JP2014067319A - Communication evaluation device, communication evaluation method and communication evaluation program - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To solve the problem that when scores are given to each operation of communication such as an inquiry by a certain user, and the skill levels of a plurality of fields of the user are compared from evaluation points totaled for each field of the inquiry content, meanings shown by the evaluation points are different due to a difference in communication quantity of each field, and the simple comparison of the evaluation points does not result in correct level determination.SOLUTION: The communication evaluation device includes: a database for storing the history information of communication constituted of the proposal operation of a topic and the reply operation to the topic; evaluation point calculation means for extracting the history information of each user from the database, and for calculating the scores of the user by totaling predetermined scores corresponding to the proposal operation and reply operation of the communication for each field of topic content for each user to calculate the scores of the user, and for calculating evaluation points by normalizing scores in the designated field of the designated user in accordance with a designated reference axis; evaluation result storage means for storing the evaluation points; and evaluation result providing means for extracting and providing the evaluation points of the designated user and field from the evaluation result storage means.

Description

  The present invention relates to a communication evaluation apparatus, a communication evaluation method, and a communication evaluation program for evaluating a user's skill in an organization, and in particular, communication capable of obtaining an evaluation point of each user from each operation that is communication between users. The present invention relates to an evaluation apparatus, a communication evaluation method, and a communication evaluation program.

  There are two types of methods for evaluating skills possessed by members of organizations such as companies and organizations (hereinafter referred to as “employees” including members of organizations other than companies). ing.

  In the first method, the self-evaluation data self-reported by the employee to be evaluated is approved by the employee's superior or superior supervisor. This method has a problem in that skill evaluation cannot be performed objectively and accurately due to a large difference in evaluation depending on personal factors such as employee self-expression and skill level of superiors.

  The second method enables business questions, answers, and information to be provided in communication devices that are open to the organization, while sharing knowledge and know-how of highly skilled employees within the organization, as well as question-and-answer and information provision It measures the skill level of employees from the status of individual communication activities. This is because in the first method, the evaluators who evaluate the skills of employees were limited to superiors and superiors, but in this method, the number of evaluators of individual communication activity skills was unspecified. Thus, the objectivity of the evaluation is improved from the first method.

  As an example of such a technique, Patent Document 1 discloses a technique for assigning and recording evaluation points with respect to various activities of employees and creating a database of technical levels possessed by individuals. In this technology, the skill evaluation points are evaluated by the evaluation of the employee's output documents by the manager of the department to which the employee belongs, or by receiving votes from other employees who are familiar with the skill field. Is granted. In addition, fixed evaluation points as output skills are given to those that have created problems related to the organization's work or the technology required by the organization, and evaluation points as input skills are assigned to those that solve the problem. The Furthermore, depending on the number or frequency of the problem, the problem creator is given a variation evaluation point for output skills. That is, it has the elements of the first method and the second method described above, thereby improving the objectivity of the evaluation.

  Also, in Patent Document 2, a field of expertise is registered based on prior declarations from respondents. When there is a question, the administrator selects an appropriate person from the field of expertise and evaluation points of past answers. A technique is disclosed in which an accurate answer is obtained by requesting an answer, and the questioner assigns a score to the answer and creates a database together with the contents of the questions and answers.

JP 2007-241673 A Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2005-316828

  However, in the technique disclosed in Patent Document 1, evaluation points are given to the problem and the answer, but the number of questions, the technical level of the answer, and the skill of the evaluator differ depending on the business area, etc. There is a problem that a person with a high evaluation point does not necessarily have excellent skills. For example, in business area A, there are many people who are interested and the number of questions and answers is high, so there are those who have a maximum of 1000 points. Of course, when there are only people who have earned points, the skill levels that the same evaluation points mean in the business areas A and B are different. Here, if a certain employee gets 100 points in the business areas A and B, the employee has the highest technical level in the organization in the business area B, but the business area A is not very good. Is correct. That is, when trying to compare skill levels for a plurality of business areas, the correct skill level cannot be determined from the score of the evaluation point unless the score tendency of the entire organization in each business area is known. The described technique does not take into account such problems in comparison.

  Further, in the technique disclosed in Patent Document 2, only an evaluation is given to the answer from the questioner, and raising an accurate question is not evaluated as a skill. In addition, since respondents are registered as areas of expertise based on self-reporting by respondents, and those who have received high praise for past responses are selected as respondents, high-skilled engineers within a specific range as the system is used It is expected that the number of respondents will be limited. Therefore, with the technology described in Patent Document 2, it is difficult to evaluate employees who have a certain level of skill although it is not the best, and employees who are in the process of gradually raising their skill level gradually by asking accurate questions at the beginning. There is a problem that it is not suitable for the evaluation.

