Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 8 / 8 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
7 / 8 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 8 selected publications.
7 / 8 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 8 selected publications.
8 / 8 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 8 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 3 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 6 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 11 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 7 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 8 / 8 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T00:14:30.138345+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:22:57.158658+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 2 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 3 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 1 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 3 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 5 | 8 | 8/8 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 8 | 8/8 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2014 | 1 |
| 2016 | 2 |
| 2023 | 2 |
| 2024 | 2 |
| 2025 | 1 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2/2 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2/2 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 4 | 10 | 19 | 4/4 | 2.5 | 3.0 | 100.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Business intelligence (BI) can assist businesses with the analysis of information to make better decisions to improve business performance; however, a lack of research with respect to the adoption of BI tools specifically in the SMME apparel sector has been observed. Developments in information technology (IT) have led to an increase in competitiveness among providers, resulting in a plethora of offerings for customers to choose from. As such, businesses are operating in evolving and complex environments where business intelligence systems (BIS) have become essential. The aim of this study was to establish the factors that influence the adoption of BI by micro-small apparel retailers in KwaZulu-Natal. The study was a cross-sectional survey that sampled 132 apparel business owners who were selected using purposive sampling. A survey questionnaire was used to collect the data. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 13.0. This study found that the main inhibitors to the adoption of BI systems among small apparel retailers are cost-related. However, an interesting finding was that although cost had a negative relationship to adoption in the results, most of the respondents still indicated that they were able to make financial plans to adopt BI. The study recommends that small apparel business owners prioritize the adoption of BI as a tool for business operations. The adoption of such tools would have a net positive effect on the operations of such businesses.
Big data (BD) adoption is still relatively slow despite the numerous business opportunities that it embodies. Within the context of financial institutions in South Africa, the specific drivers of big data adoption remain largely indeterminate. Consequently, this study explores the possible relationships between perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use and actual big data adoption, while being duly cognisant of the role that behavioural intention to adopt big data could play. The study employed a survey research approach and relied on data collected from a purposive sample of 195 management level employees of financial institutions. Regression analysis to test the hypothesised relationships in the study revealed that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use were statistically significant predictors of big data adoption. Instructively, this relationship was subject to the extent of behavioural intention of respondents. For respondents with a low behavioural intention to adopt big data, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use displayed a statistically insignificant relationship with big data adoption. Conversely, the regression model for the group of respondents with a high behavioural intention to adopt big data is statistically significant. These findings enrich literature related to big data from a developing country context while concurrently identifying veritable antecedents of big data adoption in financial institutions.
Big Data has recently been used for many purposes like medicine, marketing and sports. It has helped improve management decisions. However, for almost each case a unique data warehouse should be built to benefit from the merits of data mining and Big Data. Hence, each time we start from scratch to form and build a Big Data Warehouse. In this study, we propose a Big Data Warehouse and a model for universities to be used for information management, to be more specific gossip management. The overall model is a decision support system that may help university administraitons when they are making decisions and also provide them with information or gossips being circulated among students and staff. In the model, unsupervised machine learning algorithms have been employed. A prototype of the proposed system has also been presented in the study. User generated data has been collected from students in order to learn gossips and students’ problems related to school, classes, staff and instructors. The findings and results of the pilot study suggest that social media messages among students may give important clues for the happenings at school and this information may be used for management purposes.The model may be developed and implemented by not only universities but also some other organisations.
Data mining technology is one of the new technologies that have become increasingly popular. Data mining enables to form forecasts and models regarding future by making use of past data. It can be costly, risky and time consuming for enterprises to gain knowledge. Firms gain important competitive advantage by data mining methods. This study analyzes on the readiness to implement and the extent of utilization of data mining technologies in the Financial Information Systems (FIS) in Borsa Istanbul and also researches the level of understanding of, perceptions of and readiness to implement data mining technologies within the Borsa Istanbul. Analysis was undertaken using SPSS. Manufacturing and financial enterprises are the universal of this study. Primary data were obtained by using survey method and questionnaire technique and findings of the study were evaulated. Technological, organisational and human resources issues had a significant role in the decision to, or not to utilize data mining technology. The ability to use data mining technology was found to be increased the performance of the Financial Information System.
The escalating financial burdens faced by the Small Medium and Micro Enterprise (SMME) sector necessitate a perpetual pursuit of enhanced managerial efficacy. For enhanced financial management, client relationship management and inventory control, it is necessary for businesses to utilise various technologies and methodologies. One approach involves the utilisation of business analytical technologies, such as Business Intelligence (BI). Business Intelligence (BI) serves as a valuable tool for enterprises, aiding in the examination and interpretation of data to facilitate informed decision-making processes aimed at enhancing overall business efficacy. The eThekwini region encompasses a significant presence of micro-small enterprises within the apparel manufacturing and retail sector. The primary aim of this research was to identify and analyse the many issues that hinder the evaluation of business intelligence (BI) in micro-small apparel enterprises located in Durban, a city in Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa. A cross-sectional quantitative study was undertaken to examine a cohort of 161 small apparel business owners. The participants were chosen through the utilisation of a judgemental sampling technique. The data was gathered through the utilisation of anonymous questionnaires. The data was analysed by utilising multiple linear regression analysis to determine the characteristics that hinder the evaluation of business intelligence (BI) in the small apparel industry. The study employs the Technology-Organisation-Environment (TOE) framework as its conceptual framework. The researcher identified several obstacles that hinder the evaluation of business intelligence in micro-small textile enterprises in South Africa. These factors include perceived relative advantage, cost, organisational data environment, organizational decision-making culture, and external support. However, there are numerous governmental institutions that are intended to provide support for micro-small companies. Therefore, it is recommended that these institutions establish training initiatives aimed at educating apparel SMMEs on BI. The implementation of target-driven training has the potential to significantly contribute to the achievement of vision 2030 for fostering the growth of small, medium, and micro enterprises (SMMEs) to enhance the South African economy.
