Planview Portfolios Reviews

My primary use cases for this solution are: 

• Time reporting
• Portfolio management 
• Capacity planning

Enterprise One has improved my organization by enabling us to stop committing to work that we can't do.

The most valuable feature is capacity planning because only Planview does that. 

The resource capacity and availability have helped us to manage work by preventing us from starting work that we cannot consume.

It gives us flexibility in configuring assignments. We can do both Agile Teams and non-Agile Teams. This flexibility affects our ability to meet our company's particular needs by allowing us to work in a hybrid model, some Agile Teams, and some non-Agile Teams.

The solution out-of-the-box that we established was insufficient. We had to purchase and set up OData. I don't believe that it's a great solution out-of-the-box but eventually you can get there.

It does not provide end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. It also does not help with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives.

The portfolio creation user interface needs improvement. It's not intuitive, from a user experience perspective. If you've never used it, it doesn't click here and then the next thing opens, click here, then the next thing opens. You get all the features upon opening to create a portfolio.

The request screens, the request process, and the workflows have a poor user experience also. The workflows are definitely not intuitive. You're clicking links and going back and forth. It's way too many clicks and it doesn't make sense. It's not intuitive. On the request side, it hasn't been updated in a long time and it's the entry point for all of our work. It could provide more data value than it does today.

I have been using Planview Enterprise One for 15+ years. 

The stability is fairly high. The only problem we've had so far is that for whatever reason, Friday morning, the page load is ridiculously slow. I don't know if that's when the staff is doing updates or what, but Friday mornings are very slow.

I'm not worried about scalability. 

We have about 450 project managers, resource managers, team members, leadership viewers, and power admin users.

There are two staff members for maintenance. They both administer maintenance, consult on new capabilities, and develop reports and new functionality.

We're only one of 20 lines of business in the organization and we're the only ones currently using the solution. Within that number, there is around 20% adoption. Time reporters have to report time, but I don't know that I would consider that. They do it, but that's not a tipping point. We do have plans to increase usage. We have a proof of concept with one department outside of ours.

I'm unimpressed with technical support. When my folks call or email they say if it doesn't do whatever it's supposed to do out-of-the-box they can't answer a question and we end up back with some solution consultant.

I did not enjoy the setup process. It comes with a set way of thinking that is sometimes limiting.

We started the last deployment in June of last year and we deployed early November. Employees started using it a hundred percent in December of last year.

We used a consultant from Planview for the deployment. They went above and beyond, but their approach needs upgrading.

We are seeing the start of ROI. We have additional capability. It didn't save us money at all, but it gave us new capabilities.

I like where they're headed with the whole FLEX model. Your license gives you access to whichever tool is the one that makes sense on the Planview platform. That was a pleasant surprise. That has not been their approach over the 10 years I've had exposure to them.

We also evaluated PPM Pro and prior to that, in another organization, I evaluated CA and PPM Pro before it was owned by Planview. We have applications of Workfront, WeTeam, Trello, Azure DevOps, and various things.

Enterprise One's sweet spot is people, work, and money. They're pretty much the only one that can do that hat trick. If you want that, you have to get them, but we don't use it for any team capability. It's too cumbersome and the user interface is still lacking.

My advice would be to discuss your data upfront before you agree to an implementation. See what it looks like to have the data you need and what sort of costs would be required to do that from the very beginning. Then, see not only how will you visualize and record that data but how will you migrate data. That cost us a lot of time and delay in the user adoption because the migration of data was manual.

I would rate Enterprise One a six out of ten.

We use Enterprise One for our Project/Portfolio Management. I'm new so I'm still learning about the tool but from what I know so far, right now, we mostly use it for tracking, status reporting, budget/financials/contracts, level of effort time tracking, and project governance.

Enterprise One has enabled us to minimize the usage of other tools like tracking in Excel and have one place of the source at a consolidated level. This tool has reduced the amount of time and improved visibility across the organization on Portfolio Management. Everything is in Planview. Planview is the source of truth. So that really helps us to efficiently look at the budget, scope, schedule and to identify if there is any variance. There's a lot of learning still to do as we are also new to this tool, but right now it works for us. 

There are also a few tool limitations, but this has also brought us together as a team and community to be creative, to revise and simplify the governance, focus on what is important to be tracked and reported. 

Real-time information. Enterprise One is good for enabling me to see what stage of work and the current financials. I'm able to see where it is during the project adaptation, project summary, and also comparison to the performance baseline. Since I'm still a little new to this, I am still learning how the organization is adapting to the tool. The Planview conference gave me a lot more ideas, in terms of what more I can do with Planview. 

We do have an in-house reporting and analytics team that are working on creating custom build reportings to generate tiles and utilizing the Power BI functionality. It has been really a very cool report that has graphics with color-coded information making it easy and user-friendly. Again, as we are still new to this tool, it has been continuous learning on how to use it better and as we continue to invest time, cost and efforts we are excited to explore what would be its full capabilities. 

We think that Enterprise One will help with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. We haven't gotten there yet because we're moving towards the product Portfolio Model.

When I just joined, it was very easy for me to pick up. I was able to get myself familiarized within a month or two. I think it's a very easy tool to use. Although Enterprise One is easy and user-friendly, currently the learnings have been more via trial and error, I think if Planview could provide better consistent training like a tool demo, structured training, how-tos that would help tremendously.

I have been using Enterprise One since I joined my company around four to five months ago but I believe it was rolled out in the organization about 1 year ago.

We're still learning about the tool being about 1 year in, so far it has been fulfilling the purpose and the need of the organization. 

We are currently transitioning to a more Product based model and Planview has been a great tool to help us and I believe as we succeed that might give us the opportunity to explore other Planview products that might scale the use of this solution.

Initially, it was challenging but most recently its been great. I've been in one of the few sessions that we had with the point of contact. We do have a list of the backlog of the things that weren't functioning as intended or something that needs to be added. Our recent rep has been very helpful.

