Planview Portfolios Reviews

We use Planview Enterprise One to capture information about all of our IT projects, IT resources, and financials associated with those projects. We then use information from Planview to understand how we are progressing in plan delivery, what our pipeline of work looks like, and what resources are required to deliver that pipeline of work and the execution. We are utilizing a broad range of capabilities across what Planview Enterprise One provides.

We don't use it for task management, and the work breakdown that we keep in Planview is relatively high. As a result, it is at key milestones rather than individual activities.

In terms of features, the financial planning modules are quite good, and they are the ones that are used the most. For us at this stage in our use, the financial planning feature is the most valuable feature of Planview Enterprise One.

The reporting is poor and requires improvement.

The tiles and exception-based activities in the application are sufficient to get by. However, when it comes to producing executive reports, MI reports, or any other type of reporting, we must exit Planview and work offline. We have been working with them to improve on that, as well as using some of the Power BI capabilities that have been available for a while, but it's still more difficult than it should be.

In the next release, I would like to be able to use the data in the tool to gain insight much more easily.

We have been working with Planview Enterprise One in our company for the last two and a half years. Prior to that, I implemented it in a different organization. I strong level of knowledge of this solution.

We are six months behind because we had a few problems when we took current releases. While we didn't do any customization, some of our configurations failed in some releases and required re-work.

We haven't run into any scalability performance issues. We have over 500 work items and 2,500 resources, and it's been fine for us. 

We use this solution across the company's IT and have approximately 250 users.

We've opened a few tickets with Planview due to bugs, defects, or configuration issues. Because it varies so much, I would have to put their rating somewhere in the middle. They are sometimes excellent and sometimes poor. It all depends on the circumstances.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward. We took a very quick approach to delivery. It was simple from a Planview standpoint. The questions and approach they used worked well for us. There are no concerns about the initial implementation process. Aside from us being clear on our requirements, the tool itself is fine.

We weren't looking at this as purely a return on the investment project. The return is generated by the projects themselves, allowing us to deliver the projects more efficiently. It's difficult to quantify the improved performance of our project delivery. 

We went through an RFI and RFP process before going to market. We specified our requirements. We went through a series of presentations from vendors to determine who could meet our needs. And we looked at five, and we narrowed it down to three: KeyedIn, Daptive, and Planview. The process we went through there made it clear that it didn't really matter which tool you chose; what mattered was whether or not you felt the implementation process was going to go well. In addition, we compared user feedback to how well the user would interact with the tool. Against those two key criteria during the implementation process, Planview outperformed the others at the time. Based on user feedback on the UI and usability, Planview came out on top.

My advice would be to be very clear about requirements and the associated value. Planview, like many other tools, has a broad range of capabilities, it does some things well and some things not so well. If the things you want to do are the things it excels at, then use it. If you want to do other things, this is not the tool for you. I would be focusing on the requirements against the capabilities, the core capabilities of the tool, rather than the features that may or may not have been added.

It does what it says it will do, and the majority of it is fairly simple to do. I would rate Planview Enterprise One a seven out of ten.

We have a portfolio of 81 projects that are all related to IT. I work for an oil and gas company, but my customers are IT. So, the use cases are related to the active projects that we're currently running through the organization. We have CTOs that are working on it, so we use it for capturing time and dividing time. We use it for the entire lifecycle of the projects, and we also use it for planning our next cycle, such as 2022 planning opportunities.

Enterprise One helps with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. It makes conversations easier and leads to more effective communication. Instead of having to go through all the details, we can just look at the tool. We can have multiple people look at the same set of data and then work through and prioritize the list of opportunities that we have, for instance, for next year. We create a subset of data; for example, we create an opportunity before it becomes an active project, and we input all the data. By having standardized data inputs, it becomes easier to compare multiple opportunities because you have all the information at hand.

Enterprise One allows program managers to group work together to see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. It makes life simpler. They have an easier overview. To some extent, it is Planview's influence, but then it is also because of that dashboard capability that we have to apply at the backend so that the portfolio managers can look at their portfolios through a dashboard. So, it's not necessarily 100% within the tool, but it has made our life easier. It is a 50:50 contribution of Planview versus Power BI. We are able to drill down into the details underlying the consolidated information. So, we have better data accuracy and, therefore, better metadata.

The sheer amount of information available in one single interface is valuable. Everything is there. It is also a lot of work to maintain all the information, but generally, you can find everything you need within this one tool.

Its reporting needs to be improved. My main complaint when it comes to Planview is that it is good to maintain all the data but to actually use the information that is in it, you actually have to use a different tool. We use Power BI. So, we pull all the information, and then we use a Power BI dashboard to stage or look at the information.

I can look at one project to see what its stage is, but it is not easy. I would be able to get the information because it is a part of the work and assignment detail, but it's not something where with one click of a button, I have the information. The information is not too easily or readily available to see the stage of work.

In terms of Enterprise One's ability to create summary reports across multiple projects, 
I can input the information on a project-to-project level. So, I have the information in there for each project, which goes to a central database. However, getting the information out of the tool is not so easy. So, entering the information input is great, but I'm not sure I know how to get the output. I'm not sure if my company knows how to do that. We have a Planview team, but I doubt that they would be more knowledgeable on this particular aspect. That's because they're more data and tool-oriented. They're not for user support. They're more like tool support.

It works for large work efforts, but it is too complex for smaller work efforts. Planview has a different tool that they want you to use for less complex work. They want you to buy both tools, but I don't know how the integration would work. Having to have a second tool for less complex work sort of gives you the idea that the original tool, Enterprise One, is too complex. It should be simpler to use so that I can also use it for less complex efforts.

In terms of forecasting the remaining effort, if it is expressed in dollars, then I'm pretty okay with figuring it out, but when it is expressed in tasks, that information is not necessarily there for me. The timeline doesn't really give me that overview. So, from a financial perspective, it is good. From a scheduled perspective, it is not so good, and from an execution perspective, it is even worse.

I've been using Enterprise One since 2018. In our company, we have been using other products from Planview way before that.

It is better this year than in previous years. There used to be data issues and duplication issues. The snapshots weren't taken every month. So, the snapshots wouldn't work. There was some sort of MuleSoft software being used that was creating issues last year. This year, generally, we have had fewer issues with the tool itself. That may have something to do with the fact that we have a release schedule. Planview releases an upgrade or update every month, and then our team combines the updates for three or four months and rolls them out all at once. The quarterly update schedule is probably working better.

