Salary determination method, information processing device, and program

Abstract

To provide a salary determination method capable of objectively determining a salary of an evaluated person, and an information processing device, and a program.SOLUTION: In a salary determination method, a computer executes: an evaluation result acquisition step for acquiring an evaluation result for an evaluated person by each of a plurality of evaluators; a digitizing step for digitizing the evaluation result for the evaluated person acquired in the evaluation result acquisition step; and a salary determination step for determining the salary of the evaluated person by reflecting the evaluation result digitized in the digitizing step. The plurality of evaluators includes at least a person having a position being equal to or lower than that of the evaluated person.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 9

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a salary determination method, an information processing device, and a program. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, a method for determining the salary of an employee or other person being evaluated by taking into consideration the evaluation results of multiple evaluators has been known. This type of technology is described, for example, in Patent Document 1. Patent Document 1 describes a technology in which an employee is evaluated by multiple evaluators, such as the employee's immediate supervisor and their superiors. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 8-161396 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] However, although the technology in Patent Document 1 calculates the average and standard deviation of the evaluation scores for each evaluator for all evaluators and can determine the salary of the person being evaluated taking into account the degree of leniency, there is room for improvement in terms of determining the salary of the person being evaluated more objectively.

[0005] The present invention aims to provide a salary determination method, an information processing device, and a program that can determine the salary of an individual being evaluated more objectively. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] The present invention relates to a salary determination method in which a computer executes an evaluation result acquisition step of acquiring evaluation results of an evaluatee from each of a plurality of evaluators, a quantification step of quantifying the evaluation results of the evaluatee acquired in the evaluation result acquisition step, and a salary determination step of determining the salary of the evaluatee by reflecting the evaluation results quantified in the quantification step, wherein the plurality of evaluators include people of equal or lower rank than the evaluatee.

[0007] The evaluation results may include at least the degree of contribution made by the person being evaluated to the growth of the evaluator.

[0008] The method may further include an output step of comparing the quantified evaluation results for multiple evaluators, determining a ranking for each of the multiple evaluators based on the comparison results, and outputting the ranking.

[0009] The method may further include a performance acquisition step of acquiring the financial performance of the group to which the evaluatee belongs, a contribution acquisition step of acquiring the evaluatione's contribution to the financial performance, wherein the contribution is a value determined by the evaluator who has a higher position than the evaluatee, and a financial performance point determination step of determining the evaluatione's financial performance points, which are quantified based on the financial performance and the contribution to the financial performance, and in the salary determination step, the salary of the evaluatee may be determined by reflecting the evaluation results and the financial performance points quantified in the quantification step.

[0010] The financial performance may include at least sales performance or gross profit performance.

[0011] In the financial performance point determination step, the financial performance at the evaluation period may be compared with the financial performance at each of a plurality of periods prior to the evaluation period, a ranking of the financial performance at the evaluation period among the compared plurality of financial performances may be determined, and the financial performance points of the person being evaluated may be determined using the determined ranking of the financial performance.

[0012] The present invention also relates to an information processing device that includes an evaluation result acquisition unit that acquires evaluation results of an individual evaluated by each of a plurality of evaluators, a quantification processing unit that quantifies the evaluation results of the individual evaluated acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit, and a salary determination processing unit that determines the salary of the individual evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified by the quantification processing unit, wherein the plurality of evaluators include individuals of equal or lower position than the individual evaluated.

[0013] The present invention also relates to a program that causes a computer or an information processing device to execute an evaluation result acquisition function that acquires evaluation results of an evaluatee by each of multiple evaluators, a quantification processing function that quantifies the evaluation results of the evaluatee acquired by the evaluation result acquisition function, and a salary determination processing function that determines the salary of the evaluatee by reflecting the evaluation results quantified by the quantification processing function, wherein the multiple evaluators include people of equal or lower rank than the evaluatee. [Effects of the Invention]

[0014] According to the present invention, a salary determination method, an information processing device, and a program can be provided that can determine the salary of an individual being evaluated more objectively. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0015] [Figure 1] 1 is a system configuration diagram showing the configuration of a salary determination system according to one embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 2] 1 is a schematic diagram showing an example of an electronic document of winter bonus payment details output by a salary determination system according to one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. [Figure 3] FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing the hardware configuration of a user terminal according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 4] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of a management server according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 5]FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a part of the functional configuration of a management server according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 6] 1 is a schematic diagram showing an example of evaluation items related to the person being evaluated that are used in a salary determination system according to one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. [Figure 7] 1 is a schematic diagram showing an example of evaluation items related to the person being evaluated that are used in a salary determination system according to one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. [Figure 8] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram showing an example of a process for quantifying evaluation results in a salary determination system according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 9] 10 is a flowchart showing an example of a salary determination process performed by a management server according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 10A] 10 is a schematic diagram showing an example of a login screen for the salary determination system displayed on the display screen of a user terminal. FIG. [Figure 10B] This is a schematic diagram showing an example of an evaluator selection screen of the salary determination system displayed on the display screen of a user terminal. [Figure 10C] This is a schematic diagram showing an example of a screen that displays information about a selected evaluator in the salary determination system on the display screen of a user terminal. [Figure 10D] A schematic diagram showing an example of a screen that displays the contents of evaluation items for an evaluatee in the salary determination system on the display screen of a user terminal. [Figure 11] 1 is a schematic diagram showing an example of an electronic document for an evaluator's self-reporting output by a salary determination system according to one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0016] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0017] FIG. 1 is a system configuration diagram showing a salary determination system S according to one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram showing an example of an electronic document of payment details of an appraisee's winter bonus output by the salary determination system S. The salary determination system S is a system for determining the salary of an appraisee as an employee of an organization such as a corporation or sole proprietorship. The salary determination system S determines the salary to be paid to the appraisee by reflecting the evaluation results of the appraisee by multiple evaluators who are also employees. Examples of salary include monthly salary and bonuses. In this embodiment, an example of determining bonuses for employees at a company that operates a supermarket will be described.

[0018] 1, the salary determination system S includes a management server 1 and a user terminal 4. The management server 1 and the user terminal 4 can communicate with each other via a network N.

[0019] The network N is realized by, for example, the Internet, a LAN (Local Area Network), a mobile phone network, or a combination of these. For convenience, in Fig. 1, the salary determination system S according to this embodiment is described as including one user terminal 4, but it may include multiple terminals.

[0020] The user terminal 4 is a communication device having a processing function, a communication function, and an information display function. The user terminal 4 may be, for example, a stationary computer such as a desktop, or a wearable device such as a smartphone, tablet, or smartwatch that can be carried by the user. For example, the evaluator can input the evaluation results for the evaluee while checking the evaluation items displayed on the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4.

