JP2020057285A - Evaluation management server, evaluation management program, evaluation management method, and evaluation management system - Google Patents

Abstract

To secure fairness of evaluation according to a no-rating system.SOLUTION: An evaluation management processing unit of an evaluation management server according to the present invention includes a group setting receiving unit 252 for receiving grouping settings for grouping a group of evaluation objects into a plurality of groups and allowing at least one of the plurality of groups to include all members of the evaluation objects, an evaluation receiving unit 254 for receiving inputs of absolute evaluation of a plurality of evaluation objects included in the group, an evaluation presenting unit 255 for displaying, on a terminal of an evaluator corresponding to the group, a list of the absolute evaluations for each evaluation object included in the group with respect to the group including a plurality of evaluation objects whose absolute evaluations are input to the evaluation receiving unit 254, and an evaluation determining unit 256 for, if the group includes all the groups subjected to the grouping, receiving determination instructions as to the list of the absolute evaluations for the evaluation objects to determine the absolute evaluation of each evaluation object.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 8

Description

  The present invention relates to an evaluation management server, an evaluation management program, an evaluation management method, and an evaluation management system.

  2. Description of the Related Art Hitherto, in a general organization such as a company, personnel evaluation is performed by a rating method. The rating method is to assign a grade to a person to be evaluated and to notify an evaluation result such as a raising / lowering rate using an equivalent class. In many cases, it is used for relative evaluation in the distribution of funds, and therefore evaluation is performed so as to have a distribution determined by grade.

  On the other hand, in recent years, various studies have shown that cooperation between employees has a strong effect on the productivity of an organization. It has been pointed out that some rating methods may impair employee coordination.

  Therefore, as a new method of personnel evaluation, a no-rating method of absolutely evaluating individuals to be evaluated individually has begun to be adopted.

JP-A-2004-039000

  In the case of a resource distribution evaluation that is often used in the rating method, the resource distribution within the organization is first performed. Then, since each evaluator assigns a grade to the evaluator so that the amount of raising and lowering the salary falls within the given funds and the distribution is determined according to the grade, no deviating evaluation is performed. They ensure a certain level of fairness. In the no-rating method, each evaluator first makes an absolute evaluation of the evaluation subject under his / her own. For this reason, it has been difficult to establish evaluation standards for the entire organization, and it has been difficult to confirm whether or not the evaluation is fair.

  The present invention has been made in view of the above circumstances and has been made to solve the problem, and has as its object to ensure fairness of evaluation in a no-rating method.

  The disclosed technology groups an evaluation target group into a plurality of groups, and a group setting reception unit that receives a setting for grouping such that at least one of the plurality of groups includes all of the evaluation target group; An evaluation receiving unit that receives an input of absolute evaluations of a plurality of evaluation targets included in the evaluation receiving unit and a group including the plurality of evaluation targets whose input of the absolute evaluation is received by the evaluation receiving unit are included in the group. An evaluation presenting unit for displaying a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target on a terminal of an evaluator associated with the group; and when the group includes all the grouped groups, the evaluation target An evaluation determination unit that receives a determination instruction for a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target and determines the absolute evaluation for each evaluation target person. It is a management server.

  The fairness of evaluation in the no rating system can be ensured.

It is a figure explaining the outline of operation of the evaluation management system of this embodiment. It is a figure showing an example of the system configuration of an evaluation management system. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of an evaluation management server. It is a figure showing an example of a member database. It is a figure showing an example of an organization database. It is a figure showing an example of a group database. It is a figure showing an example of an evaluation result database. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating functions of an evaluation management processing unit. It is a 1st flowchart explaining operation | movement of an evaluation management server. It is a 2nd flowchart explaining operation | movement of an evaluation management server. FIG. 11 is a first diagram illustrating a display example of a calibration list. FIG. 7 is a first diagram illustrating an example of a calibration screen. FIG. 11 is a second diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. It is a first figure showing an example of an evaluation comment input column. It is a 2nd figure which shows an example of an evaluation comment input column. FIG. 14 is a third diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. FIG. 14 is a second diagram illustrating a display example of a calibration list. FIG. 14 is a fourth diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. FIG. 14 is a fifth diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. It is the third figure which shows an example of the evaluation comment input column. FIG. 16 is a sixth diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. FIG. 17 is a seventh diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. It is a figure showing an example of the screen where the notice of feedback was displayed. It is the 1st figure which shows an example of the screen of the member who gives feedback. It is the 2nd figure which shows an example of the screen of the member who gives feedback. It is a figure showing an example of a screen of an evaluation subject who receives feedback.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an outline of the operation of the evaluation management system according to the present embodiment.

  FIG. 1 schematically illustrates an organization M in which the evaluation management system of the present embodiment performs input, review, determination, and the like of an evaluation target person.

  The organization M includes a group G1 including all the persons to be evaluated evaluated by others, and the group G1 includes a group G21 and a group G22. The group G21 includes a group G31 and a group G32, and the group G22 includes a group G41 and a group G42.

  That is, the group G1 is a group of the highest layer including all the groups in the organization M under its control, and the groups G31, G32, G41, and G42 are groups of the lowest layer in the organization M.

  As shown in FIG. 1A, members P311, P312, and P313 belong to group G31, and members P321, P322, and P323 belong to group G32. Members P411, P412, and P413 belong to the group G41, and members P421, P422, and P423 belong to the group G42.

  The member P211 is an evaluator who evaluates members included in the group G31, and the members included in the group G31 are evaluation targets who are evaluated by the member P211 that is the evaluator. The member P212 is an evaluator that evaluates the members included in the group G32, and the members included in the group G32 are evaluation targets evaluated by the member P212 that is the evaluator.

  Similarly, the member P221 is an evaluator that evaluates the members included in the group G41, and the member P222 is an evaluator that evaluates the members included in the group G42.

  Although not shown in FIG. 1A, each of the members P211, P212, P221, and P222 includes a plurality of evaluators. For example, the member P211 includes members P211a, P211b, P211c, etc., which are evaluators of the group G31. In this case, the member P211a is, for example, an organizational supervisor of the members included in the group G31. The member P211b is, for example, the same person as the member P212b among the members 212a, P212b, and P212c that are the evaluators of the group G32.

  In the present embodiment, when the members included in each of the groups G31, G32, G41, and G42 are evaluated by the evaluators of the respective groups, the upper group including the members of G31, G32, G41, and G44 is next. The list of evaluation results is displayed to the evaluators of the above, and the evaluation is reviewed by the evaluators of the upper group.

  In the present embodiment, “performing an evaluation” means that the contents of the evaluation input in advance are reviewed or an input for changing the contents of the evaluation is performed. The contents of the evaluation input in advance are those input in the previous evaluation and the contents of the evaluation performed when the member joins the organization, and are stored in the evaluation result database described later.

  The evaluation in the present embodiment is an evaluation method used in the no rating method, and is not a result of comparing members, but an evaluation of an individual's ability based on a certain evaluation criterion. It is determined independently. In other words, the evaluation in the present embodiment can be said to be an absolute evaluation.

  As shown in FIG. 1B, the group G21 is a group including the groups G31 and G32, the members included in the groups G31 and G32, the member P211 that is the evaluator of the group G31, and the evaluator of the group G32. Is included.

  That is, in the group G21, the evaluation target persons included in the lower group of the group G21 and the evaluators of the lower group of the group G21 are the evaluation target persons.

  The group G22 is an upper group of the groups G41 and G42, and includes members included in the groups G41 and G42, a member P221 who is an evaluator of the group G41, and a member P222 which is an evaluator of the group G42.

  That is, in the group G22, the evaluation target persons included in the lower group of the group G22 and the evaluators of the lower group of the group G21 are the evaluation target persons.

  Note that the plurality of members included in the members P211, P212, P221, and P222 in FIG. 1B are the same as the plurality of members included in the members P211, P212, P221, and P222 illustrated in FIG. You don't have to.

  Members P11, P12, and P13 shown in FIG. 1B are evaluators of group G21. The members P11, P12, and P13 review and change the results of the evaluation performed by the members P211 and P212 that are the evaluators for the evaluation targets included in the groups G31 and G32. The members P11, P12, and P13 review or change the evaluation input in the previous evaluation or the like for the members P211 and P212 of the evaluators in the groups G31 and G32.

  That is, the members P11, P12, and P13 are higher-ranked evaluators than the member P211 that is the evaluator of the group G31 and the member P212 that is the evaluator of the group G32.

