Information processing device and program

Abstract

To improve, in a case in which multiple confirming persons confirms the same information materials, the confirmation efficiency by the confirming persons in comparison with a case in which the portion already confirmed by the other confirming person is displayed as the portion that should be confirmed by the confirming person.SOLUTION: When multiple confirming persons are assigned to the same portion in the same information materials and the information materials are to be confirmed by the multiple confirming persons, a processor causes the display of the one confirming person in the multiple confirming persons to display a portion which is assigned to the one confirming person and which is not confirmed yet by the other confirming person in the multiple confirming persons as the portion that should be confirmed by the one confirming person.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 12

Description

[Technical Field]

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

[0002] Documents may be reviewed by multiple reviewers.

[0003] Patent Document 1 describes a workflow management system that acquires task information including task names and detailed information, acquires skill profile information including skill names, searches for similar existing tasks based on the task information, acquires people involved in the searched tasks, checks the consistency of the searched people with the skill profile information, searches for people with common skills based on the skill profile information, calculates ranking points for people or tasks based on the consistency check results and the search results for people, and presents them in order of priority.

[0004] Patent document 2 describes a reviewer evaluation device that, for each document review, stores information indicating the points of criticism made by a reviewer in accordance with the points of criticism made about the document, and, based on the stored information, assigns weighting to each point of criticism, increasing the weighting depending on the number of times the same point of criticism has been made, calculates the ratio of the sum of the weightings to the total number of points of criticism as the reviewer's evaluation value, and outputs this evaluation value. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0005] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2009-223832 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2011-145996 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0006] It is conceivable that multiple reviewers may be assigned to the same section of the same document, and the assigned section may be displayed to each reviewer as a section to be checked, and each reviewer may be asked to check the same section. In this case, if sections that have already been checked by other reviewers are also displayed as sections to be checked, even sections that do not require checking may be displayed as sections to be checked, which may reduce the efficiency of the reviewers' checking.

[0007] The object of the present invention is to improve the efficiency of checking by multiple checkers when they are checking the same document, compared to when the parts checked by other checkers are also displayed as parts that the checker should check. [Means for solving the problem]

[0008] The invention according to claim 1 has a processor, assigning a confirmer having a role corresponding to a part to be confirmed in the document based on information indicating the role of each of the confirmers; When a plurality of checkers are assigned to the same portion of the same document and the document is checked by the plurality of checkers, a portion that is assigned to the one checker and other checkers included in the plurality of checkers and that has not been checked by the other checkers is displayed on a display of one checker included in the plurality of checkers as a portion that the one checker should check. and changing the role of each of the verifyers according to an evaluation of each of the verifyers who have verified the document by a requester who has requested the verifyers to verify the document. It is an information processing device.

[0009] The invention of claim 2 is the information processing device described in claim 1, characterized in that the areas to be checked by the one checker are areas assigned to the one checker and have not been checked by other checkers who have the same role as the one checker in terms of checking.

[0010] The invention of claim 3 is the information processing device described in claim 2, characterized in that the processor displays on the display, as areas that should be checked by the one checker, areas that are assigned to the one checker but have been checked by another checker who has a different role in the check than the one checker.

[0011] The invention of claim 4 is an information processing device described in any one of claims 1 to 3, characterized in that the processor further assigns, for each point in the document to be checked, a checker who has a role related to the point to be checked.

[0012] The invention of claim 5 is the information processing device described in claim 4, characterized in that when a checking viewpoint is defined for the area to be checked, the processor assigns a checker who has a role for the checking viewpoint to the area to be checked, and when a checking viewpoint is not defined for the area to be checked, the processor assigns multiple checkers who have different roles to the area to be checked, and does not assign multiple checkers who have the same role to the area to be checked.

[0014] The invention according to claim 6 is characterized in that verifyers having the same role are verifyers with knowledge in the same field, and verifyers having different roles are verifyers with knowledge in different fields. 5 1 is an information processing device according to any one of the preceding claims.

[0015] Claim 7 The invention relates to a computer that: assigning a confirmer having a role corresponding to a part to be confirmed in the document based on information indicating the role of each of the confirmers; When a plurality of checkers are assigned to the same portion of the same document and the document is checked by the plurality of checkers, a portion that is assigned to the one checker and other checkers included in the plurality of checkers and that has not been checked by the other checkers is displayed on a display of one checker included in the plurality of checkers as a portion that the one checker should check. and changing the role of each of the verifyers according to an evaluation of each of the verifyers who have verified the document by a requester who has requested the verifyers to verify the document. This is a program to make it work like this. [Effects of the Invention]

[0016] Claim 1, 7 According to the invention, when multiple reviewers are reviewing the same document, the efficiency of the reviewers' review can be improved compared to when the parts reviewed by other reviewers are also displayed as parts that the reviewer should review.

[0017] Claim 2, 6 According to the invention, the efficiency of confirmation by a single checker can be improved compared to when areas assigned to a single checker and confirmed by another checker are displayed as areas that the single checker should confirm.

[0018] According to the invention of claim 3, the parts checked by other checkers with different roles are not excluded from the parts to be checked, but are displayed to one checker.

[0019] According to the invention of claim 4, a checker who has a role related to a part to be checked can check that part.

[0020] According to the invention of claim 5, when a point to be checked has a defined check point, the point can be checked by a checker who has a role related to the point. When a point to be checked has no defined check point, the point can be checked by multiple checkers who have different roles. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0022] [Figure 1] 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration of an information processing system according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 2] 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration of an information processing device according to an embodiment of the present invention; [Figure 3] FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a terminal device according to the present embodiment. [Figure 4] 10 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing when requesting confirmation of a document. [Figure 5] 10 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing when checking materials. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when requesting confirmation of a document. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a specific example of a role. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when requesting confirmation of a document. [Figure 9] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when checking materials. [Figure 10] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing confirmed items. [Figure 11] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when checking materials. [Figure 12] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when checking materials. [Figure 13] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when checking materials. [Figure 14] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing comments made by reviewers. [Figure 15] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when the content of the check by the checker is evaluated. [Figure 16] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an evaluation of the check by the checker on the content of the check. [Figure 17] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a screen displayed when the content of the check by the checker is evaluated. [Figure 18] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing points held by a reviewer. [Figure 19] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a specific example of a role. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0023] An information processing system according to this embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 1. Fig. 1 shows an example of the configuration of an information processing system according to this embodiment.

