JP2022158296A - Information processing method, information processing device, and program - Google Patents

Abstract

To provide an information processing method or the like capable of favorably supporting recruitment of human resources.SOLUTION: An information processing method causes a computer to execute processing for receiving a selection input for selecting an employee to be set as a criterion from among a plurality of employees engaged in a company, receiving a selection input for selecting an inspection item to be set as a criterion from among a plurality of inspection items in an aptitude test, setting a test result of the selected inspection item among test results of the selected employee's aptitude test as a criterion for determining the aptitude of an examinee who takes the aptitude test, acquiring test results of the aptitude test of the examinee, and determining the aptitude of the examinee for the company based on the set criterion and the test results of the aptitude test of the examinee.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 5

Description

Applied for application of Article 30, Paragraph 2 of the Patent Act Published on April 3, 2020 on Mikiwame's website (https://mikiwame.com) On April 8, 2020, PR TIMES Published on the website (https://prtimes.jp/main/html/rd/p/000000028.000008701.html) On April 8, 2020, published on the CNET Japan website (https:/ /japan.cnet.com/release/30435125/) On April 8, 2020, excite. Published on the news website (https://www.excite.co.jp/news/article/Prtimes_2020-04-08-8701-28/) Work Master website on April 9, 2020 (https://www.work-master.net/2020184235) Published on HRog website on April 9, 2020 (https://hrog.net/news/hrservice/84199/ ) On April 9, 2020, published on the Recme website (https://www.recme.jp/media/2020040910143) On April 10, 2020, on the Office Mikata website (https://officenomikata.jp/news/11125/) Released on the note website on April 12, 2020 (https://note.com/utsuru_s/n/nc0dcbe51cff8) Reiwa Published on the seminarshelf website on May 1, 2020 (https://seminarshelf.com/seminar/369?utm_source=peatix&utm_medium=alliance&utm_campaign=event&lead_source=peatix) on May 1, 2020 in Japan Published on the Human Resources Department website (https://jinjibu.jp/service/detl/14656/) On August 13, 2020, published on the Onecolors website (https://one-colors. jp/107/)

Applied for application of Article 30, Paragraph 2 of the Patent Act Published on September 1, 2020 on the IT trend website (https://it-trend.jp/turnover_prevention/10146/review) Released on the @Press website on September 17 (https://www.atpress.ne.jp/news/226415) On October 20, 2020, a free trial seminar for the aptitude test cloud “Mikiwame” Published on November 4, 2020 on the IT review website (https://www.ireview.jp/products/mikiwame/profile#tutorial) Published on November 11, 2020 Released at the 5th “Kansai” General Affairs, Personnel and Accounting Week HR EXPO Released at the tremendous venture exhibition on November 11, 2020 (https://peraichi.com/landing_pages/view/monosugoi-ventureten) Japanese Published on November 16, 2020 on the Ipros manufacturing website (https://www.ipros.jp/product/detail/2000563973/) Reiwa November 25, 2020, HR Conference 2020-Autumn - published on the website (https://jinjibu.jp/hr-conference/202011/index.php) On March 4, 2020, published on the neocareer website (https://www. neo-career.co.jp/humanresource/knowhow/a-contents-newgrad-tekiseikensa-25matome-191206/) On March 4, 2021, 50 work style reform services will be known in 180 minutes. Released at the exhibition (https://peraichi.com/landing_pages/view/hrexpo2021) On March 9, 2021, released at the tremendous HR exhibition (https://peraichi.com/landing_pages/view/monosugoi -hrten)

Applied for application of Article 30, Paragraph 2 of the Patent Law Published at IT Trend EXPO 2021 spring on March 10, 2021 (https://it-trend-expo-2021-spring.online-exhibition.jp/) Released on Twitter website on April 24, 2020 (https://twitter.com/mikiwame_0408) Released on June 22, 2020 at the aptitude test cloud “Mikiwame” free trial seminar Published on the website of Digital Sphere Co., Ltd. on September 15, 2020 (http://www.digital-sphere.co.jp/-/news/news74) June 18, 2020 , Practical psychology for human resources by a clinical psychologist from Kyoto University Doctoral course Released on Facebook website on April 7, 2nd year of Reiwa (https://www.facebook.com/mikiwame.survey/?_ga=2.133574286.1060433076.1619065995-895976828.1619065995)

The present invention relates to an information processing method, an information processing apparatus, and a program.