Members P12, P13, and P14 are evaluators of group G22. The members P12, P13, and P14 review and change the results of the evaluation performed by the members P221 and P222, which are the evaluators, for the evaluation targets included in the groups G41 and G42. The members P12, P13, and P14 review and change the evaluations input in the previous evaluation and the like for the members P221 and P222 of the evaluators in the groups G41 and G42.
That is, the members P12, P13, and P14 are higher-ranked evaluators than the member P221 who is the evaluator of the group G41 and the member P222 which is the evaluator of the group G42.

  As shown in FIG. 1C, the group G1 includes a group G1 in the organization M, which includes all the persons to be evaluated that are evaluated by others.

  That is, the group G1 is a group of the highest layer including all the groups in the organization M under its control.

  In FIG. 1, the group of the highest layer in the organization M is only the group G1, but it is not limited to this. The top layer may include a plurality of groups.

  The group G1 includes members who have been evaluated in the groups G21 and G22, and members P11, P12, P13 and P14 which have been evaluators in the groups G21 and G22.

  The evaluation of the group G1 is reviewed by members Pm1, Pm2, and Pm3, which are the highest evaluators of the organization M.

  As described above, in the present embodiment, when a member in a certain group is evaluated, evaluation is performed by a member (evaluator) previously associated with the group.

  Further, in the present embodiment, a list of evaluation results performed by the evaluator is browsed by a plurality of evaluators higher than the evaluator, and the contents of the evaluation by the upper evaluator are confirmed, and corrections and changes are performed. Input. That is, in the present embodiment, a list of evaluation results by the evaluator is reviewed by an evaluator higher than the evaluator.

  Further, in the present embodiment, this procedure is repeated until the top evaluator becomes the top evaluator of the organization M. Note that the highest evaluator in this embodiment is not included in the evaluation target even if this procedure is repeated.

  In the present embodiment, when the highest evaluator gives an instruction to confirm the list of the evaluation results of the evaluation targets included in the group G1 viewed by the highest evaluator, all the evaluators included in the group G1 are checked. The evaluation result of the member is determined.

  The configuration of the group shown in FIG. 1 is arbitrarily set in the organization M, and may or may not match the organization structure. In the following description, it is assumed that the above-described group configuration is set in advance. Details of how to set a group will be described later.

  In the present embodiment, a member serving as a coordinator (organizer) is associated with each group separately from the evaluator. The start and end of browsing of the evaluation result of the evaluation target person for each group, confirmation of the contents of the evaluation, modification and change, and the like are managed by an organizer associated with the group. Therefore, in this embodiment, the review of the evaluation is performed by the evaluator for each group and the organizer.

  In the present embodiment, the evaluation of the members in the group G1 is determined by such a procedure, and the evaluator evaluates the evaluation target person by the absolute evaluation, and the evaluation result is evaluated by a plurality of other evaluators having different positions and viewpoints. A review can be made by such means.

  Therefore, according to the present embodiment, it is possible to suppress the evaluator from performing arbitrary evaluation. Further, according to the present embodiment, the evaluation result by the evaluator is reviewed by the upper evaluator, and finally, the evaluation result of all the evaluation target persons is reviewed by the highest manager of the organization. , The evaluation results of all members are determined. Therefore, the evaluation result of each evaluation target person reflects the evaluation standard of the organization.

  From the above, according to the present embodiment, the fairness of evaluation in the no rating method can be ensured.

  In the following description, when another evaluator browses the evaluation result based on the absolute evaluation input for each evaluation target person, it may be expressed as “review the evaluation result”. In the following description, changing (including adding, modifying, and updating) the content of the evaluation based on the absolute evaluation input for each evaluation target is referred to as “performing the evaluation” and “inputting the evaluation”. May be expressed.

  Further, in the following description, it is assumed that the evaluation result based on the absolute evaluation input for each evaluation target is reviewed by another evaluator, that the content of the evaluation based on the absolute evaluation input for each evaluation target is changed, May be expressed as “perform calibration”.

  That is, the calibration in the present embodiment includes a review of the evaluation result based on the absolute evaluation input for each evaluation subject, and an input for changing the content of the evaluation based on the absolute evaluation input for each evaluation subject. .

  In the following description, performing calibration on the group of the lowest layer may be referred to as “primary evaluation”.

  Hereinafter, a procedure realized by the evaluation management system of the present embodiment will be specifically described using these expressions.

  In FIG. 1, it is assumed that the members P211 and P212 are associated with the groups G31 and G32 as evaluators, and the members P221 and P222 are associated with the groups G41 and G42 as the evaluators. It was assumed.

  It is assumed that members P11, P12, and P13 are associated with the group G21 as evaluators.

  First, the members belonging to the groups G31 and G32 are evaluated by the members P211 and P212 as the evaluators. Then, the members in the group under the group G21 are in a state where the calibration has been performed.

  Next, in the present embodiment, calibration of members belonging to the groups G31 and G32 and evaluation of the members P211 and P212 are performed by the member P11 who is an evaluator of the group G21. The same applies to the group G22.

  Then, the members P11 and P12 calibrate the evaluation results of the members in the groups under the groups G21 and G22, and evaluate the evaluators of the subordinate groups. In other words, the members P11 and P12 evaluate the group including the members P211 to P423.

  Next, for the group G1, the same procedure is performed by the member Pm who is the highest evaluator.

  That is, the calibration of the evaluation results of the members in the group under the group G1 and the evaluation of the members P11 and P12 are performed by the member Pm.

  The members P11 and P12 may be set as evaluation targets in another group not shown in FIG. For example, if the evaluators of the members P11 and P12 are present in addition to the member Pm, the evaluators may evaluate the members P11 and P12 as a group including the members P11 and P12 as evaluation targets.

  In this case, the member Pm only needs to calibrate the evaluation results of all the evaluation targets in the organization M.

  In the present embodiment, it is possible to apply the above procedure, not to rate individual members, and to ensure fairness in absolute evaluation.

  In the example of FIG. 1, the groups formed in the organization M have been described as including upper groups including lower groups, but are not limited to this. For example, the upper group may be set so as to include some of the members included in the plurality of lower groups. In other words, the higher-order group may be set so as to include the members who have been evaluated in the lower-order group.

  Therefore, in the present embodiment, a group including a part of the members included in the group G31 and a part of the members included in the group G41 may be set as a group higher than the groups G31 and G41.

  Hereinafter, the evaluation management system of the present embodiment will be described. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of a system configuration of the evaluation management system.

  The evaluation management system 100 of the present embodiment includes an evaluation management server 200 and terminal devices 300-1, 300-2,..., 300-n, and the evaluation management server 200 and the terminal devices 300-1, 300-2. ,..., 300-n are connected via a network. In the following description, the terminal devices 300-1, 300-2,.

  The evaluation management system 100 according to the present embodiment is, for example, introduced into an organization (such as a company) in which personnel evaluation is performed.

  The evaluation management server 200 includes a member database 210, an organization database 220, a group database 230, an evaluation result database 240, and an evaluation management processing unit 250.

  The member database 210 stores, for example, information on members of a company in which the evaluation management system 100 is installed. In other words, the member database 210 stores information on members of the organization in which the evaluation management system 100 is installed.

  The organization database 220 stores information indicating the organization structure. The group database 230 stores information for each group, which is a result of grouping members. The evaluation result database 240 stores information indicating the evaluation result for each member.

  The evaluation management processing unit 250 refers to the member database 210, the organization database 220, and the group database 230, and causes the terminal device 300 of the member to be the evaluator to display a screen for browsing, inputting, and reviewing the evaluation. In the following description, a screen displayed on the terminal device 300 for browsing, inputting, and reviewing the evaluation is referred to as a calibration screen.

  In other words, the calibration screen of the present embodiment is a screen for both inputting the evaluation to the evaluation subject and reviewing the evaluation result.

  In the following description, the state in which the calibration screen is displayed on the terminal device 300 by the evaluation management processing unit 250 and the input to the calibration screen is received may be expressed as the execution of calibration. In other words, the execution of the calibration indicates a state in which the calibration screen is displayed on the evaluator and the terminal device 300 of the organizer so that the evaluation can be input and reviewed.

  The terminal device 300 is used in association with members (employees) included in the organization. Specifically, the terminal device 300 includes a terminal device used by a member to be evaluated, a terminal device used by an evaluator member, and a terminal device used by an organizer member.

  In the example of FIG. 1, the member database 210, the organization database 220, the group database 230, and the evaluation result database 240 are provided in the evaluation management server 200; however, the present invention is not limited to this. A part or all of these databases may be provided in a device external to the evaluation management server 200.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of the evaluation management server.

