Planview Portfolios Reviews

It is primarily used for project and portfolio management within the technology department. Only our technology department is using it. It is what we use to manage our technology work in terms of resource assignment, timesheet submission and entry, and work schedule.

We're on version 18. They do monthly versions, so we are just a couple of months behind at this point. We're using the June 2021 version.

Enterprise One's view into resource capacity and availability helps us in managing work. We are able to see the capacity of the team and the capacity of the resources. Once you're aware that a team is above and beyond its capacity, you can go back and look at the work that they have scheduled and try to reprioritize any work if need be. If Enterprise One is showing us that the team is over capacity, then it is likely that some of the work that they have scheduled and is in the backlog won't be completed within the indicated timeframe. For example, if we're looking at a forecast through the end of this year and it is showing that the team is above their capacity, then it allows us to go back and at least start talking about how do we reprioritize the work that's scheduled for them, what can be pushed away, or what can be deprioritized.

With Enterprise One, we can see the end-to-end work management. It provides 60% to 70% capability for the end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work. 

We have it lined up against our strategic initiatives, so we're able to see underneath those initiatives what work is being completed and get at least a high-level view of when that work is scheduled to end. With Enterprise One, we have the ability to see that alignment clearly in one view or in one source, and it is a source that is maintained more frequently. In the past, it was typically done in spreadsheets, and because different versions of spreadsheets may have been passed around, you wouldn't know what the true reflection or the true status was. So, it has helped us in terms of being able to align the work and the strategic initiatives clearly within one tool or within one source. If any adjustments are made, those adjustments are visible to anybody who has the necessary permissions and access to see them. So, it has probably helped us in terms of accuracy for work and strategic alignment, but it is hard to put data around that. It has definitely helped us with being able to clearly see the big-picture alignment. Knowing that any changes that are made are instant, and we have one true source of this visibility is very helpful.

Enterprise One has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. It is used to help with those discussions at a senior leadership level. So, it has been helpful because the visibility of how much work is being done and the potential cost of the work helps people make that decision. They do use data out of Enterprise One to come up with how they need to prioritize it. So, it is a contributing factor, but I wouldn't say it is the only thing that is used for prioritization determination. It may be has made us 25% more efficient in terms of knowing how to prioritize. That's simply because we have that visibility and a true source or one source where we can see where work is and where resources are. So, at least, that's a contributing factor, and there has been an impact there.

Enterprise One allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. It makes everything more effective because you're able to see where work is aligned. The way we've configured and structured it, work has to be aligned under a particular initiative. So, the program managers can certainly see all the active work that is going underneath their program. It definitely makes it more effective for them to manage their work and be able to make certain decisions.

With Enterprise One, you can drill down to the individual work items and the resource assignments from the high-level program. It did affect the ability in a good way because program managers can look at it initially from a program manager's lens. They'll see the high-level status of where everything is aligned, and then they can start to drill down. If they think that one project might be overburdening or spending more than what was planned, they can drill down to see where that impact is.

The resource management and assignment features are valuable. The timesheet management is also valuable because that is a requirement for us. So, the ability to see timesheet forecasting and timesheet actual submission from resources has been very useful and valuable to us. 

The configuration of the application helps us in aligning the projects to our strategic initiatives. So, we're able to configure that hierarchy or structure.

Forecasting is very valuable because based on the user profiles and resource profiles, we can add the utilization and the capacity for the work. So, once we do the forecasting, we're able to see if somebody is being forecasted above their capacity. There are good indicators within Planview Enterprise One that, at least, notify us to say, "Hey, this person is being forecasted above and beyond what the current capacity is." So, that's a good feature for us. It doesn't prevent us from overloading resources, but at least it indicates that somebody is overloaded. In terms of forecasting, I would rate it a four out of five.

Its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects is very limited. In terms of the out-of-the-box reporting for summary reports, the reporting that we typically leverage is around forecasting for resources, timesheets, and actuals, and just looking at what is the capacity. There is no real summary of what work is being done and how work is being accomplished. So, what we typically do is that we get a copy of the data files from Enterprise One daily, and then we have a team that manages the data mod outside of Enterprise One. They use data from Enterprise One as well as other additional sources to provide the reporting that we share with the management. So, we leverage a lot of Enterprise One data for reporting, but we don't use the reporting capabilities within Enterprise One. So, reporting can be improved, and they could help us make more customized reporting. I know it is very configurable out of the box, but we have to leverage an outside data mod that pulls in a lot of data from Enterprise One. So, the reporting function, and being able to customize reports, is the area that could be very beneficial.

