Evaluation Device and Program

Abstract

To provide an evaluation device and program capable of appropriately evaluating a current situation of an organization and / or employees.SOLUTION: A question database of an evaluation device for performing evaluation on the basis of answers to questions includes a plurality of first question categories, second question categories belonging to any of the first question categories, third question categories associated with one, two or more of the second question categories, a first question group composed of two or more of the questions associated with the second question categories, and a second question group composed of two or more of the questions associated with the third question categories. A state evaluation value showing a prescribed state of an organization and / or employees is calculated on the basis of answers to questions extracted from the first question group, and a relative evaluation value showing relative evaluation of the organization and / or the employees is calculated on the basis of answers to questions extracted from the second question group.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 2

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to an evaluation device and a program, and more particularly to an evaluation device and a program capable of appropriately evaluating the current state of an organization and / or employees.

Background Art

[0002] As an information processing system for supporting the implementation of questionnaires in companies and other organizations, for example, a questionnaire support device disclosed in Patent Document 1 is known.

Prior Art Documents

Patent Documents

[0003]

Patent Document 1

Summary of the Invention

Problems to be Solved by the Invention

[0004] In recent years, in companies and other organizations, it is required to maintain high levels of employee health and motivation for work in order to improve the productivity of employees and the company as a whole. In response, companies and other organizations regularly conduct questionnaires for employees to grasp the productivity and other conditions of the organization and / or employees. Patent Document 1 and other conventional information processing systems are highly effective in promoting the above corporate activities efficiently.

[0005] On the other hand, in the above corporate activities, for example, simply aggregating and scoring questionnaire results may not be sufficient to fully achieve issues such as productivity improvement. For example, in order to identify one's own strengths and areas for improvement, it is necessary to analyze not only the evaluation results such as simple scoring but also the factors that led to the evaluation results. Conventional information processing systems have had the problem of not being able to provide sufficient information for performing such an analysis.

[0006] An object of the present invention is to provide an evaluation apparatus and a program capable of appropriately evaluating the current state of an organization and / or employees in view of the above problems.

Means for Solving the Problems

[0007] An evaluation device according to the present invention, which has been made to solve the above problems, is an evaluation device that presents questions to employees of an organization and performs an evaluation of the organization and / or employees based on the answers to the presented questions. The evaluation device includes a question presentation unit that extracts a plurality of the hierarchically structured questions from a question database provided in the evaluation device and presents them to the employees, an evaluation unit that calculates an evaluation value indicating the evaluation based on the answers of the employees to the presented questions, and an evaluation presentation unit that presents the calculated evaluation value to the organization and / or the employees. The evaluation unit calculates the evaluation value based on scores previously associated with the answers based on the answers of the employees to the questions. The evaluation value includes a state evaluation value, a comprehensive evaluation value, and a relative evaluation value. The state evaluation value is a value indicating productivity or health status related to a predetermined category of the organization and / or employees. The comprehensive evaluation value is a value indicating the overall productivity of the organization and / or employees. The relative evaluation value is a value indicating the relative evaluation of the organization and / or employees. The evaluation unit calculates the state evaluation value from scores previously provided for the answers selected by the employees for the questions at a predetermined level, and calculates the comprehensive evaluation value by summing the calculated plurality of state evaluation values. The relative evaluation value is calculated from scores previously provided for the answers selected by the employees for the questions at a level lower than the predetermined level.In addition, in the evaluation apparatus according to the present invention, the question database is hierarchized by a plurality of first question categories, second question categories belonging to any of the first question categories, and third question categories associated with one or more of the second question categories. The first question group consists of two or more questions associated with the second question category and options for the answers to each of the questions, and the second question group consists of two or more questions associated with the third question category and options for the answers to each of the questions. The question presentation unit presents a plurality of the questions extracted from the first question group and a plurality of the questions extracted from the second question group to the employee. The evaluation unit calculates the state evaluation value with each of the second question categories as the predetermined category from the scores pre-associated with the answers selected by the employee for the questions extracted from the first question group, with the second question category as the predetermined hierarchy, and the third Question For each of the categories, the relative evaluation value may be calculated from the scores pre-associated with the answers selected by the employee for the questions extracted from the second question group.

