How to cite:

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal. (2022). Evaluation of

Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project Actors.

Journal of Eduvest . Vol 2(9): Page 1827-1837

E-ISSN:

2775-3727

Published by:

https://greenpublisher.id/

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 9, September, 2022

p- ISSN 2775-3735 - e-ISSN 2775-3727

EVALUATION OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF

BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ACTORS

Novdin M Sianturi

, Darwin Sitompul

, Syahrizal

Civil Engineering Study Program, Faculty of Engineering, Simalungun

University,Indonesia

University Of North Sumatra, Medan

, Indonesia

123

Email: [email protected]

, [email protected]

, rizal_ar@ymail.com

ABSTRACT

This study is the result of a rehearsal to find the factors that

are the main reasons for the delay in the completion of the

Sei Wampu Bridge project, Empus Village Project, Bahorok

Regency and look for various alternatives to overcome them.

By knowing these factors, it is hoped that the company can

obtain guidelines for working on subsequent projects so that

delays and quality deficiencies can be avoided. The author in

this study used a qualitative approach with descriptive

delivery. This study uses a descriptive type of research using

qualitative methods. Descriptive research is a type of research

that describes the actual situation based on data in the field.

From the results of the analysis, it can be concluded that

problems related to the completion of business achievements

that cause not on time and quality are generally caused by 3

(three) factors, namely: the employer factor of the Bridge

Construction Project Implementer, the field factor and the

order variation factor.

KEYWORDS

Management Quality , Finish Project , Quality Project

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons

Attribution- ShareAlike 4.0 International

INTRODUCTION

Sumatra Province has location potency enough geography strategic compared

with area Other provinces in Sumatra, such as Riau and Lampung Provinces . Dear once,

not yet enough developed good from object tourism nor from side utilization results earth.

For support smoothness current tour the required facilities and infrastructure (Novdin M

Sianturi et al., 2018) (Purba, Sianturi, Saragih, & Damanik, 2021), one of which is

development bridge. The development need coordination Among Government Province

with entrepreneurs as well as relevant agencies in development that (Ketaren & Sianturi,

2017). For doing development that Government Province based on instructions from The

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal

Evaluation of Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project

Actors

1828

Indonesian government chooses companies decent contractor doing profession the based

on criteria determined by the Directorate of Public Works of Highways in Jakarta which

at the time now named Department Settlement and Regional Development, Directorate

General Regional Development, Project Road Upgrades and Replacements Bridge

Region I North Sumatra represented by the Replacement Section Bridge Region I North

Sumatra (Kusiani et al., 2021). For expedite the implementation process profession the so

required service construction. However so , since mid 1997 to end 1999 a lot occur delay

implementation project in everything sector development especially in development

bridge new (Lubis & Sianturi, 2012).

This company is company private whose shares part big owned family . Bridge

Construction Project Executor is moving in the field of construction, agriculture, supplier,

trade, common and now will focus on import-export (Damanik, Sianturi, Saragih, &

Purba, n.d.)

Bridge Construction Project Executor is one of the tender winners from three

package help from the OECF focused on bridge improvement in the area of North

Sumatra Province. Package the is the “Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Project

OECF Loan. IP-444 packet OP-05, Sibaganding, Etc North Sumatra," with contract

number 01/KTR-A/05/02/1998, dated 28 July 1998. Supervision implementation

profession assisted by Bridge Construction Project Executor as consultant package bridge

Sibaganding (Debby et al., 2021), Etc as well as owner is Department Work General

Republic of Indonesia, Directorate General of Highways Section of Road and Bridge

Infrastructure . Execution time is 610 days and time 365 days maintenance calendar and

the available funds are 1% Pure APBN and 99% OECF IP – 444 (Ketaren & Sianturi,

2017).

In implementation project the owner did regulation to ensure project the permanent

walk although in state crisis monetary, including contractor's All Risk insurance,

guarantees Implementation and Guarantee of Advances that make party company deliver

all dividend company as guarantee for doing Bridge Sibaganding Etc, and make company

lack of capital in doing the profession although already handed over 13.5% down

payment given the owner, however that all no could complete project caused liberation of

the affected area development bridge new (Purba et al., 2021). Project the is one unity

from Bridge Sibaganding which consists of from a number of bridge (Kusiani et al.,

2021)..