We've been using it for three years.

It is very stable for a cloud environment. Over three years, we've had very few incidences beyond our internal network issues. So, it has been very solid. It has very good stability. I would rate it an eight out of 10 in terms of stability.

The version upgrades that they've done over the past two years have definitely increased the scalability. I would rate it a seven and a half out of 10 in terms of scalability.

Currently, we have 2,100 users. When we first deployed it, we had about 800 users. So, we have definitely grown exponentially over the last three years. 

The majority of our users are simply team member users. They just submit their timesheets there, and that's the majority. More than 1,600 of those users are simply timesheet users. The other users are in the Portfolio Manager role. They are the people who are serving in the project management role and have to manage the work and assign resources as well as resource managers. So, we have about 400 or so users in that role. We also have six Planview administrators who are providing day-to-day operational support for our users, and then we have some senior leadership, which is part of the portfolio management, but they mainly just take a look at it from month to month to see how the work is progressing and how we're looking in terms of the costs with our strategic initiatives.

It is currently being used extensively for project portfolio management. As a growing company, there is a likelihood of increasing usage. The number of users is likely to increase and continue to grow beyond the current 2,100. So, our usage will certainly continue to evolve, and we're also looking to do integrations with other applications and tools.

We submit cases from time to time. If we see any errors or encounter any system behavior that we're not able to understand from an administrative perspective, we do submit tickets on their website. That's the way we all contact them.

They're very efficient. They're very responsive as well. They typically help us in terms of explaining system functionality, and if there is a determination that there is a genuine issue with the application, they also make sure to explain that clearly to us. I would rate them an eight out of 10.

We used what's now known as Planview PPM Pro, but when we were using it, it was known as Innotas, which was prior to Planview's acquisition. At the time we were looking at upgrading from Innotas, Planview actually acquired them as an organization. So, we're using Planview PPM Pro.

We switched because we just wanted greater functionality. With the growth of the organization, we just wanted to use a tool that was more geared to help with enterprise management for projects and portfolios.

It was straightforward because we had great support from Planview. They do provide consultants who work with you and walk hand in hand with you in terms of setting it up. Maybe the complex nature is just the way that the tool is designed. I know they've made improvements to it, but at the time, the interface wasn't very user-friendly. So, we knew we had to do a lot of handholding and training, but the implementation was very straightforward.

The whole project exercise, from the initial inception of the idea to the actual implementation or just the actual deployment going live, took about seven months. So, it was about a seven-month project from sitting down to gather requirements to full deployment and getting users onboarded, etc. Because it was a cloud deployment, it was very seamless.

The implementation strategy was just going through meeting with stakeholders and understanding the requirements. We initially rolled it out to a sandbox environment, and we did some user acceptance testing in there for about a month or so. We rolled out all the features and full capability after about a month of the UAT from our sandbox and copying over that information into another sandbox environment. We had created a parallel environment. So, we had two environments for us. One that we actually had rolled out, and one that was a cut-over environment, just in case something went wrong with the full deployment.

We worked directly with Planview for its implementation. For its deployment, we required at least three of the administrators at a time. We could obviously leverage all six administrators.

For support and maintenance, at any given time, we have three administrators available, even though we have six of them. The maintenance is mainly around timesheet management. It involves helping users facilitate in terms of making sure that users have access to the work on their timesheets, and they are assigned to the correct roles. The way we have it configured is that we have work project roles and project attributes. So, it is just maintaining that access and making sure that if there are any changes within the organization, we maintain our organizational structure. Similarly, we also need to maintain access to the various users if their roles change or if their positions change within the organization.

I don't know about the actual pricing. I have not come across any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

I believe prior to me joining the team, they'd also looked at Clarity. I wasn't part of that initial review, but I understand that Clarity was one of the other options that they looked at. I am not too sure why they decided to go with Enterprise One. The cost might've been a part of it. It could also have been because of a previous relationship with leadership and being familiar with using Enterprise One. At the time, because we were using Planview PPM Pro or Innotas, the relationship was already established. So, we were able to grow with that relationship.