[0008] In the evaluation apparatus according to the present invention, the evaluation presentation unit presents the comprehensive evaluation value and the state evaluation value to the organization and / or the employee, and also presents Relative evaluation the relatively high relative evaluation value and Relative evaluation the relatively low relative evaluation value to the employee.

[0009] In the evaluation apparatus according to the present invention, the first question category may include at least a social category indicating a perspective on the relationship between the employee and the organization and / or other employees in the organization, a mental category indicating a perspective on the mental state of the employee, and a physical category indicating a perspective on the physical state of the employee.

[0010] The evaluation device according to the present invention may be configured such that the second question category belonging to the social category includes at least a social capital category indicating an aspect related to the social relationship capital of the employee in the organization.

[0011] The evaluation device according to the present invention may be configured such that the second question category belonging to the mental category includes at least a work engagement category indicating an aspect related to the employee's motivation for work and a psychological stress category indicating an aspect related to the employee's psychological stress, and may include the same.

[0012] The evaluation device according to the present invention may be configured such that the second question category belonging to the physical category includes at least a musculoskeletal disorder complaint category indicating an aspect related to the employee's subjective symptoms in the musculoskeletal system, a lifestyle disease category indicating an aspect related to the employee's lifestyle diseases, and an infectious disease category indicating an aspect related to the employee's infectious diseases.

[0013] The evaluation device according to the present invention may be configured such that the question presenting unit extracts the questions from the second question group based on the employee's answers to the questions extracted from the first question group.

[0014] The evaluation device according to the present invention further includes a fourth question category including a personality category indicating an aspect related to the employee's personality and a third question group associated with the fourth question category, and the question presenting unit further presents a plurality of the questions extracted from the third question group to the Employee and may be configured to do so.

[0015] The evaluation device according to the present invention may be configured such that the question presenting unit further presents questions related to the employee's subjective productivity, and the comprehensive evaluation value is calculated based on the employee's answers to the questions related to the subjective productivity in addition to the state evaluation value.

Advantages of the Invention

[0016] According to the configuration of the present invention, a state evaluation value indicating a predetermined state of an organization and / or an employee is calculated based on an answer to a question associated with a second question category, and a relative evaluation value indicating a relative evaluation of the organization and / or the employee is calculated based on an answer to a question associated with a third question category associated with one or more of the second question categories. By performing a relative evaluation using other questions related to the questions used for the evaluation of the state, it is possible to grasp, from the relative evaluation value, the factors regarding the level of the state as well as the level of the state, and appropriately evaluate the current state of the organization and / or the employee.

Brief Description of the Drawings

[0017]

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Embodiments for Carrying Out the Invention

[0018] Hereinafter, an example of an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a diagram showing the configuration of an evaluation device 100 in an example of the present embodiment. As shown in FIG. 1, the evaluation device 100 in an example of the present embodiment includes a question database 101, a question presentation unit 102, an evaluation presentation unit 103, and an evaluation unit 104.

[0019] In an example of this embodiment, the evaluation device 100 is a device that presents questions to employees of an organization and performs an evaluation of the organization and / or the employees based on the answers to the presented questions. Note that the number of organizations for which the evaluation device 100 performs an evaluation may be arbitrarily selected. For example, the evaluation may be performed for a single organization, or the evaluation may be performed for each of a plurality of organizations. In an example of this embodiment, the evaluation is configured to be performed for each of a plurality of organizations with respect to the organization and its employees.

[0020] In an example of this embodiment, the evaluation device 100 is configured using a server-use computer. A program for causing the computer to function as the evaluation device 100 is stored in a HDD (Hard Disk Drive) or other storage device of the computer, and by loading the program into the memory of the computer and having the CPU (Central Processing Unit) execute it, the computer is caused to function as the evaluation device 100. Note that the hardware configuration of the evaluation device 100 may be arbitrarily changed. For example, the evaluation device 100 may be configured by two or more computers.

