Information providing device, method, and program

Abstract

[Problem] To visually comprehend an evaluation factor which is preferable to be improved preferentially when compared with same or similar business styles in order to improve customer repeat visit intent, repeat purchase intent, contract intent, continuation intent, or recommendation intent. [Solution] An information providing device according to the present invention includes a research data acquisition means for acquiring evaluation data including an evaluation value of an evaluation item for a relevant product or service, a multivariate analysis means for calculating a contribution degree of an explanatory variable to an objective variable by performing multivariate analysis with repeat visit intent or the like as the objective variable and the evaluation value as the explanatory variable on the basis of the evaluation data, a reference value setting means for setting a reference value for the explanatory variable, a priority analysis means for analyzing an engagement priority on the basis of the reference value and the contribution degree, and an analysis result output means for displaying an analysis result by the priority analysis means on an information terminal.

Description

Information providing device, method and program

[0001] The present invention relates to an information providing device, method, and program for providing information that contributes to a customer's intention to revisit, repurchase, sign a contract, continue, or recommend. In this specification, "customer" includes prospective customers, and "intention to sign a contract" is a concept that includes a customer's intention to purchase a product or service before purchasing it, and a customer's intention to continue using the product or service (or to renew the contract) after purchasing it. In this specification, "intention to continue" is a concept that includes not only the intention to continue the contractual relationship, but also the intention of an employee to continue working. The target stores in this specification include not only physical stores (real stores) but also stores in virtual space.

[0002] Conventionally, customer evaluations of a target store have been analyzed by compiling survey results from monitor surveys and in-store questionnaires, and the results have been used to improve the services of the target store. Patent Document 1 discloses a technology for displaying a display showing the psychological state of customers toward the target store (for example, whether their satisfaction is high or low) superimposed on map information of the target store.

[0003] However, conventional methods including Patent Document 1 simply display aggregated survey results or questionnaire results, and are unable to grasp strengths and weaknesses and what strengths need to be maintained and what weaknesses need to be improved in order to maintain or improve overall satisfaction or intention to sign a contract. Therefore, in Patent Document 2, the applicant proposed an information provision device and method in which an evaluation value of intention to revisit or intention to recommend to others is used as an objective variable, evaluation data includes level 1 evaluation items corresponding to the objective variable, level 2 evaluation items explaining the objective variable, and level 3 evaluation items explaining the level 2 evaluation items, and the evaluation value of the level 2 evaluation items is used as an intermediate objective variable and the level 3 evaluation items are used as explanatory variables, and a second multivariate analysis is performed in which the level 1 evaluation items are used as objective variables and the level 2 evaluation items are used as explanatory variables.

[0004] JP 2013-089035 A Japanese Patent No. 7355308 A

[0005] Patent Document 2 makes it possible to quantify with high accuracy the contribution of evaluation factors to customers' intention to return to a store or to recommend the store. However, simply analyzing the contribution of evaluation factors in a specific store does not allow one to grasp which evaluation factors have a higher priority for addressing when compared with the same or similar business type.

[0006] An object of the present invention is to provide an information providing device, method, and program that enable a customer to visually grasp evaluation factors that should be prioritized for improvement when compared with the same or similar business type in order to increase the customer's willingness to return to a store, repurchase, sign a contract, continue, or recommend.

[0007] [1] An information providing device according to the present invention comprises: survey data acquisition means for acquiring evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for evaluation items for a target product or service, the evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for multiple evaluation items related to willingness to revisit, willingness to repurchase, willingness to sign a contract, willingness to continue, or willingness to recommend to others; multivariate analysis means for performing multivariate analysis based on the evaluation data using the evaluation values ​​for the multiple evaluation items in the evaluation data as a response variable and calculating the contribution of the explanatory variables to the response variable; reference value setting means for setting a reference value for each of the multiple explanatory variables; priority analysis means for analyzing effort priorities based on the reference values ​​and the contributions; and analysis result output means for displaying the analysis results obtained by the priority analysis means, including the effort priorities, on an information terminal capable of communicating via a network. [2] In the information providing device described in [1] above, the analysis result output means may be configured to display a graph created based on the effort priorities on the information terminal. [3] In the information providing device described in [1] or [2] above, the priority analysis means may analyze the effort priorities for a plurality of selected explanatory variables. [4] In the information providing device described in any of [1] to [3] above, the analysis result output means may display on the information terminal a heat map created by using evaluation items as a first axis and evaluation targets as a second axis, and expressing the effort priorities in shades of gray. [5] In the information providing device described in any of [1] to [4] above, the priority analysis means may analyze the effort priorities based on a set evaluation perspective. [6] The information providing device described in [5] above, the evaluation perspective is the proportion or absolute number of respondents related to the evaluation data, and the priority analysis means calculates a difference between the proportion or absolute number of respondents related to the objective variable and the proportion or absolute number of respondents in the same business type, and corrects the effort priorities by taking the difference into account.[7] The information providing device described in any one of [1] to [6], wherein the reference value is a difference between the average score of the evaluation item and the rating of the evaluation value of the evaluation item for products in the same business category as the target product or service. [8] The information providing device described in any one of [1] to [6], wherein, when the evaluation data is evaluation data including evaluation values ​​of evaluation items for the target product, the reference value is a difference between the average score of the evaluation item and the rating of the evaluation value of the evaluation item for products in the same price range or for the same use as the target product. [9] The information providing device described in any one of [1] to [8], wherein the priority analysis means performs a first-level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the difference value and the rating of negative evaluation items, and a second-level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the difference value and the rating of positive evaluation items.

