteria based on the user's response to the suggestion.

[0073] In one embodiment of the present invention, the recommendation unit 115 may recommend evaluation items to be added in the addition area 64. The recommendation unit 115, for example, learns the evaluation criteria for the target performance, the contents of the previous evaluation, the added evaluation items, and the like for records in which evaluation items have already been classified or for evaluation items newly set based on the records. Then, for a record in which a new evaluation item is to be classified, the recommendation unit 115 may determine whether a corresponding evaluation item exists in the database server 400, and if no evaluation item exists, may recommend text, words, and the like for the new evaluation item. The output unit 112 may then display the evaluation items recommended by the recommendation unit 115 in the addition area 64 on the comprehensive evaluation execution screen D10. In this case, it is preferable that the output unit 112 display the recommended evaluation items in a manner that allows the evaluator to recognize them as such.

[0074] In this way, according to one embodiment of the present invention, evaluation items to be added are suggested to the evaluator, which makes it easier for the evaluator to add evaluation items.

[0075] As a result of classifying the prior evaluation of a certain record into the evaluation items by the above-mentioned process, the evaluation table D20 in Fig. 9 may be generated. That is, the output unit 112 may function as an evaluation result output unit that outputs the evaluation results of the target performance according to the evaluation items into which the prior evaluation has been classified, which are set in the setting area 62.

[0076] While the present invention has been described with reference to the drawings and examples, it should be noted that those skilled in the art would readily be able to make various modifications and alterations based on this disclosure. Therefore, it should be noted that these modifications and alterations are within the scope of the present invention. For example, the functions included in each component, step, etc. can be rearranged so as not to cause logical inconsistencies. Multiple components, steps, etc. can be combined or divided into one, or omitted or modified as needed. Furthermore, the configurations described in the above embodiments may be combined as appropriate. For example, the functional units described as being included in the server 100 may be realized in a distributed manner across multiple servers, or may be included in the evaluator terminal 200. Conversely, the functional units described as being included in the evaluator terminal 200 may be included in the server 100.

[0077] For example, in the above description, evaluation criteria related to the target performance are pre-selected on the comprehensive evaluation execution screen D10 of FIG. 7, and the selection area 63 in the setting area 62 is displayed, i.e., the evaluation items are pre-displayed. However, the present invention may also be applicable to cases where there are no evaluation criteria related to the target performance, and evaluation items are set from scratch. In this case, the setting area 62 does not display the selection area 63, and displays the additional area 64. Note that the major categories of evaluation items may be set in advance, or the major categories may also be set from scratch.

[0078] The display screen of the evaluator terminal 200 is not limited to the one shown in the figure. For example, the above description was given using an example in which the evaluator terminal 200 is a laptop computer, desktop computer, or other device with a relatively large display. Therefore, if the evaluator terminal 200 is a smartphone with a smaller display than a laptop computer, the layout of the comprehensive evaluation execution screen D10 and the evaluation table D20 may be different from those shown in the figure.

[0079] The program of each embodiment of the present disclosure may be provided in a state stored in a storage medium readable by an information processing device. The storage medium may be a "non-transitory tangible medium" capable of storing the program. The program may include, for example, a software program or an information processing device program.

[0080] The storage medium may, where appropriate, include one or more semiconductor-based or other integrated circuits (ICs) (e.g., field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), application specific ICs (ASICs), etc.), hard disk drives (HDDs), hybrid hard drives (HHDs), optical disks, optical disk drives (ODDs), magneto-optical disks, magneto-optical drives, floppy diskettes, floppy disk drives (FDDs), magnetic tapes, solid state drives (SSDs), RAM drives, secure digital cards or drives, any other suitable storage media, or any suitable combination of two or more of these. The storage medium may, where appropriate, be volatile, non-volatile, or a combination of volatile and non-volatile.

[0081] Furthermore, the program of the present disclosure may be provided to the server 100 via any transmission medium (such as a communication network or broadcast waves) capable of transmitting the program.

