We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Planview Enterprise One OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Planview Enterprise One is #1 ranked solution in top Project Portfolio Management tools and #2 ranked solution in top Architecture Management tools. IT Central Station users give Planview Enterprise One an average rating of 8 out of 10. Planview Enterprise One is most commonly compared to Planview PPM Pro:Planview Enterprise One vs Planview PPM Pro. Planview Enterprise One is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 67% of users researching this solution on IT Central Station. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 27% of all views.
What is Planview Enterprise One?
Planview Enterprise, Planview's performance management platform, combines project and portfolio management software with adaptive best practices. By integrating the business process management of strategies, services, and projects within a single, Web-based solution, Planview empowers organizations to achieve greater levels of control over their ever-changing environment by dynamically managing money, resources, and capacities.

Planview Enterprise One is also known as Troux.

Planview Enterprise One Buyer's Guide

Download the Planview Enterprise One Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Planview Enterprise One Customers
Zurich Insurance Group, Zumbotel Group, Carphone Warehouse
Planview Enterprise One Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Planview Enterprise One pricing:
  • "I don't know about the actual pricing. I have not come across any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
  • "Planview is a little pricey. From a licensing perspective, for just a simple timesheet user who does nothing in the system but reports time, the licensing is a little pricey, but you have to look at it from what it is that you get. We have 6,000 users, and I don't manage the system at all. I just have to do add them to the system. The servers, maintenance, OS levels, security patching for the OS, and all other things are not something that we maintain. So, you have to look at it from an operational perspective. It is not just the product itself. A holistic view has to be taken when you look at the product and how you're going to support it. I would have to hire an entire operation staff to bring it in-house, and at the end of the day, that might cost me more."

Planview Enterprise One Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Bobby Ozuna
Planview Portfolio Support Analyst at Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
Real User
Helps prioritize projects, share the big picture with management, and has a great planning capacity

Pros and Cons

  • "Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool."
  • "The solution is stable. However, it's so robust, there's so much data, that it has the tendency to lag."

What is our primary use case?

Currently, we're building out a model for managing work for timesheets in Enterprise One, and then syncing that work to LeanKit for teams that want to use LeanKit. This would include test agile costing functionality, as my organization shut down that feature before I joined, and now I want to run it as a test case due to the fact that I believe that we need it.

How has it helped my organization?

I can't provide any specific metrics at this time, considering the infancy of the project, and my joining the organization. The company's go-live was as of August 8th this year. 

However, in the short time I've been here, and since they went live in August, the people who may have been naysayers, after closing on the first month of financials and then comparing actual data, actual timesheet data, actual work performed to forecasted dollar amounts, have had a light bulb go off. They're seeing now where our money's going, why it's going there, and how it's going there. Now, it's prompting the right type of what-is-the-status questions. I'm seeing that. I just don't have any data to provide other than hearing people profess that in meetings.

What is most valuable?

The capacity planning is great. I love the ability to forecast resource usage and to work for as long a period as I want to track. That's a really big, important aspect of resource management, and, specifically for companies that have contractors in which those contractors might only be funded due to a project. If you don't have project dates in and you don't have funding, then you don't have validation for why you have a resource. It makes it so that there's some accountability there. 

I love that using this tool gives you the ability to plan work out three, six, or even 12 months in advance very successfully. It gives us a real picture of what our organization really thinks it wants to do, what our organization is really doing, and then what our people are really doing, and reveals who's not working on anything.

When it comes to managing project plans, it works. I had this discussion yesterday with someone who's in more of a senior leadership position than I'm in. One of their concerns was the inability for project managers (PMs) to manage work in Microsoft Project and then sync that data to Enterprise One, and I said, "Well, then, if they're going to do managing the work in Project, they might as well manage it in Enterprise One," as MS Project only offers the PM visibility, unless it's cloud-based, which means it's hidden, not transparent. Enterprise One is transparent which makes it the perfect place to manage work and tasks.

I love the forecasting. It's a great tool. One of the things I'd say about Enterprise One that I love the most is it provides transparency. There's nothing to hide when an organization uses Enterprise One. You will find out what resource managers are really not managing resources. You will find out what resources are really not working, and then you will find out what PMs are not working and are working, and then you'll find out what work is relevant.

The functionality of Enterprise One, by default, is that if you request a resource to a resource manager for your project, if you're a PM, one of the actions you have to take is to submit the utilization and the effort required by that resource. Therefore, if I said I needed this person, and I just left it and submitted it to their manager, the manager would see you come across as a 100% request. If I already know the person is working on other projects on support, I’m not going to allow them to be 100% because I'm not giving that resource. It requires a PM to align the requirement for a resource, as an example, with what the budget forecasts. You only have resources based on budget.

The accountability piece that I like about Enterprise One is that it forces the actions that PMs are supposed to do. They are supposed to manage budget time and resources. If you just arbitrarily say, "Give me 10 resources at 100%," that's not managing the budget. That's not creating an effective timeline. That's not creating a realistic schedule of when you think proposed work can be done. It forces the PM to do a little work. It forces that resource manager to sit down and say, "Do I really know what my people are doing, and do I really want to give up this person for 50% of his time for the next eight months?" It forces those questions so that PMs actually know what their team is doing.

Enterprise One's view into resource capacity and availability help us manage work from the perspective of I see what my team should be working to, what they're assigned to, and whether or not I'm willing to give up a resource for other work, and kind of puts me in a place to prioritize planning of work. Every request for every resource and every request for every component of work that is entered in Planview Enterprise One requires someone or multiple people to ask themselves real questions of whether or not they know why they're doing it and whether they want to do it.

Enterprise One has the ability to create summary reports across multiple projects. The reporting tool is great. Out-of-the-box, it's just kind of black and white. It's a list of data. It's like an Excel spreadsheet without lines, and it's got sections. It pulls all the data from wherever you want to pull the data, depending on your access. It’s great for data, as the Planview Enterprise One database is huge. There is lots of data being captured. I love that. I love the ability to integrate with, for example, Microsoft's Power BI. When we do that we can take the wonderful data that Planview captures and formulate that into a more visual representation that people want.

The reporting enhances our ability to share the big picture with management. The amount of data that Planview captures for every item of work, whether it's a support bucket, a capacity, or an actual project in the project management world forces conversations. The old-fashioned corporate American model of work leadership, especially executive leadership, is to ask the arbitrary question, "What is the status?" and that's the worst question anyone in leadership can ask as it doesn't mean anything to me. What you're looking for is what you want to know - including the status which may not represent what another department is actually tracking. It's an irrelevant question.

