JP2007058886A - Device, method and program for determining improvement factor - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To extract an improvement factor superior in cost effectiveness for improving the whole satisfaction degree by taking into consideration the relationship between an improvement in the whole satisfaction degree and the cost required for improving its whole satisfaction degree in improvement of every individual factor. <P>SOLUTION: This improvement factor determining device 1 calculates a standard partial regression coefficient on the basis of an individual factor evaluation value indicating evaluation for every individual factor and the whole satisfaction value indicating the whole satisfaction degree, and calculates a value of the individual factor evaluation value required for improving the whole satisfaction value on the basis of the standard partial regression coefficient, and calculates the cost for improving the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the calculated individual factor evaluation value on the basis of cost information, and determines the cost required for improving the whole satisfaction value on the basis of the calculated cost in response to accumulation of the individual factors and its combination. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2007,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention is based on the overall satisfaction of the questionnaire target obtained from the questionnaire results and the individual factor satisfaction in the questionnaire target. The present invention relates to an improvement measure factor determination apparatus, an improvement measure factor determination method, and an improvement measure factor determination program capable of calculating whether improvement is preferable from a cost-effective viewpoint.

  2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, many methods have been used in which questionnaires are conducted on a specific target person or an unspecified number of people to check satisfaction with a specific product or a specific service.

  In an ordinary questionnaire, at least two questionnaire items may be provided: an evaluation (satisfaction level) for a plurality of individual factors, and an overall satisfaction level (overall satisfaction level) that comprehensively determines these individual evaluations. Many. For this reason, the evaluation of individual factors and the overall satisfaction are classified and evaluated by, for example, a five-level evaluation standard (hereinafter, the overall satisfaction value evaluated in this way is set as the overall satisfaction value, and the same The relationship between the overall satisfaction and the individual factors can be obtained by comparing the evaluated items with the evaluation values of the individual factors evaluated numerically as individual factor evaluation values). By using the relationship between the overall satisfaction and the evaluation of individual factors, it is possible to determine what individual factors should be improved in order to improve the overall satisfaction.

  In order to obtain the relationship between overall satisfaction and individual factor evaluation, a scatter diagram is generally created based on multiple overall satisfaction values and individual factor evaluation values answered by a questionnaire. From this, a regression equation (regression line) Y represented by Y = aX + b (Y: overall satisfaction value, X: individual factor evaluation value, a, b: constant) and a correlation coefficient r for each individual factor are obtained.

  Here, the correlation coefficient r represents the strength of the correlation between the overall satisfaction value plotted on the scatter diagram and the individual factor evaluation value, and is represented by a value from −1 to 1. In general, in a scatter diagram showing an upward regression equation, the correlation is positive and the correlation coefficient r is close to 1, and in a scatter diagram showing a downward regression equation, the correlation is negative. Thus, the correlation coefficient r becomes a value close to -1. Further, in the scattered scatter diagram, the correlation is zero and the correlation coefficient r is close to zero.

  Therefore, the correlation between the overall satisfaction value and the individual factor evaluation value can be determined to be stronger as the value of the correlation coefficient r approaches ± 1, and the correlation is weaker as the value of the correlation coefficient r approaches 0. It can be judged. In general, it is possible to improve the overall satisfaction more effectively by improving individual factors having a strong correlation than by improving a satisfaction having a weak correlation.

  The regression equation Y is an equation calculated by the least square method based on the plot values of the scatter diagram, and a shown in the regression equation Y is called a standard partial regression coefficient. Since this standard partial regression coefficient indicates the slope in the scatter plot, individual factors that show a high standard partial regression coefficient are evaluated more individually than individual factors that show a low standard partial regression coefficient. It is possible to obtain a high overall satisfaction by improving.

  Therefore, individual factors having a strong correlation (positive correlation) are extracted with priority over the correlation coefficient r, and the relationship between the standard partial regression coefficient of the extracted individual factors and the individual factor evaluation value is represented by a graph. Therefore, it is possible to determine which individual factor is preferably improved in order to effectively improve the overall satisfaction (for example, see Non-Patent Document 1 and Non-Patent Document 2).

  FIG. 8A is a graph showing regression equations of individual factors A to D, and FIG. 8B shows the current evaluation results for individual factors A to D (individual factor evaluation of individual factors A to D). 9 is a graph showing the relationship between the values h1, h2) and the standard partial regression coefficient of each individual factor shown in FIG.

  The individual factor A shown in FIG. 8 (b) tends to have a low evaluation of the individual factor (individual factor evaluation value h1) at the present time, and there is much room for improvement, and the standard partial regression coefficient is large (FIG. 8 ( Since the slope of the regression equation shown in a) is large), the overall satisfaction can be greatly improved by improving the evaluation of the individual factor A by one level.