[0021] The question database 101 is a database that stores questions to be presented to employees of an organization when the evaluation device 100 performs an evaluation of the organization and / or the employees. In an example of this embodiment, an RDBMS (Relational Database Management System) is constructed in the evaluation device 100, and a part of the area of the RDBMS is used as the question database 101.

[0022] In an example of this embodiment, the question database 101 includes a first question category to a third question category that classify questions according to the viewpoints of the questions, a first question group associated with the second question category, and a second question group associated with the third question category (not shown in FIG. 1). The configuration of the questions will be described later.

[0023] The question presentation unit 102 extracts a plurality of questions from the aforementioned question database 101 and presents them to the employees by displaying them on the display device of the user terminal 200. In an example of the present embodiment, a plurality of questions are extracted from the aforementioned first question group and second question group respectively and presented to the employees. The number of questions to be extracted and the extraction method may be arbitrarily selected. When an employee operates the user terminal 200 to answer the displayed questions, information indicating the answers is transmitted to the evaluation device 100 and used for calculating an evaluation value by the evaluation unit 104 described later.

[0024] The evaluation presentation unit 103 presents the evaluation value calculated by the evaluation unit 104 described later to the organization and / or the employees. In an example of the present embodiment, as described above, the evaluation device 100 and the user terminal 200 are communicably connected via the network 300, and the evaluation presentation unit 103 displays the above evaluation value on the display device of the user terminal 200.

[0025] The evaluation unit 104 calculates an evaluation value indicating an evaluation of the organization and / or the employees based on the answers of the employees to the questions presented by the aforementioned question presentation unit 102. In an example of the present embodiment, the aforementioned evaluation value includes a state evaluation value, a comprehensive evaluation value, and a relative evaluation value, which are calculated by the state evaluation unit 104a, the comprehensive evaluation unit 104b, and the relative evaluation unit 104c included in the evaluation unit 104 respectively.

[0026] The state evaluation unit 104a calculates the above-described state evaluation value. The state evaluation value is a value indicating the state of the organization and / or employees in each of the second question categories provided in the question database 101, and is calculated based on the answers to the questions extracted from the first question group provided in the question database 101, as will be described later. In an example of the present embodiment, first to third question categories are provided as question categories for classifying the questions presented to employees from viewpoints, and the state evaluation value indicates, as a value, the state of the organization and / or employees in the viewpoint of the second question category to which the question used for calculating the state evaluation value belongs. What viewpoints to provide as the second question category may be arbitrarily selected. For example, when a second question category from the viewpoint of health is provided, the state evaluation value in the second question category is a value indicating the health of the organization and / or employees, or when a second question category from the viewpoint of productivity is provided, the state evaluation value in the second question category is a value indicating the productivity of the organization and / or employees.

[0027] The comprehensive evaluation unit 104b calculates the above-described comprehensive evaluation value. The comprehensive evaluation value is a value indicating the comprehensive productivity of the organization and / or employees, and is calculated based on the above-described state evaluation value, as will be described later.

[0028] The relative evaluation unit 104c calculates the above-described relative evaluation value. The relative evaluation value is a value indicating the relative evaluation of the organization and / or employees in each of the third question categories provided in the question database 101, and is calculated based on the answers to the questions extracted from the second questions provided in the question database 101, as will be described later.

[0029] The user terminal 200 is a terminal used by an employee who answers questions. In an example of this embodiment, the user terminal 200 is configured using a well-known computer. The computer used as the user terminal 200 may be, for example, a stationary personal computer, a portable smartphone or tablet PC, or a dedicated terminal that communicates with the evaluation device 100 using a dedicated communication protocol. However, it is necessary to include a display 201 or other display device for displaying questions and evaluations, and a keyboard, touch panel, or other input device 202 for inputting answers. Also, in an example of this embodiment, the user terminal 200 is used as the terminal used by the employee, and the evaluation device 100 is used as a server, and an information processing system with a server-client model with the user terminal 200 as a client is constructed. However, for example, the evaluation device 100 may be configured in a stand-alone configuration, and the employee may directly operate the evaluation device 100 to answer questions and so on.

