KR20230146373A - Point-based team member evaluation method and device for project management - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a point-based team member evaluation method and device for project management. The method is a plan for managing specific tasks during the project - the plan is a plan in which the specific tasks are assigned and task participants assigned to a team consisting of - creating a; generating at least one note in which work details related to the specific work are recorded by the work participants according to the plan; Receiving an evaluation score or penalty score for the plan from an evaluator of the plan when the period of the plan has elapsed; and distributing the evaluation score or the penalty score to the task participants when a distribution request for the evaluation score or the penalty score is received.

Description

Point-based team member evaluation method and device for project management {POINT-BASED TEAM MEMBER EVALUATION METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT}

The present invention relates to team member evaluation management technology, and more specifically, to receive evaluations of the plan created during the project progress and distribute the evaluation results to team members who participated in the work of the plan to improve the efficiency of plan evaluation according to work performance. This relates to a point-based team member evaluation method and device for improving project management.

As the size of the project gradually increases and the structure of the project becomes more complex, the number of cases in which many participants participate simultaneously in a single project to perform work is gradually increasing.

Additionally, during the course of a project, various tasks can be created and managed independently, and if necessary, tasks with the same goal can be linked and integratedly managed on a plan basis.

When the plan's goals are achieved as a result of each task in the plan, the plan can be terminated, and work evaluation of participants in the plan can be performed. However, given that the plan may include a variety of tasks and work performance may vary depending on the characteristics of each task or the skill level of the participant, it may be difficult to ensure objectivity in the evaluation of participants who participated in the plan.

Not only is it difficult to apply the same standards to the evaluation of the plan and the evaluation of each work participant, but also it is difficult to accurately quantify the contribution of each work participant. Therefore, a method for effectively evaluating the plan and each participant may be required. .

Korean Patent Publication No. 10-2018-0109785 (2018.10.08)

An embodiment of the present invention is a point-based system for project management that improves the efficiency of plan evaluation according to work performance by receiving an evaluation of the plan created during the project progress and distributing the evaluation results to team members who participated in the work of the plan. Provide and provide team member evaluation methods and devices.

Among embodiments, a point-based team member evaluation method for project management is a plan for managing specific tasks during the project - the plan is a team to which the specific tasks are assigned and composed of task participants. ) assigned to - creating a; generating at least one note in which work details related to the specific work are recorded by the work participants according to the plan; Receiving an evaluation score or penalty score for the plan from an evaluator of the plan when the period of the plan has elapsed; and distributing the evaluation score or the penalty score to the task participants when a distribution request for the evaluation score or the penalty score is received.

The evaluation score or the penalty score may be defined as a fractional expression of the second score corresponding to the evaluation amount or penalty amount for the first score proportional to the workload.

The step of creating the plan may include determining one of the work participants as a team leader of the plan and determining the rest as team members of the plan.

The step of generating the at least one note may include generating the at least one note at preset time intervals according to the work plan of the plan.

The step of creating at least one note may include providing a note interface for writing notes to the work participants at each time interval.

The step of creating at least one note may include canceling provision of the note interface when writing of the note is not started for more than a preset time based on the time of provision of the note interface.

The receiving step includes a first step of receiving the evaluation score of the team assigned to the plan, a second step of distributing the evaluation score of the team to the team leader and team members, and distributing the penalty score to the team leader and team members. At least one of the third steps of distributing may be optionally included.

The distributing step may include providing a list of distribution targets among the task participants through the distribution request interface.

The distributing step includes receiving a distribution ratio for each of the distribution recipients through the interface; calculating a distribution score distributed to each distribution recipient by applying the distribution ratio to the evaluation score or the penalty score; And it may include updating the distribution score by reflecting the distribution score in the personal evaluation score of each distribution target.

The distributing step may include calculating a distribution score in fractional expression by applying the distribution ratio to each of first and second scores of the evaluation score or the penalty score.

The distributing step may include adding a first score of the distribution score to a first score of the personal evaluation score and adding a second score of the distribution score to a second score of the personal evaluation score.

The distributing step may include providing a notification regarding the distribution recipient to the evaluator of the plan when the individual evaluation score of each distribution recipient falls below a preset score.

Among embodiments, a point-based team member evaluation device for project management includes a memory and a processor electrically connected to the memory, and the processor generates a plan for managing a specific task during the project. And, create at least one note recording work details related to the specific task and store it in the plan, and when the record of the at least one note is completed, receive an evaluation score for the plan from the evaluator, , and is implemented to distribute the evaluation score to authors who wrote the at least one note.

The disclosed technology can have the following effects. However, since it does not mean that a specific embodiment must include all of the following effects or only the following effects, the scope of rights of the disclosed technology should not be understood as being limited thereby.

A point-based team member evaluation method and device for project management according to an embodiment of the present invention receives an evaluation of the plan created during the project progress and distributes the evaluation results to team members who participated in the work of the plan to improve work performance. The efficiency of plan evaluation can be improved.