  On the other hand, the individual factor B shown in FIG. 8B has a room for improvement because the current individual factor evaluation (individual factor evaluation value h1) tends to be low, but the value of the standard partial regression coefficient is small ( Since the slope of the regression equation shown in FIG. 8A is small), the improvement of the overall satisfaction when the evaluation of the individual factor A is improved by one level is smaller than that of the individual factor A.

  In addition, since the individual factor C shown in FIG. 8B tends to have a high evaluation of the individual factor (individual factor evaluation value h2) at present and there is little room for improvement, the evaluation of the individual factor C is further improved. It is not easy. However, since the standard partial regression coefficient of the individual factor C shows a large value (the slope of the regression equation shown in FIG. 8A is large), if the evaluation of the individual factor C can be improved, overall satisfaction will be improved. It is possible to greatly improve.

  Further, the individual factor D shown in FIG. 8B has a tendency that the current individual factor evaluation (individual factor evaluation value h2) tends to be high, and there is little room for improvement, and the standard partial regression coefficient is a small value ( Since the regression equation shown in FIG. 8A has a small slope), it is not easy to improve the evaluation of the individual factor D, and even if the evaluation is further improved, the overall satisfaction is improved. Will be small.

In this way, from the graph shown in FIG. 8 (b), by considering the room for improving the evaluation of each individual factor and the improvement rate of the overall satisfaction accompanying the evaluation improvement, which individual factor can be improved as a whole. It is possible to judge whether it is suitable for efficiently improving the general satisfaction. Comparing the individual factors A to D shown in FIGS. 8A and 8B, the improvement of the individual factor A is the most efficient method of improving the overall satisfaction. On the contrary, the improvement of the individual factor D is the whole It can be determined that this is not a method for efficiently improving satisfaction. For this reason, in order to improve the overall satisfaction based on the questionnaire result, it can be determined that the individual factor A should be improved with priority.
Takashi Sakai, “Books with Illustration Questionnaire Survey and Statistical Analysis”, published by the Japan Management Association Management Center, published on October 1, 2003, p. 167-P174 Roland T. Last / Valerie A. Zaitmul / Catherine N. Lemon, translated by Takao Kondo, “Integrating Customer Equity Brand, Customer Value, and Retention” Diamond, September 6, 2001, first edition, P. 124-P126

  However, even if it is determined that the improvement of the individual factor A is an effective method for improving the overall satisfaction for the above-described reason, a great amount of time or time is required to improve the individual factor A by one step. If the cost is high, it may not be determined that it is necessarily the best improvement factor.

  For example, the value of the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) that is improved by improving the individual factor A by one step is 2 as the value of the overall satisfaction (overall satisfaction value) that is improved by improving the individual factor D by one step. If the cost (cost) required to improve individual factor A by one step is 10 times the cost required to improve individual factor D by one step It can be determined that improving the individual factor D is more cost-effective in improving the satisfaction than improving the individual factor A.

  On the other hand, even if it is an individual factor with high cost effectiveness, the standard partial regression coefficient is extremely small, and it is difficult to improve overall satisfaction efficiently by improving the individual factor As a result, there is a case where the cost (cost) for improving the overall satisfaction is increased, and it may not be determined that it is the best improvement factor.

  The present invention has been made in view of the above problems, and considers the relationship between the improvement in overall satisfaction when improvements are made for each individual factor and the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction. It is an object of the present invention to provide an improvement measure factor determination device, an improvement measure factor determination method, and an improvement measure factor determination program capable of determining an improvement factor having an excellent cost-effectiveness with respect to an improvement in overall satisfaction.

  In order to solve the above-mentioned problem, the improvement measure factor determination device according to the present invention shows an individual factor evaluation value indicating an evaluation for each individual factor for the questionnaire target, and an overall satisfaction degree of the questionnaire target including the individual factor. Questionnaire result value recording means for recording a plurality of overall satisfaction values, and expense information recording means for recording expense information necessary for improving the individual factor evaluation value by a predetermined evaluation value for each individual factor And a standard partial regression coefficient calculating means for calculating a standard partial regression coefficient of the individual factor evaluation value for the total satisfaction value for each individual factor based on the total satisfaction value and the individual factor evaluation value, and the standard Based on the standard partial regression coefficient calculated by the partial regression coefficient calculation means, the value of the individual factor evaluation value required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is determined as the individual requirement. An individual factor improvement value calculation means to be calculated every time, and an expense required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation means, Based on the cost information recorded in the information recording means, individual factor improvement cost calculation means for each individual factor, and based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation means, the whole And an overall satisfaction improvement cost calculating means for calculating an expense required for improving the satisfaction value by a predetermined value according to a combination of the individual factors.