[10] An information provision device described in any one of [1] to [8], characterized in that the priority analysis means performs a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of negative evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, and a third level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are positive evaluations.

[0008]

[11] The information provision method of the present invention is characterized in that a computer executes the following steps: a step of acquiring evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for evaluation items for a target product or service, the evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for multiple evaluation items related to intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others; a multivariate analysis step of performing a multivariate analysis using the evaluation value of the intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others as a dependent variable and the evaluation values ​​of the multiple evaluation items in the evaluation data as multiple explanatory variables to calculate the contribution of the explanatory variables to the dependent variable; a reference value setting step of setting a reference value for each of the multiple explanatory variables; a priority analysis step of analyzing the priority of efforts based on the reference values ​​and the contributions; and an analysis result output step of displaying the analysis results from the priority analysis step on an information terminal capable of communicating via a network.

[12] The information provision method described in

[11] , characterized in that the priority analysis process performs a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of negative evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, and a third level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are positive evaluations.

[0009]

[13] A program of the present invention causes a computer to execute the following: means for acquiring evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for evaluation items for a target product or service, the evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for multiple evaluation items related to revisiting, repurchasing, contracting, continuing, or recommending; multivariate analysis means for performing a multivariate analysis using the evaluation values ​​for the multiple evaluation items in the evaluation data as a response variable and multiple explanatory variables to calculate the contribution of the explanatory variables to the response variable; reference value setting means for setting a reference value for each of the multiple explanatory variables; priority analysis means for analyzing the priority of efforts based on the reference values ​​and the contribution; and analysis result output means for displaying the analysis results obtained by the priority analysis means on an information terminal capable of communicating via a network. The program of the present invention is software executable on a computer and can be stored on a computer-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, DVD, USB memory, HDD, or SSD (Solid State Drive).

[14] The program described in

[13] , characterized in that the priority analysis means executes a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of negative evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, and a third level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are positive evaluations.

[0010] According to the present invention, it is possible to easily grasp evaluation factors that should be improved as a priority in order to increase a customer's intention to return to a store, repurchase, sign a contract, continue, or recommend.

[0011] FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of an information provision system according to the first embodiment. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating functions of an information provision device according to the first embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a survey form for a monitor survey according to the first embodiment. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of a survey form for a questionnaire survey according to the first embodiment. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating a multivariate analysis means according to the first embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating a priority analysis means according to the first embodiment. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of output by an analysis result output means according to the first embodiment. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating another example of output by an analysis result output means according to the first embodiment. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of output by an analysis result output means according to the second embodiment. FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of output by an analysis result output means according to the third embodiment.

[0012] First Embodiment The information provision system 1 of the first embodiment analyzes evaluation factors in a specific business format, and graphically displays evaluation factors that influence a customer's intention to revisit or recommend, making it easy to understand the factors, and has the configuration described below. Note that the information provision system 1 can also graphically display evaluation factors that influence a customer's intention to sign a contract, revisit, or repurchase by using different evaluation data.

[0013] Fig. 1 is a configuration diagram of an information provision system according to this embodiment. As shown in Fig. 1, the information provision system 1 according to this embodiment is composed of an information provision device 10 functioning as a server, a management information terminal 20 functioning as a management client, an information terminal 30 used by survey questionnaire respondents, a survey data collection device 40, and the Internet 50. Note that, although the example shown in Fig. 1 illustrates one each of the information provision device 10, management information terminal 20, and survey data collection device 40, the configuration is not limited to this, and two or more of each may be used.

[0014] The information providing device 10 is, for example, a PC server, and has a calculation unit 11, a memory unit 12 that stores an analysis program 121, and a communication unit 13 that enables communication with the information terminal 30 and the survey data collection device 40.

[0015] The management information terminal 20 is an information terminal, such as a personal computer, for inputting data into the information providing device 10 and the survey data collection device 40 and for executing the analysis program 121 and the survey data collection program 141. By executing the analysis program 121 (described later) from the management information terminal 20, the user can output various analysis results to the display device of the management information terminal 20.

[0016] The information terminal 30 is an information terminal used by the survey form respondent, and is used to input survey data into the database 122. In the example of Figure 1, the information terminal 30 is a smartphone, but is not limited to this and can be configured as any information terminal that runs a web browser, such as a personal computer or tablet.

