We performed a comparison between MEGA HOPEX and Planview Portfolios based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it's completely possible to do so."
"Its availability is very good."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"What's most valuable in MEGA HOPEX is that it follows the reference model where each component is defined. I also like the diagram consistency in MEGA HOPEX."
"The platform is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the completeness of HOPEX's meta-model. It's a strong meta-model that's rigid but comprehensive. It's a logical fit for our understanding of how we want things modeled in our database."
"The solution itself was easy to use."
"It generates friendly websites and presents specific views of the enterprise (business, functional, applicative, technological, and infrastructure)."
"The solution’s integrated product portfolio has transformed our organization’s delivery because people are a lot more accountable. When you have no accountability, then people don't always deliver the way that you want them to. Once you get accountability, they know that somebody is watching and the way that they manage their work changes quite a bit."
"The overall interface is very easy to use. It puts together strategy and execution across all your investments."
"I like that it's an enterprise environment. I can look across everything that's going on and have a sense of what is going on within the organization."
"We are able to see where everyone in the team is in terms of hours, where there is capacity, and where we can actually add them, e.g., other projects that they're not currently staffed to."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the completeness of the standard, underlying metamodel."
"We can view a project both at the top level and dig into the particularities. It's given us greater visibility into the work itself."
"Planview has helped connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution. That is the key use that we have for it. We use it to validate the work that we're doing and the funding that we need. The difference between the previous version and current version for us would be the ICPM and the way it gives us different scenarios. We can go in and build that out."
"Planview Management integrates seamlessly with other tools and systems used within the organization, such as enterprise resource planning (ERP) software, customer relationship management (CRM) systems, and collaboration platforms."
"It has a data domain where we load our data objects onto the tool but doesn't provide data governance capabilities such as cleansing or validating data."
"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
"The tool usability is weak and it also has a high learning curve."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"It takes a long time to learn how to use HOPEX. It's hard to work with it because the user interface is bad. For example, if you want to build a complex system diagram, you need a lot of knowledge to do this correctly and make it readable. In MEGA, you need to create a report and it takes a long time to publish it. The publishing is offline. With RDoC, everything is online."
"It would be great if this solution could integrate with other tools such as ITSM (ServiceNow) or CMDB."
"The training materials and learning process need improvement."
"MEGA HOPEX's initial setup could be easier. The newer version is better but they still need to improve the process. The deployment took approximately four to eight hours."
"Our challenge will be this tool is complex. It is not necessarily easy to start and learn from the beginning. How do you get people who are not professionals to adopt it, use it, and not be mean about it?"
"Its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects is very limited. In terms of the out-of-the-box reporting for summary reports, the reporting that we typically leverage is around forecasting for resources, timesheets, and actuals, and just looking at what is the capacity. There is no real summary of what work is being done and how work is being accomplished. So, what we typically do is that we get a copy of the data files from Enterprise One daily, and then we have a team that manages the data mod outside of Enterprise One. They use data from Enterprise One as well as other additional sources to provide the reporting that we share with the management. So, we leverage a lot of Enterprise One data for reporting, but we don't use the reporting capabilities within Enterprise One. So, reporting can be improved, and they could help us make more customized reporting. I know it is very configurable out of the box, but we have to leverage an outside data mod that pulls in a lot of data from Enterprise One. So, the reporting function, and being able to customize reports, is the area that could be very beneficial."
"It could do with a quicker response time for some reports or portfolios."
"When you think of planning at a PI level, roadmap planning, or release planning, I think they should make a little more headway into how agile delivery works, tying it back into the financials and the planning to Planview. I think it would be good."
"There can be improvement on the sense of urgency because a lot of times we've exhausted everything that we can, and now, we're reaching out. So, it isn't a, "Well, have you tried to reboot this?" We've already done everything. Once we put in a ticket, there should be more of a sense of urgency on it."
"The only area that I can see currently needing improvement is just the modernization of the look and feel of it."
"We have almost like a third-party group who has to do a lot of our configurations. It's a bit painful for us anytime we want to make a change. The other issue is that we have different groups all in the same instance. So, if one group wants to make a change, it impacts everyone. Then, we all have to come together, to say, "Yes, we approve this change, or no, we do not." Thus, it has not been as flexible for us."
"Their off-shore support is something new that they're laying out and the team just needed some development in terms of skill and experience."
MEGA HOPEX is ranked 4th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 37 reviews while Planview Portfolios is ranked 13th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 63 reviews. MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8, while Planview Portfolios is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Planview Portfolios writes "Helps prioritize projects, share the big picture with management, and has a great planning capacity". MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and Avolution ABACUS, whereas Planview Portfolios is most compared with Broadcom Clarity , Planview PPM Pro, LeanIX, Planview ProjectPlace and SAP Portfolio and Project Management. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. Planview Portfolios report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