It works for large work efforts, but it is too complex for smaller work efforts.

We have an operations team within the company, and they work with Planview.

It was pretty straightforward. It sort of takes you through the step-by-step setup, so you cannot really go wrong. The tool itself guides you to the next step.

We probably used a consultant, but I cannot be sure. It was done too long ago, and I wasn't involved.

They do ROI all the time, but I don't know if they've done it for the implementation of this tool.

I would advise making sure that your data is up to speed and your data is clean before you start implementing it. That's because once it is implemented, it is a lot more difficult to clean up your data.

Using Planview Enterprise One has made me aware of the sheer amount of data that is there to classify for a single project. When you look at a project, you generally think about the normal stuff such as what is the beginning date and end date, what are the stages, how much you spend, how much you spend per stage or per month, whether it is an actual or a forecast, etc. There are just so many different data points to one single project. I wasn't aware of them until I started using Planview Enterprise One.

I know that Enterprise One has the capability to view resource capacity and availability, but our company is not using that capability to its fullest extent. That's because, in the previous versions, it wasn't there. So, it is hard to get that paradigm shift. People use other tools to look at resource availability. About 50% of our projects run through Planview, and the remaining 50% of projects are managed out of the organization itself. So, they are not necessarily tracked in Planview. So, when I look at resource availability, I always have to look at the general overview. I have to combine those two sources to see how many resources I have available for a certain period of time.

Enterprise One doesn't provide end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. It is good for projects, but it is not good for non-project work. At least for us, it does not provide that capability. That's why only about 50% of our projects run through Planview, and the remaining 50% of projects are managed out of the organization itself.

Enterprise One provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people, but we don't use it.

I would rate Planview Enterprise One a seven out of 10. I like the tool, but I am looking forward to getting that reporting and analytics part fixed. For me, that's not working right now.

We have a huge contractor base and the solution is the primary time-keeping system for our contractors in IT. We manage all of our projects and financials in Planview, as well as the time submissions associated with those projects.

It has improved the way our organization functions by giving us the overall picture of our financials. Before, we were functioning using spreadsheets, and now we are using a tool where we're all able to collaborate right in it. I'm part of the PMO, and my team is Portfolio Management. My team manages the financials and oversees the financials for all of the capabilities and the departments within our IT organization, and so it provides us that one source of truth, that one data repository for us to obtain our project actuals as well as our forecast data.

I'm also the Planview administrator. When I first joined the company, Planview was primarily used for timekeeping. Since then, the level of information that we're now capturing in the tool has gone from a three to a nine. Within that three or four-year span that I've been working with Planview in my organization, I've seen us implement better measures and better data points within Planview itself. We had this information parsed throughout the company, and we are now leveraging the life cycle and the various configured screens to capture this information from end to end before a project goes into open active status.

The fast-track reporting has been beneficial to us, as well as the project and portfolio management tool. We don't have any add-ons at this time. We're exploring those at a later date, such as Projectplace and connections with Jira.

When it comes to managing project plans, we are currently in a crawl-walk-run with Planview, and we're just starting to walk. Right now, stage-wise, we can see, financially, a good picture. However, in terms of the attributes that associate the different phases in a project, we're not there yet. We're in the process of implementing that right now. I know it has great features to do that. We're just not there yet. I’d rate it at about a four out of ten, however, that's no implication on the tool itself. It's just where we are as a company. We need more time with it.

In terms of assessing Enterprise One for its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects, I would give it an eight out of ten. It provides us with the ability to slice and dice the data. We have capabilities. Most companies have departments. We’re able to leverage the project portfolios to have that visibility within the various capabilities. It provides us a more granular level, and it just gives us a source of truth in organizing our data as well.

It helps with our ability to share "the big picture" with management. It really enhances that ability, actually. We have a consolidated picture of all of the capabilities captured within Planview financially. From there, that said, we're not using the reporting features fully. We just upgraded from 15 to 18. We plan to start leveraging the Power BI feature. We do have the data now at hand where we're able to extract it and provide that overall picture to our upper management.

Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. It provides our project management with one source of truth in terms of tracking projects from creation. In terms of our backlog efforts, for example, we open projects on a quarterly basis, and so we're able to have that data housed or stored in Planview. Therefore, it's end to end, from project creation to if a project is on hold, and then that effort is reassessed and then placed into open active, and the effort is then in place while the project is going through the various phases through deployment, and then we have a complete end. Right now, for example, my quality and methodology team and I are looking to revamp our end-to-end life cycle to be inclusive of some additional project closure updates, as Planview does have that functionality available, and our quality and methodology team is currently using a different site to oversee their processes. It will be beneficial with that as well.

Enterprise One has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives in terms of visibility and the ability to leverage the portfolios amongst our capabilities. It does give us a better visual into slicing and dicing that data to assess the prioritization of the efforts. It's improved our business and its structure. The processes that we had in place previously have definitely been enhanced and we have more faith in having a source of truth versus various tools and spreadsheets.

Users can assign resources and work and the product provides a variety of types the resources so that users have the ability, when they submit their timesheet, to select various work items that have been authorized for them to charge to.

The configuration of the list is really driven by the projects themselves, so it's pretty simplistic. There's no structure that I have to go in and manage. It's all project work-driven. They are added at the task level, the task is assigned, and is populated to their spreadsheet.

The flexibility on offer is very helpful in meeting the organization's needs. We have also transitioned a work authorization request process into Jira, and from there we have a good cadence where, when resources are needing a new work authorization, our project managers and program coordinators essentially are able to view those requests and implement them. In Planview, those new work tasks will be readily available for them on a Friday when they can make their time submissions. As long as the project is in open active status, there's no hindrance.

Enterprise One does allow program managers to group work together and see resource demands and costs at a consolidated level, however, we're not using the capacity and utilization feature at this moment, as we've got that work to do to clean up our resource roles.

In terms of helping with our on-time completion rate, I rate the product at a seven out of ten. I say that due to the fact that we have better visibility into the financials, and it assists us in the monthly financial assessments that we conduct. The project managers are now able to understand how their projects are tracking and to hold them accountable for a timely delivery. In terms of the time that we spend syncing with these program project managers to assess the timeliness of their delivery, I wouldn't be able to speak to an exact number or percentage. I oversee the system and the tool itself to provide the functionality for my team to assess that, however, I wouldn't be able to give a good quantitative number for that. It might be about 50% of our time.