[0017] The survey data collection device 40 is, for example, a PC server, and includes a calculation unit 41, a storage unit 42 that stores a database 122 and an input program 123, and a communication unit 13 that enables communication with the information providing device 10 and the information terminal 30. The input program 123 includes a survey data input means that provides the database 122 with a web page that enables survey data to be input from the information terminal 30. In this embodiment, the survey data is acquired by inputting the survey data in the form of a store customer answering a questionnaire using a web browser on the information terminal 30 using the input program 123, but it may also be configured to process survey data collected from survey form respondents by other means, such as paper media, and upload the data to the database 122 from the management information terminal 20.

[0018] 2, the calculation unit 11 of the information providing device 10 executes the analysis program 121 stored in the storage unit 12 to realize (1) a survey data acquisition means, (2) a multivariate analysis means, (3) a priority analysis means, and (4) an analysis result output means. Each of these means will be described below.

[0019] (1) Survey Data Acquisition Means The survey data acquisition means is a means for storing survey data to be used in the multivariate analysis means in the storage unit 12. In this embodiment, a screen for inputting a query for acquiring survey data from the database 122 is provided to the management information terminal 20. The survey data in this embodiment is data regarding customer satisfaction based on responses from store users, and consists of two types of data: monitor survey data and questionnaire survey data.

[0020] The monitor survey in this embodiment is a survey in which monitors (surveyors) actually use the store's services and answer predetermined questions based on their own experience. Since the surveyors are paid a fee, the monitor survey can include a large number of questions. However, compared to a questionnaire survey, depending on the N number, it may be difficult to perform reliable multivariate analysis using only the monitor survey.

[0021] The questionnaire survey in this embodiment is an in-store survey with predetermined evaluation items, has less than half the number of questions compared to a monitor survey, and is composed of questions suitable for multivariate analysis. On the other hand, compared to a monitor survey, the N number can be larger (for example, more than 100 surveys can be collected per store per month), making it suitable for statistical analysis. Because the N number is large, a questionnaire survey makes it possible to grasp evaluation trends by customer segment classified by attributes such as gender, age, and region. In this embodiment, monitor survey data and questionnaire survey data can be used together, enabling statistical analysis of the strength of the influence of key evaluation items on overall satisfaction by industry and business type, while the monitor survey makes it possible to identify issues at a specific business level.

[0022] The evaluation items to be recorded on each questionnaire may be, for example, items related to QSCA (Quality Service Cleanliness Atmosphere). For target restaurants in the food and beverage category, examples of items include "customer service," "service speed," "food," "cleanliness," "space / atmosphere," and "cost performance." For target restaurants in the beauty category, examples of items include "customer service," "counseling," "skill," "cleanliness," "atmosphere," and "cost performance." In either industry, questions necessary for calculating a regression with the intention to revisit the restaurant are provided. In addition, questions may be provided for calculating a regression with the intention to recommend the restaurant to others, such as whether the customer would recommend the restaurant to others. Note that the above-mentioned items are merely examples, and dozens of items may be included depending on the industry (genre), size, season, etc. of the target restaurant.

[0023] FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of a questionnaire for a monitor survey according to this embodiment. The attribute information of the surveyor conducting the monitor survey is entered in each attribute information field. Information about the surveyor, such as their age, gender, and place of residence, is pre-registered and therefore not entered on the questionnaire. Level 1 questions consist of willingness to recommend and willingness to revisit. Level 1 questions serve as the objective variable for the multiple regression analysis described below. The evaluation of level 1 questions is, for example, a multi-level evaluation ranging from 0 to 10 points. Level 2 questions are factors that influence the objective variable, the level 1 question. Level 3 questions are explanatory variables when multiple regression analysis or other multivariate analysis is performed using level 2 questions as the dependent variable. Here, level 2 and level 3 questions are in a superordinate-subordinate relationship. For example, the subordinate concepts of "evaluation of customer service" in subcategory A of level 2 questions are "evaluation of greeting" and "evaluation of food service" in subcategory A of level 3 questions. However, not all subcategories of level 2 questions have level 3 questions.

[0024] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of a questionnaire for a questionnaire survey according to this embodiment. Respondents' attribute information is entered in each attribute information field. Because respondents are not registered respondents like investigators in monitor surveys, they are also asked to enter information such as age and gender. The level 1 questions are the same as those in monitor surveys and consist of items regarding willingness to recommend and willingness to revisit. To reduce the burden on respondents, the questionnaire survey is designed to have a small number of questions that serve as observation variables. In this embodiment, the questionnaire survey consists of level 2 questions and level 2 checks. Here, the level 2 questions and level 2 checks correspond to each other in terms of subcategories. For example, the level 2 check corresponding to "Evaluation of customer service" in subcategory A of the level 2 questions is "Dissatisfaction with customer service (multiple choices)." From another perspective, the level 2 check can be explained as replacing the level 3 questions, which were previously conducted using a multi-level evaluation, with a multi-level evaluation.