[0021] The management server 1 is an information processing device with calculation processing functions and communication functions. The management server 1 is realized by, for example, an electronic device such as a server device or a personal computer. The management server 1 performs processes such as selecting images to be displayed on the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4, storing data received from the user terminal 4, digitizing it, calculating it, and outputting the calculation results. As shown in FIG. 2, for example, the management server 1 determines the bonus amount of the person being evaluated using personnel evaluation points, financial performance points, business performance points, manager-assessed bonus amount, etc., calculated based on the evaluation results of the person being evaluated by each of multiple evaluators. Details of the salary determination process by the management server 1 will be described later.

[0022] Next, we will explain an example of the hardware configuration of the user terminal 4. Fig. 3 is a block diagram showing the hardware configuration of the user terminal 4 according to one embodiment of the present invention.

[0023] The user terminal 4 includes a processor 41, a ROM (Read Only Memory) 42, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 43, a bus 44, an input / output interface 45, a display unit 46, an input unit 47, a memory unit 48, and a communication unit 49.

[0024] The processor 41 executes various processes according to a program recorded in the ROM 42 or a program loaded from the storage unit 48 into the RAM 43. The RAM 43 also stores data and the like necessary for the processor 41 to execute various processes, as appropriate.

[0025] The processor 41 is, for example, a central processing unit (CPU), a micro processing unit (MPU), a system on a chip (SoC), a digital signal processor (DSP), a graphics processing unit (GPU), an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a programmable logic device (PLD), or a field-programmable gate array (FPGA). Alternatively, the processor 41 is a combination of two or more of these. Furthermore, the processor 41 may be a combination of these with a hardware accelerator or the like.

[0026] The processor 41, ROM 42, and RAM 43 are connected to one another via a bus 44. An input / output interface 45 is also connected to this bus 44. A display unit 46, an input unit 47, a storage unit 48, and a communication unit 49 are connected to the input / output interface 45.

[0027] Display unit 46 is configured by a display that displays images. The display is configured, for example, by a liquid crystal display (LCD) or an organic electroluminescent (EL) display. Display unit 46 may be provided with a touch panel that detects a touch position by a user on display screen 40 of the display, allowing the user to input information by touching display screen 40 of the display. In other words, the display may have a function as display unit 46 and a function as input unit 47.

[0028] The input unit 47 is configured with, for example, various buttons such as a keyboard, a mouse, a display provided with the above-mentioned touch panel, and the like, and inputs various information in response to user operations.

[0029] The storage unit 48 is configured by a semiconductor memory such as a DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory), and is a device that stores various data of the user terminal 4.

[0030] The communication unit 49 is a communication device for transmitting and receiving data to and from the management server 1 or the user terminal 4 via the network N.

[0031] Next, an example of the hardware configuration of the management server 1 will be described. Fig. 4 is a block diagram showing the hardware configuration of the management server 1 according to one embodiment of the present invention. As shown in Fig. 4, the management server 1 includes a processor 11, a ROM 12, a RAM 13, a bus 14, an input / output interface 15, a storage unit 16, and a communication unit 17. The processor 11, ROM 12, RAM 13, bus 14, input / output interface 15, and communication unit 17 of the management server 1 have the same configuration as the functional blocks of the same names included in the above-mentioned user terminal 4, and therefore description thereof will be omitted.

[0032] The storage unit 16 is composed of semiconductor memory such as DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory), and is a device that stores various data of the management server 1. The storage unit 16 stores, for example, the salary amount and assessment results of each assessee determined by the salary determination system S, the financial performance and business performance results of the company and each group within the company, and the like.

[0033] Next, a description will be given of the functional configuration of the management server 1. Fig. 5 is a functional block diagram showing a part of the functional configuration of the management server 1.

[0034] The control unit 20, which performs various controls on the management server 1, is realized by a processor 11 that executes calculations. The control unit 20 of this embodiment includes a display processing unit 21, an evaluation result acquisition unit 22, a financial performance acquisition unit 23, a contribution level acquisition unit 24, a business performance acquisition unit 25, a resource information acquisition unit 26, a manager assessment result acquisition unit 27, a quantification processing unit 28, a financial performance point determination unit 29, a business performance point determination unit 30, a salary determination unit 31, and an output processing unit 32.

[0035] The display processing unit 21 executes a process of displaying the evaluation items related to the person being evaluated on the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4. Specifically, the display processing unit 21 displays the evaluation items on the display screen 40 based on an input signal received via the communication unit 17 in response to a user operation by the evaluator who operates the user terminal 4.

[0036] The evaluation result acquisition unit 22 acquires evaluation results of the evaluatee by each of the multiple evaluators. Specifically, the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 acquires data entered into the evaluation items on the display screen 40 by user operations of the multiple evaluators as evaluation results. The multiple evaluators include at least evaluators who are at a position equal to or lower than the evaluatee. That is, the multiple evaluation results acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 include evaluation results by evaluators who are at a position equal to or lower than the evaluatee. This allows the evaluatee to be evaluated by evaluators at a position equal to or lower than the evaluatee, thereby enabling a more multifaceted evaluation of the evaluatee's abilities. Note that, from the perspective of evaluating the evaluatee more objectively, it is more preferable that the evaluators evaluating one evaluatee include evaluators with a higher position than the evaluatee, evaluators with an equal position, and evaluators with a lower position.

[0037] Here, an example of the process for obtaining the evaluation results by the salary determination system S will be described with reference to Figures 6 and 7. Examples of the process for obtaining the evaluation results for the evaluatee include the voting method shown in Figure 6 and the rating scale method shown in Figure 7.

[0038] The voting method is a method in which multiple evaluators each select a ratee from multiple ratees who correspond to the questions in the evaluation items, and the selection results are tallied. Figure 6 shows evaluation items A1 to A11 and a comment entry item B1. For example, in the example shown in Figure 6, each evaluator selects a ratee who corresponds to evaluation items A1 to A9, and the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 executes a process of tallying the selected ratees. Then, the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 acquires the evaluation results of one ratee as the number of evaluators who selected that ratee for each of the evaluation items A1 to A9.

