We performed a comparison between Planview PPM Pro and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The Warm screen, even though we're not going to the deep levels and deep details of all the projects and trying to assign resources at the lowest level, it gives us a quick visual of what resources are being worked on, what projects, and on what activities they're working on. At least at a very high level, because we're not using all the assignment components to the fullest detail, but at least with what Planview gives us as a tool and how we're leveraging it, it gives us that quick view of who's working on what project and who's booking time to what project at any given time or any given a week."
"Time tracking, portfolio management reporting, and what-if analysis create visibility into project planning, resource capacity, and demand planning."
"Just about everything about the solution is valuable. I can't pinpoint one specific thing. The tool has helped us mature as an agency, has taught us to collect better data and the benefits of having good data."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that my team can use one tool that's reliable, scalable, and provides the leadership team visibility to what's going on."
"We use PPM Pro with Projectplace. It is absolutely 100 percent fantastic. Now, we can give people that more collaborative, comfortable look and feel with a Kanban board view. We give them a smart app that goes along with it, essentially not having to worry about using rigid project management. They are very complementary towards each other: PPM Pro and Projectplace. What one is not so strong in, the other one has strengths in it. It is fantastic."
"PPM Pro is really great at the portfolio level like seeing what projects are in flight versus complete, or maybe not started. The portfolio level view is good for stage-gate management specifically."
"The solution is great for viewing projects and timelines."
"Flexibility is the most valuable feature of the solution. We're able to do a lot of integrations with ConnectWise, which is another IT services tool that we use. So, we can integrate with that, and it's pretty flexible. We just went live a couple of weeks ago, but already we're able to bring visibility into our resource utilization and project status with clients."
"The PPM module is an excellent service."
"We mainly use the solution to support operations and align our ITSM operations with our business goals. This involves coordinating between our application development, support teams, and network engineering teams. When there's an issue at the product or network level, we raise a ticket, and our team works together to resolve it."
"You don't need a lot of plugins."
"ServiceNow brings to the market different layers with different pricing, so you can customize. And all the layers are really enterprise-ready."
"The feature I find the most valuable is the one that lets you see how much time has been used in processing a ticket. This allows us to better monitor performance."
"The interface is extremely user-friendly."
"Everything is valuable. It is tough to choose a particular feature, but project portfolio management along with agile 2.0 are two key product features that I would suggest for services companies like us."
"It's a very complete solution."
"Integrations need improvement. We have the ability now with the FLEX licensing to take advantage of the different applications. But if you want them integrated there's a really large cost associated with that. The integration should be included in the cost per license. We shouldn't have to pay these really high fees to get the systems to talk together."
"It takes more time than it should to create a new project because we can't bulk edit things very easily. That is definitely an area that has room for improvement."
"There should be the ability to store historical functions, but this is not just for this tool. It is applicable to many tools. It would be great if we were able to store specific historical data, such as risk management."
"The reporting has some areas for improvement. It is not always as simple as we would like to get the reports we want or the information that we want."
"The reporting has room for improvement. I know it's all in the revamping all the time with it, but there are things that I know my PMOs don't like. For instance, they want a pie chart and I think it's a bug in the system. I've been working with somebody on it, but then she thought it was because they were trying to look at negative values, which a pie chart doesn't do, but little things like that quite haven't gotten to what we need as far as reporting, but I think it's on the roadmap."
"Connecting funding and strategic outcomes with work execution is a challenge right now for us. Part of what we are facing is we have a couple of drivers of where projects are coming from. One of them is our innovation group. They are just sort of tangentially using PPM Pro for recording the status of projects and not really planning them within there. We need a stronger link between our current financial reporting system and Planview PPM Pro, so we can start to more easily record our external costs in the tool."
"The downside to the way the solution tracks time is if your project manager doesn't add you to the project, you won't see it on your timesheet, even if you did do work."
"Based on my experience, the financial management screens have gone a long way, but I think there's still some room for improvement in terms of how you model them and the different version controls."
"The interface is cluttered with a lot of names and areas. It may not be user friendly enough for a first timer."
"The timing reporting module, and how it's used is a bit difficult to understand. Everything related to project management is quite extensive. It needs to be simplified. At first, our users didn't want to use it, because it seems a bit complex."
"A major improvement we would like to see is definitely around agile management."
"When we originally set it up, we had some kind of success manager free of charge, and now it's an additional charge over and above what we're paying."
"The price is too high."
"ServiceNow needs to invest more in integration. That's the only thing. It could always extend its portfolio a little bit."
"Dashboard interface is limited functionally and not very user friendly"
"When we import a really big project with a lot of tasks on it, we face some issues with dependencies. The links between tasks are not working very well. There is definitely room for improvement there. Microsoft Project, in my opinion, is the best option for such a use case."
More ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Planview PPM Pro is ranked 5th in Project Portfolio Management with 34 reviews while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is ranked 3rd in Project Portfolio Management with 27 reviews. Planview PPM Pro is rated 7.8, while ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Planview PPM Pro writes "Attentive customer service". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management writes "A very strategic demand management tool that visualizes risks and ratings in a bubble chart". Planview PPM Pro is most compared with Planview AdaptiveWork, Planview Portfolios, Planisware, Microsoft Project and Smartsheet, whereas ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Jira Align, Microsoft Project Server and monday.com. See our Planview PPM Pro vs. ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