Decisions are made as to whether or not to hire human resources based on the results of aptitude tests. For example, in Patent Document 1, based on the results of the aptitude test that the current employee of the company has taken in advance and the result of the employee's personnel evaluation, the prospective employee can be an excellent employee based on the results of the aptitude test. An inspection method or the like for determining whether or not the quality is high is disclosed.

JP 2006-127387 A

However, personnel evaluation largely depends on the subjectivity of the evaluator, and the invention according to Patent Document 1 cannot necessarily be said to be an appropriate inspection method.

An object of one aspect is to provide an information processing method and the like capable of suitably supporting recruitment of personnel.

An information processing method according to one aspect receives a selection input for selecting an employee as a criterion from among a plurality of employees engaged in a company, and selects an employee as a criterion from among a plurality of inspection items to be inspected in an aptitude test. receiving a selection input for selecting the test item to be tested, and using the test result of the selected test item among the test results of the selected employee's aptitude test to determine the aptitude of the examinee who takes the aptitude test to obtain the test result of the aptitude test of the examinee, and based on the set judgment criteria and the test result of the aptitude test of the examinee, the aptitude of the examinee for the company The computer executes the process of determining

In one aspect, recruitment of human resources can be preferably supported.

It is an explanatory view showing an example of composition of a recruitment support system. It is a block diagram which shows the structural example of a server. 2 is a block diagram showing a configuration example of a terminal; FIG. FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of record layouts of employee DB, examinee DB, and reference table; FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a criteria list screen; FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a reference setting screen; FIG. 10 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an examinee analysis screen; FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a processing procedure executed by a server;

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail based on the drawings showing its embodiments.
(Embodiment)
FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing a configuration example of a recruitment support system. In the present embodiment, a recruitment support system will be described that determines the aptitude of an examinee (employment candidate) for a target company from the results of an aptitude test of the examinee who wishes to be hired by the target company. The employment support system includes an information processing device 1, terminals 2, 2, 2, . . . Each device is connected for communication via a network N such as the Internet.

The information processing device 1 is an information processing device capable of various types of information processing and transmission/reception of information, and is, for example, a server computer, a personal computer, or the like. In the present embodiment, the information processing apparatus 1 is assumed to be a server computer, which will be replaced with the server 1 for the sake of brevity. The server 1 determines the aptitude of the examinee for the company based on the test result of the test taker's aptitude test and the test result of the aptitude test of each employee engaged in the target company. Specifically, as will be described later, the server 1 accepts from the user the selection of an employee using the results of the aptitude test for each of a plurality of judgment criteria, and also accepts the selection input of the inspection item of the aptitude test used as the evaluation scale. , is set as the criterion. The server 1 calculates a score representing the degree of aptitude of the examinee based on the test result of the selected test item of the selected employee for each of the plurality of judgment criteria, and judges the aptitude of the user.

The test result of the aptitude test refers to the examinee's answers to each of the plurality of questions for aptitude (personality) analysis. Since the mechanism of the aptitude test itself is the same as a general one, the description of the aptitude test is omitted in this embodiment.

The terminal 2 is a terminal device used by the user of this system, such as a personal computer, a tablet terminal, or a smart phone. The user is, for example, a person in charge of personnel affairs of each company that uses this system, but is not particularly limited. As will be described later, the terminal 2 communicates with the server 1 and displays a screen for setting criteria, a screen for displaying the judgment result of the aptitude of the examinee, and the like (see FIGS. 5 to 7).

In this embodiment, the score is calculated by the server 1 on the cloud, but it is of course possible for the local terminal 2 to calculate the score.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a configuration example of the server 1. As shown in FIG. The server 1 includes a control section 11 , a main storage section 12 , a communication section 13 and an auxiliary storage section 14 .
The control unit 11 has a processor such as one or more CPU (Central Processing Unit), MPU (Micro-Processing Unit), GPU (Graphics Processing Unit), etc., and reads out the program P1 stored in the auxiliary storage unit 14. By executing it, various information processing, control processing, etc. are performed. The main storage unit 12 is a temporary storage area such as SRAM (Static Random Access Memory), DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory), flash memory, etc., and temporarily stores data necessary for the control unit 11 to perform arithmetic processing. Remember. The communication unit 13 is a communication module for performing processing related to communication, and transmits and receives information to and from the outside.

The auxiliary storage unit 14 is a non-volatile storage area such as a large-capacity memory or hard disk, and stores a program P1 and other data necessary for the control unit 11 to execute processing. The auxiliary storage unit 14 also stores an employee DB 141 , an examinee DB 142 and a reference table 143 . The employee DB 141 is a database that stores aptitude test results of company employees. The examinee DB 142 is a database that stores the results of aptitude tests of examinees. The reference table 143 is a table that defines criteria for judging suitability of examinees.