[0039] The rating scale method is a method in which each evaluator evaluates each ratee according to a preset evaluation scale. Figure 7 shows the evaluation items A12 to A15 for each employee. In the example shown in Figure 7, the evaluator evaluates the ratee on a 10-point scale for each of the evaluation items A12 to A15. The evaluation result acquisition unit 22 acquires the 10-point evaluation results for each ratee entered by each evaluator into the evaluation items A12 to A15 as evaluation results. In the example shown in Figure 7, respondent A, the evaluator, not only evaluates ratees B, C, D, and E, but also self-evaluates. This allows the evaluator to evaluate the ratee in comparison with himself, resulting in more accurate evaluation results for the ratee. It also allows for understanding the evaluator's personality, such as whether they are stricter in their evaluations of others than in their self-evaluations.

[0040] As shown in Figures 6 and 7, evaluation items include those related to the impression the appraisee makes on others in the workplace, such as greetings, nurturing subordinates, likability, hygiene awareness, and processing ability (speed and quality of assigned tasks), as well as the appraisee's abilities. For example, evaluation item A3 in Figure 6 asks about the appraisee's contribution to the appraisee's own growth, such as "Please name one person you feel is like a mentor." The appraisee's contribution to the appraisee's growth refers to the degree to which the appraisee contributes to the appraisee's improvement in their abilities. By incorporating the results of evaluation item A3 into salary determination, for example, it is possible to grasp the appraisee's contribution to the development of subordinates, thereby determining a salary that reflects the appraisee's ability to develop subordinates. Another example is evaluation item A15 in Figure 7, such as "Want to work together," which asks about the appraisee's willingness to work on the same team again (e.g., similar to the willingness to team up again or the willingness to return to a restaurant). By obtaining the evaluation results for this item, it is possible to more accurately grasp the satisfaction level of the entire team working with the person being evaluated. In other words, it is possible to grasp the degree to which the person being evaluated is desired by their colleagues, superiors, and subordinates.

[0041] The financial performance acquisition unit 23 acquires the financial performance of the group to which the assessee belongs. The financial performance is, for example, performance against key financial performance indicators in the industry to which the unit, such as a team or group, belongs, which can be compared by recording management indicators separately and independently. In this embodiment, sales performance, gross profit performance, and man-hour sales are used as the financial performance. The financial performance may be a total value or an average value over a specified period. The financial performance acquisition unit 23 may acquire, for example, data input by user operation via the user terminal 4 or data accumulated in the memory unit 16 as the financial performance.

[0042] The contribution level acquisition unit 24 acquires a position coefficient as the ratee's contribution to the financial performance of the group to which the ratee belongs. The position coefficient indicates the degree to which the ratee has contributed to the group's financial performance. The ratee's position coefficient for financial performance is determined, for example, by an evaluator who belongs to the same group and has a higher position than the ratee. This gives the higher-ranking employee the right to decide the ratee's contribution to financial performance, thereby ensuring, for example, the authority of a supervisor over his or her subordinates. The contribution level acquisition unit 24 may acquire, for example, data input by a user via the user terminal 4 as the ratee's position coefficient.

[0043] The business performance acquisition unit 25 acquires the business performance of the group to which the assessee belongs. Examples of business performance include hygiene survey results, the number of price change errors, and the number of returns due to complaints. Hygiene survey results are the results of a visual inspection of the hygiene management status of the workplace environment. The number of price change errors is the number of cases in which consumers requested a refund because the price on the POP or price card differed from the price registered at the cash register. The number of returns due to complaints is the number of cases in which refunds were processed for sold products due to complaints such as deterioration in quality or the presence of foreign matter in the purchased products. The business performance acquisition unit 25 may acquire, for example, data entered by a user via the user terminal 4 or data stored in the memory unit 16 as business performance.

[0044] The resource information acquisition unit 26 acquires resource information regarding the resources of bonuses to all employees who are eligible for bonus payment. The resource information is, for example, the total amount planned to be paid to all employees who are eligible for bonus payment. The resource information acquisition unit 26 may acquire, for example, data input by a user via the user terminal 4 as the resource information.

[0045] The manager evaluation result acquisition unit 27 acquires the bonus amount of the appraisee determined by, for example, the appraisee's immediate superior or superior above that, using a method for determining the bonus amount of the appraisee (hereinafter referred to as the manager-assessed bonus amount). This makes it possible to determine bonuses that reflect the evaluation results of multiple evaluators of the same or lower rank, while making use of the salary system that each organization has traditionally used for evaluation and determination.

[0046] The quantification processing unit 28 quantifies the multiple evaluation results for the evaluatee acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 as performance evaluation points. The quantification processing unit 28 may quantify the evaluation results using a weighting factor set according to the evaluation item. For example, if the evaluation results are evaluated using a rating scale method, the quantification processing unit 28 may quantify the evaluation results by converting the evaluation results into scores according to the grade and multiplying the scores by a weighting factor. The quantification processing unit 28 may then quantify the performance evaluation points by averaging the scores for the evaluatee from all target evaluators. Furthermore, if the evaluation results are evaluated using a voting method, for example, the quantification processing unit 28 may quantify the scores by multiplying the number of evaluators who selected the evaluatee for each evaluation item by a weighting factor set according to the evaluation item.

[0047] The process by which the quantification processing unit 28 quantifies the evaluation results obtained by the voting method will be described with reference to FIG. 8. FIG. 8 is a schematic diagram illustrating an example of the quantification process for the evaluation results of one appraisee obtained by the voting method shown in FIG. 6. Item F1 in FIG. 8 indicates the total amount of funds to be paid to all appraisees eligible for bonus payments. The evaluation items A1 to A11 in FIG. 8 correspond to the evaluation items A1 to A11 in FIG. 6. Evaluation item C1 indicates the evaluation results of high-ranking evaluators such as department managers, store managers, and general managers. Evaluation items C2 and C3 indicate the results of customer surveys of key customers. Evaluation items C4 to C7 indicate the presence or absence of disciplinary violations and the results of hygiene surveys. From the leftmost column to the rightmost column of evaluation items A1 to A11 and C1 to C7, the following are listed in order: evaluation item name, description of the evaluation item, the raw score obtained by the appraisee for each evaluation item, weighting coefficients assigned to each evaluation item, various points such as the quantified personnel evaluation points for each evaluation item, and the average score for all employees. In addition, the 〇〇 and □□ shown in the third and fifth columns from the left in Figure 8 will contain numerical values.

[0048] The digitization processing unit 28 digitizes the evaluation results for each evaluation item by multiplying the raw scores obtained for each evaluation item by a set weighting coefficient, and calculates personnel evaluation points by aggregating the digitized evaluation results. For example, the raw score of an appraisee for evaluation items A1 to A9 shown in Fig. 8 is the number of evaluators who selected the appraisee for each evaluation item A1 to A9, and for evaluation item C2 in the questionnaire for major customers, the raw score of the appraisee is the value obtained by multiplying the score for the department to which the appraisee belongs by the position coefficient representing the degree of contribution made by the appraisee.

