# Success of Implementing Cloud Computing for Smart Development in Small Construction Projects
## 4 Results
### Factor Analysis of Critical Success Factors  
According to recent studies, 21 CC application CSFs were identified, and the results support the statistically significant data acquired from the survey. However, the potential of a comparable effect on each success criterion must be considered. EFA could resolve this \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Category** & **Classification** & **Frequency** & **\%** \\ \hline Profession & Architect & 11 & 6.87\% \\ \hline  & Quantity Surveyor & 13 & 8.12\% \\ \hline  & Civil Engineer & 93 & 58.12\% \\ \hline  & M\&E Engineer & 8 & 5\% \\ \hline  & Project Manager & 28 & 17.5\% \\ \hline  & Other & 7 & 4.37\% \\ \hline Organization & Contractor & 80 & 50\% \\ \hline  & Consultant & 70 & 43.75\% \\ \hline  & Client & 10 & 6.25\% \\ \hline Experience in the Malaysian & \multirow{2}{*}{0-5 Years} & \multirow{2}{*}{38} & \multirow{2}{*}{23.75\%} \\ Building Industry & & & \\ \hline  & 6–10 Years & 47 & 29.37\% \\ \hline  & 1–15 Years & 54 & 33.75\% \\ \hline  & 16–20 Years & 13 & 8.12\% \\ \hline  & Over 20 Years & 8 & 5\% \\ \hline Experience in Small & \multirow{2}{*}{Yes} & \multirow{2}{*}{159} & \multirow{2}{*}{99.37\%} \\ Building Projects & & & \\ \hline  & No & 1 & 0.62\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Demographic distribution of respondents. Figure 2: Level of cloud computing implementation in small building projects. issue and classify CSFs into subgroups that are realistically possible to describe with minor building projects in Malaysia. Before carrying out the study and obtaining subgroups of CSFs, the suitability for EFA analysis was evaluated [25; 26]. An EFA will be undertaken when the sample size is between 150 and 300. In addition, the sample size for a quantitative survey must be bigger than the product of the sum of the number of inquiries and the number of replies to every inquiry. A total of 105, less than the sample size of 160, were involved in this investigation [20; 21]. In a factor analysis, the variables must be between 20 and 50, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 50. The conditions for the factor analysis were satisfied; consequently, the factor analysis was undertaken on 21 variables matching CC CSFs, eliminating the possibility of erroneous findings. It was determined that the ratio of subjects to variables was 8.90:1. A ratio larger than 5:1 was necessary, and the factor analysis findings are validated further on in the paper. The sample adequacy and sphericity of 21 variables were evaluated using the Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's tests. The KMO test indices range between 0 and 1, with adequate scores of more than 0.6 indicating the inter-variable interaction type [19]. Good factor analysis findings, which measure the sphericity of data, need a significance level of lower than 0.05 for Bartlett's Test. The results of both tests using SPSS 24.0 are provided in Table 5 below. The KMO index was determined to be 0.858, more than 0.6 and adequate. The significance of Bartlett's Test was determined to be 0.000, which is less than 0.05, suggesting that EFA could have been used to create a subgroup of variables for this research. EFA evaluation was carried out utilizing principal component analysis (PCA), and component structure was derived for the 21 variables. To obtain a rotated component structure, Varimax rotation was performed. In Table 6 of the EFA findings, four components had Eigenvalues larger than 1. The Scree Plot in Figure 3 demonstrated that the variables analyzed had the same tendency. The five groups' total variance was 55.399%, larger than 50%, and indicated acceptable components. A minimum of 0.4 was the factor loading threshold level employed to obtain rotational component structure findings. After studying the EFA-obtained component structure, four subgroups were created depending on the number of components. Their names were communication and coordination; time; cost; and quality management, organizational success, and planning success.