My advice is more on the change management process and the training. I know Planview does offer great training with that. So, I would advise just making sure that your key stakeholders are involved with the implementation approach on the progress of it. That's because as a tool, it can be hard to understand and use. So, you just want to make sure that people who are going to use it are very aware of its full capabilities. You should definitely leverage Planview's help in terms of training and working with the consultants to know the full-scale capabilities of the application. You can probably go for a phased approach. There is a lot of capability within the tool that can be leveraged. So, you can maybe do a phased implementation to understand and get familiar with each of the different functionalities that are available.

It doesn't give full visibility in terms of managing project plans and seeing the stage of work. The way we have it designed, our teams do put in schedules and the tasks that are related, but they don't see the day-to-day task accomplishment. It is still very manual. If they know that the work or the task is actually done, they would have to go into each one to manually close out that task. There is no automated closing out of the schedule, and it is more at a very high level at this point in terms of project scheduling and management.

Enterprise One provides many types of resource assignments for assigning work to people, and we use the one that's more aligned with just our processes. So, it does give us different types of work assignments, but we don't require flexibility just based on our process. This flexibility doesn't really affect us because we just have one approach to resource assignment. We know that we can switch it and be flexible if we are able to change our processing, but at this point, there is no impact or no effect. However, just looking at it from our initial implementation and the way the functionality worked, the flexibility is good. So, I would assess this flexibility as a strong component or a strong feature. Depending on their process, each organization can do a resource assignment that is effective and the best fit for the organization.

Enterprise One has not increased our on-time completion rate, but I don't think that has to do with the tool itself. That's more with just our own internal processes that impact how our work is managed.

I would rate Enterprise One a seven out of 10.

We use it for change control for all IT changes in the organization. It is used to do the project work for anything that is changing from the technology perspective. We also use it for forecasting and planning work on the projects. We don't do detailed planning in Planview.

We are using the July 2021 version. It is a cloud version. We use Planview's cloud. They host it for us.

Having a single source of the truth, specifically with the integration with Power BI, enables us to give leadership more relative content for decision-making. From being just a local project manager and reporting status type of a tool, it is now being leveraged heavily in the executive decision-making process. They meet every month with summary reports that we generate to make decisions.

It has helped with the prioritization of projects. That's a part of the reporting process. From an IT perspective, we've gotten better at the delivery process. We're not, by any means, near great yet, but it is a journey that we're starting. Over the last two years, we've had a lot of adoption because of senior leadership's involvement, and therefore, things are moving more aggressively towards that point where it is more relative to what we do on a day-to-day basis.

It allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. It puts the data that the program managers need right in a single source. However, they don't do capacity planning and capacity management in Planview. So, while they can see their burn rates, the resources that they're using, and the roles that are being leveraged, they don't actually use it for capacity planning.

We use it for high-level milestone management. We use it to see if projects are falling behind. We also use it for change control and financial reporting. Our senior leadership makes decisions based on the data that is reported out of Planview. So, it is used not for detailed project planning but rather for executive reporting and consolidating the information down into manageable pieces.

It definitely improves the change process when things are running behind. When we didn't have a tool or when we didn't use Planview necessarily, data was more or less the opinion of the project manager or the program manager who would then say that we're just going to push this date out. Because there was nothing locked in stone, it was just reported that we're going to make a little change here and a little change there. They moved dates, and everybody agreed verbally. There was no question of you didn't complete on time, whereas now, the system asks about your target date. If you change that target date on a huge project by a couple of days or two or three weeks, it is obvious. Previously, where you wouldn't notice it because there was no real firm tracking mechanism, today, it stands out. When the date goes from January 1st to January 29th, the system shows that as a variance or a change. Now, it is obvious when things move, and you know when things aren't completing on time. With the reporting that we're doing to the leadership team, they can see when things aren't going as planned.

We use time reporting. We convert time reporting into financial costs and do contractor and capacity planning for our resources. We track our work. That's the module we use extensively. As a matter of fact, we have upwards of 300 open projects at this given moment. It is pretty close to 300 open activities that are working.

