JP4337676B2 - Product evaluation device - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to a product evaluation apparatus that performs product evaluation based on a plurality of collected data and enables extraction of latent information useful for planning the concept of the next product.

In developing products, in order to increase product value, it is important to draw up user needs through market research and reflect them in product quality.
As described above, as a method of reflecting the user's needs drawn up in the product quality, for example, as disclosed in Patent Document 1, based on the current product concept obtained by market research and the ideal product concept. There is a method to clarify the potential value of the product and the obvious and effective value and reflect it in the product development.
Moreover, based on the image regarding a pair of product concept which opposes about several goods, the product concept between each goods is also compared. For example, it is performed to compare where each product is located in a pair of product concepts such as “static” and “dynamic”.
JP 2002-269334 A

As described above, when clarifying the potential value and the obvious and effective value of a product, the value of the product itself can be clarified, but the relative value among multiple products can be evaluated. It was difficult to grasp the strengths and weaknesses of other products with respect to their own products because they could not do so.
In addition, as described above, when comparing product concepts between products, you can see what product concept position your product has among multiple products, but which concept you want to develop next It was difficult to make use of it for product development.
Therefore, the present invention provides a product evaluation apparatus that can clarify and quantify the strength and weakness of the product concept of the product and clarify the product concept to be emphasized of the product.

The product evaluation apparatus that solves the above problems has the following characteristics.
That is, as described in claim 1, input means for inputting a plurality of types of collection data, evaluation means for evaluating a plurality of products based on the input collection data for a plurality of evaluation items, and evaluation by the evaluation means A product evaluation apparatus comprising an output means for outputting a result and a database in which input collection data is stored , wherein each collection data stored in the database has a plurality of evaluation items, and evaluation The means converts the value of each evaluation item in the plurality of types of collected data into a deviation value, and sets each evaluation item in the plurality of types of collected data in accordance with the value of each evaluation item converted into a deviation value. It performs a positioning processing means for classifying into a plurality of areas, weighting the collected data for each evaluation item, according to the classified areas by the positioning process unit An evaluation score calculation processing means for calculating a reluctant quantifies evaluation score, based on evaluation score calculated by the evaluation score calculation processing unit, a comparing processing means for ranking of each product for each evaluation item in each area A deviation value converting unit that converts the evaluation score of each product ranked by the comparison processing means in each evaluation item into a deviation value, and the evaluation score converted into a deviation value for each evaluation item has a predetermined threshold condition And an evaluation item extraction unit that extracts an evaluation item that satisfies the threshold condition .
This makes it possible to quantify the strengths and weaknesses of other comparative products for each evaluation item, that is, for each product concept, based on the evaluation score and ranking, and clarify the product concept that should be emphasized. It becomes possible to do.
In addition, it is possible to clarify the strengths and weaknesses of own products when comparing own products with other comparative / competitive products, and to clarify the concept of products to be emphasized and the concepts to be improved. it can.
In particular, it is possible to discover and quantitatively identify potential items that reflect comparisons with competing products that cannot be understood only from the average and frequency counts that are normally calculated by collecting collected data such as questionnaires. .

Further, as described in claim 2, the plurality of types of collected data input from the input means are product evaluation data before the product purchase of the product purchaser and product evaluation data after the product purchase, and are determined by the positioning processing means. The positioning process is performed by obtaining the coordinates of each evaluation item for the value of the product evaluation data before the product purchase on one axis and the value of the product evaluation data after the product purchase on the other axis orthogonal to the one axis. The calculation of the evaluation score by the evaluation score calculation processing means is set for each area with respect to the distance from the origin of the coordinate of the evaluation item, and changes according to the angle from the horizontal axis of the coordinate of each evaluation item. This is performed by applying a weighting process performed using a weighting function .
In this way, it is possible to clarify the strengths and weaknesses of one's products when comparing one's own products with other comparative / competitive products, and clarify the product concepts that should be emphasized and the ones that should be improved. Can do.
In particular, it is possible to discover and quantitatively identify potential items that reflect comparisons with competing products that cannot be understood only from the average and frequency counts that are normally calculated by collecting collected data such as questionnaires. .