[0024] The information processing system according to this embodiment includes, as an example, an information processing device 10 and terminal devices 12 and 14. The number of each device is merely an example, and multiple terminal devices may be included in the information processing system. The information processing device 10 and the terminal devices 12 and 14 communicate with each other via a communication path such as a network (e.g., a LAN (Local Area Network) or the Internet).

[0025] In this embodiment, the same document is reviewed by multiple reviewers. For example, multiple reviewers are assigned to the same location in the same document, and the document is reviewed by multiple reviewers. Furthermore, the assignment is changed depending on the review status of the reviewers.

[0026] The material is, for example, a document. The document includes, for example, character strings, images (for example, bitmap images or vector images), and graphics. The document may contain only character strings, or may contain both character strings and images, or may contain only images.

[0027] The information processing device 10 is a device that performs processing such as assigning a checker to a portion in a document that should be checked. The information processing device 10 is, for example, a server or a personal computer (hereinafter referred to as a "PC") or the like.

[0028] The terminal device 12 is a device used by a requester who requests a confirmer to confirm a document. The requester uses the terminal device 12 to make a request to the information processing device 10 to confirm the document.

[0029] The terminal device 14 is a device used by a person who checks the materials. The person checks the materials using the terminal device 14. When multiple people check the materials using their own terminal device 14, the terminal device 14 of each person communicates with the information processing device 10, and each person checks the materials using their own terminal device 14. Of course, multiple people may check the materials using one terminal device 14.

[0030] The terminal devices 12 and 14 are, for example, PCs, tablet PCs, smartphones, or mobile phones.

[0031] The requester may request confirmation of the materials using the information processing device 10, without using the terminal device 12. In this case, the terminal device 12 may not be included in the information processing system. Similarly, the confirmer may confirm the materials using the information processing device 10, without using the terminal device 14. In this case, the terminal device 14 may not be included in the information processing system.

[0032] The information processing device 10 includes a receiving unit 16, an output unit 18, a role management unit 20, a role acquisition unit 22, a confirmation status acquisition unit 24, a confirmation status management unit 26, a determination unit 28, and an evaluation management unit 30.

[0033] The reception unit 16 receives information sent from the terminal devices 12 and 14 to the information processing device 10, and receives input from the requester or the confirmer.

[0034] The output unit 18 outputs information to the terminal devices 12 and 14. For example, the output unit 18 displays various types of information on the terminal devices 12 and 14. Specifically, the output unit 18 displays a screen for requesting confirmation of materials on the display of the terminal device 12, and displays a screen for confirming the materials on the display of the terminal device 14.

[0035] The role management unit 20 stores information indicating the role of each candidate with respect to the document in a memory and manages the role of each candidate. For example, for each candidate, information for identifying the candidate (for example, information indicating the candidate's name, information indicating the candidate's account, the candidate's ID, etc.) is linked to information indicating the role and managed. Candidates are candidates for verifying, and are registered in advance in the information processing device 10. As will be described later, candidates are assigned as verifying points in the document that need to be verified. Roles are, for example, fields in which the candidate has knowledge, fields in which the candidate is knowledgeable, fields in which the candidate is skilled, or the candidate's approval authority.

[0036] The role acquisition unit 22 acquires information indicating the role of the candidate from the role management unit 20.

[0037] The confirmation status acquisition unit 24 acquires information indicating the confirmation status of each checker for the document. The confirmation status is, for example, which checker checked which part of the document and when. When a checker checks a document, they may or may not make a comment. If a checker makes a comment, the confirmation status acquisition unit 24 acquires the comment.

[0038] The information indicating the status of the confirmation includes, for example, information for identifying the confirmer (e.g., information indicating the name of the confirmer, information indicating the account of the confirmer, the confirmer's ID, etc.), information for identifying the material to be confirmed (e.g., information indicating the name of the material, the material's ID, etc.), information for identifying the parts confirmed by the confirmer, information indicating the date and time the confirmer confirmed the material, and information for identifying the requester (e.g., information indicating the name of the requester, information indicating the account of the requester, the requester's ID, etc.). If the confirmer makes a comment, information indicating the comment is also included in the information indicating the status of the confirmation.

[0039] The confirmation status management unit 26 stores information indicating the confirmation status of each checker, acquired by the confirmation status acquisition unit 24, in a memory, and manages the confirmation status of each checker.

[0040] The determination unit 28 determines who should check the materials from one or more candidates based on the role of each candidate, determines the parts of the materials that the checkers should check, and assigns the checkers to the parts that should be checked. Furthermore, the determination unit 28 changes the checkers who should check the materials or the parts that the checkers should check, depending on the status of each checker's check of the materials.

[0041] The evaluation management unit 30 stores information indicating the evaluation of the candidate in memory and manages the evaluation of the candidate. For example, the evaluation is expressed in points, and the evaluation management unit 30 manages the points of the candidate. When the content of the confirmation by the verifyer who checked the materials is evaluated by the requester, the evaluation management unit 30 updates the points of the verifyer according to the evaluation. The role management unit 20 updates the role of the verifyer according to the updated points.

[0042] The hardware configuration of the information processing device 10 will be described below with reference to Fig. 2. Fig. 2 shows an example of the hardware configuration of the information processing device 10.

[0043] The information processing device 10 includes, for example, a communication device 32, a UI 34, a memory 36, and a processor 38.

[0044] The communication device 32 is a communication interface having a communication chip, a communication circuit, etc., and has a function of transmitting information to other devices and a function of receiving information from other devices. The communication device 32 may have a wireless communication function or a wired communication function.

[0045] The UI 34 is a user interface and includes at least one of a display and an operation device. The display is a display device such as a liquid crystal display or an EL display. The operation device is a keyboard, input keys, an operation panel, or the like. The UI 34 may be a UI such as a touch panel that combines a display and an operation device.

[0046] The memory 36 is a device that constitutes one or more storage areas for storing various types of information. The memory 36 is, for example, a hard disk drive, various types of memory (e.g., RAM, DRAM, ROM, etc.), other storage devices (e.g., optical disks, etc.), or a combination thereof. One or more memories 36 are included in the information processing device 10. The memory 36 stores information indicating the role of each candidate, information indicating the confirmation status of each confirmer, and information indicating the evaluation of each candidate.

[0047] The processor 38 is configured to control the operation of each unit of the information processing device 10. The processor 38 may have a memory. For example, the processor 38 executes a program to realize the functions of the reception unit 16, the output unit 18, the role management unit 20, the role acquisition unit 22, the confirmation status acquisition unit 24, the confirmation status management unit 26, the determination unit 28, and the evaluation management unit 30. The program is stored in the memory 36, for example.