It is not an end-user-friendly product, and that's really the biggest thing. The hardest or the biggest hurdle I've ever had to face was adoption. I did the installation of the HP product in 2011. The company used it from 2011 to 2015, and the adoption was very high. When I was given the Planview product, adoption was very low. It wasn't as extensively used. We actually had people who wanted to go back to HP PPM because the interface of Planview was so broken, and it still is to some degree. It is not user-friendly. It doesn't flow the way a project manager thinks. What we did with HP PPM was a lot more manual programming. It wasn't as nice in terms of the interface, and it wasn't as pretty, but you could design it and build it so that everything flows with the way you worked, but Planview doesn't quite do that. There are a lot of screens. You have to jump back and forth. There are so many different places you have to go to just to do some basic tasks. That's the biggest thing that has really hindered adoption.

We use it for forecasting and planning work on the projects. We are able to leverage the data that it provides to do some more concise consolidated reporting, but we mine the data using other functions. The data is collected into Planview, but its reporting is just not quite what we're looking for. We don't use it to do reporting directly. So, we create data sets or pull the data out of Planview, and to get the data down into a view that leadership can then work with, we reformat it by using tools like Excel, PowerPoint, and those kinds of things. We do quite a bit with Excel. We export the data and run it through certain functions. We deliver that data to different groups for feeding into other products because we don't currently allow direct interface into our financial systems. To eliminate the need for exporting data into Excel reports, for the most part, the Power BI capability will eventually replace the external reporting that we do by using other tools. Power BI interface is a huge improvement in the capability, but it is new in our organization, so we probably have a learning curve there. The SaaS reporting is obviously more complex and less user-friendly, but the Power BI solution has definitely more reporting, and it is leadership-data focused. It easily allows the creation of dashboards that executives can manipulate and work with themselves.

We don't find Planview's guides and documentation extremely useful. There is room for improvement. It is very difficult to find things on their website. There is no easy way to find what you're looking for. Everything appears to be broken and in small snippets of data. When you go to their customer success center sites for documentation, everything is just a little snippet of information. There is no clarity about how something works, and how something should be configured. If you're an administrator, it is even less useful, and it is very vague. We end up spending more time taking that snippet of information, and then we have to actually go and figure out the details ourselves. It is not something that tells you how to make something work. It says this is what this does, and this is what it can do. You have to then go and figure it out. They have a consulting arm of the organization, and I think they expect you to call up and ask them to come and show you how to configure something.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It is very stable from an operational perspective. In the five years that I've been managing the product, I've never had an outage of more than 15 minutes.

It seems to scale very well. We had migrated 1,900 users from HP's PPM to Planview, which was a user community of 300. We now maintain an average of 1,800 users in the system. So, we went from 300 to 1,800, and there wasn't any impact on the performance of the product.

In terms of the roles of its users, we have project managers, portfolio managers, developers, release people, architects, engineers, and a management team that does overall oversight.

I do use technical support. At the moment, I have to. Most of the time, they're knowledgeable. They tend to be responsive. I'm the product owner for the company that I'm with. So, from my perspective, they're never responsive enough, but when I think about how bad it could be, I want to say they're reasonable. Sometimes, the turnaround time is a couple of hours, and other times, the turnaround time is months but not from an actual impact to resolution. Sometimes, it takes weeks.

There was a merger of two companies. One of them was using HP PPM, and one of them was using Planview. The company that was running HP PPM decided that it was better to go to Planview, and that's when I became the owner of the Planview product. That's when I started the current path that we're on for migrating to the way the product is used. They switched because it was cost-effective.

I was not a part of the initial setup because the original setup was done in 2013 or 2014 by a company that we acquired. In 2015, we migrated HPs' PPM. 

We're starting to see a return on our investment. Obviously, it is a journey, and you have to first get adoption. We're starting to get some serious adoption. Now that leadership is starting to adopt this solution, they're looking for more from it. So, as we grow, we get more from it. 

We got an organized environment in the beginning in terms of project reporting and project management to a clear set of guides and principles. We have a single source of data for that kind of stuff, and that was a huge piece because it was all broken before. So, on that journey, return on investment has to be looked at from an individual company's perspective. We're seeing the return on the investment more so today because the leadership team is now using the data to make real-time decisions. They're forecasting their work for the next year. They're now using the data that's actually in Planview. Three years ago, we didn't do that.

Planview is a little pricey. From a licensing perspective, for just a simple timesheet user who does nothing in the system but reports time, the licensing is a little pricey, but you have to look at it from what it is that you get.