Previously, my company used Oracle Primavera. I think they switched because of the stability. Planview gives the organization what they want. We're able to do all project/product management in a very simplified and yet robust manner without any added complexity.

I wasn't involved in the setup of the tool here, but I heard was it was quite challenging specifically for configurations and to receive good technical support. It took a few executive escalations, but we were eventually assigned an excellent support representative. 

I wasn't intimidated by Enterprise One because even though I'm totally new to Planview, it is very easy to use. It fits the purpose of what the organization wants. We just want to make sure we know how are we tracking our resources, budget, etc. Enhancing the integration part would help. So once we explore the integration aspect, like with JIRA, where we can pull the milestones in and automatically log time, etc, I think that will enhance what the company is trying to achieve.

Planview is pretty cool. It does what you need to do. My advice would be not to overcomplicate it.

I would rate Enterprise One an eight out of ten. 

We are using it for timesheet and resource management and project management activities. We also use the analytical reporting, including SSRS and Power BI.

The solution is on the cloud as a PaaS.

The latest version of the solution is using Power BI for reporting functionality, which has provided a tremendous number of visualizations where users can view all the details monthly. And all the visualizations are interacting with each other. We can see the interconnectivity between the work, resources, and the strategy. This helps our project managers to view everything in one screen, with a dashboard.

When it comes to using the solution for end-to-end work management, Planview announced at the Horizons Customer Conference that they are going to integrate it with an RPA tool and that will be very helpful. Currently we are updating tools and user accounts manually. Once they have this type of integration we can update them automatically using UiPath.

Previously, some of our customers were not happy with the way reports were generated. They had to run macros which could fail, but with this tool they are able to generate reports within Planview. That is one of the main advantages and improvements.

The solution also provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. We have included our teams in Planview which is very helpful. We are able to authorize resources at the department level, at the sub-department level, and at even more granular levels.

It also helps us measure timesheet compliance. We have been able to create custom reports with the help of Planview and send reminders to users every week that they need to submit a timesheet. In the last six months we have achieved greater than 95 percent compliance with timesheet submission.

Resource management and project management are the most valuable features. Recently they included the Resource Management and Assignments stream which is very helpful for seeing results related to the resources. It is connected with reporting and helps us create reports easily.

Regarding project plans, we are using the workflow life cycle and create templates, using them to create a process. Some of them are Agile while others are Waterfall, depending on the workflow template that is selected. They are automatically triggered and the task is then created.

Its view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work. It also helps to see how much we are using. We derive that information from the work and resource management screen. That is very helpful.

In terms of its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects, we have done summaries of projects in PowerPoint presentations for our leadership team. This helps to highlight things regarding our program. We are able to show them summaries with the help of SSRS. This saves time and is helpful to management so that they can track everything.

It also helps managers see the performance of particular resources. They can see the resource utilization. For example, if we create requirements for a role, such as a developer, tester, or a technical architect, they can see how those resources are doing.

In addition, we can drill down into the details underlying the consolidated information. If a project manager finds he needs one more developer for a particular requirement, he can drill down to find a developer for that requirement. The drill-down approach means managers can completely utilize resources, each one to 100 percent of capacity.

When it comes to reporting there are some challenges with integration.

Also, some of the functionality with Microsoft is restricted.

We have been using Planview Enterprise One for around five years. We started with version 13 of Planview.

Overall it is very stable. Sometimes we run into issues, but not very often. 

Technical support helps us a lot whenever we face an issue or raise a request. They resolve them within two days.

Our initial setup took seven to 10 days. 

We started with a sandbox environment, went through all the test cases, and then moved to production.

We have about 2,500 people using Planview Enterprise One. They span the roles of team member, project manager, through to portfolio manager. We also have about eight staff who are admins for the solution.

I would suggest you go with this product, instead of using other tools. Every tool will have its own advantages and disadvantages, but with Planview there are more advantages. There are more things we can do with it. It is user-friendly and is integrated with many other tools. It is also constantly developing, providing connections with Power BI, which we have started to learn, and recently, with RPA using UiPath. That is also something we are supposed to learn. It isforcing us to learn and to keep up with the world. Planview is not becoming outdated, keeping up with recent technologies.

Some of my colleagues are currently using the CA PPM tool and they are saying that they are facing issues. I explained to them how I work with Planview, and the functionality it has, including Planview LeanKit. I noted that we can merge with Tableau and ClickView. They are thinking about using Planview.

At the moment, we use it for work and resource management modulesmainly in the area of R&D. In addition we started using the modules Planning and Outcomes in several areas for solution and program management.

With Planview we got  more transparency in the resource utilization and the budget ussage. Planview gives us the insights where we spend out budget and how we can improve the utilization of our internal resources. 

The most valuable features are: 

• The resource management
• Outcome management
• Work management

It helps us to see resource utilization and resource needs. We get more transparency out of the system to plan the resources and resource skills to train our resources or support the long term onbording process.

We can see the budget spend for a product or release with the outcome area. We can also monitor what we have planned against what was spend, to monitor how good the programs or project is running.

The view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage our work. It helps us with resource management and when we see have available resources we can easily start new projects. If we see with the tool that there not enough capacity available we can prioritize projects and programs according to our resources and the business needs.

In terms of reporting, we're mainly using Power BI connected to Planview data and we generate our own dashboards. 

Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool.

The system has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. Enterprise One is the only offical place for our projekt data and in this way it gives the portfolio management back the data of the projects for prioritization and monitoring. 

Enterprise One provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. There are a lot of possibilities for the resource management. There are some improvments in the area of agile team managment and team assignment which could be improved in the future development of Enterprise One.

There is improvement space in the handeling of agile teams and team assignments in the work planning and the resource reservation. 

My company has been using Enterprise One since 2016.

Up until the last few days, it's been very stable. It's been stable but slow for the last few days and last week we had some connectivity issues. 

The scalability of the system is really good. You can choose which module you want to use and it is possible to make a seperate role out of the different modules.  

