Good early back ground discussion / literature review.
They start with defining coordination, and then mention the meetings they have for site planning and highlight the communication issue between team members. (but do not reference any previous work in the field)
Paper covers the technology piece as tangible interfaces / displays briefly and starts mentioning the uses of BIM. But throughout do not really refer back to BIM, or how BIM helps them in their research project.
They define private vs public information taxonomy, following Tang’s methods.
They then create a BIM TABLE which in effect is not really about BIM. The table shows general information from site layout to 2D digital drawings on a flat surface. The participants can use the table browse information but essentially need to interact through the given tablets. The tablets then direct participants to different viewpoints.
About their user testing, they adopted a common/basic user testability approach. But they have not discussed why they have chosen this approach. They also defined 3 tasks / scenarios but they do not mention why these scenarios would highlight the usability issues.
They use site management scenarios / issues for the tasks. And develop their scenarios based on site management.
They compared users’ performance using paper drawings and their system. They then concluded that their abilities were not changed but users performed the tasks faster using their system.
Also, they claim that users perform their pre-defined tasks with pre-defined routes (the software did not generate routes, all routes were given, so no problem solving abilities) faster using the proposed platform but they mention users had difficulties interacting with the platform which slowed them down.