For me, the right question is, "Where do we stand with the money?" or, "How do we look on our timeline?" or, "Will this functionality be delivered by X, Y, or Z?" Those are specific questions, and the tool has that data. It requires a project manager who knows the work, understands the timeline, is really managing the resources and their capacity, leveraging their time, validating the time being submitted in approval to give that picture.

It's more difficult, as it requires more accountability. It's not a simple spreadsheet that says "Oh yeah, we'll have it done by December 1st," without any data to back it up. Planview Enterprise provides data that almost forces the PM to make sure that the "We'll have it done by date," is legitimate based on resources and legitimate based on work. It's a little bit more complex due to the maturity of most organizations. It works well for organizations that have serious thoughtful PMS. It's not for an organization that really just has note-takers tracking tasks on a spreadsheet.

Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. For all types of work, I’m not 100% sure. Enterprise One captures capabilities or features, deliverables, something that you're enhancing, and then, also, due to its ability to incorporate into tools like LeanKit, you can track that actual work. It tracks traditional projects, what we know to be a start-and-stop funded thing. It tracks support work. If you really think through how you're going to design that model, you can track your day-to-day operations, break/fixes, emergencies, et cetera.

It tracks all types of work that are performed within technology. It's just how you're going to use the tool to track that work that is in question. There’s complexity. It requires an organization to actually sit down, to know what they're doing, know what work is, know what they're delivering, how they deliver it before they start building out their structure within Enterprise One.

Enterprise One helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. That’s true in my experience with Planview, however, it’s too early in my position at this new company to really gauge. They're new; they're not there yet. They're not at that universal, "Let's plan work across the board because it's all aligned to an organizational strategy" place yet. At my past organization, we were able to prioritize work just by having snapshots by portfolios of, "What work are we actually delivering? Can we deliver it all?” This forces executive leadership to make a decision and say, "Okay, this is the work I actually want," as opposed to the old-fashioned, "Get it all done because I said so." It really breaks that model, and I love that.

The solution provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. It allows you to reserve a person so that they have access to submit time to work items, but not necessarily have to work in those items. It assigns you the ability to allocate a resource for a specific work assignment which they will be doing. It also allows you the ability to reserve a role type based on function and role, not necessarily a named person.

In terms of the flexibility of configuring assignments, from a tool usage perspective, it's easy. It's the click of a button. From the person clicking the button, the perspective of that user, the complexity comes into play in terms of whether or not you can understand the definition between what is a requirement, what is a reservation, what is an allocation, and you can memorize that and remember that every day, and know where to click a button. other than that, it’s simple.

The flexibility allows us to plan ahead for work that we aren't sure is going to be fully funded or not. We can plan a type of resource without actually knowing who would potentially do the work, which allows us to forecast a resource. The forecasting model gives us the ability to say, "Will our team that's presently in use be able to fulfill that prioritized work, or do we have to begin a process of obtaining additional headcount?"

The solution allows program managers to group work together and see resource demands and costs at a consolidated level. For example, at one of the other companies that I've worked in, they had the mindset of, "Our organization keeps our work, and you don't need to see what we're doing, and I don't need to see what you're doing." However, with this mindset, they're going to run into the constraint of, "Oh no, you need someone from my team to help you deliver that work, and now we need open visibility." This product impacts the mindset and the model of, "Who owns work? What is collaboration? Do we still remain in silos? Or is the organization the main objective?" If delivering work for the organization is the main objective, Planview delivers due to the fact that it's transparent and open to everyone.

We are mostly able to drill down into details underlying the consolidated information using Enterprise One. As an example, you can have a work item called Cool Project. With it, you can see when it's supposed to start and when it's proposed to finish. You can see the resources allocated to it. In there, you can see work items, like features or deliverables, epochs, or milestones. You can see that in a Gantt chart. You can see the start and stop dates for all of that. Planview does have the ability to let you actually see the tasks, or what Enterprise One calls the action items, for every one of those. That may not necessarily answer the bigger picture, as there's always going to be that human component that has to speak to the work, which is why a lot of teams use secondary tools, like CA's Rally tool, or Planview's new LeanKit tool, or Jira, to really give the full picture of what each individual respective work item is. Therefore, while it does give us a visual, it may not speak fully to it without the help of a secondary app.

Enterprise One has not increased our on-time completion rate. The reason is due to the fact that Enterprise One leverages true resource ability and capability as far as effort and available effort. If you leverage the tool that way, and you keep governance that reflects that, you’ll be better off. As an example, my contractors are not legally allowed to work past 40 hours, so I forecast them that way. I can see if somebody's over. I need to deal with that, due to contracts. That said, if you track outside of Enterprise One, there are organizations that may say "Hey, you're a contractor. I need you to finish the work. Sorry. You'll be doing 50 hours.” It's on a spreadsheet and no one sees it.

What needs improvement?

The issue we had was during a test case and had to do with Enterprise One linking to third-party apps. For Enterprise One, for what it's supposed to do, I don't have a problem with it as a PM. It does what I need it to do and the issue doesn’t necessarily impact traditional project management. You can manage budget, time, and resources - the three key pillars of project management - and IT can all be managed within the tool, Enterprise One.

For the more granular visibility that people expect, there are always third-party applications, like LeanKit. That gives you that more granular picture for managing the work, however, that doesn't necessarily take away from the scope of what project management is in Enterprise One.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've used the solution for about five years at two different companies. At my latest organization, we've been using it since August 8th and, of course, however many months they've been working with Planview leading up to an official launch. I'd say it's been less than one year. I joined the company a month before go-live.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable. However, it's so robust, there's so much data, that it has the tendency to lag. I don't know if that's how we configured it. I don't know if that's due to how we configured our cloud instance. That said, specifically with reporting, it was the same at the other organization I was at. I was at another large organization that had 4,000-plus people using Enterprise One, and when you pull up reports, reports can take one to 15 minutes to pull one report, sometimes longer. That seems to be consistent between the two organizations.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The ability to scale Enterprise One is great as you can integrate with tools like Power BI and then tools like Planview's LeanKit. Therefore, I consider that scalability to be great. We're building a working model right now.

We have executive leaders using Enterprise One. Overall users might be close to 4,000. I say that as that's how many users are in IT, and this is presently an IT tool for timesheet reporting. It's a pretty significant footprint, and the roles range from executive viewers, executives who just want to see reports, senior leadership, senior management, management, project managers, program managers, timesheet reporters, contractors, and then finance people who just need read-only rights to be able to see stuff. There are quite a bit of different roles that are using it.

