KR20090010957A - System for and method for psychological assessment - Google Patents

Abstract

In systems, methods and program products relating to the assessment of individuals, a subject can be provided with an assessment through software and a computer for improved functionality. The software may be directly installed on the subject's computer or may be on a remote server accessible through a communication network, such as a local network or the Internet. Stimuli to be presented to subject are selected in real time and may be selected randomly from a database of stimuli. Further, in the event of borderline cases, a refinement process may be used to provide an accurate assessment of the subject. Methods for the assessment of teams, comprising subject individuals, for the construction of ideal process profiles, and for coaching individuals are provided.

Description

Psychological evaluation system and method {SYSTEM FOR AND METHOD FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT}

The present invention generally relates to the field of psychological evaluation of an individual or team.

In the practical application of various psychological mechanisms, much time and effort is spent in determining reproducible ways of evaluating how individuals or groups of individuals (such as teams) make decisions, learn, and accomplish tasks. In a conventional evaluation scheme, an individual must endure a long evaluation that requires complex processing to determine personality, knowledge, and other forms of evaluation. Such conventional assessments typically attempt to explain the psychological characteristics of an individual by a psychotherapist performing according to a set of stimuli.

The present invention provides systems, methods and program products relating to the assessment, evaluation, training and coaching of subjects such as individuals, groups and entities.

Hereinafter, all terms used in the present invention will be described in detail. The present invention depicts a variety of individuals according to their strength and strength (ie, energy) measured according to their individual psychological categories. In some cases, there are four categories, such as strategy, motivation, analysis and activity. These categories have a plurality of names in the art. The starting point for explanation is an assessment that determines the strength of the individual in each psychological category. In some cases energy is represented by a numerical value, the higher the value, the higher the energy. In other cases, the strengths are shown in the order of category, for example, from "like" to "like". When considered together, the numbers representing the individual's strengths can form a process map that plans the process the individual uses to accomplish the task. In some cases, the energy of each category can be determined by presenting to the individual a series of stimuli (eg, word pairs) known to correspond to the category and asking the individual to select one of the plurality of stimuli. . Assessments can be built based on individual responses. In some cases, specific assessments may be written that include an individual's narrative description based on the relative intensity indicated in the assessment. These narrative descriptions may include the manner in which an individual likes to work, learn, and work with others. The concept of assessment can be further extended to include hypothetical (ie, ideal) individuals who may be best suited to performing the task, and based on a comparison of hypothetical and personal assessments, how the individual performs well on a particular task. A narrative description can be built. In some cases an assessment describing a team of individuals may be made, for example, by overlaying individual assessments of team members. Moreover, comparisons between individuals can be compared to determine how individuals can best collaborate, and a description of how individuals work together can be constructed based on the derived assessments. Moreover, assessments and narrative descriptions based on these assessments can be used to coach an individual to perform better.

In a first aspect, the present invention provides a method comprising the steps of: a) presenting to a subject two or more stimuli, such as two, three, four or more stimuli, corresponding to different characteristic categories; And b) receiving a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category. The term "evaluation" refers to an emotion, categorization or other decision of an object, such as an individual. An assessment may include a characteristic category describing the subject. Moreover, the evaluation may include psychological evaluation. An “object” can be an individual, group, or entity such as a team. In certain embodiments the assessment comprises stimuli selected by the subject. The term "presenting" or "presenting" refers to displaying graphics, text, audio, video, and the like. Indications may include the use of a computer or other electronic device and may be accomplished through a communication network, such as the Internet. The term "stimulus" refers to a pair of words or other device such as photographs, images, graphics, sketches, etc. that are selected to elicit a response from an object. The term "word pair" refers to two words or phrases that are tied together. In one embodiment, each word or phrase in a word pair is separated by commas. Non-limiting examples of word pairs include "aggressive, violent", "well prepared, conceptual", "control, firm", "investigate options, and acute". The term "characteristic category" refers to the characteristic, phase or other characteristic of an object or evaluation. Each characteristic category may correspond to a characteristic or characteristic associated with, for example, an emotional, physical, biological or intelligent characteristic. The term "receiving" refers to, for example, acquiring a signal or input. The term “receiving a selection” refers to acquiring or accepting an indication in the form of a response that selects one of the stimuli over another stimulus as input from a subject. In certain embodiments, receiving includes a response time criterion (ie, a response time limit) that does not accept the response. The term “response time criterion” refers to the time period after presentation of a stimulus assigned to a subject to provide a response. This reaction time criterion can be for example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45 seconds, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 minutes or even longer. In some embodiments, the reaction time criteria range from 1 to 10, 1 to 20, 1 to 30, and 1 to 45 seconds. In a preferred embodiment the reaction time criteria ranges from 1 to 45 seconds. In certain embodiments, if no response is accepted, the method returns to the previous step. Receiving in a particular embodiment includes recording the time it takes for the subject to respond to each of the plurality of stimuli and using the response time consistency criteria calculated from the statistical analysis of this recorded elapsed time. "Reaction time consistency criterion" refers to a statistical factor calculated from the time it takes for a subject to respond to each of a plurality of stimuli. If a response is not received within this response time consistency criterion, the response is discarded. Optionally, the subject may be presented with additional stimuli. In some embodiments, the response time consistency criterion is a multiple of the average time for the subject to respond to the plurality of stimuli. In some embodiments, the multiple of the average time ranges from 0.01 to 100 (eg, 0.1 to 10, 0.1 to 5, etc.). For example, if the average time for a subject to respond to a stimulus is 10 seconds, the response time consistency criterion may be a multiple of that (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70). , 80, 90, 100, or even 1000 seconds). In some embodiments, the response time consistency criterion is calculated by adding a multiple of the standard deviation of the response time for the plurality of stimuli to the average time taken to respond to the plurality of stimuli. In some embodiments, this multiple may range from 0.01 to 100 (eg, 0.1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, or even 100). As a non-limiting example, if the mean response time is 10 seconds and the standard deviation of the reaction time is 3 seconds, the response time consistency criterion may be a multiple of 10 seconds plus 3 seconds (e.g., for multiples of 1-5, reaction time The consistency criteria can be 13 seconds, 16 seconds, 19 seconds, 22 seconds, and 25 seconds, respectively). The term "response" is an indication of preference or selection by a subject. The response is “yes” or “no”, two extremes, a non-limiting example, a number between 1-2, 1-3, 1-5, 1-10, 1-100, or one of a plurality of options. May be a choice. Moreover, the reaction may be selected or unselected by the subject. The term “first characteristic category” refers to a characteristic category corresponding to the first stimulus selected by the subject (ie step b)).

In a preferred embodiment, three, four or more stimuli are presented in step a) or four stimuli are presented in step a), each characteristic category corresponding to a different phase in the success / satisfaction cycle. The terms "phase", "phase in success / satisfaction cycle", and "success / satisfaction cycle" are described in detail below.

In another preferred embodiment, the question is presented to the subject in step a) and the choice received in step b) is a response to this question. The terms "question" or "query" refer to the induction of a response, for example a problem presented to a subject. Thus, the subject may be asked to indicate a preference or choice in response to the stimulus. In some embodiments, the desired response may be "yes" or "no" for questions such as "Does this object describe you?" In other embodiments, this required reaction can be any number between two extremes, such as 1-2, 1-3, 1-5, 1-10, 1-100. For example, the question might be, "How many levels does this object describe you on a scale of 1 to 10?" In another embodiment, the question may ask the subject to select one of the plurality of options. For example, the question may be "Please select one of the following to indicate how well this object describes you", and the subject has two or more options, such as "very matched", "matches", "normal", "Does not match", "No match" can be presented. The term "object" herein refers to a given stimulus.

In yet another embodiment, the method includes the steps of: c) presenting to the subject a second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories than the first characteristic category; And d) receiving a selection by the subject of the second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a second characteristic category. The term "second characteristic category" refers to a characteristic category corresponding to the stimulus selected by the subject in step d).

In another embodiment, the present invention provides a method comprising the steps of: e) presenting to the subject a third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first and second characteristic categories; And f) receiving a selection by the subject of the third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a third characteristic category. The term “third characteristic category” refers to a characteristic category corresponding to the stimulus selected by the subject in step f).

In another embodiment, the method further comprises obtaining a selection order of the characteristic categories. In another embodiment, the characteristic category corresponds to the first, second, corresponding to the selection made in steps b), d) and f), in combination with any characteristic category not selected in steps b), d) and f). And a third characteristic category. The terms "selection order" and "stack order" refer to sequences according to rank, and are synonymous with the term "sequence order" in a conventional statistical sense. The term "sequence" refers to the preference of "like" to "like", but not by way of limitation. Thus, the selection order may represent a hierarchical relationship of the selected characteristic category of the object.

In another embodiment, the method is repeated by a further set of stimuli (ie, steps a) to f)). An additional set of stimuli may include stimuli that have not been previously presented to the subject. In another embodiment, stimuli for presentations are randomly selected from a database of stimuli. The term “random” refers to the same selectability among a plurality of possibilities, such as the same selection possibility of any possible stimulus among a plurality of stimuli. On the other hand, the terms "non-random" and "partial random" refer to the possibility of unequal selection of one or more possible choices among a plurality of possible choices. The term "database of stimuli" refers to a computer database containing the substance of stimuli, including graphics, text, audio, video, and the like. The identity of the database of stimuli can be referenced by characteristic categories. In a particular embodiment the stimuli in the database of stimuli are text. In another particular embodiment the stimuli in the database of stimuli are word pairs. In another embodiment steps a) to c) comprise communication with the subject over a network. This network may be the Internet. In another embodiment each stimulus is a word pair.

