Planview Portfolios Reviews

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 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 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.

Our primary use case is to provide an overview of the status of multiple programs and projects. We're doing many programs and projects at the same time and this is a way to provide a consistent way of reporting on their status and progress.

We're still in an early stage. Things will change as we use it more. I did program reports that are important and that will provide us with value.

I think that the user interface needs some getting used to. It's not immediately intuitive. That's potentially room for improvement. I think also that an organization needs to have good support from some senior management to get something like Planview established. If that's missing, then it's not so easy to get support for it in the organization. If I was to talk about a feature or something for improvement, I think it would be the user interface and, in particular, the link between strategy and work.

We started using Planview in November of last year. 

We haven't experienced any issues with scalability or stability. So far, the application seems very stable and scalable. But we're not using it for 5,000 users at the same time. We're more like a couple of hundred.

We worked with Planview consultants to configure Planview to the organization's needs. So, if there's something that is important that the customer, namely ourselves, understand what we want so we can help Planview to configure it well. Investing in knowledge before starting is quite important.

I suspect it's perhaps a bit more expensive than some other competitors, but I wasn't involved in the competitive bid. My job was to implement what we had bought. I don't have comparison prices.

I would rate Planview a seven out of ten. 

In the next release, I would like to potentially see better integration between the strategy and the work aspects of Planview, so that you can report across them better. I think it's also quite early to say. We need to use it for several months to get a better feeling for that.

The interface has to do with the fact that it takes some time for new people to understand the tool. I don't think it's too bad myself, but, potentially, they could make it even better. More intuitive. In the first instance, the user interface requires some familiarization. It takes a while to get familiar with it. It could be improved.

The primary use case is for portfolio management on product development.

We do a lot of big projects which are pretty expensive to structure the product development around and see the progress. Every time we start a project, we have to expense the spends for certain amounts. We need some baselines, like predictive versus actual.

The product has been stable and reliable throughout our testing.

So far, it has been scalable.

The support is good. There are some good people there.

My frustration is that there is so much turnover at Planview. Every time we have had an issue, particularly on the sales side, you're talking to a new set of people. 

The technical people are very competent, but there is so much turnover in the people that we talk to, and that's frustrating. They will say, "We can make this work." Suddenly, that guy has left, and we have no one. Then, we have to start all over.

The decision was made before I was in charge of Planview.

We found it the best to hire the Planview team and get the setup done through them. It took a couple of days.

We used Planview for the implementation.

It is way too soon.

Our licensing costs are about a quarter of a million dollars per year.

I would rate the product a seven out of 10.

Our primary use case for this solution is for managing a 450 million dollar portfolio from the inception and ideas into a strategy. We do this by turning it into an actual project and then understanding how that project performed and taking lessons learned for the next time around.

The biggest benefit that we have seen is that it's increased visibility across the board. It's given us a lot of data to actually make data-driven decisions, whereas before this product we didn't have the level of detail to make informed decisions around a lot of trade-offs with our strategic portfolio.

With respect to our organizational strategy, it has not been transformed by this solution, but it has enabled us to achieve our strategy and achieve our goals. We went through the large process of setting up our own IT shop in the past ten years, and Planview was a big part of being able to do that.

Collaborative Work Management has affected our operations by providing visibility and transparency throughout.

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

This solution has helped us connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution. I do not have specific examples of this but that is my understanding from my colleagues.

The biggest impact that using Planview has had is that it has given us the ability to manage the main capacity of working our resources and getting better at that over time. We are better at planning for our people and making sure that we use them appropriately.

The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting.

The integration with Power BI, in particular, makes it very easy to get information in a useable format out to our stakeholders.

This is a flexible solution. The flexibility allows you to take care of your stakeholders in different ways. Depending on their way of working, you can accommodate several different processes.

Some of the out-of-the-box reporting is not immediately useful and although it can be configured or customized, there are still improvements that can be made.

This solution is stable. I've not had a technical issue where I was not able to access it. It has always been a solid, high-quality platform.

This solution is easily scalable. It really just depends on the administration team that you have in your company. When somebody wants it, you ask them a few questions then you turn things on for them.

The technical support is among the best in the industry. They're very clear, very thorough and they get right to the heart of the problem. They're willing to work with you and help discover any issues that arise, as well as the implications.

Prior to the solution, we were using the HP Portfolio and Performance Management System. We switched because it wasn't as comprehensive and couldn't handle tying everything together. We had a big issue with getting visibility.

We realize ROI through this solution because it is the way that we manage our strategic portfolio. It is difficult to quantify, but it is an essential part of our operations.

This solution has reached a pretty comprehensive state, so it is difficult to immediately think of features that it is lacking.

My advice to anybody who is researching this type of solution is to make sure you're working with a vendor like Planview, who has a comprehensive solution from innovation to the inception of ideas all the way through getting your teams to be able to collaborate together. It really makes a difference if they're all in the same environment.

This is a good solution, but there is always room for improvement. Planview seems great at identifying what needs to be improved and then moving the ball forward.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

It is for total strategic management, portfolio management, etc. It is used for end-to-end projects from the beginning to the end. Our entire company is using it.

I am a developer. I work on RBI reports (financial reporting) in Enterprise One for our business leaders.