Bridge construction it is very necessary when this , remember old bridge already

aged more from 40 years and already no worthy again for traversed by heavy vehicles.

For that required planning making bridge new in anticipate spike usage quite a bridge

high (Purba et al., 2021), because existence object Bukit Lawang tourism and increasing

level of life population local consequence tourism that (Ketaren & Sianturi, 2017).

Construction of the Sei Wampu . Bridge need correct coordination in take all risky

action tall where party Bridge Construction Project Executor management ( contractor) in

implementation experience very complicated problem, ok from state natural surrounding

as well as outside from circumstances in the project that are not support in speed up

profession bridge that . In reality the expected target company in complete sixth bridge

for 420 days calendar no walk with good (N M Sianturi, Kamarudin, Wahab, & Saudi,

2019). Lateness the caused by need frame that doesn't in accordance Among Request

from Department Settlement and Regional Development (Novdin M Sianturi, 2014),

Directorate General Regional Development , Project Road Upgrades and Replacements

North Sumatra Region I Bridge with production factory skeleton steel bridge from

Australia, which effect side from lateness production skeleton as well as delivery skeleton

bridge the make all profession constrained until more than 6 months (Novdin M. Sianturi,

Nofirman, Yulianti, Fatmawati, & Hendriarto, 2022) . Consequence Thing the company

experience loss as well as addition time sufficient execution long so that cost

implementation Becomes more big (Novdin M Sianturi, 2015). Implementation sixth

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

volumes 2, Number 9, September, 2022

1829

http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

bridge the should eat time 610 days calendar in agreement contract between owner and

contractor . In reality until month March year 2000 implementation process profession the

has eat time 590 days kelander, project Bridge Sibaganding and Lau Tembo condition

98% complete worked on, Sei Wampu and Sei Batang bridges Attack condition 82%

complete done as well as Sei Glare Bridge and Aek Calm condition only 75% finished

worked on (Purba & Sianturi, 2013). Field inspection of the Sei Wampu (Purba &

Sianturi, 2013). Bridge experience various obstacles, including rain which, in continuous

flood continuously result in abutment role of bridge along scaffold skeleton bridge

damaged carried by the incoming flood waters from upstream river (Novdin M Sianturi et

al., 2018). Incoming frame to field no in accordance with time delivery ordered by the

company result in profession no done appropriate time (Wahyuni, Lathifa, & Susilo,

2019). Beside that , the most important problem experienced by the company is skeleton

bridge no have suitable weight with the expected so that bridge experience damage and

make the implementation process Becomes add 1 month until bridge could returned like

beginning with helped scaffolding on the 10th , 11th and 12th segments (1 segment = 5

meters where long 60 meters bridge and required 12 segments / joints ) (Novdin M

Sianturi, Saragih, Purba, & Damanik, 2021). Consequence incident the party company

experience loss from side time and cost repair component bridge broken frame (Novdin

M Sianturi & Saragih, 2020).

From the description above seen that implementation Sei Wampu Bridge Bridge

the no appropriate time and quality no in accordance with what you want owner's side .

See Thing the writer To do evaluation back management system quality related

Department Settlement and Regional Development projects with third standard including

standard poured product in drawings and specifications, work process standards as

outlined in the method work as well as standard poured system in system quality (Novdin

Manoktong Sianturi, 2022).

Based on the description that has been stated above, it looks that since project done

from beginning month August 1998 implementation often no in accordance with schedule

(time schedule) that has been set earlier (Sipayung, Sianturi, Arta, Rohayati, & Indah,

2021). This thing means that Bridge Construction Project Executor does not could do

project Sei Wampu Bridge Bridge with appropriate time and with appropriate quality

with desire owner project (owner) (Sipayung et al., 2021). because that , feel need for find

factors reason main lateness as well as mismatch quality that, then look for alternative

solution to overcome it so that in the future come delays and nonconformities quality the

no repeated again (Purba et al., 2021). In other words, the problem main will discussed in

rehearsal this is look for factors reason main too late solution project as well as not

accordingly quality with desire owner project , then look for alternative the solution

(Novdin M Sianturi et al., 2021).

rehearsal this aim for look for the factors that become reason main late settlement

process project Sei Wampu Bridge and looking for various alternatives to overcome it .