Further, as described in claim 3, when the evaluation score of the evaluation item included in the area where the value of the product evaluation data after the product purchase is larger than a predetermined value satisfies the threshold, the product has strength. When the evaluation score of the evaluation item that is extracted by the determination by the determination processing unit and is included in the area where the value of the product evaluation data after the product purchase is smaller than a predetermined value is satisfied as the evaluation item satisfies the threshold value The product is extracted as a result of determination by the determination processing means as being an evaluation item having a weakness .
Thereby, the strength level and the weakness level of each evaluation item in the own product can be grasped .

  According to the present invention, for each evaluation item of the own product, that is, for each product concept, the strength / weakness to other comparative products can be quantified by the evaluation score and ranking, and the product concept to be emphasized of the own product It becomes possible to clarify.

Next, modes for carrying out the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.
The product evaluation apparatus shown in FIG. 1 has input means 1 for inputting a market research result such as a questionnaire survey, which is collected data, and evaluates a plurality of products based on the input collected data. Evaluation means 2 for performing the above, an output means 3 for outputting an evaluation result by the evaluation means 2, and a database 4 for storing the input collected data.

  The evaluation means 2 is a positioning processing means 21 that classifies each evaluation item of each product into a plurality of areas based on the input of a plurality of types of collected data, and an evaluation determined for each area by a plurality of types of collected data. Based on the function, the evaluation score calculation processing means 22 for calculating the evaluation score of each evaluation item, the comparison processing means 23 for ranking each product for each evaluation item in each area, and the evaluation score calculation processing means 22 The deviation value converting unit 24a that converts the evaluation score of each product to a deviation value for each evaluation item, and whether or not the evaluation score converted to the deviation value of each evaluation item satisfies a predetermined threshold condition And a determination processing unit 24 including an evaluation item extraction unit 24b that extracts an evaluation item that satisfies the threshold condition.

In the product evaluation apparatus configured as described above, product evaluation is performed as follows.
First, in the product evaluation apparatus, questionnaire results for a plurality of products are input by the input means 1 and stored in the database 4 (for example, as shown in FIG. Are stored as questionnaire results 51b, 51c, 51d.

The questionnaire results for each product are composed of a plurality of types of questionnaires, and each questionnaire has a plurality of evaluation items.
For example, as shown in FIG. 3, the questionnaire result about the product A is composed of two types of questionnaires such as “importance point for purchase” and “evaluation after purchase”, and each questionnaire has a plurality of evaluation items.

“Purchase emphasis point” refers to whether or not this evaluation item is emphasized when purchasing the product A. For example, the evaluation result is expressed by a five-level evaluation from 1 to 5, and the item is closer to “1”. The evaluation is such that the item is emphasized as the value is closer to “5”.
“Post-purchase evaluation” is an evaluation for each evaluation item after purchasing the product A. For example, the evaluation result is expressed by a five-step evaluation from 1 to 5, and the evaluation of the item is closer to “1”. The lower the value is, the closer to “5”, the higher the evaluation of the item.
In the evaluation result shown in FIG. 3, for example, the evaluation result of the evaluation item “aaaa” in “Purchase importance” is “3”, and the evaluation result of the evaluation item “dddd” in “Post-purchase evaluation” is “5”. "

As shown in FIG. 2, in the product evaluation apparatus, a positioning process is performed in which each evaluation item of the questionnaire result for each product described above corresponds to which position among the four positions set in advance. After (S01), an evaluation score calculation process for calculating an evaluation score for each evaluation item is performed (S02). In performing the evaluation score calculation process, a weighting function set for each position is considered.
Next, for each evaluation item, an evaluation score comparison process for comparing the evaluation scores of each product is performed (S03). Further, based on the evaluation score comparison result, each evaluation item in the own product is a “priority maintenance item”. Then, a determination process is performed to determine whether or not the “important improvement item”, “maintenance item”, and “observation item” are applicable (S04).
Finally, the evaluation result subjected to the determination process is output from the output unit 3.

