Ppm Solutions Functional Perspective

608 views
511 views

Published on

Whitepaper presenting results of a PPM vendor survey.

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
608
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
59
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ppm Solutions Functional Perspective

  1. 1. Project PortfolioManagement SolutionsThe Functional Perspective cg_22290
  2. 2. | the way we see it
  3. 3. | the way we see itProject Portfolio Management SolutionsThe Functional PerspectiveAuthors:Mark Stigter(mark.stigter@capgemini.com)Thomas van Schie(thomas.van.schie@capgemini.com)Erwin Dunnink(erwin.dunnink@capgemini.com)Capgemini Nederland B.V.Utrecht, the NetherlandsWinter 2009
  4. 4. | the way we see it ii
  5. 5. | the way we see itForewordThe future of organizations largely depends on successful projects. In times oflimited budgets and scarce talent, management needs tools to make the rightdecisions and choices. Project-based management is nowadays the most appliedmethod of realizing and controlling complex objectives with constraints in time,budget and resources. It has moved from an approach exceptionally used, to astandard way of working. Choosing which projects to execute has become amajor part of managing a business. Organizations feel the need for anautomated support of these processes. This “automated support” has to improvethe overall governance by improving planning, monitoring and controllingcapabilities. So called Project Portfolio Management solutions offer this. Wedefine Project Portfolio Management (PPM) as the discipline focusing on thestrategic alignment, prioritization and governance of initiatives, projects andprogrammes.With pride we present the third independent study into functionality of ProjectPortfolio Management (PPM) solutions offered by vendors in today‟s market. Itis a publication in Capgemini‟s Project Performance Improvement series thatsets out our point of view on project-based management and complements oursurveys in the market for PPM solutions of 2001 and 2005 and “PPM Solutions,the user perspective” published in 2008. A global network of ProjectPerformance Improvement (PPI) departments within Capgemini offer skilledsupport to organizations looking for ways to professionalize their PPMprocesses.This survey renews the insights in the available functionality within the PPMtooling market and is based on requirements from user organizations. Theresults are clustered into implementation approaches describing differentambition levels to improve processes related to project-based management.These implementation scopes are based on the Capgemini Process Referencemodel for IT Governance.We would like to thank the 33 vendors who participated in this survey and havetaken the time needed to complete the 450+ questionnaire: this was quite aneffort. The authors of this publication: Mark Stigter, Thomas van Schie andErwin Dunnink of Capgemini the Netherlands wishes to show their gratitude tothe following persons for contribution to this paper: Tjie-Jau Man, AndréScholte, George Veldman and Hendrik Zondag. Without their valuableknowledge and input, this paper would not have been published.We trust this publication stimulates thinking about functionality needed whenimplementing a new, or extending the implementation of an existing PPMsolution to support project-based management in organizations.Utrecht, winter 2009Rudolf LaaneVice President iii
  6. 6. | the way we see it iv
  7. 7. | the way we see itContents1 There is a choice 21.1 Participants 31.2 PPM Process Reference Model for IT Governance 32 Ambition is the driver 82.1 Scope 1: Project Delivery 8 2.1.1 Project Execution Management 9 2.1.1 Financial Project Management 10 2.1.2 Business Intelligence Management 10 2.1.3 Workflow & Knowledge Management 112.2 Scope 2: Project and Resource Management 12 2.2.1 Resource Allocation Management 132.3 Scope 3: Project Based Working 14 2.3.1 Time & Expense Management 152.4 Scope 4: Project and Programme Governance 16 2.4.1 Programme Delivery Management 162.5 Scope 5: Project Portfolio Management 17 2.5.1 Ideas & Portfolio Management 182.6 Scope 6: All processes 19 2.6.1 Customer & Partner Management 20 2.6.1 Service Delivery Management 21 2.6.2 Financial Accounting Management 213 PPM supported well 244 Approach and Methodology 264.1 The questionnaire 264.2 Analysis approach 26 v
  8. 8. | the way we see it 1
  9. 9. | the way we see it 1 There is a choice Management has a broad choice in PPM solutions. In general the PPM market is a maturing market in which the competing solutions offer the basic functionality you would expect of a PPM solution. At the same time projects are carried out nearer to the core of the business and requirements for PPM have to be defined in more detail. When taking a more detailed look, difference is still there. For this reason we decided to focus the survey on the more detailed aspects, relevant for situations we encountered at our clients globally.Differences We found that the participating solutions still scored the same average score on are in the the processes in terms of percentage coverage, even with the more detailed details requirements. In line with the urgent need for tighter project management, Project Portfolio Management (PPM) solutions are maturing regarding the availability of basic functionality. When taking a detailed look at the individual scores of the solutions there is an important difference in functionality offered. When selecting and implementing a PPM solution you can therefore ask for far-reaching functionality addressing the longer term ambitions of the organization and still have vendors to choose between as can be found in the results of this survey. The outcomes of the survey are clustered in implementation scopes. Each scope covers an area of the PPM process reference model that was used for this survey. These implementation scopes can be looked at as different starting points or ambition levels when looking at PPM. The scores of the individual solutions are available as scorecards in the appendix. Three main outcomes of the survey are: 1. Market leaders offer broad support for PPM processes but solutions specialized in certain areas outperform the market leaders Main The PPM market really took off in the 90‟s. Some of the vendors haveconclusions evolved in the meantime to broad solutions offering support for all or most of the PPM processes. New solutions appear in the market that focuses primarily on a specific PPM process, for instance resource management or portfolio management. These specialized solutions often outperform broader solutions on these specific areas. Depending on the intended scope of the implementation (based on the ambition for the next couple of years) a lists of potential solutions can be created that includes solutions from specialized vendors. 2. Functionality is still a distinguishing factor Especially when looking into more sophisticated functionality a distinction can still be made between solutions. The spread of how well the solutions cover a certain functional area can sometimes range from 5% to 100%. Experience shows that based on functionality a first selection can be made. 3. True point solutions do not exist since broader functional support is always offered Although some solutions focus on a specific PPM functional area they also offer support for other related processes. This is logical since a process can only be executed based on input from other processes. If an organization is for instance primarily looking for a solution to support portfolio 2