Enterprise One is able to be adapted to the already established processes and could be confugured in different ways. 

The main useres users are data stewards, scrum masters, some project leads, finance and resource management. 

The quality of the support depends on the technician you get. Overall the expirence is really good and if there are second level support needed it is available same as the correct contact in the product management. Planview customer service is really good and is cutomer centric.

Before Enterprise One, we had some solutions which we can't use further. 

With the consulting team from planview it was a good process but sometime due to our business complex to get our work processes into the system. At the end of the configuration process all worked well

We implemented direct with the planview teams.

As Enterprise One gives us more transparency we can use our budget and resources better and trough this the ROI is given

Yes we have one in 2015 an assesment with several tools and than decided for the best tool for us.

Enterprise One is a centralized area to allow project portfolio and planning managers to track, schedule, organize, and begin the billing process for projects. That's it in a nutshell.

Our company as a whole is using both cloud and on-prem right now. For project management, we have business sponsors, we have businesses, and we have IT. IT has chargeable projects and we account for all of the application work that's happening and that's done on-prem. The business side has recently started moving over to Planview on the cloud. So currently we're on-prem. Potentially we could end up being on the cloud as well.

We have all the projects in Planview on-premise from an IT perspective. We know if we wanted to find out about a project, scheduling, or who was working on what, we'd be able to find that out with Planview. Planview highlights the human resource hierarchy within it in our on-prem solution so we know who's working on what projects.

Enterprise One provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people.

It also allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and cost at a consolidated level. I have five different projects and I can do that.

We use expenditures quite a bit. We put in forecast expenditures and then we actualize them below the line in the little box in the bottom tray. Being able to track the project with relevant milestones is also valuable. Milestones are valuable because it helps us to keep the project on track. The expenditures are valuable because we need to be able to understand expenses that are beyond the regular resources in the projects.

I don't believe we're using the resource capacity to the highest extent. The project managers and resource managers are managing that outside of the tool. There are a few select Planview experts areas that are utilizing resource management to its full extent, not in my company though. 

Its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects is good. Our solution on-premise is a bit hamstrung though because we don't have Power BI. It's on the Oracle platform right now. It's not at that level for some of the reporting, but the reporting that we do have is good. Even our Planview administrators can make new reports if required.

It feels like Planview is moving away from Oracle and guiding people towards SQL server. For us to do a migration like that, it's going to be very costly. I don't know if they'd be able to support their analytics solution through Oracle or not. We'd love if there was a way to do that.

We don't use the summary reports on-premise to go to upper management. At least in my case, there are some areas within the bank that are using it. I know that we've got the data flowing out of Planview on-premise into our own recording database and we're using Tableau to report up there. We've created the functionality that we didn't see in Planview on our own.

There's integration with Planview Enterprise. We've created an integration with all the data out of Planview and we pull all of our other project management tools into this database, as well as other relevant interfaces, such as HR. We're looking at getting JIRA in there as well.

To a certain extent, it does facilitate end-to-end management but we have to use multiple tools. We're using our MIS in-house tool along with Planview. That may not be a limitation of Planview. It's likely one of our company's needs.

I find it a little difficult to forecast the remaining effort but even though I've been using it for years I don't think that as a company we have been using it to its full extent. There is probably a little bit of process change that's required on our side, as well as understanding as to how Planview works with forecasting.

It's more internal for us to look at from a process point of view, to understand how the forecasting works. We're a bit unique because we're also using another tool called MIS along with this application and it's integrated with Planview Enterprise One. It gets a ton of the information from there and that's where we're actually relying on financial forecasts.

The integration was okay until Planview changed its integration software from Appian. They have Integration as a Service now and we're not using it. We're continuing to use Appian with our own licensing of the software for on-premise.

Being the IT development manager who implements the upgrades for Planview, I would love to see more thorough testing of expenditures and more thorough testing in general. When we do an upgrade, we have to do quite a bit of testing because we can affect the bottom line. We have to understand that Planview is upstream from our financial tool that derives the capitalization of applications. We have to do extensive testing and when we implement a release, we find numerous bugs and we have to have hot-fixes and patches put in on top of whatever we're testing at the time. Because it's such a huge amount of effort to upgrade the application we can't go to the next release, even if it has the next fixes on it because we're going to have to redo all the testing. We'll set the project back months, and then we find another bug. It's very difficult. If we can have better and higher quality testing coming from Planview software, then we'll have higher confidence in putting the software in and not testing the out-of-the-box functionality.

I have been using Enterprise Pro since 2012. 

The application has been around for a long time and there's some legacy framework that's still hanging around in the background that hinders them from moving forward. I think it actually hinders their stability at the same time. I know that Planview addresses it, but I think not addressing that legacy code framework is limiting and it is reflected in Planview's stability.

We have over 10,000 resources within Planview on-prem, so it seems pretty scalable. They used to enter times, so you could consider them users at one point. I think there were 10,000 to 12,000 users. There are around 1,200 project managers.

I have eight to ten people working for about four to five months to do an upgrade. After the upgrade, there are probably only a couple of people for maintenance but we have a full production support team that has a large budget on a yearly basis to support Planview. Not just Planview, but our whole project and portfolio-management system, from Planview all the way to our other integrated systems. It's mostly testers. We've got a lot of QA analysts, a QA lead, plus infrastructure technical leads, and then technical systems analysts.

From my experience, I think their overall tech support is good. They've got a Planview ticketing system. I don't know if it's us or what but it just seems like we do have to escalate sometimes unless they've heard of this issue before with other companies, whenever there's an issue. I think they're pretty good. From a development point of view, they're pretty good.

I've been dealing with them for so many years. Recently, their turnaround time and knowledge are good. If something new happens, then they have to get their legs right. I think part of their development was moved offshore at one point and we were right there at the beginning of it. It wasn't the best. Everybody individually was trying, but as a whole, they just had to figure out the process. Once they did, then they were able to work things very well. We had to have a little bit of patience.

