JP2015084134A - Risk knowledge providing system and risk knowledge providing method - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To make it possible to highly accurately, efficiently provide a risk knowledge excellent in usefulness for a beneficiary.SOLUTION: A risk knowledge providing system 10 executes a first process for searching answer histories of other users each at a predetermined similarity to an answer history of a target user designated by an input device on the basis of stored information in a second database 130 in relation to the target user and a target project type, searches other users each at a predetermined similarity in user attribute information to the target user on the basis of stored information in a third database 128, and identifying the answer history at a similarity equal to or higher than the predetermined similarity, of the other user at a similarity in user attribute equal to or higher than the predetermined similarity. Furthermore, the risk knowledge providing system 10 executes a second process for identifying a risk knowledge having an information granularity according to a user level indicated by the user attribute information on the target user among risk knowledge in risk evaluation items corresponding to the identified answer history from a first database 126, and outputting the identified risk knowledge to an output device.

Description

  The present invention relates to a risk knowledge presentation system and a risk knowledge presentation method, and more specifically to a technology that can provide risk knowledge that is highly beneficial to beneficiaries with high accuracy and efficiency.

  When conducting various projects in an organization, it is desirable to perform risk assessment and countermeasures, accumulate knowledge gained from actual project execution, that is, knowledge and use it effectively for other projects.

  As a technology related to the effective use of such knowledge, for example, a change in risk is detected from information such as a delay in the progress of a project such as a software development project, and the risk is managed. A project risk management support technology (see Patent Document 1) for controlling the above has been proposed.

  Also, a recommendation information distribution technique (see Patent Document 2) that automatically provides desired recommendation information to the user as the mobile phone user moves has been proposed.

  In addition, based on the lifestyle and behavior patterns of users of internet sites, it is possible to guess with high accuracy what the user is really interested in, and as a result, the advertising effect is sufficiently high for the user. A technique for providing advertisement information to be performed (see Patent Document 3) has also been proposed.

JP 2005-292960 A JP 2011-1000018 A JP 2008-97545 A

  As described above, risk knowledge, which is knowledge obtained from past experience, can be useful information for taking measures against risk. On the other hand, such risk knowledge is often information obtained and accumulated for various projects in a multifaceted and different manner. On the other hand, the attributes of beneficiaries (project managers, etc.) who want to use such risk knowledge are also different.

  Therefore, no matter how useful the risk knowledge is, if it does not match the attributes of the beneficiaries who use it (project managers, etc.), it is very difficult to demonstrate its usefulness. It can not be expected to have a positive effect on the performance results. In particular, in organizations that have carried out many projects over the years, the types and number of risk knowledge are enormous, and such problems become prominent. In addition, in the conventional technology, although knowledge is selected and provided only for monocular aspects such as the beneficiary's position and location, etc., there are multifaceted considerations to provide knowledge that is truly beneficial to the beneficiary. It wasn't made.

  Therefore, an object of the present invention is to provide a technology that can provide risk knowledge excellent in usefulness for beneficiaries with high accuracy and efficiency.

  The risk knowledge presentation system of the present invention that solves the above-described problem is a risk knowledge that is already obtained for each risk evaluation item of each project, and is classified and stored in a hierarchical structure with information granularity required for each user level. 1 database, a second database that stores each user's answer history for each risk assessment item of each project, a third database that stores user attribute information of each user, and a storage device that is specified by an input device For the target user and the target project type received, based on the storage information of the second database, an answer history with a predetermined similarity is searched between the target user and another user, and based on the storage information of the third database The target user and the user attribute information are searched for other users with a predetermined similarity, and the user attribute is more than a predetermined similarity The user indicated by the user attribute information of the target user in the first process for identifying a response history by other users having a similarity equal to or higher than a predetermined level and the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified response history An information processing unit that specifies information granularity corresponding to a level is specified in the first database, and a second process for outputting the specified risk knowledge to an output device is provided.

  The risk knowledge presentation method according to the present invention includes a first database that stores risk knowledge already obtained for each risk evaluation item of each project in a hierarchical structure with information granularity required for each user level. An information processing apparatus comprising a storage device storing a second database storing response histories of each user for each risk evaluation item of each project and a third database storing user attribute information of each user is provided as an input device With respect to the target user and the target project type specified in (2), an answer history having a predetermined similarity is searched between the target user and another user based on the storage information of the second database, and the storage information of the third database The target user and the user attribute information are searched for other users having a predetermined similarity, and the user attribute is equal to or greater than a predetermined value. Among the response histories by other similar users, the first process for identifying those whose degree of similarity is equal to or higher than a predetermined level, and the risk attribute of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified response history, the user attribute information of the target user indicates An information granularity corresponding to a user level is specified in the first database, and a second process of outputting the specified risk knowledge to an output device is executed.

  ADVANTAGE OF THE INVENTION According to this invention, the risk knowledge excellent in usefulness for beneficiaries can be provided with high accuracy and efficiency.

It is a network block diagram including the risk knowledge presentation system in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the hardware structural example of the risk knowledge presentation system in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the process example 1 of the risk knowledge presentation method in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a registration screen of knowledge information in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the item definition table of knowledge information DB in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the screen for the relationship definition between knowledge information in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the hierarchy definition table of knowledge information DB in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a hierarchy of knowledge information in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the process example 2 of the risk knowledge presentation method in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of knowledge evaluation DB in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the process example 3 of the risk knowledge presentation method in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of an evaluation object project selection screen in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of risk evaluation item DB in this embodiment. It is an example of the input screen of risk evaluation in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of risk assessment result DB in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of evaluation work information DB in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of user characteristic item DB in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of an input screen of the user characteristic in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of user characteristic DB in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the process example 4 of the risk knowledge presentation method in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the process example 5 of the risk knowledge presentation method in this embodiment.