  10. 10. | the way we see it management and also wants to support project and resource management processes but to a lesser detail a solution focusing on portfolio management might be very interesting. This is also in line with a finding from a survey published in spring 2008 into the user‟s perspective on PPM solutions1 that showed that user organization were not particularly looking for broader functional support but are looking for improvement in existing functionality and usability. 1.1 Participants We looked at the market of Project Portfolio Management vendors and contacted vendors based on our knowledge of the market, combined with 33Participants contacts found in openly available sources. In total 33 PPM vendors participated in this survey offering a picture of the type of solutions available in today‟s market. The participating vendors and their solutions can be found in Appendix A: Scorecards participating PPM solutions PPM solutions. Since our 2005 study the market has changed. Some vendors merged (for instance Planview and Business Engine), others became part of a large IT company‟s portfolio (for instance Niku Clarity to CA and Mercury ITG to HP) and new solutions (like Principle Toolbox) entered the PPM market space. 1.2 PPM Process Reference Model for IT Governance As a basis for the survey the PPI process reference model was used. This modelPPI Process describes the processes commonly found in an organization that deals with a Reference combination of projects and services and which is continuously trying toModel is the optimize the allocation of limited resources on these projects and services.basis for the survey The Model was originally developed in 2000 when Capgemini encountered a need from organizations to make clear, in a simplified way, what processes need to be in place to run projects and programmes effectively. The reference model is based on best practices of Capgemini PPI consultants combined with Project/Programme Management methodologies PMBOK, PRINCE2 and MSP. The model evolved over the years and has recently been significantly updated, based on the latest feedback from clients and consultants, to function again as the basis for the vendor survey. 1 PPM Solutions for IT Governance – The User Perspective, 2008, by Erwin Dunnink and Tjie-Jau Man 3
  11. 11. | the way we see itBy taking the Process Reference Model as the benchmark we ensured that theinformation was structured according to the requirements of the primaryprocesses of project-centred organizations. Figure 1: The Project Performance Improvement Process Reference Model 4
  12. 12. | the way we see it As shown in Figure 1, the PPI Process Reference Model covers eleven Eleven functional areas. Each functional area consists of several processes. A shortFunctional Areas description of each functional area is given below.  CPM Customer & Partner Management This functional area deals with managing the interaction with the customers (both internal and external) and other contacts in the value web in which the organization operates.  IPM Idea & Portfolio Management An idea or new demand is captured and prioritized in combination with other ideas and projects. Based on different scenarios a portfolio is determined and managed.  PDM Programme Delivery Management This functional area describes the programme management processes from starting up, governing and to end a programme.  PEM Project Execution Management This functional area covers the activities aimed at managing and controlling the project: from setting up, running and ending a project.  RAM Resource Allocation Management This functional area is about levelling the supply and demand of resources and optimizing the utilization of resources for the organization.  TEM Time & Expense Management This functional area describes the registration and approval of time and expenses on projects, services and activities not related to projects.  FPM Financial Project Management To stress the importance of the financial aspects of project management, aspects like forecasting and monitor budgets, work-in-progress, invoices and accruals are combined in this functional area.  SDM Service Delivery Management Within IT Governance services have to be managed next to projects. This functional area describes the definition of services, managing releases and managing the SLA.  WKM Workflow & Knowledge Management This functional area deals with supporting the collaboration within and over projects by sending action items, alerts and by sharing documents and other configuration items.  BIM Business Intelligence Management BIM covers the means to inform and report on the data captured in the PPM processes and possible combining with already existing information.  FAM Financial Accounting Management FAM is a discipline itself. It gives insights in the contribution of each project, customer, department or professional towards the profit of the entire organization. 5
  13. 13. | the way we see itThe average scores on these areas resulting from the survey are shown inFigure 2. Figure 2: Average score per functional area based on 33 participating PPM solutions. 6
  14. 14. | the way we see it 7
  15. 15. | the way we see it 2 Ambition is the driver The choice for a specific PPM solution highly depends on the local situation, goals and ambitions. The present PPM market offers tools that provide support for a range of aspects and processes within the projects. When implementing a PPM solution a clear choice is needed which aspects and processes will be supported. In this chapter the outcomes of the survey are structured based on six implementation scopes. These implementation scopes are based on logical combinations of processes. For each process the average score of the participating solutions is mentioned. The process reference model was used to indicate which functional areas and processes should be taken into account in each of these implementation scopes.  Scope 1: Project Delivery Six  Scope 2: Project and Resource Managementimplementation  Scope 3: Project Based Working scopes  Scope 4: Project and Programme Governance  Scope 5: Project Portfolio Management  Scope 6: All processes Each scope builds upon the functional areas and processes of the previous implementation scope, except for the project portfolio management scope. It is possible to implement a tool to support Project Portfolio Management, before processes like Project Management or Time Reporting are implemented. Functional areas already discussed in previous implementation scopes will not be discussed again. 2.1 Scope 1: Project Delivery The ambition of the organization in scope 1 is to: Focus on  implement a PPM tool to support the project management processes; supporting  gather all relevant project information in one place and individual  being able to report on individual projects from a central point. projects A centralized solution is implemented to enable control on multiple projects. The focus however lies on optimizing the support for individual projects. 8