[0030] In an example of this embodiment, as described above, the network 300 through which the evaluation device 100 and the user terminal 200 are communicably connected via the network 300 may use a wide-area computer network such as the so-called Internet, or a LAN (Local Area Network). Also, a VPN (Virtual Private Network) constructed on a wide-area network may be used. Also, for the communication protocol and other methods between the evaluation device 100 and the user terminal 200, well-known methods may be arbitrarily selected. For example, the evaluation device 100 may be made to function as a WEB application server, the user terminal 200 as a WEB client, and configured as a WEB application that communicates using HTTP as the communication protocol, or the evaluation device 100 and the user terminal 200 may be made to communicate using a dedicated communication protocol.

[0031] The above is the configuration of the evaluation device 100 in an example of this embodiment. Next, the configuration of the questions in an example of this embodiment will be described.

[0032] Figure 2 is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of a question in an example of this embodiment. As shown in Figure 2, the question database 101 in an example of this embodiment includes a first question category C100, a second question category C200, and a third question category C300 as question categories for classifying questions according to the viewpoints of the questions, and also includes a first question group G100 and a second question group G200 as question groups each consisting of two or more questions associated with any one of the question categories.

[0033] The first question category C100, the second question category C200, and the third question category C300 are question categories for hierarchically classifying questions into three levels.

[0034] The first question category C100 is the first layer, that is, the topmost layer of the hierarchically classified question categories. The first question category C100 in an example of this embodiment is specifically configured to include a social category C101 indicating a viewpoint regarding the relationship between the organization and / or other employees in the organization of the employee, a mental category C102 indicating a viewpoint regarding the mental state of the employee, and a physical category C103 indicating a viewpoint regarding the physical state of the employee.

[0035] The second question category C200 is the second-level question category of the hierarchical question categories. The second question category C200 is a question category belonging to any of the aforementioned first question categories C100. In an example of this embodiment, as the second question category C200 belonging to the social category C101, it includes a social capital category C201 indicating a perspective on social relationship capital in an employee's organization. As the second question category C200 belonging to the mental category C102, it includes a work engagement category C202 indicating a perspective on an employee's motivation for work and a psychological stress category C203 indicating a perspective on an employee's psychological stress. As the second question category C200 belonging to the physical category C103, it is configured to include a musculoskeletal complaint category C204 indicating a perspective on self-perceived symptoms in an employee's musculoskeletal system, a lifestyle disease category C205 indicating a perspective on an employee's lifestyle diseases, and an infectious disease category C206 indicating a perspective on an employee's infectious diseases.

[0036] The third question category C300 is the third layer, i.e., the lowest layer, of the hierarchical question categories. The third question category C300 in an example of the present embodiment is a question category belonging to one or more of the second question categories C200, and includes a reward category C301 indicating a perspective on rewards, a discretion category C302 indicating a perspective on discretion, an operational propriety category C303 indicating a perspective on operational propriety, a work burden category C304 indicating a perspective on the burden in work, a psychological safety category C305 indicating a perspective on psychological safety, a work autonomy category C306 indicating a perspective on the autonomy of work, a communication category C307 indicating a perspective on communication, a rest / mood change category C308 indicating a perspective on rest and mood change, a physical activity category C309 indicating a perspective on physical activity, a diet category C310 indicating a perspective on diet, a comfort category C311 indicating a perspective on comfort, a cleanliness category C312 indicating a perspective on cleanliness, a health awareness category C313 indicating a perspective on health awareness, a sports category C314 indicating a perspective on sports, a nutrition category C315 indicating a perspective on nutrition, and a rest category C316 indicating a perspective on rest and sleep.