Incidentally, the auxiliary storage unit 14 may be an external storage device connected to the server 1 . Moreover, the server 1 may be a multicomputer consisting of a plurality of computers, or may be a virtual machine virtually constructed by software.

Moreover, in the present embodiment, the server 1 is not limited to the configuration described above, and may include, for example, an input unit for receiving operation inputs, a display unit for displaying images, and the like. The server 1 may also include a reader for reading a non-temporary computer-readable recording medium 1a, and read the program P1 from the recording medium 1a. Also, the program P1 may be executed on a single computer, or may be executed on a plurality of computers interconnected via a network N.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing a configuration example of the terminal 2. As shown in FIG. The terminal 2 includes a control section 21 , a main storage section 22 , a communication section 23 , a display section 24 , an input section 25 and an auxiliary storage section 26 .
The control unit 21 has one or more processors such as CPUs, and performs various information processing by reading and executing the program P2 stored in the auxiliary storage unit 26 . The main storage unit 22 is a temporary storage area such as a RAM, and temporarily stores data necessary for the control unit 21 to execute arithmetic processing. The communication unit 23 is a communication module for performing processing related to communication, and transmits and receives information to and from the outside. The display unit 24 is a display screen such as a liquid crystal display, and displays images. The input unit 25 is an operation interface such as a keyboard and a mouse, and receives operation input from the user. The auxiliary storage unit 26 is a non-volatile storage area such as a hard disk or large-capacity memory, and stores the program P2 and other data necessary for the control unit 21 to execute processing.

The terminal 2 may be provided with a reading unit for reading the non-temporary computer-readable recording medium 2a, and may read the program P2 from the recording medium 2a. Also, the program P2 may be executed on a single computer, or may be executed on a plurality of computers interconnected via a network N.

FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of record layouts of the employee DB 141, examinee DB 142, and reference table 143. As shown in FIG.
The employee DB 141 includes an employee ID column, a name column, a company column, a department column, and an inspection column. The employee ID column stores an employee ID for identifying each employee. The name column, company column, department column, and inspection column store the employee's name, affiliated company, affiliated department, and aptitude test result in association with the employee ID.

The examinee DB 142 includes an examinee ID column, a name column, and an examination column. The examinee ID column stores examinee IDs for identifying each examinee. The name column and test column store the names of examinees and the results of aptitude tests.

The reference table 143 includes reference columns and candidate scale columns. The criteria column stores a plurality of aptitude criteria. The candidate scale column stores a plurality of aptitude test items that can be evaluation scales for each criterion in association with the criteria. The “criterion” and the “scale” will be described later in detail.

FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the criteria list screen. FIG. 5 shows a display screen (user interface) of the present system displayed by the terminal 2, which shows a list of judgment criteria for judging the aptitude of the examinee. The outline of this embodiment will be described below.

When the terminal 2 accesses (logs in to) the server 1, it displays a predetermined home screen (not shown). On the home screen, like the screen shown in FIG. 5, various menus such as "list of examinees" and "setting of aptitude score criteria" are displayed on the left side of the screen. When receiving an operation input to "set aptitude score criteria", the terminal 2 transitions to the screen shown in FIG.

The criteria list screen is a display screen that shows a list of a plurality of criteria for determining the aptitude of an examinee. In this embodiment, the server 1 has three criteria: "company culture", "stability of performance" (hereinafter referred to as "stability"), and "department/team" (hereinafter referred to as "department"). Use That is, the server 1 determines whether the examinee fits into the corporate culture of the target company (own company), the degree of stability when the examinee is employed, and how well the examinee fits into each department within the company. . The terminal 2 displays a list of corporate culture, stability, and each department in the company as criteria.

It should be noted that the above determination criteria are only an example, and other criteria may be used to determine the aptitude of the examinee. Also, the number of determination criteria may be two or less, or may be four or more.

As shown in FIG. 5, the terminal 2 displays the evaluation scale being set for each criterion for each criterion. The evaluation scale is a scale used as a basis for score calculation related to each judgment criterion, and is a test item of the aptitude (personality) of the examinee to be tested in the aptitude test. Specifically, as shown in FIG. 5, evaluation scales include "aggressiveness", "tendency to assert", and "improvement". It should be noted that the inspection items may be appropriately changed according to the question contents of the aptitude test.