  16. 16. | the way we see it The functional areas primarily looked at are Project Execution Management and Financial Project Management. Besides these two areas also some processes from Business Intelligence Management and Workflow & Knowledge Management are taken into account. 2.1.1 Project Execution Management Project Execution Management (PEM) covers the activities aimed at managing the project: from setting up a project, running the project to ending the project. All participating solutions offer the basic functionality. Leaving the basics out difference between the solutions are particularly found in controlling, planning and scheduling, quality, risk and issues and change requests. Figure 3: Project Execution Management process The functional area of Project Execution Management was covered by all Manage the solutions, with an average score of 67%. Figure 3 shows the average score per budget from a process. project perspective is The lowest scoring process is Close the project. One of the low scoring well supported questions in this process was if the solution can be set up in a way that a project cannot be closed if invoices and commitments are still open. This would prevent a misalignment between the project financial status in the PPM solution and in the financial solution. The basic information of projects can be kept in the solutions. When the data is also used for portfolio management analyses, more data is needed. For instance how the project contributes to the business goals. In 80% of the solutions multiple business goals can be linked to a project. Next to that, some intelligence in calculating a project priority based, for instance on ROI or strategic alignment, are useful. This is only supported by 43% of the solutions. Version control of a project plan is supported by 67% of the solutions. It is only possible in 50% of the solutions to keep track of the changes made and undo these if required. Typically a feature that would make the solution more user friendly from a project manager‟s perspective. Risk When looking at the area of controlling risks and issues we found low scores.management not Of the participating solutions five do not support this area at all and another available in all five very limited. A strange finding knowing that many project management solutions methods look at risk management as one of the core aspects of project management. 9
  17. 17. | the way we see it Project 2.1.1 Financial Project Managementpriorities are Financial Project Management (FPM) is mentioned as a separate functional often not area to stress the importance of proper financial control in running projects. calculated This functional area starts with capturing the expected benefits of a project and forecasting the costs to charging back or invoicing the project. Figure 4: Financial Project Management process The functional area of Financial Project Management is covered by all solutions, with an average score of 74%. Figure 4 shows the average score per process. Record purchases scores a high coverage of 91%. This shows that PPM solutions recognize managing projects is not only about managing the time of human resources. It is also important to keep track of costs for materials. Overall the information to manage the budget from a project perspective is well supported. Comparing the budget with actual money spent is possible in 90% of the solutions. Two solutions score low on the process area with a score below 30%. 2.1.2 Business Intelligence Management Business Intelligence Management (BIM) is the process that delivers management information and reports. PPM solutions gather a lot of information useful not only to project- programme-, portfolio- and resource managers but to management in general. Figure 5: Business Intelligence Management The functional area of Business Intelligence Management was covered by 32 out of 33 vendors, with an average score of 61 %. PPM solutions can contain a lot of information. Getting the desired information out of the system can be more difficult than one might expect. Remarks are often made by users that the out-of-the box available reports are not fully compliant with their needs. Looking at the scores it is clear that the information we asked for is available. But perhaps information is not logically combined from a user perspective on the standard reports. The processes Management 10
  18. 18. | the way we see it Information for Portfolios and Resource and the ability to create ad hoc reports are covered best. Most solutions (64%) score between 80% and 100% on the process Portfolio Management Information. In this area 75% of the solutions indicate it is possible to print a highlight report of the portfolio(s). This highlight report contains an overview of investments with aspects like contribution to business goal(s), needed and allocated resources and requested and allocated budget. The function to print a delta report for the portfolio(s) is available within 60% of the solutions. A delta report contains new approved investments, completed investments and investments that are put on hold. A lot of information is Reporting on service delivery scores low. This is not surprising since it is a captured and relatively new functional area to PPM solutions. It is possible to show theavailable through actual performance of a service compared to the service level agreement in reports 35% of the solutions. Regarding organizational performance, within 47% of the solutions it is possible to define, monitor and measure the service delivery based on defined metrics and other benchmarks. 2.1.3 Workflow & Knowledge Management Workflow & Knowledge Management (WKM) is a functional area that supports all the other processes in the reference model.  Workflow Management is the ability to control the primary business processes in an integrated manner.  Knowledge management is about managing the (re-)use and sharing of information, often captured in documents. Figure 6: Workflow & Knowledge Management process The functional area Workflow & Knowledge Management was covered by all Sharing solutions, with an average score of 61%. Figure 6 shows the average score per documents well process area. supported All participating solutions provide support for workflow and knowledge management. A great benefit within this functional area, as seen by many end users2, is the ability to share documents (knowledge), to get automated alerts, and to get automated notifications for example when the approval of an 2 PPM Solutions for IT Governance – The User Perspective, 2008 by Erwin Dunnink and Tjie-Jau Man 11