The solution is being used daily by up to, plus or minus, 4,000 people. The organization is using it right now as it's an IT tool, however, there are other organizations that are not IT including HR, training, accounting, and other business units within the organization that are already seeing the value to it from a project management perspective. That footprint can grow and we may increase usage.

There are conversations within the company with others that want to use it, and that would turn the IT team, who owns it, into trainers for building out new administrative groups and coaching. There's just no one yet who has actually been implementing it as we're all new to the product.

How are customer service and support?

I have never had to contact technical support in the five years I've used it.

I've used the Planview success page and it is very thorough and very good. They have a wonderful KB platform. I know that we have had to reach out maybe five times since August 8th, at least that I'm aware of. Our global admins had to reach out for some support from our Planview representative from an administrative perspective, however, from a Planview SME perspective, for finding out about usage and best how to use it, the KB articles are phenomenal which is why I've never had to call.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Our organization previously used Micro Focus. There was not enough detail. It tracked the work. It tracked somebody reporting time to it, as well as resources. However, they didn't necessarily track the budget to the fullest extent. It tracked the budget, however, it didn't track that budget to forecast, and it had no forecasting model. You couldn't plan resources and then do comparisons for analysis, and you couldn't get granularity into work items the way you can in Planview.

How was the initial setup?

I was not part of either implementation of a product instance of Enterprise One for either of the two organizations that I've worked in.

However, I can say that, with both of them, I have heard after-the-fact statements such as "We should have considered this. We should have considered that." Both organizations did not know the full scope. As an example, one of the organizations I have worked with didn't want to track at a strategic level. They wanted to track at team levels due to the traditional silos surrounding work. However, now that they're getting a taste of the tool, understanding that there is cross-collaboration, they want to manage at a program level. That said, you can't manage at the program level without using the strategy functionality within Enterprise One. When you get into strategy, it's no longer siloed work. It's organizational work. That it requires planning.

We have approximately 20 people that are classified as Planview admins, and some of those are global admins. Global admins include probably five or fewer personnel. Planview admins are probably 25 or less, and those all function together as a team. It is a collaborative effort to maintain the solution. To administrator Planview properly requires a representative from every organization and/or department that will use it to act as a liaison/admin/coach. That rolls up to a global administrative group which is about 25 people at least.

Most of the maintenance is governance. It's not maintenance for the application. It's maintenance for usage, roles, access, that type of stuff. From the application perspective, the maintenance is low. Once it's implemented, it's global, it's across the board, and it's in use. That said, there is administration for governance, usage, visibility, rights, minimal rights, and that type of stuff.

What about the implementation team?

We had some assistance from Planview directly.

What was our ROI?

We haven't recorded an ROI yet, however, we are expecting one.

That's going to be evolving as we're understanding the data and why we're putting the data into the tool. Actual data from what we planned, the budget that we planned, the budget that we spent, overspent, didn't spend, et cetera, will give us clarity in the future and those types of conversations are happening right now and they will all roll up into ROI.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't have any details in regards to the pricing or the licensing of the product.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I'm not sure if other products were evaluated before choosing this solution.

What other advice do I have?

I'd advise those considering the solution that it requires planning. If there was some CEO or senior IT leader that said, "Hey, we're thinking of using it," this is where I would go. I would say: You need to understand what is the work that you deliver. You need to understand how all of that work that you deliver rolls up into organizational goals and vision. You need to understand that and understand what type of work you deliver, being able to compartmentalize your work into either support work, operational work, or actual project or program work, or intake work for requests, or emergency break/fix-type work. You have to be able to quantify the type of work you deliver before you use a tool like this, and then understand the hierarchy of work so it can be prioritized across the organization before you implement it, and then understand what are the roles of people, like people who submit time, what is a project manager, what is a resource manager.

In IT, a resource manager is basically the engineer who can do more tickets but can't deal with people. Planview actually does the reverse. You are managing people more than you're delivering work, and that's a big, big pain point for a lot of organizations. Those things would have to be considered. Really ask those types of questions and get examples before implementing. 

One of the reasons why I love Enterprise One so much is due to the fact that, when I first started using it in 2014, when I was given the role to help administrators, there was an assumption that this tool was too complex. The company was struggling and fighting to use it. I interviewed people, including probably 30 managers, every week for several months. These were just generalized questions to help build a method for helping them use the tool, and coaching them to actually start using it. The universal answer was, "We have a lot of work. We're extremely busy, but I don't know what we're doing." Planview gives that visibility, and answers the question "What are we actually doing?" and then that leads to the, "Why are we actually doing it?" And that's extremely helpful.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Roderic Person
Planview Administrator and Robotic Process Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool

Pros and Cons

  • "Another good thing is that we can create custom reports, which is great. If I created a custom report, a tile that tells me how many people have logged in today. We currently have a little under 2000 users, and that's only users, we actually have integrations, that we created a custom form that sends hours directly to Planview. They're not using Planview directly, but they're sending their hours to Planview through an API."
  • "The content management definitely needs to improve. We don't really use content management for projects inside Enterprise One. We have actually switched to a SharePoint site. We have a feed from Enterprise One every night of all the projects that are created."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for contractor and associate contracting which reflects directly to project resource, "our spend". We do a calculation based on the vendor that the contractor is through, as well as each associate has a per hour rate that is applied to the project to attract the spend applied to that project from the resources. 

We also track the number of hours spent per application. Every application in our bank has the application code that we tied back to Planview so that we can track and see how much time is spent within the application, either with upgrades, maintenance or break-fix type of situation and also to report. It's primarily for tracking reporting.

How has it helped my organization?

Enterprise One has improved my organization with the ability to look at the hours that people track. Prior to Enterprise One we didn't have any estimation model. As we grow within Enterprise One, we're able to pull reporting to see how much time it takes for each individual person or a team to perform a task to complete a project. So with that, we're able to start building that model to estimate the approximate number of hours for each task so that when we provide that to project managers, it reduces the amount of time building the project plan because they've already had that base model to use for each of those tasks. It's created our ability to forecast how much time it would take to perform specific tasks that are very similar to each other. 

It also improved our communication. Prior to Enterprise One, there was not that much communication between project managers and resource managers. So that when a project manager went out to Microsoft Office or to Microsoft Project to schedule a resource for a task, which they actually didn't, they have to have a separate spreadsheet. They would put down a number of hours and it was just a guess. A resource manager would then come back and say, "They can't do that." It was very back and forth. It wasn't like a synergist, a single point of information where everyone looking at the same thing, it was back and forth. So with a project manager entering just random hours and just guessing to get a specific dollar amount or to fit a specific dollar amount it was a lot of work on the project managers to try to adjust it to fit in with that dollar amount.