[0025] (2) Multivariate Analysis Means The multivariate analysis means of this embodiment analyzes how each evaluation item affects the score of recommendation intention and revisit intention (hereinafter referred to as "revisit intention score") by multiple regression analysis or other multivariate analysis. Here, regression analysis is a statistical method that clarifies the relationship between a numerical value indicating a result (objective variable) and a numerical value that is a factor (explanatory variable). Multiple regression analysis is a statistical method that, when explaining an objective variable, quantifies which explanatory variable influences the result to what extent, and makes a future prediction.

[0026] In this embodiment, evaluation factors that can be improved through efforts are set as explanatory variables, and evaluation factors that are difficult to improve through efforts, such as location and appearance, are not set as explanatory variables. Specifically, "customer service," "food," "cleanliness," "space / atmosphere," "cost performance," etc. were set as explanatory variables for restaurants, and a monitor survey and questionnaire survey were conducted in which the questions were evaluation items related to the explanatory variables and evaluation items for calculating a revisit intention score.

[0027] The multivariate analysis means of this embodiment performs (a) a hierarchical multiple regression analysis using level 1 to level 3 evaluation factors, or (b) a multivariate analysis using simple correlation analysis of level 1 to level 3 evaluation factors. Analysis (a) is a first multiple regression analysis using level 2 evaluation items as the objective variable (intermediate objective variable) and level 3 evaluation items as explanatory variables, as shown in FIG. 5 . This analysis makes it possible to identify level 3 evaluation items (evaluation factors) that influence the level 2 evaluation items (intermediate objective variables). For example, in FIG. 3 , the influence (contribution) of each of the evaluation of the food taste (B-1), the evaluation of the food selection (B-2), and the evaluation of the food quantity (B-3) on the food evaluation (B) can be quantified. Also, as shown in FIG. 5 , a second multiple regression analysis is performed using level 1 evaluation items as the objective variable and level 2 evaluation items as explanatory variables. This analysis makes it possible to identify level 2 evaluation items (evaluation factors) that influence the level 1 evaluation items. For example, in Figure 3, the impact (contribution) of each of the evaluation of customer service (A), evaluation of food (B), evaluation of cleanliness (C), evaluation of space / ambience (D), and evaluation of cost performance (E) on the intention to recommend or return can be quantified.

[0028] Analysis (b) calculates the influence (contribution) on the intention to recommend or the intention to revisit based on the results of, for example, a simple correlation analysis between level 1 evaluation factors and level 3 evaluation factors and a simple correlation analysis between level 2 evaluation factors and level 3 evaluation factors. Simple correlation analysis is a known analytical method for calculating the strength of the relationship between two evaluation factors, and it is said that the closer the value of the simple correlation coefficient is to 1, the stronger the positive correlation is, the closer it is to -1, the stronger the negative correlation is, and the closer it is to 0, the weaker the correlation is.

[0029] (3) Priority Analysis Means The priority analysis means calculates the difference between the reference value and the reference value for each of the selected evaluation items (evaluation factors), multiplies the difference by the impact on the revisit intention score, and performs a predetermined correction to calculate the action priority (improvement priority). Here, the action priority is an index that indicates how efficiently the revisit intention or recommendation intention can be improved by improving the evaluation items (evaluation factors). Note that the priority analysis means of this embodiment can also analyze the action priority by taking into account the number of respondents (proportion, number) for each evaluation aspect (see Figure 8 described below).

[0030] FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating the priority analysis means, in which the level 3 evaluation items "greeting" and "consideration" were selected as the analysis targets. The evaluation items to be analyzed can be selected from the input screen displayed by the priority analysis means on the management information terminal 20, and can also be selected from the level 2 evaluation items. FIG. 6A shows the percentage of respondents who answered "good" for the set condition for "greeting" and "consideration" (number of people who answered "good" / total number of responses). As shown in the figure, the applicable percentage does not indicate which of "greeting" and "consideration" should be improved first. Here, the set conditions are not limited to the example conditions, and any conditions can be set.

[0031] 6B) shows the difference between the standard score (standard value) for the same business type calculated for each explanatory variable and the average score of the relevant person, with the vertical line in the center indicating 0. The analysis program 121 is equipped with a standard value setting means for displaying an input screen on the management information terminal 20 for the user to input the standard value used for analysis, and any standard value can be set. The standard score (standard value) can be the average score of the rating data for the same business type (e.g., a yakiniku business), or any rating that the target store aims for. Furthermore, the average score of the rating data for similar business types can also be used. For example, the difference between the standard score and the standard score for a similar business type that shares common ingredients, such as a business type that is a higher-level concept of the yakiniku business, such as a restaurant business, or a teppanyaki business, can be used.

[0032] Figure 6C) shows the influence (contribution) on the revisit intention score calculated by the multivariate analysis means. From Figure 6C), it can be seen that "consideration" has a higher contribution to revisiting than "greeting." The priority analysis means calculates the priority of efforts for each evaluation factor using the difference value from the reference score shown in Figure 6B) and the contribution shown in Figure 6C).