  The evaluation management device 200 of the present embodiment includes an input device 21, an output device 22, a drive device 23, a storage device 24, a memory device 25, an arithmetic processing device 26, and an interface device 27, which are mutually connected by a bus B. .

  The input device 21 is a device for inputting various information, and is realized by, for example, a keyboard, a pointing device, or the like. The output device 22 is for outputting various types of information, and is realized by, for example, a display or the like. The interface device 27 includes a LAN card and the like, and is used for connecting to a network.

  The evaluation management program that implements the evaluation management processing unit 250 is at least a part of various programs that control the evaluation management device 200. The evaluation management program is provided, for example, by distributing the storage medium 28 or downloading from the network. The storage medium 28 on which the evaluation management program is recorded is a storage medium for recording information optically, electrically or magnetically, such as a CD-ROM, a flexible disk, or a magneto-optical disk, or information, such as a ROM or a flash memory. Various types of storage media can be used, such as a semiconductor memory that electrically records data.

  When the storage medium 28 storing the evaluation management program is set in the drive device 23, the evaluation management program is installed from the storage medium 28 to the storage device 24 via the drive device 23. The evaluation management program downloaded from the network is installed in the storage device 24 via the interface device 27.

  The storage device 24 implements a member database 210, an organization database 220, a group database 230, an evaluation result database 240, and the like. The storage device 24 stores an evaluation management program installed in the evaluation management device 200, and is used by the evaluation management device 200. Stores various necessary files and data. The memory device 25 reads out and stores the evaluation management program from the storage device 24 when the evaluation management device 200 is started. Then, the arithmetic processing device 26 realizes various processes described below according to the evaluation management program stored in the memory device 25.

  Next, each database of the evaluation management server 200 will be described with reference to FIGS. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of the member database.

  The member database 210 of the present embodiment includes a member ID, a name, an address, a post ID, a department ID, and the like as information items, and the item “member ID” is associated with other items.

  The value of the item “member ID” indicates identification information for identifying the member (member), the value of the item “name” indicates the name of the member, and the value of the item “address” indicates the mail address of the member. The value of the item “post ID” indicates identification information for specifying the post of the member, and the value of the item “post ID” indicates the identification information for specifying the post to which the member belongs.

  In the following description, information including the value of the item “member ID” and the values of other items in the member database 210 is referred to as member information.

  FIG. 4 is an example of the member database 210, and the member database 210 may include items other than the items shown in FIG.

  FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of the organization database. The organization database 220 of the present embodiment includes a table 220-1 in which department information is stored, and a table 220-2 in which post information is stored.

  The table 220-1 stores department information in which the value of the item “department ID” is associated with the value of the item “department name”. The table 220-0 stores post information in which the value of the item "post ID" and the value of the item "post name" are associated with each other. In this embodiment, the position of the member in the organization is determined by the combination of the department ID and the post ID.

  FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of the group database. The group database 230 of this embodiment has group tables 230-1, 230-2,..., 230-n provided for each group.

  The groups shown in FIG. 6 are set in advance. FIG. 6 illustrates the group table 230-1 as an example.

  Hereinafter, setting of a group according to the present embodiment will be described. The group in the present embodiment is a unit in which an evaluation is input or reviewed, and is a group in which a list is displayed on the calibration screen.

  In the present embodiment, for example, it is set by a member of the human resources department. The groups according to the present embodiment may be configured such that one group corresponds to one department based on the structure of the organization M. In this case, the evaluator of each group is set so as to include the boss of a member (evaluation target) included in the group.

  Specifically, for example, groups “Human Resources Department”, “Training Section”, “Recruiting Section” and the like are set as groups within the organization M, and the group “Human Resources Department” has a group “Training Section”. It is set to include members of the group "Employment Section". Therefore, for example, the group “training section” and the group “employment section” respectively correspond to the groups G31 and G32 in FIG. 1, and the group “HR department” corresponds to the group G21 in FIG.

  The group table 230-1 illustrated in FIG. 6 is, for example, information on a group set as the group “upbringing section”.

  The group database 230-1 has, as information items, a group ID, a state, an organizer ID, an evaluator ID, and an evaluation subject ID, and the item “group ID” is associated with other items. In the following description, information including the value of the item “group ID” and the values of other items in the group database 230 is referred to as group information.

  The value of the item “group ID” indicates identification information for specifying a group. The value of the item “state” indicates the progress of the calibration for the evaluation subject belonging to the group in the group.

  The value of the item “organizer ID” is a member ID for specifying an organizer (coordinator) determined for each group. In the present embodiment, an organizer is determined in advance for each group, and the organizer has the authority to manage the start and end of accepting an input to the calibration screen. The organizer is in charge of, for example, a member belonging to the human resources department.

  The value of the item “evaluator ID” indicates a member ID that specifies an evaluator who performs calibration on the evaluation target person in the group.

  In this embodiment, the evaluator and the organizer are members that are associated with the group and are not included in the group.

  In the present embodiment, the evaluator for each group may include a person determined for each group, separately from the structure of the organization.

  Specifically, for example, a team in which members of a plurality of departments are mixed may be created due to the start of a new project or the like. In such a case, the members of the human resources department that set up the group will set one group with the members other than the team leader of the team being evaluated, and the team leader will be included in the evaluators of this group. Can be set to

  In this embodiment, for example, the same job type (designer, back-end engineer, etc.) in a plurality of organizations may be set in one group. In this case, a member who is a manager of the same job type can be set to be included in the evaluator of this group.

  The value of the item “evaluation target ID” indicates a member ID that specifies an evaluation target whose evaluation is input or reviewed by the evaluator. In the present embodiment, the evaluation target person is a member included in the group.

  In the example of FIG. 6, the group specified by the group ID "G31" includes five evaluators, three evaluators and the organizer are associated with each other, and the state is "before start". . Therefore, it is understood that the evaluation of this group has not been started for the evaluation target persons in the group.

  The value of the item “state” includes “before”, “being executed” indicating that the calibration is being executed, and “showing that the calibration for the evaluation target person in the group has been completed”. End "is included.

  In the present embodiment, in the structure of the organization, members having the same rank of position are in a relationship between the evaluator included in the group and the evaluator evaluating the evaluator in the group. It is assumed that a group is set.

  In other words, in the present embodiment, the group is set so that the ranks of positions in the organization database 220 of the evaluation target person included in the group and the evaluator associated with the group are different. And

  Specifically, for example, when the evaluation target person in the group G31 has a member of the position of “section manager”, the evaluator of the group G31 is different from the “section manager” and has a position higher than the “section manager”. A group is set in advance so that members (for example, “manager”) are associated with each other.

  By setting the group in this way, it is possible to prevent members of the same class in the organization from viewing each other's evaluation results.

  FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of the evaluation result database. The evaluation result database 240 of the present embodiment includes, as information items, member ID, Grade, TotalPoint, Salary, bonus, annual income, evaluation history, overall evaluation, feedback, personnel memo, self-evaluation, and disclosure availability. In the evaluation result database 240, the item “member ID” is associated with other items. In the following description, information including the value of the item “member ID” and the values of other items is referred to as evaluation result information.

  The items “grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary” are respectively associated with the item “current” and the item “target”.

  In each of the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary”, the value of the item “current” is the result determined in the previous evaluation or the evaluation performed when the member newly joined the organization. The result is shown.

  The value of the item “target” indicates the result of the calibration of the lower group. That is, in the present embodiment, the evaluation input on the calibration screen is stored in the evaluation result database 240 as the value of the item “target”.

  The value of the item “Grade” indicates the grade of the bonus of the member specified by the member ID. This grade may be, for example, a grade for specialty for each occupation that is not related to the organizational structure.

For example, a bonus is calculated by annual income × n%. The value of “n” differs for each bonus grade. For example, in the case of the grade “E1”, the bonus is the annual income × m%.
The value of the item “TotalPoint” indicates the absolute evaluation of the member specified by the member ID. The value of the item “Salary” indicates a reward for the member determined according to the value of TotalPoint which is an absolute evaluation.

  In the example of FIG. 7, the members of the member ID “1” have the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and the value of the item “current” of “Salary” set to “A1”, “9.6”, “9, 600,000 ", and the value of the item" target "is empty. Therefore, FIG. 7 shows that the current evaluation result for this member has not been calibrated yet.

  The value of the item “bonus” indicates whether there is a bonus for the member specified by the member ID. Note that the value of the item “bonus” may be the amount of bonus for the member. The value of the item “annual income” indicates the annual income of the member specified by the member ID. Specifically, the value of the item “annual income” is determined by the value of the item “Salary” and the bonus amount.