With know factors the expected company could get guidelines for doing projects next

until delay and lack of custom quality could be avoided.

RESEARCH METHOD

The author in this study used a qualitative approach with descriptive delivery. This

study uses a descriptive type of research using qualitative methods. Descriptive research

is a type of research that describes the actual conditions based on data in the field.

Meanwhile, according to Moleong that qualitative research is rooted in a natural

background as divinity, and on humans as research tools, utilizes qualitative methods of

inductive data analysis, directs research objectives in an effort to find theories more

concerned with processes than results. Choosing a set of criteria to write down the

validity of the data, the research design is tentative, the research results are agreed upon

by the research subjects .

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal

Evaluation of Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project

Actors

1830

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Internal and External Analysis

Reviewed from nature , then necessary elements get attention are you serious

could grouped between internal and external . The internal elements that are weakness

are :

 Structure Organization found in Management

 Coaching found in Management

 Rewards and Punishments are in Management

 Knowledge practical found in HR

 The number of personnel is in HR

 Inaccuracies information found in Change Construction

 Leadership weak individual .

Temporary according to external elements which is threat are :

 Claim is in the element Executor Project .

 Land claims are found in elements Social / environmental .

 Community demands exist is in the social / environmental element.

 Disturbance Security is also in the elements social / environmental .

 Worker +/- is in formal change .

Elements that have relative mean value high that is internal and can so that can be

categorized as Strengths are :

 Retrieval decision / policy is in management.

 Coordination in management.

 Description of the tasks contained in the structure organization .

 Delegation au thority vested in management .

 Work with the team that is an element of culture.

As for what is categorized as opportunities (opportunities) between other :

 Availability institution education managerial such as the Research in the Master

of Management Program in the Field of Technology in Bridge Construction

Projects.

 Emergence energies expert field civil from circle College tall

 Available management system ISO 9000 quality for contractor

 Existence projects completed bridge done previously

 Availability Quality education and training .

By complete the elements that are Strengths , Weaknesses , Opportunities as well as

threat could be seen in table 1.

Table 1 Strengths , Weaknesses , Opportunities and Threats

Strength (S)

Weakness (W)

Opportunity (O)

Threat (T)

Description Task

Leadership

Individual still

weak coaching

Not enough

Availability of

institutions

managerial

education like

Research

Institute for

Master Program

in Technology

Management in

There is a claim

from

implementing

party field

There is a claim

land ownership

There is a claim

Public

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

volumes 2, Number 9, September, 2022

1831

http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

Bridge

Construction

Projects Project

relatively done

Delegator

authority

Taking decision/

policy

Rewards and

punishments are

not enough

The emergence

of energy civil

expert college

circles Tall.

There is a

system ISO

quality

management

9000 for

contractors

Availability of

materials in the

field The

emergence of

education and

training training

quality

Disturbance

security

Coordinati

Knowledge

Practical not

enough

There is a job

add/subtract

Teamwork

Inaccuracy

Information tall

Inaccuracy

Information tall

Organizational

Structure

SWOT/ TOWS . Matrix

After fourth components ( strengths , weaknesses , opportunities and threats ) can

be known , next with use SWOT matrix is worked on to get alternative strategy based on

logic maximizing the same strengths and opportunities with that must be able to minimize

weaknesses and overcoming threats . By complete SWOT/TOWS matrix is shown in

table 2

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal

Evaluation of Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project

Actors

1832

Table 2 SWOT/TOWS Matrix cases Project Sei Wampu Bridge Bridge

Internal factors

External Factors

Strength (S)

Weakness (W)

1. Standard job

description

2. Experience on

bridge/road projects

3. Have a good name

4. Making the right

decision/policy.

5. 5. Certain work

culture

1. Leadership is still low.

2. Less coaching.

3. Less Reward &

Punishment

4. Inaccuracy

5. High Information

External Factors Opportunity

(O)

Strategy - SO

Strategy – WO

1. The existence of the

MM-USU Managerial

educational institution

2. There are completed

projects High

3. The emergence of bid

experts. College Civil

Investigation

4. The existence of an ISO

9000 Quality standard

management system for

contractors

5. Availability of materials

in the field

6. The emergence of

training/training

7. good quality

N1 : Reviewing the

working method of

implementing in the field

to be more effective in

accordance with national

and international

standards (S1,O4)