1 is a diagram explaining a team member evaluation system according to the present invention.
FIG. 2 is a diagram explaining the system configuration of the team member evaluation device of FIG. 1.
FIG. 3 is a diagram explaining the functional configuration of the processor of FIG. 2.
Figure 4 is a flowchart explaining a point-based team member evaluation method for project management according to the present invention.
Figure 5 is a diagram explaining the plan creation process according to the present invention.
Figures 6 and 7 are diagrams illustrating the evaluation/penalty score distribution process according to the present invention.
Figure 8 is a diagram illustrating various embodiments of a team member evaluation and distribution process according to the present invention.

Since the description of the present invention is only an example for structural or functional explanation, the scope of the present invention should not be construed as limited by the examples described in the text. In other words, since the embodiments can be modified in various ways and can have various forms, the scope of rights of the present invention should be understood to include equivalents that can realize the technical idea. In addition, the purpose or effect presented in the present invention does not mean that a specific embodiment must include all or only such effects, so the scope of the present invention should not be understood as limited thereby.

Meanwhile, the meaning of the terms described in this application should be understood as follows.

Terms such as “first” and “second” are used to distinguish one component from another component, and the scope of rights should not be limited by these terms. For example, a first component may be named a second component, and similarly, the second component may also be named a first component.

When a component is referred to as being “connected” to another component, it should be understood that it may be directly connected to the other component, but that other components may exist in between. On the other hand, when a component is referred to as being “directly connected” to another component, it should be understood that there are no other components in between. Meanwhile, other expressions that describe the relationship between components, such as "between" and "immediately between" or "neighboring" and "directly neighboring" should be interpreted similarly.

Singular expressions should be understood to include plural expressions unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, and terms such as “comprise” or “have” refer to implemented features, numbers, steps, operations, components, parts, or them. It is intended to specify the existence of a combination, and should be understood as not excluding in advance the possibility of the presence or addition of one or more other features, numbers, steps, operations, components, parts, or combinations thereof.

For each step, identification codes (e.g., a, b, c, etc.) are used for convenience of explanation. The identification codes do not explain the order of each step, and each step clearly follows a specific order in context. Unless specified, events may occur differently from the specified order. That is, each step may occur in the same order as specified, may be performed substantially simultaneously, or may be performed in the opposite order.

The present invention can be implemented as computer-readable code on a computer-readable recording medium, and the computer-readable recording medium includes all types of recording devices that store data that can be read by a computer system. . Examples of computer-readable recording media include ROM, RAM, CD-ROM, magnetic tape, floppy disk, and optical data storage devices. Additionally, the computer-readable recording medium can be distributed across computer systems connected to a network, so that computer-readable code can be stored and executed in a distributed manner.

All terms used herein, unless otherwise defined, have the same meaning as commonly understood by a person of ordinary skill in the field to which the present invention pertains. Terms defined in commonly used dictionaries should be interpreted as consistent with the meaning they have in the context of the related technology, and cannot be interpreted as having an ideal or excessively formal meaning unless clearly defined in the present application.

1 is a diagram explaining a team member evaluation system according to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 1, the team member evaluation system 100 may include a plurality of user terminals 110 and a team member evaluation device 130.

The user terminal 110 may correspond to a computing device operated by the user. For example, the user terminal 110 may be implemented as a desktop, laptop, tablet PC, or smartphone, but is not necessarily limited thereto and may be implemented as a variety of devices.

There may be more than one user terminal 110, and in this case, it may be one of the first user terminal 110a, the second user terminal 110b, and the third user terminal 110c, or it may include one or more of them. For convenience, the user terminal 110 used by the first user is the first user terminal 110a, the user terminal 110 used by the second user is the second user terminal 110b, and the user terminal 110 used by the third user is 110 may be referred to as a third user terminal 110c, etc.

In an embodiment of the present invention, a plurality of users may be included in one or more user groups. One or more user groups may be referred to as a first user group, a second user group, a third user group, etc. Meanwhile, one user may be included in one or more user groups at the same time.

For example, a user group may be formed in correspondence to a project or plan. In other words, multiple users can participate in a common project or plan and perform related tasks. At this time, one overall project may exist, and the entire project may include multiple plans that proceed independently. Each plan can be matched to a specific task and created to manage that task, and users who participate in the plan can perform the task or create work notes, files, etc. that record work details related to the task.

In the work note, various work history (or work contents) related to a specific task can be recorded and managed by being included in a plan corresponding to the work plan established to achieve a specific goal. For example, when a work plan for a week is established and managed as a plan, a work note recording daily work details can be created and inserted into the plan. Here, each work participant participating in the plan may be given the obligation to write work notes. Therefore, if work notes are not written even though they are required to do so, the work participant who is obligated to write work notes may receive a negative evaluation related to the work.