The only area that I can see currently needing improvement is just the modernization of the look and feel of it. I just attended the Accelerate Conference and heard that that is underway. The configuration for the front-end user can be a little antiquated and it needs a facelift. That said, overall, I'm definitely impressed with the tool itself.

I've been using the solution for three years. The company itself has used Planview probably for about 12 or more years.

I was not a part of the initial implementation. The company had set up the solution before I started working for them.

We are just a customer and an end-user.

With Enterprise One, for forecasting remaining effort, I would give it a six out of ten. That rating applies to how we're using the tool at this time. For example, we're not using requirements and allocations, and so we're able to associate effort in our financials, pending additional effort based on forecast dollars, and things of that nature and accuracy, where we go in and do our monthly financial reviews and do a comparison of actuals to forecast, and we're able to get visibility to that.

At this time, Enterprise One's view into resource capacity and availability does not help us to manage work at this time. That is another component that we look at in the future, however, we're not using it yet. It's on our roadmap to have in place by year-end. We just have some role alignments that we have to facilitate, as well as some blended rates that we may need to assess to align to those roles, to then start using the capacity and utilization feature, which is ICP.

I would definitely recommend engagement from all stakeholders versus a core team rolling out the tool. From financial management to project managers to analysts within the corporation, it would need some blanket engagement, versus one core team deciding everything for an entire organization. New users should also be mindful of what level their PMs function at. Are they operating in a full-blown project management software development life cycle? Before a company builds a tool out to that, definitely be mindful. When I first onboarded, we were upgrading from version 11 to 15, and it was like a re-implementation as there was a lot of revamping of life cycles and things of that nature. We built out a lot of screens and life cycle gates and things of that nature that were not utilized. Being mindful of your user base would likely avoid wasted time if everyone was engaged from the beginning.

I would say the biggest lesson that I have learned is the tool itself definitely can cover a lot of mileage, and you never stop learning with Planview. It's a continuous learning curve when you are actively using it.

I would rate the product overall at a nine out of ten due to what the tool can do and the various features and improvements that it can bring to an organization, as well as the process improvements automation of manual processes within the tool itself. It brings a lot of benefits to the table.

My company uses the solution to do investment planning, project and program management planning, and they do some resource management using that primarily for cost forecasts.

I work on one of the support teams here. I do some configuration and I do some training as well as some design work that involves configuration within the tool.

It's helped the company due to the fact that it does a reasonably good job of tying in those resource forecasts. We're able to integrate with cost information from other systems that we have. It does a pretty good job with that. Also, the ability to tie the risks in with the work is pretty helpful. I like that. Having that being sort of a single source of truth for the risks and for the resource forecast, that's been very useful for us.

The solution has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic initiatives or objectives. We are now funding incrementally, planning for shorter periods, and doing reviews more frequently instead of doing yearly reviews.  We're able to do that using Enterprise One. That's helped us a lot.

I like to work in the resource assignment view. I like the ability to plan tasks out and sequence them. The risk management is great and I appreciate how you can tie risks to the work level items. It helps us forecast resource costs and we’re able to tie the risk to those aspects which helps us keep those items on track.

We're not using the solution for forecasting remaining effort. We use it just to forecast resource costs and other direct costs that are entered.

The solution view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work.

For example, we're currently moving forward with what we call capacity-based planning. The tool is integral to how we're doing that.

The solution provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. It does allow us to have different assignments for resources. It does have some limitations, however, it does allow us to do that for the most part.

The solution allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and cost at a consolidated level through reporting. The reporting is pretty basic in that it allows us to export the data. It requires project management to undertake some additional analysis outside of the tool which we're able to do at this point.

When it comes to managing project plans, the solution works fine. It works well for that. The challenge that we have is that, in our environment, we don't necessarily use it as designed, we use it a little bit differently. That's not the tool's fault. We don't advance the system time every day or every week. We do it monthly. We currently are not doing extensive dependency management within the work.

The out-of-the-box reports, as far as I can tell, are weak. We've had to build a lot of reports using Power BI, which we connected to it.

Reporting is not my focus area, however, one of the things that would be nice is if we could connect our Tableau to it. We do use Power BI, however, we have also been using Tableau. It'd be nice to be able to use that toolset as well for reporting.

One of the problems that we have is that any of the data that comes out of Enterprise One is a point in time. We can't show change over time. Therefore, if we're looking at, for example, progress on work, and we wanted to know if a schedule has gotten better or worse versus last month or last year, we're not able to do that directly on Enterprise One. We have to use a reporting database and extract the data periodically and then use that as a basis for our ability to show change over time. That's a hassle. It would be nice if Enterprise One was able to show change over time, by having the ability to report on data from prior periods.

The solution doesn’t provide end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work. It doesn't work that well in and of itself for planning Agile delivery, for example. I know that they have LeanKit, and we have LeanKit licenses, however, most of our enterprise is using Jira. We are interested in connecting to Jira. That should be coming out in the next year. That said, at this point, I would say it doesn't provide us the end-to-end work management or resource management that we would like without that Jira plugin.

If it could provide historical data or prior time period data, then we would be able to have fewer integrations. That would be an improvement for us. It would probably mean an ability to shrink our footprint on some other Hash Apps, which would probably mean cost savings for us and a simplification of our reporting. 

There could be some simplification on how we manage the users on the system. When you have a user for the system, you have to manually provide them grants. It's not like you could clone a user and provide those same grants to somebody else on their team. You have to do it all manually. That's a hassle.

The inability to paste in data, or do bulk data updates is a little bit difficult as there is no bulk update for work and resource working assignments. You have to manually enter all that information. That seems unnecessary.

If somebody's allocated at a certain rate for a certain time period, you should be able to copy that across and say, this is flat for the rest of the year and then modify it with any exceptions. It's not easy to do that sometimes.

We are not able to drill down into the details and align the consolidated information with this tool. We’d like to have that capability. Every time a project manager or a program manager has to export information and then do pivots and do whatever else in Excel, it means that there are copies of data floating around that we'd rather have stay in the tool. We’d like them to be able to do their analysis and reporting directly out of the tool. We're not there yet with that.

I would not say that the solution has increased our on-time completion rate.

I'd like to see some of the configurations simplified. There's a lot of weird duplication of fields when you're looking at the alternate structures. There's inconsistency around field naming conventions.

I've been working with the solution since 2018.

The stability is pretty good. It's a little bit slow. In particular, we have some projects that are pretty sizable, and then there's substantial performance issues. For some projects where we have hundreds of tasks with hundreds of resources to open, it might take on the order of five minutes to load up, which, to open a screen, is not a reasonable amount of time. That's not normally acceptable.