  Embodiments of the present invention will be described below in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a network configuration diagram including a risk knowledge presentation system 100 of the present embodiment. A risk knowledge presentation system 100 shown in FIG. 1 is a computer system that can provide risk knowledge that is beneficial to beneficiaries with high accuracy and efficiency.

  As illustrated in FIG. 1, a risk knowledge presentation system 100, an evaluation terminal 20, and an information definition terminal 30 are connected via a network 10 so as to communicate with each other. Of these, the evaluation terminal 20 is a terminal on which the user, that is, the project manager, performs input work regarding the results of risk evaluation performed on each evaluation item in the assigned project and the characteristics such as knowledge, experience, and personality of the project provided by the user. . Further, the information definition terminal 30 is a terminal used when the above-mentioned project manager or the like performs various definition work regarding risk knowledge.

  On the other hand, the configuration of the risk knowledge presentation system 100 is as follows. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration example of the risk knowledge presentation system 100 according to the present embodiment. In this case, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 includes a storage device 101 configured with an appropriate nonvolatile storage device such as a hard disk drive, a memory 103 configured with a volatile storage device such as a RAM, and a program 102 held in the storage device 101. An arithmetic unit 104 such as a CPU that performs various determinations, calculations, and control processes, performs an overall control of the apparatus itself by reading it into the memory 103 and executing it, an input unit 105 that accepts key input and voice input from a user, processing data An output device 106 such as a display for performing display, and a communication device 107 connected to a network and responsible for communication processing with other devices are provided. When the arithmetic device 104 executes the above-described program 102, the functional units of the knowledge information definition processing unit 110 and the knowledge information presentation processing unit 111 are mounted.

  In the case where the input from the user and the information display to the user are all made via the communication device 107 between the evaluation terminal 20 and the information definition terminal 30 described above, the input device 105 and The output device 106 may be omitted. Further, in the storage device 101 in the risk knowledge presentation system 100, in addition to the program 102 for implementing necessary functions, a knowledge information DB 125, a knowledge evaluation DB 126, a user characteristic item DB 127, a user characteristic DB 128, a risk evaluation item DB 129 The risk evaluation result DB 130 and the evaluation work information DB 131 are stored at least. A configuration example of each DB will be described later.

  Here, the risk assessment in the project considered in this embodiment will be outlined. The specified entity identifies risks that hinder the success of the project to be executed and takes measures according to those risks. Specifically, in order to identify “risk events (events and conditions that cause loss)”, “risk event drivers (those that lead to the occurrence of risk events in the project environment)” are identified and countermeasures are taken. To formulate countermeasures. Risk assessment in a project is an activity that uses information that can be a driver of a risk event as an evaluation item, and causes the project manager to evaluate this evaluation item to identify risks and take measures.

  In addition, it is possible to grasp a risk at an arbitrary time point by performing a risk evaluation, and to grasp a quantitative risk and recognize a risk transition by associating a score with the risk. Risk knowledge is information that is presented in conjunction with such risk assessment, and the risks described above, such as information on risk events caused by the driver of risk events and information on countermeasures, and information on innovations for better risk management. It is knowledge that shows know-how to control well.

  Therefore, the risk knowledge presenting system 100 according to the present embodiment, the risk knowledge useful for project execution as described above, the risk evaluation result, the work status at the time of risk evaluation, the characteristics of the project manager itself, the other person evaluation result of the knowledge, etc. To present to the user.

  Subsequently, the actual procedure of the risk knowledge presenting method in the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. Various operations corresponding to the risk knowledge presenting method described below are realized by a program 102 that the risk knowledge presenting system 100 reads into the memory 103 or the like and executes. And this program 102 is comprised from the code | cord | chord for performing the various operation | movement demonstrated below.

  FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing a processing example 1 of the risk knowledge presenting method according to the present embodiment. Here, first, generation and update processing of the knowledge information DB 125 will be described. In this case, the knowledge information definition processing unit 110 in the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires knowledge information input via the information definition terminal 30 operated by the user via the network 10 (s201).

  When the risk knowledge presentation system 100 receives information input from the information definition terminal 30, for example, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 transmits the knowledge information registration screen 300 illustrated in FIG. 4 to the information definition terminal 30, and the knowledge information is displayed via the screen 300. Accept input.

  The knowledge information registration screen 300 illustrated in FIG. 4 includes, as information items of risk knowledge, a title 301 and an outline 302 for explaining relevant information, a risk factor 303, a risk event 304, a loss 305, a direct cause 306, and a motivational cause. Each input field 307 is provided. In addition, the knowledge information registration screen 300 includes a knowledge classification 308 and a knowledge level 309 regarding the corresponding risk knowledge, a material name 310 and a country / region 311 as exhibit information, and a creation date 312 and an inquiry destination as creation information of the relevant risk knowledge. 313 input fields are provided.

  Of these, the information input in the title 301 is a simple indication of the relevant risk knowledge, such as “If you use a package, make sure that the customer accepts the restrictions on non-functional requirements!” It is a string. The information input in the summary 302 is a character string indicating the actual experience that has become the information source of the relevant risk knowledge. The information input to the risk factor 303 is a character string indicating the driver of the risk event. Further, the information input to the risk event 304 is a character string that indicates what actually occurred in the event or state that causes the loss. The information input to the loss 305 is a character string indicating the impact on the project accompanying the occurrence of the corresponding risk event. Further, the information input to the direct cause 306 is information related to a management error from the viewpoint that the occurrence of the corresponding risk event cannot be prevented. The information input to the motivational cause 307 is a character string indicating the background cause that caused the direct cause.