[0049] The financial performance point determination unit 29 determines financial performance points, which are scores that reflect the financial performance of the group to which the assessee belongs and the position coefficient of the assessee relative to the financial performance. In this embodiment, the financial performance point determination unit 29 calculates points from the gross profit performance, sales performance, and man-hour sales performance acquired by the financial performance acquisition unit 23, adds up these points, and then multiplies the sum by the position coefficient acquired by the contribution degree acquisition unit 24 to determine the financial performance points of each assessee. Details of the process of determining financial performance points will be described with reference to Tables 1 to 4.

[0050] First, we will explain the process for determining gross profit performance points. Table 1 shows the average daily gross profit and gross profit performance points for the group to which the assessee belongs for March through August in 2019, 2020, and 2021. From left to right, Table 1 shows the average daily gross profit for each month in 2019, 2020, and 2021, the ranking of the average daily gross profit for each month over the past 61 months including the evaluation month, the raw score for each month determined based on the ranking, a comparison with two years ago, the average gross profit performance points for each month, and the average gross profit performance points for the first half of the year. Note that specific figures for the average daily gross profit and comparison with two years ago shown in Table 1 are omitted.

[0051] [Table 1]

[0052] The financial performance point determination unit 29 acquires the gross profit performance for the evaluation month and the period prior to the evaluation month (61 months prior to the evaluation month) from the financial performance acquisition unit 23 and the storage unit 16 to determine the salary of the assessee. The financial performance point determination unit 29 then calculates the average daily gross profit for each of the 61 months. The financial performance point determination unit 29 then compares the average daily gross profit for each of the 61 months and determines the ranking of the average daily gross profit for the evaluation month in the compared 61 months. The gross profit performance points for the evaluation month are then calculated by subtracting the ranking of the evaluation month from 61 and multiplying the result by a weighting coefficient set according to the type of financial performance. As shown in Table 1, for example, for March 2021, the historical ranking for average daily gross profit over the 61-month period was 5th, resulting in a raw score of 56 (61 minus 5). The gross profit performance points are calculated by multiplying the raw score by 1.0, which is the weighting coefficient for gross profit performance. As shown in Table 1, the average gross profit performance points for the first half of 2021 (March to August) are 53.2. Note that the average daily gross profit is used as an index to eliminate differences in the number of business days. In this embodiment, to compare monthly performance over the past five years, the performance over 61 months, rather than the past 60 months including the evaluation month, is compared. The reason for this is that, for example, when determining monthly performance for June, a 60-month period would exclude the performance for June five years prior from the comparison. Therefore, the period is set to 61 months so that monthly performance over five years can be compared for June as well. The financial performance point determination unit 29 may determine financial performance points using financial performance over the past 61 months or more, including the evaluation month, or may determine financial performance points using financial performance over the past 61 months or less, including the evaluation month. For example, by using financial performance over the past 37 months, including the evaluation month, monthly performance for each month over the past three years can be compared.

[0053] The process for determining actual sales points will now be explained. Table 2 shows the average daily sales and actual sales points for the group to which the assessee belongs for March through August in 2019, 2020, and 2021. From left to right in Table 2, it shows the average daily sales for each month in 2019, 2020, and 2021, the ranking of average daily sales for each month over the past 61 months including the month being assessed, the raw score for each month determined based on the ranking, a comparison with two years ago, the actual sales points for each month, and the average value of the actual sales points for the first half of the year. Note that specific figures for the average daily sales and comparison with two years ago shown in Table 2 have been omitted.

[0054] [Table 2]

[0055] In this embodiment, the financial performance point determination unit 29 calculates sales performance points using a process similar to the process for calculating gross profit performance points described above. As shown in Table 2, for example, in March 2021, the historical ranking for average daily sales over the 61-month period was 5th, the raw score was 56 (61 minus 5), and the sales performance points were 11.2 (the raw score multiplied by 0.2, which is the weighting coefficient for sales performance). Then, as shown in Table 2, the average value of sales performance points for the first half of 2021 (March to August) was 10.6.

[0056] The process for determining actual man-hour sales points will now be explained. Table 3 shows the man-hour sales and actual man-hour sales points for the group to which the assessee belongs for March through August in 2019, 2020, and 2021. From left to right in Table 3, it shows monthly man-hour sales for 2019, 2020, and 2021, the ranking of each month's man-hour sales for the past 61 months including the month being evaluated, the raw score for each month determined based on the ranking, a comparison with two years ago, each month's actual man-hour sales points, and the average of the actual man-hour sales points for the first half of the year. Note that specific figures for the man-hour sales and comparison with two years ago shown in Table 3 have been omitted.

[0057] [Table 3]

[0058] In this embodiment, the financial performance point determination unit 29 calculates man-hour sales performance points using a process similar to the process for calculating the gross profit performance points and sales performance points described above. As shown in Table 3, for example, in March 2021, the historical ranking for man-hour sales over the 61-month period was third, the raw score was 58, which is 61 minus 3, and the man-hour sales performance points were 29, which is the raw score multiplied by 0.5, which is the weighting coefficient for sales performance. Then, as shown in Table 3, the average man-hour sales performance points for the first half of 2021 (March to August) was 27.

[0059] Next, the financial performance point determination unit 29 calculates the financial performance points for the first half of the year for the appraisee using the calculated gross profit performance points, sales performance points, and man-hour sales performance points. Table 4 shows the financial performance points for March to August 2021 for the group to which the appraisee belongs, the appraisee's position coefficient, the financial performance points awarded to the appraisee, etc. Specifically, from the top to the bottom of Table 1, the gross profit performance points, sales performance points, man-hour sales points, the total value of the gross profit performance points, sales performance points, and man-hour sales points for the group to which the appraisee belongs, the appraisee's position coefficient, and the appraisee's financial performance points are shown.

[0060] [Table 4]

[0061] The financial performance point determination unit 29 adds up the calculated gross profit performance points, sales performance points, and man-hour sales points for each month and multiplies the total by the assessee's position coefficient for each month to calculate the assessee's financial performance points for each month. The unit then calculates the assessee's average monthly financial performance points from the calculated monthly financial performance points and multiplies this average by a predetermined point conversion coefficient to calculate the assessee's financial performance points for the first half of the year. As shown in Table 4, for example, in May 2021, the sum of the three types of financial performance points is 88.1, and the assessee's financial performance points are 79.3, multiplied by the position coefficient of 0.9. As shown in Table 1, the assessee's financial performance points for the first half of 2021 are 169.7, multiplied by the average monthly financial performance points of 84.8, multiplied by the point conversion coefficient of 2.