[0048] The hardware configuration of the terminal devices 12 and 14 will be described below with reference to Fig. 3. Fig. 3 shows an example of the hardware configuration of the terminal devices 12 and 14.

[0049] The terminal devices 12 and 14 include, for example, a communication device 40, a UI 42, a memory 44, and a processor 46.

[0050] The communication device 40 is a communication interface having a communication chip, a communication circuit, etc., and has a function of transmitting information to other devices and a function of receiving information from other devices. The communication device 40 may have a wireless communication function or a wired communication function.

[0051] The UI 42 is a user interface and includes at least one of a display and an operation device. The display is a display device such as a liquid crystal display or an EL display. The operation device is a keyboard, input keys, an operation panel, or the like. The UI 42 may be a UI such as a touch panel that combines a display and an operation device.

[0052] The memory 44 is a device that configures one or more storage areas for storing various types of information. The memory 44 is, for example, a hard disk drive, various types of memory (e.g., RAM, DRAM, ROM, etc.), other storage devices (e.g., optical disks, etc.), or a combination thereof. One or more memories 44 are included in the terminal devices 12, 14.

[0053] The processor 46 is configured to control the operation of each part of the terminal devices 12, 14. The processor 46 may include a memory.

[0054] The flow of processing when requesting confirmation of materials will be described below with reference to Fig. 4. Fig. 4 shows a flowchart illustrating the flow of processing.

[0055] When a requester uses the terminal device 12 to give an instruction to display a screen for requesting confirmation of a document (hereinafter referred to as a "request screen"), the request screen is displayed on the display of the terminal device 12 (S01). For example, the output unit 18 causes the request screen to be displayed on the display of the terminal device 12. Furthermore, the document to be confirmed is stored, for example, in the terminal device 12 or a document management system, and the confirmer uses the terminal device 12 to specify the document to be confirmed.

[0056] Next, the role acquisition unit 22 acquires information indicating the roles of the candidates from the role management unit 20 (S02). For example, a plurality of candidates are registered in advance in the information processing device 10, and information indicating the role of each candidate is stored in advance in memory and managed by the role management unit 20. The role acquisition unit 22 acquires information indicating the role of each candidate registered in the information processing device 10 from the role management unit 20.

[0057] Next, the determination unit 28 determines one or more checkers from among the multiple candidates to check the materials based on the role of each candidate, and determines the parts of the materials that each checker should check (S03). As a result, the parts of the materials that each checker should check are assigned to each checker.

[0058] Next, the output unit 18 displays the content determined by the determination unit 28 on the display of the terminal device 12 (S04).

[0059] If the requester adds a checker (S05, Yes), the requester adds the checker on the request screen (S06). The requester may specify the role of the added checker.

[0060] The information indicating the added reviewer and role is stored in memory and managed by the role management unit 20 (S07).

[0061] Next, the requester requests confirmation of the material on the request screen (S08). When the requester requests confirmation of the material, the output unit 18 may transmit information indicating the request to the terminal device 14 of each confirmer.

[0062] The process flow for checking materials will be described below with reference to Fig. 5. Fig. 5 shows a flowchart illustrating the process flow.

[0063] The checker starts checking the materials (S10). For example, when the checker uses the terminal device 14 to give an instruction to display a screen for checking the materials (hereinafter referred to as the "check screen"), the check screen is displayed on the display of the terminal device 14. For example, the output unit 18 causes the check screen to be displayed on the display of the terminal device 14. Here, it is assumed that checker A is checking the materials.

[0064] The confirmation status acquisition unit 24 acquires information indicating the status of confirmation by other checkers of the same material as the material being checked by checker A (S11).

[0065] Next, the determination unit 28 determines the part that the checker A should check based on the checking status of the other checkers (S12). For example, the determination unit 28 changes the part that should be checked determined in step S03 above, depending on the checking status of the other checkers.

[0066] The output unit 18 displays the part to be checked by the checker A, which was determined in step S12, on the display of the terminal device 14 of the checker A (S13).

[0067] When the checker A checks the document using the terminal device 14 (S14, Yes), the check status management unit 26 stores information indicating the content of the check made by the checker A in memory, and thereby manages the content of the check as the status of the check by the checker A (S15). For example, when the checker A makes a comment, information indicating the comment is stored in the check status management unit 26.

[0068] When the checker A instructs to end the check using the terminal device 14, the check by the checker A ends (S16). Also, the checker A may end the check without making a check (S14, No).

[0069] When a person other than the verifying person A checks the document, the same process as described above is carried out as when the verifying person A checks the document.

[0070] After the material has been checked by the checker, the check may be evaluated by the requester. The processes of steps S17 to S20 are processes related to this evaluation. The processes of steps S17 to S20 will be described below.

[0071] When the requester uses the terminal device 12 to issue an instruction to display the contents of the confirmations by the checkers, the output unit 18 displays the contents of the confirmations by each checker on the display of the terminal device 12. If the checker has made a comment, that comment is also displayed. The requester refers to the contents of the confirmations by each checker and evaluates the contents of the confirmations by each checker. For example, the requester selects the confirmation to be adopted (S17).

[0072] The confirmation status management unit 26 stores information indicating the requester's evaluation of the contents of the confirmation by each checker in memory (S18).

[0073] The evaluation management unit 30 updates the evaluation of each checker based on the requester's evaluation of the content of the check by each checker (S19). The role management unit 20 updates the role of each checker based on the updated evaluation (S20).

[0074] A specific example of this embodiment will be described below.

[0075] <Example of the process when a requester requests confirmation of documents> Below, with reference to Figures 6 to 8, a specific example of the process when a requester requests a reviewer to check a document will be explained. Figures 6 and 8 show the request screen. Figure 7 shows a specific example of the role of the candidate. Below, a specific example will be explained according to the flowchart shown in Figure 4.

[0076] When the requester issues an instruction to display a request screen using the terminal device 12, the request screen 48 shown in FIG. 6 is displayed on the display of the terminal device 12 (S01).

[0077] The request screen 48 displays the document 50 to be checked. For example, a list of documents is displayed on the request screen 48, and when the checker selects the document 50 to be checked from the list, the document 50 is displayed on the request screen 48. For example, a character string is written on the document 50. An image may also be placed on the document 50.

[0078] The document 50 includes one or more items. Each item may be determined by the person checking, or may be determined in advance without the person checking. In the example shown in FIG. 6, the document 50 includes items 50a, 50b, and 50c. Item 50a is an item titled "1. Internal specifications," item 50b is an item titled "2. DB integration," and item 50c is an item titled "3. Integration with other products." The items correspond to examples of points to be checked.

[0079] A list of candidates 52 is displayed on the request screen 48. When a candidate who should review the document 50 is determined as the reviewer, information for identifying the candidate is included in the list 52 and displayed on the request screen 48.

[0080] A button 54 is displayed on the request screen 48. The button 54 is a button for requesting confirmation of the material, and when the requester presses the button 54, confirmation of the material is requested.

[0081] When a client requests confirmation of a document, the role acquisition unit 22 acquires information indicating the role of each candidate from the role management unit 20 (S02). Here, as an example, the role is a field in which the candidate has knowledge (hereinafter, also simply referred to as "candidate's field").

[0082] A specific example of the field of each candidate is shown in Fig. 7. The field of each candidate shown in Fig. 7 is managed by the role management unit 20.

[0083] In the example shown in FIG. 7, candidates A, B, C, and D are registered in advance in the information processing device 10, and the fields of the candidates A, B, C, and D are managed by the role management unit 20.

[0084] Candidate A has knowledge of internal specifications and DB (database), and his field is "internal specifications" and "DB". Candidate B has knowledge of external specifications, and his field is "external specifications". Candidate C has knowledge of DB and external specifications, and his field is "DB" and "external specifications". Candidate D has knowledge of installers, and his field is "installer". For example, candidate A is linked to the fields "internal specifications" and "DB" and managed by the role management unit 20. The same applies to the other candidates.

[0085] The role acquisition unit 22 may acquire information indicating the fields of all candidates registered in the information processing device 10, or may acquire information indicating the fields of some of the candidates. Here, as an example, the role acquisition unit 22 acquires information indicating the fields of each of candidates A, B, C, and D from the role management unit 20.

[0086] Next, the determination unit 28 determines which candidates from among the candidates A, B, C, and D should check the document 50 as the checkers based on the fields of each of the candidates A, B, C, and D, and determines the items that each checker should check in the document 50 (S03). The processing of the determination unit 28 will be described in detail below.

[0087] If a verification perspective is defined for an item in the document 50, the decision unit 28 assigns a reviewer who has knowledge in the field of that verification perspective to that item. If a verification perspective is not defined for an item, the decision unit 28 assigns multiple reviewers who have knowledge in different fields to that item, and does not assign multiple reviewers who have knowledge in the same field to that item. A perspective is what kind of thinking, knowledge, perspective, etc. should be used to verify an item in the document.

[0088] For example, the viewpoint "internal specification" is defined for the item 50a, and the determining unit 28 assigns the candidate A, who has knowledge of the field "internal specification" for the viewpoint "internal specification", to the item 50a as a confirmer of the item 50a.

[0089] The determination unit 28 assigns an item to all candidates who have knowledge of the field of the perspective defined in the item. For example, since the perspective "DB" is defined in the item 50b and the candidates A and C have knowledge of the field "DB", the determination unit 28 assigns the candidates A and C as reviewers to the item 50b. The same applies to the other items.

[0090] No verification perspective is defined for item 50c "3. Linkage with other products." In this case, the determination unit 28 assigns, for example, verifyers A, B, and D to item 50c as verifyers. Since verifyers A and C have knowledge of the same field, "DB," the determination unit 28 does not assign verifyer C to item 50c. Note that candidate C may be assigned to item 50c as a verifyer instead of candidate A.

[0091] FIG. 7 shows the allocation of candidates to items. Candidate A is assigned item 50a "1. Internal specifications," item 50b "2. Database integration," and item 50c "Integration with other products." Candidate B is assigned item 50c "3. Integration with other products." Candidate C is assigned item 50b "2. Database integration." Candidate D is assigned item 50c "3. Integration with other products."

[0092] Timings for determining the confirmation viewpoint for an item include when creating document 50, when requesting confirmation of document 50, and the like.

[0093] Depending on the candidate's field and the perspectives set out in the item, the candidate may not be assigned to the item as a reviewer.

[0094] Multiple perspectives may be defined for one item. For example, the perspective "DB" and another perspective (such as "external specifications") may be defined for item 50b "2. DB integration." In this case, the determination unit 28 may assign a candidate with knowledge of the field "DB" and a candidate with knowledge of the field "external specifications" to item 50b "2. DB integration," or may assign a candidate with knowledge of both the field "DB" and the field "external specifications" to item 50b "2. DB integration."

[0095] When candidates are assigned to the items to be confirmed, the output unit 18 displays the result of the assignment on the display of the terminal device 12 (S04). FIG. 8 shows an example of the display. As shown in FIG. 8, information for identifying candidates A, B, C, and D is included in the list 52 and displayed on the request screen 48. As explained in steps S05 to S07 above, the requester may add a confirmer. Alternatively, the requester may remove a candidate from the list 52 to exclude that candidate from being a confirmer.

[0096] When the requester presses button 54 on request screen 48, the request for confirmation of document 50 is completed. For example, candidates A, B, C, and D are designated as confirmers of document 50. Hereinafter, candidates A, B, C, and D designated as confirmers will be referred to as confirmers A, B, C, and D. For example, output unit 18 transmits information indicating a request for confirmation of document 50 to each of terminal devices 14 of confirmers A, B, C, and D.

[0097] <Example of the process when a reviewer reviews materials> A specific example of the process when a verifyer checks a document will be described below with reference to Figs. 9 to 14. Confirmation screens are shown in Figs. 9, 11, 12, and 13. Confirmed items are shown in Fig. 10. Comments from the verifyer are shown in Fig. 14. A specific example will be described below in accordance with the flowchart shown in Fig. 5. It is also assumed that verifyer A checks document 50. Verifyer A corresponds to an example of one verifyer.

[0098] When the checker A issues an instruction to display a confirmation screen using the terminal device 14, a confirmation screen 56 shown in FIG. 9 is displayed on the display of the terminal device 14 (S10).

[0099] In the example shown in FIG. 9, the confirmation screen 56 displays all the contents of the document 50 to be confirmed (that is, the contents of the items 50a, 50b, and 50c).

[0100] Additionally, an area 58 is formed on the confirmation screen 56, and the items that are proposed for confirmation to the confirmer A are displayed in the area 58. Here, as an example, all items included in the document 50 (e.g., items 50a, 50b, 50c) are displayed.

[0101] The confirmation screen 56 has a comment field 60. The confirmer A may write a comment in the comment field 60 when confirming an item, or may confirm an item without writing a comment in the comment field 60.

[0102] Confirmation screen 56 displays buttons 62 and 64. Button 62 is a button for registering confirmation of an item. Button 64 is a button for instructing completion of confirmation of document 50. Button 62 and button 64 may be provided for each item displayed in area 58.

[0103] The operations of the checker when checking an item will be described below.

[0104] The checker A specifies an item and checks that item. The checker A may specify an item displayed in the area 58 and check the specified item, or may specify an item in the document 50 displayed on the confirmation screen 56 and check the specified item. For example, when the checker A specifies the item 50a, writes a comment in the comment field 60, and presses the button 62, the fact that the checker A has checked the item 50a is registered in the information processing device 10, and the comment is registered as the checker A's comment on the item 50a. The confirmation status acquisition unit 24 acquires the fact that the checker A has checked the item 50a and the checker A's comment on the item 50a as the status of the checker A's check of the document 50. Information indicating the status of the checker A's check is managed by the confirmation status management unit 26.

[0105] Furthermore, when checker A designates item 50a and presses button 62 without writing a comment in comment field 60, the fact that checker A checked item 50a without writing a comment is registered in information processing device 10. The check status acquisition unit 24 acquires the fact that checker A checked item 50a without writing a comment as the check status of checker A for document 50. Information indicating the check status of checker A is managed by check status management unit 26.

[0106] The checker A may check an item by specifying a field. In this case, the check status management unit 26 manages information indicating the field by including it in information indicating the check status of the checker A. For example, when the checker A specifies the item 50a and the field "internal specifications," and presses the button 62 with or without writing a comment, the check status management unit 26 manages the fact that the checker A checked the item 50a from the perspective of the field "internal specifications" as the check status of the checker A for the document 50. Although the perspective "internal specifications" is defined for the item 50a, the checker A may check the item 50a from another perspective. For example, when the checker A specifies the item 50a and the field "DB," and presses the button 62 with or without writing a comment, the check status management unit 26 manages the fact that the checker A checked the item 50a from the perspective of the field "DB" as the check status of the checker A for the document 50.

[0107] The same confirmation screen 56 shown in FIG. 9 is also displayed on the display of each of the terminal devices 14 of the verifying persons B, C, and D.

[0108] For example, checker B is assigned only item 50c "3. Link with other products," but the confirmation screen displayed to checker B displays the entire contents of document 50, similar to confirmation screen 56 shown in Fig. 9, and all items (e.g., items 50a, 50b, 50c) in area 58. Checker B may also check items (e.g., items 50a, 50b) that are not assigned to him or her.

[0109] The output unit 18 may display items assigned to a checker and items not assigned to a checker so that the checker can understand the items assigned to the checker. For example, the output unit 18 may display items 50a and 50b not assigned to checker B in gray, or may display item 50c assigned to checker B in highlighted form. Displaying items in a highlighted form may involve, for example, highlighting the item or displaying a frame around the item. For example, item 50c assigned to checker B and displayed in a highlighted form is suggested to checker B as an item that checker B should check, while items 50a and 50b not assigned to checker B are suggested to checker B as items that checker B should not check or do not need to check. Even when such a display is performed, checker B may be able to see items 50a and 50b not assigned to him / her. The same applies to other checkers.

[0110] The output unit 18 may display only the items assigned to the checkers in the area 58. As shown in FIG. 7 , checker A is assigned item 50a “1. Internal specifications,” item 50b “2. Database integration,” and item 50c “3. Integration with other products.” Therefore, the items 50a, 50b, and 50c are displayed in the area 58 on the confirmation screen 56 for checker A. In this manner, it may be suggested to checker A that the items 50a, 50b, and 50c are the items that should be checked by checker A. Note that, since checker A is assigned all items (i.e., items 50a, 50b, and 50c), the display example will be the same as the display example shown in FIG. 9 . Checker B is assigned item 50c “3. Integration with other products.” Therefore, on the confirmation screen 56 for checker B, item 50c is displayed in the area 58. In this manner, it may be suggested to checker B that the item 50c is the item that should be checked by checker B. Since item 50b "2. DB Linkage" is assigned to checker C, item 50b is displayed in area 58 on confirmation screen 56 for checker C. In this way, it may be suggested to checker C that item 50b is an item that should be checked by checker C. Since item 50c "3. Other Product Linkage" is assigned to checker D, item 50c is displayed in area 58 on confirmation screen 56 for checker D. In this way, it may be suggested to checker D that item 50c is an item that should be checked by checker D. Even when such a display is performed, each checker may be able to check items that are not assigned to them. For example, a checker may specify an item that is not assigned to them in document 50 displayed on confirmation screen 56 and check that item.

[0111] When the document 50 is checked by the checker, the check status acquisition unit 24 acquires information indicating the check status of the checker (S11). The check status of the checker is managed by the check status management unit 26.

[0112] 10 shows an example of the confirmation status of each checker. In the example shown in FIG. 10, checker B has confirmed item 50c "3. Linkage with other products," checker C has confirmed item 50b "2. DB linkage," and checker D has confirmed item 50c "3. Linkage with other products." Checker A has not confirmed document 50. The confirmation status of each checker shown in FIG. 10 is managed by the confirmation status management unit 26.

[0113] The output unit 18 may display the status of the check by the checker on the confirmation screen 56. For example, as shown in Fig. 11, the confirmation screen 56 displayed for checker A displays information indicating that item 50b "2. DB linkage" has been checked by checker C (for example, the character string "C checked"), as indicated by the reference numeral 66, and information indicating that item 50c "3. Other product linkage" has been checked by checkers B and D (for example, the character string "B and D checked"), as indicated by the reference numeral 68.

[0114] A verifyer may verify an item that another verifyer has verified. For example, verifyer A may verify item 50b verified by verifyer C, or may verify item 50c verified by verifyers B and D.

[0115] The output unit 18 may display items that have been checked by a checker other than the checker A, in a distinguishable manner from items that have not been checked by a checker other than the checker A. For example, the output unit 18 may display items that have been checked by a checker other than the checker A in gray, or may display items that have not been checked by a checker other than the checker A in an emphasized manner.

[0116] The determination unit 28 determines the items that the checker A should check based on the check status of the checkers B, C, and D other than the checker A (S12). The output unit 18 displays the items that the checker A should check on the confirmation screen 56 (S13).

