JP2006023879A - Apparatus and method of evaluating organization analysis and computer program - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide an apparatus and a method of performing an organization evaluation by a log analysis as a transmission message analysis inside the organization and questionnaire analysis. <P>SOLUTION: A research result, such as the questionnaire, etc. to the organization and a log, such as a message, a mail, etc., transmitted in the organization and between the organizations are analyzed, and the value of the organization is evaluated objectively. Particularly, a process obtained by integrating the two evaluation methods of an influence evaluation between the organizations as a fact by a log of a dialog in the organization and an influence evaluation between the organizations based on a subjective judgment by the questionnaire method to the member of the organization is performed to the influence evaluation between the organizations. The integrated data are selected based on the time course of the influence evaluation result of the log analysis for the object to be integrated and the questionnaire analysis. Moreover, in an advice process, the advice process of the evaluation result according to the predetermined advice conditions defined beforehand is performed. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2006,JPO&NCIPI

Description

  The present invention analyzes the influence of a certain organization on other organizations based on survey results such as questionnaires for each organization and log information based on mail transmitted between a plurality of organizations, etc. The present invention relates to an organization analysis evaluation apparatus, an organization analysis evaluation method, and a computer program that perform organization evaluation such as the value of a person.

  Currently, as systematic communication (organizational communication) means using information technology (IT), e-mail, mailing list using e-mail system, and electronic bulletin board using WWW (World, Wide, Web), etc. Generally used. Since the messages transmitted by these organization communication means are stored as message logs, the stored messages can be analyzed and the analysis results can be used as necessary.

  An e-mail transmitted as a message in organizational communication includes information such as a title, a speaker, and a date in the body and the e-mail header. For example, Patent Document 1 is stored in a message log. Also disclosed is a system for performing a natural language search for such information. For example, Patent Document 2 discloses a method of applying information included in a header to network management (path delay analysis / log accumulation). Further, for example, Patent Documents 3 to 5 disclose methods of applying information included in the header to agent processing (e-mail classification or the like) on the receiving side.

  However, none of the systems and methods disclosed in these documents is intended to evaluate the value of the impact caused by an organization using the accumulated message log. Therefore, by any of these systems / methods, what effect an organization has on other organizations, what information it provides, and what value it has Such evaluation (value evaluation) cannot be performed objectively.

  On the other hand, for example, Non-Patent Documents 1 and 2 propose a method of analyzing a message log from the viewpoint of organizational communication, and discuss its usefulness scientifically. However, these Non-Patent Documents 1 and 2 are not methods for analyzing a message log and evaluating the result as a value of a certain organization, for example, a group of a certain organization, for example, a company.

  In addition, these Non-Patent Documents 1 and 2 do not disclose a method for automatically performing the organizational communication from acquisition to analysis as to analysis. Non-Patent Document 3 discloses a method of visualizing relationship information between speakers by analyzing a message log obtained as a result of organizational communication.

  Patent Document 6 discloses a method of analyzing message logs and sharing related information. Non-Patent Document 4 discloses a method of calculating various indexes, starting with visualization using related information. However, the methods disclosed in these documents only visualize the organization communication and do not evaluate the value of the organization. Therefore, the value evaluation of the organization described above cannot be objectively performed by any of the methods disclosed in these documents.

JP 11-242545 A Japanese Unexamined Patent Publication No. 6-59993 JP-A-6-259345 Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 11-15757 JP-A-6-62046 JP-A-10-301905 Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences, pp. 167-203, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1996 ACM0-89791-782-0 / 96/04, JCMC3 (4) June 1998 Work group structures and computer support: a field experience, pp. 324-343, Portland, Oregon, United States, 1988 Takahashi, Kitayama, Kaneko: Measurement and visualization of organizational awareness in network communities, IPSJ Transactions, Vol. 40, no. 11, pp 3988-3999, Nov 1999. Pajek: http: // vlado. fmf. uni-lj. si / pub / networks / pagek / default. htm

  The present invention has been made in view of the above-mentioned problems, and analyzes the results of surveys such as questionnaires for each organization and the logs of messages, emails, etc. transmitted within and between the organizations, to determine the value of the organization. An object of the present invention is to provide a tissue analysis / evaluation apparatus, a tissue analysis / evaluation method, and a computer program that can objectively evaluate a computer program.

  In particular, for the impact assessment between organizations, there are two impact assessments: the impact assessment between organizations as a fact by the log of dialogue within the organization, and the impact assessment between organizations based on subjective judgments by questionnaire methods to members of the organization. An object of the present invention is to provide a tissue analysis evaluation apparatus, a tissue analysis evaluation method, and a computer program that enable more accurate organization evaluation by executing processing that integrates evaluation methods.

  A first aspect of the present invention is a log storage unit that stores a log based on transmission information within or between units to be evaluated, and the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units by analyzing the log A log analysis / evaluation unit that evaluates, a questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit that analyzes a response result of a questionnaire process with respect to the unit or the unit member, and evaluates an influence of the evaluation target unit on other units, and the log analysis / evaluation unit The influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units based on the log based on the transmitted information data and the questionnaire result by the integration process based on the comparison between the generated log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result generated by the questionnaire analysis evaluation unit And an integrated processing unit that executes an integrated evaluation of the tissue analysis evaluation apparatus.

  According to this configuration, in the impact assessment between organizations, the impact assessment between organizations as a fact by the dialogue log in the organization and the impact assessment between organizations based on the subjective judgment by the questionnaire method to the members of the organization. Processing that integrates the two evaluation methods is realized, and more accurate organization evaluation is possible.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the integration processing unit integrates the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result in a complementary manner, and the evaluation is included in only one of the evaluation results. It is the structure which performs the process which produces | generates integrated evaluation data containing result data, It is characterized by the above-mentioned.

  According to this configuration, in the impact evaluation between organizations, it is possible to generate a detailed evaluation result including evaluation information included only in one of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the integration processing unit performs a process of generating integrated evaluation data including data indicating the type of influence as the evaluation result data included only in the questionnaire evaluation result. It is the structure to perform.

  According to this configuration, in the impact evaluation between organizations, a detailed evaluation result including data indicating the type of impact can be generated as evaluation information included only in one of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the integration processing unit has a result notification unit that notifies the generated evaluation data, and the result notification unit satisfies a predetermined notification condition. In this case, the notification processing is executed.

  According to this configuration, it is possible to perform notification processing only when a predetermined condition that requires notification is satisfied, and it is possible to omit presentation of useless evaluation information and the like.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the notification condition includes a condition determined based on difference data between an impact evaluation result based on a log and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire. And

  According to this configuration, it is possible to perform information notification processing that extracts problems in the impact assessment, such as when the difference between the impact assessment result based on the log and the impact assessment result based on the questionnaire is significant, and presents useful assessment information. It becomes possible to execute only.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the integration processing unit, in the integration process of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result, log collection time of log information to be integrated processing, It is the structure which performs the setting process of matching with the questionnaire implementation time of questionnaire information, and this matching setting is based on the time transition data of the impact evaluation result based on the past accumulated log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire. It is the structure which sets automatically.

  According to this configuration, it is possible to perform integrated evaluation by detecting data timing in which the correlation between the impact evaluation result based on the log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire is recognized, and more accurate evaluation information generation, Notification is possible.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the association setting process based on the time transition data between the impact evaluation result based on the past accumulated log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire is correlated with the time transition data. It is the structure performed based on this.

  According to this configuration, since the integration target data is selected based on the correlation of the time transition data between the impact assessment result based on the log and the impact assessment result based on the questionnaire, accurate integration processing is realized and more accurate evaluation is performed. Information can be generated and notified.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, each of the log analysis evaluation unit and the questionnaire analysis evaluation unit is configured to perform an impact evaluation by word analysis based on accumulated data, and the integration The processing unit gives the evaluation target unit to other units based on the impact evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by word analysis in the log analysis evaluation unit and the evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by word analysis in the questionnaire analysis evaluation unit It is the structure which performs integrated evaluation of an influence.

  According to this configuration, since integrated evaluation data is generated based on word analysis data that is commonly executed in log analysis evaluation and questionnaire analysis evaluation, accurate integration processing based on word data as a common item is possible. It becomes.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis / evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the tissue analysis / evaluation apparatus further includes a questionnaire survey unit that performs a questionnaire process on the unit or unit member.

  According to this configuration, for example, by executing a questionnaire process to which a Web page is applied, an efficient tabulation process can be performed.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the log storage unit stores a log including a count value of electrophotographic paper, and the log analysis evaluation unit stores the count value of electrophotographic paper. It is characterized by analyzing the included log and evaluating the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units.

  According to this configuration, it is possible to grasp the usage rate, the usage rate, and the satisfaction level based on the count value such as the number of used sheets counted in a copying machine, a facsimile machine, a printer, etc. Can be done.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis / evaluation apparatus of the present invention, the unit is either an organization composed of individual members or an individual as a member of the organization.

  According to this configuration, a flexible evaluation process in which evaluation units for both organizations and individuals are set is realized.

  Furthermore, the second aspect of the present invention is an organization analysis evaluation method, a log storage step for storing a log based on information transmitted within or between units to be evaluated, and an analysis object by analyzing the log Log analysis and evaluation step that evaluates the influence of other units on other units, and questionnaire analysis and evaluation that analyzes the results of questionnaire processing responses to the units or unit members, and evaluates the influence of the target unit on other units Evaluation based on the log based on the communication information data and the questionnaire result by the integration processing based on the comparison between the step, the log evaluation result generated in the log analysis evaluation step, and the questionnaire evaluation result generated in the questionnaire analysis evaluation step An integrated processing step for performing an integrated evaluation of the influence of the target unit on other units In tissue assay wherein.

  According to this configuration, in the impact assessment between organizations, the impact assessment between organizations as a fact by the dialogue log in the organization and the impact assessment between organizations based on the subjective judgment by the questionnaire method to the members of the organization. Processing that integrates the two evaluation methods is realized, and more accurate organization evaluation is possible.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the integration processing step integrates the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result in a complementary manner, and the evaluation is included in only one of the evaluation results. A process of generating integrated evaluation data including result data is executed.

  According to this configuration, in the impact evaluation between organizations, it is possible to generate a detailed evaluation result including evaluation information included only in one of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result.

  Furthermore, in an embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the integration processing step includes a process of generating integrated evaluation data including data indicating the type of influence as evaluation result data included only in the questionnaire evaluation result. It is characterized by performing.

  According to this configuration, in the impact evaluation between organizations, a detailed evaluation result including data indicating the type of impact can be generated as evaluation information included only in one of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the tissue analysis evaluation method further includes a result notification step of notifying the generated evaluation data, and the result notification step includes a predetermined notification condition. The notification processing is executed when the above is satisfied.

  According to this configuration, it is possible to perform notification processing only when a predetermined condition that requires notification is satisfied, and it is possible to omit presentation of useless evaluation information and the like.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the notification condition includes a condition determined based on difference data between an impact evaluation result based on a log and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire. And

  According to this configuration, it is possible to perform information notification processing that extracts problems in the impact assessment, such as when the difference between the impact assessment result based on the log and the impact assessment result based on the questionnaire is significant, and presents useful assessment information. It becomes possible to execute only.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the integration processing step includes a log collection timing of log information to be integrated in the integration processing of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result, Including a step of executing a setting process of association with the questionnaire implementation time of the questionnaire information, and the association setting is based on time transition data between the impact evaluation result based on the past accumulated log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire. It is characterized by automatic setting.

  According to this configuration, it is possible to perform integrated evaluation by detecting data timing in which the correlation between the impact evaluation result based on the log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire is recognized, and more accurate evaluation information generation, Notification is possible.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the association setting process based on the time transition data between the impact evaluation result based on the past accumulated log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire is a correlation in the time transition data. It performs based on.

  According to this configuration, since the integration target data is selected based on the correlation of the time transition data between the impact assessment result based on the log and the impact assessment result based on the questionnaire, accurate integration processing is realized and more accurate evaluation is performed. Information can be generated and notified.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, each of the log analysis evaluation step and the questionnaire analysis evaluation step is a step of performing an impact evaluation by word analysis based on accumulated data, and the integration In the processing step, the evaluation target unit gives other units based on the impact evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by the word analysis in the log analysis evaluation step and the influence evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by the word analysis in the questionnaire analysis evaluation step. It is characterized by performing an integrated assessment of impacts.

  According to this configuration, since integrated evaluation data is generated based on word analysis data that is commonly executed in log analysis evaluation and questionnaire analysis evaluation, accurate integration processing based on word data as a common item is possible. It becomes.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis / evaluation method of the present invention, the organization analysis / evaluation method further includes a questionnaire survey step of executing a questionnaire process on the unit or unit member.

  According to this configuration, for example, by executing a questionnaire process to which a Web page is applied, an efficient tabulation process can be performed.