  The communication evaluation device of the present invention extracts a history information of each user from a database storing a history information of communication consisting of a topic start-up action and a response action to the proposed topic, and for each user Then, the score of the user is calculated by summing the predetermined score according to the communication action and response action for each topic field, and the score that the specified user has in the specified field is calculated. Evaluation point calculation means for calculating an evaluation score normalized to the designated reference axis, evaluation result storage means for storing the evaluation point, and evaluation points for the specified user and field are extracted from the evaluation result storage means. Evaluation result providing means to be presented.

  Further, the communication evaluation method of the present invention analyzes the history information of communication composed of the topic start-up action and the response action to the proposed topic, and generates the evaluation point of the user who performed each operation of communication. By extracting history information for each user from communication history information, and summing a predetermined score according to the communication action and response action for each user by topic content field A scoring step for calculating the score of the user, an evaluation score calculating step for calculating an evaluation score obtained by normalizing the score possessed in the specified field by the specified user according to the specified reference axis, and evaluation An evaluation result storing step for storing the points in the storage means, and storing the evaluation points for the designated user and field And a evaluation result providing step of presenting extracted from.

  Furthermore, the communication evaluation program of the present invention analyzes communication history information including a topic start-up action and a response action to the proposed topic, and generates an evaluation score of the user who performed each communication action. By extracting history information for each user from communication history information, and summing a predetermined score for each user according to the communication activation and response actions for each user by topic content field A scoring process for calculating the score of the user, an evaluation score calculating process for calculating an evaluation score obtained by normalizing the score that the specified user has in the specified field in accordance with the specified reference axis, and the evaluation Evaluation result storage processing for storing points in the storage means, and evaluation points for designated users and fields are stored To execute the evaluation result provision process of presenting extracted from stage to the computer.

  As described above, the present invention provides an evaluation score calculated from points given by an unspecified number of users for each communication such as a question-and-answer session, and simply compares the value of the evaluation score. Thus, it is possible to determine the skill level of employees in a plurality of business areas.

It is a block diagram which shows the structure of embodiment of this invention. It is a sequence diagram from question reception in the embodiment of the present invention to provision of an evaluation result. It is a figure which shows an example of the question table in embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows an example of the reply table in embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows an example of the evaluation result table in embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows an example of the question table and answer table after BA mark provision in embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows an example of the normalization of the score in embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows an example of the display screen of the evaluation result in embodiment of this invention.

  Next, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the embodiment of the present invention.

  Referring to FIG. 1, the present embodiment includes a communication evaluation device 1, a user A 100, a user B 101, a user C 102, and a skill evaluator 103.

  Prior to the description of each component, first, terms in the present embodiment will be described.

  In the present embodiment, a plurality of users communicate via the communication evaluation device 1. Here, “communication” refers to a series of operations in which a certain user registers a topic that the user wants to submit to the evaluation apparatus 1 and other users register various responses to the evaluation apparatus 1 for the proposed topic. . Specific examples of communication include a combination of question registration and answer registration for the question, disclosure of a document and registration of a comment for the document, or information provision and impression registration for the contents of the information provision. Further, the communication includes an operation of giving an evaluation mark indicating an evaluation by the viewer such as “agree”, “against”, and “helpful”.

  Here, the operation that starts a series of communications is called topic submission. That is, the topic refers to a question, a document, and provided information in the specific example of the communication.

  Also, information presented by the user's various reaction actions on the topic is called a response. That is, a response refers to an answer, a comment, and an impression among the above communication examples.

  Evaluation marks can be assigned to topics and responses, respectively. The number of types of evaluation marks and the number that can be given are 0 or 1 or more, and are not limited.

  In the present embodiment, a text-based question and answer exchange is taken up as a specific example of communication. In the following, “topic” is referred to as “question”, and “response” is referred to as “answer”.

  In the present embodiment, the evaluation mark includes a “BA (best answer)” mark given to an answer that is particularly useful by the user who asked the question (hereinafter referred to as “questioner”), and the usage that has been viewed. It is assumed that there are two “Like (approved)” marks given to questions and answers that the user (hereinafter referred to as “browser”) thinks good.

  Below, each component of FIG. 1 is demonstrated.

  The communication evaluation device 1 includes a communication management unit 10, an evaluation point calculation unit 11, an evaluation result providing unit 12, and a data storage unit 20.

  The data storage unit 20 stores public content information 21, a communication history database 22, and evaluation result information 23.

  A user A100, a user B101, a user C102, and a skill evaluator 103 are users who use the communication evaluation apparatus 1. Each user uses a terminal (not shown) connected to the communication evaluation device 1 via a communication network (not shown), and uses information provided from the communication evaluation device 1 or information to the evaluation device 1. Send and so on.