I was around for the upgrade and it wasn't overly complex, but it's not an upgrade. It's an installation and a migration of the database, which is into itself complex. If you could just do a simple upgrade and not have to worry about that, that would be so much easier, which is my experience with other applications.

A typical upgrade takes four to six months and costs half a million dollars. 

In terms of strategy, we have to use swing equipment and we set up a parallel environment all the way from pre-production into production. Once we are confident in each environment level, then we can move on from dev to QA. Then once we're happy with QA, we've done our full functional system testing, integration testing, and all-inclusive regression testing, then we can promote it to production. There's so much configuration that's done after and because there's so much configuration done after you install, that's what makes it complex. Planview does a configuration upgrade because all of their configuration is captured in the database. They'll take an extract of that and then they'll work on it and provide it back to us so that we can apply it into our environment. It's not the easiest thing to do.

Every time we do an upgrade, we have to have Planview heavily involved. We end up spending quite a bit of money on just the Planview consultants to do the upgrade which is on top of the half a million.

We do have to be on top of them. If we're not on top of them, then they're not there, but it takes two to tango so if we end up getting caught up busy working on our environment, and we don't go and talk to Planview, then all of a sudden they're not available anymore. But when we do need them, sometimes we do have to escalate to get their availability.

I would rate Enterprise One a seven out of ten. I give it this rating because of the quality when I do the upgrades. There are just so many things and I feel like it's a commercial off-the-shelf piece of software. I feel like I shouldn't have to have my team testing out-of-the-box functionality.

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. 

Our primary use case is for all of our agency's IT work that will be recorded as projects and/or contracts that we have with our agencies from an IT department perspective.

We are using Enterprise One to record all the new business-case intakes. Any new project that comes in from my agencies is being recorded in Enterprise One. That gives us a better view of what's out there, what needs to be done, and what the requirements are for my agencies. It also shows us how we can focus on the demand for those agencies.

We are not using strategic objectives yet, but we have a custom prioritization calculation that has been done for each project that comes in. Work is prioritized based on a specific scoring with some markers on each project. It's affected us to a point that we can react to demands.

Enterprise One provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people but it's only as good as you've set it up yourself. You can set up Planview in any way you want to use it. The type of resource that you assign is based on your own company's requirements for that. It can be anything that you want. It's flexible in configuring these assignments. This flexibility enables us to look at demand from agencies and with our own productization system, allow us to assign the resources that are needed. 

The most valuable features are scheduling, resource management, and, from a project perspective, the functions like issues that change orders. They are valuable because, from a project management perspective, we use the workflows that we build for project management and do active risk management and issue management for the projects that we want for our agencies.

We use a phased approach for our projects: plan, initiation, planning, execution, implementation, and closure, and all those processes have their own lifecycles. Then we have some customized cycles in support of that to ensure that if a contract is needed, that the contracts are being signed off by a security organization as well. Any network and infrastructure changes will be reviewed as part of that process. We use this end-to-end process for our project managers.

The forecast for remaining effort is something that we are starting to use. The challenge with that is it is only as good as the resource managers are editing and entering the allocations for the resources. An effort was started to refocus the whole resource management. With that automatically comes the forecasting. We also have some custom reports that allow us to look at our workload.

From the perspective of what's in the pipeline, what is currently being worked on, and what's needing help, we are able to know instantly where we are.

We use custom reports and we use portfolio management to look at it from a forecast perspective like who's been assigned to a process and what the workload is. Then we use it for resource portfolios for each team. They use it to assess the ability to reassign or assign resources to upcoming work. But most of the reporting is done through custom reports and some Power BI reports that I've created.

Its view into resource capacity and availability definitely helps us to manage work. It allows us to react to a new demand. It also helps to provide end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. We use it for resources like hardware licenses, software, and such.

Program managers are enabled to group work together and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. Because we use portfolio management or resource portfolio management, with that setup, we can look at it from a program perspective. If you identify portfolios within a program or projects within a portfolio program and the same with resources, you can classify them by type, by departments, and desk to see where your availabilities are.

We can drill down into the details underlying the consolidated information through the individual resources and we also do that through a custom Power BI report. Then based on time entered on projects, we can see where resources have spent time in the past, up until the current day. We have a statistical overview of where our resources have gone.

Our on-time completion rate has been reduced but it all has to do with the size of the project. When we do our planning for projects we tend to deliver it within a timeline, but there's also external influence that you can't control. From a project management perspective, we always deliver what we tend to deliver.

The biggest room for improvement are the scripted dialogues. The scripted dialogues are a logic that you set up to force a certain workflow or process to happen. It's very old in respect that there are no clauses that you can apply to that logic. That definitely can use a lot of room for improvement. The amount of text that you can manage within a scripted dialogue is limited as well. That can use some room for improvement as well.

We've been using Planview Enterprise since 2013 and we moved to Enterprise One in 2018 with the latest version.

I'm very impressed with the stability. We are a client that uses the monthly updates. So far, we have not had any issues when it comes to the new versions that have been released. I'm very pleased with the stability of the cloud platform that we use.

Scalability is not an issue because we can always add more licenses when we need to. We have almost 400 licenses that do not impede the workflow or the process. It's able to cope with the amount of users that we have.

There are about 400 users. The majority of those are people that enter the time or are the actual resources working on projects. They may have a section of project managers, then have a section of managers and resource managers. We also have a section for a specific business case.

The deployment and maintenance are all done by me. We heavily use the sandbox environment to prototype changes, then test those changes and then implement those to production. We continuously make enhancements to the system and we use a sandbox and production approach.

For the specific tasks that we do with respect to business case intake and project management, it has a 100% adoption rate. We have plans to expand the number of users in respect to time entry. That'll happen over the next year or so.

Their support is great. When I open a case I can always cut the responses within a couple of minutes, depending on the severity of the case.

My company used a different solution before my time. I think they used a custom solution that was built in-house that was replaced with Planview.