[0033] FIG. 6D) is a graph showing the priority of efforts calculated based on the difference values ​​shown in FIG. 6B) and the degree of influence on the revisit intention score shown in FIG. 6C). In FIG. 6B), the deviation from the reference value was the same for the lengths of the graphs showing "greetings" and "consideration," but in FIG. 6D), it is easy to see from the length of the bar graph that "consideration" has a higher priority of efforts than "greetings." The graphical display of the analysis results by the priority analysis means is performed by the analysis result output means described below.

[0034] (4) Analysis Result Output Means: The analysis result output means of this embodiment graphically displays the effort priorities, allowing for visual understanding. FIG. 7 is a bar graph showing an example of output by the analysis result output means. In FIG. 7, the evaluation items selected are "greeting," "consideration," "appropriate distance," "speed of serving," and "politeness when serving," and the analysis results by the priority analysis means are graphically displayed. The vertical line in the center of FIG. 7 represents 0, and the more positive the evaluation, the further the bar graph extends to the right, and the more negative the evaluation, the further the bar graph extends to the left. The analysis result output means can display the created bar graph on the management information terminal 20 and the information terminal 30.

[0035] Furthermore, the positive bar graph is colored in a first color (e.g., green), and the negative bar graph is colored in a second color (e.g., red). By coloring the positive and negative sides in different colors in this way, it is possible to instantly grasp whether the evaluation is positive or negative. This makes it possible to take measures on a store-by-store basis, starting with the items in the long negative bar graph, and then, once the negative items become less noticeable, to enhance the differentiation points of the positive side. The graphical display by the analysis result output means is not limited to the example of a horizontal bar graph, and can be displayed in any graph format, such as a bubble chart, a line graph, or a pie chart.

[0036] Furthermore, the priority analysis means of this embodiment has a function of calculating the difference between the proportion of respondents in the target store and the proportion of respondents in the same business type, and analyzing the priority of efforts taking this difference into account. The analysis result output means of this embodiment can output the priority of efforts taking into account the proportion of respondents for each evaluation perspective.

[0037] FIG. 8(a) is a table created based on responses to a multiple-choice question asking about "good points," an evaluation perspective, for level 3 evaluation items. The second column shows the percentage of respondents who answered "good" at the target store, and the third column shows the difference from the percentage of respondents who answered "good" at the same business type. The fourth column, titled "Customer Attention Level," shows the priority of the initiative calculated based on the percentage of respondents who answered "good" shown in the second column, the difference shown in the third column, and the impact on the revisit intention score. The areas marked with negative points in the fourth column are areas for improvement.

[0038] In columns 2 to 4, the positive side frames and bar graphs are colored in a first color (e.g., green), and the negative side frames and bar graphs are colored in a second color (e.g., red). In Figure 8(a), for example, 35.3% of people selected "appropriate distance," which at first glance seems like a high rating, but the difference value in column 3 shows that the selection rate is low compared to the same business type, so it receives a negative rating in column 4 (customer attention) and is an area for improvement.

[0039] Figure 8(b) is a table created based on responses to a multiple-choice question asking about "bad points" for the level 3 evaluation items. Column 2 shows the percentage of respondents who answered "bad" at the target store, and column 3 shows the difference between the percentage of respondents who answered "bad" at the target store and the percentage of respondents who answered "bad" at the same store type. Column 4, titled "Customer Attention," shows the priority of the initiative calculated based on the percentage of respondents who answered "bad" in column 2, the difference value in column 3, and the impact on the revisit intention score. In column 4, the positive side of the bar graph is colored a first color (e.g., green), and the negative side of the bar graph is colored a second color (e.g., red). In Figure 8(b), for example, 2.4% of respondents selected "speed of delivery." However, because the difference value in column 3 indicates a lower percentage of respondents who chose this option compared to the same store type, this is evaluated as positive in column 4 (customer attention) and is not an area for improvement.

[0040] In this manner, in this embodiment, it is possible to graphically display the priority of efforts (degree of customer attention) calculated based on the percentage of respondents who answered using the set evaluation criteria, the difference from the reference score for the same business type, and the impact on the revisit intention score. Furthermore, since priority of efforts analyzed using different evaluation criteria can be selected or simultaneously displayed, it is possible to more accurately grasp the evaluation items with high priority of efforts. Note that in Figures 8(a) and (b), the priority of efforts is calculated based on the percentage of respondents who answered using the set evaluation criteria (relative number), but the number of respondents who answered using the set evaluation criteria (absolute number) may also be taken into account when calculating the priority of efforts.

[0041] As described above, according to the information provision system 1 of this embodiment, a priority analysis is performed using the analysis results obtained by multivariate analysis of the objective variables and explanatory variables (evaluation factors) and the difference value from the standard score (the proportion of respondents who answered using the evaluation perspective set as necessary), and the results are provided in a graphically visualized form, making it possible to instantly grasp the evaluation factors that should be prioritized for improvement when compared with the same or similar business types.