  Information input to the knowledge classification 308 is information such as the knowledge area and development phase of the PMBOK. The information input to the knowledge level 309 is information that defines which hierarchy the risk knowledge belongs to when the risk knowledge is hierarchized. The information of the risk knowledge level 309 corresponds to a level for classifying risk knowledge targets to be referred to according to project experience and knowledge of the user.

  The information input to the material name 310 is a character string indicating the material name referred to by the user when creating the relevant risk knowledge. The information input to the country / region 311 is a character string indicating the country / region where the actual experience that has become the information source of the relevant risk knowledge has occurred. The information input as the creation date 312 is a character string indicating the date when the corresponding risk knowledge is created or registered. The information input to the inquiry destination 313 is a character string indicating the inquiry destination when the details of the relevant risk knowledge are known.

  The knowledge information definition processing unit 110 of the risk knowledge presentation system 100 writes each piece of information related to the risk knowledge input on the above-described knowledge information registration screen 300 into the knowledge information item table 400 of the knowledge information DB 125 (s202). A specific example of the knowledge information item table 400 is shown in FIG. Knowledge information item table 400 includes knowledge ID 415, title 402, summary 403, risk factor 404, risk event 405, loss 406, direct cause 407, motivational cause 408, knowledge classification 409, knowledge level 410, document name 411, country / Region 412, creation date 413, inquiry destination 414, and related risk item 416. Each information 402 to 414 is information registered by the user on the above-described knowledge information registration screen 300. In addition, the knowledge information definition processing unit 110 uniquely identifies a corresponding risk knowledge information group every time information related to risk knowledge is received in the above-described step s201, that is, every time the knowledge information item table 400 is written. The knowledge ID 415 to be identified is set to “A001” or the like. In the knowledge information item table 400, each information of one risk knowledge is stored in one column 401.

  The user who operates the information definition terminal 30 defines various information related to risk knowledge (hereinafter referred to as knowledge information), and then defines the relationship between the corresponding information. Therefore, the information definition processing unit 110 of the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires definition information on the relationship between knowledge information from the information definition terminal 30 operated by the user (s203).

  The definition information regarding the relationship between the knowledge information is information that defines the relationship between the knowledge information defined in step s202 described above and other knowledge information registered in the knowledge information DB 125 so far. Specifically, it is information that defines a link between certain knowledge information and knowledge information with more detailed contents.

  In this case, the information definition processing unit 110 transmits the related knowledge information definition screen 500 (FIG. 6) to the information definition terminal 30 via the network 10 and receives input from the above-described user. The related knowledge information definition screen 500 illustrated in FIG. 6 includes upper information 501, lower information candidates 502, and display items of information granularity 515.

  Of these, the upper information 501 includes knowledge information 503 including the ID 510 of the item to be defined in the risk knowledge defined in step s202 and the title 511 of the knowledge information corresponding thereto.

  Further, the lower information candidate 502 includes an item ID 512 indicating knowledge information already registered in the knowledge information DB 125 and a list 504 of titles 513 thereof. Further, the knowledge information 503 of the higher-level information 501 is included in the other knowledge information that is included in the concept of the knowledge information 503 indicated by the higher-level information 501 and is further refined, that is, the information granularity is reduced to a lower-level concept. The relationship 505 is included in the lower information candidate 502 as an interface for association with.

  Further, the information granularity 515 includes the value of each item ID 516 of the knowledge information 503 indicated by the above-described upper information 501 and other knowledge information in the lower information candidate 502 checked by the relevance 505 as a lower concept thereof. And the value of the information granularity 517 are included. The value of the item ID 516 is the same value as the item ID 510 in the upper information 501 and the item ID 512 in the lower information candidate 502 described above. The value of the information granularity 517 is a value selected and instructed by the user via the interface 518 such as a pull-down menu.

  The user who browses the related knowledge information definition screen 500 with the information definition terminal 30 thinks that the contents of the knowledge information 503 indicated by the higher-level information 501 are further detailed, and other related knowledge information is related. Check the property 505 and specify the hierarchical relationship according to the information granularity between knowledge information. For example, with respect to the knowledge information 503 having the item ID “A001” and “XX in the case of △△!”, The knowledge information 506 of the item ID “B003” of the lower information candidates 502 is the lower information. If it is determined, the user checks the relevance 505 given to the corresponding item ID. In addition, the interface 518 in the information granularity 515 is operated to specify the information granularity of the upper and lower knowledge information. Information input on the related knowledge information definition screen 500 in this way is sent from the information definition terminal 30 to the risk knowledge presentation system 100 via the network 10.

  The knowledge information definition processing unit 110 of the risk knowledge presentation system 100 receives the input information on the related knowledge information definition screen 500 from the information definition terminal 30 described above, and writes this into the hierarchy definition table 600 of the knowledge information DB 125 ( s204). A specific example of the hierarchy definition table 600 of the knowledge information DB 125 is shown in FIG. The hierarchy definition table 600 illustrated in FIG. 7 includes an upper information ID 601, a lower information ID 602, and an information granularity level 605.