  The communication evaluation apparatus 1 and each terminal used by each user may be configured by a general information processing apparatus (computer) that operates by program control, or may be configured by dedicated hardware.

  In the present embodiment, it is assumed that the user A100 is a questioner who raises a question to the communication evaluation device 1.

  In addition, it is assumed that the user B101 and the user C102 are users who access the communication evaluation device 1, browse a question raised by the questioner, and register an answer to the question and an evaluation mark.

  Furthermore, it is assumed that the user A100, the user B101, and the user C102 are also employees who are evaluated through the communication evaluation device 1.

  In FIG. 1, for simplification of the drawing, only the above three users are shown, but there are users other than these three.

  The skill evaluator 103 accesses the communication evaluation apparatus 1 and uses the evaluation result for the employee receiving the evaluation.

  The communication management unit 10 in the evaluation apparatus 1 accepts requests for question registration (topic submission), answer registration, and evaluation mark assignment from the user, and the contents of the question, answer, and evaluation mark are stored in the communication history database 22. Record. Note that the period during which the communication management unit 10 accepts an answer mark or an evaluation mark other than the BA mark is limited to the period from the question disclosure to a predetermined answer available period.

  Further, the communication management unit 10 creates and publishes the public content information 21 in response to a question and answer registration request and an evaluation mark assignment request. The published content information 21 can be browsed by the user B101, the user C102 and other users including the user A100. When a predetermined answerable period elapses after the question is disclosed, the communication management unit 10 notifies the user that the answer registration and evaluation mark assignment for the question has been closed as answer acceptance end processing. Normally, the communication management unit 10 continues to publish the published content information 21 even after the reply available period has elapsed, and makes it available as a database that stores technical know-how.

  The communication history database 22 is a record accumulated about all elements constituting the communication, that is, questions, answers to the questions, and evaluation marks.

  In this embodiment, the communication history database 22 includes a question table as shown in FIG. 3 and an answer table as shown in FIG.

  First, the question table will be described below.

  The question table includes a question number field in which a question number for uniquely identifying each question is registered, a question name field in which the title of each question is registered, a question content field in which the contents of each question are registered, and the creation date and time of each question Creation date and time field in which each question is registered, a field field in which each question field is registered, a creation user field in which a user name that created each question is registered, and a mark user field in which a user name to which an evaluation mark is added is registered. .

  The field registered in the field column is an identifier for grouping questions for each field related to business or technology according to the contents of the question. The type and number of fields vary depending on the purpose of evaluation, organizational culture, and the like, and may be arbitrarily determined for each organization that uses the communication evaluation apparatus 1.

  The field may be automatically assigned when the communication management unit 10 receives the question registration request, or may be directly designated by the questioner when registering the question. When the communication management unit 10 assigns, for example, there is a method in which a question name or question content is text-searched, and a field is determined by a ratio including a keyword set for each field. Further, information such as field types and keywords may be set in advance in the communication evaluation apparatus 1 or may be acquired from an external apparatus (not shown). When the questioner directly designates the field, for example, the communication management unit 10 displays a category list on the question registration screen, and the questioner selects and designates the field from the check box. There may be a plurality of fields assigned to the question.

  The marked user column is a list of user names that give a “Like” mark to the question. In this embodiment, since the evaluation mark for the question is only the “Like” mark, there is only one “Mark User” field. However, if there are multiple types of evaluation marks, a mark is assigned to each mark. Information about the selected user is provided individually.

  The information in the marked user column is added to the corresponding part of the question table by the communication management unit 10 every time an evaluation mark is given to the question. Information other than the marked user column is created when the communication management unit 10 receives a question registration request.

  Next, the answer table will be described below.

  In the answer table, each answer is uniquely identified and an answer number field in which an answer number indicating which question is to be registered is registered, an answer contents field in which each answer content is registered, and a date and time when each answer is made is registered Answer date / time field, answer user field in which the name of the user who made each answer is registered, mark user field in which the user name to which the evaluation mark is assigned is registered, and whether or not a BA (best answer) mark is assigned The BA mark column is included.

  In this embodiment, there are two types of evaluation marks given to the answers: a BA mark given by the questioner and a “Like” mark given by other users. Two columns of “BA mark” and “mark user” are provided.

  The BA mark column is information in a flag format that takes a binary value depending on whether or not a BA mark can be given only by a questioner.

  The marked user column is a list of user names that give a “Like” mark to the answer.

  The BA mark field and the mark user field are added to corresponding positions in the answer table by the communication management unit 10 every time a “Like” mark or BA mark is given to the answer. Information other than the marked user column and the BA marked column is created when the communication management unit 10 receives an answer.