Next, each of these processes (S01 to S05) will be described in detail.
[Positioning process (S01)]
The positioning processing is performed by the positioning processing unit 21 of the evaluation means 2, and as shown in FIG. 4, the evaluation score of each item in the questionnaire result shown in FIG. 3 is converted into a deviation value, and four areas are configured. An area map is assigned (S11), and a positioning result is obtained (S12).

In step S11, the deviation value is calculated by calculating the average value of the evaluation points of each product A, B,... And a table as shown in FIG. 5 is created.
For example, the evaluation item “aaa” of the item “importance point for purchase” in the product A is “3”, but when this is converted into a deviation value, it becomes “45” as shown in FIG. Evaluation item “aaa” in “deviation-valued purchase priority points”). Similarly, the evaluation item “aaaa” of the “post-purchase evaluation” in the product A is “4”, but when this is converted into a deviation value, it becomes “60” as shown in FIG. 5 (FIG. 5). The evaluation item “aaa” in “Evaluation after purchase of deviation value” in FIG.

Each evaluation item is assigned to each area of the area map shown in FIG. 6 on the basis of the “deviation-valued purchase priority point” and “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation”.
In the area map, the horizontal axis indicates “deviation-valued purchase priority points”, and the vertical axis indicates “deviation-valued purchase priority points”. An area (equivalent to the first quadrant) where the value of “post-purchase evaluation” is 50 or more is set as the first area, the value of “deviation-valued purchase priority point” is less than 50, and “deviation-valued purchase” An area where the value of “post-evaluation” is 50 or more (area corresponding to the second quadrant) is set as the second area, and the value of “deviation-valued purchase emphasis point” is less than 50 and “post-deviation-valued evaluation after purchase” Is set to the third area, the value of “deviation-valued purchase emphasis point” is 50 or more, and “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation” The area where the value is less than 50 (the area corresponding to the fourth quadrant) is set as the fourth area.

Based on the value of “deviation-valued purchase priority” and “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation”, each evaluation item for each product is placed on an area map, and any one of the first area to the fourth area Areas are allocated to obtain a positioning result as shown in FIG.
For example, the evaluation item “aaaa” of the product A has a value of “deviation-valued purchase emphasis point” and a value of “deviation-valued purchase evaluation” as “45” and “60”, respectively. The evaluation item “bbbb” of the product A belongs to the third area because the value of “deviation valued purchase emphasis point” and the value of “deviation valued post purchase evaluation” are “40” and “45”, respectively. Since the evaluation item “cccc” of the product A is “65” and “45” for the “deviation-valued purchase priority point” and “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation” values, respectively, Since the evaluation item “dddd” of the product A has a value of “deviation-valued purchase priority point” and a value of “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation” as “60” and “59”, respectively, Belongs.
This positioning process is performed for each evaluation item of each product.

Here, the first area is an area where both the “deviation-value-oriented purchase emphasis point” and the “deviation-value-based post-purchase evaluation” are high. It can be said that they are satisfied after purchasing the product. Therefore, it is important to maintain the concept of the evaluation item positioned in the first area, and it is set as the “priority maintenance item”.
The second area is an area where the value of “deviation-valued purchase emphasis point” is low but the value of “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation” is high. We did not do, but we can say that we made high evaluation after product purchase. Therefore, the evaluation item positioned in the second area is not the same as the evaluation item of the first area, but is a “maintenance item” that should maintain the concept.

The third area is an area where both the “deviation-valued purchase emphasis points” and “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation” values are low, and the consumer places importance on the evaluation items when purchasing products. I haven't been satisfied with it even after purchasing the product. Therefore, regarding the evaluation items positioned in the third area, it is important to review the concept, and it is set as “important improvement item”.
The fourth area is an area where the value of “deviation-valued purchase emphasis point” is high, but the value of “deviation-valued post-purchase evaluation” is low. However, the actual evaluation after the purchase was low. Therefore, the evaluation items positioned in the fourth area are set as “required observation items” in order to determine whether the concept is right or wrong.