N2 : Make a policy to

prioritize the use of local

materials if it is in

accordance with existing

standards (S3,O5)

N3 : Involving experts from

universities in civil society

in accordance with (W7,

O3)

N4 : Conduct comparative

studies to similar projects

that are relatively

successful (W2, W4, O2)

N5 : Involve employees

who have the potential to

participate in S1 and MM

programs (W1,W3,O1)

N6 : Improving the skills of

workers through the

education and training

program (W5,O6)

Threat (T)

Strategy - ST

Strategy - WT

1. There is a claim from the

executor in the field

2. There is a land

ownership claim

3. Community demands

4. Security Disruption

5. 5. There is

additional/less work

N7 : Appeal to field

implementers to use the

appropriate local

manpower as much as

possible.

(S2,T3)

N8 : Forming a special

team consisting of people

from various fields to

handle field problems that

arise.

(S4,S5,T1,T5)

N9 : Collaborating with

local youth organizations in

maintaining environmental

security.

(W6,T4)

N10 : Cooperate with the

local government and local

Tripika elements to provide

counseling and approach to

the community.

(W3,T2)

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

volumes 2, Number 9, September, 2022

1833

http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

Solving Solution Selection Problem

Retrieval process decision for set alternative to be priority use Analytical

Hierarchy Process (AHP) method or what is known taking multi-criteria decision . From

solution solving problem , can be conducted with method view / make an outline of what

happened, where will appear evaluation convenience implementation, cost

implementation and expectations result . Of the three elements the will appear SWOT

matrix , from the SWOT matrix so we will see ten alternative solving related problems

with convenience implementation , cost implementation .

Figure 1 The Process of Finding Ranking Alternative Solutions for Solutions

Problem.

The criteria used in choose alternative are ; NK1 = Convenience implementation

NK2 = Cost implementation

NK3 = Expectations results

Next conducted weighting criteria and followed with evaluation to alternative

based on criteria as already _ set above _ through how to brainstorm with using the form

in the attachment . After that conducted calculation with use matrix comparison pair and

normalization , continued with consistent test for knowing what is the consistency ratio

(CR), where if CR 0.10 then matrix comparison could be accepted ( answer ) consistent ).

Calculation more could see appendix B. _

As for the results calculation in weighting criteria could be seen in table 3.

III

VII

VIII

Problems

The Initial Stage of the Ease of

Implementation Process

The Initial Stage of the Result

Expectation Process Ekspetasi Hasil

Initial Stage of the Process

Implementation costs

SWOT

Ease of Implementation

The Initial Stage of the Result

Expectation Process Ekspetasi Hasil

Implementation cost

Rank

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal

Evaluation of Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project

Actors

1834

Table 3 Weighting Results Criteria

Criteria

Weight

NK1 : Convenience implementation

0.25965

NK2 : Cost �

0.41749

NK3 : Expectations results

0.32286

Then results evaluation to alternative solution solving problem based on the

criteria above shown in tables 4,.5 and.6.

Table Assessment Results To Alternative Problem Solutions based on Criteria

Convenience Execution (NK1)

Alternative Solution Troubleshooting

Score

Alternative Solution Solution Problem I

0.0988

Alternative Solution Solution Problem II

0.0749

Alternative Solution Solution Problem III

0.1024

Alternative Solution Solution Problem IV

0.1048

Alternative Solution Solution Problem V

0.1041

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VI

0.1019

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VII

0.1037

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VIII

0.0979

Alternative Solution Solution Problem IX

0.1081

Alternative Solution Solution Problem X

0.1036

Table 5 Assessment Results To Alternative Problem Solutions based on Criteria

Cost Implementation (NK2)

Alternative Solution Troubleshooting

Score

Alternative Solution Solution Problem I

0.1091

Alternative Solution Solution Problem II

0.0740

Alternative Solution Solution Problem III

0.1009

Alternative Solution Solution Problem IV

0.1035

Alternative Solution Solution Problem V

0.1009

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VI

0.1012

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VII

0.1005

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VIII

0.0993

Alternative Solution Solution Problem IX

0.1078

Alternative Solution Solution Problem X

0.1029

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

volumes 2, Number 9, September, 2022

1835

http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

Table 6 Assessment Results To Alternative Problem Solutions based on Criteria

Expected Results (NK3)