We've had to artificially break things down into smaller projects, even though that's not the way the work is being managed. That's been a challenge in terms of when we've had to execute workarounds.

There's a scalability problem around very large projects. If you get a large project with a lot of resources and you want to project out for several years, we've had to change that forecast due to the fact that it wouldn't scale. Opening it now takes five minutes, however, in the past, it would take 15 minutes to open and then change things. It was really slow to refresh. We've had to break large projects down to something smaller to make it still somewhat unmanageable, but better.

We have 500 or 600 staff that use the product. We have some people that really just manage risks. We have some people that do resource forecasts. We have other people that really are focused on reporting. We also have other people that do project management and others that manage programs. On top of that, we have some people where their extensive usage really has to do with certain life cycle approvals.

Usage may increase slightly. At one point we had almost 800 users. We were able to cut that down a little bit. We may go back up above 600 in the near future, I don't know for certain. If we have any growth, it would probably be 10% in the next year. That is my expectation.

Technical support has been pretty good. We had some challenges as we were not on the latest platform, on the latest release, however, we just did an upgrade. We're on the July release now. We're two months behind. We are not yet accepting the monthly releases.

Overall, technical support is usually pretty responsive.

Positive

We used Microsoft Project Server for some things, and for other things we used EPPM, which is from HP.

We switched from EPPM to Enterprise One. It had a good review and we wanted to give something new a try. I wasn't at the company at that time, so I don't know if it's the best alternative to EPPM. For the scheduling stuff and detail planning at the task level, we switched from Project Server based on cost. We knew that Enterprise One had the functionality, so there was no reason to support two tools any longer. By focusing on Enterprise One, we were able to simplify the assets we had running our software platforms.

I have not used SAP or Oracle products for project management in the past.

I wasn't a part of the initial setup. I can't speak to whether it was straightforward or complex.

The deployment took about nine or ten months. We wanted to do a phased roll-out due to the different organizations that were involved and also due to the fact that we wanted to work with the different parts of our organization to get the sets of requirements configured.

In terms of maintenance, we have a team of about 30 people that does testing as well as configuration and deployment. There are some people that focus on the configuration of strategy information, and life cycles. Others work on configurations related to the work and any of the work-related attributes such as risks and issues and status. Other folks just work on developing Power BI and other external reports. We have other people that work on training and communications as well.

We worked with Planview directly.

We didn't implement this product to expect some specific financial return. We were just trying to enable certain functions that we have not monetized. We don't have a payback period or anything like that.

I do not have information about the pricing. I know that we have on the order of 600 people on the license, however, I don't know the costs around it.

The company may have evaluated a few other options. Project Server was one of them.

It's my understanding that Project Server has better integration with SharePoint, which is in some ways similar to Projectplace. Project Server is easier as it requires a desktop client, or, at least it did previously in order to maintain the schedules, which was very convenient for a lot of users. That said, in a lot of ways Project Server and Enterprise One are similar, however, honestly, I like Project Server better.

We're just a customer and an end-user.

We're using the July release currently.

The solution meets our needs at this time. It has some limitations with respect to some functionality we're not using yet related to team-based assignments. Maybe it's an area that is not fully applicable since we're not using it yet. It's a feature that was rolled out a year or so ago, or maybe a little bit more, and we have not yet adopted it.

One of the things that I did hear, although I wasn't part of the decision, was that the Gartner Magic Quadrant was a big factor in swaying management's decision. Enterprise One was in the Magic Quadrant. It was well-reviewed by Gartner. I would advise others to give this less weighting and to really look at how configurable the tool is. Project Server is easier to maintain in terms of configuration and operations than this product. 

If I had a colleague at another company and they asked me, "Hey, do you like it?" I would say we do like it, however, it's not perfect. Nothing's perfect. However, users need to really think about how easy it is to find resources that can configure it or how easy it is to actually do those configurations.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We use E1 to track scope, schedule and financials for R&D projects. Some R&D teams even use E1 for RCCP. 

E1 used to be used to track Transformation projects.

E1 have a very useful tool to bring accountability back into projects, make it very easy for us to assign teams and resources to activities in project and track the progress effectively.

It has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives, the leadership has been using E1 for Strategic alignment of Projects.

It helps us keep track of the salary/ hours spent on R&D projects using the time tracking feature, which enables project managers keep track of salary charges as we have hourly labor rates associated with BU's.

But  an issue that we are facing currently is most of the engineers have to submit their time sheets on multiple tools and since planview E1 is being used for only R&D project, the engineers opinionate that it is counter productive to enter timesheets, we are also not well versed with Lean costing to implement in the Org. 

We also track various project metrics which makes it simpler for Leadership to view the details.

Lifecycle management for projects is also commendable, where we have multiple types of projects. 

The most valuable features are the W&A screen. It provides a very useful view as well as the option to capture baselines. I can always review the progress of my projects with my team. It also allows me to capture the notes with respect to the progress. It also allows me to assign members to the task and ensure that they fill that timesheet. I know how much time they spent on certain tasks.

In terms of regular traditional project management and new product development, I would give its ability to see what stage work is at a six out of 10. Non-Project managers find the Ui and UX hard to digest. 

For Agile project management, having the feature of adding backlogs is every useful, but there are a lot of issues with Projectplace connectors as well as LeanKit connectors to Enterprise One, which hampers the Agile experience which is why it feels like a half-baked product. But I hear it has been fixed in newer updates and our Org is under process for update.

With respect to the forecast, I would say it does very basic forecasting of picking whatever we predict and just dividing it by months, quarters, and years. I would prefer to have AI technology in Planview Enterprise One to forecast and predict much better based on historical data. Since Enterprise One has been existing in Flowserve for the past 10 years, there's a lot of historic data that can be used to predict rather than forecast. There are a lot of solutions out there that would do the same.

Its ability to create project related summary reports across multiple projects is one of the best features. They have very good data warehousing.

It is easy to create dashboards using E1 data connectors or the Odata that Planview team has created for us. One of the few reasons why many in leadership likes planview E1.

Our organization is shifting towards Hybrid project management and currently, we are facing issues to re-use the E1 in a way to track projects. We might need to rethink our setup but there is room to improve the standard offering of E1 for Hybrid Pm, as well as update the UI.

Its view into RCCP and availability does not at all help us to manage resources. It is one of the worst features of Enterprise One where everybody in our company hates the tool and are sort of forced to use it for RCCP, some teams have moved to use other tools for the same and use E1 as recording tool only. 