The terminal 2 displays evaluation scales (inspection items) set by the user as described later for each of the corporate culture, stability, and departments within the company. Furthermore, the terminal 2 displays the text of "Edit" corresponding to each criterion. When receiving an operation input to the text, the terminal 2 transitions to the screen of FIG.

FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the standard setting screen. The criteria setting screen is a screen for setting (editing) the contents of the criteria. FIG. 6 shows a corporate culture setting screen among the corporate culture, stability, and department displayed on the standard list screen of FIG. Although the display contents of the setting screen of stability and department are slightly different from those of the corporate culture setting screen, they are almost the same as those shown in FIG. 5, so illustration thereof is omitted.

The criteria setting screen includes an employee selection field 61 (first display field), a selected scale field 62 (second display field), and a candidate scale field 63 (third display field). The employee selection column 61 is a display column for selecting an employee using the result of the aptitude test. The selected scale column 62 is a display column for displaying inspection items of the aptitude test selected as the evaluation scale of the judgment criteria. The candidate scale column 63 is a display column for displaying other inspection items that can be evaluation scales.

The terminal 2 receives the employee's selection input via the employee selection field 61 . Specifically, the terminal 2 adds (selects) an employee in accordance with the operation input to the "add employee" button. Although one employee may use the results of the aptitude test, preferably multiple employees are selected.

It should be noted that the terminal 2, among the plurality of employees selected in the employee selection column 61, the test result of the aptitude test of one employee is the other employees (selected employees excluding the one employee) If there is a discrepancy from the test result, an alert is displayed to the effect that the test result of the one employee is deviated. Specifically, the terminal 2 displays a predetermined icon (“!” in FIG. 6) in association with the employee name. For example, for each employee selected in the employee selection column 61, the server 1 calculates the average value of the inspection results (for example, the deviation value) of each of the plurality of inspection items selected in the selection scale column 62 as described later. Then, it is determined whether or not the difference between the average value of one employee and the average value of other employees is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold. When the server 1 determines that the difference is equal to or greater than the threshold, it displays an alert in association with the target employee. As a result, it is possible to prevent a situation in which an employee with a different trend in aptitude test results is selected.

In addition, the terminal 2 receives selection input of inspection items via the selected scale column 62 and the candidate scale column 63 . Specifically, the terminal 2 displays a plurality of inspection items that can be evaluation scales of the judgment criteria in the candidate scale column 63 , and drags the inspection items displayed in the candidate scale column 63 to the selected scale column 62 . & Accepts drop operations. The inspection item moved to the selected scale column 62 is selected as the evaluation scale.

In addition, the terminal 2 displays the average deviation value for each inspection item of the employees of the target company (own company) in association with each inspection item displayed in the selected scale column 62 and the candidate scale column 63. . The average deviation value is the deviation value calculated from the test results (scores) of each test item for all employees belonging to the target company and the predetermined population data (test results of aptitude tests of multiple people). be. In other words, the mean deviation value represents how high the test results of the employees of the target company are in the distribution of the entire parameter. For example, the server 1 obtains the average deviation value Calculate The server 1 causes the terminal 2 to display the average deviation value in association with each inspection item. By presenting the average deviation value of each test item, the user can select an appropriate test item as an index representing the tendency of employees of the company.

Note that the statistical index value displayed in association with each inspection item is not limited to the deviation value, and may be, for example, the order of parameter data. That is, the server 1 calculates a statistical index value representing the level of the test results of the employees of the target company from the parameter data (test results of a plurality of people) including the employees of the target company, and presents it to the user. If possible. In addition, the parameter data is not limited to the test results of employees of the company using this system (data stored in the employee DB 141), but the test results of people other than employees of the company using this system. There may be.

A single inspection item may be selected in the selection scale field 62, but preferably a plurality of (for example, three) inspection items are selected. It should be noted that it is not essential to select a specified number (three) of inspection items in the selection scale column 62, and the number may be less than the specified number. When receiving an operation input to the "save" button at the bottom of the screen, the server 1 saves a series of settings. As a result, the server 1 uses the test result of the test item selected in the selected scale column 62 among the test results of the plurality of employees selected in the employee selection column 61 to determine the aptitude of the examinee. Set as judgment criteria. The user similarly sets other criteria (stability and department).

As for the corporate culture and the department, the terminal 2 allows the user to select an employee who embodies the corporate culture well and an employee who is desired to be employed in the relevant department. On the other hand, for stability, select employees whose performance is unstable (employees with low stability). As will be described later, the server 1 highly evaluates examinees whose test results are similar to those of the selected employees in terms of company culture and department, while evaluating examinees whose test results are opposite to those of the selected employees in terms of stability. Appreciate it.