I have been involved in the restructuring of the solution. The initial solution was not implemented by me but I have redone that whole implementation and we were able to downsize the support team from seven individuals to one individual.

The service that was implemented was very archaic. It was complex. The way that we've now implemented it is streamlined, easy to understand and identify how it's been implemented. The process took us six months. 

We went through a process improvement process where we identified the process as we would like it to be not as how it was in the system and using that, we identified a workflow in the official diagram for the various processes that we support and use.

We didn't use a consultant, we just did the deployment ourselves. There is an in-house team who worked on it. 

I can't quantify the ROI because we've been using it for so long that we really can't go back to an older system and compare it.

Pricing all depends on how many users you have planned to use. It's kind of expensive but at the same token, it's worth the investment for the functionality that it delivers.

We evaluated ServiceNow but based on the Gartner review of the marketplace of Planview, there really aren't any other competitors that can provide the same service that Enterprise One provides us.

My advice would be to have one or more individuals become experts in the use of Planview, in terms of how to set it up, how to maintain it, and how to create a lifecycle. There are scripted dialogues because the more knowledge you have within your own organization, the easier it is to accommodate change requests from within your organization.

If you have to call a consultant for services it's rather expensive and they might not be able to react to the changes that you want to implement sooner rather than later. So my advice is to create experts within your organization.

Make sure to test a lot. It can be very complex. Have a second set of eyes that can see the pitfalls that you, otherwise, might run into.

I would rate Enterprise One a ten out of ten. 

We've been using Enterprise One for a long time and we mainly used it largely for a lot of traditional waterfall, project management, resource management, and things like that. We were just about ready to pull the plug on them but we had a renewed effort in using it.

Over the last months or so we've re-engineered it a little so that we can hopefully get a little bit more of the agile use out of it. Being able to balance the old traditional resource management, costing, and stuff like that, with the new agile way of doing things as they were. We do have integration between Enterprise One and JIRA and we're trying to pull over as much of that information as we can from JIRA so that the people, the frontline folk, are doing their day-to-day work in JIRA and we have more of the product owners, project managers, program managers doing the high-level planning work in Enterprise One.

In terms of the most valuable features, the strategy view is something we never really did in the past. It shows us what all of our strategies are, what programs we have under those strategies, what work is happening, and what the current status of that work is. It's all at varying degrees, whether percentage complete, effort complete, hours expended, those types of things. From an overall corporate perspective, so far I've seen a high-level strategy program view into the data.

When it comes to managing project plans, Enterprise One is awesome at enabling us to see what stage work is at. I've always thought it was awesome because it's good whether we're doing a traditional WBS or we're linking in epics into projects that are supporting the programs and the strategies, I've always thought it was an excellent tool. We do want to try to capitalize a little bit more on some automation. Percent complete is the high-level metric that we're really trying to drive to. So if we have a large effort, we can see how far along in the process we are based on a high-level plan that we think is going to run from August to December, we can see where we are in the process. We can't have a plan unless we work it. And so we're struggling with that just a little bit, but from an overall status of things, I think it's great.

The Enterprise One view into resource capacity and availability does not help us to manage work because we don't know how to work it. It absolutely cuold and that is one of the things in our current use case that we're really struggling with because the pure Agile folks say, "You don't plan. You don't estimate. You just do." And management, managers, VPs, and above are saying, "Okay, what is our capacity to make all this work?" So we're struggling with that just a little bit. I think once we settle on something that Planview does give us a view into what our capacity is and how much work can we really take on.

Its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects is pretty good. Planview has invested a lot of years and a lot of money in creating a lot of out-of-the-box reports. It's just us trying to learn them again and really trying to find out what's available. We've been providing reports and information to our upper management, and our CIO said, "That's too much information." We're trying to find that balance between a one-page summary of everything going on versus providing all the details that might be needed. So overall, Planview is very good at providing whatever level of information we want.

In terms of sharing the big picture with management, this feature has really helped because there are certain strategy reports or certain work reports that do provide a one-page overview of everything. It's just that management is trying to decide what information they want to see. Then, in turn, can we from an administration perspective, modify the report enough to be able to provide that information.

It provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. Admittedly, when we're looking at all the different products that Planview provides, whether it be LeanKit, PPM Pro, or whatever, they do bend toward a certain type of methodology. Obviously, Enterprise One has been very traditional work and resource management focused, but I think over the years that we've been with Planview, and especially with the introduction of the Enterprise One model, they're really trying to make it to where you can have different types of projects. Whether they be traditional waterfall, Agile, Lean, SAFe, etc. Planview Enterprise One does a good job at all of that. It may not give you the capabilities of everything that you want, but that's why they've introduced these integrations with other tools like Azure DevOps, JIRA, Micro Focus, and those types of things. So that you can get that overall big picture of what's going on.

Another example of how it's been able to improve the way your organization functions is that we can now look at the strategy view to say, "Okay, what do we all have?" Because you've got this group doing something, another group doing something, and another group doing something, but overall what is everything we're doing? And as we mature in the use of the tool, not only from how much work we have out there, what can what our capacity is to do everything. But looking at the ICP portion, the investment and capacity planning portion of it to say, "Okay, we think it's going to cost us this much to do this work," but "Oh, by the way, we need to shift something around." What does that mean from mainly from the way we use it, from a capacity perspective? Because we're completely internal. We don't draw revenue directly from the internal work we do. But hopefully, we can get the benefit perspective where something may be big work, small benefits, whereas something else is small work, big benefits, and we can see where we need to re-adjust our priorities there. Overall, I think it'll help.

We're not doing direct assignments but if we were, I think it is a very flexible tool. Probably the only thing that I really struggle with is doing allocations at a certain level. And you have to do it at what they call the lowest leaf level. That's probably the only drawback I see. I'd like to be able to see allocations happen at a higher level and to where we're dealing with Epics. 