[0042] Second Embodiment An information provision system 1a according to the second embodiment includes an information provision device 10 functioning as a server, a management information terminal 20 functioning as a management client, an information terminal 30 used by customers, a survey data collection device 40, and the Internet 50, and the hardware configuration is the same as that of the first embodiment. The second embodiment differs from the first embodiment in that the priority analysis means of the analysis program 121 executed by the information provision device 10 has a multi-store evaluation function, and the analysis result output means has a heat map creation function.

[0043] FIG. 9 is a diagram (heat map) showing an example of output by the analysis result output means according to the second embodiment. FIG. 9 is a heat map created by using "good points" as the evaluation perspective, with the selected evaluation items as the first axis, the store to be evaluated as the second axis, and the numerical values ​​of the priority of the efforts displayed in shades of gray. The evaluation items to be analyzed can be selected from an input screen that the priority analysis means displays on the management information terminal 20, and can also be selected from level 2 evaluation items. The store to be analyzed can also be selected from an input screen that the priority analysis means displays on the management information terminal 20.

[0044] In Figure 9, the evaluation items are displayed in the same order as in the survey form in Figure 3, but the display order of the evaluation items shown on the first axis can be changed to any order. For example, the analysis result output means may have a sorting function that displays the evaluation items in ascending or descending order based on the total score of the evaluation points. The same applies to the stores shown on the second axis, and the order can be changed to any order. For example, the analysis result output means may have a sorting function that displays the stores in ascending or descending order based on the total score of the evaluation points. Also, unlike the example in Figure 9, the analysis result output means may have a function that switches the display between the first axis being the horizontal axis and the second axis being the vertical axis.

[0045] The numerical values ​​shown in Figure 9 are the priority levels (improvement priority indexes) corresponding to the "degree of customer attention" in Figure 8(a). The numerical values ​​of the improvement priority indexes are relative, and the larger the absolute value of the numerical value, the stronger the impact on customer evaluation. Positive values ​​indicate strengths and points of praise, while negative values ​​indicate the impact of weaknesses and points of issues. Negative values ​​are indicated by a black triangle next to the number.

[0046] In the second embodiment, the average rating of the same business type is set as the reference value used by the priority analysis means for analysis. In FIG. 9 , explanatory variables with ratings higher than the average rating of the same business type are colored a first color (e.g., green), and explanatory variables with ratings lower than the average rating of the same business type are colored a second color (e.g., red). In this embodiment, the greater the difference between the rating of the explanatory variable and the average rating, the darker the color is used. That is, the analysis program 121 of this embodiment can create a heat map in which evaluation items with ratings higher than the reference value are colored a darker first color, and evaluation items with ratings lower than the reference value are colored a darker second color. The created heat map can be displayed on the management information terminal 20 and the information terminal 30.

[0047] Figure 9 shows an example of an evaluation of a distinctive store. For example, the improvement priority index for store C shows that there are no large positive or negative values, indicating that the store is operating in a non-offensive manner and that there have been no particularly notable negative experiences. The improvement priority index for store E shows that while the amount of food is negative, the evaluation of the taste of the food is positive and far exceeds this, suggesting that the good taste makes customers want to eat more.

[0048] As described above, according to the information provision system 1a of this embodiment, a heat map colored according to the priority value of the initiative can be output for the selected evaluation items and selected stores, making it possible to grasp the priority of the initiatives at multiple stores simultaneously.

[0049] <Third embodiment> An information provision system 1b according to the third embodiment includes an information provision device 10 functioning as a server, a management information terminal 20 functioning as a management client, an information terminal 30 used by customers, a survey data collection device 40, and the Internet 50, and the hardware configuration is the same as that of the first embodiment. The third embodiment differs from the first embodiment in that the priority analysis means of the analysis program 121 executed by the information provision device 10 has a level-based improvement suggestion function.

[0050] The information provision system 1b of the third embodiment analyzes evaluation items requiring improvement activities by dividing them into Level 1 (level requiring improvement), Level 2 (potential level), and Level 3 (strength level). The order of priority for improvement efforts is Level 1 > Level 2 > Level 3. In Level 1 (level requiring improvement), negative responses are analyzed as problem points, while in Level 2 (potential level) and Level 3 (strength level), positive responses are analyzed as evaluation points. The analysis of Levels 1 to 3 can be performed for all levels at once, or it is possible to analyze only selected levels.

[0051] The first level (level requiring improvement) corresponds to an improvement of the standard level of service, and is an evaluation item that requires resolving customer dissatisfaction by eliminating disappointing and negative experiences. The second level (level of potential) corresponds to a level that is expected, and is an evaluation item that is desired to improve customer satisfaction by improving positive experiences. In other words, the second level is an evaluation item in which something that is praised in the compared product or service is not praised enough in the analyzed product or service, and there is thought to be room for praise up to the same level. The third level (level of strength) corresponds to the level of excitement, and is an evaluation item that should aim to create fans by creating an exciting experience.

[0052] 10 is a diagram for explaining the priority analysis means of the third embodiment, illustrating level 3 evaluation items for analyzing restaurants. The evaluation items to be analyzed can be selected from an input screen that the priority analysis means displays on the management information terminal 20. The third column of each table in FIGS. 10(a) to 10(c) shows the difference from the average score of the evaluation data for the same business type as the reference score (reference value).

[0053] FIG. 10(a) is a table created based on responses to a multiple-choice question asking about "bad points" as an evaluation perspective for level 3 evaluation items. At the first level (level requiring improvement), negative responses are identified as issues, and improvements are proposed for items with large negative "customer attention" scores. Specifically, the priority of efforts is analyzed based on the scores of negative evaluation items with negative differential scores. Here, items with positive numbers in the third column are negatively rated items that are lower than the average score for the same business type. In the example of FIG. 10(a), the priority analysis means extracts "Customer Service N - Lots of Private Conversations" and "Cleanliness N - Floor" as items that have a large impact on repeat visits and are lower than the average score for the same business type.

[0054] FIG. 10(b) is an example of a table created based on responses to a multiple-choice question asking about "good points," an evaluation perspective, for level 3 evaluation items. At the second level (potential level), positive responses are assigned evaluation points, and improvements are proposed for items with large negative "customer attention" scores. Specifically, the priority of efforts is analyzed based on the scores of positive evaluation items with negative differential scores. Here, items with negative numbers in the third column are negatively rated items that are lower than the average score for the same business type. In the example of FIG. 10(b), the priority analysis means extracts "Customer Service P_Consideration" and "Customer Service P_Personality" as items that have a large impact on repeat visits but are lower than the average score for the same business type.

[0055] FIG. 10(c) is another example of a table created based on responses to a multiple-choice question about "good points," an evaluation perspective, for level 3 evaluation items. At the second level (potential level), positive responses are used as evaluation points, and improvements are proposed for items with large negative "customer attention" scores. Specifically, the priority of efforts is analyzed based on the scores of positive evaluation items with positive differential values. Here, items with positive numbers in the third column are positively evaluated items that are lower than the average score for the same business type. In the example of FIG. 10(c), the priority analysis means extracts "Customer Service P_Consideration" and "Customer Service P_Personality" as items that have a large impact on repeat visits but are lower than the average score for the same business type.

[0056] The analysis results of the first to third levels by the priority analysis means can be output to the display device of the management information terminal 20 by the analysis result output means. As in the second embodiment, it is preferable to color items with a higher score than the average score of the same business type in different colors from items with a lower score. Items analyzed as having a high priority for action may be highlighted. Note that in Figure 10, items that require attention are surrounded by a thick frame.

[0057] As described above, according to the information provision system 1b of this embodiment, the priority analysis of improvement efforts is performed taking into account the perspectives of the first level (level requiring improvement), the second level (potential level), and the third level (strength level), making it possible to propose more practical priority of efforts to system users.

[0058] While the preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described above, the technical scope of the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments. Various modifications and improvements can be made to the above-described embodiments, and such modifications and improvements are also included in the technical scope of the present invention.

[0059] For example, in the above-described embodiment, a configuration was exemplified in which multiple regression analysis, which is a type of multivariate analysis, was used to determine the contribution of each evaluation factor to the revisit intention score, but the present invention is not limited to this configuration, and principal component analysis, factor analysis, correspondence analysis, multidimensional scaling, cluster analysis, path analysis, analysis of variance, conjoint analysis, regression analysis, logistic regression analysis, etc. may also be used.

[0060] In addition to the above-described embodiment, the information providing device 10 can also be configured to collect condition information such as customer segments, usage situations (daily use, anniversary use, etc.), seasons, and weather, and to analyze evaluation factors that contribute to intentions to revisit, repurchase, contract, or recommend, taking this condition information into account. Analysis by customer segment is also possible by adding graphic attributes and psychographic attributes to the questionnaire. Furthermore, by linking with a system that manages POS (Point of Sales) and purchase history, it is also possible to grasp evaluation trends by ordered product.

[0061] Furthermore, in the above-mentioned embodiment, an example was described in which survey data targeting restaurants was used, but the present invention can also be applied to other industries, such as the accommodation industry, food service industry, entertainment industry, lifestyle-related services such as hairdressing and beauty salons and public baths, education and skills teaching industry, finance industry, insurance industry, retail industry, information and communications industry, goods rental industry, professional services industry (such as legal professionals), advertising industry, real estate industry, and transportation industry.

[0062] Furthermore, in the above-described embodiment example, an example was shown in which the priority analysis means analyzed the priority of efforts using the difference value from the average score of the evaluation item in the same business type as the reference value, but if the evaluation data is evaluation data that includes evaluation values ​​of evaluation items for the target product, the reference value may be the difference value from the average score of the evaluation item in a price range similar to that of the target product (for example, the average price range of the group of products offered is a price range of ±20% or ±15%) or for a similar use (for example, if the use from the analysis perspective is a remote workspace, a cafe and a coworking space may be similar uses) to analyze the priority of efforts.