  19. 19. | the way we see it executive is needed. An interesting function within knowledge management is a search option to go through all documents and/or data within the entire solution. This option is available within 78% of the participating solutions. A part of Knowledge Management is Configuration management. Configuration Management has maybe one of the most unexpected outcomes. More and more project oriented organizations are standardizing their way of working by implementing for example PRINCE2, in which configuration management is recognized as an important process. Only 44% of the participating PPM solutions offer basic support for this process by offering version control of configuration items. To support effective configuration management, version control is an important functionality within the product- development lifecycle. Lack of support for configuration management shows that most PPM solutions refer to more specialized solutions to address this. With the emphasis on governance and laws like Sarbanes-Oxley and the Clinger-Cohen act it is becoming increasingly important for organizations to comply with these laws. When looking at the scores on the process Manage Audit Trails there is room for improvement. For instance tracking who entered what in the system and when, is something that the participating solutions cover for just 57%. 2.2 Scope 2: Project and Resource Management In this scope additional project management processes and the functional areaIntroducing the of resource management are added to scope 1. The ambition in this scope is toalignment manage projects and to link this to the management of (limited) resources. Thisbetween projects implementation scope introduces the element of aligning the need for resourceand resource from a project point of view with the capacity available in the standingpools organisation. In most cases the role of a resource manager is introduced. Two participating solutions came close to a 100 percent score (99% en 98%); the average score within scope 2 is 62%. 12
  20. 20. | the way we see it Within the functional area Project Execution Management, the processes Request for Resources and Assign Resources are added in this implementation scope. These two processes cover the role and responsibilities of the project manager in the resource allocation process. First the required capacity is indicated, based on effort estimations and criteria like required skills and location. Once the resources have been provided to the project the project manager indicates on which task the resources will be working (assigning them to tasks). PPM solutions provide different ways to support project managers in the resource allocation process. For instance views which show the remaining availability of resources are available in almost every solution (93%). The ability to assign and reassign resources to tasks is however poorly supported. It should be easy for project managers to do this, for instance by dragging and dropping resources to the specific tasks. This functionality is the lowest scoring one of the aspects looked at for this process. Not even 47% of the solutions provide this option. In the functional area Business Intelligence Management the process Management Information of resources is added, covering some specific reports to control the resources allocation process. For example the ability for resources to get information about remaining vacation or hours spend on non project related tasks is available in about 50% of the solutions. Another example is information about critical resources. The average score on the overviews asked for is only 63%.2.2.1 Resource Allocation Management Resource Allocation Management (RAM) is about matching and planning resources within a programme or project. Both capability and availability of resources are taken into account in this process. Other processes often looked at in this perspective are the analysis of capacity utilization, and the supply and demand of external resources. This functional area also includes more generic HR-processes, Recruit & Select Personnel and Manage resource data. This data is often interfaced to the PPM solution from the HR system. Figure 7: Resource Allocation Management process A distinction is made between searching for available resources and searching for suitable resources. When a project needs to be staffed the best resource (most suitable) might not be available. Depending on the priorities of the projects an organization might decide to make the resource available. This distinction is therefore important to make in the resource selection process. Searching for available resources is pretty well 13
  21. 21. | the way we see it supported with an average of 63%. When searching for available resources it is convenient if the result list shows the current and future projects on which the resources are allocated. This functionality is available within 84% of the solutions. This is a must have functionality for effective Resource Allocation Management. Surprisingly in connection with looking for available resources is the much Only 50% lower score of looking for suitable resources. Looking for the right people forsupports a search the job should be as important as looking for available resources. Yet this for a suitable process only scores 50%, 13% lower than for an availability search. Especially resource the functionality to use more than one criterion in the search criteria scored low. Only a third of the solutions have the ability to use more than one search criteria. Particularly when dealing with larger resource pools this is not sufficient. Some organisations work a lot with a limited set of preselected external contractors. When they have a position available in a project these contractors are contacted to offer candidates. Preferably the project based request can be published automatically and external contractors can propose one or multiple candidates to the request. Only five solutions offer the possibility to propose a candidate without having to create a user in the system for each candidate. 2.3 Scope 3: Project Based Working In scope 3, the functional area of Time and Expense Management is added to Closing the loop scope 2. The additional ambition here is to get a grip on the hours spend onbetween planning projects by resources. For accurate tracking of time and project budget spend, and realisation time reporting is essential. This also gives the possibility to work with Estimates and Time to Complete. This leads to more insights into the use of resources and when they become available again for other projects. Since most organizations focus on time first, the processes covering expenses have not been taken into account in Scope 3. Again, two solutions came close to a 100 percent match with 98% coverage of scope 3. The average score on this implementation scope is 62%. 14
  22. 22. | the way we see it2.3.1 Time & Expense Management Time & Expense Management (TEM) covers the activities time recording (on activity level) and validating & approving timesheets. Proper Time & Expense Management gives a direct and accurate insight into the effort that is spent and that remains to be done. Ideally this is integrated with the possibility for resources to track expenses against the project or even better on activities in the project. Figure 8: Time & Expense Management process The functional area of Time & Expense Management is covered by 32 solutions, with an average score of 63%. Figure 8 shows the average score per process area. As expected high scores are achieved on a must have functionality like the ability to show an overview of total hours per day and total hours per period (week). It is striking that the process Record Time only scores 63%. This can be explained by the details of the questions asked. It was taken for granted that time can be registered. The questions on more advanced functionally scored low. For instance the possibility to validate timesheets real time (50%), to indicate if a resource is allowed to book more