Enterprise One does  not provide any insight to respective resources on the available work and the left out work when he or she goes to the timesheet. It is like filling an Excel sheet from 15 years ago. New solutions out there actually do a better job.

The solutions I am referring to are JIRA as well as Confluence. With that connectivity I see many of my IT teams doing Agile timesheet planning with sort of a background timer capturing the time being spent on a activity. 

Enterprise One has got a very rap in the organization due to its bad UI and complicated UX. The steep learning curve and inability of other non project resources finding it hard to use the tool makes it hard for people to recommend the tool.

The number one thing that needs improvement is the UI. It should be easy for even casual project managers. It should provide customizable screens that look modern and can be a choice for project managers to choose at a professional level, medium level, and a very easy level. I am thinking 3 separate standard Ui that you can choose as per level of users. 

Many PM;s track projects using different tools and sometimes they end up using PV as a record system.  

Enterprise One does not provide a good risk assessment functionality and does not provide a good what-if analysis functionality, it would be preferable to have this in a good UX. 

It does not provide end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. It's 50/50. It is very difficult to use Enterprise One as a tool that one would WANT to use to better the project. It is at this point, a record system that we are bring told to use as it gives nice metrics for leadership to make decisions. 

I have been using Enterprise One for the last two and a half years and my company has been using it for 10+ years. 

I would give their stability an eight out of ten. It's quite stable. Here and there, there have been issues, but other than that, it is quite stable.

It can be scaled very nicely.

We have 2,000 to 3,000 users. The major chunk of these people are in engineering, if not, it's R&D project management.

Before it was ten people managing this solution but now that's down to two. 

I also use Microsoft Project, basecamp and Project for the web.

We were using Excel sheets before and some people are just content with it but can't bring accountability there. Projectplace has been the right filling point between excels and Pm tools. 

But with PowerPlatform from MS, it is becoming easier to create our own tools for project management and we create simple UX for our teams. We are able to bring accountability as well. I think some of us are using Power Apps because we feel the UX in E1 is bad.

We can aggregate E1, Projectplace and Power Apps data to PowerBI dashboard and it is pretty great.

I was involved with the setup for my R&D projects. The setup was extremely straightforward. It was a single sign-on, so it was pretty good.

All the admin guys take care of pricing and licensing and I'm pretty sure it's expensive.

I would suggest avoiding Enterprise One for small scale or medium scale businesses and go for Projectplace or even LeanKit because they are the best parts of the Planview suite. Enterprise One is old, it's aging and they need to revamp it. Large scale companies that can afford E1 for leadership, can look into it but still its difficult to recommend. 

I realize that most R&D project managers don't know how to use the system because of its user interface. But for those who do understand how to use the system, it can be an extremely powerful tool. But a project is done with a large group of people and that group don't like it.  

On a personal level, I actually like Planview Enterprise One, because I know how to use the tool pretty well. So somebody who knows the tool quite nicely can get tremendous value out of it.I do not use other PM tools like many other PM's, I use E1 and Projectplace quite rigorously and have created PowerBI dashboards for teams, sponsors and customers. For some projects I do use PowerApps to create a front end and use that data to manually input data to E1.

It's been extremely useful for me in managing projects as well as in my career. And if people weren't so hell-bent on not liking it, I would still continue to use Planview Enterprise One for everything. It's like a love-hate relationship for me. 

I would rate Enterprise One a six out of ten. 

We use it for contractor and associate contracting which reflects directly to project resource, "our spend". We do a calculation based on the vendor that the contractor is through, as well as each associate has a per hour rate that is applied to the project to attract the spend applied to that project from the resources. 

We also track the number of hours spent per application. Every application in our bank has the application code that we tied back to Planview so that we can track and see how much time is spent within the application, either with upgrades, maintenance or break-fix type of situation and also to report. It's primarily for tracking reporting.

Enterprise One has improved my organization with the ability to look at the hours that people track. Prior to Enterprise One we didn't have any estimation model. As we grow within Enterprise One, we're able to pull reporting to see how much time it takes for each individual person or a team to perform a task to complete a project. So with that, we're able to start building that model to estimate the approximate number of hours for each task so that when we provide that to project managers, it reduces the amount of time building the project plan because they've already had that base model to use for each of those tasks. It's created our ability to forecast how much time it would take to perform specific tasks that are very similar to each other. 

It also improved our communication. Prior to Enterprise One, there was not that much communication between project managers and resource managers. So that when a project manager went out to Microsoft Office or to Microsoft Project to schedule a resource for a task, which they actually didn't, they have to have a separate spreadsheet. They would put down a number of hours and it was just a guess. A resource manager would then come back and say, "They can't do that." It was very back and forth. It wasn't like a synergist, a single point of information where everyone looking at the same thing, it was back and forth. So with a project manager entering just random hours and just guessing to get a specific dollar amount or to fit a specific dollar amount it was a lot of work on the project managers to try to adjust it to fit in with that dollar amount.

Now, with Planview, with them being able to see as soon as the project manager submits a request for some hours, the resource manager can communicate with that project manager instantly and say, "It won't do that. It's not going to take that much time". And then when it comes back where the resource is actually entering the hours on the task, there's an exact number. So it's hard to put a number on how many hours were saved or how accurate it's going to be because we're still growing. But prior to this, the accuracy was really, really off. It was terrible, but now we're getting more and more accurate where we're in the, I would say, closer to 70% accurate on the estimations. So it's getting really close to being very accurate.

Enterprise One helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. We use what we call Roadmap, Roadmap items under the planning and capacity section. We're the best at the capacity section. With the Roadmaps, our department heads are able to categorize the project by rank. By ranking those we're able to, especially during this COVID period, we've seen so many projects get pushed down to the bottom or completely removed due to the inability to complete those or the return on investment not being there. It really helped a lot with that planning, investment, and capacity planning.

In terms of the flexibility of configuring assignment, my other administrator and I actually came up with that solution. We decided that was the best way to go primarily because at the state that we are in our company, the project managers weren't mature enough to utilize allocations and the resource managers weren't mature enough to reject or approve those allocations. And that was causing people to be over-allocated because they weren't charging time. Because it the estimation on the number of hours needed was completely off. They were just putting however numbers in there. The resource would show over-utilized 1,300%, 1,300% and it would just throw off all of our reporting.