  Further, in one embodiment of the tissue analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the log storage step stores a log including a count value of electrophotographic paper, and the log analysis evaluation step calculates a count value of the electrophotographic paper. It is characterized by analyzing the included log and evaluating the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units.

  According to this configuration, it is possible to grasp the usage rate, the usage rate, and the satisfaction level based on the count value such as the number of used sheets counted in a copying machine, a facsimile machine, a printer, etc. Can be done.

  Furthermore, in one embodiment of the organization analysis evaluation method of the present invention, the unit is either an organization composed of individual members or an individual as a member of the organization.

  According to this configuration, a flexible evaluation process in which evaluation units for both organizations and individuals are set is realized.

Furthermore, the third aspect of the present invention provides
A computer program for executing an organization analysis evaluation process, a log storage step for storing a log based on information transmitted within or between units to be evaluated, and analyzing the log so that the unit to be evaluated is another unit A log analysis and evaluation step for evaluating the influence on the unit, a questionnaire analysis and evaluation step for analyzing the response result of the questionnaire processing for the unit or the unit member, and evaluating the influence of the evaluation target unit on other units, and the log By the integration process based on the comparison between the log evaluation result generated in the analysis evaluation step and the questionnaire evaluation result generated in the questionnaire analysis evaluation step, the evaluation target unit is changed based on the log based on the transmission information data and the questionnaire result. And an integrated processing step that performs an integrated assessment of the impact on the unit. In the computer program characterized.

  According to the computer program of this configuration, in the inter-organizational impact assessment, the inter-organizational impact assessment as a fact by the dialogue log in the organization, and the inter-organization based on the subjective judgment by the questionnaire method to the members of the organization A process that integrates the two evaluation methods of the impact assessment of the system is realized, and more accurate organization evaluation becomes possible.

  Note that the computer program of the present invention is a recording medium provided in a computer-readable format for a computer system capable of executing various program codes, for example, a recording medium such as a CD, FD, or MO. A computer program that can be provided by a medium or a communication medium such as a network. By providing such a program in a computer-readable format, processing corresponding to the program is realized on the computer system.

  Other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from a more detailed description based on embodiments of the present invention described later and the accompanying drawings. In this specification, the system is a logical set configuration of a plurality of devices, and is not limited to one in which the devices of each configuration are in the same casing.

  According to the configuration of the present invention, it is possible to objectively evaluate the value of an organization by analyzing survey results such as questionnaires for each organization and logs such as messages and emails transmitted within and between organizations. The tissue analysis evaluation apparatus, the tissue analysis evaluation method, and the computer program are realized. In particular, for the impact assessment between organizations, there are two impact assessments: the impact assessment between organizations as a fact by the log of dialogue within the organization, and the impact assessment between organizations based on subjective judgments by questionnaire methods to members of the organization. By executing the process that integrates the evaluation methods, it is possible to perform organizational analysis that enables more accurate organizational evaluation.

  Furthermore, according to the configuration of the present invention, the integration data is selected based on the time transition of the log analysis evaluation result and the impact evaluation result as the questionnaire analysis evaluation result that are the targets of the integration process. Processing is realized.

  Furthermore, according to the configuration of the present invention, in the integrated evaluation data notification process, when the predetermined notification condition, for example, the difference data between the log analysis evaluation result and the impact evaluation result as the questionnaire analysis evaluation result satisfies a predetermined condition Since the notification condition for setting the above is defined and the evaluation result notification process is executed, selective notification of only truly useful information is possible.

The details of the tissue analysis and evaluation apparatus, the tissue analysis and evaluation method, and the computer program of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings. The description will be made according to the following items.
1. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Specific Embodiment of the Invention 2.1. Network system 2.2. Hardware configuration 2.3. Client program 2.4. Server program 2.5. Analysis / evaluation program 2.5. (A) Log processing unit 2.5. (B) Questionnaire processing section 2.5. (C) Integrated processing unit

[1. Background of the Invention]
In order to facilitate understanding of the present invention, prior to the description of specific embodiments of the present invention, first, the background that led to the present invention will be described. Until now, the value of an organization (whether it is an organization with an entity such as a company department or a virtual organization such as a mailing list) is the value of an official transaction and service outside of an organization, or It has been evaluated by sales to the outside.

  For example, in a company, organizations that are functionally differentiated with respect to problems to be solved arranged hierarchically are arranged hierarchically, and the problem is solved by transmitting a command to such an organization. Within such a corporate structure, the assessment of an organization's value is, for example, the input of resources such as people, goods and money that are purely invested in the organization, and the resulting economic value and services. It has been evaluated as the difference and ratio with the output. However, it has been pointed out from both the academic and actual business aspects that the value of an organization cannot be assessed only from the perspective of the difference and ratio between input and output.

  Also, in the field of business administration, it is pointed out that such a problem solving method using a hierarchical organization cannot quickly respond to various requests of customers. In response to such problems, IT (Information Technology) has been introduced, the organization in the company has a flat structure, autonomous distributed activities are recommended to each organization, and resources are allocated to solve the problem. A solution to flexibly change and optimize is proposed.

  However, when the structure of the organization is made flat in this way, it becomes extremely difficult to evaluate the value of the organization and its members based on the difference and ratio between the input and the output. This is because, as described above, in a flat structure, the structure changes flexibly, so that an organization is not set up aiming at solving some problems from the beginning, and the members of the organization always change. Or a member may formally or informally belong to more than one organization, and after the problem is solved, the organization itself will be dissolved. This is because it is difficult to evaluate what kind of output was made.

  The present invention focuses on communication within an organization and between organizations (organizational communication) regardless of whether it is formal or informal in order to evaluate the value of the organization. Specifically, the present invention pays attention to what range and scale of communication that occurs (transmitted) in one organization is used in other organizations. Evaluate the value of

  Focusing on these points, the value of organizations and organizational communications that did not produce direct economic value, such as providing information and services not officially imposed on a certain organization, or that were difficult to evaluate. Can alternatively be evaluated. More specifically, when an organization is solving a problem, by analyzing the content of the communication in this organization, information in one organization can be communicated to other organizations and their members, Focusing on the fact that it is used for the activities of other organizations and their members, it is possible to objectively evaluate what is different between the value evaluation of the organization and the value evaluation of the organization communication.

  For example, in a company, not only the value of the department that is actually making profits, but at first glance it seems that the value is low because it does not make profits, but in fact it is beneficial to many departments of the company and is indirectly Because it is possible to accurately and objectively evaluate the value of departments that are linked to large profits, understanding the value of the organization from this perspective is useful for appropriate allocation of investments and budgets. Can contribute to performance.

  The present applicant has already applied for an invention that supports various analyzes of organization communication performed on a daily basis as Japanese Patent Application No. 2001-275808 (organization communication analysis apparatus and method). The invention according to the above application is a factor that activates or deactivates organizational communication by performing quantitative analysis on organizational communication such as a mailing list / electronic bulletin board and associating the analysis result with qualitative information. In an exploratory analysis, the organization communication operation is realized based on the analysis results. The present invention is a further development of the invention according to this application from the viewpoints described so far, and realizes an objective value evaluation of an organization by analyzing the organization communication.

  Examples of organizational communication means (media) include verbal, telephone, video telephone systems, and computer networks (e-mail, electronic bulletin board, chat, instant message, etc.). In order to realize the present invention, it is premised that the communications performed through these media are investigated and aggregated.

  There are several methods for such investigation and analysis. The present invention realizes an organization analysis evaluation method that integrates two different analysis methods. The first analysis method is questionnaire analysis, and the other is log analysis.

  The questionnaire analysis method can be executed by distributing questionnaires to all organizations and inputting the responses written in them into the analysis / evaluation device manually or by OCR, or using a web page for analysis / There is a method in which the evaluation device asks each member of the organization online and collects answers.

  In a questionnaire survey using a web page, for example, each member writes an answer in the form of a sentence to a question displayed on a browser on a computer from a web server, or selects a prepared option. Is done. At this time, the web server or the like can automatically add the member identification information and response date and time required for response analysis and evaluation to the response, or each member can explicitly operate the browser. Can be attached to the response.

  Log analysis is, for example, analysis based on surveys and tabulations based on electronic mail logs in a company. When e-mail is used for communication, generally the message in the natural language included in the e-mail, the sender and receiver of the e-mail, the date and time when the e-mail was transmitted, etc. Can be logged.

  Distribution of e-mail on the Internet is performed via a transmission server called an SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) server. Therefore, in the company, by recording the message log of the e-mail with the SMTP server in a unified manner, when and who communicated with whom and what kind of content for all employees in the company Can be grasped. In the log analysis in the present invention, for example, a message log of an SMTP server that distributes electronic mail in a company is analyzed, and the value of an organization in the company is evaluated.

[2. Specific Embodiment of the Present Invention]
Embodiments of the present invention will be described below.

(2.1. Network system)
FIG. 1 is a diagram exemplifying a configuration of a network system 1 in which organization evaluation as organization analysis according to the present invention is executed. The network system 1 is, for example, a wide area network (WAN) constructed across a plurality of offices in the same company. As shown in FIG. 1, each of a plurality of organizations 1 to n that can be evaluated The organization-specific systems 2-1 to 2-n (n ≧ 2) and the analyzer 3 are connected via the network 100.

  Hereinafter, in the case where any one of a plurality of components such as the organization-specific systems 2-1 to 2-n is indicated without being specified, the organization-specific system 2 is simply abbreviated. In each organization-specific system 2, for example, client computers 20-1 to 20 -m (m ≧ 1) used by m members of each organization and the server 24 are connected via the organization-specific LAN 200. Take the configuration.

(2.2. Hardware configuration)
FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of the client computer 20, the server 24, and the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 illustrated in FIG. As shown in FIG. 2, the client computer 20, the server 24, and the analysis device 3 include a data processing unit 200 including a CPU 202 and a memory 204, a display / input unit 206 including an LCD display, a keyboard and a mouse (not shown), It comprises a data recording unit 208 such as an HDD / CD device, and a communication unit 212 that communicates with the network 100 and the organizational LAN 200. That is, the client computer 20, the server 24, and the analysis device 3 include components as a general computer that can communicate via a network.

(2.3. Client program)
FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the configuration of the client program 22 that runs on the client computer 20 shown in FIGS. As shown in FIG. 3, the client program 22 includes a user interface unit (UI unit) 220, a mail program 222, a web browser 224, and a LAN communication control unit 226. For example, the client program 22 is supplied to the data recording unit 208 of the client computer 20 via the recording medium 210, loaded into the memory 204, and executed. The client program 22 provides a mail transmission / reception function and a WWW browsing function to members (users) of an organization that uses the client computer 20 by using these components.

  In the client program 22, the UI unit 220 receives a user operation on the display / input unit 206 (FIG. 2) and controls processing of each component of the client program 22. In addition, the UI unit 220 displays the electronic mail received by the mail program 222 and the data from the WWW received by the web browser 224 to the user.

  The mail program 222 provides the user of the client computer 20 with a function for sending and receiving electronic mail. The LAN communication control unit 226 communicates with other client computers 20 or servers 24 in the same organization via the organization-specific LAN 200 (FIG. 1) and the network 100 (generally constituting components of communication main body are also referred to as communication nodes). And communication with communication nodes of other organizations.

  The web browser 224 provides a WWW browsing function to the user of the client computer 20. When an organizational communication questionnaire survey is performed, the web browser 224 displays a question / item necessary for the organizational communication questionnaire survey received from the web server 266 of the server 24 (described later with reference to FIG. 4). 206 and displayed to each of the users (members 1 to m). When each member 1 to m inputs an answer to the question items displayed on the browser using the display / input unit 206, the web browser 224 accepts the answer and transmits it to the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3. To do.

(2.4. Server program)
FIG. 4 is a diagram showing the configuration of the server program 26 that operates on the server 24 shown in FIGS. As shown in FIG. 4, the server program 26 includes a LAN communication control unit 260, a network communication control unit 262, a mail server program 264, a web server 266, a log management unit 268, and a log database (log DB) 270. As with the client program 22 (FIG. 3), the server program 26 is supplied to the data recording unit 208 (FIG. 2) of the server 24 via the recording medium 210 (FIG. 1), loaded into the memory 204 and executed. .

  The server program 26 provides a mail server function to the client computers 20 (members) belonging to the same organization-specific system 2 (organization) by these components, and is the same or different organization-specific system 2 (organization). The WWW server function is provided to the client computer 20 (member).

  In the server program 26, the LAN communication control unit 260 performs communication control with the organization-specific LAN 102 (FIG. 1). The network communication control unit 262 performs communication control with the network 100. The mail server program 264 implements a mail server function.

  The web server 266 implements a WWW server function. When a questionnaire survey of organizational communication is performed, the web server 266 sends the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 (FIG. 2) to the display / input unit 206 (FIG. 2) via the web browser 224 (FIG. 3) operating on the client computer 20. The questions necessary for the questionnaire survey of organizational communication received from Fig. 1) are displayed. Further, when the members 1 to m input answers to the question items displayed on the browser using the display / input device 206, the web server 266 analyzes a response indicating the contents of the answer (described later). -It transmits with respect to the evaluation apparatus 3.