In one embodiment, at least one of the user terminals 110 may be a mobile terminal and may be connected to the team member evaluation device 130 through cellular communication or Wi-Fi communication. In another embodiment, at least one of the user terminals 110 may be a desktop and may be connected to the team member evaluation device 130 via the Internet.

The team member evaluation device 130 may correspond to a computing device that can be connected to at least one user terminal 110 through a network. In one embodiment, the team member evaluation device 130 may manage at least one user group in which other users associated with one user are members, that is, work participants. For example, the team member evaluation device 130 can manage work participants participating in a plan by grouping them into one team. In other words, when a plan with a specific task is created, a team consisting of multiple task participants may be assigned to the plan to manage the task.

In one embodiment, the team member evaluation device 130 may be connected to the user terminal 110 through a dedicated agent installed on the user terminal 110. Here, the dedicated agent may correspond to an agent program, which is software that, when installed on the user terminal 110, allows the user terminal 110 and the team member evaluation device 130 to interact with each other under the approval of the user terminal 110. .

Meanwhile, the connection and combination between the team member evaluation device 130 and the user terminal 110 described herein may correspond to one embodiment, and may be changed into various forms within a typical range according to various operating environments. Of course, it can be applied.

FIG. 2 is a diagram explaining the system configuration of the team member evaluation device of FIG. 1.

Referring to FIG. 2 , the team member evaluation device 130 may include a processor 210, a memory 230, a user input/output unit 250, and a network input/output unit 270.

The processor 210 can execute a point-based team member evaluation procedure for project management according to the present invention, and manage the memory 230 that is read or written in this process, and the volatile memory in the memory 230. The synchronization time between and non-volatile memory can be scheduled.

The processor 210 can control the overall operation of the team member evaluation device 130 and is electrically connected to the memory 230, the user input/output unit 250, and the network input/output unit 270 to control the data flow between them. You can. The processor 210 may be implemented as a Central Processing Unit (CPU) or a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) of the team member evaluation device 130. More specific operation details of the processor 210 will be described in detail later with reference to FIG. 3.

The memory 230 may be implemented as a non-volatile memory such as a solid state disk (SSD) or a hard disk drive (HDD) and may include an auxiliary memory used to store all data required for the team member evaluation device 130, It may include a main memory implemented as volatile memory such as RAM (Random Access Memory). In this way, the memory 230 can be implemented as volatile and non-volatile memory, and if implemented as a non-volatile memory, it can be implemented to be connected through a hyperlink.

The user input/output unit 250 includes an environment for receiving user input and an environment for outputting specific information to the user, for example, a mouse, trackball, touch pad, graphic tablet, scanner, touch screen, keyboard, or pointing. It may include an input device that includes or is connected to an adapter such as a device, and an output device that includes an adapter such as a monitor or touch screen. In one embodiment, the user input/output unit 250 may correspond to a computing device connected through a remote connection, and in such case, the team member evaluation device 130 may function as a server.

The network input/output unit 270 provides a communication environment for connection to the user terminal 110 through a network, for example, a local area network (LAN), a metropolitan area network (MAN), a wide area network (WAN), and It may include an adapter for communication such as VAN (Value Added Network). Additionally, the network input/output unit 270 may be implemented to provide short-range communication functions such as WiFi and Bluetooth or wireless communication functions of 4G or higher for wireless transmission of data.

FIG. 3 is a diagram explaining the functional configuration of the processor of FIG. 2.

Referring to FIG. 3, the processor 210 of the team member evaluation device 130 may include a plan creation unit 310, a note management unit 330, a plan evaluation processing unit 350, and a control unit 370 as functional components. .

At this time, the processor 210 according to an embodiment of the present invention does not need to include all of the above functional configurations at the same time, and depending on each embodiment, some of the above configurations may be omitted, or some of the above configurations or It may be implemented by optionally including all of them. Additionally, the processor 210 may be implemented as an independent module that selectively includes some of the above components, and may perform the team member evaluation method according to the present invention through interconnection between each module. Hereinafter, the operation of each component will be described in detail.

The plan creation unit 310 may create a plan for managing specific tasks while a project is in progress. To this end, the plan creation unit 310 may provide an interface for plan creation. For example, a user creating a plan can access the interface for creating a plan through a command (or menu) called ‘Create Plan’. The plan creation unit 310 may receive a request for plan creation through an interface and create a plan based on information entered along with the request. The plan created by the plan creation unit 310 can be managed as part of a project, and for this purpose, a unique identification code can be assigned to the plan. That is, the plan creation unit 310 can manage plans created in association with a project based on the identification code.

Meanwhile, if plan creation is successful, the plan creation unit 310 can assign a specific task and assign a team composed of task participants. In other words, the plan can be matched to a specific task and provide various functions for overall management of the specific task while performing the task. For example, the plan provides information necessary for managing work schedules, distributing work responsibilities, tracking and recording work progress, and can support efficient situation sharing and smooth communication between work participants through interaction with each work participant. there is. Basically, one team can be assigned to one plan, but of course it is not limited to this.

