On the Nuclear Engineering Institute, three systems are in use for KM: WikiIEN, IEN Progress Report Magazine and CarpeDIEN. These systems have different purposes and function differently from each other. Therefore, a single methodology was proposed to compare the functionality of these three systems and point their strengths and weaknesses regarding their use on KM. Studies that present criteria and information to assist in the evaluation and choice of the most appropriate KM system for a given use were used as reference. Evaluation criteria usually focus on software functionalities grouped in categories. The evaluation of such criteria is subjective, and based on the evaluators’ experience and technical knowledge while using such systems. The evaluation of the three systems was structured in two steps: selection criteria and evaluation of systems by experts. In the first step, it is defined a list of 14 criteria, classified into 7 categories. In the second step, the three systems are evaluated by five experts in KM systems using the criteria to verify whether the systems meet the criteria. The results were obtained from a consensus of opinions among the experts. The results point out that WikiIEN is a solution more indicated for a bigger, general public because of its more user-friendly interface and workflow, auto-sufficient set of features not dependent on external software. IEN Progress Report Magazine and CarpeDIEN are solutions more indicated for smaller, niche public. Problems were identified related to four criteria, pointing to weaknesses in IEN Progress Report Magazine and CarpeDIEN.
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.