  The log management unit 268 performs communication (communication) performed by the mail server program 264 and the web server 266 as a message log in the log DB 270 in accordance with control data input from the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 via the network communication control unit 262. Record. In addition, the log management unit 268 transmits the message log recorded in the analysis / log DB 270 to the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 or the like as necessary.

  FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an e-mail message log recorded in the log DB 270 illustrated in FIG. 4. The log management unit 268 performs communication (communication) performed by the mail server program 264 and the web server 266 as a message log in the log DB 270 in accordance with control data input from the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 via the network communication control unit 262. Record.

  Also, the log management unit 268 transmits the message log recorded in the log DB 270 to the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 via the network communication control unit 262 and the network 100 according to the control of the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3.

  As shown in FIG. 5, the message log recorded by the log management unit 268 includes an ID (communication ID) attached to each e-mail, identification data (ID) of the side that sent the e-mail, and the side that received it. The contents of the e-mail message (communication contents) and the date and time when the e-mail was transmitted are included.

(2.5. Analysis / Evaluation Program)
FIG. 6 is a functional configuration diagram illustrating mainly the functions of the analysis / evaluation program 35 operating on the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. In each database shown in the figure, a data recording unit (data recording unit 208 in FIG. 2) is applied, and data processing shown in other blocks is processing mainly executed in the data processing unit 200 in FIG. Similar to the client program 22 (FIG. 3) and the server program 26 (FIG. 4), the analysis / evaluation program 35 is supplied to the data recording unit 208 of the analysis / evaluation apparatus 3 via the recording medium 210 and the like, and stored in the memory 204. It is loaded and executed.

The analysis / evaluation program 35 shown in FIG. 6 has the following three data processing functions.
(A) Log processing unit 301
(B) Questionnaire processing unit 341
(C) Integration processing unit 350
These data processing units.

  (A) The log processing unit 301 collects an e-mail message log, a WWW browsing log, and the like from the servers 24 (FIG. 1) of each of the departmental systems 2-1 to 2-n. Analyze and evaluate the value of the organization. Further, the log processing unit 301 also acquires and stores logs such as count values of electrophotographic paper, and in log analysis evaluation, analyzes logs including count values of electrophotographic paper as well as message logs. Then, the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units is evaluated. For example, based on a count value such as the number of used sheets counted in a copier, facsimile, printer, etc., it becomes possible to grasp the usage rate, usage rate, and satisfaction level, and the questionnaire processing unit 341 can efficiently determine a questionnaire or the like to be performed. Can be done automatically.

  (B) The questionnaire processing unit 341 displays a question for questionnaire survey related to organizational communication on the web browser 224 of the client program 22 (FIG. 3) operating on the client computer 20 (FIG. 1) of each organization-specific system 2. In response to this question, each organization-specific system 2 receives the responses of each member, analyzes and evaluates the responses, and analyzes how one organization or individual has an impact on other organizations or individuals. , Evaluate its value.

  (C) The integrated processing unit 350 compares and analyzes the evaluation results of the log processing unit 401 and the questionnaire processing unit 341, and executes final evaluation processing and notification processing.

As other configurations, the organization information of the organizations 1 to n (FIG. 1) using the departmental systems 2-1 to 2-n and the personal information of the members 1 to m of the organizations 1 to n Organization / personal DB 310 to store,
A network communication unit 300 for controlling communication with the network 100;
It has a UI unit 312 that accepts a user operation on the display / input device 206 and controls processing of each component of the analysis / evaluation program 35.
The UI unit 312 displays log information, questionnaire information, analysis / evaluation result data, and the like on the display / input device 206 in accordance with a user operation.

Data stored in the organization / personal DB 310 will be described with reference to FIGS.
FIG. 7 is a diagram showing organization information stored in the organization / personal DB 310 shown in FIG.
FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a specific example of the organization information shown in FIG.
FIG. 9 is a diagram showing personal information stored in the organization / personal DB 310 shown in FIG.
10 is a diagram showing a specific example of the personal information shown in FIG.
The organization / individual DB 310 includes organization information (FIGS. 7 and 8) of each of the organizations 1 to n (FIG. 1) using the departmental systems 2-1 to 2-n, and the members 1 of the organizations 1 to n. Each personal information (FIG. 9, FIG. 10) of .about.m is stored.

As shown in FIGS. 7 and 8, the organization / personal DB 310 uses the organization 1 to n identifier (organization ID), the organization name, the organization form, and the period in which the organization exists as the organization information of each organization 1 to n. Period), and if there is a higher organization in the organizations 1 to n, the higher organization is stored.
As shown in FIGS. 9 and 10, the organization / individual DB 310 includes, as personal information of the members 1 to m of the organizations 1 to n, identifiers (personal ID / employee ID), names, and emails of the members 1 to m. The address and the organization ID (FIG. 7) of the organization to which the members 1 to m belong are stored.

In the items of the organization form of the organization information shown in FIGS. 7 and 8, the organization appearing in the existing organization chart is represented as formal.
In addition, an organization formed to cross-organize information such as well-end meetings and mailing lists that do not appear in the organization chart is represented as informal.
An organization that carries out cross-cutting activities at intervals is called a project.

The organization ID is uniquely associated with each organization and is used to indicate the correspondence with the upper organization.
The organization name is the name of the organization or an informal organization or project organization.
The lifetime of the organization is assigned from when to when it has been.
The organizational structure shown in FIGS. 7 and 8 includes the official organization as described in the organization chart of the company, and the project organization in which a plurality of official organizations are gathered to achieve a certain purpose. Stores attributes of an organization such as a community based on voluntary participation, an organization such as an information sharing group that shares the same interests (normal organization, project, community, etc.).

Less than,
(A) Log processing unit 301
(B) Questionnaire processing unit 341
(C) Integration processing unit 350
Details of the processing of each data processing unit will be described.

(2.5. (A) Log processing unit)
First, the processing of the log processing unit 301 will be described. The log processing unit 301 includes a log collection / management unit 302, a log DB 304, an analysis / evaluation unit 306, and an analysis / evaluation result DB 308, and each of the departmental systems 2-1 to 2-n via the network communication unit 300. The server 24 (FIG. 1) collects e-mail message logs, WWW browsing logs, and the like, analyzes the collected message logs and the like, and evaluates the value of the organization. As an evaluation unit, either an organization composed of individual members or an individual as a member of the organization can be set.

  It should be noted that even if the WWW log is analyzed, the value evaluation of the organization according to the present invention can be realized, but in the explanation of the embodiment of the present invention, the analysis of the email message log is performed, A specific example is a method of evaluating value.

  FIG. 11 is a diagram showing organization communication information (organization communication information) stored in the log DB 304 by the log collection / management unit 302. In the organization communication information (organization communication information), the organization communication ID is uniquely assigned to each communication. The sending side ID and the receiving side ID correspond to the personal information shown in FIG. 9 and the like, and the sending side organization ID and the receiving side organization ID are based on the correspondence with the organization information associated with the personal information. can get. Further, in the item of communication content, information such as a conversation performed between the sender ID and the receiver ID is recorded, and further, the date and time when this communication is performed is associated.

  Note that FIG. 11 shows a case where there is one sender and one receiver. However, by appropriately changing the data structure shown in FIG. The organization communication information can also be stored in the log DB 304. The log collection / management unit 302 collects the message logs shown in FIG. 5 from each of the servers 24 of the departmental systems 2-1 to 2-n via the network 100 and stores them in the log DB 304.

  In the organization communication information creation process by the log collection / management unit 302, the log collection / management unit 302 refers to the organization / personal DB 310, the message log obtained from the server 24, the organization information shown in FIGS. The personal information shown in FIGS. 9 and 10 is associated with each other, and organization communication information is created and stored in the log DB 304.

  For example, in processing for communication by normal electronic mail, the log collection / management unit 302 uses personal information stored in the organization / individual DB 310 using the outgoing mail address and the incoming mail address of the electronic mail (FIG. 9). To obtain the personal ID (employee ID) of the member i who sent the e-mail and the personal ID (employee ID) of the member j (i, j = 1 to m) who received the e-mail. The personal ID (employee ID) of the member i who has sent the e-mail is the sending side ID, and the personal ID (employee ID) of the member j who has received the e-mail is the receiving side ID.

  Further, the log collection / management unit 302 searches the organization information (FIG. 7) stored in the organization / personal DB 310 using the sender ID and the sender ID, and the organization to which the member i who sent the email belongs belongs. The organization ID of p is the sender organization ID, and the organization ID of the organization q (p, q = 1 to n) to which the member j who has received the email belongs is the receiver organization ID. Further, the log collection / management unit 302 adds an identifier (organization communication ID) to each piece of information obtained as a result of the above search, adds the message content of the e-mail as communication content, The sent date / time and organization form are added, and organization communication information shown in FIG. 11 is created and stored in the log DB 304.

  As shown in FIG. 11, the organization communication information has a data configuration including an organization communication ID, a sender ID, a receiver ID, a sender organization ID, a receiver organization ID, communication contents, and a communication date and time.

  Next, analysis processing and evaluation processing performed in the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 will be described.

<Analysis of common words>
The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 extracts organization communication information having the same transmission-side organization ID and reception-side organization ID from the organization communication information (FIG. 11) stored in the log DB 304. In other words, the analysis / evaluation unit 306 transmits the electronic message transmitted between the internal members i and j (client computers 20-i, j) in each of the organizations p (departmental systems 2-1 to 2-m). Organization communication information (intra-organization communication information) is taken out.

  Further, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 displays the organization (transmission side organization ID and reception side organization ID) to which the transmission side (ID) and the receiver side (ID) included in the intra-organization communication information belong to FIGS. Analyzing the communication content of the organization (corresponding to the organization information shown in), and extracting common concepts used in the organization for all organizations (sender side organization ID) included in the in-organization communication information ·Tally.

  As a common concept of this organization, communication contents of in-house communication information are generally treated as a unit in natural language processing, etc., words, sentences, synonyms of common words, semantic networks based on common words and synonyms, and , Ontology (a common concept set used in the organization p), and the like can be used.

  The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 executes a process of extracting / aggregating words commonly used in communication (common words) as a common concept. The analysis / evaluation unit 306, for example, sets organization communication information as a processing target one line at a time from the beginning, performs individual tabulation processing, and sets words obtained as a result of individual tabulation as common words of the originating organization (ID). As a candidate, the frequency and type are set as a list.

  The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 sets, for example, the top five common words in each organization as common words. The list can contain a large number of words, but the number of words can be limited by this selection process.

  The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 extracts communication contents from the row of organization communication information to be processed, and divides it into word units. For example, the analysis / evaluation unit 306 divides the communication content into parts of speech by morphological analysis, and takes out a noun as an expression element. Note that the analysis / evaluation unit 306 can use not only a noun but also other parts of speech such as a verb as an expression element, a combination of several parts of speech as an expression element, or a phrase or the like instead of a part of speech. It can also be used as an expression element.

  Further, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 counts the number of word types from the obtained expression elements, and counts the number of appearances of words for each word type. Note that the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 may extract proper nouns or set the frequency of proper nouns as a target of aggregation in the individual aggregation process, not limited to simple word appearance frequencies.

  12A is a first diagram illustrating intra-organization communication common word information stored in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308 by the analysis / evaluation unit 306 illustrated in FIG. For example, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 uses, as a common word, a word that is frequently included in the communication content of the in-organization communication information of the organization p, for example, three words x, y, z is selected, and as shown in FIG. 12, the organization ID of the organization p is added to each of the words x, y, and z to create common word information (attribute), which is stored in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308. The common word information is stored in a list in association with the organization ID.

  FIG. 12B is a second example in which the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 shown in FIG. 6 illustrates a common concept as intra-organization communication common word information stored in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308. As described above, for example, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 includes a sentence included in the communication content of the communication information in the organization, a synonym of the common word, a semantic network based on the common word and the synonym, and an ontology (used in the organization p. Information indicating other concepts of the common word, such as a common concept set).

  The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 records the extracted words in association with other concepts such as common word information. As a common concept, for example, a common synonym is applied. The common synonym is a common synonym dictionary available on the market, and the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 performs the same processing as the common word (however, as a target to be matched, It is possible to extract / aggregate by performing on the organizational communication information a step that matches all relevant words in the thesaurus. The matching here corresponds to “search” in terms of the database field, and specifically, for example, searching for a common concept of the word A from a certain communication unit group.