  Moreover, in the improvement measure factor determination device, the individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value are stored in the questionnaire result value recording unit in association with regional information related to a questionnaire target, and the expense information recording unit is The expense information is classified and recorded for each area information, and the individual factor improvement expense calculation unit improves the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation unit. The expense required for the calculation is calculated for each individual factor based on the expense information for each area information recorded in the expense information recording means, and the overall satisfaction improvement expense calculating means is the individual factor improvement Expenses required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value based on the expenses for each area of each individual factor calculated by the expense calculation means The may be one calculated in accordance with the individual factor combinations taking into account the differences in regional expense amounts of the individual factors.

  On the other hand, the improvement measure factor determination method according to the present invention is based on an individual factor evaluation value indicating an evaluation for each individual factor with respect to a questionnaire object and an overall satisfaction value indicating an overall satisfaction degree of the questionnaire object including the individual factor. A standard partial regression coefficient calculating step for calculating a standard partial regression coefficient of the individual factor evaluation value with respect to the overall satisfaction value for each individual factor, and based on the standard partial regression coefficient calculated by the standard partial regression coefficient calculation step The individual factor evaluation value calculation step for calculating the individual factor evaluation value required for improving the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value for each individual factor, and the individual factor improvement value calculation step The cost required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the calculated value of the individual factor evaluation value, and the individual factor evaluation value are improved by a predetermined evaluation value. An individual factor improvement cost calculation step for calculating for each individual factor based on the cost information in which the cost required for the determination is defined, and the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation step And an overall satisfaction improvement cost calculating step of calculating an expense required for improving the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value according to a combination of the individual factors.

  The improvement measure factor determination method is defined such that the individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value are classified in association with regional information related to a questionnaire target, and the expense information is classified and defined for each regional information, In the individual factor improvement cost calculation step, the cost required for improving the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation step is calculated for each region information. Calculated for each individual factor based on cost information, and in the overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation step, based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation step, the total Expenses required to improve the satisfaction value by a predetermined value, taking into account the regional differences in the individual factors, the individual factors Or it may be calculated according to the combination.

  Furthermore, the improvement measure factor determination program according to the present invention includes an individual factor evaluation value indicating an evaluation for each individual factor with respect to a questionnaire object, and an overall satisfaction value indicating an overall satisfaction level of the questionnaire object including the individual factor, Improvement countermeasure factor comprising a plurality of recorded questionnaire result value recording means, and expense information recording means for recording expense information required for improving the individual factor evaluation value by a predetermined evaluation value for each individual factor An improvement measure factor determination program for a determination device, wherein the improvement measure factor determination device determines the individual factor evaluation value for the total satisfaction value for each individual factor based on the overall satisfaction value and the individual factor evaluation value. Based on the standard partial regression coefficient calculation function for calculating the standard partial regression coefficient of the standard partial regression coefficient and the standard partial regression coefficient calculated by the standard partial regression coefficient calculation function. The individual factor improvement value calculation function for calculating the individual factor evaluation value required for improving the value by a predetermined value for each individual factor, and the individual factor improvement value calculation function An individual factor improvement cost calculation function for calculating for each individual factor the cost required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the factor evaluation value based on the cost information recorded in the expense information recording means And the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation function according to the combination of the individual factors An overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation function to be calculated is realized.

  The improvement measure factor determination program stores the individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value in association with the regional information related to the subject of the questionnaire in the questionnaire result value recording means, and the expense information recording means. The expense information is classified and recorded for each area information, and the individual factor improvement cost calculation function improves the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation function. Expenses required for the calculation are calculated for each individual factor based on the expense information for each area information recorded in the expense information recording means, and the individual factor improvement in the overall satisfaction improvement expense calculation function Necessary for improving the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value based on the cost for each area of each individual factor calculated by the cost calculation function Expenses to be, the may be configured to calculate in accordance with a combination of the individual factors taking into account the differences in regional expense amounts of the individual factors.

  According to the improvement measure factor determination device, the improvement measure factor determination method, and the improvement measure factor determination program according to the present invention, the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is determined according to the combination of the individual factors. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which individual factor should be improved from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness.

  In addition, when the individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value are associated with the regional information related to the questionnaire target, and the expense information is classified for each regional information, it is optimum to consider the difference in expenses for each regional information. A combination of individual factors can be determined. For this reason, in order to improve the satisfaction of the whole area including all the areas, it is possible to easily determine which individual factor should be improved for each area from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness.

  Hereinafter, an improvement measure factor determination device according to the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an improvement measure factor determination apparatus 1 according to the present invention. The improvement measure factor determination device 1 includes a monitor 2, a keyboard 3, a mouse 4, and a device body 5.