Now, with Planview, with them being able to see as soon as the project manager submits a request for some hours, the resource manager can communicate with that project manager instantly and say, "It won't do that. It's not going to take that much time". And then when it comes back where the resource is actually entering the hours on the task, there's an exact number. So it's hard to put a number on how many hours were saved or how accurate it's going to be because we're still growing. But prior to this, the accuracy was really, really off. It was terrible, but now we're getting more and more accurate where we're in the, I would say, closer to 70% accurate on the estimations. So it's getting really close to being very accurate.

Enterprise One helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. We use what we call Roadmap, Roadmap items under the planning and capacity section. We're the best at the capacity section. With the Roadmaps, our department heads are able to categorize the project by rank. By ranking those we're able to, especially during this COVID period, we've seen so many projects get pushed down to the bottom or completely removed due to the inability to complete those or the return on investment not being there. It really helped a lot with that planning, investment, and capacity planning.

In terms of the flexibility of configuring assignment, my other administrator and I actually came up with that solution. We decided that was the best way to go primarily because at the state that we are in our company, the project managers weren't mature enough to utilize allocations and the resource managers weren't mature enough to reject or approve those allocations. And that was causing people to be over-allocated because they weren't charging time. Because it the estimation on the number of hours needed was completely off. They were just putting however numbers in there. The resource would show over-utilized 1,300%, 1,300% and it would just throw off all of our reporting.

We cracked down on it. We had people to start utilizing the utilization percentage. Making sure that they had that communication line with the resource manager since we have our estimate as growing. But with the reserve and authorization, being able to authorize an entire team to a specific task and reserve them, allowed us to easily create the schedule that works best for that agile environment. Especially with the specific number of hours used for each person that was really easy to use those types of assignments.

What is most valuable?

We have different groups that use it for different purposes. There are project managers who use it in place of Microsoft Project. So they track their project through its phases, their financials, keeping on schedule, on time, and on budget. Our resource managers use it primarily to track their resources, to see how much capacity their team has to perform different tasks or different projects, and how much time they're spending on each individual application. Technology managers actually represent the overall group who use it to roadmap, outlook,  see what's down in the pipeline, what team has what capacity to actually take on a task, see if that project is worth the money, that return on investment is worth actually doing it. Executives are just in it for the reporting to track the financials, to see how much we're spending within the technology and enterprise operations departments. Enterprise One is useful in many ways. We have a little bit under 2,000 people using it.

Another good thing is that we can create custom reports, which is great. If I created a custom report, a tile that tells me how many people have logged in today. We currently have a little under 2,000 users, and that's only users, we actually have integrations, that we created a custom form that sends hours directly to Planview. They're not using Planview directly, but they're sending their hours to Planview through an API. We have over 1,500 contractors overseas and within the United States, that submit their time to Planview, so we can track their work in their project as well. In total, I would say the amount of user input for Planview would be close to 3,000.

Inside Planview, they have what they call a "lifecycle". It's basically a workflow, it's a set of steps that each project has to go through, and with its customization, being able to match our own project process, we match it one for one. And so we can see at each stage of the project where it is either through the gate, from gate zero through gate four, and even with Agile, being able to iterate through that same gate, by using scripted dialogues, or exit scripts, we've been able to track projects exactly where they are. Each schedule can be tied back to either the hours entered, by either date, or a percentage of the effort completed on it, so it ties together pretty good.

It's being used a lot for the remaining effort. We actually create tons of reporting off of it. We've created multiple Power BI dashboards. Data feed allows us to create our custom Power BI dashboards, so that way we can track what efforts been used, what efforts are remaining in a very graphical, easy to read way. We've created this primarily for the project managers and resource managers. My manager has a breakout session that discusses our Power BI dashboards. It's really nifty for tracking that. We use it a lot. Our executive challenged us to be able to forecast and estimate hours used on each task. That's why we implemented Enterprise One initially, but we since provided what she wanted and now we're providing more. Initially, it was just the requirement and now we're exceeding that requirement to give better visibility to all resource managers and project managers.

We have a really large organization, 22,000 associates total, including the 3,000 people using Planview. Being able to group projects into portfolios based on specific filters, either the project manager or any other approver organizational hierarchy, once you set your portfolio, you can either share that with your team or whomever so that they can all be on the same page. With the Power BI dashboards, we have a very open information model where we want everyone to be able to see the same thing. There's only one section where it's confidential and we as administrators have to provision that separately, but everything else is open for everyone else to see. So if you're just a time reporter or just have a reporting, you can go in and see the same information as a manager. Being able to group projects in the portfolios, filter them, and being able to see all of that data graphically using the Power BI or the standard reporting that came with the FastTrack setup has been very helpful to our entire organization.

For all the work that we perform, Enterprise One provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. We have our technology projects. We have what we call non-technology projects, which are basically projects that don't necessarily have a technology component in it. It's things like branch opening and closures, even though sometimes they will have the technology, but it just depends. We also have what we call OTW, which is another planned work. This is primarily for resource managers so that they can track their applications like how much time is spent on their applications doing upgrades or break-fix. We also have programs of work, another resource manager tool that tracks Agile programs, and we also have Roadmaps. For all the project types that we, or work types that we have within our organization, it does great.

We just started doing the on time and on a budget since we are in infancy with Enterprise One, we weren't really holding the project managers to that. We were holding them to it through the governance, but not through the Enterprise One. Now that we're a little more mature, we've started tracking that grader as well as being able to use those change requests to track as scheduled, budget, or scope changes. It has allowed us to definitely increase our on-time and on-budget awareness.

What needs improvement?

The content management definitely needs to improve. We don't really use content management for projects inside Enterprise One. We have actually switched to a SharePoint site. We have a feed from Enterprise One every night of all the projects that are created. And once they're created, we run our process that goes out to create SharePoint sites for each project. Because of the inability for drag-and-drop file ingestion, the best thing about it is the versioning, but that's also done in SharePoint. We just don't use it because it's HTML and it's hard to use. It's a little bit more cumbersome than it should and then we like.

For how long have I used the solution?

We implemented Enterprise One initially for our pilot group at the end of 2018 and we went into production last year in April.