[0082] Furthermore, each embodiment of the present disclosure may also be realized in the form of a data signal embedded in a carrier wave in which a program is embodied by electronic transmission.

[0083] The program of the present disclosure may be implemented using any programming language, such as a scripting language such as JavaScript (registered trademark) or Python (registered trademark), or C language, Go language, Swift, Koltin, or Java (registered trademark). [Explanation of symbols]

[0084] 100 Server (information processing device) 110 control section 111 Acquisition Department 112 Output section 113 Generation part 114 Selection Section 115 Recommendation Department 170 Storage section 200 Evaluator terminal (communication terminal) 210 Control Unit 211 Acquisition Department 212 Display processing unit 213 Evaluation Item Selection Reception Section 214 Evaluation item input reception section 220 Communications Department 230 Display section 240 Input / output section 270 Storage section 400 database servers 500 Network 600 Evaluation Support System

Claims

1. An evaluation support device that supports the setting of evaluation criteria for evaluating performance, an acquisition unit that acquires a record that records a target performance for which the evaluation criteria are set and a plurality of prior evaluations of the target performance; a screen output unit that displays the prior evaluation and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set; a generation unit that generates evaluation criteria using the evaluation items set in the setting area; An evaluation support device comprising:

2. Further, a storage unit is provided that stores the evaluation items included in each of the plurality of evaluation criteria, the screen output unit displays, as the setting area, a selection area in which the evaluation item can be selected from a plurality of evaluation items included in the evaluation criteria stored in the storage unit, and an addition area in which an additional evaluation item can be added; the generation unit updates the evaluation criteria stored in the storage unit with the additional evaluation items set in the additional area; The evaluation support device according to claim 1 .

3. The acquisition unit further acquires information regarding the time points at which the plurality of prior evaluations were performed, the screen output unit displays the plurality of prior evaluations for the target performance by arranging them at positions on a time axis at which the plurality of prior evaluations were made; The evaluation support device according to claim 1 .

4. the plurality of prior evaluations are made by a plurality of different users, and the screen output unit, when arranging and displaying the plurality of prior evaluations for the target performance at positions on a time axis at which the plurality of prior evaluations were made, displays the users who made the prior evaluations in an identifiable manner; The evaluation support device according to claim 3 .

5. a selection unit that selects, from the plurality of evaluation criteria stored in the storage unit, an evaluation criterion including an evaluation item to be displayed in the selection area based on a plurality of prior evaluations of the target performance; The evaluation support device according to claim 2 .

6. The acquisition unit further acquires a user's selection result of an evaluation criterion including an evaluation item to be displayed in the selection area from among the plurality of evaluation criteria stored in the storage unit; the screen output unit displays evaluation items in the selection area based on the selection result by the user. The evaluation support device according to claim 2 .

7. a recommendation unit that recommends the additional evaluation items; the screen output unit displays the evaluation items recommended by the recommendation unit in the additional area; The evaluation support device according to claim 2 .

8. the generation unit determines consistency between the additional evaluation item added in the additional area and the evaluation item included in the evaluation criteria before the update. The evaluation support device according to claim 2 .

9. an evaluation result output unit that outputs an evaluation result of the target performance according to the evaluation items set in the setting area and into which the preceding evaluation is classified; The evaluation support device according to claim 1 .

10. A control method for an evaluation support device that supports setting of evaluation criteria for evaluating performance, comprising: The evaluation support device A step of obtaining a record of a target performance for which the evaluation criteria are set and a plurality of prior evaluations of the target performance; a step of displaying the prior evaluation and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set; generating an evaluation criterion using the evaluation items set in the setting area; A control method for an evaluation support device that executes the above.

11. A control program for an evaluation support device that supports the setting of evaluation criteria for evaluating performance, Evaluation support device, a function of acquiring a record of a target performance for which the evaluation criteria are set and a plurality of prior evaluations of the target performance; a function of displaying the preceding evaluation and a setting area in which evaluation items can be set; a function of generating evaluation criteria using the evaluation items set in the setting area; A control program for the evaluation support device that realizes this.

Images