In fact, I had a scenario this morning come up where we had an Epic that was created. Some allocations were put on the Epic, and when somebody tried to put a story or a task up underneath that Epic and we couldn't. And so that's the only feedback on the whole resource assignments, how I'd like to stay flexible enough to where I can go at a higher level to where I don't have to do that. A developer is going to be working on this story and we're allocating X number of hours to that particular story. I'd like to know that, I know Jane and Joe are working on a project or this work. And I think over a course of two, three sprints, months, whatever, I think they're going to be working about 75% of the time. So it is flexible, but it's not flexible.

There are pros that we're seeing from being able to draw down and see the resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. I'm a product owner and when I look at an overall endeavor and I know that I've got five Epics and 10 stories across that, from an investment perspective or a cost/benefit perspective, they say, "Okay, Epics are like features. Which feature is going to cost me more to provide?" And then hopefully I've got an idea in my brain if I'm a product owner of "Alright, this Epic is going to give us more value than then another Epic and Epic A is only going to take five story points, whereas Epic B, isn't going to give as much value is going to take us 30 story points or something like that." 

I've personally been using Planview for going on 17 years now, and I think they have made some great improvements in it. I've used it both as a Resource Manager and Project Manager, and now I've been using it from an admin perspective for quite a while. I think some of the administrative aspects of it could be a little easier, especially when it comes to designing reports. The reporting coming out of it could be a little bit better.

There are some small things that are troublesome to me as far as assigning resources, setting people up, trying to configure resource structures, and stuff like that. But those are just small nibs. I think overall from a usability perspective, it's really good. It's huge. Planview's the Microsoft of project planning and PPM. There's a lot to it and people just need to take the time to learn it.

I have been using Enterprise One for about 25 years. We use the latest version, Enterprise One, PPM release. We're on the continuous cloud.

I think the stability is great. Planview had some issues about, three or four weeks ago. But I think they've gotten over that, as far as the technical stability. It has pretty good functional stability. I think it's really good there. There's just a lot of stuff we don't know. Everybody working from home has had a big stress on internet service providers and big companies like ours are using a VPN solution. And so if I'm on VPN and I get on, try to get into Planview, there are some issues there, but overall, I think it's pretty good.

From a number of users perspective, it's how many licenses you purchased from the amount of data. I'm not worried about that since we don't have it on-premise we could probably go as big as they want it to it's just until Planview says, "Hey, their cut back" or something like that.

We are looking at expanding the ICP usage specifically. I know that's integral into it and we're trying to go a little bit more enterprise maybe. That's specific to Enterprise One, but a little bit from a cross-tool perspective, we are looking at the capability and technology management offering for our enterprise architecture group. I think we're going to start looking at LeanKit.

Technical support is very good if they know what's going on. The reason I say that is because we have introduced a Tasktop as the integration between JIRA and Planview. And so the support model is we have to go through Planview to get all of our support. I have found it a little difficult to get answers based on some recent questions that I've had with regards to the Tasktop Integration Tool. That's my only complaint, but I think it's fairly new, I know task integration with Tasktop is a little bit more than a year old.

I think the whole integrations team is fairly young and, they've got a lot of different tools that they have to support, but maybe the support model for Tasktop and the integrations could be a little bit better.

The initial setup is complex but it's huge. There's a lot to configure and there's a lot to consider and when we reengaged with Planview to get us to reset back up, we spent from March to June and beyond getting things configured. I look at trying to set up Microsoft Outlook or Microsoft teams. There's a lot to it. Is it impossible? Absolutely not. But would it change my mind on going with Planview? Absolutely not.

In terms of strategy, we were trying to re-initiate and figure out how we can mix the traditional sense of what we've used Planview for in the old waterfall method, timesheets, and all that. How we can blend it into this new, Agile methodology they were using. And we still have some teams that are very Kanban-oriented work comes in where it goes out, that type of thing. So that was our strategy to how can we mold all this together and be able to get the necessary information out of the tool that we want for upper management. We have a reset goal yet.

If it was up to management, we'd have it yesterday. We're getting back into some traditional project status things like what's the current health of the project, what's the current red, yellow, green status? We're trying to financially cost things out through the financial planning details and stuff like that. Our goal at least for projects data thing is hopefully by the end of this month with hopefully some more customized reporting, hopefully by the end of October.

We brought together a good cross-functional team between our PMO, which we have five people that write five or six people on the PMO. We brought in some scrum masters and product owners. In our core team we have about 10 employees working on it from a day to day maintenance perspective. There's one that would be me from a data maintenance perspective. It's falling mainly currently on the PMO members, which is to get to three contractors. There are seven or eight of us on the PMO.

In terms of how many people use this solution, we have all of our contractors entering timesheets, so we can do timesheet reconciliation, which is about 50 or 60. The number of people that are in it week to week are around 30 or so. That's going to increase as we're trying to move our project status thing back into the program manager, product owner space as well. 

We have time reporters, team member roles, program manager roles, mostly most of the users that we have set up are in the program manager role for being able to see statuses and updates statuses, we have about 10 people that are in what's called the requester role or more the executive I just need to be able to see the information. I don't need to be in the weeds entering data or anything like that. 

In the past, we have seen ROI. Again, we're still trying to figure out who, where, what, why and how. And so, I think the ROI calculation may come about a year from now.

It's kind of expensive, but I don't write the check. As long as the bosses will pay, we'll write the check. That's fine. Pricing isn't really part of my concern, per se. And again, not knowing what other solutions are out there and how they compare from a licensing perspective, I couldn't give you opinion either way.

There's the SaaS cost and there was a cost for the Tasktop Integration as well, but that's to be expected. We use JIRA and anytime we want to bolt on something new, we need to spend some money to make it happen. I don't think it's unreasonable.

The biggest lesson I've learned is that there's a lot to it. There's a lot of information, and the big thing is trying to interpret what the information is telling us. I can look at one report one day, and the same report another day and get a different picture. It's just really understanding, especially week to week, what the numbers mean.