hours than planned on a project (40%) and the ability to indicate the remaining duration (53%). Being able to support the recording of time is one thing. Organisations want to be able to check the submission of timesheets. This process often steers the charge back or invoicing of the hours spend. In the questionnaire specific questions were asked. The automated warning when timesheets are not submitted in time is covered by 65%. Reminding resource they have to approve time sheets is only supported by 56% of the solutions. The least supported functionality related to time and expense management is that of the ability to adjust or correct timesheets. This is needed when a mistake was made, for instance by booking too many hours or booking on the wrong project task. It is possible within the solutions to deal with corrections in a closed time period by: Recording negative hours in a new time period: 44% Replacing the closed time period completely (with corrected items): 50% Other: 31% (e.g. re-open a timesheet, an interface to a financial system or even a specific role/person like the project manager, timesheet approver or „invoice manager‟ is approved to edit timesheets) Overall this functional area is well supported. Offering support for what is needed often in practice, the ability to be able to make changes to timesheet already handed in, can be improved. 15
  23. 23. | the way we see it 2.4 Scope 4: Project and Programme Governance In this implementation scope the functional area of Programme Delivery Adding the Management is added. In situations where an organization wants to achieve aprogramme level challenging strategic objective the organization structure of a programme can be useful. In essence a new temporary department is created focusing on achieving the strategic goal by executing projects that realize parts of it. In this implementation scope this specific part of PPM is added to the ambition. The areas of resource management, financial project management and time reporting are included in this scope. The process Management Information Programmes of the functional area Business Intelligence Management is added. 2.4.1 Programme Delivery Management Programme Delivery Management (PDM) covers the discipline program management from starting up a programme, governing the programme to closing the programme. A PPM solution should be capable of supporting programmes. Figure 9: Programme Delivery Management processLinking multiple The functional area of Programme Delivery Management was covered by 31 goals to a solutions, with an average score of 60%. Figure 9 shows the average score perprogramme only process. supported by 53% In 80% of the solutions it is possible to distinct a programme from a project. This means that in six solutions the concept of a programme is not available at all. Some of these vendors have answered the questionnaire assuming a “special” project can be used to act as a programme. 16
  24. 24. | the way we see it Before starting a programme the programme-mandate has to be made. It should be possible to register data elements from this mandate to be able to report on it. Most solutions offer support for registering a programme in structured way. Related to this is the ability to identify the programme and issue a programme brief. Programmes are related to business goals that represent the reason for executing the programme. Sometimes a programme supports two or more business goals. Of the solutions 62% indicate that programmes can be linked to multiple goals, but only 53% can support an indication of how much the programme will support the different goals. The basis functionality to distinct a programme from a project is available within 81% of the solutions. Worrying are the low scores on governing and closing programmes. To support the governance of a programme questions were asked about the possibilities to perform what-if scenarios. To accomplish the goal of the programme a programme manager can choose between different initiatives. Calculating and evaluating different scenarios can help in this. About half of the solutions provided the possibilities to perform what-if scenarios within a program. Within portfolio management 57% of the solutions provide this possibility. This lower score is therefore surprising, because the techniques involved are identical. Closing the programme is another process with a surprisingly low score. Of course it can be indicated that a programme is no longer active. However there is no additional functionality available to support the programme manager in running some final checks before deactivating a programme.2.5 Scope 5: Project Portfolio Management Project portfolio management depends on information of projects registered during the idea phase and the subsequent phases of a project lifecycle. The ambition in this scope is to support the decision-making in the project portfolio process. The objective is that projects within the portfolio have the optimal contribution to accomplishing the goals and strategy of the organization. Next to project portfolios, application and service portfolios can exist in an organization. 17
  25. 25. | the way we see it Project portfolio management can be done stand alone (can be implemented within an organization without implementing the other functional area‟s). This means that the portfolio solution is not integrated with the solution for project management. Portfoliomanagement can Over the last couple of years several organizations choose to start their PPM be implemented ambition from a top-down perspective and focused first on this area to be able stand alone to better base their portfolio decisions. This is why project portfolio management was identified as a separate implementation scope. Important aspects for portfolio management are the goals and strategy of the organization. These goals and strategy are translated into concrete criteria which are input for the portfolio management process to score and rank projects on. By applying weighting criteria to criteria the PPM solution can support in determining the optimal project portfolio. 2.5.1 Ideas & Portfolio Management Idea Management is input for the Portfolio Management process. What possible new investments are being created? What is the business case for this new investment? This information will be used in the Portfolio Management process. Demand Management is answering the question how to do it all after selecting which idea to include. Portfolio Management is the continuing process of deciding which investments to start, continue, put on hold or stop. In this way the projects being executed have the most optimal contribution to accomplishing the company goals and strategy. Figure 10: Ideas & Portfolio Management process The functional area of Idea and Portfolio Management was covered by 29 solutions, with an average score of 63%. Figure 10 shows the average score per process. When updating the process reference model in preparing this survey it was decided to put specific emphasis on Idea and Portfolio Management than wasA graphical view done in previous versions of the reference model by identifying a specialof the portfolio is functional area for this. Reporting options connected to portfolio management available in are covered in the functional area of Business Intelligence Management. almost all Manage the programme and project portfolio is the highest scoring process in solutions this functional area; three out of four solutions support this process area with 80-100% coverage. When managing the portfolio it is important to have a graphical overview of all projects in the portfolio. A Gantt Chart showing all projects of the portfolio in one view is available in 93% of the solutions. Another much desired functionality of organizations is to be able to drill down from the portfolio into the underlying projects which is available in 80 % of the solutions. The processes of managing the service portfolio and managing the application portfolio are relatively new to PPM tools and are specific to IT Governance. These processes score remarkably better than expected. 18