  The value of the item “evaluation history” indicates the history of evaluation comments by the evaluator input to the member specified by the member ID until the calibration for all the evaluation targets included in the organization is completed. .

  The value of the item “comprehensive evaluation” indicates the result of comprehensive evaluation for the member specified by the member ID. The value of the item “feedback” indicates the content to be fed back to the member specified by the member ID. In other words, the value of the item “feedback” indicates the evaluation content to be notified to the member specified by the member ID.

  The value of the item “personnel memo” indicates an evaluation content that is not notified to the member specified by the member ID. The value of the item “self-evaluation” indicates the content of self-evaluation input by the member specified by the member ID.

  The value of the item “disclosure permission” indicates whether or not the evaluation result information can be disclosed to the member specified by the member ID. Whether or not to disclose the evaluation result information is determined by the manager in the department to which the member specified by the member ID belongs.

  Next, a function of the evaluation management processing unit 250 of the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating the function of the evaluation management processing unit.

  The evaluation management processing unit 250 according to the present embodiment includes an input reception unit 251, a group setting reception unit 252, a display control unit 253, an evaluation reception unit 254, an evaluation presentation unit 255, an evaluation determination unit 256, a group state determination unit 257, and a group state. An update unit 258, a start determination unit 259, an evaluation result output unit 260, and a notification output unit 261 are provided.

  The input receiving unit 251 receives various inputs to the evaluation management server 200. Specifically, the input receiving unit 251 receives, for example, input of information stored in each database, designation of a group for inputting and reviewing an evaluation, input according to an operation on the terminal device 300, and the like.

  The group setting reception unit 252 causes the group information to be set. Specifically, the group setting reception unit 252 receives an input of group information stored in the group database 230 and stores group information for each group in the group database 230.

  In other words, the group setting receiving unit 252 receives a setting for grouping the evaluation target group, which is all the evaluation targets in the organization, into a plurality of groups. At this time, the grouping is performed such that at least one of the plurality of groups includes all the grouped groups.

  The display control unit 253 controls display on the terminal device 300 according to the input received by the input receiving unit 251. Specifically, for example, the display control unit 253 controls the display on the terminal device 300 in accordance with the member ID associated with the terminal device 300 for which the input receiving unit 251 has received the input.

  The evaluation receiving unit 254 receives an input of an evaluation for the evaluation target person. More specifically, the evaluation receiving unit 254 may receive an input for changing the input evaluation, a comment for the evaluation target person, or the like. That is, the evaluation receiving unit 254 receives an input corresponding to the item “target” in the evaluation result information stored in the evaluation result database 240. The evaluation result information received by the evaluation receiving unit 254 is stored as the value of the item “target” in the evaluation result database 240.

  The evaluation presentation unit 255 causes the terminal device 300 of the evaluator of the group to display a list of the absolute evaluations of all the evaluation targets in the group.

  That is, the evaluation presenting unit 255 of the present embodiment causes the evaluator of the upper group to review the evaluation result of the absolute evaluation in the lower group with respect to the evaluation target.

  At this time, the evaluation presenting unit 255 determines that the value of the item “target” has not been input for any of the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary” of the evaluation result information of the evaluation target person in the group. Displays the value of the item "current" of the items "Grade", "TotalPoint", and "Salary" as a list of the absolute evaluations of the evaluation target person.

  In addition, when the value of the item “target” of the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary” of the evaluation result information of the evaluation target person in the group is input, the evaluation presentation unit 255 , "TotalPoint", and the value of the item "target" of "Salary" are displayed as a list of absolute evaluations of the evaluation target person.

  The evaluation determination unit 256 receives an operation of terminating the absolute evaluation for all the evaluation subjects in the group including all the evaluation subjects in the organization, and assumes that the calibration of all the evaluation subjects has been completed, Finalize the evaluation result of the absolute evaluation.

  Specifically, when the calibration for the evaluation results of all the evaluation subjects is completed, the evaluation determination unit 256 overwrites the value of the item “target” in the evaluation result database 240 with the value of the item “current”. , Delete the value of the item “target” and leave it empty. In addition, the evaluation determination unit 256 prohibits the update of the values of the items other than the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary” in the evaluation result database 240.

  The group state determination unit 257 determines the state of the group based on the value of the item “state” included in the group information.

  The group status update unit 258 updates the value of the item “status” included in the group information. Specifically, the group status update unit 258 receives the operation of starting the execution of the process by the evaluation management processing unit 250 from the terminal device 300 to which the member ID of the organizer for each group is associated, and receives the value of the item “status”. Is updated during execution from before the start.

  When the group status update unit 258 receives, from the terminal device 300 associated with the member ID of the organizer, an operation to end the absolute evaluation for the evaluation target in the group, the value of the item “status” is changed from “in execution” to “end”. Update to

  Upon receiving the designation of the group, the start determination unit 259 determines whether or not the evaluation target persons included in the group in which the calibration is being performed exist among the evaluation target persons included in the specified group. Then, when there is a corresponding evaluation target person in the specified group, the start determination unit 259 prohibits the evaluation management processing unit 250 from starting processing for the specified group.

  In addition, the start determination unit 259 of the present embodiment determines that the designation of the item “status” included in the group information is not “finished” in all the groups included in the designated group. The evaluation of the group and the start of the calibration may be prohibited.

  The evaluation result output unit 260 transmits the evaluation result information stored in the evaluation result database 240 to the terminal device 300 of the evaluator or the terminal device 300 of the person to be evaluated. The notification output unit 261 transmits various notifications according to the operation of the evaluation management server 200 to the corresponding terminal device 300.

  Next, the operation of the evaluation management server 200 of the present embodiment will be described. FIG. 9 is a first flowchart illustrating the operation of the evaluation management server.

  The evaluation management processing unit 250 of the evaluation management server 200 according to the present embodiment determines whether the input receiving unit 251 has received designation of a group (step S901). If the group designation has not been received in step S901, the evaluation management processing unit 250 waits until the group designation is received.

  The designation of a group is performed by an organizer associated with the group. The designation of a group may be performed, for example, by inputting information for identifying a group such as a group ID in the terminal device 300 used by the organizer.

  In step S901, when the group designation is received, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether the start determination unit 259 determines whether the designated group includes an evaluation target person included in another group that is being calibrated. It is determined whether or not it is (step S902). If there is a corresponding evaluation subject in step S902, the start determination unit 259 prohibits the reception of the group designation and returns to step S901. At this time, the start determination unit 259 may cause the terminal device 300 to which the group has been designated to output an error message or the like indicating that the group designation is prohibited.

  In the present embodiment, by performing the processing of step S902, for example, when one evaluation target is included in a plurality of groups, the evaluation target is simultaneously evaluated and reviewed in a plurality of groups. Can be prevented from being performed. Therefore, according to the present embodiment, it is possible to prevent the same person from being evaluated differently at the same time.

  In step S902, when there is no corresponding person to be evaluated, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether the input receiving unit 251 has received a calibration start instruction from the organizer (the terminal device 300 used by the organizer). A determination is made (step S903).

  If the start instruction is not received in step S903, the evaluation management processing unit 250 waits until the start instruction is received.

  Upon receiving the start instruction in step S903, the evaluation management processing unit 250 refers to the group database 230 by the notification output unit 261 and notifies the start to the terminal devices 300 of all the evaluators associated with the specified group. Is transmitted (step S904). Specifically, the notification output unit 261 may send an e-mail including a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) for displaying a calibration screen to the evaluator.

  At this time, the evaluation management processing unit 250 updates the value of the item “status” in the group information of the specified group from “before start” to “executing” by the group status update unit 258.

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether or not the group specified by the group status determination unit 257 includes a group including the evaluation target whose value of the item “target” is input in the evaluation result information. A determination is made (step S905).

  In other words, the group state determination unit 257 determines whether there is an evaluation subject for which calibration has been performed in the specified group.

  In step S905, when there is no corresponding person to be evaluated, the evaluation management processing unit 250 causes the evaluation presenting unit 255 to display a calibration screen including the value of the item “current” of the evaluation result information on the terminal device 300 of the evaluator. It is displayed (step S906), and the process proceeds to step S908 described later.

  In other words, the calibration screen displayed here is a screen for inputting the evaluation result of the absolute evaluation that is the primary evaluation for the person to be evaluated.

  In step S905, when there is a corresponding evaluation target person, the evaluation management processing unit 250 causes the evaluation presentation unit 255 to display a calibration screen including the value of the item “target” of the evaluation result information on the terminal of the evaluator. The information is displayed on the device 300 (step S907), and the process proceeds to step S908 described below.