  FIGS. 13A and 13B are first and second diagrams illustrating the inter-organization communication common word information generated by the log analysis / evaluation unit 306. FIG. As shown in FIG. 13, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 adds organization IDs (sending side organization ID, receiving side organization ID) of the sending side and the receiving side to the extracted common word, and the inter-organization communication common word information Is created and stored in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308. The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 uses the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308 to share the organization communication information exchanged (transmitted / received; transmitted) between two different organizations p and q (here, p ≠ q). Extract and register concepts.

  The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 further executes a matching process for extracting a common concept of organization communication information. For example, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 determines whether or not the transmission-side organization ID and the reception-side organization ID included in the organization communication information are different, and the transmission-side organization ID and the reception-side organization ID are different, and Assuming that the sending organization communicates (influenced) the receiving organization with the inclusion of the sending organization's word (common concept) between the receiving organization and the sending organization, The common word list of the sender organization ID (= receiver organization ID) included in the organization communication information is read, and the common word i to be matched is set.

  Further, when the common word i to be processed is included in the row of organization communication information to be processed, the common word i to be processed is recorded as inter-organization information shown in FIG. To summarize the matching process, first, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 reads the organization communication information line by line, extracts the corresponding communication content, and the common word of the sender organization ID and the communication included in the read line. Match the contents. This matching processing is executed when the transmission-side organization ID included in the row that is the processing target of the organization communication information is different from the reception-side organization ID.

  As a result of this matching process, when the common word of the sender organization ID is included in the communication content, it is assumed that the in-organization information exchanged with the sender organization has affected the recipient organization, as shown in FIG. It is recorded as common word information for communication between organizations. The matching process is executed for all the common words included in the common word list associated with the caller organization ID included in the row of the organization communication information to be processed.

  Inter-organizational communication common word information indicating which organization influences which organization via which common word (influence level) by performing the above matching processing for all the organization communication information. (FIG. 13A) is created. In addition, when the same matching process is performed on the concept (sentence, synonym of common word, semantic network by common word and synonym, and ontology) instead of the common word, from either of the two organizations, Inter-organizational communication common word information (FIG. 13B) indicating what kind of influence is produced is created.

  For organization communication information exchanged between two or more organizations, by applying common concept (word) extraction / aggregation processing and matching processing to which organization, from which organization to which organization, It is possible to know whether it is affected through such common words.

  For example, when information is transmitted from the sending organization p to the receiving organizations q and r, the sending organization ID is the organization ID of the organization p, and the receiving organization ID is the organization ID of the organization q. Inter-organizational communication common word information can be obtained by performing extraction / aggregation processing and matching processing of common concepts (words) separately using the organization ID of the organization r as the organization ID of organization r.

  In addition, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 can also extract common words and concepts of email organization communication information exchanged between members, as well as common word information within and between organizations. . As shown in FIGS. 14 (a) and 14 (b), the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 adds the sender and receiver personal IDs (sender personal ID and receiver personal ID) to the extracted common words and concepts. In addition, personal communication common word information is created and stored in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308.

<Organization impact assessment>
The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 includes intra-organization communication common word information (FIG. 12) and individual common word information (FIG. 14) generated as described above, and intra-organization communication common word information of the organization p to be evaluated. Or personal communication common word information of the individual i, intra-organization communication common word information (FIG. 12), and inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) of each organization q (q = 1 to n; q ≠ p) Compare

  Further, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 includes the organization / individual common word / concept (FIGS. 12 and 14) included in the intra-organization communication common word information as the common word / concept, and the evaluation target. Organizations that are affected by the organization / individual to be evaluated are those that include common words / concepts of other organizations / individuals as common words / concepts in the communication common word information between the organizations. Judge that there is.

  FIGS. 15A and 15B are first and second diagrams illustrating the impact evaluation results stored in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308 by the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 illustrated in FIG. 6. The influence can be aggregated by dividing it into an influence range and an influence degree. The influence range is calculated by counting how many other organizations use a concept commonly used in a certain organization (common concept). The degree of influence is calculated by counting how many concepts commonly used in one organization appear in other organizations.

  Hereinafter, an aggregation process of the influence range based on the inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) will be described. The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 reads the inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) line by line. Next, the analysis / evaluation unit 306 counts the number of receiving-side organizations without duplication from the inter-organization communication common word information. In order to count the number of receiving side organizations without duplication, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 attaches a flag to each receiving side organization ID counted once, and does not count the receiving side organizations with the flag. The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 performs such counting for each row of the inter-organization communication common word information, and sets the total value as an influence range for all organizations of a certain organization (sender organization).

  Next, the influence degree totaling process based on the inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) will be described. The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 reads inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) line by line, and cumulatively counts how many times a common word has been used in the receiving organization for each sending organization. The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 performs such counting for each row of the inter-organization communication common word information, and sets the total value as the degree of influence on all the organizations of a certain organization (sender organization). In addition, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 aggregates the cumulative value of the frequency of common words in the originating organization, so that more commonly used words in one organization are used in other organizations. Sometimes, the influence degree may be calculated by estimating the influence degree high.

  FIG. 16A is a diagram illustrating a specific example of the influence range obtained for each concept, and FIG. 16B is a diagram illustrating a specific example of the influence degree obtained for each concept. As shown in FIG. 15, the influence range and the influence degree can be calculated for each organization ID, and as shown in FIG. 16, the total value can be calculated for each concept.

  Note that the number of appearances of the common word x may be analyzed noting the entire network system 1 (company) but focusing only on the organization q where the employee j communicates with the employee i of the organization p. It is wrong to judge that organization p is affected by organization q when the same word is just a coincidence and used only in organization q other than organization p. The influence range and the influence level of such an error can be removed from the influence range and the influence degree that an organization has on other influences.

  Furthermore, even if the organization p and the organization q are not in direct organizational communication (organizational communication), but are in an indirect communication (communication etc.) via another organization r, It is also possible to evaluate the influence range and the influence degree in a chained manner and evaluate the total value as the influence of the organization p on the organization q. For example, each of the organizations A to D uses the word x in communication inside and outside the organization, and in the inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) calculated from the organization communication information, between the organizations AB and B- When the Cs are connected by organization communication (communication) including the common word x, the appearance of the common word x in the organization C should be counted as the influence range and the influence degree of the organization A on the organization C. Can do.

  For such chained evaluation, the number of chains included in the evaluation may be set in advance. For example, if the number of chains is 2, the word y is a communication between organization A and organization B, between organization B and organization C, and between organization C and organization D in the inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13). When included in the contents, the influence range and influence of the organization A are not counted between the organizations C and D. If a loop such as organization A to organization B and organization B to organization A occurs, the process ends at that point.

  Furthermore, for the evaluation of the chained influence range and the degree of influence, weighting depending on the number of chains may be performed. For example, when communication (communication) including the common word x from organization A to organization B, organization B to organization D, and from organization D to organization E is performed in a chained manner, the influence range and influence of organization A In order to evaluate the degree, 1 is added to the number of organizations as the degree of influence on the organization B. When counting the influence range and the degree of influence on the organization D via the organization B, 1/2 is added to the number of organizations. When the influence range and degree of influence on the organization E that passes through the organization B and further passes through the organization D are counted, the evaluation may be performed by adding 1/4 to the number of organizations.

<Other analysis and evaluation>
The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 includes the number of inter-organization communication common word information, the intra-organization communication common word information, and the personal communication common word information shown in FIGS. It is possible to analyze how an organization / individual to be evaluated is utilized in which organization based on which organization the common word / concept of the individual is transmitted to.

  The organization communication information (FIG. 11) includes the organization ID of the sending side, the organization ID of the receiving side, and the date and time when the e-mail was exchanged, and the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 tracks these. By doing so, it is possible to analyze in what time course and in which route the common word / concept of the organization / individual to be evaluated has spread. The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 combines the above analysis / evaluation results as necessary into a comprehensive analysis result, and stores it in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308.

  FIG. 17 is a flowchart illustrating the analysis / evaluation processing procedure of the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 (see FIG. 6). The log analysis / evaluation unit 306 performs analysis / evaluation by processing according to this flow, and stores the result in the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308. The UI unit 312 displays the analysis / evaluation result on the display device of the display / input unit 206 or records it in the recording medium 210 via the data recording unit 208.

  Each step of the flow shown in FIG. 17 will be described. In step S200, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 analyzes communication contents such as an e-mail and a message transmitted within the organization, and extracts a common word (attribute) for each organization. By this processing, the in-organization communication common word information shown in FIG. 12 is generated.

  In step S202, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 analyzes the communication content of emails transmitted between organizations, and extracts common words (attributes) of emails transmitted between organizations. By this processing, the inter-organization communication common word information shown in FIG. 13 is generated.

  In step S <b> 204, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 analyzes the communication contents of the email related to the individual, and extracts common words (attributes) of the email related to the individual. Through this process, personal communication common word information shown in FIG. 14 is generated.

  In step S206, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 compares the common word / concept of the organization / individual to be evaluated with the common word / concept of another organization. This process is executed based on each piece of communication information generated in steps S200 to S204.

  In step S208, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 evaluates the influence of the organization / person to be evaluated on other organizations. By this processing, the impact evaluation result data described with reference to FIGS. 15 and 16 is generated. That is, as described above, the inter-organization communication common word information (FIG. 13) is read line by line, and the cumulative total of how many times a common word has been used in the receiving organization is performed for each of the originating organizations. The impact evaluation result data described with reference to FIG. 16 is generated.

  In step S210, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 analyzes the degree of utilization of the organization / individual to be evaluated. In step S212, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 evaluates based on the number of organizations and the degree of utilization influencing the organization / individual to be evaluated. Assess the value of the target organization / individual. That is, the number, frequency, organization form (business) of organization-to-individual communication common word information, intra-organization communication common word information and personal communication common word information shown in FIGS. Analyze how the organization / individual to be evaluated is used in which organization based on the status of transmission to other organizations, and evaluate the value of the organization / individual to be evaluated.

  Note that the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 can evaluate organization communication in an arbitrary time range by referring to the existence period of the organization communication information (FIG. 11) and the date and time of communication.

  In step S214, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 analyzes how the influence of the organization / individual to be evaluated has changed over time.

  In step S <b> 216, the log analysis / evaluation unit 306 stores the comprehensive analysis / evaluation result of the organization to be evaluated obtained by the above processing in the analysis / evaluation result DB 308.

[2.5. (B) Questionnaire processing section]
Next, processing executed by the questionnaire processing unit 341 shown in FIG. 6 will be described.
The questionnaire processing unit 341 includes a questionnaire survey unit 342, a questionnaire survey result DB 344, a questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346, and a questionnaire questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

  The questionnaire processing unit 341 displays and displays a question for a questionnaire survey related to organization communication on the web browser 224 of the client program 22 (FIG. 3) operating on the client computer 20 (FIG. 1) of each organization-based system 2. In response to the responses of each member of the organization-specific system 2 to this question, the responses are analyzed and evaluated to analyze how one organization or individual has an impact on other organizations and individuals. To evaluate. As an evaluation unit, either an organization composed of individual members or an individual as a member of the organization can be set. Further, as a questionnaire method, not only the case where a browser is applied, but also a method such as questionnaire form distribution and collection may be applied.

  Furthermore, by analyzing and evaluating responses, a word and its concept (concepts include words, sentences, semantic networks, and ontologies, which are examples of words) have an impact on the organization and its members. Analyze and evaluate its value. Although the evaluation method according to the present invention can be realized even by using e-mail or the like, as described above, in the description of the embodiment, the value of the organization is based on a questionnaire survey using a web page. A case where evaluation is performed is taken as a specific example.

Hereinafter, details of each component of the questionnaire processing unit 341 will be described.
<Questionnaire Survey Unit 342>
FIG. 18A is a diagram illustrating survey result information regarding “activity” stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344 by the questionnaire survey unit 342.
FIG. 18B is a diagram illustrating survey result information regarding “information transmission” stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344 by the questionnaire survey unit 342.
FIG. 18C is a diagram illustrating survey result information regarding “psychological activity (psychological change)” stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344 by the questionnaire survey unit 342.

  The questionnaire survey unit 342 has a function similar to that of the web server 266 of the server program 26 (FIG. 4). The questionnaire survey for organizational communication is performed on the web browser 224 operating on the client computers 20-1 to 20-m. The question for is displayed and shown to the members of the system 2 by organization. When a member of the organization-specific system 2 answers a question displayed on the web browser 224 operating on the client computer 20 and transmits a response, the questionnaire survey unit 342 (FIG. 6) receives the responses and totals them. The survey result information shown in (a) to (c) is created according to the response content and the question content, and stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344.

  For example, when the questionnaire survey unit 342 conducts a questionnaire survey on how the organization information obtained from the mailing list is used for personal activities, the presence or topic of the mailing list (ML) Asked each member of System 2 by the question “Have you ever helped your job or activity?”