Alternative Solution Troubleshooting _

Score

Alternative Solution Solution Problem I

0.1083

Alternative Solution Solution Problem II

0.0724

Alternative Solution Solution Problem III

0.1003

Alternative Solution Solution Problem IV

0.1039

Alternative Solution Solution Problem V

0.1024

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VI

0.1013

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VII

0.1032

Alternative Solution Solution Problem VIII

0.1017

Alternative Solution Solution Problem IX

0.1081

Alternative Solution Solution Problem X

0.0983

After conducted weighting criteria and values for every alternative solution

problem based on each known criteria, then the next step is calculate the Average Value

(NR) for every alternative solution solving problem with use formula :

where Wj = Weight for j criteria

Aij = Value for alternative 1 based on j

Then conducted sorting priority and set start from alternative solution solving

problems that have an Average Score (NR) and an assignment order priority could be

seen in table 6.7 with method shorten sentence alternative solution solving problems like

the following ASPM this :

Table 7 Calculation Results of Total Value (NR) and Determination Order Priority

Alternative

Score Based On Criteria

Score

Average2

(Nr)

Priority

NK1

NK2

NK3

ASPM 1

0.0988

0.1091

0.1083

0.1054

ASPM 2

0.0749

0.0740

0.0724

0.0738

ASPM 3

0.1024

0.1009

0.1003

0.1012

ASPM 4

0.1048

0.1035

0.1024

0.1036

ASPM 5

0.1041

0.1009

0.1013

0.1020

ASPM 6

0.1019

0.1012

0.1032

0.1021

ASPM 7

0.1037

0.1005

0.1017

0.1019

VII

ASPM 8

0.0979

0.0993

0.1081

0.1017

VIII

ASPM 9

0.1081

0.1078

0.0983

0.1047

ASPM 10

0.1036

0.1029

0.1056

0.1040

III

WEIGHT

0.2597

0.4175

0.3229

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal

Evaluation of Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project

Actors

1836

CONCLUSION

From result analysis obtained conclusion that related problems _ with

effort achievement solution that causes no appropriate time and quality in general

caused by 3 ( three ) factors , namely : employer factor ( Bridge Construction

Project Executor ), factor field and variation order factors . Then after To do

analysis quantitative to elements reason from third the above factors , then next

with usage SWOT matrix and Analytical Hierarchy Process obtained 10 ( ten )

alternatives strategic

1. Method review work executor field for more effective with national standard .

2. Shaping team specially made up of people from various fields to handle

problems or obstacles that arise in the field .

3. Working same with party related for stage counseling know approach to

Public like local government local .

4. Raising work together with local youth organization in guard security

environment .

5. Make policy for more prioritize use of local raw materials when Fullfill

standard job mix.

6. urge to executor field for as far as possible possible use energy work local

when Fulfill criteria work .

7. Engaging power expert from circle College in _ investigation geology in see

location development project .

8. Increase Skills watchman through the training program or training .

9. Follow potential workers / employees _ for follow in education Diploma,

Bachelor and MM programs.

10. To do comparative study to similar projects _ where relatively successful .

REFERENCES

Damanik, Dermina Roni Santika, Sianturi, Novdin Manoktong, Saragih, Deardo

Samuel, & Purba, Virgo Erlando. (n.d.). Analisis Penurunan dan Lendutan

Sistem Pondasi Tiang Sebagai Perkuatan pada Tanah Gambut. TEKNIK,

42(1), 273–281.

Debby, Farida, Umi, Nongkeng, Hasan, Ybnu, Muhammad, Al Amin, La Ode

Abdul Salam, Manoktong, Sianturi Novdin, & Yusriadi, Yusriadi. (2021).

The role of work environment and leadership on employee performance

through employee work discipline. Proceedings of the International

Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, 3734–

3740.

Ketaren, Kataresada, & Sianturi, Novdin M. (2017). Decision Making Modelling

with Logistic Regression Approach. International Journal of Applied

Engineering Research, 12(19), 9067–9073.

Kusiani, Eni, Ansar, Syahruddin, Bakri, Muh, Syukrano, Muhammad, Yusriadi,

Yusriadi, & Manoktong, Sianturi Novdin. (2021). Increasing the

professionalism of military teachers with training and experience through

competence. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial

Engineering and Operations Management, 3298–3304.