[0117] For example, the determination unit 28 excludes items that have been confirmed by a checker other than checker A from the items that checker A should confirm, and determines items that have not been confirmed by other checkers as items that checker A should confirm. In this case, the output unit 18 displays the items that checker A should confirm and the other items in a distinguishable manner. For example, the output unit 18 may highlight the items that checker A should confirm in the document 50 displayed on the confirmation screen 56, or may gray out the other items. To give a specific example, if item 50c “3. Link with Other Products” is confirmed by a checker other than checker A (for example, checker B), the determination unit 28 excludes item 50c “3. Link with Other Products” from the items that checker A should confirm, and the output unit 18 displays item 50c “3. Link with Other Products” in a grayed-out manner. Furthermore, the output unit 18 does not have to display item 50c in the area 58. In this way, items that have been checked by other checkers are not suggested to checker A as items that checker A should check, but items that have not been checked by other checkers are suggested to checker A as items that checker A should check. The same applies to other checkers.

[0118] The determination unit 28 may exclude items that have been confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in the same field as confirmer A from the items to be confirmed by confirmer A, and may determine items that have not been confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in the same field as confirmer A as items to be confirmed by confirmer A. For example, confirmers A and C have knowledge in the same field, "DB," and are assigned to item 50b "2. DB Linkage" (see FIG. 7). Because item 50b "2. DB Linkage" has already been confirmed by confirmer C, the determination unit 28 excludes item 50b "2. DB Linkage" from the items to be confirmed by confirmer A. In this case, for example, as indicated by reference numeral 70 in FIG. 12, the output unit 18 displays item 50b in the document 50 displayed on the confirmation screen 56 in a grayed-out state. Furthermore, the output unit 18 does not display item 50b in the area 58. In this way, items that have been confirmed by other confirmers with knowledge in the same field as confirmer A are not suggested to confirmer A as items that confirmer A should confirm, and items that have not been confirmed by other confirmers with knowledge in the same field as confirmer A are suggested to confirmer A as items that confirmer A should confirm.

[0119] The determination unit 28 does not need to exclude items confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in a different field from confirmer A from the items to be confirmed by confirmer A. For example, confirmers A, B, and D have knowledge in different fields and are assigned to item 50c “3. Other Product Linkage” (see FIG. 7). Item 50c “3. Other Product Linkage” has already been confirmed by confirmers B and D, but confirmers A, B, and D have knowledge in different fields. Therefore, the determination unit 28 does not exclude item 50c “3. Other Product Linkage” from the items to be confirmed by confirmer A. As shown in FIG. 12, item 50c in document 50 is not displayed grayed out, and item 50c is displayed within area 58. In this way, items confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in a different field from confirmer A are proposed to confirmer A as items to be confirmed by confirmer A.

[0120] The output unit 18 may display items assigned to verifyer A but not confirmed by other verifyers on the confirmation screen 56 as items to be confirmed by verifyer A. For example, if items 50a and 50b are assigned to verifyer A and no one has confirmed items 50a and 50b, the output unit 18 grays out item 50c in the document 50 displayed on the confirmation screen 56 and displays items 50a and 50b in the area 58. If item 50b is confirmed by another verifyer (e.g., verifyer C), the output unit 18 grays out items 50b and 50c and displays only item 50a in the area 58. The output unit 18 may highlight the item to be confirmed by verifyer A (e.g., item 50a). In this way, items assigned to verifyer A but confirmed by other verifyers are not proposed to verifyer A as items that verifyer A should confirm, but items assigned to verifyer A but confirmed by other verifyers are proposed to verifyer A as items that verifyer A should confirm. The same applies to other verifyers.

[0121] The output unit 18 may determine, as items to be confirmed by the confirmer A, items that are assigned to the confirmer A but have not been confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in the same field as the confirmer A. For example, if items 50a and 50b are assigned to the confirmer A and item 50b is confirmed by the confirmer C, the output unit 18 grays out items 50b and 50c in the document 50 displayed on the confirmation screen 56 and displays only item 50a in the area 58. The output unit 18 may highlight an item that the confirmer A should confirm (e.g., item 50a). In this way, items assigned to the confirmer A that have been confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in the same field as the confirmer A are not proposed to the confirmer A as items to be confirmed by the confirmer A, whereas items assigned to the confirmer A that have not been confirmed by other confirmers who have knowledge in the same field as the confirmer A are proposed to the confirmer A as items to be confirmed by the confirmer A.

[0122] The determination unit 28 may not exclude items that are assigned to the verifying person A but that have been confirmed by another verifying person who has knowledge in a different field from the verifying person A from the items to be confirmed by the verifying person A, and the output unit 18 may display the items on the confirmation screen 56 as items to be confirmed by the verifying person A. For example, if items 50b and 50c are assigned to the verifying person A and item 50c is confirmed by a verifying person B who has knowledge in a different field from the verifying person A, the determination unit 28 does not exclude item 50c from the items to be confirmed by the verifying person A. In this case, the output unit 18 displays items 50b and 50c in the area 58 and does not gray out items 50b and 50c. In this way, items that are assigned to the verifying person A but that have been confirmed by another verifying person who has knowledge in a different field from the verifying person A are suggested to the verifying person A as items to be confirmed by the verifying person A.

[0123] As shown in FIG. 13, when checker A specifies, for example, item 50b "2. DB Linkage," writes a comment in comment field 60, and presses button 62, the fact that checker A has checked item 50b is registered in information processing device 10, and this comment is registered as checker A's comment on item 50b (S14, S15). The check status acquisition unit 24 acquires the fact that checker A has checked item 50b and checker A's comment on item 50b as the check status of checker A for document 50. Information indicating the check status of checker A is managed by check status management unit 26. In this way, checker A may check item 50b "2. DB Linkage," which has been excluded from the items that checker A must check.

[0124] 14 shows specific examples of comments made by each reviewer on an item. Reviewers A and C have commented on item 50b. The review status management unit 26 stores information indicating the comments made by reviewers A and C on item 50b in memory, and manages the comments made by reviewers A and C.

[0125] When the checker A presses the button 64, the checker A's check of the document 50 ends (S16).

[0126] In the above-described embodiment, the output unit 18 may display items assigned to the checkers in the area 58. For example, checker A is assigned items 50a, 50b, and 50c, and therefore the output unit 18 displays items 50a, 50b, and 50c in the area 58 on the confirmation screen 56 displayed for checker A. Checker B is assigned item 50c, and therefore the output unit 18 displays item 50c in the area 58 on the confirmation screen 56 displayed for checker B. Checker C is assigned item 50b, and therefore the output unit 18 displays item 50b in the area 58 on the confirmation screen 56 displayed for checker C. Checker D is assigned item 50c, and therefore the output unit 18 displays item 50c in the area 58 on the confirmation screen 56 displayed for checker D. In this way, items assigned to a checker may be suggested to the checker as items that the checker should check.