Another aspect of the invention relates to a method of performing an assessment of a subject, a) presenting to the subject two to four stimuli, such as two, three or four stimuli, and a question, wherein each stimulus is successful / Corresponds to the phase in the satisfaction cycle; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli in response to the question; And c) repeating steps a) and b) until the order of selection of each step in the success / satisfaction cycle is determined. The terms "phase in success / satisfaction cycle" and "success / satisfaction cycle" are described in detail below. In a preferred embodiment the method further comprises d) processing the order of selection to determine an individual's evaluation. The term “processing the selection order” refers to providing an assessment based on the hierarchical order of phases in a success / satisfaction cycle. In a preferred embodiment each stimulus of the method is a word pair. In certain embodiments, the receiving step further comprises a response time criterion for which no response is accepted. In certain embodiments, if no response is accepted, the method returns to the previous step. In a preferred embodiment, the reaction time criteria ranges from 1 to 45 seconds. In a particular embodiment, receiving includes recording the time required to respond to each of the plurality of stimuli, and calculating response time consistency criteria to determine whether a particular response is to be accepted as described herein. If a response is not received within this response time consistency criterion, the response is discarded. Optionally, additional stimuli can be presented to the subject. In some embodiments, the response time consistency criterion is a multiple of the average time required for the subject to respond to the plurality of stimuli. In some embodiments, the multiple of the mean time ranges from 0.01 to 100 (eg, 0.1 to 10, 0.1 to 5, etc.). As a non-limiting example, if the average time for a subject to respond to a stimulus is 10 seconds, the response time consistency criterion is a multiple of that (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 seconds, or more).

In another aspect, the present invention provides a program product. The program product includes: a) presenting to the subject a two or more sets of stimuli, such as two, three, four or more stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; And b) machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform receiving a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category.

In a preferred embodiment, the program product further comprises machine readable program code for causing the machine to present four stimuli in step a), each of the different characteristic categories being different in a success / satisfaction cycle as detailed below. Correspond to the phase. In another embodiment, the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing the machine to present a question to the subject in step a) and to receive a selection by the subject in response to the question in step b). . In another embodiment, the program product further comprises: the machine c) presenting to the subject a second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first characteristic category; d) machine readable program code for receiving a selection by the subject of the second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a second characteristic category. In another embodiment, the program product further comprises: the machine e) presenting to the subject a third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first and second characteristic categories; f) further comprising machine readable program code for receiving a selection by the subject of the third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a third characteristic category. In another embodiment, the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing the machine to obtain a selection order of the characteristic categories. In another embodiment, the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing the machine to repeat steps a) to f) with an additional set of stimuli. In another embodiment, steps a) and b) further comprise communication with the subject over a network. In a particular embodiment the network is the Internet. In another embodiment, each stimulus of the program product includes a word pair. Moreover, in this aspect, any embodiment may further include machine readable program code for causing the machine to calculate and use a response time criterion or reaction time consistency criterion, as described herein.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a method comprising the steps of: a) presenting to a subject two to four stimuli, such as two, three, or four stimuli, each stimulus corresponding to a phase in a success / satisfaction cycle; ; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli in response to the question; And c) machine readable program code for causing the machine to repeat steps a) and b) until the selection order of each step in the success / satisfaction cycle is determined. In a preferred embodiment, the program product further comprises machine readable program code for causing the machine to perform d) processing the selection order to determine an assessment of the subject. In another embodiment, each stimulus of the program product includes a word pair. Moreover, in this aspect, any embodiment may further include machine readable program code for causing the machine to calculate and use a response time criterion or reaction time consistency criterion, as described herein.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a system for performing an assessment of a subject, wherein the system presents to the subject two or more stimuli, each stimulus corresponding to a different characteristic category, on the computer, wherein It includes a server configured to receive one selection. A "server" may include a computer or computing device having software that enables the computer or computing device to communicate with other computers or computing devices in a server-client relationship, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art. In another embodiment of this system, each stimulus comprises a word pair.

In another aspect, a computer-implemented method of evaluating an assessment of a subject is provided, the method comprising: a) at least one stimulus, such as 1, 2, 3, 4 or more stimuli, selected in real time and corresponding to a characteristic category; Presenting to the subject; And b) evaluating the assessment of the subject based on the response received from the subject for each of the presented stimuli. The term "evaluating an assessment" refers to assigning a numerical value score to a characteristic category of the assessment. The numerical value score may be the sum of the weighted stimulus scores corresponding to the specific stimuli. The term "weighted stimulus score" refers to the number of 1-100 ranges associated with each stimulus, including but not limited to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, 30, 40, Say 50, 100. Weighted stimulus scores can be associated with stimuli in a database of stimuli according to methods generally known in the art. Specific examples of weighted stimuli associated with certain stimuli are shown here, for example, in FIG. 6. The term “response received from a subject” refers to the selection of one or more stimuli presented in step a). In certain embodiments, the subject has a time limit to react (ie, reaction time criteria), after which the reaction is not accepted. In certain embodiments, if no response is accepted, the method returns to the previous step. In a preferred embodiment, the reaction time criteria ranges from 1 to 45 seconds. In a particular embodiment, the receiving step includes recording the time it takes for the subject to respond to each of the plurality of stimuli, and using the response time consistency criteria calculated from the statistical analysis of the recorded elapsed time. If a response is not received within this response time consistency criterion, the response is discarded. Optionally, the subject may be presented with additional stimuli. In some embodiments, the response time consistency criterion is a multiple of the average time for the subject to respond to the plurality of stimuli, as described herein. In some embodiments this multiple is in the range of 0.1-10. The term "real time" refers to the period during which the evaluation is performed. Real time may include, for example, a delay associated with the processing, communication, or access of data or devices. “Real time” can be 1 microsecond or less, 10 microseconds or less, 1 second or less, 10 seconds or less, 1 minute or less, or 10 minutes or less before presenting a stimulus to a subject. In a preferred embodiment, step a) further comprises randomly selecting at least one stimulus from a database of stimuli. The term "selecting" refers to selecting, selecting or selecting one or more stimuli, for example, from a list, table or database. In another preferred embodiment, each stimulus is a word pair. In another embodiment, step a) further comprises formulating the overall assessment by presenting the plurality of stimuli to the subject. The term "formulating" refers to the selection of the entire set of stimuli to be presented to the subject for evaluation. In certain embodiments, the plurality of stimuli may comprise at least one stimulus corresponding to each of a plurality of different characteristic categories. In another embodiment, the method further comprises c) determining whether the assessment assessed in step b) requires refinement between two or more of said characteristic categories. The term "fineness" refers to the identification process required in the borderline case. The term "near the boundary line" refers to the case where the difference between the numerical scores of the two categories is not greater than the minimum required. The terms "minimum required" and "fineness criteria" refer to, for example, one, two, three, four, five or more numbers. For example, if the numerical value scores of two characteristic categories are 3 or less and the minimum required is 4, refinement will be required. In another embodiment, the method includes d) presenting additional stimuli corresponding to each of two or more characteristic categories. Another embodiment includes e) repeating steps b) to d) until the desired level of refinement is achieved. The term "desired level of refinement" refers to the minimum required in the difference of the numerical value scores of the two categories of evaluation, as described above. In another embodiment of this aspect, the method includes the steps of: d) presenting to the subject two or more stimuli, each stimulus corresponding to a different characteristic category; e) receiving a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli; And f) repeating steps d) and e) to obtain the order of selection of each of the different characteristic categories. In another embodiment, the method further comprises g) repeating steps c) to f) until the desired level of refinement is achieved.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a program product. The program product includes: a) presenting to the subject a first set of three or more stimuli when the assessment of the subject requires refinement between two or more characteristic categories of the assessment, each stimulus corresponding to a different characteristic category; ; b) receiving a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli; c) presenting to the subject a second set of two or more stimuli, each stimulus corresponding to a different characteristic category; And d) machine readable program code for causing the machine to repeat steps b) and c) to obtain a selection order of each of the different characteristic categories. Moreover, in this aspect, any embodiment may further include machine readable program code for causing the machine to calculate and use a response time criterion or reaction time consistency criterion, as described herein.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a method of performing an assessment of a team of members, the method comprising: a) providing a process map of the member of the team; b) overlapping the process map of the members of the team; And c) evaluating the team by providing a process map comprising the nested process map of the members of the team. The terms "process map" and "nesting" are described in detail below. The term "team" refers to a plurality of individuals (ie, "members" or "members") who have a common goal (ie, "mission") and a shared task of achieving that goal. The team depends on the success of its individual members. In certain embodiments the team further includes a manager (eg, a coach or representative of the entity employing the team member (s)). A team may contain only two members. In certain embodiments, a two member team includes an individual and a coach.

In a preferred embodiment the method further comprises building a process map of the virtual members of the team (ie, "virtual team members"), wherein the method comprises: d) deficiency or in each characteristic category of the team assessment; Identifying excess; And e) building process maps of the virtual members of the team by ascribing values to each characteristic category of the process maps of the virtual members of the team to compensate for the lack or excess of nested process maps of the members of the team. Steps. In team evaluation, the terms "deficiency" and "excess" refer to the difference in the numerical value scores of a particular characteristic category for the corresponding value of an ideal team member. The term “ideal team member” refers to a hypothetical team member with a numerical value score associated with each characteristic category that compensates for the lack and overcapacity of that characteristic category of the team's evaluation. An ideal team member, for example, does not necessarily prevail in all or any characteristic category of the team process map. For example, a "deficiency" in a team member may refer to a dominant phase if its superiority changes from the team's overall performance. An ideal process map (i.e., a process map of a hypothetical team member with an optimal energy level in each phase of the team process) can be built taking into account the team assessment described above, which process map is identified as lacking by the team assessment. Or compensate for excess. Thus, the terms "virtual member of a team" and "virtual team member" refer to a virtual team member with an ideal process map. In another embodiment, the virtual team member has a process map that fulfills a particular role or relationship within the team.

In another embodiment, the method further comprises identifying a candidate team member, the method comprising: f) comparing a process map of the virtual team member with a plurality of stored assessment data obtained for the candidate team member; g) identifying a match between the virtual team member process map and the stored assessment data; And h) identifying candidate team members associated with the stored assessment data. The term "candidate team member" refers to an individual or another team that can associate with the team on which team evaluation was performed. The term "stored assessment data" refers to an entry in a database containing assessments. The comparison method of step f) can be carried out in various ways known to those skilled in the art. For example, a composite comparison can be provided by summing the absolute values of the numerical differences between the ideal process map and the numerical value scores of the candidate team member's process map. In another embodiment, these differences are squared before summing. The term "identifying a match" refers to an identification in stored assessment data of a process map of a candidate team member or set of candidate team members, similar or identical to the process map of a virtual team member. The term “identifying a candidate team member” refers to a database management step that provides for identification of candidate team members according to methods known in the art.