We have the cloud solution. It's all hosted. The team that is using it, for the most part, is just the technology area, application development, information security does our technology group. We have some enterprise groups also that are using it.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We haven't had any issues with stability. In the previous versions, there were interface issues with Internet Explorer because it's just an antiquated browser. With Microsoft adopting Microsoft more of the Edge and Chrome, the stability is fine. We haven't had any issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is great, with the monthly improvement push, they're on a monthly cadence of updates with the new version 18, the improvements come every month. It's awesome. They have a vast library of API calls that we actually have a contractor system. We're actually onboarding that now and we're going to implement API calls to Planview that way. I have created a multiple UiPath robot that used Planview to create reporting, to add users, to do monthly maintenance, as well as the call API to UiPath. I do a lot of robotic process automation and I can do a lot of the automation with Planview. The scalability, being able to integrate with JIRA, Workday, create custom integrations if we need to, being able to use API calls through either JSON or primarily SOAP, is pretty awesome. I don't have any complaints so far on the scalability.

We're looking to integrate JIRA into our Enterprise One with LeanKit. We're still working out the financials on that to try to figure out a way to integrate that either through a flexible license or through individual licensing. Initially, we started off with technology because that was the executive who decides to start tracking the projects since that's where the project management organization lives, under technology. But more and more enterprise business unit groups are starting to want to track time and see what their resources are spending their time on as well. We're growing slowly throughout the rest of the organization. With the amount of data that the Planview provides and that type of reporting, it's kind of giving other departments and other groups visuals into what they could have by using Enterprise One. We're growing through them. 

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is great. It's just like technical support at any other institution where sometimes you'll get someone who is very adept in the system, and then the others are a little less. But, generally with the way that Planview is set up, if we have any issues, we have a representative we can talk to and bail and get the right people to work on it. We've had no issues.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were previously using a homegrown SharePoint site that we worked with our SharePoint team to build. It didn't have a nearly as robust workflow, reporting approval ability, and tracking as Planview.

How was the initial setup?

In terms of the setup, I actually got hired on in the middle of implementation, but we had a Planview representative on-site performing the configuration. She basically did training while we were there so I was able to pick it up really quickly and become adjusted to building or configuring the system through configuring screens, scripted dialogues, and the lifecycle. It was really easy. It seems like a low-code solution, so it was really easy to pick up.

I would estimate the setup took from July to December. That is when we did the primary build-out of all of the integrations. We had a previous system that was homegrown through SharePoint that we had a lot of projects and data in. We had to do a lot of data manipulation in order to put it in a format that's ingestible by Planview. That took a little while too. I wrote a robot that would automatically convert all of the data over to the new data format, and we were able to send that to Plan B to have them import it.

The big parts of the strategy were just integrations with our financial system. We have a general ledger financial system that we had to integrate with and that we had to send a file over to Plan B to enter that information. We also have a Workday integration for resource management. That is a pretty nifty one where whenever the Workday feed comes over, it either removes resources, adds resources, and creates users based on if they're in a specific hierarchy of the bank. That was really nice.

From our end, it was primarily just me and my teammates working on the deployment. We were the primaries. We actually had one other resource through application development that was helping us. That was primarily for the deal integration. The Workday was just a file feed, and that was all in Planview. My colleague is also a Planview administrator. He doesn't do the robotic automation, but he does a lot of the architecting of the system.

For management, at this point, it's just me and my teammate. We have one other person who is specialized in the reporting. They do a lot of the SQL queries, SSRS, and Power BI setups, but they don't do really much of the administering of the system. 

What about the implementation team?

We only worked through Planview. We didn't work with any other third parties.

What was our ROI?

The area with the most ROI is our ICCMO, being able to track that on time and on budget, all of the resource managers. Those are going to be the department heads for each of our technology departments. They would be the ones that would see the most return on investment. As well as tracking their contractors and the hours they're spending on the applications.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing and licensing are fine, but with the model we currently have, we don't have the FLEX license just yet. We actually have the tiered based on the access side from just a team member to project, we call it portfolio manager to admin. The pricing is fine. That was one of the solid points for switching to Planview. There are additional costs for integrations.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We actually did an RFP. So we looked at the Gartner quadrants and we had other people provide proposals. But with all the requirements, Planview was the only one that was able to provide all of the items that we needed which is why we went with them.

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson learned would be regarding making sure to have Planview do the training. When we did our training for our organization, we did a train the trainer where Planview came in and trained just a few people in our organization and then they went out and trained their people.

But it's like a game where you tell one thing to a person that you pass it down the line and it gets changed by the time it reaches the very end. If you have the budget for it, have Planview perform the training because I think that would increase adoption a lot easier. We had a lot of people who came from different areas that had different methods of tracking projects from Visio Excel and Microsoft Project. Getting everybody on the same page to Planview we had a lot of contention and a lot of people who didn't like the product initially. And that came down to me to training. With the trainer themselves not being very familiar with the system, being unsure about what they're trying to train the other people on didn't give the other associates much confidence in the system initially.

The adoption was a lot slower than we wanted. I think that if Planview had worked to perform the training, it would have made people a lot more of a point of contact to reach out to. And having a lot more acceptance and what they were being taught. So that would be the lesson learned.

Especially if you're an administrator, go through the advanced training if you're doing FastTrack and if you're doing the configuration so that you'll be more familiar with what the consultant is doing. Our consultant was great. She did a lot for us, but we also saw afterward, once we became more familiar with it, we saw a few errors that needed to be corrected but they were easy and we were able to fix them ourselves. If you don't go through advanced training, you wouldn't recognize it. 

I would rate Planview Enterprise One a nine and a half out of ten because nothing is perfect.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about Planview Enterprise One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
552,407 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Keith Kennedy
Project Administrator at Texas Mutual Insurance Company
Real User
Top 5
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

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

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.

What is most valuable?

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." 

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

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.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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.

How are customer service and technical support?

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.

How was the initial setup?

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. 

What was our ROI?

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.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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.

What other advice do I have?

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.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
MK
Senior Analyst - Technology at LPL Financial
Real User
Helpful for clearly aligning the work and strategic initiatives within a single source, but needs better reporting

Pros and Cons

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

What is our primary use case?

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

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

How has it helped my organization?

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

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

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

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

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

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

What is most valuable?

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

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

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

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using it for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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

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

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

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

How are customer service and support?

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

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

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

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

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

How was the initial setup?

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

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

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

What about the implementation team?

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

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

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

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

What other advice do I have?

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

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

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

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

I would rate Enterprise One a seven out of 10.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
NS
Enterprise Program Management Office, Center of Excellence Leader at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Helps with forecasting completion and delivery dates but does not scale well

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work."
  • "The out-of-the-box reports, as far as I can tell, are weak. We've had to build a lot of reports using Power BI, which we connected to it."

What is our primary use case?

My company uses the solution to do investment planning, project and program management planning, and they do some resource management using that primarily for cost forecasts.