  That is, the calibration screen displayed here is a screen for reviewing the evaluation result (for example, the evaluation result of the primary evaluation) performed in the previous stage for the person to be evaluated.

  Note that, in step S905, when there is a corresponding evaluation target person in step S905, the evaluation presenting unit 255 checks the evaluation result information item “target” for all the evaluation target persons included in the specified group. It may be determined whether a value has been input. Then, as a result of this determination, the evaluation presenting unit 255 proceeds to step S907, which will be described later, only when the value of the item “target” of the evaluation result information has been input for all the evaluation target persons. If the value of the item “target” of the evaluation result information has not been input for the user, the process may return to step S901. In other words, the evaluation presenting unit 255 of the present embodiment performs the calibration of the specified group only when the execution of the calibration in the lower group has been completed for all the evaluation targets in the specified group. Can be executed.

  In this embodiment, the calibration screen of the specified group may be displayed only when the evaluation input states of all the evaluation subjects included in the specified group are the same. In this way, the evaluation results can be reviewed while comparing the evaluation results of all the evaluation targets in the designated group.

  Note that the display control unit 253 of the present embodiment displays the calibration screen in a state in which the reception of the input is prohibited when the access from the terminal device 300 of the evaluator is received before the start notification is transmitted. The information may be displayed on the device 300.

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether the evaluation receiving unit 254 has received an input to the terminal device 300 on which the calibration screen is displayed (Step S908). If the input is not received in step S908, the evaluation management processing unit 250 waits until the input is received.

  In step S908, when the input is received, the evaluation management processing unit 250 causes the display control unit 253 to change the member ID associated with the terminal device 300 that has received the input into the manager member who is the boss associated with the evaluation target person. It is determined whether it is an ID (step S909).

  In step S909, if the terminal device 300 that has received the input is the manager terminal device 300, the evaluation management processing unit 250 proceeds to step S912 described below.

  In step S909, when the terminal device 300 that has received the input is not the terminal device 300 of the manager, the notification output unit 261 transmits a notification indicating a warning to the terminal device 300 (step S910).

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether the evaluation receiving unit 254 has received, from the terminal device 300 that has transmitted the notification indicating the warning, a notification indicating that an input is to be performed (a notification indicating that the input is permitted). Is determined (step S912). If the relevant notification is not received in step S912, the evaluation management processing unit 250 returns to step S908.

  In step S911, upon receiving a notification indicating that an input is to be performed from the terminal device 300, the evaluation management processing unit 250 proceeds to step S912 described below.

  Upon receiving the input on the calibration screen, the evaluation management processing unit 250 causes the evaluation receiving unit 254 to store the input information in the evaluation result database 240 (step S912). Specifically, the evaluation receiving unit 254 stores the input information in the evaluation result database 240 in association with the member ID of the evaluation target to whom the evaluation has been input.

  At this time, if the input information is any of the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary”, the evaluation receiving unit 254 sets the value of the item “target” associated with each item. , Stored in the evaluation result database 240.

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether or not information has been input for all the evaluation target persons included in the specified group by the evaluation receiving unit 254 (step S913). That is, the evaluation receiving unit 254 determines whether or not the absolute evaluation has been input for all the evaluation target persons in the group.

  In step S913, when the input has not been performed for all the evaluation target persons, the evaluation management processing unit 250 returns to step S908.

  In step S913, when the input has been performed for all the evaluation target persons, the evaluation management processing unit 250 causes the group status update unit 258 to set the item “status” included in the group information of the specified group in the group database 230. Is updated from “being executed” to “end” (step S914).

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines whether the input receiving unit 251 has received a calibration end instruction from the organizer terminal device 300 (step S915). In step S915, when the termination instruction is not received, the evaluation management processing unit 250 waits until receiving the termination instruction.

  In step S915, when receiving the end instruction, the evaluation management processing unit 250 ends the calibration.

  In the present embodiment, the processing in FIG. 9 is repeatedly performed until the processing is performed on all groups. In this embodiment, when the calibration of all groups is completed, the evaluation results of all the evaluation subjects in the organization are determined, and the evaluation result information for each evaluation subject can be fed back to the evaluation subjects. Become like The operation of the evaluation management server 200 when the calibration of all groups is completed will be described below with reference to FIG.

  FIG. 10 is a second flowchart illustrating the operation of the evaluation management server. The evaluation management processing unit 250 of the present embodiment determines whether or not the calibration termination instruction received by the input reception unit 251 is the calibration termination instruction of the highest-order group, by the evaluation determination unit 256 ( Step S1001).

  Specifically, the evaluation determination unit 256 determines whether the end instruction received by the input reception unit 251 is an end instruction received from the terminal device 300 used by the organizer of the group including all the evaluation targets in the organization. Is determined.

  In step S1001, if the instruction is not a corresponding end instruction, that is, if it is not an instruction to end calibration of a group including all evaluation subjects in the organization, the evaluation management processing unit 250 waits until receiving the corresponding end instruction. I do.

  In step S1002, if the instruction is a corresponding end instruction, that is, if it is an instruction to end calibration of a group including all evaluation targets in the organization, the evaluation determination unit 256 determines the evaluation results of all the evaluation targets. It is determined (step S1002). Specifically, the evaluation determination unit 256 overwrites the value of the item “target” corresponding to each of the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary” with the value of the item “current” in the evaluation result database 240. Then, the value of the item “target” is set to empty. Further, the evaluation determination unit 256 prohibits updating of items other than the items “Grade”, “TotalPoint”, and “Salary” in the evaluation result database 240.

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 transmits, by the notification output unit 261, a notification indicating that feedback of the evaluation result is possible to each supervisor of the evaluation target person (step S <b> 1003).

  Here, the boss to which this notification is transmitted is a member who becomes the boss of the person to be evaluated in the organization configuration indicated by the organization database 220. Therefore, the evaluator in the group set in the group database 230 and the boss who feeds back the evaluation result may be different persons.

  Subsequently, the evaluation management processing unit 250 determines from the terminal device 300 that has transmitted the notification in step S1003, whether the designation of the person to be evaluated and the disclosure request of the evaluation result information have been received (step S1004).

  In step S1004, when the disclosure request is not received, the evaluation management processing unit 250 waits.

  In step S1004, when the disclosure request is received, the evaluation management processing unit 250 outputs the evaluation result to the terminal device 300 of the specified person to be evaluated by the notification output unit 261 (step S1005), and ends the processing.

  Specifically, the notification output unit 261 changes the value of the item “disclosure permission” of the evaluation result information of the specified evaluation target person from “not permitted” to “permitted” in the evaluation result database 240, and The evaluation result information is transmitted to the terminal device 300 of the user.

  As described above, in the present embodiment, when the evaluation results of all the evaluation targets in the organization are determined, and the disclosure request of the evaluation result information is made by the superior who has authority to view the evaluation results of the evaluation targets, Only in this case, the evaluation result information is disclosed to the evaluation target person.

  Therefore, in the present embodiment, for example, the evaluation result is disclosed to the evaluation target before the evaluation result is erroneously determined, or the evaluation result of the evaluation target is disclosed to a person who is not originally authorized to view. Generation can be suppressed.

  Hereinafter, the processing of the evaluation management processing unit 250 of the present embodiment will be described more specifically with reference to a display example on the terminal device 300.

  FIG. 11 is a first diagram illustrating a display example of a calibration list. On a screen 110 shown in FIG. 11, a list 101 of groups for which calibration is to be executed is displayed. In the list 101, the name of the group is associated with information indicating the state of the group.

  In addition, the screen 110 is provided with a display column 102 in which the name of the organizer associated with each group is displayed. In the example of FIG. 11, it can be seen that the organizers of each group are members with the name “II HH”.

  In the example of FIG. 11, groups of the recruiting section, the training section, the human resources department, and the entire company are set from the list 101 as groups of units for inputting and reviewing evaluations (groups displayed on the calibration screen). You can see that there is.

  In the example of FIG. 11, the state of the group is indicated by a label displayed at a position corresponding to the name of the group.

  For example, in the list 101, when a training section is selected as a group whose list is displayed on the calibration screen, a label 103 displayed at a position corresponding to the training section indicates that calibration is being performed. It becomes a label.

  FIG. 12 is a first diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. A screen 120 shown in FIG. 12 shows an example of a calibration screen referred to by the evaluator and the organizer of the training section when the training section calibration is selected from the list of FIG.

  Further, the calibration screen 120 shown in FIG. 12 shows a state in which the operation button 131 is not operated by the organizer and no calibration start instruction is given.

  The calibration screen 120 includes display fields 121, 141, and 161. The display field 121 includes display fields 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, and 130 and operation buttons 131.