Plan information may include assigned task information and assigned team information, and task information may include information such as task content, task start and end date, task deadline, and task person in charge. Additionally, team information may include team creator, team identification code, information about team leader and team members, team evaluation information, etc. Meanwhile, the plan may have a period set according to the work plan, and the set period of the plan may correspond to the work period of the assigned task. For example, the period of the plan may be set to correspond to the start and end dates of work.

Additionally, the plan creation unit 310 may provide a dedicated chat room for communication between business participants participating in the plan. In other words, relevant business participants can participate in a dedicated chat room and share data with each other and exchange work-related conversations.

Additionally, when a plan is created, the plan creation unit 310 can manage the plan by assigning a unique identification code for plan management and inserting it into a dedicated container. In other words, a dedicated container can be a tool for integrated management of plans created during the project. The plan creation unit 310 can provide functions such as searching for plans created through a dedicated container or modifying and deleting plans, and can visualize plans in a dedicated container using tools such as a Kanban Board. It can be displayed as follows.

In one embodiment, the plan creation unit 310 may determine one of the task participants as the team leader of the plan and determine the rest as team members of the plan. The plan creation unit 310 may assign a team to each plan to enable team-based work management. A team may be composed of multiple task participants who participate in specific tasks matched to the plan, and a team leader responsible for the team may be determined from among the task participants. In other words, one team may include a team leader and the remaining team members, and the team leader may be designated by the manager (or team creator) when the team is first created, or may be randomly determined among team members according to certain conditions. When a plan is created, the plan creation unit 310 can basically determine the team leader and team members as the team leader and team members of the plan, respectively.

However, the plan creation unit 310 may decide to give priority to the work participant designated by the plan creator as the plan team leader even if the team leader exists. Meanwhile, each work participant can participate as a team member in multiple teams and may be designated as a team leader in at least one team.

The note management unit 330 may create at least one note in which work details related to a specific task are recorded by task participants according to the plan. The note management unit 330 may create a note (or work note) that records work details during the processing of work assigned to the plan. A variety of work-related records, such as task creator, task instructor, task handler, task performance period, task instruction content, processing content, and supplementary content, can be stored in the task note.

In one embodiment, the note management unit 330 may create at least one note at preset time intervals according to the plan's work plan. That is, the note management unit 330 may periodically create notes according to the work characteristics assigned to the plan, and may also create notes at each work progress stage. If periodic recording of notes is required, the note management unit 330 can determine a person in charge of writing notes among the work participants at each note writing cycle, and can enable note writing through methods such as providing a notification for note recording. It can be induced.

If the periodic writing of notes for the plan is successfully performed, it can be automatically reflected in the plan's evaluation. For example, if the periodic writing of notes is completed before the period of the plan has elapsed, a basic score related to the periodic writing of notes may be assigned to the evaluation point when evaluating the plan. In other words, the plan's evaluator can enter the plan's evaluation score while the basic score is assigned, and the right to modify the basic score may be limited.

In one embodiment, the note management unit 330 may provide a note interface for writing notes to work participants at preset time intervals. If periodic recording of notes is required, the note management unit 330 may provide a notification for note writing at each note writing cycle. Additionally, the note management unit 330 may provide a note interface for writing notes along with a notification for writing notes. The note interface may correspond to a note writing tool and may be implemented to provide various functions for note writing. Additionally, the note interface can provide a variety of pre-implemented note templates, and note writers can write notes by selecting a specific note template from the template list.

Additionally, the note management unit 330 can store a note in association with a plan when it is created, and create a unique link connecting the plan and the note. In other words, work participants can access the plan through notes, and conversely, they can also access notes through the plan. Notes belonging to a plan can be viewed and accessed through the plan's details screen, and the plan's details screen may include functions for viewing or modifying notes.

In one embodiment, the note management unit 330 may cancel provision of the note interface if writing of a note does not start for more than a preset time based on the time of provision of the note interface. The note management unit 330 may release the note interface if note writing does not start for a predetermined period of time (for example, 5 minutes) despite being notified about note writing or providing a note interface. Additionally, the note management unit 330 may treat the note as not being written for that period if note writing does not continue to start after the note interface is released. In this case, penalty points for not writing notes may be automatically reflected in the evaluation of the plan.

The plan evaluation processing unit 350 may receive an evaluation score or penalty score for the plan from the evaluator of the plan when the set period of the plan has elapsed. The plan may be changed to a state where evaluation of the plan is possible after a set period has elapsed. For example, if the plan period has elapsed, a menu for plan evaluation may be provided on the plan details screen. In addition, a menu for assigning a penalty along with plan evaluation may be provided through the plan details screen.