  The monitor 2 is a device (output device) for outputting characters / images output from the device main body 5 so as to be visible to an operator who operates the improvement measure factor determination device 1, and includes a liquid crystal display, A general image (video) output means such as a CRT monitor is used. The operator can check the determination result by the improvement measure factor determination device through the monitor 2. In addition, as a configuration of the improvement measure determination device, a printer that outputs a determination result to a paper medium or the like may be added.

  The keyboard 3 and the mouse 4 are general input devices used by the operator to operate the improvement measure factor determination device 1. The operator can use the keyboard 3 or the like to create a questionnaire item for an answerer to answer as necessary, and to add / change expense information and the like to be described later.

  As shown in FIG. 2, the apparatus main body 5 includes an arithmetic processing unit (standard partial regression coefficient calculating means, individual factor improvement value calculating means, individual factor improvement cost calculating means, overall satisfaction improvement cost calculating means) 10, a storage unit 11 and a communication processing unit 12.

  The arithmetic processing unit 10 has a role of calculating a combination of individual factors that should be improved in order to improve overall satisfaction according to costs. The arithmetic processing unit 10 includes a central processing unit, a main storage device such as a RAM (Random Access Memory) used as a work area in arithmetic processing, and a ROM (Read Only Memory) that only reads data. It has.

  The storage unit 11 is configured by a hard disk drive. The storage unit 11 in the present embodiment means a general auxiliary storage device, and is not necessarily limited to the hard disk drive. For example, a storage device using a semiconductor memory as a storage unit, a DVD-ROM (Digital Versatile Disk Read Only Memory) / CD-ROM (Compact Disk Read Only Memory) for reading only, and reading / writing are also possible. It is also possible to use a DVD-RAM (Digital Versatile Disk Random Access Memory), a CD-RW (Compact Disk ReWritable), or the like.

  The storage unit 11 includes a control program (improvement measure factor determination program) used for performing arithmetic processing in the arithmetic processing unit 10, questionnaire response results compiled by respondents, and questionnaire form data created by the operator. (Questionnaire question item data) and the like are stored. The storage unit 11 includes a questionnaire result recording area (questionnaire result value recording means) 11a in which questionnaire response results (for example, information such as individual factor evaluation values and overall satisfaction values described later) are recorded, and individual factors An expense information recording area (expense information recording means) 11b in which expense information necessary for improving the evaluation is recorded is provided.

  The communication processing unit 12 is a device for transmitting / receiving data to / from other computers 14a, 14b, 14c, etc. through a network (communication line) 13. The communication processing unit 12 is a general NIC (Network Interface Card).

  As shown in FIG. 1, the improvement measure factor determination device 1 can present questionnaire question items and the like via a communication processing unit 12 to a network (communication line) 13 such as the Internet. . Specifically, the term “presentation” means that a homepage on which questionnaire question items and the like are displayed in response to a request (input of a predetermined homepage address) by the computers 14a, 14b, and 14c connected to the network 13 can be viewed. means. That is, the improvement measure factor determination device 1 can function as an Internet server via the communication processing unit 12.

  FIG. 3 shows an example of questionnaire items displayed on the monitors of other computers 14 a, 14 b, 14 c connected to the network 13. The respondent can answer the questionnaire on the computer in accordance with the questionnaire question items displayed on the monitors of the computers 14a, 14b, and 14c.

  In the present embodiment, a case will be described in which a satisfaction survey of traffic road conditions is performed as an object of a questionnaire. FIG. 3 shows question items of a questionnaire regarding satisfaction with traffic road conditions. At least the area information of the roads used by respondents (specifically, by letting respondents select a specific national road (from a section of the national highway XX line to a specific section)) In this embodiment, the area of the road used by the respondent is answered.In this embodiment, three areas of area 1: point A to point B, area 2: point B to point C, and area 3: point C to point D are roads. Set as regional information), question 21 for answering the overall satisfaction level of traffic roads used by respondents based on a five-step evaluation, and individual specifics for traffic road conditions used by respondents (In this embodiment, individual factor X: “There are many signals and the flow of cars is bad.”) Individual factor Y: “It is difficult to turn right at the intersection.” Individual factor Z: “Road lighting Or street trees The question 22 is made to answer the evaluation of “three types of individual factors” “inadequate maintenance” by a five-step evaluation.

  The operator can create in advance questionnaire contents, layout, and the like as shown in FIG. 3 using the keyboard 3, mouse 4, and the like. Questionnaire items are not limited to pre-coded questions where respondents select answers according to the question content, but respondents can respond freely by entering (filling in) actual sentences. It is also possible to use free answer type questions that can be answered. A questionnaire created in advance by the operator is stored in the storage unit 11.

