In the project and portfolio management category, Microsoft Project Server and Planview Daptiv are prominent solutions. Microsoft Project Server appears to have the upper hand due to its seamless integration with Microsoft applications, making it well-suited for organizations within the Microsoft ecosystem.
Features: Microsoft Project Server provides comprehensive resource allocation, global visibility, and project data aggregation within a single platform. Users find it adaptable and easy to use, particularly with Microsoft tools such as Excel. Integration with SharePoint enhances collaboration. Planview Daptiv is known for its strong portfolio management capabilities, strategic project linking, and robust reporting features. Its graphical scheduling and collaboration tools are also highly valued.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Project Server could benefit from better resource allocation algorithms, improved system integration, and more flexible reporting options. The on-premises version requires a more streamlined deployment and enhanced collaboration features. Planview Daptiv needs to refine features like reporting and capacity planning. An undo feature could significantly improve user experience.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Project Server offers diverse deployment options, including on-premises and hybrid cloud, which introduce complexity and often require substantial IT involvement. Customer service experiences vary, reflecting inconsistencies in technical support efficiency. Planview Daptiv's private and public cloud options facilitate simpler deployment, with consistently favorable customer support ratings, although response time variability is noted.
Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Project Server is considered expensive, especially for smaller businesses, due to complex licensing tied to roles and infrastructure needs. While users acknowledge high costs, they justify it with the solution's robust features. Planview Daptiv, with lower costs structured around annual licenses based on user roles, offers a flexible and scalable model. Many users find Daptiv more cost-effective compared to standalone project software, delivering positive ROI, particularly for cloud-focused organizations.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Project Server | 3.9% |
| Planview Daptiv | 3.1% |
| Other | 93.0% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 25 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 33 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 7 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 1 |
| Large Enterprise | 4 |
Microsoft Project Server streamlines project management with features like resource allocation, project scheduling, and SharePoint integration. It's valued for its intuitive interface and ability to provide comprehensive insights through advanced reporting and dashboards.
Designed to enhance collaboration and efficiency, Microsoft Project Server supports complex task management by integrating seamlessly with SharePoint. It offers tools like Gantt charts and timeline management for effective tracking. Users benefit from Excel and Power BI compatibility, enhancing analytical capabilities. Despite its powerful functionalities, users identify areas for improvement in tool integration, resource management, and collaboration features. There are calls for a modernized interface and more flexible pricing. While the cloud version boasts continuous updates, the on-premises model lags behind.
What are the main features of Microsoft Project Server?Microsoft Project Server finds its application across industries by providing tools for planning IT infrastructure and managing enterprise-level projects. It helps organizations document projects and manage portfolios, enabling clear visibility into performance through milestones and KPIs.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