We have 6,000 users, and I don't manage the system at all. I just have to add them to the system. The servers, maintenance, OS levels, security patching for the OS, and all other things are not something that we maintain. So, you have to look at it from an operational perspective. It is not just the product itself. A holistic view has to be taken when you look at the product and how you're going to support it. I would have to hire an entire operation staff to bring it in-house, and at the end of the day, that might cost me more. The license might cost me less. I might get a whole lot lower cost on my contract, but at the end of the day, I'd have to have all of the backend resources and the knowledge on the backend resources to support the app locally. So, the cost is strictly going to be looked at from a company's perspective.

We've looked at other options. We've looked at the possibility of a different product. As a matter of fact, our current agreement is about to expire. So, we're looking at other options and other capabilities to see if there is something out there that makes more sense for us.

We've looked at Clarity and Azure. We have Azure and Jira in the organization today, and they are used widely. We also have ServiceNow in the organization. We are evaluating whether those products meet what we get from Planview today and whether we can reasonably migrate to that type of solution. It is really more about the migration to a new product in terms of adoption and training.

Its view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work to a degree, but we don't use it extensively. That's the one area where we're looking to improve or increase the capability of the product from our own internal perspective. It is not necessarily in terms of the way the product works; it is in terms of the management and administration of our resource pool. That's the step that we're working on now.

We don't use it for end-to-end work management, resource assignment, and creating summary reports across multiple projects. All the reporting is done in Power BI.

I would rate Planview Enterprise One a six out of 10.

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.

They have the PRM portion and the CTM portion. We predominantly use the PRM portion. We have installed the CTM portion, but we have not put it into production. We concentrate mostly on the PRM portion. Within the PRM, we use the Strategy module, the Planning module, the Work module, and the Resource module.

Our production has the July 2021 release. We typically take two to three months to upgrade. We are in the process of upgrading to the October release at the end of the month.

Its view into resource capacity and availability helps us in managing work. It helps our management team to see where the demand is and whether we have the capacity, which allows us to ramp up and ramp down so that we do not have any constraints. Even if we have the budget, we might not have the resources to fulfill the demand. So, that gap has greatly reduced for us. 

It allows us to create summary reports across multiple projects. They have provided reports, and we also develop our own reports for certain specific needs of our business. Because we are on-prem, we have the ability to create those custom reports within our own environment. There has been no issue with what we want, and we're getting that information. These summary reports help us a lot in sharing the big picture with the management. There is visual and graphical information that we can drill into. We can see how things are happening and dig into the raw data that is feeding the charts.

It has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with our strategic objectives. We use the Strategy module, the Planning module, and the Work module to get that visibility. About five or six years ago, we used to do all of this in spreadsheets. We had to maintain multiple versions of those spreadsheets, and we would miss things. The result used to come to us, and then we had a huge amount of work at hand to replicate all of that into Planview where we were only using the Work module. Planview has replaced all those spreadsheets, and with the additional improvements that Planview is making and where it is right now, we can bring into place both agile and hybrid models of project management. In a short time, we were able to wean our users away from spreadsheets. The system is supporting them. So, there is one source of truth.

It provides various types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. We do demand management for when a project comes in and there is an ask for funding and different types of resources. So, we make use of both the requirements and reservations. 

It increases our on-time completion rate. When a particular project extends or crashes, it gives us visibility on the demand within a particular month, which helps in managing our teams. If there is a requirement for an additional resource, they can bring someone in. They can also move someone out. Projects are not an island. There are multiple projects, and a task of one project may be dependent on another task or other projects. Planview gives us the ability to link tasks from one project to the other project. Their Dependency Management module provides visibility to the program managers and the project managers who are managing those individual projects. They are able to see where the demand is and their bottlenecks, which helps them in better management. We have seen our project teams having more success. We have never seen any kind of surprises and delays. People know in advance if there is going to be a delay because of its features. When some task gets finished sooner, other project teams get to know that they can start their task sooner. This way, our time-to-delivery has actually improved.

We have different users for different modules. We manage programs and portfolios by using the Strategy module. Our project teams predominantly use the Work module. Our resource management team uses the Resource module and RMA to manage resources capacity, demand, etc. So, each of the modules is important for the respective people. We have a yearly planning process, and we use the Planning module to a certain extent to do the portfolio creation work.

RMA has been really good for forecasting the remaining effort. Planview has been making a lot of improvements. The recent improvement that they have done to provide visibility to the actual timesheets that are submitted has been really good. The roadmap that Planview has and the way they're continuously and quickly improving and providing solutions have been very positive for us. We know that we don't have to wait for six months to realize the benefits of their development. From the delivery point of view, that has been one of the best things about Planview.