  The questionnaire survey unit 342 is used to identify the respondent by associating the member's response to this question with the personal information and organizational information (FIGS. 7 to 10) stored in the personal / organization DB 310. An identifier (respondent ID; personal ID), an identifier for identifying this answer (answer ID, described later), an identifier indicating the organization of the activity (organization ID), an activity content, an identifier of the person involved in the activity (personal ID) ), The survey result information including the time and frequency of the activity is created in a format as shown in FIG. 18A (survey result regarding “activity”) and stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344.

  In addition, for example, when the questionnaire survey unit 342 conducts a questionnaire survey on how the organization information obtained from the mailing list is transmitted, “You are about the presence of ML and the content being discussed. The question “has it been communicated to other people?” Is given to each member of the system 2 by organization.

  The questionnaire survey unit 342 associates the member's response to this question with the personal information and organization information (FIGS. 7 to 10) stored in the personal / organization DB 310, and the respondent ID (personal ID), The survey result information including the answer ID, the communication partner (personal ID) indicating the information transmission partner, the content of the transmitted information (transmission content), the timing and frequency of information transmission, and the like are as shown in FIG. It is created in the form (survey result regarding “information transmission”) and stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344.

  In addition, for example, when conducting a questionnaire survey on changes in consciousness among members in each organization, “The presence or topic of ML has led to changes in your consciousness or feelings about the company or work. Is there a question "Is there any?" To each member of the system 2 by organization.

  The questionnaire survey unit 342 associates the member's response to this question with the personal information and organization information (FIGS. 7 to 10) stored in the personal / organization DB 310, and the respondent ID (personal ID), The survey result information including the answer ID, the identifier (personal ID) of the member who has a psychological influence on the respondent, the contents of the psychological influence, the time and frequency at which the psychological influence is given, and the like is shown in FIG. ) (Study result regarding psychological change) as shown in FIG.

  In addition, for example, for information indicating a person who has a psychological influence on the respondent, the respondent himself / herself directly answers, for example, performs text analysis on a sentence included in the respondent's answer. Thus, the questionnaire survey unit 342 can automatically obtain the result.

  In the examples shown in FIGS. 18A to 18C, personal IDs or organization IDs are used as appropriate in the survey result information. However, in the individual / organization DB 310 shown in FIGS. Using the stored information, the personal ID can be converted into an organization ID.

  Thus, for example, the results of a survey collected to determine how an individual has an impact on other individuals can be used to determine how an organization has an impact on other individuals and organizations. Can also be converted into survey results that show

  Furthermore, in addition to the questionnaire survey as described with reference to FIGS. 18A to 18C, the questionnaire survey unit 342 includes the individual of the respondent, the attribute of the organization to which the respondent belongs, and the external surrounding the respondent. It is also possible to conduct a questionnaire survey on the environment and the individual's recognition.

  Of these questionnaire surveys, when conducting a survey of the external environment surrounding the respondents, the questionnaire survey unit 342 asks each member of the organization-specific system 2 “Informally gathered at your office. Ask, "How much space do you have to chat with?" And "Do you think your office is in a place where you can easily exchange information with other related organizations?"

  Also, when conducting a questionnaire survey of individual respondents' awareness, the questionnaire survey unit 342 asks each member of the organization-specific system 2 about the qualities of the organization regarding the sharing and utilization of information. If there is something you don't understand, there is an atmosphere of helping each other, "your department belongs to a system that is evaluated separately from your personal achievements regarding information sharing."

  In addition, about one questionnaire survey, how many survey result information shown in each of FIGS. 18A to 18C is created for each of the respondents who answered the question among the members of the system 2 by organization. It depends on how many answers you have allowed for the question.

  For example, in a questionnaire survey, when up to three answers are allowed for a question, 1 to 3 survey result information is created for each respondent (respondent ID).

  FIG. 19 is a diagram showing organization communication IDs defined for the answer result information shown in FIGS. As described above, when a plurality of survey result information can be created for one respondent, the questionnaire survey unit 342 includes a plurality of survey result information including the same respondent ID (FIGS. 18A to 18C). ) Is assigned a unique response ID, and the plurality of pieces of survey result information are distinguished and managed.

  Further, as shown in FIG. 19, the questionnaire survey unit 342 uniquely defines the organization communication ID for each combination of the respondent ID and the answer ID described so far, and uses the organization communication ID to Each of the investigation result information shown in (a) to (c) is managed.

  FIG. 20 is a diagram showing the association between the survey result information shown in FIGS. 18A to 18C and respondents. Furthermore, since the same respondent answered a plurality of questions, the questionnaire survey unit 342 creates a plurality of survey result information (FIGS. 18A to 18C) for one respondent. As shown in FIG. 20, the respondent ID is associated with an identifier (for example, an answer ID) indicating each question, and each answerer manages what kind of answer to the plurality of questions. .

<Questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346>
Hereinafter, analysis processing and evaluation processing performed in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 will be described.

<Analysis of common words>
The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 refers to the organization / individual DB 310, and uses the respondent ID of the survey result information (FIGS. 18A to 18C) stored in the questionnaire survey result DB 344 as the organization to which this respondent belongs. Sort by each.

  Further, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 provides specific / substantial activity / information transmission or psychological effects such as activity contents, transmission contents or influence contents included in the survey result information for each organization obtained as a result of classification. Common words included in simple contents (content information).

  FIG. 21 is a diagram illustrating common word information in the organization stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 shown in FIG. For example, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 has words that are frequently included in the content information included in the survey result information in which the members of the organization p are respondents, for example, three words from the most frequently used words. Select x, y, z, and create organization common word information (attribute) by adding organization ID of organization p to each of words x, y, z as shown in FIG. -It memorize | stores in evaluation result DB348. The common word information is stored in a list in association with the organization ID.

  FIG. 21B is a diagram illustrating a common concept in the organization stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 shown in FIG. For example, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 includes a sentence included in the communication content of the intra-organization communication common word information, a synonym of the common word, a semantic network based on the common word and the synonym, and an ontology (used in the organization p. Information indicating other concepts of the common word, such as a common concept set).

  The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 records the extracted words in association with other concepts such as common word information. Common synonyms are applicable as a common concept. A common synonym is a common synonym dictionary available on the market, and the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs a process similar to the extraction of the common word on the organization communication information. It is possible to extract and tabulate by performing on the other hand.

  FIG. 22 is a first and second diagram illustrating common word information between organizations including a concept stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 shown in FIG. 6. The questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 refers to the individual / organization DB 310, and for each of the survey result information (FIGS. 18 (a) to (c)), respondents and their counterparts (activities, active parties, and communication partners). , The affected person, etc.) and the organization to which it belongs.

  Furthermore, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 is shared from the content information of the survey result information belonging to organizations p and q (here, p ≠ q) where the respondent and the partner who has influenced the respondent are different. Extract words and concepts.

  As shown in FIG. 22, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 includes the identifier of the respondent or the organization to which the respondent belongs (personal ID, organization ID) and the person who has influenced the extracted common word and its concept. An organization identifier (organization ID) is attached, common word information between organizations is created, and stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

  The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 executes a matching process for extracting a common concept of the survey result information (FIGS. 18A to 18C). First, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 reads the survey result information line by line, extracts the corresponding communication contents, and includes the common word of the organization (sender side organization ID) to which the respondent belongs and the read row. Matching with communication contents. This matching process is performed when the ID of the organization to which the respondent included in the row that is the processing target of the survey result information belongs (sender organization ID) and the ID of the affected organization (receiver organization ID) are different. To be executed.

  As a result of this matching processing, when the common word of the ID of the organization to which the respondent belongs (sender organization ID) is included in the communication content, the information in the organization exchanged by the (sender organization) of the organization to which the responder belongs However, it is recorded as the common word information shown in FIG. The matching process is executed for all common words included in the common word list associated with the ID of the organization to which the respondent included in the survey result information row to be processed belongs (sender organization ID). .

  By performing the above matching processing for all the survey result information, common word information indicating which organization influences which organization via which common word (influence degree) (FIG. 22). (A)) is created.

  When matching processing is performed for concepts (sentences, synonyms for common words, semantic networks based on common words and synonyms, and ontologies) instead of common words, how is it changed from which of the two organizations? Common word information (FIG. 22 (b)) indicating whether or not the influence is given.

  In addition, regarding survey result information exchanged between two or more organizations, by applying the common concept (word) extraction / aggregation processing and matching processing, which organization to which organization, which It is possible to know whether it is affected through such common words.

  For example, when information is transmitted from the organization p to which the respondent belongs (sending organization p) to the affected organizations q and r (receiving organization q, r), the ID (sending of the organization to which the respondent belongs) The organization ID of the organization p), the organization ID of the affected organization (receiving organization ID) as the organization ID of the organization q, and the organization ID of the receiving side as the organization ID of the organization r, respectively. When the common word extraction process and the matching process are performed separately, common word information can be obtained.

  FIG. 23 is a first and second diagram illustrating personal common word information stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 shown in FIG. As shown in FIGS. 23 (a) and 23 (b), the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 includes an identifier (individual ID, organization ID) of the respondent or the organization to which the respondent belongs, The common person word information is created with the identifier (individual ID) of the affected person, and stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

<Evaluation of organization / individual impact>
The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 includes the intra-organization communication information of the organization p to be evaluated, among the intra-organization common word information (FIG. 21) and the individual common word information (FIG. 23) generated as described above, or Individual common word information that is assumed to be an influence of individual i, common word information in each organization q (q = 1 to n; q ≠ p) (FIG. 21), and common word information between organizations (FIG. 22) is compared.

  Further, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 includes the common word / concept of the organization / individual to be evaluated (FIGS. 21 and 23) as the common word / concept in the common word information of the organization / individual. An organization including an organization / individual as a person / organization that has an influence on the organization / individual is determined to be an organization that has been affected by the organization / individual to be evaluated.

  If the organization / individual impact assessment described here is conducted for all organizations / individuals, it is possible to trace which organization / individual has an impact on which organization / individual. It is possible, and it is also possible to evaluate in a chain manner which organization / individual has an influence on other organizations based on the result of the trace.

  When performing such chained evaluation, the questionnaire survey unit 342 may perform weighting depending on the number of chains. For example, when the communication (communication) including the common word x from the organization A to the organization B, the organization B to the organization D, and the organization D to the organization E is performed in a chain, the questionnaire survey unit 342 In order to evaluate the degree of influence of A, 1 is added to the number of organizations as the degree of influence on the organization B, and 1/2 is added to the number of organizations as the degree of influence on the organization D via the organization B. The degree of influence on the organization E via the organization D may be evaluated by adding ¼ to the number of organizations.

The definition of the influence range is purely the number that the respondent A of the organization α counts “organization β” of “information x transmitted to the organization β” without duplication for other respondents.
In other words, it is possible to survey questionnaires not only for the members of organization α to be surveyed, but also for members of “organization β”. The terminology is also called Snow Bowl Sampling.
In this case, it is possible to determine a threshold for how far the chain is to be investigated.
Moreover, it is necessary to provide appropriate constraints so that the chain does not circulate.
In addition, the question contents of questionnaires distributed in a chain must be customized to the question “Where did you communicate information x” answered by respondent A of organization α, and this is the only question that needs to be chained. There is.

  In addition, as an evaluation value of an influence range, you may total for every concept ID in this way, and as an influence range of the organization A, you may total the influence range of all concept IDs. Here, regarding the influence range, when the information of the organization A is used in the activities other than the organization A and the organization A, the number of organizations in which the information is used is set as the influence range. This aggregation / evaluation of information that has caused psychological changes is not performed.

  FIG. 24 is a first and second diagram illustrating an impact evaluation result stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 shown in FIG. 6.

  The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 uses the number of affected organizations obtained as a result of the determination as an evaluation index indicating the degree of influence of the organization / individual to be evaluated. For example, if the result of a questionnaire with a five-level evaluation is used instead of the number of organizations that have had a simple influence, the result of adding each option with a weight of 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 is evaluated. It may be an evaluation index indicating the degree of influence of the target organization / individual.

  The influence range calculation process executed by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 will be described. First, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 reads the common word information (FIG. 23) line by line. Next, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 counts the number of affected organizations (receiving organizations) from the common word information without duplication.

  In order to count the number of affected organizations (receiving organizations) without duplication, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 adds a flag to each receiving organization ID once counted and receives the affected flagged effects. Do not count the organization (receiver organization). The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs such counts for all the rows of the common word information, and calculates the total value as an influence range for all organizations of a certain organization (affected organization; sending organization). To do.

  Next, an influence degree calculation process executed by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 will be described. The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 reads the common word information (FIG. 23) one line at a time, and cumulatively counts how many times the common word was used in the affected organization (receiving organization) for each sending organization. To do. The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs such counts for all the rows of the common word information, and calculates the total value as the degree of influence on all organizations of a certain organization (affected organization; sending organization). To do.

  The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 aggregates the cumulative value of the frequency of common words in the affected organization (sender organization), so that more commonly used words in an organization When used in another organization, the degree of influence may be highly estimated to calculate the degree of influence.