  26. 26. | the way we see it This has to be seen in relation with the functional area of Service Delivery Management. The lowest scoring functionality was the ability to see the customer satisfaction of the services in the portfolio. What is surprising is the low score of analyse the portfolio scenarios. An essential part of the portfolio management process is the ability to perform what-if scenarios to look at all projects from multiple directions to support decision making of which portfolio supports the organization best. An interesting point of view is for instance is to look at spread of the risks in the portfolio. This, for instance, can be done by looking at how projects score when comparing the type of risks to the return on investments. Within the participating solutions there is 67% coverage. The weakness is in the ability to compare different scenarios with each other and with the current portfolio. What is well covered is the functionality to effectuate the consequences of these scenarios on high level resource demand (63%). This is one of the most important requirements by organizations in the portfolio process. Support for the portfolio management process needs to be improvement to increase the level of support for executive managers in prioritizing their projects. Especially when looking at the ability to set goals for the portfolio by indicating a desired risk profile or by setting the limits of the amount of the budget that should be spend accomplishing a business goal. Finally it is of course essential that the current portfolio and scenario can be compared to these goals. 2.6 Scope 6: All processes The final implementation scope covers all processes identified in the processAdding non core reference model. Most functional areas have already been discussed in one of areas the previous implementation scopes. In comparison with the previous mentioned implementation scopes the functional areas of Customer & Partner Management, Service Delivery Management and Financial Accounting Management are added. The average score in this scope is 63%. 19
  27. 27. | the way we see it2.6.1 Customer & Partner Management Customer & Partner Management includes the processes that manage the interaction with the customers (both internal and external), and with other parties in the value web or eco system in which the company (or department) operates. Details of the customer are recorded, their business needs are identified and (if required) proposals are created. Of course it is important to measure the quality of the services provided as experienced by the customer. In a world where part of the organization is outsourced to other companies, where system development or other functions are performed in countries such as India and projects are partly staffed by free-lancers or consultancy companies, managing these interactions is important. Figure 11: Customer & Partner Management process The functional area of Customer & Partner Management was covered by all solutions, with an average score of 65%. Figure 11 shows the average scores. Identify new business is scoring reasonable. But when we look at the spread of the scores it shows that they either score really high (24 solutions score >80%) or really low (9 solutions score <20%). Check customer satisfaction scores low. For instance only 44% of the solutions offer the possibility to link satisfaction criteria to a customer from a configurable list. Satisfaction of the customer is maybe the most important thing in making a project successful. By managing the expectations of a customer the success of delivering a project which connects to the customers‟ needs can be increased. Keeping track of the expectations on a customer and project level in the solution would in that perspective is very useful. The process, “Exchange project & resource data”, scores lowest. Being able to share and exchange data related to projects and resources is essential in the global economy organisation operate in today. A reason for this low score is the inability of most solutions (67%) to support the functionality where an external vendor offers a resource for a request. 20
  28. 28. | the way we see it 2.6.1 Service Delivery Management Service Delivery Management (SDM) covers the processes from defining the service to managing new releases. Figure 12: Service Delivery Management process The functional area of Service Delivery Management was covered by 27 Release and solutions, with an average score of 53%. This area seems to be up to level withportfolio planning the maturity of the market, or maybe even ahead of it. The best supported poorly integrated process is defining the service. Of the participating solutions 72% is able to make an overview of the available services and make it visible in a report. Of the participating solutions 63% has the functionality to create a separate object within the solution for the service; so it does not have to be defined as a project. It looks like service management is becoming basic functionality for PPM solutions with an IT governance focus. That there still is room for improvement is made visible with the lowest score in the Service Delivery Management area “Deliver new releases”. Only 50% of the solutions are able to plan new releases within the service. Of these solutions, 45% who offer new-release planning are able to make a connection between the release-planning and the portfolio planning. There is a big difference between the tools. Of the solutions 30% have a score in this process area of 80-100%, while 58% do not score more than 60%. Functionality has to grow in this area. 2.6.2 Financial Accounting Management Financial Accounting Management (FAM) gives insights in the contribution of each project, customer, department and professional towards the financial performance of the entire organization. Figure 13: Financial Accounting Management process The functional area of Financial Accounting Management was covered by 30 Financial out of 33 solutions, with an average score of 49%. The most striking about the management results is the fact that there does not seem to be an in between, either solutionssupported by half support the process within Financial Account Management very well or they of the solutions barely support it. The two strongest functionalities of the process “Chargeback/invoice the project” are the possibilities to see all the cost of a project in one view (88%) and the possibilities to change the rate per resource per project (80%). Really handy when resources work on different projects for different companies with different pricing agreements. But also when a distinction is made between working on own department projects and on projects of other departments. 21