The server 1 acquires the result of the aptitude test of the examinee, who is a candidate for employment at the target company, and determines the aptitude of the examinee for the target company in accordance with the criteria set above. Although there is no particular limitation on how the test taker obtains the test results, for example, when the terminal 2 receives the selection input of "create test request" from the menu on the left side of the screen in FIG. (Uniform Resource Locator) will be attached to an e-mail and sent to the examinee. Alternatively, the terminal 2 accepts an upload of an electronic file (CSV or the like) storing the examination results of the examinee.

FIG. 7 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an examinee analysis screen. For example, the terminal 2 displays a list of examinees who have already taken the aptitude test when receiving the selection input of "request for examinee" on the left side of the screen. When the terminal 2 receives a selection input of a subject to be analyzed from the list, the screen transitions to the screen shown in FIG. 7 .

The examinee analysis screen is a screen for displaying the analysis (judgment) result of the aptitude of the examinee. The examinee analysis screen includes a department selection column 71 , a comprehensive evaluation column 72 , a score graph 73 , a distribution graph 74 , a similar employee display column 75 , a criteria-based detail column 76 , and an other department aptitude column 77 .

The department selection column 71 is an input column for selecting a department for determining compatibility (suitability) with the examinee. For example, the user selects the department to which the examinee is to be assigned.

The comprehensive evaluation field 72 is a display field for displaying a comprehensive evaluation of the examinee's aptitude based on a plurality of criteria. The comprehensive evaluation column 72 displays a rank ("B+" in FIG. 7) representing the comprehensive evaluation of the examinee in multiple stages, the average score of each of the multiple criteria, and a comment corresponding to the rank.

The score graph 73 is a display column that displays scores for each of a plurality of criteria. The terminal 2 displays, as the score graph 73 , a radar chart indicating the score calculated out of 10 for each of the company culture, stability, and department selected in the department selection field 71 .

The distribution graph 74 is a graph showing the distribution of the aptitude determination results of all examinees who took the examination at the target company (own company). The terminal 2 displays on the distribution graph 74 the number of all examinees who have taken the aptitude test for the target company by rank. In addition, the terminal 2 highlights (for example, displays in different colors) the rank to which the examinee to be analyzed belongs on the examinee analysis screen being displayed.

The similar employee display column 75 is a display column for displaying one or more employees presumed to be similar to the examinee. The terminal 2 displays the name of the employee presumed to be similar to the examinee, the degree of similarity between the employee and the examinee (“match degree” in FIG. 7), and the difference in personality between the employee and the examinee. display.

The criteria-by-criteria detail column 76 is a display column for displaying the details of the analysis results for each of the plurality of criteria. The terminal 2 displays the company culture, the stability, and the score of each selected department, and also displays the details of the analysis results for each inspection item, which is an evaluation scale.

The other department aptitude column 77 is a display column for displaying the aptitude for departments other than the department selected in the department selection column 71 . The terminal 2 displays the average score of each criterion and the rank corresponding to the average value for each of the plurality of departments other than the selected department.

The server 1 determines the aptitude of the examinee based on the setting contents of each criterion set on the criterion setting screen. Specifically, the server 1 calculates a score representing the degree of aptitude of the examinee for each of a plurality of criteria. More specifically, the server 1 provides the test result (deviation value of each test item) of the examinee for each test item selected as the evaluation scale on the standard setting screen, and the result of each employee selected on the standard setting screen. A score for each criterion is calculated based on the inspection results for each inspection item. Then, the server 1 calculates the average value of the scores for each determination criterion, and determines a rank representing the overall evaluation of the examinee in multiple stages according to the average value.

6, when calculating the corporate culture score, the server 1 uses the test results of the aptitude test of the three employees selected in the employee selection field 61 to determine the aptitude of the examinee. use. The server 1 collects the test results of "aggressiveness", "aggressive tendency", and "ambition" of the three employees and the test results of "aggressiveness", "aggressive tendency", and "ambitiousness" of the examinee. Compare and calculate the corporate culture score out of 10 points. In the present embodiment, the deviation value in the aptitude test is used as the reference for the "test result". For example, the server 1 assigns 10/3 points (≈3.33 points) to each of the three inspection items, and the closer the employee's inspection result (deviation value) and the examinee's inspection result are, the more similar each inspection item is. A high score is calculated, and the total score of the three inspection items is calculated as the corporate culture score.