My advice would be to be ready to work hard, understand your needs, understand your requirements, and understand what information you want to get out of Enterprise One. So that, in working with Planview on a solution, they can tell you what information you will need to put into Planview, or the Enterprise One application to get that information. That's something I think that we didn't do very well. We thought we knew what we wanted, but then we'd get a month down the road, and we'd say, "Okay, I'm not getting this information." Planview was right to say, "You didn't ask for that information." So again, it totally goes against Agile methodologies, but you've got to really set a good base of what you want, so that you don't have to continually shift, on a week to week basis. Thankfully Planview has been very gracious to us and has reacted to our needs and our changes in requirements. 

I'd rate Planview an eight out of ten. It's a really good tool, very powerful, and very robust but very complex.

Our primary use cases are for portfolio planning, forecasting, budgeting, and obviously reporting. The project managers input for projects, input resources for proper forecasting, and for budgeting. It's the same with our resource managers to monitor their teams' capacity and then also for finance purposes for our annual budget planning.

We don't use the solution a lot for the project planning itself. As far as tasks and milestones, we don't use some of the features to see what stage a project is at. We really just use it to input the project. We actually use outside applications to manage a project in most cases. 

As far as project planning, entering specific tasks and resources assigned to the project to forecast those projects is about all we use it for. And then, of course, start and finish dates. The flexibility to use a certain finish date is nice, but we don't really go into the project details in Enterprise One.

Enterprise One improves our monthly portfolio and resource capacity planning and forecasting. It improves the visibility of the resource capacity and the team's capacity to take on new work. 

It has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. We have not used the strategy feature much in Enterprise One, but it does help to prioritize projects based on the need and the capacity of the resources to take on the work. It ultimately helps manage the project to have the bank customer in mind. So as we're taking on new projects, we can all work for the same goal with the customer in mind.

The assignments are in a project that's assigned to a resource. The capability is there.

The resource capacity planning is the most valuable feature because you can evaluate your team's capacity by team and what projects they're working on and you can forecast easily by team.

The resource capacity and availability help us to manage our work. During portfolio planning each month with new projects that are presented, we're able to use Enterprise One to measure the capacity of each team that's being requested to be on the project. And obviously, the resource managers and project managers are still getting used to using the tool. But I think that as time goes, it's a good tool to measure, to see the capacity and overloaded resources, as far as projects go and taking on new projects.

Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. It does do end-to-end project management. It's a good thing that we can do end-to-end project management as far as monitoring the project resources, capacity, and timeline, and the schedule of the project. But that's all we use it for. They get what they need from an outside system in order to manage the project end-to-end.

I do all of the reporting for Enterprise One and it's not as user-friendly. So there's not a whole lot of flexibility of what we can do with the reports or custom reports like we could in our old system. The ability to customize reports is not there. And we actually have to pay for Planview consultants to capture reporting that we really need because of the inability to configure the current track record for Enterprise One. That's the thing that we are struggling with is the reporting capability in Enterprise One, without having to pay for extra services from Planview to get what we need. The downfall of this is because Enterprise One is a hosted application, our administrators do not have access to the data table to all of the data tables, to all of the data, and all of the data sets that are running in the background.

The feature to create summary reports across multiple projects affects our ability to share the big picture with management. The flexibility to customize the reports in the way that management would like to see them, we cannot do. We have to engage Planview in order to have access to data to provide to management.

The reporting capability and access to the fields for our system administrators to have access to the data without having to pay Enterprise One to get the data that's needed to create custom reports for management to create reports need improvement. 

Another improvement would be on the request side for visibility. For the requesters to see progress for work and reporting for requesters portfolios, and for requesters to be able to monitor the working end to end.

I would also like to have the ability to report at a task level for chargeback purposes.

We just configured Enterprise One last September and we went live in December.

There is very minimal downtime. The only thing that is room for improvement is that their reporting is very slow. It's a very painful process to pull reports, it's just really slow.

It does slow down based on the number of projects and also based on the amount of data that's being pulled in a report. If we are pulling reports, from September, for example, it's pulling nine months of data into a report. Every month goes by it takes that much longer because it's pulling in that much data, especially if we're trying to get time-phased effort.

We have about 500 users and the roles are requesters, project managers, executive users, resource managers, compliance, finance users, and we have our system administrators.

We are using it about 50% of the application's capability and we have plans to increase that by bringing in cost capital. It's basically expenses.

I would rate technical support a six out of ten. Most of the time, if a ticket is open for an issue or we are not able to do something, we're just referenced to go read out into the customer success center without actually getting help from the customer support. Or by the time a solution is provided by customer support, our system administrators have figured out a solution. Our customer support representative that monitors our tickets is really good. He monitors our tickets for us. He follows up on the tickets. I think that that is a good thing to have for all clients. I think clients should have a customer support representative to collaborate on what tickets are open.

Secondly, the reason I gave it a six is because a lot of the things that we bring, that's not an actual error, but has to do with the functionality of the application, we're just told the functionality is not there. No, Enterprise One can't do that or yes, it can, but you have to pay a consultant to set that up for you. Which are things that should be able to be done by an administrator. But again, with the application on the cloud, in the cloud, we are very limited on the flexibility of what a system administrator can do within the application.

Then timeliness of resolution and tickets being routed to the correct team's queue to work on the ticket could be improved. The customer support representatives are great. I think they're as helpful as they can be. But their knowledge of the system in itself has them answer us in a way that say "Just go read about it on the Customer Success Center."

The initial setup was very complex. It was rushed and there wasn't a lot of follow up after the configuration. Our consultant was very knowledgeable, he was very good. But there's only so much he can do in so little time. The configuration was basically the consultants setting everything up with very minimal help or interaction with our administrators, and because the configuration and go-live are so far apart, there was not any followup. To improve after configuration, there should be a series of follow-ups with the system administrators and the product owners, as well as going live, make that available.