FIG. 25A is a diagram illustrating a specific example of the influence range obtained for each concept.
FIG. 25B is a diagram illustrating a specific example of the degree of influence obtained for each concept.
The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 adds common words and concepts to the identifiers (organization IDs, personal IDs) of the organization / individuals to be evaluated to the number / range of affected organizations, and the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 Remember. Note that the process of the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 can be changed so as to obtain the influence range and the influence degree for each concept shown in FIG. 25 instead of the influence range and the influence degree for each organization.

  Note that the number of appearances of the common word x may be analyzed noting the entire network system 1 (company) but focusing only on the organization q where the employee j communicates with the employee i of the organization p. When the same word is used only in an organization q other than the organization p by chance, it is wrong to judge that the organization q is affected by the organization p. The effect of such an error can be removed from the influence of one organization on other influences.

  Furthermore, even if the organization p and the organization q are not in direct organizational communication (organizational communication), but are in a relationship such as indirectly communicating through another organization s, they are chained. It is also possible to evaluate the influence and evaluate the total value as the influence of the organization p on the organization q. For example, each of the organizations A to D uses the word x in communication inside and outside the organization, and the organizations A, B, and D are connected by organization communication (communication) including the common word x. When communication including the word x is not performed with the organization, the appearance of the common word x in the organization C is removed from the influence of the organization A on the organization C.

<Evaluation of common words and concepts>
The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 extracts the extracted common word and the concept of the evaluation target individual / organization in the same manner as the evaluation of the influence of the evaluation target individual / organization on other individuals / organizations. Concepts include words, sentences, semantic networks, and ontology. Words are an example of these to evaluate the impact that an individual has had on an organization.

  In other words, by extracting the organization / individual corresponding to the common word information (common word information within organization, common word information between organizations / common word information) including common words / concepts extracted for the individual / organization to be evaluated The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 can evaluate the influence on the organization / individual by the common word / concept itself extracted for the individual / organization to be evaluated.

  FIG. 26 is a first to third diagram illustrating the evaluation results of the influence of the concept on the organization / individual. That is, for example, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 compares the common word information extracted for the individual / organization to be evaluated with the concept of the evaluation target (FIG. 21, FIG. 22, FIG. 23). Extract common word information (such as FIG. 21 (a)) including the concept extracted for the individual / organization, and select the organization / individual corresponding to the extracted common word information from the organization / Determine that you are an individual.

  The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 attaches an identifier (concept ID) to each concept and an organization / individual identifier (organization ID / individual ID) corresponding to the concept. The number of individuals is assigned as the degree of influence, and stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 in the format shown in FIG.

  The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 evaluates the identity between the concept of the evaluation target and the other concept by an existing method, and converts the concept given the numerical evaluation above a certain level to the concept of the evaluation target. When the function of extracting as a concept approximated to is added, as shown in FIG. 26B, the questionnaire survey unit 342 selects the organization / individual corresponding to the common word information including the concept to be evaluated and the concept approximated thereto. Determine that the organization / individual is affected.

  In addition, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 sets the concept itself as an evaluation target regardless of the organization / individual, and the organization / individual corresponding to the common word information including the evaluation target concept as shown in FIG. May be determined to be within the range of organizations / individuals affected by the concept of the evaluation target, and stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

  In addition, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 may obtain the sum of the influence levels of the common words / concepts illustrated in FIG. 26 for each organization / individual and may use it for determining the influence level of each organization / individual.

<Statistical analysis>
The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 further statistically processes the information recorded in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 by a general method such as simple correlation analysis, regression analysis, principal component analysis, and factor analysis, and The correlation or the like is analyzed, and the result is stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

  Through this statistical process, between the organization to which the respondent belongs, the other organizations and individuals that the organization to which the respondent belongs, the attributes of these organizations and individuals, and the information affected by these organizations and individuals. The relationship of is clarified. This statistical analysis does not evaluate the value of the organization or individual, but any organization or individual has responded with psychological changes from the respondents who used the information, the respondents who transmitted the information, and the information. Useful to understand whether it has affected or increased the value of one of the population. This kind of relationship understanding can be used, for example, as a guideline for creating an organization that can generate high value, or management to improve an organization / individual that has produced only low value into an organization / individual that generates high value. It becomes an important reference material.

  For example, a statistical analysis shows a group of respondents who communicate high-value information and the organization to which the respondents belong. “If you do not know what department you belong to, there is an atmosphere that helps each other. There is a high correlation with the recognition that "there is a mechanism in which your department is evaluated separately from your personal achievements regarding information sharing" In some cases, in order to bring high value to an organization, it is understood that it is necessary to bring the atmosphere of the organization in the direction of “help each other if there is something you don't understand.” It can be effectively used in corporate management.

<Analysis over time>
The questionnaire survey result information (FIG. 18) includes information indicating the time when activity, information transmission, and psychological influence were given. Therefore, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 displays the figure as needed. As indicated by a dotted line in FIG. 26, the timing information of the survey result information that is the object of evaluation can be added to the evaluation result information. As described above, when the time information is included in the evaluation result information, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 analyzes the evaluation result information in time series, and stores the analysis result in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348. .

  Similarly, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 determines how evaluation results change over time by time-series analysis, for example, how a concept spreads to organizations within a company. The analysis result is stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348. The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 focuses on a certain organization A, analyzes how the organization A itself and the value of the concept used in the organization A have changed, and analyzes them. The result is stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

<Comprehensive evaluation, etc.>
The evaluation results of each organization / individual by the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 can be displayed in various formats via the UI unit 352. For example, the analysis result obtained by the analysis over time is displayed on the display / input unit 206 (FIG. 2) in the form of a line graph, for example. For example, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 displays the degree of influence of a certain organization on other organizations in the form of a ranking or inputs information on the distance between organizations according to the user's operation. In response, the correlation between the degree of influence and the distance between the organizations is displayed.

  In addition, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 not only performs evaluation for each organization / individual, but also adds together the evaluations of the plurality of organizations / individuals to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the plurality of organizations / individuals. For example, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 evaluates each of the organizations A to F independently, displays and outputs the evaluation results, and adds, for example, the evaluations of the organizations A to D. The evaluations are added together, and the comprehensive evaluations of the organizations A to D and the comprehensive evaluations of the organizations E and F are stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 or displayed to the user via the UI unit 352.

  Further, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 compares, for example, the evaluation information of the two organizations A and B, thereby making a difference in communication, influence range, And the difference of each value over time is analyzed across the organization and stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348.

  FIG. 27 is a flowchart for explaining the analysis / evaluation processing procedure of the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346. The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs analysis / evaluation by processing according to this flow, and stores the result in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348. The UI unit 312 displays the analysis / evaluation result on the display device of the display / input unit 206 or records it in the recording medium 210 via the data recording unit 208.

  Each step of the flow shown in FIG. 27 will be described. In step S400, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 generates the survey result information shown in FIGS. 18A to 18C and FIG. 20 from the response returned from the client computer 20 (FIG. 1). The questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 further analyzes the generated survey result information, and extracts common words / concepts (attributes) for each organization / individual as described with reference to FIGS.

  In step S402, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 compares the obtained common word / concept regarding the organization / individual to be evaluated with the survey result information. That is, a comparison between the survey result information shown in FIGS. 18A to 18C and FIG. 20 and the common word / concept (attribute) for each organization / individual described with reference to FIGS. Do.

  In step S404, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 determines the influence of the organization / individual subject to evaluation on other organizations / individuals based on the comparison result in the process of S402 according to the user's designation. To evaluate. For example, the influence range and the influence degree of the unit shown in FIG. 24 are obtained, and the evaluation based on the influence range and the influence degree is performed.

  In step S406, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 evaluates the influence of the common word / concept of the organization / individual to be evaluated on the organization / individual according to the user's designation. For example, an influence range and an influence level in units of concepts (words) shown in FIG. 25 are obtained, and evaluation based on the influence range and the influence degree is performed.

  In step S408, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs S404. Statistical analysis is performed on the evaluation result in the process of S406. In step S410, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs S404. The evaluation result in the process of S406 is analyzed with time.

  In step S412, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 performs S404. A comprehensive evaluation is performed on the evaluation result in the process of S406.

  In step S416, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit 346 stores the analysis / evaluation results obtained by the above processing in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348, and stores the various analysis / evaluation results stored in accordance with user operations. The data is displayed on the display / input device 206 (FIG. 2) via the UI unit 352 (S310).

[2.5. (C) Integrated processing unit]
Next, processing of the integration processing unit 350 illustrated in FIG. 6 will be described. The integration processing unit 350 includes a comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351, a comparison analysis / evaluation result DB 352, a comparison analysis / evaluation result notification unit 353, and a comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354.

  The comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 stores the analysis / evaluation result executed based on the questionnaire in the questionnaire processing unit 341 and the analysis / evaluation result executed based on the log by the log processing unit 301, respectively. The evaluation result of the result DB 348 and the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308 are compared, integrated analysis and evaluation are executed based on the comparison process, a comparative analysis / evaluation result is generated, and the generated result is compared, analyzed and evaluated. Record in the result DB 352.

  The comparative analysis / evaluation result notification unit 353 notifies the organization or individual of the results recorded in the comparative analysis / evaluation result DB 352 and the integrated result data generated by the comparative analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354. The notification process is executed when a notification condition described later is satisfied. For example, when it is determined that there is a difference between the common analysis items of the questionnaire analysis result and the log analysis result, a process of notifying the difference via the “network communication” means is executed. As an evaluation unit, either an organization composed of individual members or an individual as a member of the organization can be set.

  The comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 executes data integration processing based on the results recorded in the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB 352. That is, analysis items that are not common to the questionnaire analysis result and the log analysis result are integrated with each other, and the integration result is notified via the network communication unit 300.

  The processing of the comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 will be described with reference to FIG. The comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 includes an analysis / evaluation result executed based on the questionnaire in the questionnaire processing unit 341 and an analysis / evaluation result executed based on the log by the log processing unit 301, respectively. Are obtained from the log analysis / evaluation result DB 308, the evaluation results are compared, and integrated analysis and evaluation are executed based on the comparison process.

  FIG. 28A shows correspondence data between a concept (word) corresponding to an organization, which is one of the analysis / evaluation results performed based on the log in the log processing unit 301, and the influence range. This data is the data described with reference to FIG. 16A, and is evaluation data based on a log. FIG. 28B shows correspondence data between a concept (word) corresponding to an organization, which is one of the results of analysis / evaluation performed based on the questionnaire in the questionnaire processing unit 341, and the influence range. This data is the data described with reference to FIG. 25A, and is evaluation data based on a questionnaire.

  The comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 compares each of these data, and for the data having the same organization ID and concept (word), the influence range (influence degree) by log analysis and the influence range (influence degree) by questionnaire analysis FIG. 28 (c) comparative analysis / evaluation data is generated as the data associated with each other, and the generated result is recorded in the comparative analysis / evaluation result DB 352. In this example, only the influence range data is shown, but as described above, the influence degree data acquired in the log analysis and the questionnaire analysis may be used as the configuration data.

  With reference to FIG. 29, the process of the comparative analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 will be described. The comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 executes an integration process of data recorded in the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB 352. That is, analysis items that are not common to the questionnaire analysis result and the log analysis result are integrated with each other, and the integration result is notified via the network communication unit 300.

  FIG. 29A shows correspondence data between a concept (word) corresponding to an organization, which is one of the results of analysis / evaluation performed based on a log in the log processing unit 301, and an influence range. This data is the data described with reference to FIG. 16A, and is evaluation data based on a log. FIG. 29B shows correspondence data of a concept (word) corresponding to an organization, which is one of the analysis / evaluation results performed based on the questionnaire in the questionnaire processing unit 341, and the influence range. This data is the data described with reference to FIG. 25A, and is evaluation data based on a questionnaire.

  The comparative analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 generates, for example, comparative analysis / evaluation analysis integrated data shown in FIG. 29C based on these data, and the generated result is compared with the comparison analysis / evaluation result notification unit 353. This process is used to notify organizations and individuals. The notification condition will be described later.

  The comparative analysis / evaluation analysis integrated data shown in FIG. 29 (c) is data in which an organization ID, a concept, an influence range (average value), and an influence type are associated with each other. In this example, the influence range data in the integrated data is set as an average value of the influence range data based on the log analysis shown in FIG. 29 (a) and the influence range data based on the questionnaire analysis shown in FIG. 29 (b). Yes. The type of influence is data obtained only by questionnaire analysis.

  In this way, the comparative analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 executes integration processing of analysis data of both log analysis and questionnaire analysis. Note that the average value is applied to the influence range data here, but it can be applied in various ways such as applying a larger value, applying a smaller value, or performing weighted averaging. is there. Further, in this example, only the influence range data is shown, but as described above, the influence degree data acquired in the log analysis and the questionnaire analysis may be used as the configuration data of the integrated data.