  Among these, the upper information ID 601 stores the same value as the ID 510 of the item indicated by the upper information 501 on the relational knowledge information definition screen 500 described above. This ID 510 has the same value as the knowledge ID 401 of the knowledge information defined in step s202 described above. The lower information ID 602 stores the same value as the item ID 512 in which the relationship 505 of the relationship knowledge information definition screen 500 is checked in step s203 described above. The level 605 stores a value indicating the information granularity level of the knowledge information corresponding to the value of the lower information ID 602. The value of the information granularity level 605 is designated by the user in the interface 518 in the relation knowledge information definition screen 500 described above.

  When the information stored in the hierarchy definition table 600 of the knowledge information DB 125 is visualized in this way, a hierarchical structure as shown in FIG. 8 is shown. In the example shown here, the knowledge ID “C008” of the node 702 and the knowledge ID “C009” of the node 703 are associated with the knowledge ID “B003” of the node 701. That is, when the granularity of the knowledge information of the knowledge ID “B003” is made fine, it can be divided into the knowledge information of the knowledge ID “C008” and the knowledge ID “C009”. Further, if the way of viewing the hierarchy is changed, the knowledge information obtained by abstractly capturing each knowledge information of the knowledge ID “C008” and the knowledge ID “C009” can be regarded as the knowledge ID “B003”.

  More specifically, regarding the granularity of such knowledge information, for example, knowledge information “A001” having an information granularity of “Level 1” exists as knowledge information for a project manager with a high skill level. As knowledge information for a project manager whose skill level is one step lower, there are knowledge information “B001” and “B003” having an information granularity of “Level 2”. The information granularity image of the knowledge information “A001” of “Level 1” has a coarse granularity such as “XX in case of ΔΔ!”, And knowledge information “B001” and “B003” of “Level 2”. As an image of the information granularity, the granularity is as fine as “It is necessary to pay attention to XX in the case of △△ and need to determine ◯ △”. Furthermore, as an image of the information granularity of “Level 3” knowledge information “C008” and “C009”, which is the lower hierarchy of “B003”, “Because it is necessary to pay attention to XX, Please make a preliminary interview to confirm it. "

  By defining a hierarchical relationship for each granularity of knowledge information, it is possible to provide knowledge information with an appropriate granularity according to the skill level (experience or knowledge) of the user, that is, the project manager. The risk knowledge presentation system 100 determines the skill level by applying the information of the user characteristic DB 128 described later to a predetermined algorithm for the target user who presents the risk knowledge, and the knowledge information of the information granularity corresponding to the determined value is described above. The hierarchy definition table 600 can be specified.

  The knowledge information definition processing unit 110 described above repeats steps s201 to s204 until processing is completed for all knowledge information desired by the user, that is, until an instruction from the user is received from the information definition terminal 30 (s205: N-s201). Note that the execution order of steps s201 and s202 and steps s203 and s204 in the flow example of FIG. 3 may be switched.

  Next, a process of acquiring an evaluation from the project manager for the knowledge information provided from the risk knowledge presentation system 100 and storing the evaluation in the knowledge evaluation DB 126 will be described. FIG. 9 is a flowchart showing a processing example 2 of the risk knowledge presenting method in the present embodiment, and FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a configuration example of the knowledge evaluation DB 126 in the present embodiment.

  In this case, among knowledge item IDs stored in the knowledge information DB 125, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 for knowledge information corresponding to the corresponding item ID designated by the corresponding project manager via the evaluation terminal 20 among the item IDs of each knowledge information. Returns an appropriate interface for accepting evaluation to the evaluation terminal 20, and obtains an evaluation value from the interface (s300, s301). Further, the risk knowledge presenting system 100 writes the evaluation value obtained here in the knowledge evaluation DB 126 in association with the corresponding knowledge information (s302). The risk knowledge presentation system 100 repeats steps s300 to s302 until an instruction from the project manager is received from the evaluation terminal 20 (s303: N to s300).

  The knowledge evaluation DB 126 illustrated in FIG. 10 is generated in this way. The knowledge evaluation DB 126 is a collection of records in which evaluation values 802 for each item 806 of each knowledge information to be evaluated are associated with the project ID of the evaluated project manager, that is, the user ID 801 of the user as a key. Among them, for example, records “804” and “805” indicate that the users with user IDs “10004” and “10241” have the same evaluation regarding each piece of knowledge information.

  Next, risk knowledge presentation processing in the present embodiment will be described. FIG. 11 is a flowchart showing a processing example 3 of the risk knowledge presenting method in the present embodiment. In this case, the knowledge information presentation processing unit 111 in the risk knowledge presentation system 100 accepts designation of a project to be evaluated (s1601). The designation of the project is accepted via the evaluation target project selection screen 1700 (see FIG. 12) transmitted from the risk knowledge presentation system 100 to the evaluation terminal 20.

  The evaluation target project selection screen 1700 includes, in the display contents, a project list 1701 to be evaluated and an item 1702 for selecting the development process of the target project. Among them, in the project list 1701, information on the project name 1703, the previous evaluation time 1704, the previous evaluation time step 1705, and a selection 1706 that is a radio button are displayed. The project manager confirms the project to be evaluated in the project list 1701 and designates the target project this time with the radio button of the selection 1706. Further, the project manager selects information on the development process of the current target project in the development process selection item 1702. When an evaluation execution button 1707 is pressed on the evaluation target project selection screen 1700 in which such selection has been made, selection information on the screen 1700 is returned from the evaluation terminal 20 to the risk knowledge presentation system 100. .

  In response to a reply from the evaluation terminal 20 to the risk knowledge presenting system 100, the risk knowledge presenting system 100 starts the process of step s1602. In step s1602, the knowledge information presentation processing unit 111 reads an evaluation item in the target project from the risk evaluation item DB 129.