In another aspect, the invention provides a system for performing an assessment of a subject, comprising a server configured to present at least one stimulus to a subject and receive a response of the subject to each of the presented stimuli, wherein the at least one The stimulus is selected in real time and corresponds to a characteristic category, wherein the server is further configured to determine an assessment of the subject based on the response. In another embodiment, the server is configured to determine whether the assessment requires refinement between two or more specific categories, and wherein the server presents additional stimuli corresponding to each of the two or more feature categories when refinement is needed. Is further configured.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a method of improving (ie, "coaching") the ability of a current or potential team member in the promotion of a team mission. Here, coaching is performed by " coaches, " individuals who are responsible for individual client education. The term "client" refers to an individual who is coached. In a preferred embodiment, the method comprises the steps of: a) evaluating a client current process map to provide a client assessment; And b) describing the client evaluation in detail to the client. The term "client current process map" is determined according to the method of the present invention and refers to a client process map whose evaluation is presently valid, i.e., the present client. The client current process map may be obtained concurrently with coaching or may be the result of a previous evaluation of the client. The previous evaluation of the client may have occurred one day, one week, one month, two months, three months, six months or more prior to coaching, for example. The term “client evaluation” refers to an energy level that a client has, or an energy level that can focus on the phase of success / satisfaction cycle described later in detail, which may include a narrative description of the client taking into account the client current process map.

In another embodiment, the invention further comprises comparing the client current process map with a coach process map to provide a coach / client evaluation, e.g., determining how the client and coach naturally like to collaborate. . The term "coach process map" refers to a process map provided in accordance with the present invention, which is derived from the evaluation of a coach. The term "coach / client evaluation" refers to the energy level difference between the client and the coach in the phase of success / satisfaction cycle described below, which refers to the strength measured according to the energy level difference within the categories of the client current process map and the coach process map. Include narrative descriptions of the clients and coaches they include. Additionally, the coach / client evaluation may include a narrative description of the behavior change of the client and coach to improve the coach / client relationship. Additionally, the coach / client evaluation may include a client's learning report described below and a coach's teaching report described below. In another embodiment the coach / client evaluation is described in detail to the client by the coach. In another embodiment, the method provides an explicit list of behavioral changes of the client and coach to improve the ongoing working relationship.

In another embodiment, the method further includes detailing the client's learning report and the coach's teaching report to the client. The term "client's learning report" refers to a written narrative that describes the client's learning style in a way that the client prefers to learn most naturally, as determined by considering the client's current process map. In addition, the client's learning report may include a written description of the client's behavioral change to achieve more efficient task completion. The proposed client's behavioral change is made in accordance with the coach's view, which provides the coach with specific tasks and goals for the client. The term "coach's teaching report" refers to a written narrative that describes the coach's teaching style in a manner that coaches most like to teach (ie, coach) as determined by considering the coach process map. In addition, the coach's teaching report may include written narratives of coach's behavioral changes to achieve more efficient work done by the client. In another embodiment, the method further includes explaining to the client the change in the learning style of the client or the change in the teaching style of the coach to the client in order to achieve more efficient work completion by the client. By way of example, and not by way of limitation, if the client current process map exhibited a dominant level in the analysis phase, the coach may advise the client to lower the level of the analysis activity in order to devote the more concentrated energy described below to another phase.

In another embodiment, the method further includes comparing the client current process map with a client target map to provide an ideal client assessment. The term "client aspiration map" refers to a process map that describes how much dynamic intensity the client ideally desires (i.e., the energy level within the phase of the success / satisfaction cycle). The client goal map may be prepared according to the evaluation method of the present invention, and further includes a question about the client's desire. Thus, the subject may be asked to indicate a preference or choice in response to the stimulus. In some embodiments, the requested response may be "yes" or "no" for questions such as "Does this object describe what you want to be ideal?". In other embodiments, this requested response can be any number between two extremes, such as 1-2, 1-3, 1-5, 1-10, 1-100. For example, a query might be "What level does this object describe on the scale of 1 to 10 that you want to be ideal?" In another embodiment, the query may ask the subject to select one of the plurality of options. For example, the query may be "Please select one of the following to indicate how well this object describes what you would like to be ideal", and the subject has two or more options, such as "Very matched", "Matched" , "Normal", "inconsistent", "no match at all" may be suggested. The term "object" here refers to a given stimulus. The term “ideal client evaluation” refers to the energy level at which the client wishes to focus on the phase of success / satisfaction cycle described in detail later, which may include a narrative description of the client in consideration of the client goal map.

In another embodiment, the coach details the ideal client assessment to the client. In yet another embodiment, the method further includes describing the client's behavior change in detail to the client to minimize the difference between the client current process map and the client anomaly process map.

In another embodiment, the method further includes comparing the client current process map with the peer process map to provide a peer / client evaluation that determines how the client and colleague like to work as a team. The term “peer process map” refers to a process map provided in accordance with the present invention, derived from a peer's evaluation. The term “peer / client evaluation” refers to the difference in energy levels between peers and clients in the phase of success / satisfaction cycle described below, which refers to the strength and strength measured according to the difference in energy levels within the categories of client current process map and peer process map. You can include narrative descriptions of your colleagues and clients. In another embodiment, the coach details the peer / client evaluation to the client. In another embodiment, the coach details the client's and coworker's behavioral changes to the client to increase success and satisfaction in performing the work by the client or coworker.

In another embodiment, the method further includes comparing the client current process map with the task / project process map to provide task / client evaluation. The term "task / project" refers to a task undertaken by a client as part of a project assigned to the client. The term "task / project process map" refers to a process map of an idealized client that is ideally suited to the performance of a particular task as part of a particular project. For example, the task / project requirements for sales managers may include desirable motivation and activity energy levels and lower energy levels (eg, selection energy levels) in the analysis and strategy categories. This combination of energy levels would allow the idealized client to perform the duties of a sales manager without wasting time. The term "task / client evaluation" refers to the energy level difference between the client and the task / project in the phase of success / satisfaction cycle described below, which refers to the client including strength and weakness measured according to the energy level difference within the scope of the process map. May contain narrative descriptions of tasks / projects.

In another embodiment, the task / project process map is constructed by arithmetically averaging the individual corresponding numerical components (ie, numerical value scores) of the phases of the process maps of the plurality of actual individuals who perform the work well. The term 'performing well' herein refers to any of the above ideals for any of a plurality of criteria important for management, including, for example, minimum time consumption, minimum resource consumption, maximum benefit, and other criteria important for management known in the art. Successful completion of a subject task by a given client or a plurality of actual individuals In another embodiment, the present invention provides a method of constructing a task / project process map that an individual skilled in the subject task creates based on personal experience. In certain non-limiting examples, an individual skilled in a target task may determine that a particular task requires high motivational and analytical energy and lower activity and strategy energy. For the numerical value points assigned to each phase of the business / project process map, the target Compensation corrections (such as raising or lowering 1, 2, 3, or 4 points) are made to compensate for the disposition of an unskilled individual In another embodiment, this compensation is done at the discretion of the individual skilled in the task. For example, an individual skilled in a target task may have a very high energy (i.e., dominant) in a particular phase, such as an analytical phase, in which case the analytical energy level of the idealized process map created by the individual skilled in the target task is In order to compensate for the original energy level of an individual who is proficient in, it may be necessary to provide a down compensation (eg, by 1, 2, 3 or 4 points) In another embodiment a plurality of individuals proficient in the subject task (ie, "analytic evaluation"). Each group produces an idealized process map, and the individual corresponding numerical components of the phases of the created process maps are arithmetically averaged to Create a project process map In another embodiment, the administrator analyzes the individual energy levels in the task / project process map constructed in accordance with the present invention according to the statistics of numerical values for each energy level provided by the analysis evaluation group (e.g., 1, 2, 3, or 4 points up or down). For example, if each member of the analysis evaluation group specified a high analysis energy level in the idealized process map, the analysis energy level need not be compensated. On the other hand, if the analytical assessment group provided a range of values for analytical energy in an idealized process map, measured according to a large square deviation or standard deviation, then the corresponding analytical energy level in this business / project process map is May require down compensation.

In another embodiment, the method further includes the coach detailing the task / client evaluation to the client. In another embodiment the method further comprises the step of detailing the client's behavior change to the client in order to minimize the energy level difference between the client current process map and the task / project process map.

In another embodiment, the method further includes explaining to the client the work preferences of the client in detail. The term "client's preference for work" refers to how the client most naturally prefers to do work. The classes of information thus provided are, for example, the client's ideal working environment, the client's communication skills, the client's ability to set the direction of work and keep it close, the leadership of the client, the client's decision making and risk preferences, and the client's Persuasion and sales skills can be included. In another embodiment, the coach and the client set mutual expectations and goals, predict and improve performance in consideration of the client's work preferences.

In another embodiment, the method further includes explaining to the client the learning preferences of the client in detail. The term "client's learning preference" refers to how the client most naturally likes to learn. The class of information thus provided may include, for example, the client's ideal learning environment and the skills with which the client communicates with a manager, teacher, or coach who trains the client.

In another embodiment the method further comprises visualizing how the client prefers to spend time on a task or role. In another embodiment, coaches and clients use this visualization to set mutual expectations, predict and improve performance. In another embodiment the method further comprises visualizing how the client prefers to consume energy concentrated in the task. The term "concentrated energy" is described later. In another embodiment, coaches and clients use this visualization to set mutual expectations, predict and improve performance.

In another embodiment, the method further comprises including the client assessment and the coach / client assessment in an archive database. The term "archive database" is a computer data structure configured to retain subject information (such as name, address, job status, etc.), work information, assessments, process maps, emotions, editorial feedback, commented responses, and comments from clients and coaches. Say. Separate entries in this database, the client archive and the coach archive, are maintained for the client and the coach, respectively. The client archive is configured so that the client can change entries without the permission of the coach or client's employer (ie, administrator). The archive database is constructed and maintained according to methods known in the art.

In another embodiment, the method further includes annotating the response of the coach and the client in an archive database. The term “annotating” refers to providing a document that accompanies the reaction, which is included in the archive database.