The configuration was about six to eight weeks. We had our plan B consultant about that long. But after the system is configurated, we didn't go live until December, because after configuration we also have to take time for the creation of training material to train our end users because it was a completely new system. After configuration, you need a couple of months to just create the training material and provide training and adoption of the application. We were not able to go live until about December because of the time it takes to do the training and adoption of the application. By that time when you go live, you're not really using the system right after configuration until then. There are going to be things that come up that a consultant should still be available for the solution as the company goes live.

We had implementation strategies based on the user role. To start, if you think of end-to-end projects starting with the requester, all the way down to closing the project. The strategy was starting at the initiation of a project and continuously moving in the training, the order, or at the same workflow that a project goes.

The licensing and pricing are a bit high and the flexibility of the licensing is high. I think that the pricing to engage consultants is high. I don't have anything to compare it to other than other applications that I've supported. So there's just not a whole lot of flexibility in our licensing, which makes it very limited to what our requesters can do and different roles in an app.

My advice would be to be more engaged between the system administrators and the consultants during the configuration stages. Also, for Planview to be more transparent about what the system administrators can and cannot do as far as reporting. And then also make sure that there is time for a training plan and a very well-thought-out training plan based on each phase of a project and user role as they are interacting with that project.

The lessons I've learned is the need to ask more questions about how the application works as far as configuring the system and learning more of the limitations of a system administrator so those questions can be asked upfront during configuration.

I would rate Enterprise One an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for managing our application portfolio. We do some lightweight business architecture connecting to our portfolio. We started rolling into the information portfolio and connecting that also to our application portfolio. Those are the primary use cases. It's also to support the bigger M&A activities that we have in our company.

One of our latest use cases is basically onboarding. Our information and risk management team were looking for a system that could house a catalog of information objects. I suggested that that can leverage our platform, and it already had prebuilt configuration screens so they could easily be on-boarded in starting to use it. We configured more elaborate workflows for the use cases, and that took a couple of months. Now, they are rolling it out. Time to market is important and we leveraged it in the existing system.

This solution has not yet transformed our organization strategy. While we have been using this solution for eleven years, our EA department got canned two years ago. We restarted based on the merger and acquisition. So, it's rebuilding and we're still a small team of only three people. It's basically restarting the whole discipline and also getting strategy, business architecture, and information architecture. While we were in IT, we only considered our application and technology. But we are now focused more on business and information. Once that is in place, then we can think about strategies, roadmaps, and the whole thing.

We do not use the Collaborative Work Management features.

We do not yet use the Lean/Agile Delivery tools.

The biggest impact that using Planview has had is the flexibility that it provides, as well as the ability to use the predefined metamodel and the new portal.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the completeness of the standard, underlying metamodel. We can put most of our attributes or information that we want into the standard metamodel. This is important because we don't need to think about what kinds of attributes or objects we need to create because they are already provided. If we stick to what is called the active metamodel, then the UI is on top of that and we don't need to do a lot of UI customization in order to manage that data.

This is a flexible solution in the places where it needs to be, although it is rigid in certain places because it still uses old technologies. For example, you can see this in the reporting. They started with a Cognos Business Intelligence/Business Objects, then they moved to BIRT, and now they have moved to SSRS. There are still some legacy flash components in there, so there is no clear strategy on that side.

The flexibility helps in that it has a vast amount of predefined roles. It's flexible to safeguard the areas of the platform that you open up. The new portal is flexible enough to create your own portfolios and column sets, which will cater eighty-percent to what people want. The flexibility allows it to become more self-service, and we can on-board users that do not have an IT or enterprise role, but more like an add-on list or even a business user.

Configuring the UI in the content management system is too elaborate and too time-consuming. The look and feel are outdated because it's more than ten years old, so it's not that flexible when it comes to using the real estate that you have on the screen to cater to certain persons. If you look nowadays at web UIs, they are more intuitive than what is currently provided.

The workflow engine needs to be improved to provide for easier configuration and better functionality. Creating workflows needs to be done in multiple places, and the process is elaborate and time-consuming.

We would like to see improvements made on the CTM side and the survey engine. We are now doing app rationalization and we took all of our applications out of Planview CTM and put them into a different tool to run the surveys.

All the parts are there for a low code platform, it needs some uplifting in the UI and workflow. this is the real untapped possibility of CTM.

We have been using this solution for 12 years.

I think that the stability of this solution is below average. With every new update, I find bugs. We have on average twelve bugs active overall and the number doesn't go down with each release. They will fix something and then I find something else.

The scalability of this solution is good. We're onboarding more people and because we're running on-premises, we can scale our VMs ourselves.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the technical support an eight. It depends on the question that I asked because we do a lot of our own development on Planview, and sometimes it's in a gray area. At times it will need to be Professional Services, but in most cases, I will get my answers and technology questions answered.

I believe that we have seen ROI because for us it brings value, but I cannot quantify it in a monetary sense. It's more in the insight and knowledge that makes things feasible. That's what is important. We're not in a place where we can put a figure against it. It is a subjective measure, rather than objective.

Our licensing fees are approximately $50,000 USD annually.

As an enterprise architect, it's our role to see what's out in the market and evaluate competing solutions. I do have contacts with two of their competitors, BiZZdesign and LeanIX, who would prefer me to use their solution. 

There are several reasons that we have stayed with Planview so far. First, we have a lot invested in this solution. The metamodel is still great. We are used to their UI and we have integrated our application portfolios into other systems. Moving away from this solution would require changing some of our integrations.

LeanIX is not ArchiMate 3 compliant and has a limited set of relationships and components.

With BiZZdesign, you need to have multiple products to match what Planview can do. 

Generally, Planview is always keeping in touch with the players in that field. They are always heading towards a common discipline.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to start small. Think about your primary use cases and build it out from there. Also, think about what kind of information you want to use or start with. Make sure that you are safeguarded for scope because Enterprise One is a strategic and tactical system, and don't try to make it an operational system. We tried to do that in the past, doing more like IT operations, like CMDB, and the system is not geared for that. It's more on the strategy side, but that also means that you are more thinking in logical construct and conceptual, than really operational things.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.