It helps our management team in planning resource capacity and availability pretty nicely. We've been doing this for over two years now, and consistently, it has improved. Even though the functionality was there, we only started using it in the last two years. We provided whatever feedback we had to the Planview team, and they went in and built those additional features that we requested. For example, they created a great way for our users to search for a specific resource, project, program, or role. We were not using some of the features, and we wanted them to not be visible, and they helped us with that. They also brought a feature to provide visibility into when a resource was never assigned to any task. There was no visibility to this before. This feature was really very good for visibility into the resource portfolio. If we have about 60 resources, and four of them have never been assigned to any task or any project, we can see that. So, the search option and the visibility into the resources that have not been assigned are the quick features that they provided.

We've been encouraging our users to manage their schedules directly in the Work and Assignments module. So far, it has been good, but we've been in conversation with the vendor product team to improve the performance of the Work and Assignments module. Right now, it is a bit slower.

We don't use the Progression feature. We will use it at some point in time. Until then, we want to have a way to set time to help decide what's in the past, present, and future. It is one of the things we've been discussing with Planview.

It provides flexibility for configuring assignments, but one of the things about which we've been talking to Planview is related to certain resources that are associated with a project. When the project extends, their demand also equally goes up. There are also resources where if a particular task has to crash, it may need additional effort. So, it is between the fixed effort versus fixed duration. Planview is more duration-based. For example, if you crash a task, the system rightly thinks that you're crashing the task, and you need to finish the work by doing overtime or working additional hours. If you are taking 30 hours to finish a task in three weeks, and for whatever reason, you have to crash the task into two weeks, 30 hours need to be fulfilled within those two weeks. If the task moves to four weeks, instead of three weeks, you still have 30 hours that get distributed among four weeks, so you will be able to finish the task. That makes sense for those resources that are associated with the task, but there are certain resources, such as a project manager or project administrator, for whom when a project extends, the demand also equally goes up. So, if somebody is assigned 50% for a project, and assuming that the project is moving out by a month or two or three months, the effort shouldn't go down. Currently, the allocation goes down, and our resource managers have to go and update the effort back up to 50% or whatever the demand is. We are interacting with Planview to provide a solution. Right now, we have to go and update the additional demand because of the change in the project.

We've been using Planview since 2010. It wasn't called Enterprise One then. In 2010, it was still called Planview. It became Enterprise One a few years ago when they changed the platform to include the CTM portion. 

They have been excellent. They're very accessible. I would give their support team the highest rating because of the way they respond. Most of the time, the issue gets resolved within the same day. If not, it is resolved the next day. We've been very happy with their support system.

We were using Business Engine Network before we moved to Planview. Business Engine Network was bought over by Planview.

Until about a year and a half ago, our users used to use Microsoft Project for schedules, and they used to update the schedule into Planview on a regular basis, at least once a week. Of late, we have started to move to Planview for full work resource management. We've been encouraging our users to manage their schedules directly in the Work and Assignments module.

In my previous work experience, I have mostly used Microsoft Project and some of the products that Microsoft gave. At one point in time, I used Rational, but that was mostly from the software development management point of view.

I wasn't part of the team. I joined in 2010, and all the discussions and evaluations happened in 2009. All I know is that our company went in and looked at all the other products that were available at that time, and then they decided that Planview would be a better solution. It has been one of the very good decisions the company has made. We've been using it for close to 11 years.

Overall, it has been a good tool. Based on my conversations with other users and colleagues who moved from other organizations, I would rate it higher than other solutions. 

In a way, it provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. Our IT team uses different systems. They use Jira and another home-grown system. We have done integration with some of the IT systems that they use, and we are also planning to integrate with Jira, which is critical for us to do. Right now, we have a way to integrate that information, and we are making use of it, but we are looking at seamless integration with Jira. Our IT teams are looking at updating and moving some of their work into Jira for easy management, and that's where this whole end-to-end solution would become a reality, but the integration that we currently have is meeting the expectations of our users as well as the business.

I would rate it a nine out of 10. There is always room for improvement, and Planview is constantly making changes. We've been a part of their inner circle programs where we provide our feedback, and they look at our requests. They have been great in terms of looking at those requests.