We cracked down on it. We had people to start utilizing the utilization percentage. Making sure that they had that communication line with the resource manager since we have our estimate as growing. But with the reserve and authorization, being able to authorize an entire team to a specific task and reserve them, allowed us to easily create the schedule that works best for that agile environment. Especially with the specific number of hours used for each person that was really easy to use those types of assignments.

We have different groups that use it for different purposes. There are project managers who use it in place of Microsoft Project. So they track their project through its phases, their financials, keeping on schedule, on time, and on budget. Our resource managers use it primarily to track their resources, to see how much capacity their team has to perform different tasks or different projects, and how much time they're spending on each individual application. Technology managers actually represent the overall group who use it to roadmap, outlook,  see what's down in the pipeline, what team has what capacity to actually take on a task, see if that project is worth the money, that return on investment is worth actually doing it. Executives are just in it for the reporting to track the financials, to see how much we're spending within the technology and enterprise operations departments. Enterprise One is useful in many ways. We have a little bit under 2,000 people using it.

Another good thing is that we can create custom reports, which is great. If I created a custom report, a tile that tells me how many people have logged in today. We currently have a little under 2,000 users, and that's only users, we actually have integrations, that we created a custom form that sends hours directly to Planview. They're not using Planview directly, but they're sending their hours to Planview through an API. We have over 1,500 contractors overseas and within the United States, that submit their time to Planview, so we can track their work in their project as well. In total, I would say the amount of user input for Planview would be close to 3,000.

Inside Planview, they have what they call a "lifecycle". It's basically a workflow, it's a set of steps that each project has to go through, and with its customization, being able to match our own project process, we match it one for one. And so we can see at each stage of the project where it is either through the gate, from gate zero through gate four, and even with Agile, being able to iterate through that same gate, by using scripted dialogues, or exit scripts, we've been able to track projects exactly where they are. Each schedule can be tied back to either the hours entered, by either date, or a percentage of the effort completed on it, so it ties together pretty good.

It's being used a lot for the remaining effort. We actually create tons of reporting off of it. We've created multiple Power BI dashboards. Data feed allows us to create our custom Power BI dashboards, so that way we can track what efforts been used, what efforts are remaining in a very graphical, easy to read way. We've created this primarily for the project managers and resource managers. My manager has a breakout session that discusses our Power BI dashboards. It's really nifty for tracking that. We use it a lot. Our executive challenged us to be able to forecast and estimate hours used on each task. That's why we implemented Enterprise One initially, but we since provided what she wanted and now we're providing more. Initially, it was just the requirement and now we're exceeding that requirement to give better visibility to all resource managers and project managers.

We have a really large organization, 22,000 associates total, including the 3,000 people using Planview. Being able to group projects into portfolios based on specific filters, either the project manager or any other approver organizational hierarchy, once you set your portfolio, you can either share that with your team or whomever so that they can all be on the same page. With the Power BI dashboards, we have a very open information model where we want everyone to be able to see the same thing. There's only one section where it's confidential and we as administrators have to provision that separately, but everything else is open for everyone else to see. So if you're just a time reporter or just have a reporting, you can go in and see the same information as a manager. Being able to group projects in the portfolios, filter them, and being able to see all of that data graphically using the Power BI or the standard reporting that came with the FastTrack setup has been very helpful to our entire organization.

For all the work that we perform, Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. We have our technology projects. We have what we call non-technology projects, which are basically projects that don't necessarily have a technology component in it. It's things like branch opening and closures, even though sometimes they will have the technology, but it just depends. We also have what we call OTW, which is another planned work. This is primarily for resource managers so that they can track their applications like how much time is spent on their applications doing upgrades or break-fix. We also have programs of work, another resource manager tool that tracks Agile programs, and we also have Roadmaps. For all the project types that we, or work types that we have within our organization, it does great.

We just started doing the on time and on a budget since we are in infancy with Enterprise One, we weren't really holding the project managers to that. We were holding them to it through the governance, but not through the Enterprise One. Now that we're a little more mature, we've started tracking that grader as well as being able to use those change requests to track as scheduled, budget, or scope changes. It has allowed us to definitely increase our on-time and on-budget awareness.

The content management definitely needs to improve. We don't really use content management for projects inside Enterprise One. We have actually switched to a SharePoint site. We have a feed from Enterprise One every night of all the projects that are created. And once they're created, we run our process that goes out to create SharePoint sites for each project. Because of the inability for drag-and-drop file ingestion, the best thing about it is the versioning, but that's also done in SharePoint. We just don't use it because it's HTML and it's hard to use. It's a little bit more cumbersome than it should and then we like.

We implemented Enterprise One initially for our pilot group at the end of 2018 and we went into production last year in April.

We have the cloud solution. It's all hosted. The team that is using it, for the most part, is just the technology area, application development, information security does our technology group. We have some enterprise groups also that are using it.

We haven't had any issues with stability. In the previous versions, there were interface issues with Internet Explorer because it's just an antiquated browser. With Microsoft adopting Microsoft more of the Edge and Chrome, the stability is fine. We haven't had any issues.

Scalability is great, with the monthly improvement push, they're on a monthly cadence of updates with the new version 18, the improvements come every month. It's awesome. They have a vast library of API calls that we actually have a contractor system. We're actually onboarding that now and we're going to implement API calls to Planview that way. I have created a multiple UiPath robot that used Planview to create reporting, to add users, to do monthly maintenance, as well as the call API to UiPath. I do a lot of robotic process automation and I can do a lot of the automation with Planview. The scalability, being able to integrate with JIRA, Workday, create custom integrations if we need to, being able to use API calls through either JSON or primarily SOAP, is pretty awesome. I don't have any complaints so far on the scalability.

We're looking to integrate JIRA into our Enterprise One with LeanKit. We're still working out the financials on that to try to figure out a way to integrate that either through a flexible license or through individual licensing. Initially, we started off with technology because that was the executive who decides to start tracking the projects since that's where the project management organization lives, under technology. But more and more enterprise business unit groups are starting to want to track time and see what their resources are spending their time on as well. We're growing slowly throughout the rest of the organization. With the amount of data that the Planview provides and that type of reporting, it's kind of giving other departments and other groups visuals into what they could have by using Enterprise One. We're growing through them. 

Technical support is great. It's just like technical support at any other institution where sometimes you'll get someone who is very adept in the system, and then the others are a little less. But, generally with the way that Planview is set up, if we have any issues, we have a representative we can talk to and bail and get the right people to work on it. We've had no issues.

We were previously using a homegrown SharePoint site that we worked with our SharePoint team to build. It didn't have a nearly as robust workflow, reporting approval ability, and tracking as Planview.