[0062] In this embodiment, the financial performance point determination unit 29 compares the financial performance for the evaluation period with the financial performance for multiple periods prior to the evaluation period, determines the ranking of the financial performance for the evaluation period among the multiple financial performances compared, and determines financial performance points using the determined ranking of the financial performance. The ranking of the financial performance for the evaluation period is a ranking indicating how best the financial performance for the evaluation period is among the financial performances including the multiple past periods compared. For example, the higher the gross profit, the higher the ranking; the higher the sales, the higher the ranking; and the higher the sales per man-hour, the higher the ranking. This allows for a more objective evaluation of financial performance because it does not use numerical values ​​that are subjective to the setter's subjectivity, such as the goal achievement rate, but instead uses rankings that represent objective numerical values ​​based on past performance and comparison results.

[0063] The business performance point determination unit 30 determines business performance points, which are scores that reflect the business performance of the group to which the person being evaluated belongs. Specifically, the business performance point determination unit 30 calculates business performance points based on the results of the hygiene survey of the workplace environment, the number of price change errors, the number of returned products, etc., acquired by the business performance acquisition unit 25.

[0064] The following describes the process of calculating the business performance points of the hygiene investigation results by the business performance point determination unit 30. The business performance points of the hygiene investigation results may be calculated by, for example, scoring the points of the group to which the person being evaluated belongs based on a checklist consisting of multiple items, and converting the scored points into points according to a predetermined standard.

[0065] This section explains the calculation process of business performance points for the number of selling price change errors by the business performance point determination unit 30. Table 5 shows the number of selling price change errors and business performance points for each month from March to August in 2020 and 2021 for the group to which the assessee belongs.

[0066] [Table 5]

[0067] The business performance point determination unit 30 acquires data on the number of selling price change errors for the group to which the appraisee belongs and for departments of the same type within the company during the evaluation month for determining the appraisee's salary from the business performance acquisition unit 25 and the memory unit 16. Next, the business performance point determination unit 30 calculates the average number of selling price change errors for departments of the same type as the group to which the appraisee belongs, and uses the calculated average to calculate the intra-departmental deviation of the group to which the appraisee belongs as business performance points. For example, as shown in Table 5, in March 2021, the number of selling price change errors was 5, the intra-departmental deviation was -1.17, and the business performance points for the number of selling price change errors were -1.17.

[0068] This section explains the calculation process of business performance points for the number of complaints and returns by the business performance point determination unit 30. Table 6 shows the number of complaints and returns and business performance points for each month from March to August in 2020 and 2021 for the group to which the person being evaluated belongs.

[0069] [Table 6]

[0070] The business performance point determination unit 30 acquires data on the number of complaints and returns for the group to which the appraisee belongs and for departments of the same type within the company during the evaluation month for determining the appraisee's salary from the business performance acquisition unit 25 and the memory unit 16. Next, the business performance point determination unit 30 calculates the average value for departments of the same type as the group to which the appraisee belongs, and uses the calculated average value to calculate the deviation within the department of the group to which the appraisee belongs as business performance points. For example, as shown in Table 5, in March 2021, the number of complaints and returns was 4, the deviation within the department was -1.14, and the business performance points for the number of complaints and returns was -1.14.

[0071] The salary determination unit 31 determines the salary of the appraisee based on the personnel evaluation points determined by the quantification processing unit 28, the financial performance points determined by the financial performance point determination unit 29, and the business performance points determined by the business performance point determination unit 30. Specifically, as shown in FIG. 2, the salary determination unit 31 adds up the personnel evaluation points, financial performance points, business performance points, etc. of the appraisee to calculate the total points earned by the appraisee (260.6 points in the example of FIG. 2). Then, the salary determination unit 31 calculates the sum of the total points earned by all appraisees who are eligible for bonus payment (55,524.5 points in the example of FIG. 2), and calculates the point unit price of the total points earned (540.3 points in the example of FIG. 2) using the resource information acquired by the resource information acquisition unit 26. The bonus payment amount for item B (140,821 yen in the example of FIG. 2) is then calculated by multiplying the total points earned by the appraisee by the point unit price. Then, by adding the calculated bonus payment amount for item B to the manager assessment bonus payment amount for the person being evaluated obtained by the manager assessment result acquisition unit 27 (452,500 yen in the example of Figure 2), the subtotal of the winter bonus payment amount for 2021 for the person being evaluated (593,321 yen in the example of Figure 2) is calculated.

[0072] The output processing unit 32 outputs data on the salary amount of the appraisee determined by the salary determination unit 31, the quantified evaluation results for the appraisee, and an electronic document of the bonus payment details as shown in Fig. 2. More specifically, the output processing unit 32 outputs an electronic document that summarizes the process that led to the salary determination, such as the salary amount, the contents of the evaluation items, and raw scores, on a single sheet of paper to provide feedback to the appraisee. This makes it possible to provide the appraisee with a bonus payment details that makes it easy to understand the relationship between the wide-ranging evaluation results and the bonus payment amount.

[0073] Furthermore, for example, the output processing unit 32 compares the quantified evaluation results of multiple appraisers, determines and outputs the rankings of each of the multiple appraisers based on the comparison results. In this embodiment, the ranking of each appraiser among all employees eligible for payment is determined and output. The output processing unit 32 may generate and output an electronic document such as a certificate certifying that the appraiser has achieved a predetermined ranking or higher, or may generate and output an electronic self-reporting document containing objectively quantified indicators for the appraiser, such as personnel evaluation points, financial performance points, and business performance points.

[0074] Next, we will explain an example of the flow of the salary determination process for an evaluatee executed by the management server 1. Figure 9 is a flowchart showing the flow of the salary determination process by the management server 1.

[0075] 9, the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 acquires the evaluation result for the evaluatee (step S11). Specifically, the evaluation result acquisition unit 22 acquires data input to the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4 by the user operation of the evaluator.

[0076] The control unit 20 determines whether or not evaluation results for the evaluatee by all pre-selected evaluators have been acquired (step S12). If the control unit 20 determines that evaluation results by all pre-selected evaluators have not been acquired (step S12; No), the control unit 20 returns the process to step S11. On the other hand, if the control unit 20 determines that evaluation results by all evaluators have been acquired (step S12; Yes), the control unit 20 transitions the process to step S13. Note that the evaluators include at least employees of the same or lower position than the evaluatee.

[0077] The digitization processing unit 28 executes a process of quantifying all the evaluation results for the evaluatee acquired in step S11 as performance evaluation points (step S13).