  29. 29. | the way we see itThe process “Process Period Closure” contained a very important questionconcerning time periods: “Is it possible to close time periods per part of theorganization instead of for the whole system at once (to support different timezones)? Of the vendors which cover Financial Accounting Management, 82%have answered no, this functionality is not available. This type of advancedfunctionality is most often covered by an already present financial system, butindicates the way Project Portfolio Management solutions are developing. Itshows that the PPM solutions are not completely ready yet for an enterpriseapproach. Closing a month for a whole organization that operatesinternationally at one moment in time is hard to do from a process point ofview.Looking at the results for financial accounting management it is clear that it isout of scope for most solutions. What is supported, are the functionalitiesdirectly linked to projects and the time accounting done on them. Theinformation from the PPM solutions is either manually transferred orautomatically interfaced to the financial system used by an organization. 22
  30. 30. | the way we see it 23
  31. 31. | the way we see it 3 PPM supported well The outcomes of the survey show that many PPM solutions available in the market can offer broad and sufficient support for the processes identified in the PPI process reference model. The outcomes also show that solutions can be found for each scope an organization wants to cover in its implementation. Three main outcomes of the survey are: 1. Market leaders offer broad support for PPM processes but solutions specialized in certain areas outperform the market leaders 2. Functionality is still a distinguishing factor 3. True point solutions do not exist since broader functional support is always offered Over 60% of the questions asked for each of the implementation scopes identified are answered positively.Average score per implementation scope Figure 14: Average score per scenario In some scopes there is a big difference in the offered functionality by the different vendors. The scope “Project Portfolio Management” taking the crown with a spread from 4% to a 100%. Some solutions that score low in this scope are however one of the best solutions in another scope. The individual scores of the participating solutions can be found in Appendix A: Scorecards participating PPM solutions. When an organization is thinking about implementing a PPM solution, this survey clearly shows that there are a lot of potential solutions to look at. The basics are well covered by all. Organizations should think about functionality they really need to support their business processes now, and also what they want supported in the near future. 24
  32. 32. | the way we see it When creating the questionnaire for the survey it was clear that some of the questions would be difficult to some of the solutions. On the other hand we would have expected the solutions to perform better on some functional areas, taking into account the number of times we encountered those situations at our clients. Looking at the average figures this is particularly true for the next functionalities which we think should be improved in the near future to become core PPM functionality as well. A portfolio manager would like better support for: o options to compare different portfolio scenarios (preferably in one screen) o dealing with dependencies between projects in the portfolio o playing with different risk profiles o taking portfolio management to the corporate level. Support for project managers should be improved in: o tracking and acting on risks and issues, o keeping a clear view on the tolerances set for the project o performing final checks when closing a project o managing the business case For resource managers the support should be improved for: o searching for suitable resources based on criteria set in the resource request o being able to propose and manage a situation in which multiple candidates are proposed for a request. o managing resource reservations including probability and priorities, o support for dealing with external resources proposed for a request. Resources could use better support for: o Making adjustments on timesheets o Real time validations of their timesheet o Dragging and dropping options in the solution, for instance when dragging a document to a task in the project. In the end the ambition of the organization using the PPM solution determines what is required. The outcomes of this survey clearly show that broad support for PPM processes is available. 25
  33. 33. | the way we see it 4 Approach and Methodology Vendors of PPM solutions were asked to fill in a 450+ questionnaire based on the Project Performance Improvement (PPI) – Process Reference Model. In this survey, the functional coverage of the offered solutions is highlighted. We invited over 100 PPM vendors to participate (searched on the internet and gained from internal records). Of these vendors 33 have filled in the questionnaire. Participating vendors range from multinationals that have been around for a while, to companies just starting on the PPM market.4.1 The questionnaire The questionnaire is based on the PPI Process Reference Model, as was done in the two previous surveys. The questionnaire was revised for two reasons: 1) to keep the questionnaire manageable, and 2) to delete superfluous questions. These questions are defined as basis functionality and are therefore used as a starting point. The questions used are more complex to get insights in the differences of the participating PPM solutions. Another objective of this study is to be able to get an indication which tools perform best in a certain functional area or process. As a result questions that did not contribute to making a distinction between PPM solutions have been removed from the questionnaire. The consequence of this is that solutions that do support a functional area very well in basic functionality can score low within our survey. Vendors were asked to answer the questions only for „out of the box‟ available functionality. 4.2 Analysis approach The first approach to analyze the data has been to score the individual questions, process areas and functional areas. This has been done made on the answered questions with the following grading system: Score = Questions answered „Yes‟ for the applicable area x weight assigned x100% Total number of questions in the applicable area Questions that were not answered are considered as not available. Tools that do not support a functional area have been taken out the equation, so it will not bring the average score for that functional area down. In the results paragraph of each functional area will be stated how many of the participating vendors cover this functional area. Within the individual scorecards, at the end of this paper, it will be shown per vendor which functional area they support. The second approach to analyze the answers is based on the eleven functional areas as described within our process reference model. This gives a clear indication on how the vendor-market is behaving on several functional aspects of Project Portfolio Management. 26