In the present embodiment, the deviation value is used as the "test result" that is the basis for score calculation. You may adopt rank etc.

Returning to FIG. 7, the description continues. The server 1 similarly calculates the score of the examinee so that the closer the examination result is to the employee selected as the criterion, the higher the score of the examinee. On the other hand, regarding the degree of stability, the server 1 calculates a higher score for the examinee as the tendencies of the test results are opposite to those of each employee selected as the criterion. As described above, on the stability standard setting screen, an employee whose performance is unstable is selected. Therefore, the server 1 evaluates an employee whose performance is unstable and an examinee whose test results are opposite to each other as a person with a high degree of stability. Stability can be favorably evaluated by measuring the degree to which the performance is opposite to that of unstable employees.

Specifically, when calculating the score for each inspection item related to stability, the server 1 first determines whether the average value of the inspection results (deviation values) of the selected employee is a predetermined reference value (for example, 50) or more. determine whether or not If it is equal to or greater than the reference value, the server 1 calculates a lower score as the test result of the examinee exceeds the reference value, and a higher score as the test result falls below the reference value. On the other hand, if the average value of the test results of the selected employee is less than the reference value, the server 1 calculates a higher score as the test result of the examinee exceeds the reference value, and a lower score as the test result falls below the reference value. do. In this way, the server 1 calculates a higher score for the examinee who has the opposite tendency to the selected employee depending on whether the average value of the examination results of the selected employee is equal to or higher than the reference value. and the correspondence between the high and low scores.

Note that the server 1 is not limited to the above calculation method, as long as the score of the examinee can be calculated to be higher as the tendency of the test result is opposite to that of the selected employee. For example, the server 1 may calculate a higher score as the test result (deviation value) of the selected employee deviates from the test result of the examinee.

The server 1 calculates the average score (“7.5” in FIG. 7) of the three types of criteria. Then, the server 1 determines the rank of the examinee according to the average value, and makes the overall evaluation of the examinee. The server 1 displays the rank and the average value of scores in the overall evaluation column 72 . In addition, the server 1 displays the score of each criterion in the score graph 73 and the detail column 76 by criterion.

Further, the server 1 counts the number of all examinees by rank, and displays the counted number of people for each rank on a distribution graph 74 . Then, the server 1 highlights the rank to which the subject currently being analyzed belongs. In this way, the user is presented with how high the degree of aptitude of the target examinee is among all the examinees.

The server 1 also calculates the degree of similarity between each employee of the target company and the examinee, and displays the employees with the highest degree of similarity in the similar employee display column 75 . The similarity can be calculated by any method. For example, the server 1 calculates the Euclidean distance between the employee and the examinee as the similarity, using the test results (deviation values) of each of the plurality of test items as variables. The server 1 calculates the degree of similarity between each employee and the examinee, extracts employees whose calculated degree of similarity is equal to or less than a certain level, and displays the employee with the degree of matching according to the degree of similarity.

Note that the employees to be extracted are not limited to the employees selected as the criterion, and may include other employees.

In addition, the server 1 analyzes the test result of the examinee for each test item selected as the evaluation scale for each determination criterion, and displays the analysis result in the detail column 76 for each criterion. The criteria-specific detail column 76 displays, for each inspection item, the item name of each inspection item, an analysis comment on the target examinee, a distribution bar 761 and an evaluation icon 762 .

The distribution bar 761 is a display bar showing the deviation value of the target examinee among all examinees (indicated by dark hatching) and the numerical range suitable or inappropriate for employment candidates (indicated by light hatching). The server 1 calculates the deviation value of the target examinee from the test results of all examinees of the corresponding test item, and displays the deviation value of the examinee at the corresponding position on the distribution bar 761 . In the example of FIG. 7, the deviation value of "claim tendency" is displayed as "64".

Furthermore, the server 1 calculates the deviation value of each employee selected as the criterion from the test results of all examinees of the corresponding test item. Then, the server 1 sets appropriate or inappropriate numerical ranges for employment candidates according to the deviation value of each employee, and displays them on the distribution bar 761 . The numerical range is set, for example, between the minimum and maximum deviation values of each employee. In the example of FIG. 7, a distribution bar 761 displays an appropriate numerical range of deviation values for the “claim tendency”.