[0078] The salary determination unit 31 determines the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the personnel evaluation points, etc., which are the evaluation results quantified in step S13 (step S14). The salary determination unit 31 may determine the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting, for example, the financial performance points of the person being evaluated determined by the financial performance point determination unit 29 and the business performance points determined by the business performance point determination unit 30, in addition to the personnel evaluation points.

[0079] The output processing unit 32 outputs data related to the salary payment amount of the person being evaluated determined by the salary determination unit 31, the quantified evaluation results of the person being evaluated, etc. (Step S15). After the processing of Step S15, the processing executed by the management server 1 in the salary determination process for the person being evaluated ends.

[0080] Next, the salary determination system S according to this embodiment will be described with reference to Figs. 10A to 10D, with regard to the procedure for inputting evaluation results into evaluation items related to an evaluatee using the user terminal 4. Fig. 10A is a diagram showing a login screen displayed on the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4. Fig. 10B is a diagram showing a screen for selecting an evaluatee displayed on the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4. Fig. 10C is a diagram showing a screen displaying information about the selected evaluatee. Fig. 10D is a diagram showing a screen displaying evaluation items for the evaluatee.

[0081] When the evaluator starts the application of the salary determination system S on the user terminal 4, the login screen shown in Fig. 10A is displayed on the display screen 40. The evaluator enters his / her name in the input field 50, enters a predetermined password in the input field 51, and clicks the login icon 52.

[0082] When the evaluator clicks on the login icon 52, the screen for selecting the evaluator shown in Fig. 10B is displayed on the display screen 40. As shown in Fig. 10B, the selection screen displays an item 54 displaying the logged-in evaluator, an icon 55 for selecting an evaluator for returning to the login screen, and a list of evaluators 56. The list of evaluators 56 displays the employee numbers, names, and affiliations of the evaluators that the logged-in evaluator needs to evaluate.

[0083] When the evaluator clicks on the icon 57 for selecting the evaluator to be evaluated, the information of the selected evaluator is displayed on the display screen 40 as shown in Fig. 10C. Specifically, as shown in Fig. 10C, an item 58 displaying the logged-in evaluator, an icon 59 for selecting an evaluator for returning to the login screen, an item 60 displaying the employee number of the selected evaluator, an item 61 displaying the name, and an evaluation item display icon 61 for displaying the evaluation items and evaluation results for the selected evaluator are displayed.

[0084] When the evaluator clicks on the evaluation item display icon 61, evaluation items 63 to 66 for the person being evaluated, as shown in Fig. 10D, are displayed on the display screen 40. By clicking on the evaluation items 63 to 66, selection items for a 10-point evaluation, as shown in Fig. 7, are displayed on the display screen 40. When the evaluator clicks on the icon 67 shown in Fig. 10D, the evaluation results for the person being evaluated entered by the evaluator are sent from the user terminal 4 to the management server 1.

[0085] Next, an example of a self-assessment electronic document generated by the output processing unit 32 will be described. As shown in Fig. 11, the self-assessment entry section of the self-assessment electronic document displays the various points, such as personnel evaluation points and financial performance points, earned by the person being appraised, corresponding to the content of the self-assessment, as well as the ranking of the various points earned by the person being appraised within the department to which the person being appraised belongs. This allows the person being appraised to evaluate themselves for various evaluation items while checking their own performance, which has been quantified and ranked. In particular, the results of the quantified multifaceted evaluation allow the person being appraised to understand the evaluations of other employees in the workplace, allowing for more objective self-assessment.

[0086] According to the embodiment described above, the following effects are achieved.

[0087] In the salary determination method of this embodiment, a computer executes an evaluation result acquisition step in which evaluation results for the person being evaluated are acquired by each of multiple evaluators, a quantification step in which the evaluation results for the person being evaluated acquired in the evaluation result acquisition step are quantified, and a salary determination step in which the salary of the person being evaluated is determined by reflecting the evaluation results quantified in the quantification step, and the multiple evaluators include people of equal or lower rank than the person being evaluated.

[0088] This uses quantified evaluation results from multiple evaluators, including those at the same or lower position than the person being evaluated, so the evaluation results from the perspective of subordinates and colleagues are more accurately reflected in the salary. This allows the salary of the person being evaluated to be determined based on objective evaluation. Furthermore, since the person being evaluated can be evaluated from various perspectives, including not only the superior but also the subordinates and colleagues, the salary of the person being evaluated can be determined more objectively without adjusting the evaluator's level of leniency toward the person being evaluated. By not adjusting the evaluator's level of leniency toward the person being evaluated, it also has the effect of providing feedback to the person being evaluated based on pre-set evaluation items and raw scores.

[0089] In the salary determination method according to this embodiment, the evaluation results include at least the degree of contribution made by the person being evaluated to the growth of the evaluator.

[0090] This allows the evaluator to understand the degree to which the person being evaluated contributes to the evaluator's own growth, and allows the salary to be determined based on the person's ability to develop subordinates and their leadership skills, making it easier to pay higher salaries to highly valuable employees.

[0091] The salary determination method according to this embodiment further includes an output step of comparing the quantified evaluation results for multiple evaluators, determining and outputting the rankings of each of the multiple evaluators based on the comparison results.

[0092] This allows the person being evaluated to understand the evaluation results from others as their ranking within the organization, so if they receive a high ranking, their desire for recognition can be satisfied. In addition, since the desire for recognition can be stimulated by obtaining a high ranking, improvements in the person's performance can be expected.

[0093] The salary determination method of this embodiment further includes a performance acquisition step for acquiring the financial performance of the group to which the person being evaluated belongs, a contribution acquisition step for acquiring the person being evaluated's contribution to the financial performance, where the contribution is a value determined by an evaluator with a higher position than the person being evaluated, and a financial performance point determination step for determining the person being evaluated's financial performance points, which are quantified based on the financial performance and the contribution to the financial performance, and in the salary determination step, the salary of the person being evaluated is determined by reflecting the evaluation results and financial performance points quantified in the quantification step.

[0094] This allows the appraisee to determine the profits from financial performance and reflect the employee's salary, taking into account the contribution of the evaluator, who is higher in rank than the employee. This ensures the authority of higher-ranking employees while reflecting the evaluations of the employee by their subordinates and colleagues.

[0095] In the salary determination method according to this embodiment, the financial performance includes at least sales performance or gross profit performance.

[0096] This allows for a more accurate assessment of the group's profits and determines the salary of the person being evaluated.