In terms of the setup, I actually got hired on in the middle of implementation, but we had a Planview representative on-site performing the configuration. She basically did training while we were there so I was able to pick it up really quickly and become adjusted to building or configuring the system through configuring screens, scripted dialogues, and the lifecycle. It was really easy. It seems like a low-code solution, so it was really easy to pick up.

I would estimate the setup took from July to December. That is when we did the primary build-out of all of the integrations. We had a previous system that was homegrown through SharePoint that we had a lot of projects and data in. We had to do a lot of data manipulation in order to put it in a format that's ingestible by Planview. That took a little while too. I wrote a robot that would automatically convert all of the data over to the new data format, and we were able to send that to Plan B to have them import it.

The big parts of the strategy were just integrations with our financial system. We have a general ledger financial system that we had to integrate with and that we had to send a file over to Plan B to enter that information. We also have a Workday integration for resource management. That is a pretty nifty one where whenever the Workday feed comes over, it either removes resources, adds resources, and creates users based on if they're in a specific hierarchy of the bank. That was really nice.

From our end, it was primarily just me and my teammates working on the deployment. We were the primaries. We actually had one other resource through application development that was helping us. That was primarily for the deal integration. The Workday was just a file feed, and that was all in Planview. My colleague is also a Planview administrator. He doesn't do the robotic automation, but he does a lot of the architecting of the system.

For management, at this point, it's just me and my teammate. We have one other person who is specialized in the reporting. They do a lot of the SQL queries, SSRS, and Power BI setups, but they don't do really much of the administering of the system. 

We only worked through Planview. We didn't work with any other third parties.

The area with the most ROI is our ICCMO, being able to track that on time and on budget, all of the resource managers. Those are going to be the department heads for each of our technology departments. They would be the ones that would see the most return on investment. As well as tracking their contractors and the hours they're spending on the applications.

The pricing and licensing are fine, but with the model we currently have, we don't have the FLEX license just yet. We actually have the tiered based on the access side from just a team member to project, we call it portfolio manager to admin. The pricing is fine. That was one of the solid points for switching to Planview. There are additional costs for integrations.

We actually did an RFP. So we looked at the Gartner quadrants and we had other people provide proposals. But with all the requirements, Planview was the only one that was able to provide all of the items that we needed which is why we went with them.

The biggest lesson learned would be regarding making sure to have Planview do the training. When we did our training for our organization, we did a train the trainer where Planview came in and trained just a few people in our organization and then they went out and trained their people.

But it's like a game where you tell one thing to a person that you pass it down the line and it gets changed by the time it reaches the very end. If you have the budget for it, have Planview perform the training because I think that would increase adoption a lot easier. We had a lot of people who came from different areas that had different methods of tracking projects from Visio Excel and Microsoft Project. Getting everybody on the same page to Planview we had a lot of contention and a lot of people who didn't like the product initially. And that came down to me to training. With the trainer themselves not being very familiar with the system, being unsure about what they're trying to train the other people on didn't give the other associates much confidence in the system initially.

The adoption was a lot slower than we wanted. I think that if Planview had worked to perform the training, it would have made people a lot more of a point of contact to reach out to. And having a lot more acceptance and what they were being taught. So that would be the lesson learned.

Especially if you're an administrator, go through the advanced training if you're doing FastTrack and if you're doing the configuration so that you'll be more familiar with what the consultant is doing. Our consultant was great. She did a lot for us, but we also saw afterward, once we became more familiar with it, we saw a few errors that needed to be corrected but they were easy and we were able to fix them ourselves. If you don't go through advanced training, you wouldn't recognize it. 

I would rate Planview Enterprise One a nine and a half out of ten because nothing is perfect.

We use Enterprise One to capture everything in IT that we're working on from projects that require capital funding, to running the business. We are doing everything from soup to nuts, including timesheets. We've established the full implementation.

It provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. We're able to see the full scope of what people are working on. We can see all the different types of activities that they are charging time to and we can do an analysis of whether we think that's the right distribution of the workload.

Enterprise One has improved my organization in terms of everything that we're working on. We're able to see where our resources are allocated and when we have availability, which helps us to schedule the portfolio. That's really the main intent of Enterprise One.

The ability to capture timesheets is the most valuable feature. Also, the ability to see what the full organization's working on is probably the biggest bang for the buck.

Prior to implementing Enterprise One, we didn't have a tool to do any of that. We were hard-pressed to understand what our people were working on. Now, we have a full view of projects, allocations, and effort to deliver our portfolio projects.

Enterprise One's ability to forecast remaining efforts is pretty good. It's a regular schedule, so you can see your burndown rate and see what's left on the project to spend from a labor and non-labor perspective.

Its view into resource capacity and availability absolutely help us manage work. We can't plan out projects for delivery until we know if we have resources available to deliver them. That's been really critical. We look at our projects and see what availability of resources we have. That helps us to determine when we can start new work.

Project managers can group work together and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. They can create portfolios. 

We are able to drill down to the underlying details via consolidated information. We can see exactly what people are working on and we can see where they're charging their time. We can see their allocations and redistribute the load if we need to based on how much is being demanded for individuals.

We hope that it will increase our on-time completion rates. That will hopefully happen when the projects are delivering. Some of them have end dates coming up in the next quarter and some not for another 6+ months. We'll probably be able to start viewing that within two to three months.

I don't initially expect the on-time completion rate to be increased, but I'm hoping over time, we get better at project intake and estimation. That will help us to deliver things more efficiently and meet our timelines.

The scheduling's kind of clunky in terms of its ability for us to see what stage work is at. They could have done better with that. It can be difficult to use.

We don't use its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects. I think it's poor.

We implemented Enterprise One three months ago. We're about to upgrade to the September release so, we'll be current as of next week.

It's mostly been stable. There have been a few times where things were delayed but it came out pretty quickly.

We will be rolling it out more broadly across the organization. I don't envision any issues with scalability. We plan on expanding it to many other areas. I'm already talking with seven other departments within my company. It's going to be rolled out enterprise-wide. The supply chain is probably the biggest organization next to ours, then there's legal, and a couple of other departments who it will make the biggest impact for. 

There are 750 users across our organization. 

Technical support is fair. Some people are very talented and very knowledgeable but others are not. They're generally responsive. There have been some times when they've not been, but they are 75% of the time.