[0127] <Example of process when requester evaluates the content of confirmation by the confirmer> Below, with reference to Figures 15 to 19, a specific example of processing when a requester evaluates the content of the check by a verifying party will be described. Figures 15 and 17 show the screen (hereinafter referred to as the "evaluation screen") that is displayed when evaluating the content of the check by a verifying party. Figure 16 shows the results of the evaluation. Figure 18 shows the points held by the candidate. Figure 19 shows the role of the candidate. Below, a specific example will be described according to the flowchart shown in Figure 5.

[0128] When the requester uses the terminal device 12 to give an instruction to display the confirmation content, the output unit 18 displays an evaluation screen on the display of the terminal device 12. An evaluation screen 72 is shown in FIG.

[0129] The evaluation screen 72 displays the document 50, the items checked by the reviewer, a list 74 of the reviewer's comments, a button 76, and a button 78.

[0130] For example, when the requester specifies an item, the content of the confirmation by the checker for the specified item is displayed on the evaluation screen 72. As another example, even if the requester does not specify an item, the content of the confirmation for the item checked by the checker may be displayed on the evaluation screen 72.

[0131] 15, the comments of the reviewers for item 50b are displayed in a list 74. Comment 74a is a comment from reviewer C, and comment 74b is a comment from reviewer A.

[0132] The button 76 is a button for instructing to accept the comment. The button 78 is a button for instructing to reject the comment. Note that only either the button 76 or the button 78 may be displayed.

[0133] When the requester selects a comment and presses button 76 (S17), the selected comment is adopted. For example, the requester may select and adopt a comment that they found helpful. The confirmation status management unit 26 stores information indicating the adoption result of the comment in memory and manages the adoption result (S18).

[0134] For example, if the requester selects comment 74b instead of comment 74a and presses button 76, comment 74a is not adopted and comment 74b is adopted. The confirmation status management unit 26 stores information in memory indicating that comment 74a was not adopted and comment 74b was adopted.

[0135] If the requester selects a comment and presses button 78, the selected comment will not be adopted.

[0136] Fig. 16 shows the evaluation of each checker. In the example shown in Fig. 16, for item 50b, the comment of checker C is not adopted, and the comment of checker A is adopted. The confirmation status management unit 26 stores information indicating whether or not each of the comments of checkers A and C has been adopted in memory, and manages whether or not each of the comments of checkers A and C has been adopted.

[0137] Note that information for identifying the reviewer who made the comment may be displayed in the comment list 74. For example, information for identifying reviewer C is displayed where comment 74a is displayed, and information for identifying reviewer A is displayed where comment 74b is displayed. In this way, it may be possible to display who made what comment.

[0138] A checker may check document 50 without making any comments. In this case, information indicating that the checker checked without making any comments is displayed on evaluation screen 72. For example, if checker C checks item 50b without making any comments, as shown in FIG. 17, check content 74c indicating that checker C checked item 50b without making any comments is displayed in list 74. When the requester selects check content 74c and presses button 76, check content 74c is adopted, and confirmation status management unit 26 manages the result of adoption.

[0139] The evaluation management unit 30 updates the evaluation of each checker based on the requester's evaluation of the content of the check by each checker (S19). For example, the evaluation management unit 30 manages points corresponding to the evaluation for each checker and for each field, and updates the points of each checker based on the evaluation by the requester. Specifically, if a comment on a certain item is adopted by the requester, the evaluation management unit 30 adds points to the checker for the field corresponding to the viewpoint defined for that item. On the other hand, if a comment on a certain item is not adopted by the requester, the evaluation management unit 30 subtracts points from the checker for the field corresponding to the viewpoint defined for that item. The same applies when a checker checks without making a comment. If the content of a checker's check on a certain item is adopted by the requester, the evaluation management unit 30 adds points to the checker for the field corresponding to the viewpoint defined for that item. If the content of a checker's check on a certain item is not adopted by the requester, the evaluation management unit 30 subtracts points from the checker for the field corresponding to the viewpoint defined for that item.

[0140] FIG. 18 shows an example of points. For example, before evaluation, candidate A (i.e., verifyer A) has a score of "5" for the field "DB," and candidate C (i.e., verifyer C) has a score of "5." If verifyer A's comment for item "2. DB integration," for which the perspective "DB" is defined, is adopted and verifyer C's comment is not adopted, the evaluation management unit 30 adds points to verifyer A's score for the field "DB" (for example, adds 1 point) and subtracts points from verifyer C's score (for example, subtracts 1 point). As a result, verifyer A's score for the field "DB" is changed from "5" to "6," and verifyer C's score is changed from "5" to "4." The same applies when the verifyers confirm without making any comments; if the content of the confirmation is adopted, points are added, and if the content of the confirmation is not adopted, points are subtracted. In the example shown in Figure 17, if the content of a comment or confirmation is selected and the reject button 78 is pressed, the evaluation management unit 30 will deduct points from the reviewer who made the comment and the reviewer who made the confirmation.

[0141] In addition, when a verifyer specifies a field and checks an item in the document 50, the fact that the verifyer has checked the item in the document 50 from the perspective of that field is managed by the check status management unit 26 as the verifyer's check status. In this case, if the content of the verifyer's check for that item is adopted by the client, the evaluation management unit 30 will add points to the verifyer for that field. If the content of the verifyer's check for that item is not adopted by the client, the evaluation management unit 30 will subtract points from the verifyer's points for that field.

[0142] For example, if the verifyer A specifies the item 50a and also specifies the field "DB," and checks the item 50a with or without writing a comment (for example, by pressing the button 62 in FIG. 9), the verification status management unit 26 manages the fact that the verifyer A checked the item 50a from the perspective of the field "DB" as the status of the verification by the verifyer A of the document 50. If the content of the verification by the verifyer A of the item 50a is adopted by the requester, the evaluation management unit 30 adds points to the verifyer A for the field "DB," and if the content of the verification is not adopted by the requester, it subtracts points from the verifyer A for the field "DB."

[0143] The role management unit 20 updates the role of each checker based on the updated points (S20). Here, as an example, the role management unit 20 updates the field of each checker. For example, a standard value of points (e.g., "5") is set, and the role management unit 20 compares the updated points with the standard value and updates the field according to the result of the comparison. Specific processing will be described below.

