EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 440 (2023) E3S Web Conf., 440 (2023) 07009 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 440, 2023
International Conference on Environment and Smart Society (ICEnSO 2023)
Article Number 07009
Number of page(s) 7
Section State of the Art Smart Environments
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202344007009
Published online 01 November 2023
  1. L. Liao, E. A. L. Teo, R. Chang, and L. Li, “Investigating Critical Non-Value Adding Activities and Their Resulting Wastes in BIM-Based Project Delivery,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 355, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12010355. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Liao, Teo, and Chang, “Reducing Critical Hindrances to Building Information Modeling Implementation: The Case of the Singapore Construction Industry,” Applied Sciences, vol. 9, no. 18, p. 3833, 2019, doi: 10.3390/app9183833. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. R. Belferik et al., “Manajemen Proyek: Teori & Penerapannya.” PT. Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  4. A. Syamil, J. M. Samosir, and P. Heriyati, “The Impact of Project Performance on Customer Satisfaction,” Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 5658–5668, 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. N. Bui, C. Merschbrock, and B. E. Munkvold, “A Review of Building Information Modelling for Construction in Developing Countries,” Procedia Eng, vol. 164, pp. 487–494, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.649. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. I. Im, S. Hong, and M. S. Kang, “An International Comparison of Technology Adoption - Testing the UTAUT Model,” Journal of Information and Management, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  8. A. Costin, A. Adibfar, H. Hu, and S. S. Chen, “Building Information Modeling (BIM) for transportation infrastructure – Literature review, applications, challenges, and recommendations,” Autom Constr, vol. 94, pp. 257–281, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2018.07.001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. C. Eastman, “Automated Assessment of Early Concept Designs,” Architectural Design, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 52–57, 2009, doi: 10.1002/ad.851. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. H. Khechine, S. Lakhal, and P. Ndjambou, “A meta-analysis of the UTAUT model: Eleven years later,” Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 138–152, 2016, doi: 10.1002/cjas.1381. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. M. Hamsal, D. Dwidienawati, M. Ichsan, A. Syamil, and B. Trigunarsyah, “Multi-Perspective Approach to Building Team Resilience in Project Management—A Case Study in Indonesia,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 20, p. 13137, 2022. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. A. Syamil, W. J. Doll, and C. H. Apigian, “Product development process performance: Measures and impacts,” in Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute, San Diego, CA, 2002, pp. 1991–1996. [Google Scholar]
  13. R. Howard, L. Restrepo, and C.-Y. Chang, “Addressing individual perceptions: An application of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology to building information modelling,” International Journal of Project Management, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 107–120, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.10.012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. A. Syamil, P. Heriyati, and M. Hermawan, “Perspektif Industri Financial Technology di Indonesia,” 2020. [Google Scholar]
  15. V. Venkatesh and S. A. Brown, “Bridging The Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Guidelines For Conducting Mixed Methods Research In Information Systems,” vol. X, no. X, pp. 1–34, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  16. E. No and J. K. Kim, “Determinants of the Adoption for Travel Information on Smartphone,” International Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 534–545, Nov. 2014, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.1945. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. P. V. Shara and T. Widodo, “Penerapan Model Unified Theory Of Acceptance And Use Of Technology (UTAUT) Untuk Menganalisis Minat Pengguna Smartphone Di Kota Bandung,” SOSIOHUMANITAS, vol. 20, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.36555/sosiohumanitas.v20i1.49. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. E. Park and J. Ohm, “Factors influencing users’ employment of mobile map services,” Telematics and Informatics, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 253–265, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2013.07.002. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Venkatesh, Thong, and Xu, “Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 1, p. 157, 2012, doi: 10.2307/41410412. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. A. Kuruuzum and C. D. Koksal, “The Impact of Service Quality on Behavioral Intention in Hospitality Industry,” International Journal Of Business and Management Studies, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 9–15, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  21. P. J. B. Tan, “Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan,” Sage Open, vol. 3, no. 4, p. 215824401350383, 2013, doi: 10.1177/2158244013503837. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. J. W. Creswell, V. L. P. Clark, M. L. Gutmann, and W. E. Hanson, “Advanced mixed methods research designs,” in Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie, Eds., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003, pp. 209–240. [Google Scholar]
  23. A. Syamil, “International benchmarking of integrated product development practices in the auto industry supply chain: a multigroup invariance analysis,” Unpublished Dissertation, The University of Toledo, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  24. Zhabrinna, R. J. Davies, M. M. A. Pratama, and M. Yusuf, “BIM adoption towards the sustainability of construction industry in Indonesia,” MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 195, p. 06003, 2018, doi: 10.1051/matecconf/201819506003. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.