[0097] In the salary determination method according to this embodiment, the financial performance point determination step compares the financial performance at the time being evaluated with the financial performance at each of multiple periods prior to the time being evaluated, determines the ranking of the financial performance at the time being evaluated among the multiple financial performances compared, and determines the financial performance points of the person being evaluated using the determined ranking of the financial performance.

[0098] This allows for a more objective assessment of financial performance during the evaluation period based on a comparison with past data, rather than on target achievement rates, which can be subjective to the setter's subjectivity. For example, traditional performance evaluations of financial performance, etc., determine merit or demerit based on budget achievement rates, year-on-year comparisons, or a combination of these. However, budgets can be subjectively determined by the subjective judgment of the budget setter. Even if a budget is determined through extensive discussion and consideration of various factors, such as the competitive environment and market conditions, the person being evaluated may perceive it as a "given budget." If the budget is set low and the evaluation is based on this, the person being evaluated may feel lucky. Conversely, if the person works with a high budget, they may feel "unlucky. There's no way I could achieve it," which can lead to a decrease in motivation. Incorporating competitive factors and external environmental factors into the evaluation leaves the judgment ambiguous and loses objectivity and fairness. Even if ambiguity were eliminated from the assessment, for example, if a five-level rating system (e.g., "S, A, B, C, D") were used as the final assessment, the boundaries between each level would have to be set, for example, with a budget achievement rate of 110% or higher as "S" and 100%-110% as "A," resulting in different assessment ranks for 99.9% and 100.1%. Such experiences could further tempt the assessee to set a lower budget. In contrast, this embodiment eliminates the need for evaluators to set any criteria for judgment, and the assessment process, including the process itself, can be openly disclosed to all assessees. Furthermore, by comparing one's own performance with past performance rather than with others or budgets, it can motivate individuals to "strive for their personal best."

[0099] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiment, and any modifications and improvements that can achieve the object of the present invention are included in the present invention.

[0100] In the above embodiment, the management server 1 and the user terminal 4 of the salary determination system S communicate with each other via the network N, but the management server 1 and the user terminal 4 may be configured to be able to communicate with each other without going through the network N. In other words, the salary determination system may be a standalone type.

[0101] In the above embodiment, the management server 1 was equipped with a memory unit 16 that stores various data such as the salary amount and evaluation results of each assessee determined by the salary determination system S, the company's financial performance and business performance, etc., but the memory unit 16 may also be configured to be provided separately from the management server 1 and connected to the management server 1 via a network N.

[0102] In the above embodiment, the management server 1 is an information processing device equipped with a control unit 20 that executes the process of displaying evaluation items related to the person being evaluated on the display screen 40 of the user terminal 4, acquires the evaluation results entered into the evaluation items, quantifies them, and calculates the salary of the person being evaluated, but the user terminal 4 may also be an information processing device equipped with a control unit 20 that performs the above processing. Also, for example, the configuration may be such that both the management server 1 and the user terminal 4 perform the above processing, or the configuration may be such that the management server 1 and the user terminal 4 share the responsibility of the above processing.

[0103] In the above embodiment, the salary determination system S determined the bonus payment amount using gross profit performance, sales performance, and man-hour sales performance as financial performance, but in addition to gross profit performance, sales performance, and man-hour sales performance, for example, the operating profit performance of the department may also be used.

[0104] Furthermore, for example, the control unit 20 of the management server 1 may not have any components other than the evaluation result acquisition unit 22, the quantification processing unit 28, and the salary determination unit 31. In other words, the management server 1 may determine the salary based only on the quantified evaluation results of multiple evaluators, without reflecting financial performance, business performance, or the amount of the manager-assessed bonus payment.

[0105] For example, the control unit 20 of the management server 1 may also have an unfriendly evaluator determination processing unit for identifying evaluators whose relationships with the evaluator have broken down or may be breaking down. Specifically, the unfriendly evaluator determination processing unit compares the evaluation results of multiple evaluators for the same evaluator, and if any of the compared evaluation results fall outside a predetermined standard, it determines the evaluator whose evaluation result is an unfriendly evaluator. For example, the unfriendly evaluator determination processing unit may calculate the average of multiple evaluation results and determine an evaluator whose evaluation result differs from the average by more than a predetermined standard as an unfriendly evaluator. This allows the evaluation results of multiple evaluators for the same evaluator to be compared, making it possible to identify breakdowns in the relationship between the evaluator and the evaluator.

[0106] Furthermore, the above-described series of processes can be executed by hardware or software. In other words, the functional configuration of Figure 4 is merely an example and is not particularly limited. That is, it is sufficient for the management server 1 to be provided with the function of being able to execute the above-described series of processes as a whole, and the type of functional block used to realize this function is not particularly limited to the example of Figure 4. Furthermore, one functional block may be configured as a single piece of hardware, a single piece of software, or a combination thereof.

[0107] When a series of processes is executed by software, the programs that make up the software are installed into a computer or the like from a network or a recording medium. The computer may be a computer built into dedicated hardware. Alternatively, the computer may be a computer that can execute various functions by installing various programs, such as a general-purpose personal computer.

[0108] The recording medium containing such a program may be a removable medium distributed separately from the device main body to provide the program to the user, or may be a recording medium provided to the user in a state where it is pre-installed in the device main body. Removable media may be, for example, a magnetic disk (including a floppy disk), an optical disk, or a magneto-optical disk. Optical disks may be, for example, CD-ROMs (Compact Disk-Read Only Memory), DVDs (Digital Versatile Disks), Blu-ray (registered trademark) Discs, etc. Magneto-optical disks may be, for example, MDs (Mini-Disks), etc. Recording media provided to the user in a state where it is pre-installed in the device main body may be, for example, a hard disk included in the ROM 42 in FIG. 2 or the ROM 12 in FIG. 3 on which the program is recorded, or in the storage unit 48 in FIG. 2 or the storage unit 16 in FIG. 3.

[0109] In this specification, the steps of describing a program to be recorded on a recording medium include not only processes that are performed chronologically in accordance with the order, but also processes that are not necessarily performed chronologically but are performed in parallel or individually.