  Questionnaire items of the questionnaire are created by HTML data, and the contents of the created questionnaire questions are published (provided) for a certain period via the network 13. After responding to the question items of various questionnaires on the computer 14a, the respondent returns the response contents (response results) to the improvement measure factor determination apparatus 1 by returning the response contents of the questionnaire via the network 13. It becomes possible. The answer result of the questionnaire returned by the respondent within the period is automatically recorded in the questionnaire result recording area 11a of the storage unit 11.

  At this time, the answer result recorded in the questionnaire result recording area 11a includes at least regional information indicating the road area used by the respondent and the overall satisfaction degree regarding the traffic road condition (five-step evaluation, overall satisfaction value). And evaluation of individual specific factors (individual factors X, Y, Z) regarding the traffic road situation (five-step evaluation, individual factor evaluation value).

  On the other hand, in the expense information recording area (expense information recording means) 11b, the evaluation of individual factors is improved (in this embodiment, the case where the one-stage evaluation is improved in order to increase the understanding of the explanation is illustrated. However, in an actual questionnaire, evaluation is often performed at a scale of about 0.1. The same applies to the overall satisfaction value). Yes.

  The difference in expenses necessary for improving the evaluation of individual factors is, for example, when evaluating “1: I think so” in “Individual factor X:“ There are many signals and the flow of the car is bad. ” : “I think that's a bit.”

  For example, in the individual factor X, it is assumed that the average evaluation of the respondents in the area 1 is “1: I think so” and the average traffic passage time of the road in the area 1 is 20 minutes. On the other hand, it is assumed that the average evaluation of the respondents in area 2 is “2: I think so”, and the average traffic passage time on the road in area 2 is 10 minutes. In this case, considering the evaluation of the area 2 and the average traffic jam passage time, the average traffic passage time of the road in the area 1 is shortened by 10 minutes, so that the individual factor X in the area 1: “There are many signals and the flow of the car. It can be determined that the evaluation of “bad” can be improved from 1 to 2. For this reason, in area 1, it can be determined that the cost required to improve the individual factor X by one step is the road construction cost required to reduce the average traffic jam transit time by about 10 minutes.

  However, even when the same road construction (for example, construction for creating a bypass for bypassing a traffic jam location) is performed, the cost differs depending on the land price, the presence or absence of surrounding vacant land, etc. Since the cost required for each region varies as described above, the cost information (cost) for each individual factor is classified for each region information and recorded in the cost information recording area (expense information recording means) 11b. It becomes.

  Next, the arithmetic processing unit 10 of the apparatus main body 5 determines a suitable combination of individual factors for improving the overall satisfaction degree (overall satisfaction value) of the traffic road condition while considering the regional cost difference of the individual factors. The method will be described.

  FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing processing in the arithmetic processing unit 10. First, the arithmetic processing unit 10 classifies the answer results recorded in the questionnaire result recording area 11a of the storage unit 11 for each area information (step S.1). Further, the arithmetic processing unit 10 is based on the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) and individual factor evaluations (individual factor evaluation values) (both five-level evaluations) based on the answer results classified for each road area. A scatter diagram is created for each individual factor (FIG. 5 (a) shows a scatter diagram of individual factor X in area 1, FIG. 5 (b) shows a scatter diagram of individual factor Y in area 1, and FIG. (C) shows a scatter diagram of individual factors Z in area 1), and calculates a standard partial regression coefficient from the scatter diagram (step S.2, standard partial regression coefficient calculation step, standard partial regression coefficient calculation function) .

  By calculating the standard regression coefficient in the arithmetic processing unit 10, how much the overall satisfaction (overall satisfaction value) is improved by improving the individual factor evaluation (individual factor evaluation value) by one step, It becomes possible to judge for each individual factor. For example, in the regression formula of the individual factor X shown in FIG. 5A, the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) is improved by improving the individual factor evaluation value of the individual factor X by one level (evaluation value 2 to 3). It can be confirmed that only L is improved.

  Next, the arithmetic processing unit 10 acquires the expense information recorded in the expense information recording area 11b for each area information, and the expense (expense) required for improving the individual factor evaluation (individual factor evaluation value) by one step. ) Is determined for each area information and for each individual factor (step S.3).

  FIGS. 6A to 6C are graphs in which the expense information recorded in the expense information recording area 11b is divided into road areas. In the area of area 1 (point A to point B) shown in FIG. 6A, the cost for improving the individual factors by one level in the order of factor Z, factor X, and factor Y is high. On the other hand, in the area of area 2 (point B to point C) shown in FIG. 6B, the cost for improving the individual factors by one level in the order of factor Z, factor Y, and factor X is high. Furthermore, in the area of area 3 (point C to point D) shown in FIG. 6C, the cost for improving the individual factors by one level in the order of factor X, factor Y, and factor Z is high.