In another embodiment, the method further comprises receiving editing feedback by the client prior to writing the client evaluation into the archive database. The term "editing feedback by the client" refers to editing an entry provided by the client. The edit entry refers to the client's comments that are included in the client's evaluation and stored in the archive database. The edit entry may further include the client's selection as to which element of the client assessment and client learning report the client feels most accurately describes the client. The client may be presented with a number of elements of the client's assessment, each of which is labeled with a certain name, such as a) most of the time I like it very much, b) some time I like me somewhat, and c) not like me at all. That is, an opportunity may be given. The client evaluation element, denoted "a)" or "b)", is kept within the client evaluation, which is rewritten and stored in the client archive. All elements are retained in the coach archive, regardless of how the client indicated them. As an alternative, the names a), b) and c) may be replaced with color codes such as green, yellow and red, respectively. The client may also be presented with multiple elements of the client learning report, categorizing each element with names such as a) most like me most of the time, b) like me some time, and c) not like me at all. You may be given the opportunity to do so. Then, the client learning report element labeled "a)" is maintained in the client assessment, which is rewritten and stored in the client archive. Regardless of how the client indicated, all elements of this learning report are kept in the coach archive. The names a), b) and c) may be replaced with color codes such as green, yellow and red, respectively.

In another embodiment, the method further includes the coach and the client reviewing the archive database to confirm success and failure of a coach-client relationship. The term "success and failure of a coach-client relationship" refers to how well the coach and client cooperate (ie whether the coach or client has stress or anger), how well the client responds to the coach's teaching style (for example, Measured by changes in the client's behavior), how well the coach responds to the client's conversations (this is measured by changes in the coach's teaching style, for example, in response to the client), and the tasks by which the client forms the basis of coaching How well do you finally perform?

In another embodiment, the method further includes repeating steps a) and b) and comparing the client assessment with a client assessment in the archive database to provide an updated client assessment. The term "updated client assessment" refers to describing a change in client assessment. The updated client evaluation is useful for comparing functional changes in the client's current process map over time, or for example determining how the client later performs other tasks.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a program product comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to evaluate a client current process map to provide a client evaluation. In another embodiment the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map with a coach process map to provide a coach / client evaluation. In another embodiment, the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map with a client target map to provide an ideal client assessment. In another embodiment, the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map with the peer process map to provide peer / client evaluation. In another embodiment, the program product further includes machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map with the task / project process map to provide task / client evaluation.

In another aspect of the invention, a system for performing an assessment of a subject includes a server configured to present at least one stimulus to a subject and receive a response of the subject to each of the presented stimuli. The at least one stimulus is selected in real time and corresponds to a characteristic category. The server is further configured to determine an assessment of the subject based on the response. The evaluation is determined based at least in part on the elapsed time for the reaction.

In one embodiment, the assessment is determined based on a comparison of elapsed time for each response with an average elapsed time for all reactions from the subject.

In another embodiment, the server is configured to assign a predetermined value to each response based on the elapsed time for the response. The predetermined value may be determined by applying a multiplier dependent on the elapsed time to a default value. The server may be configured to perform a statistical analysis on the values of the response to determine the assessment.

In another embodiment, the server is configured to perform a statistical analysis on the elapsed time of the response to determine the assessment.

In one embodiment, the system further comprises a narrative database corresponding to one or more assessments. The server is configured to output a narrative from the database in response to the determined assessment.

In another aspect, the invention includes a method of performing an assessment of a subject. The method comprises the steps of: a) presenting to the subject two or more stimuli of at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; And d) outputting the subject assessment based on the response. The evaluation is determined based at least in part on the elapsed time for the reaction.

In another aspect, a program product includes the steps of: a) the machine presenting a first set of two or more stimuli to a subject, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; And d) machine readable program code for performing a method comprising outputting an assessment of the subject based on the response. The evaluation is determined based at least in part on the elapsed time for the reaction.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a system for performing a relationship assessment of two or more subjects, wherein the subject presents at least one stimulus, selected in real time and corresponding to a characteristic category, to each subject and responding to each of the presented stimuli. It includes a server configured to receive. The server is further configured to determine a characteristic category assessment of each subject based on the response to one or more characteristic categories. The system further includes a dyad database based on evaluating a characteristic category of each subject and corresponding to evaluating a relationship of relationships between the subjects.

In one embodiment, the dial database includes a narrative corresponding to one or more relationship evaluations. The server is configured to output a narrative from the database corresponding to the relationship assessment.

In another embodiment, each diamond includes a characteristic category evaluation of at least one of the following characteristic categories: strategy writing, motivation, analysis, and activity.

In another aspect of the invention, a method of performing a relationship assessment of two or more subjects comprises: a) presenting to a subject a two or more sets of stimuli, wherein at least two of the stimuli correspond to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; d) determining a characteristic category assessment of the subject based on the response to one or more characteristic categories; e) repeating steps a) to d) for each of the remaining subjects; And f) outputting a relationship evaluation of the relationship between the objects based on the characteristic category evaluation determined for each object.

In another aspect of the invention, a program product includes: a) presenting to a subject a two or more sets of stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; d) determining a characteristic category assessment of the subject based on the response to one or more characteristic categories; e) repeating steps a) to d) for each of the remaining subjects; And f) outputting an evaluation of the relationship of the relationship between the objects based on the characteristic category evaluation determined for each object. Machine readable program code for causing the machine to perform the method.

1 illustrates a conventional Gestalt experience cycle.

2 illustrates the success / satisfaction cycle derived from the Gestalt experience cycle.

3 is a table showing exemplary word pairs in four phases of a success / satisfaction cycle.

4 is a flow chart illustrating a target evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present invention.

5A, 5B, and 5C are screens illustrating an exemplary evaluation process.

6 is a table showing exemplary word pairs in four categories used as stimuli in evaluation.

7 is a flow chart illustrating a target evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present invention.

8 is a flow chart illustrating one embodiment of a method for refinement.

9 is a flow chart illustrating another embodiment of an inter-category refinement method.

10 is a schematic diagram showing the front end of a system according to some embodiments of the inventions.

11 is a schematic diagram showing a back end of a system according to some embodiments of the inventions.

12 shows an exemplary dyad database in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.

The present invention provides an evaluation system, method and program product based on a combination of pairwise comparison methods and task completion from the Gestalt framework. The user may be forced to compare selections physically or electronically, for example, through interactive software designed with Flash, PHP, and other products known in the art. The assessment can be applied to an individual, group or idealized individual or team to create a template for subsequent screening of the individual.

The pairwise comparison method is based on Thurstone's Law of Comparative Judgment. When a person is presented with stimuli such as word pairs or pictures, a series of events occurs. These peripheral stimuli are patterned in the retina, then converted into electrical signals and transmitted to the brain. The brain then uses an independent group of neurons to biochemically establish the mental representation, one group for each stimulus. These events are massively parallelized and can involve tens of thousands of neurons with electrochemical interactions between them.

In the case of evaluation of embodiments of the present invention, the neural mechanism causes two mental representations, one for each stimulus, if the individual is presented with a stimulus such as a word pair for comparison. The individual's favorite representation will produce the strongest nerve signal strength and choose the pair.

Even though an individual consciously believes in "selecting" one of the pairs of words, it is actually an electrochemical process in the brain that applies certain rules to control the reaction.

In some embodiments of the invention, the stimulus is a word pair of the subject's choice. The words used in the word pairs are derived from the success / satisfaction cycle derived from the Kestalt framework and the descriptive words of a particular phase found in the descriptors of important brain processes. The term “success / satisfaction cycle” refers to, for example, the process by which a subject completes or processes a task. The success / satisfaction cycle may include a plurality of phases in which tasks are processed by the subject. This treatment may occur sequentially or in parallel. The success / satisfaction cycle is rooted in a systematic approach to the development and application of the Gestalt figure-ground model, as it relates to the construction of individual and group experiences. Edwin C. Nevis's book, "Organizational Consulting: Gestalt Approach" (Gardner Press; December 1, 1987) is a model and foundation from which the success / satisfaction cycle is derived from the Gestalt experience cycle. . 1 illustrates a Gestalt experience cycle 100, and FIG. 2 illustrates a success / satisfaction cycle 200.

In the illustrated embodiments of the present invention, the success / satisfaction cycle evaluates the subject's experience through five phases of the success / satisfaction cycle: strategy, motivation, analysis, activity, and assessment. Thus, the term "phase" refers to the individual components of a success / satisfaction cycle, for example as shown in FIG. The term “phase in success / satisfaction cycle” likewise refers to the individual components of the success / satisfaction cycle as shown, for example, in FIG. 2. In certain embodiments the term "dynamic" is used synonymously with the term "phase" when referring to a success / satisfaction cycle. In certain embodiments, this cycle is identified as a series of dynamics in the order of examination, stimulation, investigation, and execution, where execution and examination dynamics are linked by "evaluate" behavior.

The names of the phases of the success / satisfaction cycle may be named differently in the art. Such alternative nomenclature may also describe the characteristic category of the phase. For example, the strategy phase may be known as the "synthetic" or "checkup" phase, ie dynamic, and the motivational phase may be known as the "interaction" or "stimulation" phase, ie dynamic, and the analysis phase may be "interpretation". , "Articulate" or "investigation" phases, ie dynamics, and the activity phase may be known as "conclusion" or "execution" phases, ie dynamics, and the evaluation phase may be known as the "emotion" phase, ie May be known as dynamic. Moreover, phases can be referenced by the person performing the function of phase. By way of example, and not by way of limitation, the strategy phase may be based on "power", "synthesizer", "coordinator" or "exhibitor," and the motivational phase may be "motivator", "interacter", or " Stimulator ", the analysis phase may be based on" analyzer "or" investigator ", and the activity phase may be based on" completer ".

Each assessment (eg, emotion) phase of the success / satisfaction cycle consists of two parts: success and satisfaction. The measurement process in this phase varies from person to person or group and can be based on a variety of factors (eg, culture, education, completion schedule, past experience with this particular process, etc.). For example, some subjects may focus more on measuring external processes of success, while others may focus more on measuring internal satisfaction.

Each phase has a characteristic level of energy, focus or time associated with it for each object. In some embodiments the energy characteristic level is represented numerically. These levels vary from subject to subject, but are generally robust against the same subject. In certain embodiments the energy levels are divided into four categories in descending order and are named as non-limiting examples, ie energy, dominant, preferential, selective, and stress / avoidance. Phases classified as "dominant" dominate the subject's process. Most of the time and energy is spent in this phase, other phases of the cycle have little or no credit, and moving objects to other phases of the cycle can be difficult and sometimes stress the associate or colleague. Phases classified as "priority" are often used naturally, very comfortably. This phase works with the least stress on both the object and the objects around it. Phases classified as "choice" are consciously involved by individuals and adapted to specific tasks or relationships. Subjects spend a long time in this selective focus phase and may not be stressed out. Longer periods of time spent in phases classified as "stress / avoidance" can stress the subject and are usually avoided by the subject. This phase is only performed for a limited time, but it can make you feel stressed or tired.