[0037] The first question group G100 is a question group consisting of two or more questions associated with the second question category C200. In an example of the present embodiment, the questions are configured to be associated with any one of the second question categories C200, i.e., any one of the social capital category C201 to the infectious disease category C206. The answers of employees to the questions belonging to the first question group G100 are used for calculating the state evaluation value by the state evaluation unit 104a provided in the evaluation unit 104 of the evaluation device 100 as described above.

[0038] The second question group G200 is a question group consisting of two or more questions associated with the third question category C300. In an example of the present embodiment, the questions are configured to be associated with any one of the third question categories C300, that is, any one of the reward category C301 to the rest category C316. The answers of the employees to the questions belonging to the second question group G200 are used for calculating the relativity evaluation value by the relative evaluation unit 104c provided in the evaluation unit 104 of the evaluation device 100 as described above.

[0039] FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 are diagrams showing examples of questions in an example of the present embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of a question belonging to the first question group G100, and FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of a question belonging to the second question group G200. As shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the questions in an example of the present embodiment are questions that allow an employee to select one from a predetermined number of options, and for the question text Q101, the option Q102 and the question category Q103 associated with the question are configured to correspond. Further, in the questions belonging to the first question group G100 shown in FIG. 3, they are configured to be associated with any one of the second question categories C200 in the question category Q103, and in the questions belonging to the second question group G200 shown in FIG. 4, they are configured to be associated with any one of the third question categories C300 in the question category Q103. In an example of the present embodiment, as shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, four-choice options Q102 are provided for each question, but the form of the answer to the question and the number of options may be arbitrarily changed. For example, a question may be provided that allows an employee to freely enter an answer.

[0040] The above is the configuration of the questions in an example of this embodiment. In an example of this embodiment, the first question group G100 and the second question Q200 are classified by question categories consisting of three hierarchies from the first question category C100 to the third question category C300. However, a configuration in which different question categories, question groups, or questions are added may also be used. For example, a fourth question category including a personality category indicating the perspective of an employee's personality and a third question group associated with the fourth question category may be provided, and the question presenting unit 102 may extract a plurality of questions from each of the first to third question groups. In this case, further, when the evaluation unit 104 calculates an evaluation value, the calculation method may be changed or the coefficient used in the calculation may be increased or decreased based on the answers to the questions regarding the above personality.

[0041] Next, the processing flow of the evaluation device 100 in an example of this embodiment will be described. FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing the processing flow by the evaluation device 100 in an example of this embodiment.

[0042] In an example of this embodiment, first, the question presenting unit 102 of the evaluation device 100 extracts questions from the question database 101 (step S101). The extraction of questions is performed from the first question group G100 and the second question group G200 of the question database 101 according to a predetermined method. The predetermined method may be arbitrarily selected. For example, the number of questions to be extracted and the ratio of each of the second question category C200 and the third question category may be set in advance, and the questions of the above number may be extracted so as to be in the ratio of each of the second question category C200 and the third question category C300.

[0043] The extracted questions are then presented to the employee by being displayed on the display device 201 of the user terminal 200 by the question presenting unit 102 (step S102).

[0044] When an employee answers a question, a message including the answer is sent from the user terminal 200 to the evaluation device 100, and the evaluation device 100 receives the message (step S103). The evaluation device 100 that has received the message extracts the employee's answer from the message and executes an evaluation process by the evaluation unit 104 (step S104).

[0045] The evaluation process in step S104 calculates, as an evaluation value, an evaluation regarding the organization and / or the employee based on the aforementioned employee's answer. In step S104 in an example of the present embodiment, calculation of a state evaluation value by the state evaluation unit 104a (step S104a), calculation of a comprehensive evaluation value by the comprehensive evaluation unit 104b (step S104b), and calculation of a relative evaluation value by the relative evaluation unit 104c (step S104c) are performed.