  A specific example of the risk evaluation item DB 129 is shown in FIG. The risk evaluation item DB 129 is a collection of records in which the values of the item ID 1801, the question content 1802, and the answer selection 1803 are associated with each other. Among these, in the answer selection 1803, a score 1805 is linked to the selection content 1804, and the score is “0” when there is no risk factor regarding the status of the question content of the corresponding item.

  In addition, the judgment of the risk assessment itself is performed by the project manager viewing the risk assessment input screen 1200 via the assessment terminal 20 and using this to perform the risk assessment work for the project. An example of the risk evaluation input screen 1200 displayed on the evaluation terminal 20 is shown in FIG. The risk evaluation input screen 1200 is a collection of records in which the question contents 1201 and the values in the answer column 1202 are associated with each other. Among them, the answer column 1202 displays options defined in the answer selection 1803 of the risk evaluation item DB 129 as options 1203 as an appropriate interface such as a pull-down menu. The evaluation result by the project manager, that is, the evaluator is returned from the evaluation terminal 20 to the risk knowledge presentation system 100.

  Therefore, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 receives the above-described evaluation result from the evaluation terminal 20 and stores it in the risk evaluation result DB 130 (s1603). In addition to receiving input from the project manager from the evaluation terminal 20, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires information on evaluation results regarding other users from the risk evaluation result DB 130. Also, information on the time required for the evaluator to answer each question item on the above-described screen 1200 is also returned from the evaluation terminal 20 to the risk knowledge presentation system 100.

  Here, an example of the risk evaluation result DB 130 is shown in FIG. The risk evaluation result DB 130 is a set of records in which the values of the project ID 1301, the user ID 1302, the evaluation date 1306, and the answer result 1303 are associated with each other. Among them, the project ID 1301 stores a unique ID assigned to each project. The user ID stores a unique ID assigned to each project manager or person in charge. The evaluation date 1306 stores the date on which the evaluation was made. The answer result 1303 stores the answer contents that are the evaluation results for each item 1310 of the knowledge information. For example, records 1304, 1307, 1308, and 1309 store evaluation result data for each month in the same project “PJ001”.

  By using such a risk evaluation result DB 130, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 relates to the project “PJ0001” for the project manager with the user ID “10001” as in the reply column 1305 whose evaluation item 1310 is “R004”, for example. As an evaluation result in the evaluation item “R004”, the response results are “(1)” and “(2)” in the four evaluations from the evaluation date “2011/3/6” to “2011/6/28”. , “(1)” and “(2)” can be obtained. Similarly, in the column 1305, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 relates to the evaluation item “R004” in the project ID “PJ001” for the other user with the user ID “10002”, from the evaluation date “2011/3/6” to “2011 /”. In each of the four evaluations of 6/28 ", it is possible to obtain information whose response results have changed to" (3) "," (3) "," (1) ", and" (2) ". Information is acquired in the same manner for other users.

  An example of the evaluation work information DB 131 is shown in FIG. The evaluation work information DB 131 is a set of records in which the values of the user ID 1402, the evaluation date 1404, and the response time 1403 for each evaluation item 1410 are associated with each other using the project ID 1401 as a key. If this evaluation work information DB 131 is used, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 can also obtain a response time transition in an arbitrary item, such as a response time column 1405 of the evaluation item “R004”.

  There is a risk factor in the evaluation result information received from the evaluation terminal 20 in step s1603 described above. In other words, the option specified by the user in the answer column 1202 of the screen 1200 corresponds to the score “0”. If not (s1604: Y), the risk knowledge presentation system 100 advances the processing to step s1605 to present the risk knowledge useful to the user. On the other hand, there is no risk factor in the evaluation result information received in step s1603. In other words, the option specified by the user in the answer column 1202 of the screen 1200 corresponds to the score “0” (s1604). : N), the risk knowledge presentation system 100 returns the process to step s1602.

  In step s1605, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires both the response time 1403 associated with the user ID 1402 corresponding to the project manager and the response time 1403 of other users from the evaluation work information DB 131. As described above, the evaluation work information DB 131 stores information on the temporal transition of the time required for the reply made for each item for each project. For example, in the column 1405, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 relates to the evaluation item “R004” in the project ID “PJ001” with respect to the project manager with the user ID “10001”, and from the evaluation date “2011/3/15” to “2011/6”. In each of the four evaluations of / 20, information is acquired for which the response time has changed as “41”, “67”, “21”, and “16”. Similarly, regarding the other user with the user ID “10002”, the evaluation item “R004” in the project ID “PJ002” (same as the item related to “PJ0001” described above) from the evaluation date “2011/3/6”. In the four evaluations of “2011/6/28”, information whose response times have changed as “32”, “27”, “33”, and “27” is acquired. Information is acquired in the same manner for other users. Here, when the risk knowledge presentation system 100 obtains information on the response time, the same or similar evaluation items are selected for the same or similar project as the project specified by the corresponding project manager, and the response time of the response time is selected. Get information. Therefore, as a matter of course, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 holds the project type information associated with the project ID in the storage device 101 and can use it at any time.

  Subsequently, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires information on user characteristics related to the project manager and other users from the user characteristics DB 128 (s1606). The user characteristic information acquired here is information input from the project manager via the evaluation terminal 20 in the characteristic evaluation input screen 900 generated based on the contents of the user characteristic item DB 127.