[0063] Furthermore, the present invention can also be used to visually grasp evaluation factors that should be prioritized for improvement when compared with the same or similar business types in order to improve employee satisfaction and intention to continue working.

[0064] In the above-described embodiment, an example was described in which multivariate analysis was performed on hierarchical evaluation factors to enhance the explanatory power of the influence (contribution) of evaluation factors on the intention to return to the store or the intention to recommend to others, but the technical concept of the present invention can also be applied to multivariate analysis using non-hierarchical evaluation factors.

[0065] REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 1... Information provision system 10... Information provision device 20... Management information terminal 30... Information terminal 40... Survey data collection device 50... Internet

Claims

1. An information provision device comprising: survey data acquisition means for acquiring evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for evaluation items for a target product or service, the evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for multiple evaluation items related to intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others; multivariate analysis means for performing multivariate analysis based on the evaluation data using the evaluation value of intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others as a dependent variable and using the evaluation values ​​of the multiple evaluation items in the evaluation data as a dependent variable to calculate the contribution of the explanatory variables to the dependent variable; reference value setting means for setting a reference value for each of the multiple explanatory variables; priority analysis means for analyzing effort priorities based on the reference values ​​and the contributions; and analysis result output means for displaying the analysis results obtained by the priority analysis means, including the effort priorities, on an information terminal capable of communicating via a network.

2. The information providing device according to claim 1, wherein said analysis result output means displays a graph created based on said initiative priorities on said information terminal.

3. The information providing device according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the priority analysis means analyzes the priority of efforts for a plurality of selected explanatory variables.

4. The information providing device according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the analysis result output means displays on the information terminal a heat map created by using evaluation items as the first axis and evaluation targets as the second axis, and expressing the numerical values ​​of the priority of the initiatives in shades of gray.

5. The information providing device according to claim 1, wherein the priority analysis means analyzes the priority of the efforts based on a set evaluation viewpoint.

6. The information provision device described in claim 5, characterized in that the evaluation perspective is the proportion or absolute number of respondents related to the evaluation data, and the priority analysis means calculates the difference between the proportion or absolute number of respondents related to the objective variable and the proportion or absolute number of respondents in the same business type, and analyzes the initiative priority taking into account the difference.

7. An information providing device according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the reference value is the difference between the average score of the evaluation item in the same business category as the target product or service and the evaluation score of the evaluation item.

8. An information providing device as described in claim 1 or 2, characterized in that when the evaluation data is evaluation data including evaluation values ​​of evaluation items for a target product, the reference value is the difference between the average score of the evaluation items for products in the same price range or for the same use as the target product and the rating of the evaluation value of the evaluation items.

9. An information providing device as described in claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the priority analysis means performs a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the difference value and the rating of negative evaluation items, and a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the difference value and the rating of positive evaluation items.

10. An information provision device as described in claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the priority analysis means performs a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of negative evaluation items for which the difference value is a negative evaluation, a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items for which the difference value is a negative evaluation, and a third level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items for which the difference value is a positive evaluation.

11. An information provision method in which a computer executes the following steps: a step of acquiring evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for evaluation items for a target product or service, the evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for multiple evaluation items related to intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others; a multivariate analysis step of performing multivariate analysis using the evaluation value of the intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others as a dependent variable and using the evaluation values ​​of the multiple evaluation items in the evaluation data as multiple explanatory variables to calculate the contribution of the explanatory variables to the dependent variable; a reference value setting step of setting a reference value for each of the multiple explanatory variables; a priority analysis step of analyzing the priority of efforts based on the reference values ​​and the contributions; and an analysis result output step of displaying the analysis results in the priority analysis step on an information terminal capable of communicating via a network.

12. The information provision method described in claim 11, characterized in that the priority analysis process performs a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of negative evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, and a third level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are positive evaluations.

13. A program that causes a computer to execute: means for acquiring evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for evaluation items for a target product or service, the evaluation data including evaluation values ​​for multiple evaluation items related to intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others; multivariate analysis means for performing multivariate analysis using the evaluation value of the intention to revisit, intention to repurchase, intention to sign a contract, intention to continue, or intention to recommend to others as a dependent variable and the evaluation values ​​of the multiple evaluation items in the evaluation data as multiple explanatory variables, thereby calculating the contribution of the explanatory variables to the dependent variable; standard value setting means for setting a standard value for each of the multiple explanatory variables; priority analysis means for analyzing the priority of efforts based on the standard values ​​and the contributions; and analysis result output means for displaying the analysis results by the priority analysis means on an information terminal that can communicate via a network.

14. The program described in claim 13, characterized in that the priority analysis means executes a first level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of negative evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, a second level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are negative evaluations, and a third level analysis that analyzes the priority of efforts based on the ratings of positive evaluation items whose difference values ​​are positive evaluations.

Images