  Then, based on the calculated standard partial regression coefficient, the arithmetic processing unit 10 improves the individual factor improvement evaluation value (the value of the individual factor evaluation value) required to improve the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) by one step. (Step S.4, individual factor improvement value calculation step, individual factor improvement value calculation function).

  If it demonstrates using the regression line of the individual factor Y shown in FIG.5 (b), in order to improve the whole satisfaction (total satisfaction value) from 2 to 3, for example, evaluation of an individual factor will be evaluated from p1 to p2. Need to be improved. In this way, the improvement evaluation value (individual factor evaluation value) of the individual factor necessary for improving the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) by one step is obtained as (p2-p1).

  The arithmetic processing unit 10 calculates the cost (cost) required to improve the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) by one level, the improvement evaluation value (individual factor evaluation value) of the obtained individual factor, and the cost. Calculation is made based on the expense information recorded in the information recording area 11b (step S.5, individual factor improvement expense calculation step, individual factor improvement expense calculation function).

  FIG. 6D shows the expenses required for improving the overall satisfaction value by one level in area 1 (point A to point B) for each individual factor. Moreover, FIG.6 (e) shows the expense required in order to improve the whole satisfaction value one step in the area 2 (point B-point C) for every individual factor. Further, FIG. 6 (f) shows expenses required for improving the overall satisfaction value by one level in the area 3 (point C to point D) for each individual factor.

  In this way, which individual factors should be improved to improve overall satisfaction by calculating the cost required for improving (improving) overall satisfaction by one level for each region Can be judged from the viewpoint of cost-effectiveness. For example, in the case of improving the overall satisfaction in area 1 (point A to point B), in the conventional determination method using the standard partial regression coefficient, the individual factor X having a high standard partial regression coefficient (FIG. 5A). There is a tendency to determine that it is preferable to improve the reference), but it is more preferable to improve the individual factor Y from FIG. Judgment can be made.

  The arithmetic processing unit 10 calculates the expenses required for improving the overall satisfaction as described above for each individual factor, and is necessary for improving the overall satisfaction of the entire road (point A to point D). Expenses are derived according to combinations of individual factors (step S.6, overall satisfaction improvement expense calculation step, overall satisfaction improvement expense calculation function).

  FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating combinations of individual factors that improve the overall satisfaction value by the R value. Graph m shows individual factors Y and area 2 (points B to C) in area 1 (point A to point B). ) Shows the individual factor Z, and the cost Q1 when the individual factor Z is improved in the area 3 (point C to point D). On the other hand, graph n shows individual factor Z in area 1 (point A to point B), individual factor Y in area 2 (point B to point C), and improvement of individual factor X in area 3 (point C to point D). Expense Q2 in the case of performing is shown. As shown in FIG. 7, even when the overall satisfaction value is improved by the same value R, the expense Q2 when the combination of individual factors shown in the graph n is adopted is the combination of individual factors shown in the graph m. Costs higher than the cost Q1 in the case of adopting the are required.

  As shown in FIG. 7, even when the overall satisfaction value is increased to a predetermined value, if the combination of individual factors for improvement is different, there is a difference in the total construction costs (improvement costs). . In FIG. 7, only combinations of individual factors shown in the graph m and the graph n are shown. However, since the arithmetic processing unit 10 can calculate expenses in consideration of all combinations, depending on the combination By referring to the calculation result of the expense calculated in this way, it is possible to obtain a cost-effective improvement method for individual factors for each region.

  In particular, general roads such as national roads are public resources, and taxes are put into these improvement measures. For this reason, when taking measures to improve roads, it is necessary to consider measures that can effectively improve (improve) overall satisfaction while efficiently utilizing taxes borne by the public. By actively using the improvement measure factor determination device 1 according to the present invention in a highly public project, it is possible to efficiently satisfy the user's satisfaction while suppressing unnecessary expenses such as taxes. It is possible to create a plan.

  As described above, in the improvement measure factor determination device according to the present invention, the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction (total satisfaction value) by a predetermined level (one level in the present embodiment) Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which individual factor should be improved from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness.

  In particular, when determining individual factors that should be improved based on the results of questionnaires conducted for each region, it is necessary to determine the optimal individual factors in consideration of differences in expenses for each region. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which individual factors in each region can improve the satisfaction of the entire region from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness.

  The improvement countermeasure factor determination device according to the present invention has been described above with reference to the drawings. However, the improvement countermeasure factor determination device according to the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiment. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various changes and modifications can be made within the scope of the claims, and these are naturally within the technical scope of the present invention. Understood.