  A specific example of the above-described user characteristic item DB 127 is shown in FIG. The user characteristic item DB 127 is a set of records in which the values of the item ID 1001, the question content 1002, and the answer selection 1003 are associated with each other. The characteristic evaluation input screen 900 in which these pieces of information are reflected is composed of a question content 901 and an answer column 902 as shown in FIG. Among these, in the answer column 902, the answer selection 1003 of the user characteristic item DB 127 is displayed as an option. Each question content 901 and answer column 902 are provided for each of knowledge relating to project management, questions relating to practical ability, and questions relating to personality. In other words, what kind of knowledge and experience the project managers and other users have based on the project, and what kind of human relations are built during project execution Regarding the personality, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires the characteristics.

  As shown in FIG. 18, the user characteristic DB 128 in which the input values on the characteristic evaluation input screen 900 are stored is a collection of records in which the values of the user ID 1101, the evaluation date 1102, and the answer result 1103 are associated with each other. ing. Among them, for example, regarding the column 1107, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 can recognize each user's answer to the question item "Pr0003" and its temporal transition (every month). Further, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 compares the response results of the records 1104, 1105, and 1106, for example, and the response tendencies of the users with the user IDs “10001”, “10004”, and “102421” are close (similar). Can be recognized.

  Subsequently, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 acquires the evaluation result of each user for each piece of knowledge information that has been read in the above steps from the knowledge evaluation DB 126 (s1607). A specific example of the knowledge evaluation DB 126 is as already shown in FIG. Since steps s1605 to s1607 are independent from each other, the order may be different.

  Next, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 selects useful knowledge information to be presented to the above-mentioned project manager based on each information acquired in the above steps s1605 to s1607 and the information in the knowledge information DB 125, and this is selected. It is transmitted to the evaluation terminal 20 and displayed (s1608).

  The risk knowledge presenting system 100 in step s1608, for example, as shown in the flow of FIG. 20, evaluates the same or the same kind of evaluation regarding the same or the same kind of project obtained for the corresponding project manager and other users in the above step s1603. Search for information on the temporal transition of the answer result 1303 regarding the item, that is, the answer history, that has a predetermined similarity between the corresponding project manager and another user (eg, the answer results for a predetermined period match 80% or more). (S2001).

  Further, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 searches for other users with a predetermined similarity (for example, each item matches 80% or more) with respect to the user characteristics obtained in step s1606, and the user characteristics are predetermined. Of the answer histories by other users similar to the above, those having a predetermined similarity or higher are specified (s2002).

  In this case, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 searches the knowledge information item table 400 of the knowledge information DB 125 for the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item (eg, “R003”) corresponding to the answer history specified above (s2003), where Among the retrieved items, the information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user characteristic of the corresponding project manager (for example, “information granularity level 2”) is specified in the hierarchy definition table 600 of the knowledge information DB 125 (s2004). Also, among the risk knowledge specified here, the evaluation result (obtained in step s1607) from other users or all other users whose user characteristics are similar to the project manager to a certain degree or more is a predetermined value or more. Is further specified (s2005), and the specified risk knowledge is output to the evaluation terminal 20 or the output device 106 (s2006).

  Alternatively, the risk knowledge presenting system 100 in step s1608, for example, as shown in the flow of FIG. 21, is the same or similar for the same or similar project obtained in step s1603 for the corresponding project manager and other users. Information on the temporal transition of the answer result 1303 regarding the evaluation item, that is, the answer history, which has a predetermined similarity between the corresponding project manager and other users (eg, the answer results for a predetermined period match 80% or more) Search is performed (s2101).

  In addition, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 searches for other users with a predetermined similarity (for example, each item matches 80% or more) with the corresponding project manager with respect to the user characteristics obtained in step s1606 (s2102), and the user Among the response histories by other users whose characteristics are similar to each other by a predetermined value, those having a similarity of a predetermined value or more are specified (s2103).

  In addition, the risk knowledge presentation system 100 matches the project manager with a predetermined similarity (for example, the trend of the response time is more than 70% of the predetermined period) with respect to the response time information obtained in step s1605 described above. ) Other users are searched (s2104). Here, the risk knowledge presenting system 100 has a similarity that is higher than a predetermined value among response histories by other users whose user characteristics are similar to each other by a predetermined level, and the similarity of the response work attribute, that is, the temporal transition of the response time. Is specified more than a predetermined value (s2105).

  The risk knowledge presenting system 100 searches the knowledge information item table 400 of the knowledge information DB 125 for the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item (for example, “R003”) corresponding to the answer history identified in step s2105, and among those searched here The information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user characteristic of the project manager (for example, “information granularity level 2”) is specified in the hierarchy definition table 600 of the knowledge information DB 125 (s2106).

  In addition, the risk knowledge presentation system 100, among the risk knowledge identified in step s2106 described above, evaluates from other users or all other users whose user characteristics are more than a certain level similar to the project manager (obtained in step s1607). Is further specified (s2107), and this is output (s2108).

  Note that the display format of the risk knowledge on the evaluation terminal 20 or the output device 106 includes the display form by transmitting the screen data, the mail address of the corresponding project manager is received by the evaluation terminal 20 or the input device 105, and It is also possible to adopt a form in which an e-mail containing the relevant risk knowledge is delivered to an e-mail address.

  Although the best mode for carrying out the present invention has been specifically described above, the present invention is not limited to this, and various modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention. For example, it may be applied not only to risk knowledge presentation processing related to projects as described above, but also to situations such as knowledge presentation for evaluation systems in questionnaires and audits, and recommendation information such as products and services when using mobile phones, etc. Good.