  In the display field 122, the title of the calibration including the name of the group, "Calibration Section Calibration" is displayed. The display column 123 displays the number of evaluation targets included in the group.

  In the display field 124, the total of rewards that have risen within the group as a result of the absolute evaluation is displayed. The display column 125 displays the average of the rewards within the group. The display column 126 displays the ratio of the change in the average of the reward after evaluation to the average of the reward before evaluation.

  FIG. 12 shows a state in which an instruction to start calibration has not been issued and input to the calibration screen 120 is prohibited. Therefore, "0" is displayed in the display columns 124 to 126.

  The display field 127 displays the name of the organizer. The display column 128 displays the same number of icons as the number of evaluators. Each of the icons is associated with information about the evaluator, including the position and name of the evaluator.

  The display column 129 displays the progress of the execution of the calibration. Specifically, the display column 129 displays the number of evaluation subjects in the group and the number of evaluation subjects who have been calibrated. In the calibration screen 120, since calibration has not been started, 0/5 is displayed in the display field 129.

  In the display column 130, the number of persons for each state of the evaluation input for the evaluation subject is displayed. For example, the state “Draft” is a state in which the content of the evaluation is stored as the value of the item “current” in the evaluation result database 240, or a state in which the content of the evaluation is temporarily held as the value of the item “target”. Is shown. The state “Proposed” is the content of the evaluation after the calibration, and indicates a state temporarily stored in the item “target” as the content to be submitted to the higher-level evaluator. In addition, the state “Pending” indicates a state in which the input of the evaluation is suspended, and the state “Agreeed” indicates a state in which all the evaluators have agreed on the evaluation contents of the evaluation target person. In the calibration screen 120, the number of persons in the state "Draft" is "5" because all of the evaluation target persons have not yet entered the evaluation.

  In this embodiment, when the input state of the evaluation of all the evaluation target persons becomes the state “Pending” or the state “Agreeed”, the organizer can end the calibration of this group. .

  Therefore, in the present embodiment, even if the evaluation for the evaluation subject has not been input, the state corresponding to the evaluation subject is set to “Pending” and the calibration is ended, so that the calibration of the upper group can be performed. Becomes As described above, in the present embodiment, providing the state “Pending” is effective when it is difficult to evaluate the group for some reason.

  The operation button 131 is an operation button for instructing the start of the calibration of the group “training section”, and can be operated only by the organizer. Note that the operation button 131 may be included only in the calibration screen 120 displayed on the terminal device 300 of the organizer.

  The display column 141 displays a list in which the evaluation target person and the evaluation result of the evaluation target person are associated with each other. In the display field 141, display fields 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 and a label 148 are displayed for each evaluation subject.

  The display columns 143 to 147 included in the display column 141 correspond to the items included in the evaluation result information.

  The display field 142 displays the name, department, and the like of the person to be evaluated. The display field 143 displays the value of “Grade”, the display field 144 displays the value of “TotalPoint”, the display field 145 displays the value of “Salary”, and the display field 146 displays The value of “annual income” is displayed, and the presence or absence of “bonus” is displayed in the display column 147.

  The label 148 displays the state of the evaluation input for each evaluation target person. That is, the label 148 displays one of “Draft”, “Proposed”, “Pending”, and “Agreeed”. In the example of FIG. 12, "Draft" is displayed on the label 148 of all the evaluation target persons.

  This indicates that, at the time when the calibration screen 120 is displayed, the absolute evaluation for the evaluation target person in the group “upbringing section” has not been input. That is, the calibration screen 120 indicates that the evaluation target persons included in the group “upbringing section” will be input with the primary evaluation.

  The display field 161 displays a message indicating the state of the group “upbringing section”. On the calibration screen 120, a message indicating that calibration has not started yet and that only the organizer “II HH” can give a start instruction is displayed.

  FIG. 13 is a second diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. The calibration screen 120A shown in FIG. 13 shows an example of the calibration screen after the operation button 131 is operated by the organizer in the calibration screen 120 of FIG.

  That is, the calibration screen 120A shown in FIG. 13 is in a state where the evaluator can input.

  The calibration screen 120A includes display fields 121A, 141A, and 162. An operation button 132 is displayed in the display field 121A instead of the operation button 131.

  The operation button 132 is a button for giving a calibration end instruction, and can be operated only in the terminal device 300 of the organizer. Therefore, it is displayed on the calibration screen 120A so as not to be operated. The operation button 132 may be displayed only on the terminal device 300 of the organizer, and in that case, the operation button 132 may not be displayed on the calibration screen 120A.

  In the display field 141A, operation members 144a and 144b for operating values displayed in the display field 144 and operation members 145a and 145b for operating values displayed in the display field 145 are displayed. On the calibration screen 120A, the evaluator can operate the operation members to input the evaluation of the evaluation target person.

  In the display field 162, a message is displayed that indicates that the calibration start instruction and the end instruction can be performed only by the organizer.

  Further, in the present embodiment, by selecting an icon displayed at the upper right of the calibration screen 120A, a display column 171 including the name, department, post, and the like of the evaluator who is viewing the calibration screen 120A is displayed. Is displayed. In the example of FIG. 13, it can be seen that the evaluator who is viewing the calibration screen 120A is “EE ee” of the training section manager.

  FIG. 14 is a first diagram illustrating an example of the evaluation comment input field. FIG. 14 is a first diagram showing an example of the evaluation comment input field. In the calibration screen 120B illustrated in FIG. 14, the input accepting unit 251 accepts selection of the evaluation subject “AA aa”, and the display control unit 253 displays an input column for an evaluation comment for the evaluation subject “AA aa”. FIG.

  The calibration screen 120B includes display fields 121A, 141A-1, 162, and 181. The display column 181 is an evaluation comment input column for the evaluation target person “AA aa”. The display field 141A-1 shows the input result of the absolute evaluation of the evaluation subject "AA aa" selected as the evaluation comment input target.

  The display column 181 includes display columns 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, and operation buttons 187. The display field 182 displays the evaluation comment input for the evaluation subject “AA aa” input in the input field 188. In the display column 182, a list of evaluation comments input by other evaluators and evaluation comments input in the past calibration is displayed. That is, the display column 182 displays the history (evaluation history) of the evaluation comment input for the evaluation subject “AA aa”. In the example of FIG. 14, since the calibration of the group “upbringing section” is a calibration for performing the primary evaluation of the evaluation subject “AA aa”, the evaluation history is not displayed.

  The display column 183 displays the overall evaluation for the evaluation target person. In the display column 184, matters to be fed back to the evaluation subject are displayed. The display column 185 displays a personnel memo. The display field 186 displays the content of the self-evaluation input by the person to be evaluated.

  The content displayed in the display columns 182 to 185 may be the content input by the evaluator of the group “upbringing section”, or the content of the evaluation subject “AA aaa” may be obtained by calibration in another group. It may be the content that has been input.

  The operation button 187 is an operation button for changing the evaluation input state of the evaluation target person “AA aa” from “Draft” to “Proposed”.

  When the operation button 187 is operated on the calibration screen 120B of FIG. 14, the input state of the evaluation of the evaluation subject “AA aa” becomes “Proposed”.

  Further, in this embodiment, when the evaluator icon displayed on the calibration screen is selected with a cursor or the like, information about the evaluator such as the evaluator's name and affiliation associated with the icon is displayed. In the example of FIG. 14, one of the icons displayed in the display column 128 has been selected, and information on the evaluator associated with the icon is displayed in the display column 172. Here, as the evaluator information, the evaluator's name “FF ff” and the post “manager” are displayed.

  In the present embodiment, by embedding the evaluator information in the icon, the evaluator set for each group can be confirmed on the calibration screen.

  FIG. 15 is a second diagram illustrating an example of the evaluation comment input field. A calibration screen 120C illustrated in FIG. 15 illustrates a state when an input is performed on the calibration screen 120A and the calibration screen 120B by an evaluator other than the manager of the evaluation subject “AA aa”.

  Note that the calibration screen 120C shown in FIG. 15 is a screen displayed on the terminal device 300 of an evaluator other than the manager of the evaluation target “AA aa”.

  The calibration screen 120C includes display fields 141B-1, 163, and 181A.

  The display field 141B-1 displays the evaluation result after the evaluation for the evaluation subject “AA aa” is input. In each of the display columns 183A, 184A, 185A, and 186A in the display column 181A, the comprehensive evaluation, feedback, personnel memo, and self-evaluation input for the evaluation subject "AA aa" are displayed.

  The display field 163 displays a message indicating that the evaluator who has made an input to the calibration screen 120C is not the manager of the evaluator.