Those skilled in the art will appreciate that various terms describe the characteristic energy levels of the phases of the success / satisfaction cycle described above. By way of example, and not limitation, the term "extreme" may be used synonymously with "dominant", "an effortless" as "priority", "careful" as "selection", and "stress" as "stress / May be used synonymously with "avoidance".

The priority for the time a subject prefers to spend on work or project is associated with each characteristic energy level. The term "focused energy" refers to the energy level at which the subject naturally prefers to use it for work or projects. The extreme, effortless, discreet and stress energy levels here may be associated without limitation with the terms "prolonged", "suitable", "short term" and "too much / too little", respectively.

The terms "process profile", "process style" and "process map" can be used interchangeably without any limitation, as the data constituting the assessment, i. Can say the natural energy level. That is, the process map is the description of the energy, focus or time associated with each phase of the Gestalt success / satisfaction cycle shown in FIG. 2 at some subject. Likewise, the terms “ideal process profile”, “ideal process style” and “ideal process map” refer to the idealized process profile described herein.

As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, individuals within a team may be characterized by non-limiting names, such as "leader", "member", "facilitator", "scribe" and "liaison". Play different roles with “and“ energizers. ”Team leaders provide guidance for the team, perform administrative duties, and ensure that team members are preceded by good team practices. Where “good” refers to the successful completion of a task assigned to a team, and “maneuvering” refers to the means by which a particular goal is achieved. Team facilitators are teachers and coordinators, problem solvers and conflict resolvers who help to achieve team goals as needed, reach consensus within the team, and in the means by which teams accomplish those goals. The facilitator looks at the group, recognizes the problem, and finds a way to overcome it.The writer writes the minutes of the team meeting, reconstructs the meeting in paper form, and writes the documented minutes. Submit for review and distribute the minutes The liaison functions as a contact with other entities, such as other teams, officials, and entities outside the organization with the team as a member. Provide additional motivation and active energy focus to the team and its members.

A diverse and respected team is best described as an overlay of the process map of the individual members of the team, where "diversity" refers to the range of capabilities the team has as a whole, and "respected" A subjective meaning given to a team by external entities, including, without limitation, entities outside the organization that have other teams, management, and the target team as members. Evaluations provided to team individual members in the present invention are represented by a process map, for example as shown in FIG. Thus, the overlay of a team member's personal process map (ie, "team process map") represents the team's process map as a whole, "team assessment." Considering the team members' personal process map as a whole, the role of each team member (eg, leader, facilitator, scribe, or liaison / activator) may be recommended. Moreover, the differences in team process maps are clearly visible to team members and directors. Recognition of such differences can guide the addition or reduction of team members to optimize team organization and thus optimize the overall effectiveness of the team.

3 shows a table 300 showing exemplary word pairs used in embodiments of the present invention. Table 300 consists of six sets of word pairs, but additional sets may be further provided, for example as shown in FIG. Once a set is presented to a subject, the set can be selected from the available sets in any order or at random. In a particular embodiment each set includes word pairs for each of the four phases in a success / satisfaction cycle. In another embodiment, additional categories or phases may include word pairs for each set.

4 is a flow chart illustrating an exemplary method of evaluation in accordance with certain embodiments of the present invention. The method 400 begins by presenting a set of stimuli to a subject (block 410). This presentation may be physical, electronic or verbal. Stimuli may include photographs, diagrams, sketches or other media. In certain embodiments, the stimulus is a word pair. This set of stimuli includes two or more stimuli that the subject selects. In the exemplary embodiment described below with reference to FIGS. 3 and 5A, each set includes four word pairs.

In block 420 the question is presented to the subject. This presentation may also be physical, electronic or oral. The presentation of this question and the presentation of the stimulus set can be done simultaneously or in reverse order. The query is designed to allow the subject to select one of the stimulus sets (block 430).

In block 440, a determination is made as to whether further selection from the set of stimuli from the subject is required. If it is determined that further selection is required, the method 400 returns to block 420. For example, in an exemplary embodiment with four word pairs in a stimulus set, additional selection may be required to determine the relative order of the remaining stimuli after the subject has selected one stimulus. On the other hand, if it is determined that no further selection is required, the method 400 proceeds to block 450. For example, in an exemplary embodiment with four word pairs in a stimulus set, one stimulus may remain unselected after repeated selection. Therefore no further selection is required for ordering.

At block 450, a determination is made as to whether additional sets will be presented to the subject. If it is determined that an additional set will be presented, the method 400 returns to block 410 to present a new set of stimuli to the subject. In certain embodiments, additional confidence may be achieved in the final stack order by processing of a plurality of stimulus sets. In one embodiment, method 400 includes processing two sets of stimuli. In another embodiment, three or more sets of stimuli are processed for each subject.

If it is determined in block 450 that no further set is to be presented, the method 400 proceeds to block 460, where the stack order for that object is determined. Stack order indicates the evaluation of the subject. The method 400 then ends at block 470. In the exemplary embodiment described above, the stack order indicates the relative order of various categories or phases of success / satisfaction cycles. If one subject is presented with a set of stimuli, the stacking order may be a direct mapping of word pair selection. When a plurality of stimulus sets are presented to a subject, a scoring method may be used to determine the overall stack order.

5A-5C show screen shots, for example, where a web server 520 can be presented to a subject on user device 510 of FIG. 5. 5A includes an initial presentation of a set of stimuli, where each pair includes four word pairs corresponding to categories or phases of success / satisfaction cycles. The illustrated set of stimuli corresponds to set number 6 in table 300 of FIG. 3. With this set of stimuli, the question asks the subject to select a word pair that most accurately describes the subject. If the subject selects one of the word pairs, the screen is updated with the screenshot shown in FIG. 5B. In this case, the user has selected the word pair "punctual, objective" corresponding to the analysis phase. Therefore, this analysis phase is placed at the top of the stacking order.

Subsequently, as shown in FIG. 5B, the subject is presented with the remaining stimuli in the set, with the question asking the subject to select a word pair that describes the subject with the lowest accuracy among the remaining stimuli. If the subject selects one of the remaining word pairs, the screen is updated with the screenshot shown in FIG. 5C. In this case, the user selects the word pair "conceptual, aware-of-feeling" corresponding to the strategy writing phase. Therefore, this strategy phase is placed at the bottom of the stacking order.

Finally, as shown in FIG. 5C, the subject is asked to complete the remaining two word pairs and the stacking order. This question asks the subject to select a word pair that more accurately describes the subject. Phases corresponding to the word pair selected by the subject are placed second in the stacking order, and categories or phases corresponding to the unselected word pairs are placed third.

The example assessments shown in FIGS. 5A-5C are made according to one set of stimuli and only three clicks or selection by the subject. Thus the evaluation can be obtained quickly. For further confidence in the evaluation, the process of FIGS. 5A-5C can be repeated by an additional set of stimuli where each set requires only three additional clicks by the subject.

6 shows another exemplary table of stimuli presented to a subject as part of an assessment.

In the illustrated embodiment, each stimulus is a word pair corresponding to a characteristic category. The embodiment shown in FIG. 6 includes four characteristic categories. In other embodiments, more or less categories may be used. Each category refers to a characteristic, phase, or other characteristic of an object or assessment, and each characteristic category may correspond to a characteristic or feature associated with, for example, an emotional, physical, biological, and / or intelligent characteristic. In this illustrated embodiment each characteristic category corresponds to the phase of success / satisfaction cycle of FIG. 2.

With reference to FIG. 7, illustrated is a method for evaluating an object in accordance with certain embodiments of the present invention. Method 700 begins with selecting a stimulus in real time. The stimulus can be selected, for example, from a list, table or database. The choice of stimulus may be completely or partially random. For example, referring to Figure 6, the selection may be completely random by selecting any word pair from any of the four categories, or may be partially random by selecting a word pair from any selected category, such as the "SYNTHESIZER" category. Can be.

In other categories the selection of the stimulus may be guided by information about the subject and / or the client with which the subject is associated. Such information can be obtained from the user database 1040 of FIG. 10. For example, the information obtained from the user database 1040 may indicate that the subject has already been evaluated and may include a particular stimulus presented to that subject. Thus, stimulus selection at block 710 of FIG. 7 may be guided to avoid stimuli already presented to the subject.

The stimulus may be any device, such as photograph, image, graphic, sketch, etc., selected to elicit a response from the subject. In one embodiment each stimulus is a word pair, such as the word pair shown in FIG. 6.

Real-time stimulus selection is facilitated by implementing the assessment as a computer-based method.

Referring again to FIG. 7, at block 720, the selected stimulus is presented to the subject. In this regard, the stimulus can be presented by displaying the stimulus in graphics, text, audio, video, and the like. Such indication may include the use of a computer or other electronic device by a subject, such as a standalone or networked computer. In certain embodiments, the communication that results in an indication is through a communication network, such as the Internet. When a stimulus is presented, the subject is asked to indicate a preference or choice in response to the stimulus. The requested response is, "Does this word pair describe you?" "Yes" or "No" for questions such as these. In other embodiments the reaction can be any number between two extremes, such as 0-100, 0-10, 1-10, or 1-5. For example, the question might be, "What level does this word pair describe you on a scale of 1 to 10?" In another embodiment, the question may be asked to select one option from a range of options. For example, the question could be "Please select one of the following to indicate how well this word pair describes you," and the target has the following options: "Very match", "Matched", "Normal", "Matched" Not "," no match at all "may be suggested.

At block 730, a response from the subject is received. In this regard, a signal or input may be obtained from the object.

At block 740, it is determined whether additional stimuli will be presented to the subject. This assessment may, for example, require a minimum number of stimuli to be presented for each characteristic category. In this regard, if a sufficient number of stimuli have not been presented, the method 700 returns to block 710 to select another stimulus to be presented. In certain embodiments, as indicated by block 750, a characteristic category for the next stimulus may be selected to facilitate a complete evaluation.