  Further, the user A100 who made the question looks at the content of the answer to the question, adds a response message to the respondent, or determines that the intention of the question is not communicated. Information may be added. The communication management unit 10 reflects the response message and the supplementary information in the question table and the question content column of the public content information 21 in association with the question.

  The evaluation point calculation unit 11 scores a communication operation for each field for each user based on the communication history database 22 after the answer possible time limit has passed and the BA mark is given by the questioner. The score P in the field A of a certain user (user name = id) is calculated using, for example, the following equation.

P (A, id) = w1 * c (a1) + w2 * c (a2) +... + Wx * c (ay)
Here, wx (x = 1, 2,...) Is a weighting factor of the stipulation set for each field or user characteristic. Further, c () is a function for counting the number of communication operations, and the argument ay (y = 1, 2,...) Of the function c represents the type of operation given a mark. Here, the types of communication operations include question raising, answer registration, answer acquisition, BA mark acquisition, “Like” mark assignment, “Like” mark acquisition, and violation.

  The weighting factor wx is basically a positive value, but may be a negative value. For example, in order to suppress acts only for improving the evaluation, registering many of the same questions or performing unnecessary mark assignments are considered violations, and wx for those violations is set to a negative value. It is possible to do.

  Specific examples are as follows: a1 = question, a2 = answer registration, a3 = “like” mark assignment, a4 = “like” mark acquisition, a5 = BA mark acquisition, weight When the coefficient (scoring) is set to w1 = 3, w2 = 5, w3 = 1, w4 = 2, w5 = 3, if the question is raised (a1) once, 3 points will be added, Registration (a2) 5 points at a time, 1 point for “Like” mark, 2 points for each “Like” mark, 3 points for each BA mark It means that points are added.

  The evaluation point calculation unit 11 calculates an evaluation score obtained by normalizing the score for each field after scoring the communication operation. The normalization of the score in the present embodiment means, for example, that the score group for each field is recalculated based on a certain rule so that the score groups after recalculation of a plurality of fields in a certain user can be compared with each other. . A specific example of normalization will be described in detail later in the description of the overall operation.

  The normalization means that a group of data or the like is transformed based on a certain rule so that it can be easily used according to the purpose of use. Various normalization methods exist depending on the purpose of use.

  Normalization may be performed on scores of all fields of all users of the organization, or may be applied to a group from which specific fields or users are extracted. For example, in the case of desiring to “evaluate the fields A and B of the users belonging to the department X”, the fields A and B are specified as attributes when specifying the classification in the first method. When the user is specified in the second method, the department X is specified as the user attribute. As a result, the evaluation point calculation unit 11 normalizes the score in the range of the target user to be evaluated and the business field. At this time, the user and field range designation and extraction operation may be automatically performed by the evaluation point calculation unit 11 based on the setting, or may be performed by the user of the apparatus 1. For example, when a boss looks at the evaluation results of a subordinate to select a member for a new project, the boss designates his / her department name as a user attribute to the evaluation point calculation unit 11 as the skill evaluator 103 Further, it is also possible to manually specify the field related to the skill required for the project as the field and extract the normalization range manually. On the other hand, when there is no specific designation, the evaluation point calculation unit 11 may automatically extract the normalization target based on the presetting.

  The evaluation point calculation unit 11 stores the normalized score in the evaluation result information 23 in the form of an evaluation result table as shown in FIG. The evaluation result table includes a user name that uniquely identifies the user and an area that holds a score for each field.

  Upon receiving the evaluation result request from the skill evaluator 103, the evaluation result providing unit 12 reads out the evaluation score of the designated user and field from the evaluation result information 23 and presents it. FIG. 8 is an example of an evaluation result display screen presented by the evaluation result providing unit 12.

  The evaluation result providing unit 12 receives a request from an external device (not shown), extracts evaluation points for a specified user and field from the display result information 23, and outputs evaluation point data to the external data It may be provided to the device.

  When a user or field range for which normalization processing has not been performed is specified at the time of requesting the evaluation result, the evaluation result providing unit 12 performs normalization within the range once specified by the evaluation point calculation unit 11. Request an optimization process, and present the evaluation score after the normalization process is completed.

  The data storage unit 20 is realized by, for example, a disk device or a semiconductor memory device.

  Next, the operation of the present embodiment having the above-described configuration will be described in detail with reference to FIG.

  As a premise, it is assumed that the communication evaluation apparatus 1 is in a state where it can be arbitrarily accessed by all employees of a certain organization. When a user accesses the communication evaluation device 1, user authentication is performed by a function inside the device 1 or by an external device (not shown). It is assumed that user attributes such as can be obtained. Further, in the apparatus 1, as a method for determining a normalization standard, it is set that a field with a large score scale (total of scores of all users) is used as a standard. In addition, the apparatus 1 is preset by the skill evaluator 103 with the conditions that the normalization user range is employees belonging to the department X, and the field ranges are “field 1” and “field 2”. And

  A specific operation of the present embodiment under the above precondition will be described below.