I am part of the admin team that uses this. So we kind of help run it behind the scenes, but company-wide, we mainly currently are just using the project management system for our IT projects. We have a few business projects that have started using it, but it's still mainly only with our IT organization. And in planning for next year will be the first time that we have used it for our annual planning purposes. That seems to be working really well.

We really like how it ties into Projectplace for the annual planning. The integration has been really helpful in terms of keeping the business case files together. Once a project is created in Enterprise One, it shows up in both places and that's been really helpful. It's also a really good place to pull data from. In addition, it helps us better manage our people and get better insight into their hours.

We just started using the planning tool and it has been an improvement from each team running projects individually in different Excel spreadsheets.

Enterprise One has been helpful with prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. This is because sometimes we have upper management expecting more work than our team has the resources to carry out. Being able to use the tool to give them insight into our capacities has helped make decisions. It gives us the proof we need to show higher management how something will or will not work in terms of our team's capabilities.

The solution allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. Setting up portfolios has worked really well for us. We are able to drill down into details the underlying consolidated information.

I would give the solution’s ability to create summary reports across multiple projects a three out of five. I think Enterprise One is great at being a source for data, but our company is still running reports externally. Currently, I'm working on setting up more specific reports and pulling into different environments, but overall I would say it's a great data source, but not the best reporting source. The best way to improve this would be to have an integrated tie-in with Power BI or Tableau.

One big issue we have been having during our annual planning is that only the creator of a portfolio can edit it. This means that only the creator of a portfolio can edit which projects are included or excluded in it. If the person who created a particular profile that we need to make changes to is out for a week, we can not put it into a big overview until they come back. Admin rights for portfolios would be super helpful.

I have been using Planview Enterprise One since May of this year. The company set it up in 2017/2018 but has been using it full-time only since 2019. 

My impression of the stability of the solution is that it is stable. The upgrades run overnight and it seems to work well during the day. We have had a few minor glitches, but nothing that hinders the broad use of it. 

Right now, Enterprise One is pretty much only being utilized by the IT program, but I know there are several other parts of the company that are looking into using it. I think the program itself would allow it, especially in terms of licensing. I think we have an unlimited license, but I think the biggest issue with adding more parts of the business into it is having enough admin staff to run it right now. There are five of us and so adding more parts of the company would just make it harder in terms of the administration side of it.

I think they've been helpful and we have never had any big major crashes. But, with any minor glitches we had, they tried to figure everything out within a couple of weeks and get it fixed on the next update. I think we get monthly or bi-monthly updates.

We previously used Microsoft Project. 

I would say that we have had some issues. This might just be more of a tractor supply issue, but we've kind of had to almost backtrack a lot of how it was originally set up. This is because the people from Tractor Supply who were there when it set up left four months in, so it was set up a little off, to begin with.

We got help from Planview's people on the implementation. 

When we have teams using it correctly, I would say the solution works really well. It is really helpful in terms of scheduling and being able to look at which teams are needed on projects. We just have some issues with buy-in from some people.

I would say it works really well for forecasting remaining effort, especially in terms of forecasting the dollar amounts. We've gotten pretty good at adjusting rates because we have a lot of contract workers.

The solution's view into resource capacity and availability helps us manage workers. This is particularly true if you have a resource manager rather than just a project manager looking at just one factor. A resource manager can look at the time they have spent on every single project and adjust and talk to the parts' managers. Enterprise One makes it really easy to just pull the resource management tab and quickly look at who is overloaded. You can color code the resource management assignments page screen to make it better to look at.

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 are using Enterprise One to track our epics and the hours worked on them and related work items. In that effort, we have implemented the task top to bring in both import and export data into our Jira instance.

We are also just now getting into the investment capacity planning features. In the past 18 months, we got Enterprise One set up and now we're getting into investment and capacity planning. Eventually, we want to move more into portfolio management and then road mapping and some of the other features that the software has.

It has certainly helped us in upgrading or modernizing how we report our financials in the sense of our CapEx and OPEX hours. It is a great system of record for that. It also gives us insight into the work that's being done and allows us to follow up with our application development teams on how they're spending their time and whether adjustments to prioritization and such need to happen. It has helped us in both of those areas.

Just having one place to put everything is the big deal. Before Enterprise One, we had multitudes of different Excel spreadsheets across different departments, and everyone kind of doing their own thing. The biggest thing that we've been able to do is get a view of all the work that's happening and then see where the hours are going. That is where we are at right now in terms of the features we are leveraging. 