  For example, in the present embodiment, a case has been described where it is determined which combination of individual factors is preferable from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness in order to improve the overall satisfaction of the entire road (point A to point D). When deriving this combination, if the answer result of the questionnaire is the highest evaluation (in this embodiment, the individual factor evaluation value is 5), the individual factor (for example, the questionnaire question 22 shown in FIG. Individual factors that are frequently evaluated as “5. Not at all” may be excluded from the combination candidates.

  Individual factors with good evaluation results have little room for improvement due to high satisfaction, so it is difficult to actually improve even individual factors that have low expense information and can be improved at low cost This is because it can be determined. Furthermore, because individual factors with good evaluation results are already highly satisfactory, it can be determined that it is not easy to improve the overall satisfaction even if further improvements are made.

  Further, in this embodiment, the determination of individual factors for improvement is performed based on the expense information classified for each area information of the road. However, in the improvement measure factor determination device according to the present invention, the response result is not necessarily classified by region. There is no need to classify. Even when determining individual factors without classifying expense information by region, it is necessary to find the optimum individual factor based on the cost of each individual factor required to improve overall satisfaction. Therefore, it is possible to easily determine which individual factor should be improved from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness.

  Furthermore, the number of individual factors to be improved is not limited to one for each region. For example, it is possible to determine to improve two or more individual factors in one region. Even when multiple individual factors are improved in this way, individual factors can be determined based on the expense information, which is required to improve overall satisfaction and satisfaction. Expenses can be easily calculated.

  Further, in the above embodiment, the improvement factor determination apparatus according to the present invention is obtained by using the questionnaire results for the road satisfaction survey to obtain improvement items for individual factors suitable for improving the overall satisfaction. Can also be used in questionnaires other than road satisfaction surveys. For example, when the improvement measure factor determination device according to the present invention is used in a satisfaction questionnaire for elementary school education, for example, “the number of elementary school teachers per school is small”, “the number of elementary schools is small”, “one class is small” A plurality of individual factors such as “large number of people” are set as questionnaire question items, and expenses necessary for improving these individual factors are recorded in the expense information recording area 11b of the storage unit 11 in advance as expense information. This makes it possible to obtain a preferable combination of individual factors from the viewpoint of cost effectiveness.

  Furthermore, in the present embodiment, a method of grasping factors for improving the overall satisfaction based on the standard partial regression coefficient obtained by the multiple correlation analysis is used. However, the standard partial regression coefficient is limited to that obtained in the multiple correlation analysis. Instead, it is also possible to use a method of grasping the improvement factor of the overall satisfaction based on the regression coefficient obtained by the single correlation analysis.

  In the above embodiment, the improvement countermeasure factor determination device is described as an example. However, the invention according to the present invention is not limited to the improvement countermeasure factor determination device, and is illustrated by the flowchart of FIG. An execution program (improvement countermeasure factor determination program) of the improvement countermeasure factor determination apparatus and its determination method (improvement factor determination method) are also included in the present invention.

It is the figure which showed the state by which the improvement countermeasure factor judgment apparatus which concerns on this embodiment was connected to the network. It is the block diagram which showed schematic structure of the improvement countermeasure factor judgment apparatus which concerns on this embodiment. It is the figure which showed the example of the content of the questionnaire item. It is the flowchart which showed the process in the arithmetic processing part of the improvement countermeasure factor judgment apparatus which concerns on this embodiment. (A) shows a scatter diagram of individual factors X in area 1, (b) shows a scatter diagram of individual factors Y in area 1, and (c) shows a scatter diagram of individual factors Z in area 1. ing. (A) to (c) are graphs in which the cost information for each individual factor is divided into regions, and (d) to (f) are required to improve the overall satisfaction value by one level. It is the figure which showed the expense information for every individual factor according to regional information. It is the figure which illustrated the combination of the individual factor for improving the whole satisfaction value only by R value. (A) is a graph showing a regression formula of individual factors A to D, (b) is a current partial evaluation result for each individual factor A to D and standard partial regression of each individual factor shown in (a). It is the graph which showed the relationship with a coefficient.

Explanation of symbols

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Improvement countermeasure factor judgment apparatus 2 ... Monitor 3 ... Keyboard 4 ... Mouse 5 ... Apparatus main body 10 ... Arithmetic processing part (standard partial regression coefficient calculation means, individual factor improvement value calculation means, individual factor improvement cost calculation means, overall satisfaction Improvement cost calculation means)
11 ... Storage unit 11a ... Questionary result recording area 11b (in storage unit) Expense information recording area 12 (in storage unit) ... Communication processing unit 13 ... Network 14a, 14b, 14c ... Computer 20 ... (Regarding road area information) Question 21 ... (for overall satisfaction) Question 22 ... (for assessment of individual factors)

Claims (6)