  First, suppose that the user A100 has asked the communication evaluation apparatus 1 for the question name “related to XX”, the question content “Please tell me about XX”, and the direct specification of the field “field 1”. In response to this, the communication management unit 10 performs a question registration acceptance process (step S100).

  In the question registration acceptance process, first, the communication management unit 10 classifies the question according to the content of the question, and adds “field” information to the question. Note that there may be a plurality of pieces of information on the field assigned to the question. Here, as described above, there are a method for automatically assigning “field” information and a method for automatically assigning information by the communication management unit 10 and a method for direct designation by the questioner. Here, it is assumed that “field 1” is designated by the user A100 himself at the time of question registration, and the communication management unit 10 adopts the designated content as it is.

  After classifying the questions, the communication management unit 10 registers the contents of the questions in the question table of the communication history database 22. First, the management unit 10 assigns a question number for uniquely identifying a question, and at this time, stores “1” in the question number column. Next, the management unit 10 uses the date / time / minute / second format in the question name column, “Please tell me about XX” in the question content column, and the time when the question registration request was received in the creation date / time column. In “YYYYMMDDhhmmss”, “field 1” is stored in the field column, and the user name “A” of the questioner is stored in the creation user column. The question table after registration of this question is as shown in FIG. 3 except for the marked user column. The mark user column at this time is in an initial state (blank column).

  Next, the communication management unit 10 creates the public content information 21 from the contents of the question, and discloses the public content information 21 to the user of the communication evaluation device 1. For example, the management unit 10 publishes information on the fields other than the marked user registered in the question table, that an answer or mark can be given to the question, and an answerable period that is a period for receiving the answer or mark. To do. This ends the question registration acceptance process.

  When the question is disclosed, the user who has accessed the communication evaluation device 1 can view the question, and can register a response such as an answer or an evaluation mark within a predetermined answerable period. . Here, the operation when the user B101 and the user C102 register a response will be described.

  First, when the user B101 browses the published question, he / she wants to register the answer, and requests the communication evaluation apparatus 1 to register the answer “I think XX is △△”. To do. In the communication device 1, the communication management unit 10 performs an answer registration reception process (step S101).

  In the answer registration acceptance process, first, the communication management unit 10 registers the contents of the answer in the answer table of the communication history database 22. First, the management unit 10 creates an answer number by combining a question number “1” and a number that uniquely identifies an answer to the question, and stores “1-1” in the answer number column. Next, the management unit 10 displays “YYYMMDDxxxxxxxx” in the format of year, month, day, hour, minute, and second in the format of year, month, day, hour, minute in the answer contents column, “XX thinks that Δ is △”, and the answer date field. The user name “B” who requested the answer is stored. The answer table after registration of this answer is as shown in FIG. 4 except for the mark user field and the BA mark field. At this time, the mark user field and the BA mark field are in an initial state (the mark user field is blank and the BA mark field is 0).

  Next, the communication management unit 10 adds the content of the answer to the public content information 21 and publishes the public content information 21 including the question and the answer. This completes the answer registration acceptance process.

  Next, it is assumed that the user C102 browses the published question and answer, feels good evaluation for both the question and the answer, and wants to give a “Like” mark. At this time, the user C102 requests the communication evaluation apparatus 1 to give a “like” mark to both the question by the user A100 and the answer by the user B101. In the communication device 1, the communication management unit 10 performs an acceptance process for assigning an evaluation mark (step S102).

  In the acceptance process of the evaluation mark assignment, first, the communication management unit 10 adds the evaluation mark assignment event to the portion of the communication history database 22 that is the target of the evaluation mark. Here, the management unit 10 adds the user name “C” to the marked user column corresponding to the question number 1 in the question table for the event of giving the “Like” mark to the question by the user A100, and the answer by the user B101. Similarly, the user name “C” is added to the marked user column corresponding to the response number 1-1 in the response table for the event of giving the “Like” mark.

  Next, the communication management unit 10 adds the evaluation mark assignment status to the public content information 21 and publishes the public content information 21. This completes the mark granting process.

  In this embodiment, the evaluation mark is assigned after the answer registration for the question. However, the answer registration and the evaluation mark assignment can be performed in an arbitrary order.