[0110] Although several embodiments of the present invention have been described above, these embodiments are merely illustrative and do not limit the technical scope of the present invention. The present invention can take on various other embodiments, and various modifications such as omissions and substitutions can be made without departing from the spirit of the present invention. These embodiments and their modifications are included within the scope and spirit of the invention described in this specification, etc., and are also included in the invention described in the claims and their equivalents. [Explanation of symbols]

[0111] 1 Management server (information processing device) 4. User terminal 11 processors 12 ROM 13 RAM 16 Memory section 22 Evaluation result acquisition unit 28 Digitization processing section 31 Salary Determination Department S Salary Determination System

Claims

1. an evaluation result acquisition step of acquiring evaluation results of the evaluatee by each of the multiple evaluators; a quantification step of quantifying the evaluation result for the assessee acquired in the evaluation result acquisition step; a salary determination step of determining the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified in the quantification step; In the evaluation result acquisition step, data input into the evaluation items by a user operation of the evaluator is acquired as the evaluation result; In the quantification step, a personnel evaluation point is calculated as the quantified evaluation result based on the data input to the evaluation items and a weighting coefficient set according to each evaluation item, In the salary determination step, the salary of the person being evaluated is determined based on a value calculated by multiplying the performance evaluation points by a point unit price; The plurality of evaluators include persons of equal or lower rank than the person being evaluated, A salary determination method in which the evaluation results include at least the degree of contribution made by the person being evaluated to the growth of the evaluator.

2. An evaluation result acquisition step for acquiring evaluation results of an evaluatee by each of a plurality of evaluators; a quantification step of quantifying the evaluation result for the assessee acquired in the evaluation result acquisition step; a salary determination step for determining the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified in the quantification step; a performance acquisition step of acquiring financial performance of the group to which the assessee belongs; a step of acquiring the degree of contribution of the assessee to the financial performance, the degree of contribution being a value determined by the assessor who has a higher position than the assessee; a financial performance point determination step of determining a financial performance point of the assessee quantified based on the financial performance and the contribution to the financial performance, In the evaluation result acquisition step, data input into the evaluation items by a user operation of the evaluator is acquired as the evaluation result; In the quantification step, a personnel evaluation point is calculated as the quantified evaluation result based on the data input to the evaluation items and a weighting coefficient set according to each evaluation item, In the salary determination step, the salary of the person to be evaluated is determined based on a value calculated by multiplying the sum of the personnel evaluation points and the financial performance points by a point unit price; A salary determination method in which the multiple evaluators include people of equal or lower rank than the person being evaluated.

3. A salary determination method as described in claim 1 or 2, further comprising an output step of comparing the quantified evaluation results for multiple evaluators, determining and outputting a ranking for each of the multiple evaluators based on the results of comparing the evaluation results.

4. The salary determination method according to claim 2 , wherein the financial performance includes at least sales performance or gross profit performance.

5. A salary determination method as described in claim 2 or 4, wherein the financial performance point determination step compares the financial performance at the evaluation period with the financial performance at each of multiple periods prior to the evaluation period, determines the ranking of the financial performance at the evaluation period among the multiple financial performances compared, and determines the financial performance points of the person being evaluated using the determined ranking of the financial performance.

6. an evaluation result acquisition unit that acquires evaluation results of the evaluatee by each of a plurality of evaluators; a digitization processing unit that digitizes the evaluation results for the person being evaluated acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit; a salary determination processing unit that determines the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified by the quantification processing unit; the evaluation result acquisition unit acquires data input into the evaluation items by user operation of the evaluator as the evaluation result; the quantification processing unit calculates personnel evaluation points as the quantified evaluation results based on the data input to the evaluation items and weighting coefficients set according to each evaluation item; The salary determination processing unit determines the salary of the person being evaluated based on a value calculated by multiplying the performance evaluation points by a point unit price, The plurality of evaluators include persons of equal or lower rank than the person being evaluated, An information processing device in which the evaluation result includes at least the degree of contribution made by the person being evaluated to the growth of the evaluator.

7. An evaluation result acquisition unit that acquires evaluation results of an evaluatee by each of a plurality of evaluators; a digitization processing unit that digitizes the evaluation results for the person being evaluated acquired by the evaluation result acquisition unit; a salary determination processing unit that determines the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified by the quantification processing unit; a financial performance acquisition unit that acquires the financial performance of the group to which the assessee belongs; a contribution degree acquisition unit that acquires the degree of contribution of the assessee to the financial performance; a financial performance point determination unit that determines the financial performance points of the assessee, which are quantified based on the financial performance and the contribution to the financial performance; The degree of contribution is a value determined by the evaluator who has a higher position than the evaluee, the evaluation result acquisition unit acquires data input into the evaluation items by user operation of the evaluator as the evaluation result; the quantification processing unit calculates personnel evaluation points as the quantified evaluation results based on the data input to the evaluation items and weighting coefficients set according to each evaluation item; The salary determination processing unit determines the salary of the person to be evaluated based on a value calculated by multiplying the sum of the personnel evaluation points and the financial performance points by a point unit price; An information processing device in which the multiple evaluators include people of equal or lower position than the person being evaluated.

8. On the computer, an evaluation result acquisition function for acquiring evaluation results of the evaluatee by each of a plurality of evaluators; a digitization processing function that digitizes the evaluation results for the assessee acquired by the evaluation result acquisition function; a salary determination processing function that determines the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified by the quantification processing function; the evaluation result acquisition function acquires, as the evaluation result, data input into the evaluation items by a user operation of the evaluator; The quantification processing function calculates personnel evaluation points as the quantified evaluation results based on the data input to the evaluation items and weighting coefficients set according to each evaluation item, The salary determination processing function determines the salary of the person being evaluated based on a value calculated by multiplying the performance evaluation points by a point unit price, The plurality of evaluators include persons of equal or lower rank than the person being evaluated, A program in which the evaluation results include at least the degree of contribution made by the person being evaluated to the growth of the evaluator.

9. A computer comprising: an evaluation result acquisition function for acquiring evaluation results of the evaluatee by each of a plurality of evaluators; a digitization processing function that digitizes the evaluation results for the assessee acquired by the evaluation result acquisition function; a salary determination processing function that determines the salary of the person being evaluated by reflecting the evaluation results quantified by the quantification processing function; a financial performance acquisition function for acquiring the financial performance of the group to which the assessee belongs; a contribution degree acquisition function for acquiring the degree of contribution of the assessee to the financial performance; a financial performance point determination function for determining the financial performance points of the assessee, which are quantified based on the financial performance and the contribution to the financial performance; The degree of contribution is a value determined by the evaluator who has a higher position than the evaluee, the evaluation result acquisition function acquires, as the evaluation result, data input into the evaluation items by a user operation of the evaluator; The quantification processing function calculates personnel evaluation points as the quantified evaluation results based on the data input to the evaluation items and weighting coefficients set according to each evaluation item, The salary determination processing function determines the salary of the person being evaluated based on a value calculated by multiplying the sum of the personnel evaluation points and the financial performance points by a point unit price; A program in which the multiple evaluators include people of equal or lower rank than the person being evaluated.

Images