  34. 34. | the way we see itA third approach used to analyze the answers, was the use of scopes asmentioned in chapter 2. The reference model is used by PPI consultants ofCapgemini to determine what functionality is desired by the customer toimplement. Based on these experiences, we have established a couple of basicscopes we see when implementing PPM tools. Comparison is made how wellPPM tools support these scopes.Two remarks have to be made: 1) not every sub process in the reference modelis used in the different scopes. And 2) in every sub process the askedfunctionality will not cover the need by every organization looking toimplement a PPM tool for a certain scope.Finally we have to mention that Capgemini did not validate the answers givenby the vendors. We can therefore take no responsibility for the answers given.The outcomes of this survey can be a starting point for PPM tool selectionprocesses that has to be completed by a demonstration based on a specificsituation applicable for an organization. In line with the approach taken in thissurvey these demonstrations should be focussed on the advanced,distinguishing functionalities since the base functionality is covered by more orless all PPM solutions available in today‟s market. 27
  35. 35. | the way we see it 5 Appendix A: Scorecards participating PPM solutions This appendix gives an overview of all the solutions which participated in the survey. For each solution a scorecard is presented. We feel that choosing a PPM solution is always a balancing act between several aspects. The results are alphabetically ordered by the solutions name. In the score cards, the following abbreviations are used in connection with the spider diagrams:CPM - Customer & Partner ManagementIPM - Idea & Portfolio ManagementPDM - Programme Delivery ManagementPEM - Project Execution ManagementRAM - Resource Allocation ManagementTEM - Time & Expense ManagementFPM - Financial Project ManagementSDM - Service Delivery ManagementWKM - Workflow & Knowledge ManagementBIM - Business Intelligence ManagementFAM - Financial Accounting Management On the left the scores of the solutions per implementation scope are mentioned: Scope 1: Project Delivery Scope 2: Project and Resource Management Scope 3: Project Based Working Scope 4: Project and Programme Governance Scope 5: Project Portfolio Management Scope 6: All processes On the right the overall score is represented as a spider diagram, comparing the score of the solution to the average score of all 33 participating solutions. The blue line represents the average score of the 33 participating vendors. The red line represents the individual solutions score. 28
  36. 36. | the way we see itName Solution Vendor@task AtTask Inc.Artemis 7 version 7.2 Artemis International Solutions Corporation, a Versata Company.Augeo 5 version 5.3 Augeo Software 29
  37. 37. | the way we see itName Solution VendorAxxerion version 969 Axxerion B.V.BB.Net 4.0 BusinessBaseCardinis Suite version 4.3 Cardinis Solutions SpA 30
  38. 38. | the way we see itName Solution VendorChangepoint version 12 CompuwareCA Clarity PPM version 8 Computer AssociatesDaptiv PPM Daptiv, Inc. 31
  39. 39. | the way we see itName Solution VendorPlanview Enterprise 9.1 Planview, Inc.Paradigm eServicesManager version 7.1 Paradigm Software Technologies Inc.Telelogic’s Focal Point V6.1 Telelogic Netherlands, an IBM Company. 32
  40. 40. | the way we see itName Solution VendorGoEfficient version 2.1 MCH Information & Communication solutionsInventX SP2M 4.5 Cranes Software International ltd.Microsoft Office Enterprise Project Microsoft B.V.Management (EPM) 2007 33
  41. 41. | the way we see itName Solution VendorPlanisware 5 PlaniswarePowerProject PowerProjectPrimavera P6, version 6.0 Primavera 34
  42. 42. | the way we see itName Solution VendorPrincipal Toolbox version 4.1.6 Fortes Solutions B.V.Project Insight Enterprise Project Metafuse, Inc.Management SoftwareRational Portfolio Manager IBM 35
  43. 43. | the way we see itName Solution VendorResilient Project Portfolio Manager, ResilientVersion 4.0.314Sagitta & Centurio, Astrea, Intelligence, Icorp B.V.Blackberry & ServicesPlanningPSNext version 2.5 SciForma 36
  44. 44. | the way we see itName Solution VendorShareLock projectsoftware Dataleaf ICTTaskTimer/Projectcontroller version 7 Mobiprowith MindManager Project Edition.Borland Tempo 2007r2 Borland B.V. 37
  45. 45. | the way we see itName Solution VendorTimewax version 6 Timewax B.V.Trias Relatiebeheer en Trias DigitaalProjectmanagementUnanet Project Portfolio version 9.0 Unanet Technologies 38
  46. 46. | the way we see itName Solution VendorXiphers version 7.0 MatadexSAP RPM (SAP Resource & Portfolio SAPManagement) 39
  47. 47. | the way we see it6 Appendix B: About Capgemini PPM SolutionsCapgemini‟s Project Portfolio Management Solutions (PPM) departments areglobally present in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Sweden, theUK, India and the US. These departments serve project-based organisationswith the professionalization of executing and governing projects, programmesand portfolios. PPM is a full service provider in this market space: Consulting.Technology. Outsourcing.The main business issue addressed by PPM involves organisations that are notin control of the execution of their projects, programmes and portfolios. Weoffer services such as project managers‟ assessments, organisation assessments(OPM3, CMMI), setting up or running Project Management Offices,implementing PRINCE2, MSP and Project Portfolio management (PPM). Wealso focus on optimising the project portfolio management processes in anorganisation with the support of the right tools. PPM Solutions has thoroughknowledge of the solutions available in the market. Finally the implementationof these solutions is supported from an onshore centre in the Netherlands incombination with offshore centres in India. The offshore centres focus mainlyon application management, but they also engage in report and interfacedevelopment, configuration solutions and application management based on aSoftware-as-a-Service principle.For more information on PPM Solutions see www.nl.capgemini.com/PPI (inDutch). 40
  48. 48. About Capgemini and the Collaborative Business ExperienceCapgemini, one of the world‟s foremost providers of Consulting, Technology andOutsourcing services, has a unique way of working with its clients, called the CollaborativeBusiness Experience.Backed by over three decades of industry and service experience, the Collaborative BusinessExperience is designed to help our clients achieve better, faster, more sustainable resultsthrough seamless access to our network of world-leading technology partners andcollaboration-focused methods and tools. Through commitment to mutual success and theachievement of tangible value, we help businesses implement growth strategies, leveragetechnology and thrive through the power of collaboration. Capgemini employsapproximately 68,000 people worldwide and reported 2006 global revenues of €7.7 billion.The Capgemini Group is headquartered in Paris.www.capgemini.com 41
  49. 49. www.nl.capgemini.comCapgemini Nederland B.V.Papendorpseweg 100Postbus 2575 - 3500 GN UtrechtTel. 030 689 00 00Fax 030 689 99 99

×