  Thereafter, within the answerable period, user D (not shown) registers a new answer (answer number 1-2) and assigns a “like” mark to the question, and then user E (not shown) Suppose that “Like” is given to the answer of the user D, and finally the user F (not shown) gives the “Like” mark to the question and the answer of the user D (step S103). The operations of the user D, the user E, and the user F are the same as those described above, and thus the description thereof is omitted. As a result, the contents of the question table and the answer table registered in relation to the question of the user A100 are as shown in FIG. 6 except for the BA mark column.

  In addition, the user who browsed the question or answer may not register the answer or the evaluation mark.

  Moreover, the user A100 who made the question can view the state of the response to the question in the same manner as other users. As described above, the user A100 may perform a response to the answer or add supplementary information to the question during the period from the disclosure of the question to the answerable period.

  When a predetermined answerable period has elapsed since the question was disclosed, the communication management unit 10 performs an answer reception end process (step S104).

  In the answer acceptance ending process, the communication management unit 10 first notifies the user that the answer registration to the question and the evaluation mark assignment have been closed, and thereafter, except for the BA mark assignment from the questioner, We will not accept requests for answers to these questions and evaluation marks.

  Next, the communication management unit 10 waits for a BA mark granting request from the user A100 who is the questioner. At this time, the management unit 10 may notify the user A100 that the reply available period has passed and may send a message for promoting the provision of the BA mark. This completes the answer acceptance end process.

  The user A100 browses each answer to the question, selects the best answer from the answers, such as a particularly useful answer, and sends a request for adding a BA mark to the answer to the communication evaluation apparatus 1. In the present embodiment, it is assumed that the user A100 gives a BA mark to the answer of the user D. Note that the user A100 may make a request to end without assigning the BA mark when there is no answer worthy of high evaluation. In the communication device 1, the communication management unit 10 performs an acceptance process for assigning an evaluation mark (step S105).

  The operation of the acceptance process for the BA mark assignment is the same as the evaluation mark assignment acceptance process described above, except that the evaluation points are calculated further.

  Specifically, the communication management unit 10 first changes the BA mark column corresponding to the answer number 1-2 that is the answer of the user D given the BA mark in the answer table of the communication history database 22 to 1. .

  The communication history database 22 related to the final question is in the state shown in FIG. 6, and no further update is performed.

  If the user A 100 makes a request to end without assigning the BA mark, the update processing of the communication history database 22 is skipped and the next operation is started.

  Next, the management unit 10 publishes the public content information 21 by reflecting the state of the BA mark assignment in the public content information 21. If the answer reception end process has already been performed, the process proceeds to the evaluation point calculation process by the evaluation point calculation unit 11. If the answer acceptance end process is not performed at the time of applying the BA mark, the process proceeds to the evaluation point calculation process after the end process is performed.

  In the evaluation point calculation process, the evaluation point calculation unit 11 first refers to the communication history database 22 in the state of FIG. 6 and scores communication operations for each field for each user (step S106).

  From the question table in FIG. 6, the evaluation point calculation unit 11 raises the question regarding the communication operation targeted by this question by the user A100, and assigns a “like” mark by the user C102, the user D, and the user F. Recognize as an action. For the field “field 1” that is the field of this question, the calculation unit 11 uses the operation before the normalization process (hereinafter referred to as “the score so far”) based on the operation regarding each user's other questions as the operation related to the question. Add the score.

  Specifically, for the user A100, the raising of questions and the acquisition of three “Like” marks are subject to scoring. Furthermore, for the user C102, the user D, and the user F, the “Like” mark is given as a scoring target. The calculation of the score uses the above-described formula or the like.

  Next, from the answer table of FIG. 6, the evaluation point calculation unit 11 similarly scores two answers. Regarding the first answer, the user A100 scored for one answer, the user B101 scored for the answer registration and the one “Like” mark, and the user C102 gave a “Like” mark. obtain. Regarding the second answer, the user A100 obtains one answer, the user D registers the answer, obtains the two “like” marks and the BA mark, and the user E and the user F “like”. A score is obtained for each of the "" marks. The score related to the answer is added to the score so far of “Field 1” which is the same as the field of the question. As for the answer, the above-described formula is used for the calculation of the score. This completes the scoring process.

  As specific examples of scoring processing, the types of actions are as follows: a1 = question raising, a2 = answer registration, a3 = “like” mark assignment, a4 = “like” mark acquisition, a5 = BA mark acquisition, weight An example in which the scores of the question table and the answer table are calculated together with the coefficients as w1 = 3, w2 = 5, w3 = 1, w4 = 2, and w5 = 3 will be described below.