That is, plan evaluation can be performed by the plan evaluator, and for this purpose, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 can provide an independent evaluation interface. If an evaluator of the plan is designated, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may provide an evaluation interface through the evaluator's user terminal 110 in response to a request for evaluation of the plan. The plan's evaluator may enter an evaluation score for the plan through an evaluation interface (e.g., an evaluation screen or evaluation page, etc.). Meanwhile, the evaluation interface may be provided through a dedicated agent running on the user terminal 110, but of course, the evaluation interface is not necessarily limited thereto.

Here, the evaluation score for the plan can be entered in numerical form. In particular, the evaluation score may be defined as a fractional expression of the second score relative to the first score. Specifically, the first score corresponds to the denominator of the fraction expression and may be determined in proportion to the workload. The second score corresponds to the numerator of the fraction expression and can be determined in correspondence to the evaluation quantity. For example, the evaluation score of a plan can be expressed as '70/100', where '100' is a value proportional to the amount of work assigned to the plan, and '70' is given based on '100'. It can correspond to the evaluation value.

In addition, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 can verify the validity of the evaluation score entered through the evaluation interface, and if the evaluation score is entered incorrectly and is determined to be invalid, it can request re-entry of the evaluation score or initialize the evaluation score. there is.

Additionally, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may distribute the evaluation scores or penalty points to task participants when a distribution request for evaluation scores or penalty points is received. Since the plan is granted to the team leader, the evaluation score entered through the evaluation of the plan may basically correspond to the personal evaluation score for the team leader of the plan. If a request for distribution of evaluation scores or penalty points is entered by the plan's evaluator or distribution authority (for example, a division manager or team leader), the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may initiate an operation for distribution, and may perform distribution. An interface can be provided for this. At this time, the distribution request can be entered through the plan's evaluation interface (or evaluation screen), and can also be entered through the plan's details screen. Additionally, distribution requests may be entered independently for evaluation scores or penalty scores. The plan evaluation processing unit 350 may distribute evaluation scores or penalty points to each task participant based on the distribution ratio according to the distribution request. If this is the first distribution, an individual evaluation score may be generated for each task participant.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may receive the evaluation score of the team assigned to the plan. In another embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may distribute the team's evaluation scores to the team leader and team members or distribute penalty scores to the team leader and team members. In other words, the evaluation of the plan may correspond to the evaluation of the team that actually performed the specific tasks assigned to the plan. Accordingly, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 can match the evaluation score input according to the plan evaluation with the team evaluation score.

The plan's evaluation screen may include a menu for distributing evaluation points or penalty points, and when a distribution request is input through this, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may initiate an operation to distribute the evaluation points or penalty points. . As a result, the plan's evaluation operation is divided into a first process of evaluating the team that implemented the plan, a second process of distributing the team's evaluation scores to the team leader and team members, and a third process of distributing penalty points to the team leader and team members. It can be done. For example, the evaluation of the plan may be performed only in the first process, only in the first and second processes, in only the first and third processes, or in the first to third processes selectively.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may provide a list of distribution recipients among task participants through an interface for distribution requests. That is, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 can provide an interface for inputting a distribution request, and can automatically display distribution recipients who can distribute scores through the interface. For example, in the case of distribution of evaluation points, a list of note takers who wrote notes according to the plan may be provided through the interface, and in the case of distribution of penalty points, a list of note takers who did not write notes through the interface may be provided. This can be provided.

At this time, the distribution authority can selectively grant evaluation scores or penalty scores to distribution recipients displayed on the interface. Specifically, the distribution operation for the evaluation score or penalty score may be performed by directly inputting the distribution ratio for each distribution target. To this end, the interface may include an input window where the distribution ratio of each distribution recipient can be entered along with a list of distribution recipients. If the distribution authority does not enter the distribution ratio for a specific distribution recipient, evaluation points or penalty points may not be distributed to the distribution recipient.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 receives the distribution ratio for each distribution target through an interface, applies the distribution ratio to the evaluation score or penalty score to calculate the distribution score distributed to each distribution target, , the distribution score can be reflected and updated in the personal evaluation score of each distribution target. That is, the evaluation scores for the plan can be divided according to the distribution ratio according to the distribution request, and the divided evaluation distribution scores can be distributed to the distribution recipients. In this case, the distributed evaluation distribution scores may be reflected by adding up to the personal evaluation scores of each distribution recipient, and in the case of penalty scores, the distributed penalty distribution scores may be added to and reflected in the personal evaluation scores.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may receive the distribution ratio for each distribution target through an interface and then check the validity of the total distribution ratio. For example, if the total of the distribution ratios exceeds 100% or is less than 100% as a result of entering the distribution ratio for a total of 3 people, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 considers the input of the distribution ratio to be invalid and closes the interface. You can request modification or re-entry of the distribution ratio.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 receives the distribution ratio for each of the distribution recipients through the interface, and then, when the total of the distribution ratios is less than 100% and the distribution ratio is not entered for some of the distribution recipients, The remaining distribution ratio can be applied equally to the portion for which the ramen distribution ratio has not been entered. For example, if the total of the distribution ratios received through the interface is 80% and there are two distribution recipients whose distribution ratios have not been entered, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 sets a distribution ratio of 10% to each of the two distribution recipients. can be applied. Accordingly, the distribution operation can be performed normally by inputting a total distribution ratio of 100% for all distribution recipients.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may calculate a distribution score in fractional expression by applying the distribution ratio to each of the first and second evaluation scores or penalty scores. That is, since the evaluation score or penalty score is defined as a fraction expression, the distribution ratio can be applied independently to the denominator and numerator of the fraction expression. As a result, the distribution points distributed to each distribution recipient can also be defined as a fractional expression. This will be explained in more detail through Figures 6 and 7.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may add the first score of the distribution score to the first score of the personal evaluation score and add the second score of the distribution score to the second score of the personal evaluation score. Unlike general summation of fractions, the process of adding up fraction expressions can be applied independently to the numerator and denominator. That is, the denominator (first score) of the fraction expression can be added to the other denominator, and the numerator (second score) can be added to the other numerators. For example, if scores of 2/3, 8/10, 3/5, and 0/10 are obtained as evaluation points and penalty points, the total score is (2+8+3+0)/(3+10) +5+10) = 13/28.