[0144] If there is no change in the relationship between the updated points of a checker in a certain field and the reference value, the role management unit 20 does not update the field of the checker. For example, if checker A's points in the field "internal specifications" are "5" before the points are updated (i.e., before the requester makes an evaluation), and checker A's points in the field "internal specifications" are "5" after the points are updated (i.e., after the requester makes an evaluation), the role management unit 20 does not change the fact that checker A has knowledge of the field "internal specifications," and manages checker A and the field "internal specifications" in association with each other.

[0145] If the updated points of a checker in a certain field are greater than the reference value, the role management unit 20 adds the field whose points are greater than the reference value to the fields of knowledge possessed by the checker and associates the checker with the field. In other words, the role management unit 20 manages that the checker has knowledge in the field. For example, assume that the field "external specifications" is not associated with checker A. If checker A's points in the field "external specifications" are "5" before the point update and checker A's points in the field "external specifications" are "6" after the point update, the role management unit 20 considers that checker A now has knowledge in the field "external specifications," adds the field "external specifications" to checker A's fields, and associates and manages checker A with the field "external specifications." Even if the points in a certain field are less than the reference value (for example, even if the points are "0"), it is possible that the checker's confirmation content is adopted by the requester as he or she reviews the materials, increasing the points, and as a result, the points may exceed the reference value. In this case, the field is newly linked to the reviewer.

[0146] If the updated points of a checker for a certain field are smaller than a reference value, the role management unit 20 deletes the field whose points are smaller than the reference value from the fields of knowledge held by the checker, and releases the association between the checker and the field. In other words, the role management unit 20 manages that the checker does not own the field. For example, in the example shown in FIG. 18, checker C's points for the field "DB" have become "4," which is smaller than the reference value, so the role management unit 20 deletes the field "DB" from the fields of checker C and releases the association between checker C and the field "DB."

[0147] For example, as shown in Figure 19, before the points were updated, verifyer C was considered to have knowledge of the fields "DB" and "external specifications," and verifyer C was linked to the fields "DB" and "external specifications" and managed. After the points were updated, verifyer C's points for the field "DB" became smaller than the reference value, so the field "external specifications" was deleted from verifyer C's field. As a result, verifyer C is no longer linked to the field "DB," but is linked to and managed with the field "external specifications."

[0148] For example, when new materials are identified, the determination unit 28 assigns each candidate to an item in the materials based on the candidate's updated field.

[0149] In this embodiment, the role of the reviewer may be the authority to approve. In this case, a scenario in which the processing according to this embodiment is applied may be a scenario in which, within a company, a subordinate circulates a document to multiple superiors who have the authority to approve the document in order to obtain approval for the document, and the multiple superiors review the document. For example, if superiors A and B have the same authority, and if superior B reviews item X in the document (e.g., approves item X), item X is not proposed to superior A as an item to be reviewed, and items that superior A has the authority to approve but that superior B has not reviewed are proposed to superior A as items to be reviewed by superior A. In this way, this embodiment may be applied to a scenario in which a document is approved.

[0150] The functions of each part of the information processing device 10 and the terminal devices 12 and 14 are realized, for example, by cooperation between hardware and software. For example, the processor of each device reads and executes a program stored in the memory of each device, thereby realizing the function of each device. The program is stored in the memory via a recording medium such as a CD or DVD, or via a communication path such as a network.

[0151] In the above embodiments, the term "processor" refers to a processor in a broad sense, and includes general-purpose processors (e.g., CPU: Central Processing Unit, etc.) and dedicated processors (e.g., GPU: Graphics Processing Unit, ASIC: Application Specific Integrated Circuit, FPGA: Field Programmable Gate Array, programmable logic device, etc.). Furthermore, the operations of the processor in the above embodiments may not only be performed by a single processor, but may also be performed by multiple processors located in physically separate locations working together. Furthermore, the order of the operations of the processor is not limited to the order described in the above embodiments, and may be changed as appropriate. [Explanation of symbols]

[0152] 10 information processing device, 12, 14 terminal device, 16 reception unit, 18 output unit, 20 role management unit, 22 role acquisition unit, 24 confirmation status acquisition unit, 26 confirmation status management unit, 28 decision unit, 30 evaluation management unit, 38 processor.

Claims

1. a processor; The processor: assigning a confirmer having a role corresponding to a part to be confirmed in the document based on information indicating the role of each of the confirmers; When a plurality of verifyers are assigned to the same portion of the same document and the document is verified by the plurality of verifyers, a portion that is assigned to the one verifyer and other verifyers included in the plurality of verifyers and that has not been verified by the other verifyers is displayed on a display of one verifyer as a portion that should be verified by the one verifyer; changing the role of each of the verifyers in accordance with an evaluation by a requester who has requested the verifyers to verify the document, of each of the verifyers who have verified the document; Information processing device.

2. The part to be confirmed by the one confirmer is a part assigned to the one confirmer and has not been confirmed by another confirmer who has the same role as the one confirmer in confirmation.

2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:

3. The processor: a part assigned to the one checker and checked by another checker having a different role from the one checker is displayed on the display as a part to be checked by the one checker; 3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:

4. The processor further comprises: assigning a reviewer who has a role related to each part to be reviewed in the document; 4. The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the information processing device is a computer.

5. The processor: If a verification point is specified for the area to be verified, a verifying person with a role for the verification point is assigned to the area to be verified. When the viewpoint of checking is not defined for the part to be checked, multiple checkers with different roles are assigned to the part to be checked, and multiple checkers with the same role are not assigned to the part to be checked.

5. The information processing apparatus according to claim 4,

6. Verifiers with the same role are those with knowledge in the same field, Verifiers with different roles are those with knowledge in different fields.

6. The information processing device according to claim 2, wherein the information processing device is a computer.

7. The computer assigning a confirmer having a role corresponding to a part to be confirmed in the document based on information indicating the role of each of the confirmers; When a plurality of verifyers are assigned to the same portion of the same document and the document is verified by the plurality of verifyers, a portion that is assigned to the one verifyer and other verifyers included in the plurality of verifyers and that has not been verified by the other verifyers is displayed on a display of one verifyer as a portion that should be verified by the one verifyer; changing the role of each of the verifyers in accordance with an evaluation by a requester who has requested the verifyers to verify the document, of each of the verifyers who have verified the document; A program to make it work like this.

Images