The initial setup was very complex. If you've ever done the implementation it's not an easy implementation. It's very complex. We had a group of 20 people working on this project for 6+ months to implement the tool. The configuration alone was six weeks just to set up resources, initial lifecycles, and things like that. 

In terms of the implementation strategy, we had the project all laid out. We knew what and when we needed to deliver it. We knew what the scope of our work was. We had a massive communication exercise. The change management aspect of this going from no tool to a very sophisticated tool like this one required extensive communication and change management. I was the project lead, I lep up the whole implementation and worked with project managers. 

Maintenance requires three people. I oversee them. I have two full-time people.

We worked with Planview's implementation team for the deployment. 

As long as we can get enough participants, it will make the pricing more reasonable. We signed up for an enterprise license. That makes the per person cost much lower.

Aside for standard licensing, we had a cost for the implementation but nothing besides that. 

We evaluated nine other solutions including Planisware, Clarity, Microsoft, and ServiceNow. Enterprise One is very similar out of the other two industry leaders. Clarity, Planisware, and Planview are the three industry leaders. They're all pretty comparable. We ended up getting a reasonable price, which is why we went with them.

For the organization, people really have an appetite for the data. Being able to pull it all together really was the biggest benefit for us.

My advice would be not to underestimate the amount of effort it takes to implement. It's much more than the vendor would tell you.

I would rate Enterprise One a seven out of ten. I would give it this rating because of the amount of effort it took to implement and bring an organization this big along. It was a monumental effort. It took a lot of work to do that.

Our primary use cases are for using the requests, the work and resource planning, and the financials.

We are hoping to add a planning module strategy so that we can better track our program, work, resource capacity planning, and have a better handle on our financial forecasting.

Enterprise One allows us to provide a single-source view of our IT portfolio, how it aligns with the strategy of IT, and shows us the big picture of our workforce and where we're investing. 

It has also helped us with prioritization of projects, through alignment with strategic objectives. Our business areas are not using Planview, and it's difficult for us to align with the prioritization, but it shows a picture of how we believe we're aligning with their strategy.

This allows us to work with the business to help us find the priority of work, the work that we should be doing to move the business forward, as opposed to, "Here's the list of the things we want done." We can focus on the things that are needed now, as opposed to just a big list of work.

Having Enterprise One has increased our on-time completion rate by 40%. 

The work and resource planning are the most valuable features. We are able to track our IT portfolio of approved work and assign named resources to the work level, have a better handle of our resource capacity, and the ability to take on additional work. The financial planning helps us with making sure our investments in IT are aligned with the strategy of the company.

Enterprise One provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. It's very easy and straightforward to configure these assignments. Planview allows us to see the entire workforce. We can see where our skill sets of people are, what they're working on, and allows us to make informed business decisions based on priority. 

We don't use the full project management piece at this time, but we're working towards that and becoming a more agile workforce. We are working towards tracking our work better. We're just getting started on that piece of really understanding the phases of our work and conjunction with our spend.

Its view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work by entering our resources into the work and assignments to understand where our resources are working and looking at the skill sets, aligning them to our priority work. Some of our higher paid resources are working on our new development and understanding how to align our resources better through the financials and the skills that we have attached to those resources.

Enterprise One does a very good job of allowing us to create views across different projects of our resources who are working on multiple projects to understand the capacity of our resources. This feature affects our ability to share the big picture with management. We are able to show our management our extended views, our forecasted views of our approved work, and help make suggestions on where we could better align our investments and our resources.

It also provides end-to-end work management but we are using it with a combination of another tool, JIRA, to get that full picture. It gives them a better insight into the projects that are going on when they're scheduled and the available resources they have for the work and their budgets. 

The resource area needs improvement. The improvements that have been made recently in the later versions have been good improvements, but I think there are some more improvements needed there.

I would like to see where we could add a few of our own fields and be able to track some additional information such as release information attached to the pieces of work so we can tie our accounting codes into the work and the release at the resource level.

I don't think there's been a lot of investment in the request area. That's our intake and it seems to have remained the same over many years. I feel there's a disconnect from when we enter a new request, and if we approve it and dispatch work, the request and the work are then disconnected.

We've been using Enterprise One since 2012. 

It's very stable. We've had very few incidents.

Scalability is very good. It's very scalable for our organizations. We're a small implementation, we have 140 users. There are resource managers and application managers. We have senior staff who are mostly reporting, admins, and some architects.

For maintenance, we have two admins and two owners. One is a business owner and one is a technology owner who oversees what's going on. The admins are technical people from the development staff and the business owner would be like myself, who is more process-oriented around how we use the tool and what type of reports are needed.

Within the IT division, we have a 100% adoption rate. We have plans to increase usage. We're working with two other areas now to see if they will adapt it.

Their support is good but not as good as it was a couple of years ago. Since it's moved out internally from Planview to being outsourced, it has not been as responsive. It's still very good. We get where we need to be but it takes longer for us to get to support at times.

Before Enterprise One we were using Excel. We switched to have a more robust centralized system that we could do more for reporting. We wanted to have a centralized area for everything in a dependable system that we could do better reporting.

We've used PeopleSoft which is an Oracle product and Microsoft Projects.

The initial setup was complex. I think it was because of the consultants that were sent out to help us. They didn't understand our model and I think they were a little junior. They sent us a brand new person. We were his first assignment and he wasn't sure of how to set it up properly so we went through several consultants and rework those over about a six month period. Our deployment took six months. 

In 2012 our implementation was the basic Planview which we used the request to intake the work projects, to capture our approved book of work for portfolios work and resources to understand the capacity of our workforce.

We have seen ROI in the sense that we have fewer people involved in tracking work and resources than we did in the past.

It would be nice if all of the licenses were FLEX. They've been fairly stable with their pricing over the years.

We evaluated five other solutions. They were PPM solutions from Computer Associates, HP, and a couple of other smaller ones, mostly the ones in the upper right corner of the Gartner quadrant.

Some of the others were much bigger and more costly solutions. Planview seemed to meet our needs where we would need just one solution. We might have needed others to compensate for some of the areas that they didn't do as well as we plan. Microsoft had a product but their financials were nowhere near what we needed. We would have to have a secondary tool for that. Planview offers the best all-around package. Enterprise One is equal to them when it comes to intuitiveness and ease of creating reports. Oracle also requires more training.

Planview is a very well designed application that with a little bit of training can be easily adapted by the entire organization. The different modules really round out the product, which gives it an advantage over some of its competitors.

Enterprise One is a very reliable product and offers robust reporting. The company is very in touch with their customers.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.