As a result, since the first score of the personal evaluation score is determined in proportion to the workload, the workload of work participants can be indirectly compared through the first score. For example, if worker A's score is 8/10 and worker B's score is 80/100, this may indicate that B performed more work than A. In addition, since the second score is determined in response to the evaluation amount of the work participants based on the total workload, the work ability of the work participants can be evaluated through the second score.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may determine the work grade of each work participant by grading individual evaluation scores, and may determine the work grade of the team by integrating the work grades of the team leader and team members. . At this time, the work grade can be classified and defined according to the combination of workload and evaluation amount. The plan's detailed screen can include team information, including the team leader and team members, and individual work grades can be visualized and displayed. For example, individual work grades may be displayed separately by colors, numbers, icons, etc.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may provide a notification regarding the distribution recipient to the evaluator of the plan when the individual evaluation score of each distribution recipient falls below a preset score. In another embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may provide a notification regarding the distribution recipient to the evaluator of the plan when the work grade according to the individual evaluation score of each distribution recipient falls below a preset grade. At this time, the evaluator of the plan may be basically the same as the plan creator, but may also correspond to a work participant designated by the plan creator at the time of plan creation. Meanwhile, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may notify the distribution recipient of the results of the distribution of evaluation scores or penalty points along with the updated individual evaluation scores.

In one embodiment, the plan evaluation processing unit 350 may provide a notification regarding the corresponding distribution recipient to the evaluator of the plan when the first score among the personal evaluation scores of each distribution recipient exceeds a preset reference value for workload. In other words, the first score among the personal evaluation scores is determined in proportion to the workload, so a larger first score may mean that the individual's workload is relatively large. The plan evaluation processing unit 350 may monitor individual evaluation scores and select work participants with excessive workload based on the first score and provide related information to the manager.

The control unit 370 may control the overall operation of the team member evaluation device 130 and manage the control flow or data flow between the plan creation unit 310, the note management unit 330, and the plan evaluation processing unit 350.

Figure 4 is a flowchart explaining a point-based team member evaluation method for project management according to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 4, the team member evaluation device 130 may generate a plan for managing a specific task while the project is in progress through the plan creation unit 310 (step S410). The team member evaluation device 130 may generate at least one note in which work details related to a specific task are recorded by task participants according to a plan through the note management unit 330 (step S430).

In addition, the team member evaluation device 130 may receive an evaluation score or penalty score for the plan from the evaluator of the plan when the period of the plan has elapsed through the plan evaluation processing unit 350 (step S450), and the evaluation score or penalty score may be received. When a distribution request for is received, evaluation scores or penalty scores can be distributed to work participants (step S470).

Figure 5 is a diagram explaining the plan creation process according to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 5 , the team member evaluation device 130 may generate a plan 510 for managing specific tasks within a project. When the creation of the plan 510 is completed, the team member evaluation device 130 may assign a specific task to a team consisting of task participants and then assign the task to the plan 510. In Figure 5, plan 510 may be assigned to Team 1, and Team 1 may be comprised of team leader A and team members B and C. The team member evaluation device 130 may provide an interface for designating a team after creating the plan 510, and may provide a list of currently set teams through the interface. Meanwhile, the interface may include a function for creating a new team in addition to the currently set team.

Additionally, the team member evaluation device 130 may provide an evaluation button 530 that initiates an evaluation operation for the plan 510 through the detailed screen of the plan 510. The team member evaluation device 130 may provide an evaluation button 530 through the details screen of the plan 510 as well as a distribution button 550 that initiates distribution of evaluation scores or penalty points.