The server 1 evaluates the degree of aptitude of the examinee for the test item according to the numerical range and the deviation value of the examinee, and displays it as an evaluation icon 762 . The evaluation icon 762 is an icon representing the degree of aptitude, and in the present embodiment, three types of icons are prepared: "suitable", "somewhat suitable", and "not suitable". As described above, the server 1 calculates the score of each inspection item out of 10/3 points (≈3.33 points). The server 1 determines whether the score of each test item is equal to or higher than a predetermined high score (eg, 2.5 points), is less than a predetermined low score (eg, 1.5 points), or is in between. Select the "Good", "Not Good", or "Somewhat Good" rating icon 762.

Appropriate numerical ranges are displayed on the distribution bar 761 for the corporate culture and department, but inappropriate numerical ranges are displayed on the distribution bar 761 for the stability (see FIG. 7). Specifically, the server 1 determines whether or not the average deviation value of each employee (employee whose performance is unstable) selected as the standard of stability is equal to or greater than the standard value (50). If the average value is less than the reference value, set a predetermined low numerical range (e.g., 30 or less) as an inappropriate numerical value range, and if it is equal to or higher than the reference value, set a predetermined high numerical value range (e.g., 65 or more) set to an inappropriate numeric range. In addition, the server 1 selects the evaluation icon 762 of "suitable", "not suitable", or "somewhat suitable" according to the score of each inspection item, similar to the corporate culture and department.

The server 1 also calculates scores for departments other than the department selected in the department selection field 71 from the test results of the employees set as the judgment criteria and the test results of the examinees, and It is displayed in the aptitude column 77 . Specifically, the server 1 stores the test results of each test item selected as the evaluation scale of each employee selected as the judgment criteria in each department and the test result of each test item of the examinee. Based on this, the score of each department is calculated. Then, the server 1 displays the score and the rank corresponding to the score in the other department aptitude column 77 in association with the department name of each department. The other department aptitude column 77 displays an average value of the score of "department", the scores of "corporate culture" and "stability", and a rank corresponding to the average value of the scores. Accordingly, it is possible to present to the user how well the person fits in the case of being assigned to a department other than the department to which he or she is scheduled to be assigned.

As described above, the server 1 allows the user to select a reference employee and test items of an aptitude test as an evaluation scale, and based on the test results of each test item of the selected employee, the examinee (employment candidate person). As a result, the results of the aptitude test can be used favorably to support recruitment of human resources.

FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a processing procedure executed by the server 1. As shown in FIG. Processing executed by the server 1 will be described with reference to FIG. It is assumed that the server 1 has already acquired the test results of the aptitude test of the employee and the examinee and stored them in the employee DB 141 and the examinee DB 142 . Further, the server 1 ends the series of processes at the timing when the user logs out.

The control unit 11 of the server 1 causes the terminal 2 to display a predetermined home screen in response to the access from the terminal 2 (step S11). The control unit 11 determines whether or not to set the determination criteria according to the operation input from the user (step S12). When determining to set the determination criteria (S12: YES), the control unit 11 causes the terminal 2 to display a criteria list screen showing a list of a plurality of determination criteria (step S13). Specifically, the control unit 11 displays a plurality of criteria and test items of the aptitude test already set in the evaluation scale for each criteria.

The control unit 11 receives a selection input of criteria to be set (edited) (step S14). The control unit 11 causes the terminal 2 to display a criterion setting screen for setting the selected criterion (step S15). Specifically, the control unit 11 includes an employee selection field 61 (first display field) for selecting an employee, and a selection scale field 62 (second display field) for displaying search items as evaluation scales. , and a candidate scale column 63 (third display column) for displaying other search items that can be evaluation scales.

The control unit 11 receives selection input for selecting one or a plurality of employees among a plurality of employees engaged in the target company (step S16). Further, the control unit 11 receives a selection input for selecting one or a plurality of inspection items among the plurality of inspection items displayed in the candidate scale field 63 (step S17). The control unit 11 sets the test result of the test item selected in step S17 among the test results of the aptitude test of the employee selected in step S16 as a criterion (step S18).

After executing the process of step S18, or in the case of NO in step S12, the control unit 11 determines whether or not to analyze (determine) the examinee's aptitude according to the operation input from the user (step S19). . If it is determined to analyze the test results (S19: YES), the control unit 11 determines the examinee's aptitude for the target company based on the criteria set in step S18 and the test result of the examinee's aptitude test. Determine (step S20). Specifically, the control unit 11 calculates a score representing the degree of aptitude of the examinee for each of a plurality of criteria. The control unit 11 calculates a score for each criterion from the test results of the examinee and the employee regarding one or more test items set in the evaluation scale for each criterion. Further, the control unit 11 calculates the average value of the scores in each evaluation order, and determines the rank representing the overall evaluation of the examinee in multiple stages according to the average value.