  In the display column 163, operation buttons 164 are displayed. On the calibration screen 120C, when the operation button 164 is operated, an input can be made from an evaluator who is not a manager of the evaluator.

  FIG. 16 is a third diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. The calibration screen 120D shown in FIG. 16 shows a state in which the evaluation of the evaluation subjects “AA aa”, “BB bb”, and “CC cc” has been input in the group “upbringing section”.

  On the calibration screen 120D, in the display field 141B, the labels 148 and 149 indicating the respective evaluation input states of the evaluation target persons “AA aa” and “BB bb” become “Agreed” and the evaluation target person “CC cc” The label 150 indicating the state of the evaluation input is “Pending”.

  In the display field 121B, the number “1” is associated with the state “Pending” in the display field 130, and the number “2” is associated with the state “Agreeed”.

  In this embodiment, when the label indicating the state of the input of the evaluation of all the evaluation targets included in the group “upbringing section” is “Agreeed” or “Pending”, and the end instruction is given by the operation of the operation button 132 by the organizer. Then, the calibration of the group “training section” is completed.

  FIG. 17 is a second diagram illustrating a display example of a calibration list. On the screen 110A shown in FIG. 17, the calibration of the group “upbringing section” is excluded from the list 101A of the group in which the calibration is to be executed, and is displayed in the display box 105 of the executed calibration.

  In the display column 105, a label 103A indicating that calibration has been executed is displayed at a position corresponding to the training section. “Done” indicating that the calibration has been executed is displayed on the label 103A.

  FIG. 18 is a fourth diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. The calibration screen 180 shown in FIG. 18 includes a terminal device 300 of the evaluator of the group "HR department" and the organizer when the calibration of the group "HR department" is selected in the list 101A of the screen 110A shown in FIG. Is displayed on the terminal device 300. Further, the calibration screen 180 can be displayed when the evaluations of all the evaluation targets included in the group “HR section” have been input.

  Here, the group “Human Resources Department” includes a group “Training Section” and a group “Recruiting Section”, and the group “Human Resources Department” is a group that is higher than the group “Training Section” and the group “Recruiting Section”. It is. In other words, the group “HR department” includes an evaluation target person included in the group “Development section” and an evaluation target person included in the group “Recruitment section”. Therefore, the calibration screen 180 can be displayed when the evaluations of all the evaluation targets included in the group “training section” and the group “employment section” have been input.

  Note that, in the state shown in FIG. 18, the calibration of the group “Human Resources Department” has not been started yet.

  The calibration screen 180 includes display fields 202 and 191. The display column 202 includes display columns 203, 204, 205, 206, 207 and operation buttons 208.

  The display column 203 displays the title of the calibration including the name of the group, “HR department calibration”. The display field 204 displays the name of the organizer. In the display field 205, the same number of icons as the number of evaluators are displayed.

  The display column 206 displays the progress of the execution of the calibration. The display field 207 displays the number of persons for each of the evaluation input state “Draft”, the state “Proposed”, the state “Pending”, and the state “Agreeed” of the evaluation subject. The operation buttons 208 can be operated only by the organizer of the “HR department”.

  The display column 191 displays a list in which all the evaluation targets included in the group “Human Resources Department” are associated with the evaluation results of the absolute evaluation in the primary evaluation for each evaluation target.

  Further, the calibration of the group “HR department” is started in a state where the evaluation result of the primary evaluation for the evaluation target person in the group is input. Therefore, in the display field 191, the input state of the evaluation of all the evaluation target persons is set to “Proposed” in order to indicate that the evaluation result in the lower group is taken over.

  In a display column 191-1 included in the display column 191, the evaluation result of "GG gg", which is a manager of the group "Employment Section" and an evaluator of the group "Employment Section", is displayed. In the display column 191-2, evaluation results of "EEee" who is a manager of the group "upbringing section" and an evaluator of the group "upbringing section" are displayed.

  As described above, in the present embodiment, the person who was the evaluator in the lower group is targeted for calibration in the upper group.

  In the display column 191, the managers of the group “Employment Section” and the managers of the group “Training Section” are also in a state where the primary evaluation has been performed in groups other than the group “Human Resources Department”.

  FIG. 19 is a fifth diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. On the calibration screen 180A shown in FIG. 19, the calibration of the group "HR department" is started, and the evaluator is ready to input an evaluation.

  The calibration screen 180A includes display fields 202A and 191A. The display column 202A includes a display column 195. The display field 195 displays a message notifying that the calibration cannot be ended when there is an evaluation subject whose state is “Draft”.

  Further, in the display field 191A of the calibration screen 180A, the label indicating the state of all the evaluation subjects is "Draft", which indicates that the evaluation can be input for each evaluation subject.

  FIG. 20 is a third diagram illustrating an example of the evaluation comment input field. The calibration screen 180B shown in FIG. 20 shows a state in which the evaluation subject “AA aa” is selected and the evaluation comment input box 181B of the evaluation subject “AA aa” is displayed on the calibration screen 180A. .

  In the display column 181B, the evaluation comment input to the evaluation subject “AA aa” in the past performed the calibration in the group “upbringing section” is displayed as an evaluation history in the display column 182A.

  FIG. 21 is a sixth diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. The calibration screen 180C shown in FIG. 21 shows a state in which the evaluations of all the evaluation target persons in the group “HR department” have been input.

  The calibration screen 180C includes a display column 202B and a display column 191B. In the display column 202B, the display column 195 is not displayed, and in the display column 207, the state of the input of the evaluation of all the evaluation target persons is set to “Agreed”.

  In the display field 191B, the label indicating the input state of the evaluation of all the evaluation target persons is “Agreeed”.

  The calibration of the group “HR department” can be ended by the organizer when the state shown in FIG. 21 is reached.

  FIG. 22 is a seventh diagram illustrating an example of the calibration screen. FIG. 22 shows a calibration screen 211 of the group “company-wide”, which is the highest-order group, after the calibration of the group “HR department” is completed.

  The calibration screen 211 includes display columns 212 and 221. The display column 212 includes display columns 213, 214, 215, 216, 217 and operation buttons 218.

  The display field 213 displays the title of the calibration “company-wide calibration” including the name of the group. The display field 214 displays the name of the organizer. The display column 215 displays the same number of icons as the number of evaluators. The evaluator here is the evaluator of the highest group that includes all the evaluation targets in the organization, and is the highest evaluator. The top evaluator is not the evaluator.

  The display column 216 displays the progress of the execution of the calibration. In the display field 217, the number of persons for each of the evaluation input state “Draft”, the state “Proposed”, the state “Pending”, and the state “Agreeed” is displayed.

  In the calibration screen 211, the input state of the evaluation of all the evaluation target persons is set to “Agreed”.

  The display column 221 displays a list in which all the evaluation targets included in the group “company” are associated with the input evaluation results of the absolute evaluation for each evaluation target. In the display field 221, the label indicating the state of the input of the evaluation of all the evaluation target persons is “Agreeed”.

  Therefore, in the calibration screen 211, when the operation button 218 is operated by the organizer of the group "company", the calibration is completed. This termination instruction is a finalization instruction for finalizing the evaluation result information including the absolute evaluation and the evaluation comment input to all the evaluation target persons.

  In the present embodiment, when this confirmation instruction is received, a notification indicating that the evaluation result can be fed back is transmitted to the supervisor's terminal device 300 for each evaluation target person.

  FIG. 23 is a diagram illustrating an example of a screen on which a feedback notification is displayed. The screen 222 shown in FIG. 23 is a screen displayed on the terminal device 300 of the training section manager “EE ee”.

  The screen 222 is a screen that displays a list 223 of things to be performed by the training section manager “EE ee”.

  Also, the list 223 includes a message 224 instructing feedback of the evaluation result, and an operation button 225 for enabling the disclosure of the evaluation result information of the evaluation target person to be fed back.

  In the present embodiment, for example, when the evaluation section manager “EE ee” selects an evaluation subject to be a subordinate on his or her organizational structure, and the operation button 225 is operated by the development section manager “EE ee”, It becomes possible to disclose the evaluation result information of the selected evaluation target person.

  FIG. 24 is a first diagram illustrating an example of a screen of a member performing feedback. The screen 232 shown in FIG. 24 is displayed on the terminal device 300 used by the training section manager “EE ee” when the evaluation section “AA aaa” belonging to the training section is selected by the training section manager “EE ee”. This is the screen that is displayed.

  The screen 232 includes display fields 233, 234, and 235. The display column 233 displays the selected evaluation target person and a message indicating that the evaluation target person can browse the evaluation result information.