Meanwhile, the evaluation button 530 or distribution button 550 may be provided only to those with evaluation or distribution authority. That is, for team members without authority, even if they access the detailed screen of the plan 510, the evaluation button 530 or distribution button 550 may not be displayed or may be displayed in a deactivated state where selection is not possible.

If the plan evaluator or distribution authority selects the evaluation button 530 or the distribution button 550, a dedicated interface for evaluation or distribution may be provided.

Figures 6 and 7 are diagrams illustrating the evaluation/penalty score distribution process according to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 6, the team member evaluation device 130 may provide an independent interface 610 for distributing evaluation scores. Here, the evaluation score is the evaluation score of the plan and can correspond to the team's evaluation score, and is expressed as a fraction of the second score ('8') for the first score ('10'), such as '8/10'. can be entered. In addition, the team member evaluation device 130 may provide a list 630 of people to whom evaluation scores are to be distributed through the interface 610, and the distribution authority may input the distribution ratio for each of the people to be distributed through the list. Distribution of evaluation scores can be performed.

For example, in FIG. 6, the plan's evaluation score may be displayed at the top center of the distribution interface 610, resulting in an evaluation score of '8/10'. The distribution authority can distribute evaluation scores to each team leader and team members based on the corresponding evaluation scores. In other words, 30% may be entered for team leader A, 50% for team member B, and 20% for team member C, and the distribution ratio may not be entered for the remaining team member D. Accordingly, the distribution points of each distribution target can be distributed as 30% to team leader A, 50% to team member B, and 20% to team member C based on the evaluation score of '8/10'.

Additionally, the distribution score of each distribution recipient can be calculated by independently applying the distribution ratio to each of the denominator and numerator of the fraction expression. In Figure 6, in the case of team leader A, the distribution score as a result of applying a distribution ratio of 30% to the evaluation score of '8/10' can be calculated as '2.4/3'. For team member B, the distribution score can be calculated as '4/5' as a result of applying the distribution ratio of 50% to the evaluation score of '8/10', and for team leader C, the distribution ratio of 20% can be calculated to the evaluation score of '8/10'. As a result of the application, the distribution score can be calculated as '1.6/2'.

At this time, although each of '2.4/3' and '4/5' is the same ratio as '8/10', they can be treated as different values in terms of absolute value. Additionally, the first and second scores may be expressed up to a specific decimal place as a result of being calculated by applying the distribution ratio.

Thereafter, the distribution score of each distribution recipient may be reflected in the individual evaluation score. If the distribution score is distributed to the distribution recipient for the first time, a personal evaluation score may be created and reflected.

Referring to FIG. 7 , the team member evaluation device 130 may provide an independent interface 710 for distributing penalty points. Here, the penalty score is a score input according to the evaluation of the plan and can be distributed to the team leader and team members, and can be selectively input by the plan evaluator on the condition that the plan evaluation score is input. Additionally, the penalty score can be automatically determined in correspondence to the team's evaluation score entered as an evaluation of the plan.

For example, in Figure 6, if the team's evaluation score is entered as '8/10', the penalty score for this may be determined as '0/10'. The penalty score may also be defined as a fractional expression in the same way as the evaluation score, and the first score corresponding to the denominator may be determined to be the same as the first score of the evaluation score, and the second score corresponding to the numerator may be determined as '0'. That is, considering that the first score is a score determined in proportion to the workload, the penalty score may correspond to a case where the evaluation value compared to the workload is minimum as a result of the second score corresponding to the penalty amount being set to '0'.

In addition, the team member evaluation device 130 may provide a list 730 of penalty score distribution recipients through the interface 710, and the distribution authority may input the distribution ratio for each distribution recipient through the list. A distribution operation of penalty points can be performed.

For example, in FIG. 7 , the penalty score is determined to be '0/10' in response to the plan's evaluation score and may be displayed at the top center of the distribution interface 710. The distribution authority can distribute penalty points to each team leader and team members based on the corresponding penalty points. In other words, 70% may be entered for team leader x and 30% for team member y, and no distribution ratio may be entered for the remaining team member z. Accordingly, the distribution points of each distribution target can be distributed 70% to team leader x and 30% to team member y based on the penalty score '0/10'.

In addition, the distribution score of each distribution recipient can be calculated by independently applying the distribution ratio to each of the denominator and numerator of the fraction expression, and in the case of team leader x, the distribution score is the result of applying the distribution ratio of 70% to the penalty score '0/10' can be calculated as '0/7', and in the case of team member y, the distribution score as a result of applying a distribution ratio of 30% to the penalty score of '0/10' can be calculated as '0/3'. Thereafter, the distribution score of each distribution recipient may be reflected in the individual evaluation score.