This study examines the impact of Big Data technologies on operational efficiency in DP World’s supply chain and logistics operations. Employing a mixed-methods approach, we surveyed 405 stakeholders and performed 20 semi-structured interviews to investigate the incorporation of advanced analytics, machine learning, and real-time processing capabilities. The study employs Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) and economic frameworks to examine the technological, organisational, environmental, and economic determinants affecting Big Data adoption. Results indicate substantial positive effects on the reduction of operational complexity, enhancement of customer responsiveness, improvement of supplier connections, and strengthening of technical partnerships. PLS-SEM analysis utilising ADANCO software validated all hypotheses, demonstrating robust connections between Big Data deployment and supply chain efficiency measures. Essential findings indicate that governmental assistance, organisational culture, and information technology infrastructure are crucial success determinants. The report offers practical advice for supply chain managers and policymakers, emphasising Big Data's revolutionary capacity for competitive advantage in global logistics operations.
While African big businesses are increasingly utilising big data analytics to enhance their competitiveness, many small to medium enterprises (SMEs) across the continent remain hesitant to adopt these tools. Although SMEs could also gain significant benefits from big data analytics, the factors driving their potential adoption for information security management are not yet well understood. This paper presents a qualitative grounded theory study, focusing on SMEs in South Africa. Through in-depth analysis, this research generated a theory that reveals key factors influencing the adoption of big data analytics amongst these SMEs. Using semi-structured interviews, data were collected from 28 owner-managers of SMEs, then transcribed and systematically coded using the grounded theory approach. The resulting substantive theory provides valuable insights into the core aspects driving big data adoption for information security management among South African SMEs – specifically, ability, opportunity, and motivation. The study implies that by understanding the impact of these three factors, SMEs can make more informed decisions to enhance information security performance.
The escalating financial burdens faced by the Small Medium and Micro Enterprise (SMME) sector necessitate a perpetual pursuit of enhanced managerial efficacy. For enhanced financial management, client relationship management and inventory control, it is necessary for businesses to utilise various technologies and methodologies. One approach involves the utilisation of business analytical technologies, such as Business Intelligence (BI). Business Intelligence (BI) serves as a valuable tool for enterprises, aiding in the examination and interpretation of data to facilitate informed decision-making processes aimed at enhancing overall business efficacy. The eThekwini region encompasses a significant presence of micro-small enterprises within the apparel manufacturing and retail sector. The primary aim of this research was to identify and analyse the many issues that hinder the evaluation of business intelligence (BI) in micro-small apparel enterprises located in Durban, a city in Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa. A cross-sectional quantitative study was undertaken to examine a cohort of 161 small apparel business owners. The participants were chosen through the utilisation of a judgemental sampling technique. The data was gathered through the utilisation of anonymous questionnaires. The data was analysed by utilising multiple linear regression analysis to determine the characteristics that hinder the evaluation of business intelligence (BI) in the small apparel industry. The study employs the Technology-Organisation-Environment (TOE) framework as its conceptual framework. The researcher identified several obstacles that hinder the evaluation of business intelligence in micro-small textile enterprises in South Africa. These factors include perceived relative advantage, cost, organisational data environment, organizational decision-making culture, and external support. However, there are numerous governmental institutions that are intended to provide support for micro-small companies. Therefore, it is recommended that these institutions establish training initiatives aimed at educating apparel SMMEs on BI. The implementation of target-driven training has the potential to significantly contribute to the achievement of vision 2030 for fostering the growth of small, medium, and micro enterprises (SMMEs) to enhance the South African economy.
Business intelligence (BI) can assist businesses with the analysis of information to make better decisions to improve business performance; however, a lack of research with respect to the adoption of BI tools specifically in the SMME apparel sector has been observed. Developments in information technology (IT) have led to an increase in competitiveness among providers, resulting in a plethora of offerings for customers to choose from. As such, businesses are operating in evolving and complex environments where business intelligence systems (BIS) have become essential. The aim of this study was to establish the factors that influence the adoption of BI by micro-small apparel retailers in KwaZulu-Natal. The study was a cross-sectional survey that sampled 132 apparel business owners who were selected using purposive sampling. A survey questionnaire was used to collect the data. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 13.0. This study found that the main inhibitors to the adoption of BI systems among small apparel retailers are cost-related. However, an interesting finding was that although cost had a negative relationship to adoption in the results, most of the respondents still indicated that they were able to make financial plans to adopt BI. The study recommends that small apparel business owners prioritize the adoption of BI as a tool for business operations. The adoption of such tools would have a net positive effect on the operations of such businesses.
Big data (BD) adoption is still relatively slow despite the numerous business opportunities that it embodies. Within the context of financial institutions in South Africa, the specific drivers of big data adoption remain largely indeterminate. Consequently, this study explores the possible relationships between perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use and actual big data adoption, while being duly cognisant of the role that behavioural intention to adopt big data could play. The study employed a survey research approach and relied on data collected from a purposive sample of 195 management level employees of financial institutions. Regression analysis to test the hypothesised relationships in the study revealed that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use were statistically significant predictors of big data adoption. Instructively, this relationship was subject to the extent of behavioural intention of respondents. For respondents with a low behavioural intention to adopt big data, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use displayed a statistically insignificant relationship with big data adoption. Conversely, the regression model for the group of respondents with a high behavioural intention to adopt big data is statistically significant. These findings enrich literature related to big data from a developing country context while concurrently identifying veritable antecedents of big data adoption in financial institutions.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:56 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |