I felt like the slide publisher isn't that user-friendly. I think it wasn't that easy to use or to figure out because of formatting constraints, or maybe we need to get better at understanding some of its limitations. Slide publisher is something that we're definitely interested in, and it was great in theory, but when we put it to use, it didn't serve our needs. So we aren't using it currently. For the most part, I think the workflow management capabilities are sufficient based on what I've seen in my role as the team admin on some of the earlier teams that I've been on. However, there was difficulty updating the schedules on the fly without relining all the data. At Dell, we're always trying to match the project schedules to reality. So many of the dates start shifting, and people are getting frustrated with managing the schedule because the dates keep changing, and we have to keep fixing them. And I think that there are maybe too many dependencies added to the schedules that they've created. Some of the dependencies are needed because they have to hit a specific delivery date. So, it's kind of like, "Okay, if you don't use that, then technically you can push past that delivery date." So, they constantly have to shorten certain parts of the schedule to keep the dates from shifting. I think that was the biggest complaint in terms of the workflow piece. As far as automating life cycle service requests goes, we've done some configuration just in project intake. That was about as much automation as we've done. We've also used Clarizen to generate a schedule using certain templates on the due date and then backtrack. So yeah, we've done some automation on that. It wasn't easy to automate, though, because the project manager would still have to go in and do some updates and fixes every time, so it's never fully automated. I think it was always just semi-automated, and they still had to put in a decent amount of work to get the schedule correct.