I work on one of the support teams here. I do some configuration and I do some training as well as some design work that involves configuration within the tool.

How has it helped my organization?

It's helped the company due to the fact that it does a reasonably good job of tying in those resource forecasts. We're able to integrate with cost information from other systems that we have. It does a pretty good job with that. Also, the ability to tie the risks in with the work is pretty helpful. I like that. Having that being sort of a single source of truth for the risks and for the resource forecast, that's been very useful for us.

The solution has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic initiatives or objectives. We are now funding incrementally, planning for shorter periods, and doing reviews more frequently instead of doing yearly reviews.  We're able to do that using Enterprise One. That's helped us a lot.

What is most valuable?

I like to work in the resource assignment view. I like the ability to plan tasks out and sequence them. The risk management is great and I appreciate how you can tie risks to the work level items. It helps us forecast resource costs and we’re able to tie the risk to those aspects which helps us keep those items on track.

We're not using the solution for forecasting remaining effort. We use it just to forecast resource costs and other direct costs that are entered.

The solution view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work.

For example, we're currently moving forward with what we call capacity-based planning. The tool is integral to how we're doing that.

The solution provides a variety of types of resource assignments for assigning work to people. It does allow us to have different assignments for resources. It does have some limitations, however, it does allow us to do that for the most part.

The solution allows program managers to group work together and see the resource demands and cost at a consolidated level through reporting. The reporting is pretty basic in that it allows us to export the data. It requires project management to undertake some additional analysis outside of the tool which we're able to do at this point.

What needs improvement?

When it comes to managing project plans, the solution works fine. It works well for that. The challenge that we have is that, in our environment, we don't necessarily use it as designed, we use it a little bit differently. That's not the tool's fault. We don't advance the system time every day or every week. We do it monthly. We currently are not doing extensive dependency management within the work.

The out-of-the-box reports, as far as I can tell, are weak. We've had to build a lot of reports using Power BI, which we connected to it.

Reporting is not my focus area, however, one of the things that would be nice is if we could connect our Tableau to it. We do use Power BI, however, we have also been using Tableau. It'd be nice to be able to use that toolset as well for reporting.

One of the problems that we have is that any of the data that comes out of Enterprise One is a point in time. We can't show change over time. Therefore, if we're looking at, for example, progress on work, and we wanted to know if a schedule has gotten better or worse versus last month or last year, we're not able to do that directly on Enterprise One. We have to use a reporting database and extract the data periodically and then use that as a basis for our ability to show change over time. That's a hassle. It would be nice if Enterprise One was able to show change over time, by having the ability to report on data from prior periods.

The solution doesn’t provide end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work. It doesn't work that well in and of itself for planning Agile delivery, for example. I know that they have LeanKit, and we have LeanKit licenses, however, most of our enterprise is using Jira. We are interested in connecting to Jira. That should be coming out in the next year. That said, at this point, I would say it doesn't provide us the end-to-end work management or resource management that we would like without that Jira plugin.

If it could provide historical data or prior time period data, then we would be able to have fewer integrations. That would be an improvement for us. It would probably mean an ability to shrink our footprint on some other Hash Apps, which would probably mean cost savings for us and a simplification of our reporting. 

There could be some simplification on how we manage the users on the system. When you have a user for the system, you have to manually provide them grants. It's not like you could clone a user and provide those same grants to somebody else on their team. You have to do it all manually. That's a hassle.

The inability to paste in data, or do bulk data updates is a little bit difficult as there is no bulk update for work and resource working assignments. You have to manually enter all that information. That seems unnecessary.

If somebody's allocated at a certain rate for a certain time period, you should be able to copy that across and say, this is flat for the rest of the year and then modify it with any exceptions. It's not easy to do that sometimes.

We are not able to drill down into the details and align the consolidated information with this tool. We’d like to have that capability. Every time a project manager or a program manager has to export information and then do pivots and do whatever else in Excel, it means that there are copies of data floating around that we'd rather have stay in the tool. We’d like them to be able to do their analysis and reporting directly out of the tool. We're not there yet with that.

I would not say that the solution has increased our on-time completion rate.

I'd like to see some of the configurations simplified. There's a lot of weird duplication of fields when you're looking at the alternate structures. There's inconsistency around field naming conventions.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with the solution since 2018.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is pretty good. It's a little bit slow. In particular, we have some projects that are pretty sizable, and then there's substantial performance issues. For some projects where we have hundreds of tasks with hundreds of resources to open, it might take on the order of five minutes to load up, which, to open a screen, is not a reasonable amount of time. That's not normally acceptable.

We've had to artificially break things down into smaller projects, even though that's not the way the work is being managed. That's been a challenge in terms of when we've had to execute workarounds.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There's a scalability problem around very large projects. If you get a large project with a lot of resources and you want to project out for several years, we've had to change that forecast due to the fact that it wouldn't scale. Opening it now takes five minutes, however, in the past, it would take 15 minutes to open and then change things. It was really slow to refresh. We've had to break large projects down to something smaller to make it still somewhat unmanageable, but better.

We have 500 or 600 staff that use the product. We have some people that really just manage risks. We have some people that do resource forecasts. We have other people that really are focused on reporting. We also have other people that do project management and others that manage programs. On top of that, we have some people where their extensive usage really has to do with certain life cycle approvals.

Usage may increase slightly. At one point we had almost 800 users. We were able to cut that down a little bit. We may go back up above 600 in the near future, I don't know for certain. If we have any growth, it would probably be 10% in the next year. That is my expectation.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support has been pretty good. We had some challenges as we were not on the latest platform, on the latest release, however, we just did an upgrade. We're on the July release now. We're two months behind. We are not yet accepting the monthly releases.

Overall, technical support is usually pretty responsive.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used Microsoft Project Server for some things, and for other things we used EPPM, which is from HP.

We switched from EPPM to Enterprise One. It had a good review and we wanted to give something new a try. I wasn't at the company at that time, so I don't know if it's the best alternative to EPPM. For the scheduling stuff and detail planning at the task level, we switched from Project Server based on cost. We knew that Enterprise One had the functionality, so there was no reason to support two tools any longer. By focusing on Enterprise One, we were able to simplify the assets we had running our software platforms.

I have not used SAP or Oracle products for project management in the past.

How was the initial setup?

I wasn't a part of the initial setup. I can't speak to whether it was straightforward or complex.

The deployment took about nine or ten months. We wanted to do a phased roll-out due to the different organizations that were involved and also due to the fact that we wanted to work with the different parts of our organization to get the sets of requirements configured.