The control unit 11 causes the terminal 2 to display an examinee analysis screen showing the determination result of the suitability of the examinee (step S21). Specifically, the control unit 11 displays the overall aptitude determination result (rank), the score for each criterion, the score for each evaluation item, the degree of aptitude (score) for a department different from the scheduled assignment department, and the like. . After executing the process of step S21, or in the case of NO in step S19, the control unit 11 returns the process to step S12.

As described above, according to the present embodiment, it is possible to suitably support recruitment of human resources.

The embodiments disclosed this time are illustrative in all respects and should not be considered restrictive. The scope of the present invention is indicated by the scope of the claims rather than the above-described meaning, and is intended to include all modifications within the scope and meaning equivalent to the scope of the claims.

1 server (information processing device)
11 Control Unit 12 Main Storage Unit 13 Communication Unit 14 Auxiliary Storage Unit P1 Program 141 Employee DB
142 Examinee DB
143 reference table 2 terminal 21 control unit 22 main storage unit 23 communication unit 24 display unit 25 input unit 26 auxiliary storage unit P2 program

Claims (9)

Receiving a selection input for selecting an employee as a criterion from among a plurality of employees engaged in the company,
Receiving a selection input for selecting an inspection item to be used as a criterion from among multiple inspection items to be inspected in the aptitude test,
setting the test result of the selected test item among the test results of the selected employee's aptitude test as a criterion for determining the aptitude of the examinee who takes the aptitude test;
Obtaining test results of the aptitude test of the examinee,
An information processing method in which a computer executes a process of judging the aptitude of the examinee for the company based on the established judgment criteria and the test result of the aptitude test of the examinee. Receiving selection input of the employee and inspection items for each of the plurality of judgment criteria,
The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein a score representing the aptitude level of the examinee is calculated for each of the plurality of criteria. 3. The information processing method according to claim 2, wherein the score is calculated higher as the tendencies of the test results of the aptitude test are opposite between the selected employee and the examinee. The criteria include multiple departments within the company,
Receiving selection input of the employee and inspection items for each department,
Calculate the score for each of the scheduled assignment department of the examinee and other departments other than the scheduled assignment department,
4. The information processing method according to claim 2, wherein the scores of the expected assignment department and other departments are respectively displayed on a display unit. Based on the aptitude test results of a plurality of persons and the aptitude test results of each employee of the company, a statistical index value representing the level of test results of employees of the company is calculated for each of the test items. ,
Displaying on a display unit a plurality of inspection items that can be evaluation scales for the judgment criteria and the statistical index values for each of the inspection items;
5. The information processing method according to any one of claims 1 to 4, further comprising receiving a selection input of the inspection item to be used as a criterion from among the plurality of displayed inspection items. determining whether or not the aptitude test result of one of the selected employees is different from the aptitude test result of the other employees;
The information processing method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein when it is determined that there is a deviation, an alert is output to the effect that the inspection result of the one employee has deviated. calculating a degree of similarity between each employee and the examinee based on the results of the aptitude test of each employee of the company and the results of the aptitude test of the examinee;
7. The information processing method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein the employees whose calculated degree of similarity exceeds a certain level are displayed on a display unit. A first reception unit that receives a selection input for selecting an employee as a criterion from among a plurality of employees engaged in the company;
a second reception unit that receives a selection input for selecting a test item as a criterion from among a plurality of test items to be tested in the aptitude test;
a setting unit that sets the test result of the selected test item among the test results of the selected employee's aptitude test as a judgment criterion for judging the aptitude of the examinee who takes the aptitude test;
an acquisition unit that acquires test results of the aptitude test of the examinee;
A determination unit that determines the aptitude of the examinee for the company based on the set criteria and the result of the aptitude test of the examinee. A first display field for selecting the employee who uses the test results of the aptitude test, and a second display field for displaying the test items of the aptitude test that are used as evaluation scales for judging the aptitude of the examinee. , displaying a third display column for displaying the plurality of inspection items that can be the evaluation scale on the display unit;
Receiving a selection input for selecting an employee as a criterion from among the plurality of employees engaged in the company via the first display field,
By accepting an operation input for moving the inspection item used as a criterion among the plurality of inspection items displayed in the third display column to the second display column, accepting selection input of the inspection item,
setting the test result of the selected test item among the test results of the aptitude test of the selected employee as a criterion for judging the aptitude of the examinee who takes the aptitude test; program to run.

Images