  According to this embodiment, it is possible to provide risk knowledge that is highly beneficial to beneficiaries with high accuracy and efficiency.

  At least the following will be clarified by the description of the present specification. That is, in the risk knowledge presentation system of the present embodiment, the storage device further includes a fourth database that stores attribute information of each user's answer work for each risk evaluation item of each project, and the arithmetic device includes: In the first process, for the target user and target project type specified by the input device, a response history of a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched based on the information stored in the second database. Based on the storage information of the third database, the target user and the user attribute information are searched for other users having a predetermined similarity, and based on the storage information of the fourth database, between the target user and the other users Search for attribute information of answer work with a predetermined similarity, and use the response history of other users whose user attributes are more than a predetermined similarity Similarity be of more than a predetermined similarity of attributes from the answer tasks is to identify more than a predetermined, may be.

  According to this, among the similar response histories for similar evaluation items in the same type of project by other users that are similar in terms of the knowledge and experience that the user holds about the project, the personality orientation when managing the staff, etc. It is possible to identify a similar situation (answer time, etc.) at the time of answering work and present relevant risk knowledge. For example, the time required for the answer is “It seems that you are patrolling for item A, so you may not be confident in the answer contents and project progress of the relevant item”, “both time a and time b are for item A The answer was “Yes”, but it may reflect the situation that, based on the fact that the time at time b has been significantly slowed, something may have started to happen to the project progress. By presenting risk knowledge based on similar response histories of similar users who are in similar situations, the beneficiaries can consider the true progress of the project and the success or failure of the project. It is possible to provide risk knowledge with excellent profitability with high accuracy and efficiency.

  Further, in the risk knowledge presentation system of the present embodiment, the storage device further stores the evaluation results of each user for the knowledge of each risk evaluation item of each project in the first database, In the second process, out of the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified response history, the user attribute information has a predetermined similarity or an evaluation result from other users or all other users becomes a predetermined value or more. The information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user attribute information of the target user is identified in the first database, and the identified risk knowledge is output to the output device. Good.

  According to this, based on the assessment of risk knowledge, that is, the usefulness when referring to the project work corresponding to the relevant evaluation item of the relevant project, the risk knowledge that is highly beneficial to the user is highly accurate and efficient. Can be provided.

  Further, in the risk knowledge presentation system of the present embodiment, the storage device stores information indicating personality characteristics and information on knowledge about each project type as user attribute information of each user in the third database. In the first process, the arithmetic device is configured to determine whether the target user and other users are related to the target user and target project type specified by the input device based on the storage information of the second database. Search for an answer history with a predetermined similarity between them, and based on the information stored in the third database, the personality characteristics and knowledge information among the target user and user attribute information are searched for other users with a predetermined similarity, Among the response histories by other users whose attributes are similar to a predetermined value, those whose similarity is a predetermined value or more are specified. It may be.

  According to this, similar response histories for similar evaluation items in the same type of project by other users that are similar in terms of knowledge and experience that the user has about the project, personality orientation when managing staff, etc. are identified. It is possible to present relevant risk knowledge. Providing risk knowledge based on similar response histories of similar users who are similar in these respects is also extremely beneficial for beneficiaries, taking into account even the project management trends and relationships with staff. Risk knowledge can be provided with high accuracy and efficiency.

  Further, in the risk knowledge presentation system of the present embodiment, the calculation device, regarding the risk knowledge output to the output device for the user, the evaluation result for the corresponding knowledge when the corresponding user used the corresponding risk knowledge for the corresponding project Is input by the input device, and the input of the evaluation result from each user is input in the third process of storing the received evaluation result in association with the corresponding user for the corresponding evaluation item of the corresponding project in the first database. It is further executed each time it occurs in the device, and in the second process, among the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified response history, the user attribute information is from other users or all other users with a predetermined similarity. The evaluation result is a predetermined value or more, and the user attribute information of the target user The information granularity corresponding to the indicated user level may be specified in the first database that is continuously updated by the third process, and the specified risk knowledge may be output to the output device. .

  According to this, it is possible to provide highly accurate and efficient risk knowledge that is continuously evaluated by each user and based on the evaluation result of the risk knowledge with good latestness.

  Further, in the risk knowledge presentation system according to the present embodiment, the storage device stores, for each of a plurality of answer opportunities for the corresponding risk evaluation item, as attribute information of each user's answer work for each risk evaluation item of each project in the fourth database. In the first process, the arithmetic device is configured to determine the target user and target project type specified by the input device based on the storage information in the second database. An answer history having a predetermined similarity is searched between the user and another user, and the target user and the user attribute information are searched for another user having a predetermined similarity based on information stored in the third database, and the fourth database Based on the response time information for each of the plurality of response opportunities, which is stored information of the target user and other users. Search for attribute information of answer work whose answer time in a predetermined period is a predetermined similarity, and the degree of similarity is a predetermined value or more among answer histories by other users whose user attributes are more than a predetermined similarity It is also possible to identify those whose degree of similarity with respect to the transition of the answer time is a predetermined value or more.

  According to this, among similar response histories for similar types of evaluation items in the same type of project by similar other users, the response status (response time, etc.) is identified and the corresponding risk is identified. Knowledge can be presented. For example, the time required for the answer is “It seems that you are patrolling for item A, so you may not be confident in the answer contents and project progress of the relevant item”, “both time a and time b are for item A The answer was “Yes”, but it may reflect the situation that, based on the fact that the time at time b has been significantly slowed, something may have started to happen to the project progress. By presenting risk knowledge based on similar response histories of similar users who are in similar situations, the beneficiaries can consider the true progress of the project and the success or failure of the project. It is possible to provide risk knowledge with excellent profitability with high accuracy and efficiency.