Enterprise one is good for forecasting remaining effort from what I can tell. We are able to see everything from where the resources are requested, to where they are then being allocated and the hours being logged and make decisions off of that.

If I were to assess Enterprise One's ability to enable me to see which stage projects are in, on a scale of one to 10, I would give it a seven. That's partly because I'm seeing plenty of projects that don't have the right status because they haven't been updated properly. We are having a hard time getting people to use the system to keep that information up to date. The system has the right fields there, but we are still learning how to better use the system. We're trying to figure out how to get our processes better so we can keep the system current.

From a PMO perspective, Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for a full spectrum of types of work. It is too early to say how it has affected our project management. We are doing better, but we are certainly not where we want to be eventually.

Enterprise One has helped us with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. It has affected our business in that we now have a lot more transparency. We can see where the work is being done and make adjustments to align where the work is being done to priorities that change over time.

It provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. I've never had any issues there. It is customizable wherever we need it to be and it is doing great.

Enterprise One allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. It has positively affected my project management. We are happy with the selection that we have made, excluding the cumbersomeness of the user interface at times. Enterprise One has been exactly what we need.

We are enabled to drill underlying consolidated information down into details. This certainly helps me see their impact on specific projects. We can view a project both at the top level and dig into the particularities. It's given us greater visibility into the work itself. It is too early to tell if the solution has increased our on-time completion rate.

I would say that Enterprise One's ability to create summary reports across multiple projects is cumbersome. I know that they are making changes to the user interface. It was talked about in the conference they're having right now.

I think the capabilities are there, but it seems difficult for me to even create a report as I am not a Planview technical expert. It is not particularly intuitive. It slows us down in reporting the big picture to management. 

I would say that they should continue to dig into usability and user experience because it can be hard to find things. The system could be made more user-friendly and robust with perhaps a more interactive help section. It is difficult for someone like me who does not use Enterprise One every day to find what I'm looking for. It's just not intuitive.

I have been using this solution for 18 months. 

Enterprise One is very stable. It is slow and less performant at times, but stable. 

We have not had any issues with scalability. 

My experience with their tech support was great. We had no issues. They were responsive and knowledgeable. 

The initial setup was complex. It took 12 weeks. The size of our company made it complex. We have 800 people in IT only. The help that we got from Planview was good, however. We had them on sight for weeks at different engagements. 

We worked directly with Planview. 

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 Planview Management to assess the current project portfolio, evaluate resource availability, and prioritize projects based on strategic objectives, ROI, and risk factors. 

Planview Management improves an organization depending on how well it aligns with the organization's goals and processes and how effectively it is implemented and utilized by the team. 

Our overall experience was good. Our primary use case is Planview Management. In this scenario, it is to improve project visibility, optimize resource utilization, and drive better decision-making to achieve organizational goals effectively.

This software totally changed our organization's workflow. Planview Management offers a centralized platform for managing all projects and portfolios. This helps to improve visibility into project status, progress, and resource allocation across the organization. 

Planview Management enables our organizations to make data-driven decisions. The centralized platform offers robust reporting and analytics capabilities. 

Planview Management integrates seamlessly with other tools and systems used within the organization, such as enterprise resource planning (ERP) software, customer relationship management (CRM) systems, and collaboration platforms. This integration enhances data visibility, streamlines workflows, and eliminates silos between departments. All other services are sophisticated

Enhancements are needed in:

Advanced reporting and analytics: While Planview Management provides robust reporting and analytics capabilities, further enhancements could include more advanced data visualization options, predictive analytics features, and customizable dashboards to provide deeper insights into project performance and trends. 

Enhanced collaboration tools: While Planview Management facilitates collaboration, additional features such as real-time chat, video conferencing integration, and collaborative document editing can further improve communication and teamwork among project teams and stakeholders. 

Scalability and performance: As organizations grow and their project portfolios expand, it's essential for Planview Management to ensure scalability and performance. This could involve optimizing the platform's architecture, enhancing database management, and improving response times for large-scale deployments. 

Overall, by addressing these areas for improvement and incorporating additional features in the next release, Planview Management can continue to meet the evolving needs of organizations and remain a leading solution for project and portfolio management.

I've used the solution for six months.