Questionnaire result value recording means for recording a plurality of individual factor evaluation values indicating the evaluation of each individual factor for the questionnaire target and overall satisfaction values indicating the overall satisfaction level of the questionnaire target including the individual factors;
Expense information recording means for recording expense information required for improving the individual factor evaluation value by a predetermined evaluation value for each individual factor;
Standard partial regression coefficient calculating means for calculating a standard partial regression coefficient of the individual factor evaluation value with respect to the overall satisfaction value for each individual factor based on the overall satisfaction value and the individual factor evaluation value;
Based on the standard partial regression coefficient calculated by the standard partial regression coefficient calculation means, the value of the individual factor evaluation value required for improving the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is calculated for each individual factor. Individual factor improvement value calculation means to
Based on the expense information recorded in the expense information recording means, the expense required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculating means. An individual factor improvement cost calculating means for calculating for each individual factor;
Based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation means, the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is calculated according to the combination of the individual factors. An improvement measure factor determination device comprising: an overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation means. In the questionnaire result value recording means, the individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value are stored in association with regional information related to a questionnaire target,
In the expense information recording means, the expense information is classified and recorded for each area information,
The individual factor improvement expense calculation means includes the expense information recording means for the expense required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation means. Calculated for each individual factor based on the expense information for each area information recorded in
The overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation means is required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation means. The improvement measure factor determination device according to claim 1, wherein the cost is calculated according to a combination of the individual factors while considering a difference in regional cost of the individual factors. Based on the individual factor evaluation value indicating the evaluation for each individual factor with respect to the questionnaire object and the overall satisfaction value indicating the overall satisfaction level of the questionnaire object including the individual factor, the individual with respect to the total satisfaction value for each individual factor A standard partial regression coefficient calculating step for calculating a standard partial regression coefficient of the factor evaluation value;
Based on the standard partial regression coefficient calculated in the standard partial regression coefficient calculation step, the value of the individual factor evaluation value required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is calculated for each individual factor. Individual factor improvement value calculation step to
To improve the individual factor evaluation value by a predetermined evaluation value, the cost required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation step An individual factor improvement expense calculation step for calculating for each individual factor based on expense information in which a required expense is defined;
Based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation step, the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is calculated according to the combination of the individual factors. An improvement measure factor judgment method comprising: an overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation step. The individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value are classified in association with regional information related to a questionnaire target,
The expense information is categorized and defined for each area information,
In the individual factor improvement cost calculation step, the cost required for improving the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation step is calculated for each region information. Calculate for each individual factor based on expense information,
In the overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation step, it is required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value based on the cost for each area of each individual factor calculated in the individual factor improvement cost calculation step. 4. The improvement measure factor determination method according to claim 3, wherein a cost for calculating the improvement factor is calculated according to a combination of the individual factors while taking into account a difference in regional cost of the individual factors. Questionnaire result value recording means for recording a plurality of individual factor evaluation values indicating evaluation for each individual factor with respect to the questionnaire target, and overall satisfaction values indicating the overall satisfaction level of the questionnaire target including the individual factor, and the individual An improvement measure factor determination program of an improvement measure factor determination device comprising expense information recording means for recording expense information required for improving a factor evaluation value by a predetermined evaluation value for each individual factor,
A standard partial regression coefficient for calculating, based on the overall satisfaction value and the individual factor evaluation value, a standard partial regression coefficient of the individual factor evaluation value for the overall satisfaction value for each individual factor, based on the overall satisfaction value and the individual factor evaluation value A calculation function;
Based on the standard partial regression coefficient calculated by the standard partial regression coefficient calculation function, the individual factor evaluation value required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is calculated for each individual factor. Individual factor improvement value calculation function to
Based on the expense information recorded in the expense information recording means, the expense required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation function An individual factor improvement cost calculation function to calculate for each individual factor;
Based on the cost for each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation function, the cost required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value is calculated according to the combination of the individual factors. Improvement measure factor judgment program characterized by realizing the overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation function. In the questionnaire result value recording means, the individual factor evaluation value and the overall satisfaction value are stored in association with regional information related to a questionnaire target,
In the expense information recording means, the expense information is classified and recorded for each area information,
In the individual factor improvement cost calculation function, the cost information recording means indicates the cost required to improve the evaluation of the individual factor by the value of the individual factor evaluation value calculated by the individual factor improvement value calculation function. Calculated for each individual factor based on the expense information for each area information recorded in
The overall satisfaction improvement cost calculation function is required to improve the overall satisfaction value by a predetermined value based on the cost of each individual factor calculated by the individual factor improvement cost calculation function. 6. The improvement countermeasure factor determination program according to claim 5, wherein the cost is calculated according to a combination of the individual factors while considering a difference in regional cost of the individual factors.

Images