  The display field 234 displays information of a person who provides feedback. Here, since the feedback is provided by the training section manager "EE ee", the name and title of the training section manager "EE ee" are displayed.

  The display column 235 displays the evaluation result of the selected evaluation target person based on the absolute evaluation. In the present embodiment, the evaluation result of the absolute evaluation includes Grade, Saraly, bonus, and annual income.

  In the present embodiment, when an operation of aligning a cursor or the like is performed on the display column 235, the value of the corresponding item of the evaluation result information stored in the evaluation result database 240 is displayed. In the present embodiment, when an operation of scrolling down the screen 232 is performed, information other than the items that are regarded as absolute evaluations is displayed in the evaluation result information.

  FIG. 25 is a second diagram illustrating an example of a screen of a member performing feedback. Screen 232A in FIG. 25 includes display columns 233, 234, 235A, and 270.

  The display column 235A displays the result of the absolute evaluation of the selected evaluation target person “AA aa”.

  The display column 270 includes display columns 271, 272, 273, 274, and 275. The display column 271 displays the value of the item “overall evaluation” in the evaluation result information of the selected evaluation target person. The display column 272 displays the value of the item “feedback” in the evaluation result information. Also, in the display columns 271 and 272, messages 271m and 272m notifying that the information displayed in each display column is disclosed to the person to be evaluated.

  The display column 273 displays the value of the item “personnel memo” in the evaluation result information. In the display field 273, a message 273m notifying that the displayed information is not disclosed to the evaluation subject is displayed.

  The display column 274 displays the value of the item “TotalPoint” in the evaluation result information.

  The display column 275 displays the value of the item “evaluation history” in the evaluation result information. In the display field 275, the input evaluation comment is displayed in the group to which the evaluation target person has received feedback.

  FIG. 26 is a diagram illustrating an example of a screen of the evaluation subject who receives feedback. A screen 280 shown in FIG. 26 is an example of a screen displayed on the terminal device 300 of the evaluation subject.

  The screen 280 is displayed on the terminal device 300 of the evaluation subject according to the operation, for example, when the evaluation subject is notified that the boss gives feedback and performs an operation for requesting display of the evaluation result information. .

  Screen 280 includes display fields 235A, 271A, 272A, and operation buttons 277. The information displayed in the display field 235A of the screen 280 is the same information as the information displayed in the display field 235A of the screen 232A shown in FIG. That is, in the display field 235A of the screen 280, the result of the absolute evaluation of the evaluation subject “AA aa” is displayed.

  In the display column 271A, the value of the item “overall evaluation” of the evaluation result information is displayed, and in the display column 272A, the value of the item “feedback” is displayed. Note that a message indicating that the information is information to be disclosed to the evaluation subject is not displayed in the display column 271A and the display column 272A.

  Thus, on the screen 280 browsed by the evaluation target, only the information disclosed to the evaluation target is displayed.

  When the operation button 277 is operated by the person to be evaluated on the screen 280, the feedback to the person to be evaluated is completed.

  As described above, according to the present embodiment, after the evaluation results of all the evaluation targets included in the organization are determined, the evaluation target is selected by the supervisor of the evaluation target, and the disclosure of the evaluation results is instructed. Only when the evaluation is performed, the evaluation result can be browsed by the evaluation target person.

  Therefore, according to the present embodiment, the confidentiality of the evaluation result information is ensured. Therefore, according to the present embodiment, for example, the evaluation result information is browsed by a person who does not have authority to browse, or the evaluation result is disclosed to the person before the evaluation result is determined. Can solve the problem assumed when trying to manage the evaluation result information.

  As mentioned above, although the Example of this invention was described in full detail, this invention is not limited to such a specific embodiment, A various deformation | transformation is carried out within the range of the gist of this invention described in the claim.・ Change is possible.

REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 100 evaluation management system 200 evaluation management device 210 member database 220 organization database 230 group database 240 evaluation result database 250 evaluation management processing unit 251 input reception unit 252 group setting unit 253 display control unit 254 evaluation reception unit 255 evaluation presentation unit 256 evaluation determination unit 257 Group status determination unit 258 Group status update unit 259 Start determination unit 260 Evaluation result output unit 261 Notification output unit 300 Terminal device

Claims (10)

A group setting reception unit that groups the evaluation target group into a plurality of groups, and receives a setting for grouping so that at least one of the plurality of groups includes all of the evaluation target group;
An evaluation receiving unit that receives input of absolute evaluations of a plurality of evaluation target persons included in the group,
For the group including the plurality of evaluation targets for which the input of the absolute evaluation has been received by the evaluation reception unit, a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target included in the group is referred to as an evaluator associated with the group. An evaluation presentation unit to be displayed on a terminal of
In the case where the group includes all of the grouped groups, an evaluation determination unit that receives a determination instruction for a list of absolute evaluations for each of the evaluation targets, and determines the absolute evaluation for each of the evaluation targets, Evaluation management server having The evaluation receiving unit,
The evaluation management server according to claim 1, wherein an input for changing the absolute evaluation in a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target person included in the group is received. The plurality of groups are
A plurality of evaluation targets included in the group and an evaluator associated with the group are set such that the ranks of respective positions are different in the configuration of the organization including the evaluation target group. The evaluation management server according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation management server performs the evaluation management server. A determination unit that receives the specification of the group and determines whether or not an evaluation target included in the list displayed on the terminal exists in the specified group,
The determination unit includes:
The evaluation management server according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein when a corresponding evaluation target person exists in the specified group, acceptance of the specification of the group is prohibited. The determination unit includes:
Receiving the designation of the group,
The list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target person included in the group is displayed when the input of the absolute evaluations of all the evaluation target people included in the specified group is received. Evaluation management server. The evaluation receiving unit,
Accepting the selection to suspend the input of the absolute evaluation of the evaluation subject,
The determination unit includes:
When the evaluation target person included in the specified group is the evaluation target person whose input of the absolute evaluation is suspended and the evaluation target person whose input of the absolute evaluation is received, the evaluation target person is included in the group. The evaluation management server according to claim 5, wherein a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target person to be displayed is displayed. A display control unit that displays a plurality of input fields in which a plurality of types of comments for the evaluation subject selected in the list are input,
The evaluation according to any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein the plurality of types of comments include a comment disclosed to the selected evaluation subject and a comment not disclosed to the selected evaluation subject. Management server. A group setting reception process for grouping the evaluation target group into a plurality of groups and receiving a setting for grouping such that at least one of the plurality of groups includes all of the evaluation target group;
An evaluation reception process for receiving input of absolute evaluations of a plurality of evaluation targets included in the group,
For a group including the plurality of evaluation targets for which the input of the absolute evaluation has been received in the evaluation reception process, a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target included in the group is displayed by an evaluator associated with the group. Evaluation presentation processing to be displayed on the terminal of
In the case where the group includes all the grouped groups, an evaluation determination process for receiving a determination instruction for a list of absolute evaluations for each of the evaluation targets and determining the absolute evaluation for each of the evaluation targets, An evaluation management program that causes a computer to execute An evaluation management method using a computer, wherein the computer
A group setting receiving step of grouping the evaluation target group into a plurality of groups and receiving a setting for grouping at least one of the plurality of groups to include all of the evaluation target group;
An evaluation receiving procedure for receiving input of absolute evaluations of a plurality of evaluation subjects included in the group,
In the evaluation receiving procedure, for a group including the plurality of evaluation target persons for which the input of the absolute evaluation is received, a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target person included in the group is evaluated in association with the group. Evaluation presentation procedure to be displayed on the user's terminal,
When the group includes all the grouped groups, an evaluation determination procedure for receiving a determination instruction for a list of absolute evaluations for each of the evaluation targets, and for determining the absolute evaluation for each of the evaluation targets, An evaluation management method for executing An evaluation management system having a terminal and an evaluation management server,
The evaluation management server,
A group setting reception unit that groups the evaluation target group into a plurality of groups, and receives a setting for grouping so that at least one of the plurality of groups includes all of the evaluation target group;
An evaluation receiving unit that receives input of absolute evaluations of a plurality of evaluation target persons included in the group,
For the group including the plurality of evaluation targets for which the input of the absolute evaluation has been received by the evaluation reception unit, a list of absolute evaluations for each evaluation target included in the group is referred to as an evaluator associated with the group. An evaluation presentation unit to be displayed on a terminal of
In the case where the group includes all of the grouped groups, an evaluation determination unit that receives a determination instruction for a list of absolute evaluations for each of the evaluation targets, and determines the absolute evaluation for each of the evaluation targets, Evaluation management system having

Images