  In addition, when log analysis and questionnaire analysis are regularly performed, for example, every month, every three months, the comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 and the comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 determine which log analysis You have to select which questionnaire analysis results you want to compare or integrate.

  A process for automatically setting the log analysis result and the questionnaire analysis result to be compared or integrated will be described with reference to FIGS. 30 and 31. FIG. FIG. 30 is a graph showing the time transition of the influence range (or degree of influence) of the past log analysis results and the questionnaire analysis results executed periodically. The time transition of the influence range (or influence degree) corresponding to a certain concept (word) with a certain organization ID is shown.

  In the example shown in the figure, the log analysis result shows the transition of the same influence range (or influence degree) with a delay of about three months with respect to the questionnaire analysis result. That is, the log analysis result corresponds to the questionnaire analysis result with a delay of almost three months. Based on such transition analysis, the optimal comparison process and log analysis result that is executed three months after the questionnaire analysis is applied to the log analysis result that is the target of comparison or integration processing for a certain questionnaire analysis result. It is presumed that integrated processing will be possible.

  In addition, in the calculation process of the shift which applied the time transition data of the influence range (or influence degree) of the past log analysis result and questionnaire analysis result shown in FIG. 30, basically, as a process based on the correlation of each data Although it is executed, specifically, a simple upper / lower value or an upper / lower level may be set, or an algorithm such as graph approximation or pattern recognition may be used.

  The comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 and the comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 perform comparison and integration processing between the optimal log analysis result and the questionnaire analysis result through such estimation processing. FIG. 31 shows an example of timing setting for comparison and integration processing between log analysis results and questionnaire analysis results.

FIG. 31 is a list showing a plurality of timing setting examples.
[ID1] is an example in which both questionnaire analysis and log analysis are executed every month, and is a timing setting example in which comparison and integration processing are executed using the results of questionnaire analysis and log analysis in the same month.
[ID2] is an example in which the questionnaire analysis is performed every three months and the log analysis is performed every month, and the log analysis result for each month and the questionnaire analysis result for every three months are used to perform comparison and integration processing. is there.
[ID3] is an example in which the questionnaire analysis is performed every year and the log analysis is performed every month, and the log analysis result of each month and the questionnaire analysis result of each year are used to perform comparison and integration processing. is there.
[ID4] is executed every month for both the questionnaire analysis and the log analysis, but the questionnaire analysis result is a timing setting example in which comparison and integration processing is executed using a result of three months before the log analysis result.

  When the questionnaire analysis result time transition and the log analysis result time transition described with reference to FIG. 30 are included, the process according to the timing setting of [ID4] is executed to execute the optimum comparison and integration process. The

  The comparison / analysis evaluation unit 351 and the comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 can set various timing processes shown in FIG. 31 by selecting an ID. Any number of timings can be specified, and questionnaire surveys can be automatically performed at the specified time set here (for example, Web surveys are conducted for organization members and survey data is recorded). .

  If you do not want to set the timing, set the default value (for example, the timing at which the questionnaire analysis was performed, the questionnaire once every six months, the log analysis to analyze the data going back six months ago, etc.) You may follow The result of recognition by questionnaire analysis is considered to have a time lag in being reflected in the result of log analysis, so the correspondence between the recognition (result of questionnaire analysis) and the result of action accumulation (result of log analysis) It is possible to specify any step backward. For example, it is possible to intentionally set the questionnaire timing before the log analysis timing (see, for example, [ID4]).

  It is possible to automatically set how far back to specify by pattern matching of past influence levels and influence transitions (see FIG. 30). Of course, the questionnaire analysis result older than the log analysis result can be manually or automatically associated for some reason.

  Next, the process of the comparative analysis / evaluation result notification unit 353 will be described. The comparative analysis / evaluation result notifying unit 353 notifies the organization, the individual, the evaluation organization, and the like of the results recorded in the comparative analysis / evaluation result DB 352 and the integrated result data generated by the comparative analysis / evaluation analysis result integrating unit 354. .

  The notification process by the comparative analysis / evaluation result notification unit 353 is executed when a predetermined notification condition is satisfied. The notification condition will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 32 shows five types of notification conditions as examples.

[ID1] is a notification condition that the notification process is executed when a difference of 50 or more is seen in the influence degree of the organization A, and a specific conditional expression is the following expression.
IF (| (degree of influence of questionnaire analysis result of organization A)-(degree of influence of log analysis of organization A) |> 50) THEN notification [ID2] has a difference of 30 or more in the scope of influence of organization B Is a notification condition that the notification process is executed, and a specific conditional expression is the following expression.
IF (| (Scope of impact of questionnaire analysis result of organization B)-(Scope of impact of log analysis of organization B) |> 30) THEN notification [ID3] Is a notification condition that the notification process is executed when a difference of 100 or more is seen, and a specific conditional expression is the following expression.
IF ((| (Scope of impact of questionnaire analysis results of organization B)-(Scope of impact of log analysis of organization B) |> 100) and (| (degree of impact of questionnaire analysis results of organization A)-(log of organization A) Impact level of analysis) |> 20)) THEN notification [ID4] is a notification condition that the notification process is executed when a difference of 27 or more regarding the impact content “customer” of organization A is found, A specific conditional expression is the following expression.
IF (| (Influence level related to “customer”, impact content of organization A questionnaire analysis results) − (Influence level related to “customer”, impact level from log analysis of organization A)) |> 27) THEN notice [ID5] is 2003 In October, the notification condition is that the notification process is executed when a difference of 50 or more is found in the influence degree of the organization A, and a specific conditional expression is the following expression.
IF (| (Influence of questionnaire analysis results of organization A in October 2003)-(Influence of log analysis of organization A in October 2003) |> 50) THEN Notice

  The notification condition shown here is an example, and various other notification conditions can be set. The comparative analysis / evaluation result notifying unit 353 records in the comparative analysis / evaluation result DB 352 when a predetermined notification condition, for example, a notification condition set in any of ID1 to ID5 shown in FIG. 32 is satisfied. As a result, the integrated result data generated by the comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354 is notified to an organization, an individual, an evaluation organization, or the like.

  Note that any number of notification conditions can be set, and the notification method can be simply displayed on the UI, or can be executed by e-mail, instant message, telephone or the like. Note that the notification condition may include a natural language (for example, refer to the condition of [ID4]), and the notification condition may include a description regarding temporal change (for example, refer to the condition of [ID5]).

  Next, a processing sequence executed in the integrated processing unit 350 will be described with reference to the flow of FIG.

  In step S600, a notification condition is set. As described above with reference to FIG. 32, various conditions can be set for the notification condition. One of the IDs shown in FIG. 32 is selected to determine the notification condition. In addition, it is good also as a setting which notifies all when it corresponds to either of several conditions selected by several ID selection.

  In step S602, it is determined whether or not the correspondence setting between the log analysis result and the questionnaire analysis result is set automatically. The automatic setting of the analysis result of the log and the questionnaire analysis is a process of determining the optimum correspondence based on the past log analysis result and the time transition data of the questionnaire analysis result described above with reference to FIG.

  If it is automatic setting, the process advances to step S604 to automatically calculate the correspondence between the log analysis result and the questionnaire analysis result. As described above, this processing includes past impact level, pattern matching of transition of influence, simple determination of upper and lower values, determination processing based on upper and lower level data, or algorithms such as graph approximation and pattern recognition. Apply and execute.

  If it is not automatic setting, the process proceeds to step S606, and the log analysis result and the questionnaire analysis result are associated with each other as a manual operation by the operator.

  In step S608, it is determined whether a new questionnaire analysis result has been input. This is executed based on determination of whether or not new result data is stored in the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB 348 of the questionnaire processing unit 341 (see FIG. 6). If no new questionnaire analysis result is input, the standby state is set and the process returns to the start step.

  If a new questionnaire analysis result is input, an analysis and evaluation process based on the questionnaire result is executed in step S610, and an analysis and evaluation process based on the log result is executed in step S612. These analysis and evaluation processes are executed in the questionnaire processing unit 341 and the log processing unit 301, respectively. Note that these processes are not necessarily executed at this point in time, and may be executed at the respective data accumulation timings in the questionnaire processing unit 341 and the log processing unit 301, respectively.

  In step S614, a comparison process between the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result executed by the questionnaire processing unit 341 and the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result executed by the log processing unit 301 is executed. In this comparison processing, the processing timing of the analysis and evaluation processing based on the questionnaire results executed in steps S610 and S612 and the analysis and evaluation processing based on the log results is the automatic setting in step S604 or the manual setting timing in step S606. This is executed as a process for determining whether the data has the corresponding timing.

  If the data does not correspond to these setting timings, the process returns to step S608 to wait for input of a new questionnaire result. In step S614, the processing timing of the analysis and evaluation processing based on the questionnaire results executed in steps S610 and S612 and the analysis and evaluation processing based on the log results corresponds to the automatic setting in step S604 or the manual setting timing in step S606. If it is determined that the data is the timing data, the process proceeds to step S616.

In step S616, the analysis and evaluation process based on the questionnaire results executed in steps S610 and S612, the analysis based on the log result, and the comparative analysis and evaluation process based on the respective result data of the evaluation process are executed. This process is a process of associating the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result with the log analysis / evaluation result as described with reference to FIG. 28. For example, as shown in FIG. ), The corresponding data of the influence range (or influence degree) by the log analysis and the influence range (or influence degree) by the questionnaire analysis are generated and stored as the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB 352.

  Next, in step S618, a comparison analysis / evaluation result integration process is executed. This process is a process of the comparative analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354, and as described above with reference to FIG. 29, the questionnaire analysis / evaluation result and the log analysis / evaluation result are applied in a complementary manner. This is a process for generating the integrated analysis and evaluation results. For example, a table including organization ID, concept (word), influence range (or degree of influence) as an average value of log analysis and questionnaire analysis, and data of the types of influence mainly made by questionnaire analysis shown in FIG. It is executed as a process for generating data.

  Next, in step S620, a process for determining whether or not the notification condition is met is executed. This process is a process of the comparative analysis / evaluation result notifying unit 353, and determines whether or not the notification condition set in step S600 is satisfied among the notification conditions described above with reference to FIG. If the condition is satisfied, the process proceeds to step S622 to execute notification processing. If the setting notification condition is not satisfied, the process returns to step S608 to wait for input of a new questionnaire result.

  By these processes, when a predetermined setting notification condition is satisfied, the result recorded in the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB 352, the integration result data generated by the comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354, etc. Notify the evaluation organization.

  A specific notification condition setting example and notification information example will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 34 shows (a) notification conditions, (b) comparison analysis / evaluation results stored in the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB, (c) difference data, and (d) notification information.

In this example, it is assumed that (a) the notification condition [ID1] is set as the notification condition. [ID1] is a notification condition that the notification process is executed when a difference of 50 or more is found in the degree of influence of the organization A, and a specific conditional expression is the following expression.
IF (| (degree of influence of questionnaire analysis result of organization A)-(degree of influence of log analysis of organization A) |> = 50) THEN notification

  The difference data between the influence range by the log analysis and the influence range by the questionnaire analysis based on the comparison analysis / evaluation result stored in the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB shown in (b) is (c) difference data. Based on the difference data, it is determined whether or not (a) the setting notification condition [ID1] in the notification condition is satisfied. This determination process is executed in the comparative analysis / evaluation result notification unit 353. As a result, the values [85] and [55] shown in FIG. 34 (c) difference data indicate the notification condition of [ID1], that is, “notification processing when a difference of 50 or more is seen in the influence degree of the organization A”. Is satisfied, the notification process is executed.

  Specific notification information is, for example, as shown in (d) notification information, “the influence range of organization A through“ trust ”and“ knowledge ”is the recognition (questionnaire) and reality (log). Then there are more than 50 gaps ".

  As described above, when the predetermined notification condition is satisfied, the result recorded in the comparison analysis / evaluation result DB 352, the integration result data generated by the comparison analysis / evaluation analysis result integration unit 354, or the like Notify individuals and evaluation organizations. The information to be notified is information based on the analysis / evaluation results of both the questionnaire analysis and the log analysis, and it is possible to provide information that more reflects the substance.

  The present invention has been described in detail above with reference to specific embodiments. However, it is obvious that those skilled in the art can make modifications and substitutions of the embodiments without departing from the gist of the present invention. In other words, the present invention has been disclosed in the form of exemplification, and should not be interpreted in a limited manner. In order to determine the gist of the present invention, the claims section described at the beginning should be considered.

  The series of processes described in the specification can be executed by hardware, software, or a combined configuration of both. When executing processing by software, the program recording the processing sequence is installed in a memory in a computer incorporated in dedicated hardware and executed, or the program is executed on a general-purpose computer capable of executing various processing. It can be installed and executed.