In terms of maintenance, we have a team of about 30 people that does testing as well as configuration and deployment. There are some people that focus on the configuration of strategy information, and life cycles. Others work on configurations related to the work and any of the work-related attributes such as risks and issues and status. Other folks just work on developing Power BI and other external reports. We have other people that work on training and communications as well.

What about the implementation team?

We worked with Planview directly.

What was our ROI?

We didn't implement this product to expect some specific financial return. We were just trying to enable certain functions that we have not monetized. We don't have a payback period or anything like that.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I do not have information about the pricing. I know that we have on the order of 600 people on the license, however, I don't know the costs around it.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The company may have evaluated a few other options. Project Server was one of them.

It's my understanding that Project Server has better integration with SharePoint, which is in some ways similar to Projectplace. Project Server is easier as it requires a desktop client, or, at least it did previously in order to maintain the schedules, which was very convenient for a lot of users. That said, in a lot of ways Project Server and Enterprise One are similar, however, honestly, I like Project Server better.

What other advice do I have?

We're just a customer and an end-user.

We're using the July release currently.

The solution meets our needs at this time. It has some limitations with respect to some functionality we're not using yet related to team-based assignments. Maybe it's an area that is not fully applicable since we're not using it yet. It's a feature that was rolled out a year or so ago, or maybe a little bit more, and we have not yet adopted it.

One of the things that I did hear, although I wasn't part of the decision, was that the Gartner Magic Quadrant was a big factor in swaying management's decision. Enterprise One was in the Magic Quadrant. It was well-reviewed by Gartner. I would advise others to give this less weighting and to really look at how configurable the tool is. Project Server is easier to maintain in terms of configuration and operations than this product. 

If I had a colleague at another company and they asked me, "Hey, do you like it?" I would say we do like it, however, it's not perfect. Nothing's perfect. However, users need to really think about how easy it is to find resources that can configure it or how easy it is to actually do those configurations.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Other
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
GS
Vice President, PMO Portfolio Management at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Useful for time reporting and milestone management, but its reporting is not quite what we're looking for

Pros and Cons

  • "We use time reporting. We convert time reporting into financial costs and do contractor and capacity planning for our resources. We track our work. So, that's the module we use extensively. As a matter of fact, we have upwards of 300 open projects at this given moment. It is pretty close to 300 open activities that are working."
  • "It is not an end-user-friendly product, and that's really the biggest thing. The hardest or the biggest hurdle I've ever had to face was adoption. I did the installation of the HP product in 2011. The company used it from 2011 to 2015, and the adoption was very high. When I was given the Planview product, adoption was very low. It wasn't as extensively used. We actually had people who wanted to go back to HP PPM because the interface of Planview was so broken, and it still is to some degree. So, it is not user-friendly. It doesn't flow the way a project manager thinks. What we did with HP PPM was a lot more manual programming. It wasn't as nice in terms of the interface, and it wasn't as pretty, but you could design it and build it so that everything flows with the way you worked, but Planview doesn't quite do that. There are a lot of screens. You have to jump back and forth. There are so many different places you have to go to just to do some basic tasks. That's the biggest thing that has really hindered adoption."

What is our primary use case?

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

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

How has it helped my organization?

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

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

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

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

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

What is most valuable?

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

What needs improvement?

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

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

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

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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

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

How are customer service and support?

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

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

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

How was the initial setup?

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

What was our ROI?

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

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

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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

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

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

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

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

What other advice do I have?

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

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

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

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Other
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Kelly Brummond
Enterprise Portfolio Manager at Wellmark
Real User
Top 5
A lot of of the value is around the project metrics, strategic planning, and programs and then tying that into outcomes

Pros and Cons

  • "A lot of of the value is around the project metrics so far but as I get more plugged into the strategic management, it's strategic planning and programs and then tying that into outcomes. I work with executive leadership and that's really what they're looking for, to say, "Okay, what outcomes do we want to achieve and how are we going to get there, plan that out, sequence that out, and then get the work to do that? And then track the work back to where we're headed with our outcomes.""
  • "We've been using it for a while, so it's about maturity. It's about being able to build out things in Agile groups and teams and some of that. Then really trying to drive into the direction of Lean Portfolio Management and more Agile program management, I think is where we're heading."

What is our primary use case?

We have historically used it for resource management and project, so, work management. They're maturing different pieces of the resource management and the work management to leverage some of that. Other use cases that we've started with would be planning, strategies and outcomes. We have it initially built out from a beginning use case and continuing to mature that as we roll out some change in the organization of moving to a strategically managed portfolio, not just a tech portfolio.

How has it helped my organization?

The more we have access to data and being able to portray the reality of the situation, as long as people are managing the data right, we have more opportunity to make data-driven decisions as we move forward. As we look at what's happening in a project and its execution throughout the lifecycle, its understanding where they're at, what they're doing, what challenges they are having, and what their forecast looks like. Are they going to be able to meet some of those milestones, or do we think that the data says they may have some challenge? And then we can ask the anecdotal and the non-data-driven questions about what's happening. It helps us drive to ask more pointed questions and dialed-in conversations.

Enterprise One has helped with the prioritization of projects through alignment with strategic objectives. That's what we're getting to implement now. We're working through the hierarchy and the alignment piece right now with our executive leadership. And what I'm excited about is we'll be able to show them the alignment in data and reports. As we move through the planning process, it's not just being tracked outside of that and it's not just conversational, it's about understanding what they're wanting to do, how it aligns, and then not only the strategy but the outcome because that's the important part.

We can determine if something is our strategy, what our desired outcome is, then how it aligns, and how it is going to add value. I'm excited about what it's going to bring into our planning as we move forward from here. This was something I've been looking forward to for quite a while, so I'm glad we're turning the corner to implement that.

What is most valuable?

A lot of of the value is around the project metrics so far but as I get more plugged into the strategic management, it's strategic planning and programs and then tying that into outcomes. I work with executive leadership and that's really what they're looking for, to say, "Okay, what outcomes do we want to achieve and how are we going to get there, plan that out, sequence that out, and then get the work to do that? And then track the work back to where we're headed with our outcomes."

A lot of seeing what stage work is at is based upon how you instruct people to build them out. As far as the tool, the tool has the capabilities, it's just getting the people to make the right choices in how they set up and then manage the data. That's always the challenge.

It does a great job with forecasting remaining effort. The dependency is on the people and the process. With whom the people are managing, what their future plan looks like so that the forecasting can be accurate. It's about the due diligence and the work between the resources, resource management, and project management to say, "Here's what our schedule is. Here's the work remaining." And as long as that's being managed, it's great.