[Evaluation score calculation process (S02)]
In the evaluation score calculation process, first, the coordinates of the evaluation items placed in the area map shown in FIG. 6 are converted to polar coordinates, and the following equation is used using the distance r from the origin and the weighting function F (θ) set for each area. The evaluation score of each evaluation item is calculated from (1).
(Evaluation score) = r × F (θ) (1)
Here, as shown in FIG. 8, the weighting function F (θ) is represented by a value in the range of 0 to 1, and the value depends on the magnitude of the angle θ from the horizontal axis of the coordinates of the evaluation item. Change.

The value of the function F (θ) of the first area increases linearly from 0 to 1 as the angle θ increases, for example, when the angle θ is in the range of 0 to π / 4. In the range of / 4 to π / 2, it is always 1.
The value of the function F (θ) of the second area increases linearly from 0 to 1 as the angle θ increases, for example, when the angle θ is in the range of 0 to π / 2.
Further, the value of the function F (θ) in the third area decreases linearly from 0 to −1 as the angle θ increases in the range of the angle θ from 0 to π / 2, for example.
Further, the value of the function F (θ) of the fourth area decreases linearly from 0 to −1 as the angle θ increases, for example, when the angle θ is in the range of 0 to π / 4. When θ is in the range of π / 4 to π / 2, it is always -1.

Then, the evaluation score of the evaluation item “aaaa” of the product A is calculated by the following equation (2) using the function F (θ) of the second area.
(Evaluation score) = r2 × F (θ2) (2)
Further, the evaluation score of the evaluation item “bbbb” of the product A is calculated by the following equation (3) using the function F (θ) of the third area.
(Evaluation score) = r3 × F (θ3) (3)
Further, the evaluation score of the evaluation item “cccc” of the product A is calculated by the following equation (4) using the function F (θ) of the fourth area.
(Evaluation score) = r4 × F (θ4) (4)
Further, the evaluation score of the evaluation item “dddd” of the product A is calculated by the following equation (5) using the function F (θ) of the first area.
(Evaluation score) = r1 × F (θ1) (5)

  As described above, in the evaluation score calculation processing step, as shown in FIG. 9, the product-specific questionnaire results shown in FIG. 3, the positioning results obtained from the questionnaire results through the positioning processing steps, and the positioning results (for each area) Using the weighting function F (θ), the coordinates of each evaluation item are subjected to polar coordinate conversion and weighting processing is performed (S21), and an evaluation score for each product is calculated (S22). This product-specific evaluation score is calculated for all evaluation items in all products, and the calculated evaluation score is represented in a table as shown in FIG.

In FIG. 10, the evaluation score according to goods about the own goods and each evaluation item of goods A-D is shown.
Here, “own product” is a product that wants to clarify the product concept that should be emphasized by clarifying and quantifying the strengths and weaknesses of the product concept, and “product A, B, C ...” It is a product that competes with its own product, or a product to be compared with its own product.

[Evaluation Score Comparison Processing (S03)]
Next, as shown in FIG. 11, the calculated evaluation scores are compared / aggregated for each evaluation item and each positioned area (S31), and each product is ranked for each evaluation item (S32). .
As shown in FIG. 12, the ranking of products is represented for each evaluation item in a table created for each area.
In the table shown in FIG. 12, the product rankings for the evaluation items placed in the first area are shown.

For example, in the column of the evaluation item “aaaa” in the table shown in FIG. 12, the product names of the products in which the evaluation item “aaaa” is positioned in the first area are arranged in the ranking order, and the evaluation item “aaaa” is It can be seen that the evaluation score value of the own product was the second largest.
In addition, regarding the evaluation item “bbbb”, it can be seen that the evaluation score value of the product is the fourth largest. The same applies to the evaluation item “cccc” and thereafter.

[Determination Processing (S04)]
In the determination processing step shown in FIG. 13, using the evaluation score table shown in FIG. 10 and the product ranking table shown in FIG. 12, the ranked evaluation scores are converted into deviation values for each evaluation item, It is determined whether or not the deviation value evaluation score satisfies a predetermined threshold condition (S41).
FIG. 14 shows a table representing the deviation evaluation score of each evaluation item in the first area and the determination result for the own product.
In this case, the threshold condition that is the basis of the determination is set to “whether or not the value of the deviation value evaluation score exceeds 50”, and the evaluation that the deviation value evaluation score of the own product exceeds the threshold value Only the items are extracted as satisfying the threshold condition (in the table of FIG. 14, “○” is displayed in the column of the evaluation item whose deviation value evaluation score exceeds the threshold and the deviation value is displayed. “×” is displayed in the column of evaluation items that have not been extracted because the computerized evaluation score is equal to or lower than the threshold value).