[0046] Step S104a calculates a state evaluation value indicating a predetermined state of the organization and / or employees in each of the second question categories C200 based on the answers of employees to the questions extracted from the aforementioned first question group G100. As described above, each of the questions in an example of the present embodiment is configured to be associated with any one of the second question categories C200, that is, the social capital category C201 to the infectious disease category C206. Step S104a calculates the state evaluation values of employees and the organization for each of the second question categories based on the answers of employees to the questions associated with the second question category C200. As the calculation method, a well-known calculation method may be arbitrarily selected. In an example of the present embodiment, scores are provided for each of the aforementioned options Q102. For each of the second question categories C200, the scores of the options selected by the employees are totaled and then converted so that the full score is 100 points to calculate the state evaluation value of the employee. The state evaluation value of the organization is calculated by obtaining the average of the state evaluation values of the employees belonging to the organization. Note that it may be arbitrarily selected whether to calculate the state evaluation value for the organization, for each employee, or for both. Also, regarding the calculation of the state evaluation value of the organization, it may be arbitrarily selected whether to calculate it each time an answer is received from one employee, or at the timing when a predetermined number or a predetermined percentage of answers are received.

[0047] Step S104b calculates a comprehensive evaluation value indicating the comprehensive productivity of the organization and / or employees based on the state evaluation value calculated in the aforementioned step S104a. Similar to step S104a, as the calculation method, a well-known method may be arbitrarily selected. In an example of the present embodiment, in the aforementioned step S104a, a state evaluation value is calculated for each of the second question categories. The comprehensive evaluation value calculates the comprehensive evaluation value of one employee by weighting and summing the state evaluation values of one employee for each of the second question categories, and then calculates the comprehensive evaluation value of the organization by obtaining the average value of the comprehensive evaluation values of the employees belonging to the organization.

[0048] Step S104c calculates a relative evaluation value indicating the relative evaluation of the organization and / or employees in each of the third question categories based on the answers of employees to the questions extracted from the aforementioned second question group G200. Similar to the aforementioned steps S104a and S104b, the calculation method may arbitrarily select a well-known method. In an example of this embodiment, for each of the third question categories, the scores of the options selected by the employees are totaled and converted so that the full score is 100 points, thereby calculating the relative evaluation value of the employee. Further, by obtaining the average value of the relative evaluation values of the employees belonging to the organization, the relative evaluation value of the organization is calculated. The relative evaluation value may be the value obtained by performing the above summation and conversion, or may be a value obtained by converting this into a deviation value or other dimensionless number, etc., to facilitate relative evaluation.

[0049] When the calculation of the evaluation value by step S104 is completed, next, the evaluation presentation unit 103 of the evaluation device 100 presents the calculated evaluation value to the organization and / or employees (step S105).

[0050] FIG. 6 is a diagram showing the configuration of an evaluation presentation screen in an example of this embodiment. In an example of this embodiment, an evaluation presentation screen is displayed on the display device 201 of the user terminal 200 by the evaluation presentation unit 103. As shown in FIG. 6, the evaluation presentation screen W100 in an example of this embodiment is composed of a comprehensive evaluation area W110, a status evaluation area W120, and a relative evaluation area W130.

[0051] Note that, as described above, the evaluation device 100 in an example of this embodiment is a device that evaluates an organization and the employees of the organization, and the evaluation presentation screen W100 is a screen that displays either the evaluation value for the organization or the evaluation value for the employees. When the employee using the user terminal 200 has the authority to view the evaluation value for the organization, he / she can select whether to view the evaluation value for the organization or for himself / herself. On the other hand, when an employee without the above authority views the evaluation presentation screen W100, he / she can only view the evaluation value for the employee.

[0052] The comprehensive evaluation area W110 is an area that displays a comprehensive evaluation value indicating the overall productivity of the organization and / or employees. The comprehensive evaluation area W110 in an example of this embodiment is composed of a comprehensive evaluation value area W111 that displays the comprehensive evaluation value of the organization or employees, and a comprehensive evaluation distribution area W112 that shows the distribution of the comprehensive evaluation values in one or more organizations.