The resource capacity helps us look at not only our future forecasting and what we need to do from a resource standpoint, but we can go back and see what we used. We can even leverage historical to understand what our future might look like and find the balance there. It helps us do both.

Its ability to create summary reports across multiple projects is great as long as you're managing the base data correctly in the roll-up. I love a lot of the out-of-the-box reporting that they have and the ability to manage the configurations within our team. To be able to say, "Okay, we want to show this or we want to slice by this." And being able to be flexible in that.

The reporting options are great because not only can you have so many out-of-the-box, but you've got the abilities to use Power BI, pull down things in Excel, and do portfolios. There are all kinds of different ways to manage data.

As we transition into using the strategies and the outcomes, I'm very excited about some of the strategic dashboards that are out there. One of the things that we've started looking at are TreeMaps. TreeMaps have taken an interest in our leadership to see the distribution of some of the information and just by showing it in different ways. The only thing I'd say is that it would be nice to see some of the TreeMaps, not just on strategy, but on other data elements too.

It provides end-to-end work management for the full spectrum of types of work in one tool. Historically, we've been just doing technology data, tracking, and reporting, but as we shift into the strategic management, I'm excited about the opportunities to be able to manage all work, not just tech work. We'll be able to track and understand where we're at with milestones towards our outcomes. We're looking forward to the system transition there.

It's quite flexible, depending upon how the organization chooses to use it, which I think is great. There are some different ways that we've chosen to use it that maybe down the road, we may flex and change that as we go forward. I like that there's an opportunity to use it and partner with Planview to understand what your use cases are and what's the best way to manage through that.

It can go through and group together in a strategic program on the strategy side. We've chosen to implement it so that it ties up there and then manage the initiatives. And you can see then the attachment and the roll-up, so it's an association. It sounds like there's maybe some more coming as we look at some more flexibility. We're able to drill down to details underlying the consolidated information.

It's helped us drive awareness into what's going on and then being able to manage our completion rates better.

What needs improvement?

We've been using it for a while, so it's about maturity. It's about being able to build out things in Agile groups and teams and some of that. Then really trying to drive into the direction of Lean Portfolio Management and more Agile program management, I think is where we're heading.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Enterprise One for three and a half years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability has been great. I haven't noticed any issues as far as that goes. I think anything that we've had any challenges with has been handled very quickly and it's usually in an off-hour. I haven't noticed any issues personally.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability has been fine from a user standpoint. We haven't had any issues. Our biggest thing is as we switched our contracting, we looked at FLEX licensing and I think that's going to be a huge asset for us to be able to have much more flexibility in bringing people on and having roles go up and down, versus a contracted set number of roles. That'll help.

In terms of increasing our usage, we're pretty early in our expanse of the capabilities. A couple of years ago, I walked through the capabilities with our leadership team and road mapped out from a portfolio standpoint what I'd like to see us leverage across the organization for me to be successful in strategic portfolio management for the organization.

We're working down some of those implementations and those capabilities. We started by ensuring that we were reset and set up well on the handful of core capabilities. We'll continue to build that out as we go and mature. I love the roadmap of where they're headed with capabilities and what they're offering organizationally. It aligns with where we're headed in our organization too.

How are customer service and technical support?

I don't personally use technical support but our administrator does. I know that we've been plugged into conversations that she's facilitated with them. Some of the times we have to just ask them to contact us because it's much easier to have a conversation about it versus what we think is wrong and what we're seeing in our scenario. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I'm not sure what my current company previously used but where I had worked previously, at my other employer, we used Clarity. That was the only other tool that I had used. They're similar to a certain extent, but what I see with Planview is where they're headed and how they bring things together, more than just what I understood Clarity to be doing when I last used them. Keeping up with where things are headed.

How was the initial setup?

Since they've gone to the regular releases, the initial setup is pretty straightforward. I don't know that we were doing a good job of managing regular releases when it was major releases. It became a little bit more of a struggle there as we got caught up in our releases. Now that we are managing on a regular, monthly cadence, it's so much easier to take an increment than it was, skipping major upgrades and then trying to figure it out.

Upgrades are done overnight. We get it for a week or so to play in the sandbox and validate it, then they process it overnight, and then we're able to leverage it the next day. It's a very quick turnaround.

Because it's so component-based, there has not been a huge strategy that we've had to do from an implementation standpoint, but as we look at being able to deploy or mature some of the capabilities, then that would tie into the strategies at those points.

What about the implementation team?

We've only used Planview's global consulting services. We haven't used an external company to do that.

For maintenance, we have one main owner of the application with her back up, so we've got two people that support Planview overall for our organization day to day. They're application owners. 

In terms of users, we roughly have 1,000 to 1,200 technology partners using it and then a handful of business partners.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We're looking at the FLEX licensing or the partner licensing for our renewal. Where we are looking at having access to all of the products in our contracts so that as we decide to continue to build out the capabilities and make changes, we have access to their other products as well.

We've got PPM, but we're not holistically using that a ton yet. As we build out our business architecture and enterprise architecture, we've got that and we've got the ability to use it. One that interests me from a portfolio standpoint is the connectivity to Azure DevOps, potentially LeanKit, and Lean Portfolio management capabilities that way. It's on the roadmap.

What other advice do I have?

A big lesson for the organization was not to so prescriptively narrow their opportunities. The way they had it configured prior to me coming on, they had shut themselves off from being able to implement feature capabilities because they had driven out so many restrictive requirements that some of the things couldn't be leveraged.

We've been understanding what the capabilities are and where we would like to be, and having a different conversation with Planview when we partnered with them and their global consulting services, to understand what that roadmap looks like, so that we could be guided a little bit better about what to implement and when, and how it might work together as we move forward.

My advice would be to be open to the possibilities and not tying yourself too closely that it has to be a certain way. Be open to understanding where you'd like to head and then how that all needs to come together, and leveraging the opportunities that way.

I would rate Enterprise One a nine out of ten. We really like the tool and a lot of the possibilities that are there. We've really connected with our support, consulting, and even our sales staff. As we've worked with other partners and conversations throughout the processes, we've really had an enjoyable experience with them as we've gone through our transition. Not only that, we like using what we see every day.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
LM
System Administrator at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Improves the visibility of the resource capacity and the team's capacity to take on new work

Pros and Cons

  • "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 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."

What is our primary use case?

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.

How has it helped my organization?

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.

What is most valuable?

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.

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

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

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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.

How are customer service and technical support?

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."

How was the initial setup?

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.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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.

What other advice do I have?

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.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Planview Enterprise One Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.