Although the evaluation items located in the first area are positioned as “important maintenance items”, the evaluation items of the own product whose deviation value evaluation score exceeds the threshold are other products A, B, C,. Since it is considered to be an item that has a high evaluation and strength compared to, it is extracted by judgment and adopted as a “priority maintenance item”. On the other hand, since the evaluation items of the own product whose deviation value evaluation score is less than or equal to the threshold value cannot be said to have much strength compared to other products A, B, C. ”Is not adopted.
In addition, although the evaluation item located in the second area is positioned as a “maintenance item”, as in the case of the evaluation item in the first area, the threshold condition is “the value of the deviation evaluation score exceeds 50. Or not ”is set. And, since the evaluation item of the own product whose deviation value evaluation score exceeds the threshold value is considered to be an item having high evaluation and strength compared to other products A, B, C. Since the evaluation item of the own product whose deviation value evaluation score is equal to or less than the threshold value cannot be said to have much strength compared with other products A, B, C,. "Is not extracted.

On the other hand, for the evaluation items located in the third area and the fourth area, since the value of the evaluation score is a negative value, the threshold condition is “whether the value of the deviation evaluation score is less than 50”. Only the evaluation items that are set and the deviation value evaluation score of the item is smaller than the threshold are extracted as satisfying the threshold condition.
This is because the evaluation items located in the third area and the fourth area are positioned as “important improvement items” and “observation required items”, but the evaluation items of the own product whose deviation value evaluation score is smaller than the threshold are Since it is considered that the item is poor in evaluation and weak compared to other products A, B, C,..., It is extracted by determination and adopted as an “important improvement item” and “observation item to be observed”. On the other hand, since the evaluation item of the own product whose deviation value evaluation score is equal to or greater than the threshold is not a big weakness compared with other products A, B, C. "Items" and "Necessary observation items" are not adopted.

In this way, the evaluation items satisfying the threshold condition are extracted, and the extracted “maintenance maintenance item”, “maintenance item”, “important improvement item”, and “observation required item” are output as the determination results. (S42 in FIG. 13).
The output means 3 that outputs the determination result is, for example, a display device that displays the determination result on a screen, a printer that prints out the determination result on a paper medium, or the like.

As described above, the product evaluation apparatus includes an input unit 1 for inputting a plurality of types of collected data such as “important points for purchase” and “evaluation after purchase”, and a plurality of products based on the input collected data. A product evaluation apparatus including an evaluation unit 2 for performing the evaluation item and an output unit 3 for outputting an evaluation result by the evaluation unit 2;
The evaluation means 2 is a positioning process for classifying each evaluation item of each product into a plurality of areas from the first area to the fourth area based on the contents of the input “important points for purchase” and “evaluation after purchase”. Unit 21, an evaluation score calculation processing unit 22 that calculates an evaluation score obtained by digitizing the collection data of each evaluation item while performing weighting according to the classified area, and each area based on the calculated evaluation score And a comparison processing unit 23 that ranks each product for each evaluation item.
Therefore, the strengths and weaknesses of other comparative products can be quantified by evaluation score and ranking for each evaluation item of the own product, that is, for each product concept, and the product concept that should be emphasized is clarified. It becomes possible.

  In particular, the areas are classified into four areas, “Maintenance maintenance items”, “Maintenance items”, “Observation required items”, and “Important improvement items” according to the strength and weakness of the evaluation items in the product. Therefore, it is possible to grasp the strength level and the weakness level of each evaluation item in the own product.