Lubis, Muhammad Efrizal, & Sianturi, Novdin M. (2012). Penetapan Model

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

volumes 2, Number 9, September, 2022

1837

http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

Bangkitan Pergerakan Untuk Beberapa tipe Perumahan di Kota

Pematangsiantar. Media Teknik Sipil, 10(1).

Purba, Virgo Erlando, & Sianturi, Novdin M. (2013). Kajian Pemilihan Pondasi

Sumuran sebagai Alternatif Perancangan Pondasi. Jurnal Rancang Sipil,

2(1).

Purba, Virgo Erlando, Sianturi, Novdin Manoktong, Saragih, Deardo Samuel, &

Damanik, Dermina Roni Santika. (2021). Kombinasi Abu Dasar Batu Bara

dan Abu Vulkanik sebagai Material Beton. Jurnal Permukiman, 16(1), 10.

https://doi.org/10.31815/jp.2021.16.10-20

Sianturi, N M, Kamarudin, M. K. A., Wahab, N. A., & Saudi, A. S. Mohd. (2019).

The Hydraulic Modelling on Sediments Ponds in Binanga Aron River, North

Sumatera Indonesia. International Journal of Recent Technology and

Engineering (IJRTE), ISSN, 2277–3878.

Sianturi, Novdin M., Nofirman, Nofirman, Yulianti, Eka Budi, Fatmawati,

Endang, & Hendriarto, Prasetyono. (2022). Relevancy technological

innovation and community economic development in Indonesia. Linguistics

and Culture Review, 6, 117–130.

https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v6ns3.2091

Sianturi, Novdin M. (2014). Performance of Clean Water Reservoir in

Pematangsiantar, Indonesia, Affected by Earthquake. Journal of Civil

Engineering Research, 4, 2163–2340.

Sianturi, Novdin M. (2015). Evaluasi Terhadap Pengelolaan Sampah Dalam

Meningkatkan Pelayanan Aset Di Kota Pematangsiantar. Jurnal Teknik Sipil,

13(3), 240–254.

Sianturi, Novdin M, Kamarudin, Mohd Khairul Amri, Toriman, Mohd Ekhwan,

Wahab, N. A., Hakparn, Surachate, Lertbunchardwong, Kanittha,

Potikengrith, Tepvisit, Islam, Mir Sujaul, & Harith, Hazamri. (2018).

Assessment of environmental management in Lake Toba, Samosir Regency,

North Sumatera Province, Indonesia. Int. J. Eng. Technol, 7(3.14).

Sianturi, Novdin M, Saragih, Deardo S., Purba, Virgo E., & Damanik, Dermina R.

S. (2021). Bahaya Longsor dan Pencegahan Di Kelurahan Sukadame

Kecamatan Siantar Utara Kota Pematangsiantar. Pubarama: Jurnal Publikasi

Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, 1(2).

Sianturi, Novdin M, & Saragih, Deardo Samuel. (2020). EVALUASI

PEMBANGUNAN DRAINASE RINGROAD PANGURURAN–TOMOK

STA 32+ 000 SAMPAI DENGAN STA 38+ 000 DI KABUPATEN

SAMOSIR. Jurnal Santeksipil, 1(1).

Sianturi, Novdin Manoktong. (2022). Evaluation of Multi-Function Drainage

Channels For Running Water Fish Culture For The Benefit of The

Community In Pangururan District. International Journal of Engineering,

Science and Information Technology, 2(2), 118–128.

Sipayung, Kammer Tuahman, Sianturi, Novdin Manoktong, Arta, I. Made Dwipa,

Rohayati, Yeti, & Indah, Diani. (2021). Comparison of Translation

Techniques by Google Translate and U-Dictionary: How Differently Does

Both Machine Translation Tools Perform in Translating? Elsya: Journal of

English Language Studies, 3(3), 236–245.

Wahyuni, Dwi, Lathifa, Rifqi Fuadatul, & Susilo, Vendi Eko. (2019). Safety of

Bioinsecticide Ekstract Sugar Apple Seed’s Granule (Annona squamosa L.)

on Histology of White Rat (Rattus norvegicus B.).

Novdin M Sianturi, Darwin Sitompul, Syahrizal

Evaluation of Quality Management System of Bridge Development Project

Actors

1838