Alternatively, if at block 740 it is determined that no further stimulation is needed for evaluation, the method 700 proceeds to block 760 where the assessment of the subject is determined. In this regard, the subject's response to a given stimulus can be evaluated. In one embodiment, a scoring method may be used to determine the overall stack order for a subject. For example, five points may be assigned to each "very matched" response and four points may be assigned to a "matched" response. The numerical score for each characteristic category can determine the position of that category in the stacking order. Stack order indicates the evaluation of the subject. In the exemplary embodiment described above, the stack order indicates the relative ordering of various categories or phases of success / satisfaction cycles.

At block 770, it is determined whether refinement of the stack order is needed for two or more characteristic categories. For example, the evaluation may require a minimum difference (ie, refinement criteria) in the numerical scores to distinguish between the two categories, and if the two categories of numerical scores differ by less than the minimum required, the stacking order Refinement may be necessary to accurately determine each location in the.

In a particular embodiment, the numerical value scores for each characteristic category assign weights to each stimulus (e.g., word pairs in FIG. 6), accumulate weights as the evaluation is performed, and finally accumulate the weighted weights for each characteristic. It is calculated by presenting it as a numerical value score for the category. In some embodiments equal weights (ie, 1 point) are given to each stimulus. In another embodiment, variable weights are given for each word pair. In one embodiment, word pairs below line “A” in FIG. 6 are given values greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “A”. The word pairs of are given a lower value. In another embodiment, word pairs below line “B” in FIG. 6 are given a number greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “B”. The word pairs of are given a lower value. In another embodiment, word pairs below line “C” in FIG. 6 are given a number greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “C”. The word pairs of are given a lower value. In another embodiment, the word pairs below line “D” in FIG. 6 are given a number greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “D”. The word pairs of are given a lower value. In another embodiment, word pairs below line “E” in FIG. 6 are given a number greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “E”. The word pairs of are given a lower value. In another embodiment, word pairs below the line “F” in FIG. 6 are given a number greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “F”. The word pairs of are given a lower value. In another embodiment, word pairs below the line “G” in FIG. 6 are given a number greater than 1, such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10, and above this line “G”. The word pairs of are given a lower value.

If it is determined at block 770 that no refinement is needed, process 700 proceeds to block 790 to generate an evaluation report. Referring to FIG. 11, this report may be generated by the report generator 1150 based on the response to the stimulus and the determination of the assessment for the subject in block 760 of FIG. 7. The method 700 then ends at block 799.

On the other hand, if it is determined in block 770 that refinement is required, then process 700 proceeds to block 780 to perform refinement. Once the refinement is complete, the method 700 returns to block 760 to again determine the assessment of the subject.

Depending on the determination at block 770, the required refinement can be performed in a number of ways. Two refinement methods according to embodiments of the present invention are as shown in FIGS. 8 and 9 to be described later.

One embodiment of the refinement method 780a shown in FIG. 8 begins with the determination of the category to be refined at block 810. In this regard, the category may be received, for example, from an assessment determined at block 760 of FIG. 7. Refinement may be required between any number of categories, including two categories, three categories, or four categories in the example illustrated above with four characteristic categories of evaluation.

At block 820, a stimulus is selected from the category in which the stimulus is to be refined. In this regard, the stimulus may be selected, for example, from a stimulus table or other database shown in FIG. 6. At blocks 830 and 840, a stimulus is presented to the subject and a response is received. In FIG. 8, blocks 820, 830, 840 are shown to be performed in batch form (ie, all stimuli are first selected, then presented and all responses received). However, the function of these blocks is performed for one stimulus at a time, and these blocks may be repeated for each stimulus.

In block 850 the assessment of the subject is determined for the category to be refined as a sub-assessment. In this regard, the assessment may be determined using a scoring method that is the same as or different from the determination of the assessment at block 760 of FIG. 7.

Referring back to FIG. 8, at block 860 it is determined whether the refinement criteria have been met. This refinement criterion may require a specific difference (ie, the minimum required) of the numerical value score for the category to be refined, for example, similar to the minimum difference required at block 770 of FIG. 7. This difference may be a fixed value or may be a function of the number of stimuli presented in the refinement method 780a, for example.

If it is determined at block 860 that the refinement criteria are not met, the method 780a returns to block 820 where an additional stimulus is selected from the category to be refined. This process can be repeated as necessary to meet the refinement criteria. Note that the accuracy of the assessment increases as the number of presented stimuli increases.

On the other hand, if it is determined at block 860 that the refinement criteria have been met, the method 780a proceeds to block 899, and the results of the refinement return to the method 700 of FIG. 7.

9 is a flow chart illustrating another exemplary refinement method in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention. The method 780b begins with an electronic presentation of a set of stimuli to a subject (block 910). Stimuli include photographs, diagrams, sketches and other media. In certain embodiments, the stimulus is a word pair. The set of stimuli includes two or more stimuli that the subject selects. In the exemplary embodiment described below with reference to FIGS. 3 and 5A, each set includes four word pairs.

At block 920, the question is presented to the subject. The presentation of a question and the presentation of a set of stimuli can be done simultaneously or in reverse order. The question is designed to allow the subject to select one of the stimulus sets (block 930).

At block 940, a determination is made as to whether further selection from the subject among the stimulus sets is required. If it is determined that further selection is required, the method 780b returns to block 920. For example, in an exemplary embodiment with four word pairs in a stimulus set, additional selection may be required to determine the relative ordering of the remaining stimuli after the subject has selected one stimulus. On the other hand, if it is determined that no further selection is required, the method 780b proceeds to block 950. In an exemplary embodiment, for example with four word pairs in a stimulus set, one stimulus may remain unselected after repeated selection. Therefore no additional choice is required for ordering.

At block 950, an assessment of the subject for the category to be refined is determined. Determination of this evaluation involves determining the stack order for the subject. Stack order indicates the evaluation of the subject. In the exemplary embodiment described above, the stack order indicates the relative ordering of various categories or phases of success / satisfaction cycles. If one subject is presented with a set of stimuli, the stacking order may be a direct mapping of word pair selection. Thus, where refinement is required between the "INTERACTOR" and "CONCLUDER" categories, the relative placement of these categories within the stacking order can be used as an assessment of the subject for these categories.

In block 960 it is determined whether the refinement criteria have been met. The refinement criteria may require, for example, the reproducibility of the particular relative placement of the categories to be refined in the stack order, or relative placement in successive stack orders. In one embodiment, the refinement criteria may require that the categories to be refined be the same relative arrangement in two consecutive stack orders. For example, where refinement is required between the "interacter" and "finalizer" categories, the refinement criteria may be applied when the "interacter" category is placed at a higher level than the "completer" category in three consecutive stack orders. Can be satisfied.

If it is determined at block 960 that the refinement criteria have not been met, the method 780b returns to block 910 where an additional set of stimuli is presented. On the other hand, if the refinement criterion is determined at block 960, then the method 780b proceeds to block 999 and then back to block 760 of FIG.

In certain embodiments, a set of stimuli of the present invention may be presented to a subject on a remote computer by a web server. Such a system is shown in FIG. The system 1000 includes a user device 1010 configured to communicate with a web server 1020 via a communication network 1030. The user device may be any device, such as a desktop or laptop computer. In other embodiments, user device 1010 may be a portable or wireless device such as a wireless telephone, personal digital assistant (PDA) or other handheld device.

Web server 1020 may be any computing device having server software, for example. Accordingly, the user device 1010 and the web server 1020 may communicate through a server-client relationship. The web server 1020 may be provided with software configured to present the user device 1010 with stimuli and questions displayed on a monitor connected to or connected to the user device 1010.

Communication between the user device 1010 and the web server 1020 may be facilitated via a direct link. In the illustrated embodiment, the user device 1010 and the web server 1020 communicate via a communication network 1030. The communication network 1030 may be a private communication network or a public communication network. In one embodiment, communication network 1030 is a public switched telephone network (PSTN). In another embodiment, communication network 1030 is a network of computers, such as the Internet. In one embodiment, the communication between the user device 1010 and the web server 1020 is encrypted by means known in the art, such as a secure hypertext transfer protocol.

Thus, FIG. 10 provides a front-end system 1000 that allows a subject to access evaluation software via a web server 1020. 11 shows a complementary back-end system 1100 for performing subject assessment. The back end system 1100 includes an assessment engine 1110 for controlling the management of the assessment. The evaluation engine 1110 includes software for managing and evaluating evaluations. The components of the software are shown by way of example in FIGS. 7-9 and are described in more detail herein.

The back end system 1100 includes a user interface 1120 for providing an interface through which the subject can interact with the assessment engine 1110. User interface 1120 may be configured to present a graphical user interface on user device 1010 to the subject of FIG. 10. User interface 1120 may be configured to provide graphics, text, data, audio or video data to a subject, and may be configured to receive input from a user through one or more input devices such as, for example, a keyboard, mouse, microphone, or camera. Can be.

11 shows a bidirectional communication link between web server 1020 and evaluation engine 1110. Such a communication link may be direct, indirect or through a network. The back end system 1100 includes a database of stimuli 1130 that store stimuli to be presented to a subject. The stimulus database 1130 may include stimuli in the form of a table, list, or database. Moreover, the database of stimuli 1130 may be configured to be updated or changed, for example via administrator input. Such updates or changes may be necessary to include additional stimuli or to delete existing stimuli.

The user database 1140 is provided for storing information about the subject or client. In this regard, the subject may include an individual, group or entity. Similarly, clients can include entities such as individuals, groups, or companies. Each client can be associated with one or more targets. This database may, for example, contain information about the subject or client evaluated or registered for evaluation.

The back end system 1100 may also include a report generator 1150. The report generator 1150 may be configured to receive evaluation results from the subject or to receive raw responses, eg, to generate an assessment report tailored to the subject and / or client. This report may contain text, graphics, or other forms of information related to the assessment. In one embodiment, the subject material provided by the report generator is identified by comparing the evaluation results from the subject with the subject data library referenced by the characteristic energy level of the phase of the success / satisfaction cycle.

Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the various modules shown in FIG. 11, including the evaluation engine 1110, user interface 1120, and report generator 1150, may be implemented as one software module or further separated into additional submodules. . Moreover, various modules may be implemented as software, hardware or firmware. Furthermore, the stimulus database 1130 and the user database 1140 may be implemented, for example, as a list, table, or database, and may be stored in various memory devices known in the art.

In another aspect of the invention, the subject assessment may include a time for the subject to respond to the stimulus. In this regard, the system (eg, the server managing the assessment) can measure the elapsed time between the presentation of the stimulus and the receipt of the response from the subject. Elapsed time may be important as this may reflect the accuracy of the reaction. For example, a short elapsed time may indicate that the subject is very confident in the response, and a long elapsed time may indicate low confidence.

Elapsed time can be included in the evaluation in several ways. For example, in one embodiment, once the subject has completed responses to all assessment stimuli, the elapsed time for each response can be compared to the average elapsed time for all responses by the subject. In this way, the elapsed time factor is normalized to account for problems related to the subject's ability to respond faster or slower to the stimulus.

In other embodiments, a value may be assigned to each reaction, which value may be affected by the elapsed time for that reaction. For example, this value can be determined by applying a predetermined multiplier depending on the elapsed time to the default value for the response. In one embodiment this multiplier is between 0 and 1. The shorter the elapsed time, the closer the multiplier is to 1; the longer the elapsed time, the closer the multiplier will be to zero. In this regard, low confidence responses are substantially less important, and high confidence responses are weighted accordingly.

A statistical analysis can then be performed to determine the assessment. Statistical analysis can be performed on the values of the responses that determine the assessment or on the elapsed time for each response.

Once an assessment is determined, the server managing the assessment can access a database of narratives corresponding to various assessments. The narrative corresponding to the assessment determined for the subject can then be selected and stored in memory, presented to the subject, or transmitted to another person or entity, for example via e-mail.

In another aspect, embodiments of the invention may provide an assessment of the relationship between two or more individuals. For example, the interaction between husband and wife can be evaluated based on the evaluation of each individual. Various relationships can be mentioned in this regard. In addition to couples, for example, relationships between two or more partners in a business venture, teacher-student relationships, or many other relationships can be evaluated. Moreover, such relationship assessment can be applied to the specific circumstances for such a role. For example, a relationship assessment can be provided to a husband and wife in a romantic setting (as a couple) or in a business setting (business partner).

In this regard, two or more subjects may be presented with the foregoing assessment. Specifically, each subject is presented with a set of two or more stimuli as shown in FIGS. 5A-5C. The subject makes a selection and this response is received by the server, for example, managing the assessment. This is repeated by further stimulation on the subject until the assessment of the subject can be determined in one or more characteristic categories or phases. The same applies to each other object.

In this way, a cartelistic category evaluation was determined for each subject. For example, in the case of two subjects, subject A and subject B, subject A may be determined as follows.

Strategic Phase: Dominant

Motivation Phase: High Select

Analysis phase: preferential

Activity Phase: Select Altitude

On the other hand, subject B was determined as follows.

Strategic Phase: Dominant

Motivation Phase: Low Select

Analysis phase: preferential

Activity Phase: Stress

Based on this characteristic category evaluation, the management server accesses a database containing dyads and corresponding narratives. An exemplary diagram for the diamond is shown in FIG. 12. Diagram 1200 shows a list of some diamonds for a two party relationship. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that such diamonds can also be applied to relationships involving any number of parties. Moreover, the term "diamond" is used herein generically and refers to a set of descriptors for two or more parties.

Referring now to FIG. 12, diagram 1200 includes a list of diamonds, such as diamond 1210, where each diamond contains two descriptors 1212, 1214. Each descriptor includes four location slots, each location slot corresponding to a different characteristic category. For example, in the diagram shown in FIG. 12, the first diamond set 1202 corresponds to the strategy phase, so each descriptor includes an entry in the first slot. Similarly, second set of diamonds 1204 corresponds to the motivation phase, and thus the descriptor includes an entry in the second slot. The third diamond set 1206 corresponds to the analysis phase and the fourth diamond set 1208 corresponds to the activity phase.

In the embodiment shown in FIG. 12, an entry is provided in only one slot in each diamond descriptor, and the remaining three slots are blank. In this way, the relationship assessment of the relationship between the objects is evaluated using one characteristic category assessment at a time. As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, multi-dimensional assessments can be made through analysis of two or more characteristic categories at a time within the scope of the present invention.

Referring back to the examples of Subject A and Subject B, their characteristic category evaluations can be used to select a diamond for each of the four characteristic categories. The diamonds 1222, 1224, 1226, 1228 are selected according to the characteristic category evaluation described above. Each diamond in this database corresponds to a narrative developed by an expert. Appropriate narratives for each characteristic category can be retrieved from this database and output to the object, manager or other entity. Alternatively, these narratives can be stored for future reference.

The narrative of the relationship provides the role assignment and environment description of the assessment. In this regard, the database may include independent diamonds for different relationships. For example, one set of diamonds may be suitable for a manager-employee relationship, and the other set may be suitable for a teacher-employee relationship.

The foregoing description of the embodiments of the invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise form disclosed, and modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings and are intended to be obtained from practice of the invention. The above embodiments are selected and described in order to explain the principles of the present invention and its practical application so that those skilled in the art can use the present invention in various embodiments or in various modifications to suit particular applications. It is intended that the scope of the invention only be defined by the claims appended hereto and their equivalents.

Claims (122)

A system for performing an assessment of a subject, A server selected in real time and configured to present to the subject at least one stimulus corresponding to a characteristic category and to receive the subject's response to each of the presented stimuli Including, The server is further configured to determine an assessment of the subject based on the response, And wherein said assessment is determined based at least in part on elapsed time for said response. The method of claim 1, And wherein said assessment is determined based on a comparison of elapsed time for each response with an average elapsed time for all responses from said subject. The method of claim 1, The server is configured to assign a value to each response based on the elapsed time for the response. The method of claim 3, And the value is determined by applying a multiplier that is dependent on the elapsed time to a default value. The method of claim 4, wherein The server is configured to perform a statistical analysis on the values of the response to determine the assessment. The method of claim 3, The server is configured to perform a statistical analysis on the values of the response to determine the assessment. The method of claim 1, The server is configured to perform a statistical analysis on the elapsed time of the response to determine the assessment. The method of claim 1, Each stimulus comprises a word-pair. The method of claim 1, Further comprising a database of narratives corresponding to one or more assessments, The server is configured to output a narrative corresponding to the determined assessment from the database. As a method of performing the evaluation of a subject, a) presenting to the subject a first set of two or more stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; And d) outputting an assessment of the subject based on the response, wherein the assessment is determined based at least in part on elapsed time for the response Target assessment method comprising a. The method of claim 10, And wherein said evaluation is determined based on a comparison of elapsed time for each response with an average elapsed time for all responses from the subject. The method of claim 10, And assigning a value to each response based on the elapsed time for the response. The method of claim 12, And wherein said value is determined by applying a multiplier dependent on said elapsed time to a default value. The method of claim 13, And wherein said assessment is determined by performing a statistical analysis on the values of said response to determine said assessment. The method of claim 12, And wherein said assessment is determined by performing a statistical analysis on the values of said response to determine said assessment. The method of claim 10, And wherein said assessment is determined by performing a statistical analysis on said elapsed time of said response to determine said assessment. The method of claim 10, Wherein each stimulus comprises a word pair. The method of claim 10, Outputting the evaluation, Selecting a narrative from a database of narratives corresponding to the determined assessment; And Outputting the selected narrative Target assessment method comprising a. a) presenting to the subject a first set of two or more stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; And d) outputting an assessment of the subject based on the response, wherein the assessment is determined based at least in part on elapsed time for the response And a machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. The method of claim 19, Wherein said evaluation is determined based on a comparison of elapsed time for each response with an average elapsed time for all responses from the subject. The method of claim 19, Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method step of assigning a value to each response based on the elapsed time for the response. The method of claim 21, Said value being determined by applying a multiplier dependent on said elapsed time to a default value. The method of claim 22, Wherein said assessment is determined by performing a statistical analysis on the values of said response to determine said assessment. The method of claim 21, Wherein said assessment is determined by performing a statistical analysis on the values of said response to determine said assessment. The method of claim 19, Said evaluation being determined by performing a statistical analysis on said elapsed time of said response to determine said evaluation. The method of claim 19, Each product stimulus contains a word pair. The method of claim 19, The machine readable program code for causing a machine to output the evaluation is: Selecting a narrative from a database of narratives corresponding to the determined assessment; And And machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the step of outputting the selected narrative. A system for performing a relationship assessment of two or more objects, A server, selected in real time, configured to present to each subject at least one stimulus corresponding to the characteristic category, and receive a response by each subject for each presented stimulus, wherein the server is configured for one or more characteristic categories. Further determine a characteristic category assessment of each subject based on the responses; And Database of diamonds, each diamond based on a characteristic category evaluation of each object and corresponding to a relationship evaluation of the relationship between the objects Target relationship evaluation performing system comprising a. The method of claim 28, A system for performing a subject relationship assessment wherein each stimulus comprises a word pair. The method of claim 28, The database of diamonds includes narratives corresponding to one or more relationship evaluations, The server is configured to output a narrative corresponding to the relationship evaluation from the database. The method of claim 28, Each diamond comprises a characteristic category assessment of at least one of the characteristic categories of strategy, motivation, analysis and activity. A method of performing a relationship assessment of two or more subjects, a) presenting to the subject a first set of two or more stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; d) determining a characteristic category assessment of the subject based on the response to one or more characteristic categories; e) repeating steps a) to d) for each of the remaining subjects; And f) outputting a relationship assessment of the relationship between the subjects based on the characteristic category assessment determined for each subject; Target relationship evaluation method comprising a. 33. The method of claim 32, Wherein each stimulus comprises a word pair. 33. The method of claim 32, Outputting the relationship evaluation, Selecting a diamond from a database of diamonds including narratives corresponding to one or more relationship evaluations; And Outputting a narrative from the database corresponding to the relationship evaluation Target relationship evaluation method comprising a. The method of claim 34, wherein Wherein each diamond comprises characteristic category evaluation for at least one of the characteristic categories of strategy, motivation, analysis and activity. a) presenting to the subject a first set of two or more stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category; c) repeating steps a) and b) with additional sets of stimuli as needed; d) determining a characteristic category assessment of the subject based on the response to one or more characteristic categories; e) repeating steps a) to d) for each of the remaining subjects; And f) outputting a relationship assessment of the relationship between the subjects based on the characteristic category assessment determined for each subject; A machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. The method of claim 36, Each product stimulus contains a word pair. The method of claim 36, The machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform outputting the relationship evaluation includes: Selecting a diamond from a database of diamonds including narratives corresponding to one or more relationship evaluations; And Outputting a narrative from the database corresponding to the relationship evaluation A machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. The method of claim 36, Each diamond includes a characteristic category evaluation of at least one of the characteristic categories of strategy, motivation, analysis, and activity. As a method of performing the evaluation of a subject, a) presenting to the subject two or more stimuli of the first set, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; And b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category Target assessment method comprising a. The method of claim 40, A method of performing a subject assessment in which at least three stimuli are presented in step a). The method of claim 40, A method of performing a subject assessment in which at least 4 stimuli are presented in step a). The method of claim 40, A method of performing a subject assessment in which step a) more than 4 stimuli are presented. The method of claim 40, Further presenting four stimuli in step a), Wherein each of said different characteristic categories corresponds to a different phase in a success / satisfaction cycle. The method of claim 40, Presenting a question to the subject in step a) and receiving a selection by the subject in response to the question in step b). The method of claim 40, c) presenting to the subject a second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first characteristic category; And d) receiving a selection by the subject of the second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a second characteristic category Target assessment method further comprising. 47. The method of claim 46 wherein e) presenting to the subject a third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first and second characteristic categories; And f) receiving a selection by the subject of the third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a third characteristic category Target assessment method further comprising. The method of claim 47, Obtaining a selection order of the characteristic categories. The method of claim 48, Repeating steps a) to f) with the further set of stimuli. The method of claim 40, The receiving step further comprises a response time criteria. 51. The method of claim 50, The response time criterion is in the range of 1 to 45 seconds. The method of claim 40, Steps a) and b) further comprise communicating with the object over a network. The method of claim 52, wherein And wherein said network is the Internet. The method of claim 40, Wherein each stimulus comprises a word pair. As a method of performing the evaluation of a subject, a) presenting the subject with two to four stimuli and a question, each stimulus corresponding to a phase in a success / satisfaction cycle; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli in response to the question; And c) repeating steps a) and b) until the order of selection of each of the phases is determined; Target assessment method comprising a. The method of claim 55, d) processing the order of selection to determine an assessment of the subject. The method of claim 55, Wherein each stimulus comprises a word pair. The method of claim 55, The receiving step further comprises a response time criteria. The method of claim 58, The response time criterion is in the range of 1 to 45 seconds. a) presenting to the subject a first set of two or more stimuli, at least two of the stimuli corresponding to different characteristic categories; And b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli corresponding to a first characteristic category A machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. The method of claim 60, Further comprising machine readable program code for causing the machine to present four stimuli in step a), each of said different characteristic categories corresponding to a different phase in a success / satisfaction cycle. The method of claim 60, Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to present a question to the subject in step a) and to receive a selection by the subject in response to the question in step b). The method of claim 60, c) presenting to the subject a second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first characteristic category; And d) receiving a selection by the subject of the second set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a second characteristic category Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. The method of claim 63, wherein e) presenting to the subject a third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to characteristic categories different from the first and second characteristic categories; And f) receiving a selection by the subject of the third set of two or more stimuli corresponding to a third characteristic category Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. 65. The method of claim 64, Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to obtain a selection order of said characteristic categories. The method of claim 65, Further comprising machine readable program code for causing the machine to repeat steps a) to f) with an additional set of stimuli. The method of claim 60, Steps a) and b) further comprise communication with the subject over a network. The method of claim 67, Said network is the Internet. The method of claim 60, Each product stimulus contains a word pair. a) presenting to the subject two to four stimuli and a question, each stimulus corresponding to a phase in a success / satisfaction cycle; b) receiving a selection by the subject of the stimuli in response to the question; And c) repeating steps a) and b) until the order of selection of each of the phases is determined; A machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform the method steps of the method. The method of claim 70, d) machine readable program code means for causing a machine to perform a method step of processing the selection order to determine an assessment of the subject. The method of claim 70, Each product stimulus contains a word pair. A system for performing evaluation of a subject, A server configured to present two or more stimuli to the subject on a computer, each of which corresponds to a different characteristic category Including, And the server is further configured to receive a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli. The method of claim 73, Each stimulus includes a word pair. A computer-implemented method of evaluating an assessment of a subject, a) presenting to the subject at least one stimulus selected in real time and corresponding to a characteristic category; And b) evaluating the assessment of the subject based on the response received from the subject for each of the presented stimuli Computer implemented method comprising a. 76. The method of claim 75, Step a) further comprises randomly selecting the at least one stimulus from a database of stimuli. 76. The method of claim 75, And the stimulus is a word pair. 76. The method of claim 75, Step a) further comprises formulating the overall assessment by selecting a plurality of stimuli. The method of claim 78, And the plurality of stimuli comprises at least one stimulus corresponding to each of a plurality of different characteristic categories. 76. The method of claim 75, c) determining whether the assessment assessed in step b) requires refinement between two or more of said characteristic categories. The method of claim 80, d) presenting additional stimuli corresponding to each of the two or more of the characteristic categories. 82. The method of claim 81 wherein e) repeating steps b) to d) until the desired level of refinement is achieved. The method of claim 80, d) presenting to the subject two or more stimuli, each stimulus corresponding to a different said characteristic category; e) receiving a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli; And f) repeating steps d) and e) to obtain a selection order of each of said different characteristic categories Computer implemented method further comprising. 84. The method of claim 83, g) repeating steps c) to f) until the desired level of refinement is achieved. 76. The method of claim 75, And the response received from the subject further comprises a response time criterion. 86. The method of claim 85, The response time criteria is in the range of 1 to 45 seconds. a) presenting to the subject a first set of three or more stimuli when the assessment of the subject requires refinement between two or more characteristic categories of the assessment, wherein each stimulus of the three or more stimuli of the first set is different Corresponds to characteristic category-; b) receiving a selection by the subject of one of the stimuli; c) presenting to the subject two or more stimuli of the second set, wherein each stimulus of the two or more stimuli of the second set corresponds to a different characteristic category; And d) repeating steps b) and c) to obtain a selection order of each of said different characteristic categories Program product comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to perform a method comprising a. As a way of conducting a team assessment of members, a) providing process maps of the members of the team; b) overlaying the process maps of the members of the team; And c) evaluating the team by providing a process map comprising the nested process maps of the members of the team Team evaluation method comprising a. 89. The method of claim 88, Establishing a process map of the virtual members of the team; The method, d) identifying deficiencies or excesses in each characteristic category of the team assessment; And e) assuring that each of said characteristic categories of said process map of said virtual member of said team compensates for said deficiency or excess of said nested process maps of said member of said team; Building the process map of the virtual member Team evaluation method comprising a. 91. The method of claim 89 wherein And wherein said virtual member of said team fulfills a particular role or relationship within said team. 91. The method of claim 90, Further comprising identifying candidate team members, The method, f) comparing the process map of the virtual member of the team with a plurality of stored assessment data obtained for candidate team members; g) identifying a match between the virtual team member process map and the stored assessment data; And h) identifying the candidate team member associated with the stored assessment data. Team evaluation method comprising a. A system for performing evaluation of a subject, A server selected in real time and configured to present to the subject at least one stimulus corresponding to the characteristic category and to receive a response by the subject to each of the presented stimuli Including, The server is further configured to determine an assessment of the subject based on the response. 92. The method of claim 92, The server is further configured to determine whether the assessment requires refinement between two or more feature categories, and wherein the server presents additional stimuli corresponding to each of the two or more feature categories when the refinement is needed. More configured target assessment system. As a way to coach a client by a coach, a) evaluating the client current process map to provide a client assessment; And b) detailing the client evaluation to the client Client coaching method comprising a. 95. The method of claim 94, Comparing the client current process map and a coach process map to provide a coach / client evaluation that determines how the client and the coach naturally like to collaborate. 97. The method of claim 95, And detailing the coach / client evaluation to the client. 97. The method of claim 95, Instructing the client in detail the behavioral changes of the client and the coach to improve a coach / client relationship. 97. The method of claim 95, And explaining the client's learning report and the coach's teaching report in detail to the client. 99. The method of claim 98, And detailing a change in the learning style of the client and the teaching style of the coach to the client in order to achieve more efficient work completion of the client. 95. The method of claim 94, Comparing the client current process map with a client aspiration map to provide an ideal client assessment. 101. The method of claim 100, And detailing the ideal client assessment to the client. 101. The method of claim 100, And detailing the behavior change of the client to the client to minimize the difference between the client current process map and the client anomaly process map. 95. The method of claim 94, Comparing the client current process map with a peer process map to determine how to provide a peer / client assessment to make the client and the colleague like to work as a team. 103. The method of claim 103, And detailing the peer / client assessment to the client. 103. The method of claim 103, And detailing behavioral changes of the client and the colleague to the client in order to increase success and satisfaction in performing the work by the client and the colleague. 95. The method of claim 94, Comparing the client current process map with a task / project process map to provide a task / client evaluation. 107. The method of claim 106, And detailing the task / client evaluation to the client. 107. The method of claim 106, And detailing the behavior change of the client to the client to minimize the energy level difference between the client current process map and the task / project process map. 95. The method of claim 94, Instructing the client in detail of the client's work preferences. 95. The method of claim 94, Explaining to the client the learning preferences of the client in detail. 95. The method of claim 94, Visualizing how the client prefers to spend time at work. 95. The method of claim 94, Visualizing how the client prefers to consume energy focused on a task. 97. The method of claim 95, Incorporating the client assessment and the coach / client assessment into an archive database. 113. The method of claim 113, And annotating the response of the coach and the client within an archive database. 113. The method of claim 113, Receiving editing feedback by the client prior to entering the client evaluation into the archive database. 113. The method of claim 113, Reviewing the archive database by the coach and the client to identify success and failure of a coach-client relationship. 116. The method of claim 115, Repeating steps a) and b) and comparing the client assessment with the client assessment in the archive database to provide an updated client assessment. Program product comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to evaluate a client current process map to provide a client evaluation. 118. The method of claim 118 wherein Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map and a coach process map to provide a coach / client evaluation. 118. The method of claim 118 wherein Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map and a client target map to provide an ideal client assessment. 118. The method of claim 118 wherein Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map with a peer process map to provide peer / client evaluation. 118. The method of claim 118 wherein Further comprising machine readable program code for causing a machine to compare the client current process map with a task / project process map to provide a task / client evaluation.

Images