[0053] The state evaluation area W120 is an area that displays a state evaluation value indicating a predetermined state of the organization and / or employees in each of the second question categories C200. The state evaluation area W120 in an example of this embodiment is composed of a state radar chart area W121 that displays the state evaluation value by a radar chart, and a state evaluation table area W122 that displays the state evaluation value in a tabular form.

[0054] The relativity evaluation area W130 is an area that displays a relative evaluation value indicating the relative evaluation of the organization and / or employees in each of the third question categories C300. The relativity evaluation area W130 in an example of this embodiment is composed of a high evaluation area W131 that displays a relative evaluation value with a high relative evaluation, that is, a relative evaluation value that gets a high score in comparison with a predetermined comparison target, and a low evaluation area W132 that displays a relative evaluation value with a low relative evaluation, that is, a relative evaluation value that gets a low score in comparison with the above-mentioned predetermined comparison target. The comparison target for the relative evaluation may be arbitrarily selected. However, in an example of this embodiment, when displaying the evaluation value of an employee, other employees in the organization to which the employee belongs are the comparison targets, and when displaying the evaluation value of an organization, other organizations are configured to be the comparison targets.

[0055] As described above, in an example of this embodiment, the relativity evaluation value is calculated for each of the third question categories C300 based on the answers of the employees to the questions extracted from the second question group G200 in step S104c. Since each of the third question categories C300 is associated with one or more of the second question categories C200, each of the relativity evaluation values calculated in step S104c is an evaluation value associated with one or more of the second question categories C200.

[0056] In an example of the present embodiment, the state evaluation values in each of the second question categories C200 are displayed in the state evaluation area W120. However, when an employee selects any of the displayed state evaluation values by operating the user terminal 200, for the relativity evaluation value associated with the second question category of the selected state evaluation value, a relatively high relativity evaluation value is displayed in the high evaluation area W131, and a relatively low relativity evaluation value is displayed in the low evaluation area W132.

[0057] The description of the example of the present embodiment is as above, but the configuration of the present invention is not limited to the above. For example, in an example of the present embodiment, it is configured to sequentially execute the extraction of questions in step S101 and the evaluation of answers in step S104. However, it may be configured to repeatedly execute steps S101 to S103 to present the questions for which answers are requested to the employee in multiple portions. In this case, in the repetition of steps S101 to S103 after the second time, based on the answers obtained in step S103 before the previous time, questions may be extracted in step S101. For example, based on the employee's answers to the questions extracted from the first question group, questions may be extracted from the second question group.

[0058] Also, the question categories in an example of the present embodiment are a hierarchical question category consisting of the first question category C100 to the second question category C300. In addition to this, a question category that does not belong to the hierarchical structure may be provided, or a question that does not belong to any question category may be provided. For example, as a question that does not belong to any question category in the question database 101, a question regarding the subjective productivity of the employee may be provided. In this case, in steps S101 and S102, in addition to the questions extracted from the first question group G100 and the second question group G200, the question regarding the subjective productivity of the employee is presented to the employee, and in the calculation of the comprehensive evaluation value in step S104b, in addition to the state evaluation value, the comprehensive evaluation value may be calculated based on the answers to the question regarding the subjective productivity of the employee.

[0059] Other specific configurations are not limited to this embodiment, and various changes can be made without departing from the spirit of the present invention.