  The score P (field 1, A) of the user name “A” in “field 1” is P (field 1, A) = (3 * 1) + from the raising of questions and the acquisition of three “Like” marks. (5 * 0) + (1 * 0) + (2 * 3) + (3 * 0) = 9 points. For user B101, P (field 1, B) = (3 * 0) + (5 * 1) + (1 * 0) + (2 * 1) + (3 * 0) = 7 points. The user C102 has P (field 1, C) = (3 * 0) + (5 * 0) + (1 * 2) + (2 * 0) + (3 * 0) = 2 points. Similarly, the scores of user D, user E, and user F are 13 points, 1 point, and 2 points, respectively.

  Next, the evaluation point calculation unit 11 performs score normalization processing for each field (step S107).

  The evaluation point calculation unit 11 extracts the field of the normalization target range specified by the setting and the user's score. That is, the scores in the fields 1 and 2 of the employees belonging to the department X are extracted. After extraction, the calculation unit 11 performs normalization processing based on the extraction result.

  As an example, a normalization process when the above extraction result is as shown in FIG. Note that a) in FIG. 7 includes a score obtained by evaluating communication other than the series of operations related to the above-described question of the user A100.

  The evaluation point calculation unit 11 determines a normalization standard according to a designated determination method. That is, the total score of all users is calculated for each field, and a field with a large total score is selected. Specifically, the calculation unit 11 obtains 60 points of the total score (10 + 7 + 5 + 20 + 15 + 3) of all users of “Category 1” in FIG. 7A) and 120 points of the total score of all users of “Field 2” (30 + 30 + 20 + 15 + 20 + 5). Are determined based on “field 2” having a large numerical value.

  Next, the calculation unit 11 performs normalization by combining “field 1” with “class 2” as a reference. There are various normalization methods as described above. Here, a method of proportionally converting the scores based on the ratio of the total size of the scores of all users for each field is used.

  In FIG. 7a), the ratio of the total score of field 1 and field 2 is 60: 120 = 1: 2. Therefore, the calculation unit 11 doubles the score of each user of “field 1”, so that the total score of all users of “field 1” is 120 points, which is the same as the total score of “field 2” as a reference. Normalization is performed so that The result of normalization is as shown in FIG.

  In this embodiment, the classification with a large total score is set as a standard for normalization by presetting. However, the field to be used as a standard may be arbitrarily set for each skill evaluator 103, and not a field but a fixed field. May be used as a reference value (for example, the highest score of a user in the normalization target field is adjusted to 100).

  The evaluation point calculation unit 11 replaces the evaluation points calculated by the normalization process with the corresponding existing data in the evaluation result information 23 and stores the evaluation points. That is, the data of b) in FIG. 7 is stored in the evaluation result table in the evaluation result information 23. This is the end of the normalization process.

  Further, the normalization process may be performed a plurality of times based on the setting of different extraction ranges and reference determination methods. For example, a first normalization process for all employees and all fields may be performed, followed by a second normalization process only for specialized fields for each department. In that case, as many evaluation result tables as the number of normalization processes are created and stored.

  After the score normalization process, the evaluation result providing unit 12 reads the data in the designated range of the evaluation result information 23 in response to a request from the skill evaluator 103 and provides the data to the skill evaluator 103. The designated range may be, for example, scores for all fields of a specific user, or scores for all users of a specific field. Further, when a plurality of evaluation result tables are stored, the skill evaluator 103 designates the evaluation result table. FIG. 8 is an example of a display screen when an evaluation result for a specific skill (field) of a user is requested.

  In this way, the communication evaluation device 1 can provide the skill evaluator 103 with an evaluation score that is an evaluation result calculated from points given by an unspecified majority to each communication activity such as question and answer. .

  Here, it will be described how the evaluation score provided by the skill evaluator 103 becomes easier to use due to the effect of the normalization process.

  If the skill evaluator 103 refers to the score by designating only the user E who is a subordinate, the user E is in the field 1 = 15 according to the score table of FIG. Since field 2 = 20, it seems that field 2 is the best field for user E. However, since the scale of the total score is twice in the field 2 than in the field 1, it can be interpreted that the activity in the field 1 seems to be dwarfed simply because the amount of communication in the field 2 is doubled. correct. In order to avoid such evaluation judgment including misunderstanding, the skill evaluator 103 obtains the information of the entire evaluation result table shown in a) of FIG. It was necessary to analyze the original meaning of user E's score.

  However, in the present embodiment, based on the evaluation result obtained by performing the normalization process, the information that the score (evaluation point) of the user E is field 1 = 30 and field 2 = 20 is obtained based on the skill. Since it is provided to the evaluator 103, it can be understood that the field 1 is actually the best field by simply referring to the evaluation point of the user E. That is, it is possible to accurately compare evaluations for each field of the user only by referring to the evaluation points of only the user who is the original evaluation object without analyzing a large amount of information other than the evaluation object.