10 Network 20 Evaluation Terminal 30 Information Definition Terminal 100 Risk Knowledge Presentation System 101 Storage Device 102 Program 103 Memory 104 Computing Device 105 Input Device 106 Output Device 107 Communication Device 110 Knowledge Information Definition Processing Unit 111 Knowledge Information Presentation Processing Unit 125 Knowledge Information DB (first database)
126 Knowledge Evaluation DB (first database)
127 User characteristic item DB
128 User characteristic DB (third database)
129 Risk assessment item DB
130 Risk assessment result DB (second database)
131 Evaluation work information DB (fourth database)

Claims (7)

A first database in which risk knowledge already obtained for each risk assessment item of each project is classified and stored in a hierarchical structure at the information granularity required for each user level, and each user for each risk assessment item of each project A storage device that stores a second database that stores the answer history and a third database that stores user attribute information of each user;
With respect to the target user and target project type specified by the input device, an answer history having a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched based on the storage information of the second database, and the third database A first process for searching for another user whose target attribute and user attribute information have a predetermined similarity based on stored information, and for identifying an answer history by another user whose user attribute is similar to a predetermined value and having a similarity equal to or higher than a predetermined value When,
Among the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified answer history, the information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user attribute information of the target user is identified in the first database, and the identified risk knowledge is A second process for outputting to the output device;
An arithmetic unit for executing
A risk knowledge presentation system characterized by comprising: The storage device further includes a fourth database storing attribute information of each user's answer work for each risk assessment item of each project,
The arithmetic unit is:
In the first process, with respect to the target user and target project type specified by the input device, an answer history having a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched based on the stored information in the second database. Based on the storage information of the third database, the target user and the user attribute information are searched for other users having a predetermined similarity, and based on the storage information of the fourth database, the target user and other users are predetermined. Search for attribute information of answer work of similarity, and the similarity of the answer work by other users whose user attributes are similar to a predetermined value is higher than a predetermined value, and the similarity of the answer work attribute is higher than a predetermined value Which identifies
The risk knowledge presentation system according to claim 1. The storage device
In the first database, the evaluation result of each user for knowledge of each risk evaluation item of each project is further stored.
The arithmetic unit is:
In the second process, out of the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified answer history, the user attribute information has a predetermined similarity or an evaluation result from another user or all other users being a predetermined value or more. The information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user attribute information of the target user is identified in the first database, and the identified risk knowledge is output to an output device.
The risk knowledge presentation system according to claim 2. The arithmetic unit is:
Regarding the risk knowledge output to the output device for the user, when the corresponding user uses the corresponding risk knowledge for the corresponding project, the evaluation result for the corresponding knowledge is received by the input device, and the received evaluation result is the first database. The third process of storing the corresponding evaluation item of the corresponding project in the above in association with the corresponding user is further executed every time the input of the evaluation result from each user occurs in the input device,
In the second process, out of the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified answer history, the user attribute information has a predetermined similarity or an evaluation result from another user or all other users being a predetermined value or more. The information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user attribute information of the target user is identified in the first database continuously updated by the third process, and the identified risk knowledge Is output to the output device,
The risk knowledge presentation system according to claim 3. The storage device
In the third database, as user attribute information of each user, information indicating personality characteristics in the corresponding user and knowledge information about each project type are stored.
The arithmetic unit is:
In the first process,
With respect to the target user and target project type specified by the input device, an answer history having a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched based on the storage information of the second database, and the third database Based on the stored information, the personality characteristics and knowledge information among the target user and user attribute information are searched for other users with a predetermined similarity, and the similarity is predetermined among the response histories of other users whose user attributes are more than a predetermined similarity. Is what identifies the above,
The risk knowledge presentation system according to claim 1. The storage device
In the fourth database, as attribute information of each user's answer work for each risk assessment item of each project, information on answer times for a plurality of answer opportunities for the corresponding risk assessment item is stored.
The arithmetic unit is:
In the first process, with respect to the target user and target project type specified by the input device, an answer history having a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched based on the stored information in the second database. Based on the storage information of the third database, the target user and the user attribute information are searched for other users having a predetermined similarity, and based on the information on the response time for each of the plurality of response opportunities, which is the storage information of the fourth database. The attribute information of the answering work whose answer time transition in a predetermined period is a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched, and the similarity is included in the answer history by other users whose user attributes are more than predetermined. It is more than a predetermined value, and the similarity with respect to the transition of the response time is specified more than a predetermined value.
The risk knowledge presentation system according to claim 2. A first database in which risk knowledge already obtained for each risk assessment item of each project is classified and stored in a hierarchical structure at the information granularity required for each user level, and each user for each risk assessment item of each project An information processing apparatus comprising a storage device storing a second database storing the answer history and a third database storing user attribute information of each user,
With respect to the target user and target project type specified by the input device, an answer history having a predetermined similarity between the target user and another user is searched based on the storage information of the second database, and the third database A first process for searching for another user whose target attribute and user attribute information have a predetermined similarity based on stored information, and for identifying an answer history by another user whose user attribute is similar to a predetermined value and having a similarity equal to or higher than a predetermined value When,
Among the risk knowledge of the risk evaluation item corresponding to the identified answer history, the information granularity corresponding to the user level indicated by the user attribute information of the target user is identified in the first database, and the identified risk knowledge is A second process for outputting to the output device;
Risk knowledge presenting method characterized by executing

Images