Further, the product evaluation device includes a deviation value converting unit 24a that converts the evaluation scores of the products ranked by the comparison processing unit 23 in each evaluation item into a deviation value, and an evaluation score converted into a deviation value for each evaluation item. Is provided with a determination processing unit 24 including an evaluation item extraction unit 24b that determines whether or not a predetermined threshold condition is satisfied and extracts an evaluation item that satisfies the threshold condition.
Therefore, it is possible to clarify the strengths and weaknesses of the own product when comparing the own product with other comparative / competitive products, and clarify the product concept to be emphasized and the concept to be improved. it can.
In particular, it is possible to discover and extract potential items that reflect comparisons with competing products, which cannot be understood only from the average or frequency calculated by collecting collected data such as questionnaires, and quantitatively grasp it. Thus, it can be used for planning the product concept.

  In addition, it is also possible to quantitatively grasp changes in purchasers' preferences by collecting questionnaires and other collected data over a certain period of time and performing evaluations equivalent to the above evaluations while comparing them over time. It is.

It is a block diagram which shows the outline | summary structure of the goods evaluation apparatus concerning this invention. It is a figure which shows the product evaluation flow by a product evaluation apparatus. It is a figure which shows the questionnaire result about "purchase importance point" and "evaluation after purchase". It is a figure which shows the flow of the positioning process process in FIG. It is a figure which shows "purchase importance point" and "post-purchase evaluation" which were converted into deviation values. It is a figure which shows the area map where a positioning process is performed. It is a figure which shows the positioning process result. It is a figure which shows a weight function. It is a figure which shows the flow of an evaluation score calculation process process. It is a figure which shows the evaluation score calculated for every evaluation item of each goods. It is a figure which shows the flow of the comparison process process of a figure evaluation score. It is a figure which shows each goods by which ranking processing was carried out for every evaluation item. It is a figure which shows a determination process process. It is a figure which shows the determination process result.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Input means 2 Evaluation means 3 Output means 4 Database 21 Positioning process part 22 Score calculation part 23 Comparison process part 24 Judgment process part

Claims (3)

An input means for inputting a plurality of types of collected data, an evaluation means for evaluating a plurality of products for a plurality of evaluation items based on the input collected data, an output means for outputting an evaluation result by the evaluation means, and an input A product evaluation device comprising a database storing collected data ,
Each collected data stored in the database has a plurality of evaluation items,
The evaluation means converts the value of each evaluation item in the plurality of types of collected data into a deviation value, and sets each evaluation item in the plurality of types of collected data in accordance with the value of each evaluation item converted into a deviation value. Positioning processing means for classifying into a plurality of areas ,
Evaluation score calculation processing means for calculating a numerical evaluation score while weighting the collected data of each evaluation item according to the area classified by the positioning processing means ;
Comparison processing means for ranking each product for each evaluation item in each area based on the evaluation score calculated by the evaluation score calculation processing means ;
A deviation value converting unit that converts the evaluation score of each product ranked by the comparison processing means in each evaluation item into a deviation value, and the evaluation score converted into a deviation value for each evaluation item has a predetermined threshold condition. A determination processing unit configured to determine whether or not the evaluation item is satisfied, and includes an evaluation item extraction unit that extracts an evaluation item that satisfies the threshold condition ;
A product evaluation apparatus characterized by that. The plurality of types of collected data input from the input means are product evaluation data before the product purchase of the product purchaser, and product evaluation data after the product purchase,
Positioning processing by the positioning processing means is to set the coordinates of each evaluation item for the value of the product evaluation data before the product purchase on one axis and the value of the product evaluation data after the product purchase on the other axis orthogonal to the one axis. Done by getting
Evaluation score calculation by the evaluation score calculation processing means is a weight that is set for each area with respect to the distance from the origin of the coordinates of the evaluation items, and changes according to the angle from the horizontal axis of the coordinates of each evaluation item Performed by applying a weighting process performed using a function,
The product evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: When the evaluation score of the evaluation item included in the area where the value of the product evaluation data after the product purchase is larger than a predetermined value satisfies the threshold, the determination process is performed assuming that the product is an evaluation item having strength. Extracted by means of means,
When the evaluation score of the evaluation item included in the area where the value of the product evaluation data after the product purchase is smaller than a predetermined value satisfies the threshold value, the determination process is performed assuming that the product is an evaluation item having a weakness Extracted by means of means,
The product evaluation apparatus according to claim 2 , wherein:

Images