Figure 8 is a diagram illustrating various embodiments of a team member evaluation and distribution process according to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 8, the team member evaluation device 130 can evaluate the team in charge of the plan's work through evaluation of the plan, and distribute the evaluation results to the team leader and team members to evaluate the team according to work performance. The efficiency of plan evaluation can be improved. More specifically, when the set period of the plan has elapsed, the plan becomes available for evaluation, and an evaluation score by the evaluator of the plan can be entered accordingly. The team member evaluation device 130 can receive the evaluation score from the evaluator, and if there is no request for distribution of the evaluation score, it can store the evaluation score of the plan as detailed information of the plan (S810).

The team member evaluation device 130 may provide an interface for distribution when a request for distribution of the evaluation score is entered, and may calculate the evaluation distribution score for the team leader or team member according to the distribution ratio entered through the interface to evaluate each individual. It can be reflected in the score (S830). The team member evaluation device 130 may provide an interface for distribution when a request for distribution of penalty points is entered, and calculate the penalty distribution score for the team leader or team member according to the distribution ratio entered through the interface to evaluate each individual. It can be reflected in the score (S820).

In addition, the team member evaluation device 130 may receive a distribution ratio for the evaluation score according to a distribution request for the evaluation score, and may then receive a distribution ratio for the penalty score according to a distribution request for the penalty score, Each evaluation/penalty distribution score can be calculated and reflected in each individual evaluation score (S840).

As a result, the team member evaluation device 130 can provide a means to effectively manage the work capabilities of participants participating in the project through plan evaluation and distribution.

Although the present invention has been described above with reference to preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art may make various modifications and changes to the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention as set forth in the claims below. You will understand that you can do it.

100: Team member evaluation system
110: User terminal 130: Team member evaluation device
210: Processor 230: Memory
250: user input/output unit 270: network input/output unit
310: Plan creation unit 330: Note management unit
350: Plan evaluation processing unit 370: Control unit

Claims (12)

Creating a plan for managing a specific task while a project is in progress - the plan is assigned the specific task and is assigned to a team composed of task participants;
generating at least one note in which work details related to the specific work are recorded by the work participants according to the plan;
Receiving an evaluation score or penalty score for the plan from an evaluator of the plan when the period of the plan has elapsed; and
Comprising: distributing the evaluation score or the penalty score to the task participants when a distribution request for the evaluation score or the penalty score is received,
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, wherein the evaluation score or the penalty score is defined as a fractional expression of a second score corresponding to the corresponding evaluation amount or penalty amount for the first score proportional to the workload.
The method of claim 1, wherein the step of creating the plan is
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising the step of determining one of the work participants as the team leader of the plan and determining the rest as team members of the plan.
The method of claim 1, wherein the step of creating at least one note
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising the step of generating the at least one note at preset time intervals according to the work plan of the plan.
The method of claim 3, wherein the step of creating the at least one note
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising providing a note interface for writing notes to the work participants at each time interval.
The method of claim 4, wherein the step of creating the at least one note
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising the step of canceling provision of the note interface if writing of the note does not start beyond a preset time based on the time of provision of the note interface. .
The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving step includes
Comprising a first step of receiving the evaluation score of the team assigned to the plan,
Point-based team members for project management, optionally comprising at least one of a second step of distributing the team evaluation score to the team leader and team members and a third step of distributing the penalty score to the team leader and team members. Assessment Methods.
The method of claim 1, wherein the dispensing step is
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising providing a list of distribution targets among the task participants through the distribution request interface.
The method of claim 1, wherein the dispensing step is
Receiving a distribution ratio for each of the distribution recipients through the interface;
calculating a distribution score distributed to each distribution recipient by applying the distribution ratio to the evaluation score or the penalty score; and
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising the step of updating the individual evaluation scores of each distribution target by reflecting the distribution scores.
The method of claim 8, wherein the distributing step is
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising calculating a distribution score of the fractional expression by applying the distribution ratio to each of the first and second scores of the evaluation score or the penalty score. .
The method of claim 9, wherein the distributing step is
For project management, comprising adding a first score of the distribution score to a first score of the personal evaluation score and adding a second score of the distribution score to a second score of the personal evaluation score. Point-based team member evaluation method.
The method of claim 8, wherein the distributing step is
A point-based team member evaluation method for project management, comprising the step of providing a notification regarding the distribution recipient to the evaluator of the plan when the individual evaluation score of each distribution recipient falls below a preset score.
Comprising a memory and a processor electrically connected to the memory,
The processor is
Create a plan for managing specific tasks during the project,
Create at least one note recording work details related to the specific task and save it in the plan,
Receive an evaluation score for the plan from an evaluator when the record of the at least one note is completed,
Implemented to distribute the evaluation scores to authors who wrote the at least one note,
A point-based team member evaluation device for project management, wherein the evaluation score or the penalty score is defined as a fractional expression of a second score corresponding to the evaluation amount or penalty amount for a first score proportional to the workload.