The product has been good. The strategic planning started in 2017. They have been making good decisions based on the data that is available in Planview. They can do a drill down to the results level and what is happening exactly in every project.

They are trying to use the product portfolio. I had news that our management team is trying to get the product portfolios in place. It's about to launch.

The integration stuff from tool to tool, like Projectplace to Planview, to manage projects is the most valuable feature. It keeps all our tasks up-to-date. It closely follows up with everything, which is really cool.

From a reporting angle, it is flexible. We can use it in multiple ways, like with the in-house dashboards inside of Planview. With the security and all its options, the data can be limited to the extent of that user's need based on their roles, which is awesome. There is a lot of connectivity to a number of tools.

We had issues with the data rephrasing. 

The integration stuff is not going so well. I heard that there are a lot of updates to version 18. It is almost 40 to 50 percent updates on the integration part. We should feel the difference and our problem should be resolved.

I am looking forward to exploring the bots on the recording part. This will really help us out when it is added.

The stability is good.

Impact-wise, more users and teams are getting onboard, seeing Planview within the organization. People are using it in IT, engineering, manufacturing, R&D, etc. Users are increasing daily.

Technical support is awesome. I personally know Natalia. I have been interacting with her for my last couple of calls. Whenever we have support, we raise the last developmental request, and they are very good. They're very helpful all the time.

The product is a nine out of 10. I need to give a little space for improvement.

It's primarily for project and portfolio management, which includes resource assignments onto projects as well as financial management of our projects.

When we implemented it, we were able to intentionally assign resources to the projects that they've been approved for. Previously, we didn't have a way of restricting resources from charging time against any active projects that we have. By utilizing Enterprise One, we were able to reflect and show the resources when they went to enter their time sheets for only active projects and projects that they were approved to work on. This meant that they were charging hours against work that their project manager was expecting them to work on.

We are still going through a lot of transformation as an organization on the whole. Planview is a good partner because one of the ways that we have tried to change our strategies is to move to a product-based approach. I think Planview will help us with that.

It has helped to transform our organization’s delivery. It is enabled us to see actual planned start and end times of projects, then we can look back when the projects actually closed out. This gives us an opportunity to look back, and say, "Why did it take us so long to finish a project, especially if it went above the proposed plan?" It also manages our costs to say, "Based on how we're trending on our costs, how are we going to finish within budget? Are we likely to go over budget?" This also affects schedule.

Planview has helped connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution because we utilize the strategic module within Enterprise One to help with that work.

The biggest impact has been resource assignment and management. It has helped us consolidate those and be very intentional as far as the tasks that resources are assigned to track. It has a big impact on our financial planning as well.

The most valuable features are the resource management, the time sheet entry and usage, and the financial planning. With our projects, we primarily focus on resource assignments, as far as determining the actual forecast and actuals of our projects. A lot of it is based off of the resources utilized on those projects. The time based helps us capture the actuals. The amount of time people are spending on working on their project tasks. Because they've built this into the schedule, so we can build the forecast. With financial planning, we're able to look back on what our variance is and if there is anything between the scheduled forecasted hours, dollars against the actual hours, and the costs that they utilize.

We are able to adjust it based on any process changes that I've identified as far as our work types and the way our workflows work. We're able to go in there and make those changes ourselves. It's helped us because we can do some self configurations.

I would like a bit more flexibility, as far as the configuration, and have additional capabilities to configure, making it more flexible for our use.

It's very stable. I am very happy with the stability.

It is very scalable. I think it's helping us grow, as far as we are a changing organization. Planview has been able to grow with us in that respect.

We've used that technical support. We have faced some challenges with some of the enhancement requests that we might want information on and the process it takes to get some of those changes put in. The process has improved from when we first implemented it. We have noticed a difference. 

I am leaning towards rating the technical support a seven and a half to eight out of 10. I would expect that next year, I'll probably be able to rate them a 10.

We're using Innotas at the time, which is now Planview PPM Pro. Ironically, we didn't realize that they were going to be acquired by Planview when we started using it. We switched over just for maturity and to have better financial planning and reporting application as well.

It was a bit complex due to the change nature of the product from where we were with our old legacy application, then moving onto Planview. Once we settled in, it became easier to use and manage.

We partnered with Planview in terms of the initial deployment. They had an onsite consultant who helped us with the configuration and creating the test environment before we were able to cut over and move into the extra production environment. The experience with them was very good. I would rate the experience as a 10 out of 10. We had a very good cut over experience.

We don't track the ROI. I think that there is some ROI available just based on the cost of how much we've been spending on our portfolio the last year and on how Planview has helped us manage those costs.

From PPM Pro to Planview Enterprise One, we did not evaluate other vendors. We already had the relationship with Planview from using PPM Pro so that helped us. Planview came to us very receptive. Also with the costs, they were very understanding. Knowing that we were an existing customer, they were very much willing to work with us to make sure that we were able to transition to Enterprise One.

I would rate them as a solid nine out of 10.

Give Enterprise One a fair consideration. It is very scalable and flexible with the changes that we are seeing with version 17. There are a lot of integrations, so the capabilities are much broader than what you may initially perceive. I would definitely put it up there as a product that is as good, if not better, than anything that's out there in the marketplace that is similar.

We are not yet using the Lean/Agile delivery tools, but we're hoping to do so in the next couple of months.