  As described above, in this embodiment, the evaluation result given to each communication such as a question and answer can be accurately determined by simply comparing the evaluation points of the evaluation target users for each technical field. There is an effect that can be.

  The reason is that the score normalization process provides an evaluation score in which the difference in the total score due to the difference in the amount of communication activity in each field is corrected in advance.

In addition, the present embodiment also has an effect that the latest evaluation result in an arbitrary user or field range can be obtained at an arbitrary time. (For example, in Patent Document 1, the evaluation is such that a boss individually inputs an evaluation in response to an input request from the system, or a person who is familiar with the skill field is designated to vote to obtain a skill evaluation point. Since it is necessary to go through a specific stage in order to determine the skill level, the calculation time of the technical level for employees is set to “regular”, and the time when the latest state of the skill evaluation points of employees can be referred is limited. There is.)
The reason is that each individual communication is completed, the score is determined and the evaluation score is calculated and replaced with the previous evaluation score as needed, so at the time of use arbitrarily selected by the skill evaluator, This is because all evaluation points that can be evaluated at the time are always prepared.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Communication evaluation apparatus 10 Communication management part 11 Evaluation point calculation part 12 Evaluation result provision part 20 Data storage part 21 Public content information 22 Communication history database 23 Evaluation result information 100 User A
101 User B
102 User C
103 Skill Evaluator

Claims (9)

A database for storing communication history information consisting of a topic launching action and a response to the proposed topic;
The history information for each user is extracted from the database, and for each user, a predetermined score according to the proposed action of the communication and the response action is totaled according to the field of the topic content. An evaluation score calculating means for calculating a score and calculating an evaluation score obtained by normalizing the score that the specified user has in the specified field according to the specified reference axis;
Evaluation result storage means for storing the evaluation points;
An evaluation result providing means for extracting and presenting an evaluation score of a designated user and field from the evaluation result storage means, and providing a communication evaluation apparatus. The communication history information stored in the database includes history information of an operation of giving an evaluation mark representing a positive or negative evaluation given to the topic and the answer,
The evaluation score calculating means includes, when calculating the user's score, the evaluation mark providing operation included in the communication for each user and a predetermined score corresponding to the acquisition of the evaluation mark. The communication evaluation apparatus according to claim 1. 2. The communication history information stored in the database, wherein the topic proposal activation includes a question proposal activation, and the response action includes an answer action performed by an answer sentence composed of sentences. Item 3. The communication evaluation device according to Item 2. In the communication evaluation method for analyzing the history information of the communication consisting of the topic activation work and the response action to the proposed topic, and generating the evaluation point of the user who performed each operation of the communication,
By extracting the history information for each user from the communication history information, and summing a predetermined score according to the proposed action and the response action of the communication for each user according to the topic content field A scoring step for calculating the user's score;
An evaluation score calculating step for calculating an evaluation score obtained by normalizing the score that the specified user has in the specified field according to the specified reference axis;
An evaluation result storage step of storing the evaluation score in a storage means;
An evaluation result providing step of extracting and presenting evaluation points of designated users and fields from the storage means, and providing a communication evaluation method. The communication history information includes history information of an operation of giving an evaluation mark representing a positive or negative evaluation given to the topic and the answer,
In the scoring step, when the user's score is calculated, the evaluation mark adding operation included in the communication for each user and a predetermined score corresponding to the acquisition of the evaluation mark are totaled. The communication evaluation method according to claim 4, wherein: 6. The communication according to claim 4, wherein, in the communication history information, the topic start-up action includes a question start-up action, and the response action includes an answer action performed by an answer sentence consisting of sentences. Evaluation method. In the communication evaluation system for analyzing the history information of the communication consisting of the topic start-up work and the response action to the proposed topic, and generating the evaluation point of the user who performed each operation of the communication,
By extracting the history information for each user from the communication history information, and summing a predetermined score according to the proposed action and the response action of the communication for each user according to the topic content field Scoring processing for calculating the user's score;
An evaluation score calculation process for calculating an evaluation score obtained by normalizing the score that the specified user has in the specified field according to the specified reference axis;
An evaluation result storage process for storing the evaluation score in a storage means;
A communication evaluation program for causing a computer to execute an evaluation result providing process for extracting and presenting evaluation points of designated users and fields from the storage means. The communication history information includes history information of an operation of giving an evaluation mark representing a positive or negative evaluation given to the topic and the answer,
The scoring process, when calculating the user's score, includes the evaluation mark providing operation included in the communication for each user and a predetermined score corresponding to the acquisition of the evaluation mark. The communication evaluation program according to claim 7, wherein: 9. The communication according to claim 7, wherein, in the communication history information, the topic start-up action includes a question start-up action, and the response action includes an answer action performed by an answer sentence composed of sentences. Evaluation program.

Images