  For example, the program can be recorded in advance on a hard disk or ROM (Read Only Memory) as a recording medium. Alternatively, the program is temporarily or permanently stored on a removable recording medium such as a flexible disk, a CD-ROM (Compact Disc Read Only Memory), an MO (Magneto optical) disk, a DVD (Digital Versatile Disc), a magnetic disk, or a semiconductor memory. It can be stored (recorded). Such a removable recording medium can be provided as so-called package software.

  The program is installed on the computer from the removable recording medium as described above, or is wirelessly transferred from the download site to the computer, or is wired to the computer via a network such as a LAN (Local Area Network) or the Internet. The computer can receive the program transferred in this manner and install it on a recording medium such as a built-in hard disk.

  The various processes described in the specification are not only executed in time series according to the description, but may be executed in parallel or individually as required by the processing capability of the apparatus that executes the processes. Further, in this specification, the system is a logical set configuration of a plurality of devices, and the devices of each configuration are not limited to being in the same casing.

  As described above, according to the configuration of the present invention, the value of an organization can be objectively analyzed by analyzing survey results such as questionnaires for each organization and logs such as messages and emails transmitted within and between organizations. , A tissue analysis and evaluation apparatus, a tissue analysis and evaluation method, and a computer program are realized. In particular, for the impact assessment between organizations, there are two impact assessments: the impact assessment between organizations as a fact by the log of dialogue within the organization, and the impact assessment between organizations based on subjective judgments by questionnaire methods to members of the organization. By executing the process that integrates the evaluation methods, it is possible to perform organizational analysis that enables more accurate organizational evaluation.

  Furthermore, according to the configuration of the present invention, the integration data is selected based on the time transition of the log analysis evaluation result and the impact evaluation result as the questionnaire analysis evaluation result that are the targets of the integration process. Processing is realized.

  Furthermore, according to the configuration of the present invention, in the integrated evaluation data notification process, when the predetermined notification condition, for example, the difference data between the log analysis evaluation result and the impact evaluation result as the questionnaire analysis evaluation result satisfies a predetermined condition Since the notification condition for setting the above is defined and the evaluation result notification process is executed, selective notification of only truly useful information is possible.

It is a figure which illustrates the structure of the network system to which the evaluation method concerning this invention is applied. It is a figure which shows the hardware constitutions of the client computer, server, and analysis / evaluation apparatus which were shown in FIG. It is a figure which shows the structure of the client program which operate | moves on the client computer shown in FIG. 1, FIG. It is a figure which shows the structure of the server program which operate | moves on the server shown in FIG. 1, FIG. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an e-mail message log recorded in a log DB illustrated in FIG. 4. It is a figure which shows the structure of the analysis / evaluation program which operate | moves on the analysis / evaluation apparatus shown in FIG. 1, FIG. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing organization information stored in an organization / personal DB shown in FIG. 6. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the structure | tissue information shown in FIG. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing personal information stored in the organization / personal DB shown in FIG. 6. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the personal information shown in FIG. It is a figure which shows the organization communication information which a log collection and management part memorize | stores in log DB. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating intra-organizational communication common word information stored in a log analysis / evaluation result DB by a log analysis / evaluation unit illustrated in FIG. 6. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating inter-organization communication common word information stored in a log analysis / evaluation result DB by a log analysis / evaluation unit illustrated in FIG. 6. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating personal communication common word information stored in a log analysis / evaluation result DB by a log analysis / evaluation unit illustrated in FIG. 6. It is a figure which illustrates the impact evaluation result which the log analysis / evaluation part shown in Drawing 6 memorizes in log analysis / evaluation result DB. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the influence range calculated | required for every concept, and an influence degree. It is a flowchart which shows the log analysis / evaluation process sequence which a log analysis / evaluation part (FIG. 6) performs. It is a figure which illustrates the survey result information which a questionnaire survey part memorize | stores in questionnaire survey result DB. It is a figure which shows organization communication ID. It is a figure which illustrates the survey result information which the questionnaire survey part 342 memorize | stores in survey result DB, when a some question is made to each member of the system according to organization (FIG. 1). It is a figure which illustrates the common word information in a structure | tissue which the questionnaire analysis and evaluation part shown in FIG. 6 memorize | stores in questionnaire analysis and evaluation result DB. It is a figure which illustrates the common word information between organizations which the questionnaire analysis and evaluation part shown in FIG. 6 memorize | stores in questionnaire analysis and evaluation result DB. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating personal common word information stored in a questionnaire analysis / evaluation result DB by a questionnaire analysis / evaluation unit shown in FIG. 6. It is a figure which shows the impact evaluation result which the questionnaire analysis and evaluation part shown in FIG. 6 memorize | stores in questionnaire analysis and evaluation result DB. It is a figure which shows the specific example of an influence range and an influence degree. It is a figure which illustrates the evaluation result of the influence which a concept gives to an organization and an individual. It is a flowchart which shows the analysis / evaluation process sequence of a questionnaire analysis / evaluation part. It is a figure explaining the process example of the comparative analysis and evaluation part of an integrated process part. It is a figure explaining the example of a process of the comparison analysis and evaluation analysis result integration part of an integrated process part. It is a figure explaining matching with the log analysis and questionnaire analysis applied in the process of an integrated process part. It is a figure explaining execution of log analysis and questionnaire analysis, and the timing setting of matching. It is a figure explaining the example of a setting of the notification timing applied in the process of the comparative analysis / evaluation result notification part of an integrated process part. It is a flowchart explaining the process sequence which an integrated process part performs. It is a figure explaining the specific example of the process which an integrated process part performs.

Explanation of symbols

1 Network system 100 Network 2 Departmental system 102 Departmental LAN
20 Client computer 200 Data processing unit 202 CPU
204 Memory 206 Display / input unit 208 Data recording unit 210 Recording medium 212 Communication unit 22 Client program 220 UI unit 222 Mail program 224 Web browser 226 LAN communication control unit 24 Server 26 Server program 260 LAN communication control unit 262 Network communication control unit 264 Mail server 266 Web server 268 Log management unit 3 Analysis / evaluation device 35 Analysis / evaluation program 300 Network communication unit 301 Log processing unit 302 Log collection / management unit 304 Log DB
306 Log Analysis / Evaluation Unit 308 Log Analysis / Evaluation Result DB
310 Organization / Personal DB
312 UI unit 341 Questionnaire processing unit 342 Questionnaire survey unit 344 Questionnaire survey result DB
346 Questionnaire Analysis / Evaluation Department 348 Questionnaire Analysis / Evaluation Result DB
350 Integrated Processing Unit 351 Comparative Analysis / Evaluation Unit 352 Comparative Analysis / Evaluation Result DB
353 Comparative Analysis / Evaluation Result Notification Unit 354 Comparative Analysis / Evaluation Analysis Result Integration Unit

Claims (23)

A log storage unit for storing a log based on transmission information within or between units to be evaluated;
A log analysis and evaluation unit that analyzes the log and evaluates the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units;
Analyzing the response result to the questionnaire processing for the unit or unit members, and a questionnaire analysis evaluation unit for evaluating the influence of the evaluation target unit on other units;
Based on the log based on the transmission information data and the questionnaire result, the evaluation target unit is obtained by the integration process based on the comparison between the log evaluation result generated in the log analysis evaluation unit and the questionnaire evaluation result generated in the questionnaire analysis evaluation unit. An integrated processing unit that performs an integrated assessment of the impact on other units;
A tissue analysis evaluation apparatus characterized by comprising: The integrated processing unit
The log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result are integrated in a mutually complementary manner, and the process for generating the integrated evaluation data including the evaluation result data included in only one of the evaluation results is performed. The tissue analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 1. The integrated processing unit
The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the evaluation result data included only in the questionnaire evaluation result is configured to execute processing for generating integrated evaluation data including data indicating the type of influence. The integrated processing unit
It has a result notification unit that notifies the generated evaluation data,
The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the result notification unit is configured to execute a notification process when a predetermined notification condition is satisfied. The notification condition is:
The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 4, comprising a condition determined based on difference data between an impact evaluation result based on a log and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire. The integrated processing unit
In the integration process of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result, a configuration process for executing a setting process for associating a log collection time of log information to be integrated with a questionnaire implementation time of the questionnaire information, The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the association setting is configured to be automatically set based on time transition data of an impact evaluation result based on past accumulated logs and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire. .   The association setting process based on time transition data between an impact evaluation result based on the past accumulated log and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire is configured to be executed based on a correlation in the time transition data. 6. The tissue analysis evaluation apparatus according to 6. Each of the log analysis evaluation unit and the questionnaire analysis evaluation unit is configured to perform an impact evaluation by word analysis based on accumulated data,
The integrated processing unit determines whether the evaluation target unit is another unit based on the impact evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by word analysis in the log analysis evaluation unit and the evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by word analysis in the questionnaire analysis evaluation unit. The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the structure analysis evaluation apparatus is configured to perform an integrated evaluation of an influence on the organization. The tissue analysis evaluation apparatus further includes:
The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a questionnaire survey unit that performs a questionnaire process on the unit or unit member. The log storage unit stores a log including a count value of electrophotographic paper,
The said log analysis evaluation part is a structure which analyzes the log containing the count value of the sheet | seat of electrophotography, and is the structure which evaluates the influence which the unit of evaluation object has on other units. Organization analysis evaluation device.   The organization analysis evaluation apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 10, wherein the unit is one of an organization composed of individual members and an individual as a member of the organization. Organization analysis evaluation method,
A log storage step for storing a log based on transmission information within or between units to be evaluated;
A log analysis evaluation step of analyzing the log and evaluating the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units;
A questionnaire analysis evaluation step of analyzing a response result of a questionnaire to the unit or unit members, and evaluating an influence of an evaluation target unit on other units;
By the integration process based on the comparison between the log evaluation result generated in the log analysis evaluation step and the questionnaire evaluation result generated in the questionnaire analysis evaluation step, the evaluation target unit is based on the log based on the transmission information data and the questionnaire result. An integrated processing step that performs an integrated assessment of the impact on other units;
A tissue analysis evaluation method characterized by comprising: The integration processing step includes
The log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result are integrated in a mutually complementary manner, and processing for generating integrated evaluation data including evaluation result data included in only one of the evaluation results is executed. Item 13. The tissue analysis evaluation method according to Item 12. The integration processing step includes
The organization analysis evaluation method according to claim 13, wherein a process of generating integrated evaluation data including data indicating the type of influence is executed as evaluation result data included only in the questionnaire evaluation result. The tissue analysis evaluation method further includes:
A result notification step for notifying the generated evaluation data;
The organization analysis evaluation method according to claim 12, wherein the result notification step executes a notification process when a predetermined notification condition is satisfied. The notification condition is:
The organization analysis evaluation method according to claim 15, comprising conditions determined based on difference data between an impact evaluation result based on a log and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire. The integration processing step includes
In the integration process of the log evaluation result and the questionnaire evaluation result, a step of executing a setting process of a correspondence between a log collection time of log information to be integrated and a questionnaire implementation time of the questionnaire information, The organization analysis evaluation method according to claim 12, wherein the association setting is automatically set based on time transition data between an impact evaluation result based on a past accumulated log and an impact evaluation result based on a questionnaire.   The association setting process based on the time transition data between the impact evaluation result based on the past accumulated log and the impact evaluation result based on the questionnaire is executed based on a correlation in the time transition data. Organization analysis evaluation method. Each of the log analysis evaluation step and the questionnaire analysis evaluation step is a step of performing an impact evaluation by word analysis based on accumulated data,
In the integration processing step, the evaluation target unit is another unit based on the impact evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by word analysis in the log analysis evaluation step and the evaluation result of the evaluation target unit by word analysis in the questionnaire analysis evaluation step. The organization analysis evaluation method according to claim 12, wherein an integrated evaluation of an influence on the organization is performed. The tissue analysis evaluation method further includes:
The organization analysis evaluation method according to claim 12, further comprising a questionnaire survey step of executing a questionnaire process on the unit or unit member. The log storing step stores a log including a count value of electrophotographic paper;
The organization analysis evaluation according to claim 12, wherein the log analysis evaluation step analyzes a log including a count value of electrophotographic paper and evaluates an influence of a unit to be evaluated on other units. Method.   The organization analysis evaluation method according to any one of claims 12 to 21, wherein the unit is one of an organization composed of individual members and an individual as a member of the organization. A computer program that executes organization analysis evaluation processing,
A log storage step for storing a log based on transmission information within or between units to be evaluated;
A log analysis evaluation step of analyzing the log and evaluating the influence of the unit to be evaluated on other units;
A questionnaire analysis evaluation step of analyzing a response result of a questionnaire to the unit or unit members, and evaluating an influence of an evaluation target unit on other units;
By the integration process based on the comparison between the log evaluation result generated in the log analysis evaluation step and the questionnaire evaluation result generated in the questionnaire analysis evaluation step, the evaluation target unit is based on the log based on the transmission information data and the questionnaire result. An integrated processing step that performs an integrated assessment of the impact on other units;
A computer program characterized by comprising:

Images