Description of Reference Numerals

[0060] 100 Evaluation device 101 Question database 102 Question presentation unit 103 Evaluation presentation unit 104a State evaluation unit 104b Comprehensive evaluation unit 104c Relative evaluation unit 104 Evaluation unit 200 User terminal 201 Display device 202 Input device 301 Network

Claims

1. An evaluation device that presents questions to employees of an organization and performs an evaluation of the organization and / or employees based on the answers to the presented questions, a question presentation unit that extracts a plurality of the hierarchical questions from a question database included in the evaluation device and presents the questions to the employee; an evaluation unit that calculates an evaluation value indicating the evaluation based on the employee's answer to the presented question; an evaluation presentation unit that presents the calculated evaluation value to the organization and / or the employee; comprising: the evaluation unit calculates the evaluation value based on a score associated with the answer in advance based on the employee's answer to the question; the evaluation value includes a state evaluation value, a comprehensive evaluation value, and a relative evaluation value; the state evaluation value is a value indicating productivity or health status regarding a predetermined category of the organization and / or employees; the comprehensive evaluation value is a value indicating the overall productivity of the organization and / or employees; the relative evaluation value is a value indicating the relative evaluation of the organization and / or employees; the evaluation unit: calculates the state evaluation value from a score provided in advance for the answer selected by the employee for the question at a predetermined level; calculates the comprehensive evaluation value by summing the calculated plurality of state evaluation values; calculates the relative evaluation value from a score provided in advance for the answer selected by the employee for the question at a level lower than the predetermined level; Evaluation device.

2. The question database: is hierarchized by a plurality of first question categories, a second question category belonging to any of the first question categories, and a third question category associated with one or more of the second question categories; a first question group consisting of two or more questions associated with the second question category and options for the answers to each of the questions; a second question group consisting of two or more questions associated with the third question category and options for the answers to each of the questions; including: the question presentation unit: presents the employee with a plurality of the questions extracted from the first question group and a plurality of the questions extracted from the second question group; the evaluation unit: uses the second question category as the predetermined level, and calculates the state evaluation value with each of the second question categories as the predetermined category from a score associated in advance with the answer selected by the employee for the question extracted from the first question group. For each of the third question categories that are the lower-level hierarchies, the relative evaluation value is calculated from the scores pre-associated with the answers selected by the employee for the questions extracted from the second question group. The evaluation device according to claim 1, characterized in that.

3. The evaluation presentation unit, presents the comprehensive evaluation value and the state evaluation value to the organization and / or the employee, and presents to the employee each of the relative evaluation values with high relative evaluation and the relative evaluation values with low relative evaluation The evaluation device according to claim 2, characterized in that.

4. The first question category includes at least a social category indicating a perspective on the relationship between the employee and the organization and / or other employees in the organization, a mental category indicating a perspective on the psychological state of the employee, a physical category indicating a perspective on the physical state of the employee, The evaluation device according to claim 2 or 3, characterized in that it includes.

5. The second question category belonging to the social category includes at least a social capital category indicating a perspective on the social relationship capital of the employee in the organization, the evaluation device according to claim 4, characterized in that.

6. The second question category belonging to the mental category includes at least a work engagement category indicating a perspective on the employee's motivation for work, a psychological stress category indicating a perspective on the employee's psychological stress, The evaluation device according to claim 4 or 5, characterized in that it includes.

7. The second question category belonging to the physical category includes at least a musculoskeletal complaint category indicating a perspective on the subjective symptoms in the musculoskeletal system of the employee, a lifestyle disease category indicating a perspective on the lifestyle diseases of the employee, an infectious disease category indicating a perspective on the infectious diseases of the employee, The evaluation device according to any one of claims 4 to 6, characterized in that it includes.

8. The evaluation device according to any one of claims 2 to 7, characterized in that the question presentation unit extracts the questions from the second question group based on the answers of the employee to the questions extracted from the first question group.

9. The question database further includes a fourth question category including a personality category indicating a perspective on the personality of the employee, a third group of questions associated with the fourth question category, and comprising the question presenting unit further presents a plurality of the questions extracted from the third group of questions to the employee The evaluation device according to any one of claims 2 to 8, characterized in that

10. the question presenting unit further presents a question regarding the subjective productivity of the employee, and the comprehensive evaluation value is calculated based on the answer of the employee to the question regarding the subjective productivity in addition to the state evaluation value The evaluation device according to any one of claims 2 to 9, characterized in that

11. A program for causing a computer to function as the evaluation device according to any one of claims 1 to 10

Images