Posts Tagged ‘Microsoft Project’
The Winner Is… itensil
As I discussed in our last post, “A Consultant’s PMO”, we are looking for a PMO (Project/Program/Portfolio Management Office, take your pick) tool to form the core tool to help manage the business of the Centivity group. That is a group of independents that function as a single market entity that I’m affiliated with. Based on our selection criteria we have selected the Knowledge Apps™ tool from Itensil.
What we’ll do in today’s post is examine why we made this decision. Clearly, Itensil is not a household name and they certainly aren’t a large company so why would we make this decision. I believe there are some interesting answers.
The first thing to remember is that we are looking for a tool to manage a collection of projects, resources, documents and manage a collection of proposals, including the creation of those proposals. Consultants have to find work before they can do it. When we include the creation and management of proposals into the mix we extend the scope for our tool beyond just a traditional PMO application. We must also have the ability to manage resources and their activities that are not associated with any projects. Also, we have no expectation that one tool will do everything. Our goal is to minimize the portfolio of required software.
First we must decide how to minimize the required software. To do that we have to decide what functionality is needed in each tool. Besides the list of requirements identified in the last post, we need accounting functionality and project scheduling functionality. We need for the selected tool to connect with an accounting package. For the SMB (Small to Midsize Businesses) we chose Intuit QuickBooks for starters. It is not an elaborate tool but will service our needs. Other tools may be used instead of QuickBooks based on client requirements. As for project scheduling, I confess I’m a Microsoft Project bigot. There are many other tools and several are web-based. However, Project has been around for a long time, has many users and is a solid tool for most projects. It may run out of gas for very large projects and it may be overkill for very small projects. It is still a great overall standard for the majority of projects that we’ll run into. It too can be replaced based on client requirements.
For us, workflow is actually fairly significant. We need to standardize our business processes so we’re not reinventing how we do business with every project and proposal. That is a typical problem with small companies. We must position ourselves for an active future. Being able to incorporate automated workflow into our tools is very important, if not essential.
Now let’s focus on the available solutions. Before we start I want to acknowledge that many of you can provide many alternatives to the field of candidates we chose. We make no claims that our process was exhaustive. It did include representation of the major solution types of interest to us, like minimum cost, maximum project management features, strong document management and collaboration capabilities. First up is Google Docs. It is definitely the low cost leader. We are definitely very budget conscious so this was an early leader. However, it runs out of gas on many fronts very quickly. It’s OK for light document management and can provide some project management capabilities but, frankly, won’t build a lot of confidence in our prospective clients. It may be useful to get started but doesn’t meet the client sniff test.
Now let’s consider a Microsoft Exchange/SharePoint solution. This approach is very capable for document management, proposal management and non-automated workflow management. It’s fairly expensive and we’re pretty much on our own for doing the plumbing connections to other apps (obviously we can always hire help). This approach is not intrinsically cloud-based so there are some IT management requirements. We don’t need to worry about those things for a while. It would produce very capable tools but there would be more up front work than we want.
Next is the Project in a box solution. This is very much a document-centric approach with a heavy focus on lean project management. It is not intrinsically cloud-based which, like the Microsoft-centric approach, means more IT management. While having DSDM Atern artifacts built in is a big deal to me, it doesn’t provide a good all around solution. Connecting other apps to it is problematic. The fact that it is supported out of the UK is very inconvenient, not a deal killer but definitely a problem.
Finally, we’ll consider the Itensil Knowledge Apps™ approach. Their Knowledge Apps tool is basically a framework that is, in turn, customized to the customer’s requirements. That customization is remarkably easy and fast. Their basic offer includes a customized Knowledge App to help us get going quickly. They are cloud-based and, therefore, easily accessible by all of our project resources regardless of location. Workflow is built in, as shown in the diagram on the right, which is a huge deal for us. Wiki-based document management is strong, making collaboration on projects and proposals very easy. It can manage proposal creation as a project and supports other forms of collaboration as well. They can he
lp us with connecting the plumbing to other apps as well.
On the downside, they are a small company and there is some risk there. We have made arrangements with them that will mitigate that risk to our satisfaction. On the upside, they are a small company which makes other small companies (like us) a big fish in their pond. That’s a good thing. It offers functionality similar to Microsoft SharePoint Workspace 2010 in a cloud-based format. That is another good thing.
Overall, we were impressed with the tool. We like what it is now and what it will become. Everyone on our side was excited with what they saw during the demo. Oh yes, and we like the price. It’s one of the more affordable tools which is a big thing to us small companies. I also believe that we have a good relationship with their management. I think they’ll deliver on everything they’ve promised. We’ll keep you posted.
This post has run over my word limit so I’ll stop now. I believe that we’ve made the right decision for our PMO needs. We are looking forward to customizing the Knowledge Apps framework and working with Itensil to grow their product (the big fish in a small pond effect). Let me know if you have any questions.
Stay tuned for more…
A Consultant’s PMO
StrAIT Advisors is a part of the Centivity group. That group is a collection of independent companies which have committed to work together collaboratively, sharing resources and knowledge as one seamless group similar to what I have described in an earlier post. To manage such a group, we need to be able to collaborate, manage projects, manage proposals and share resources effectively in order to compete with larger, established traditional companies.
Essentially, what we need is an extension of a Project Management Office, or PMO, to accommodate everything. To that end, we have been searching for such a tool based on the criteria listed below:
- Supports Agile methodologies
- Web-based application
- Manages proposals like projects
- Resource leveling across multiple projects, possibly many small projects
- Time and Resource accounting
-
Collaboration
- Within project team
- External to project team but within same company
- External to project team
- Within project team
- Integrates with scheduling tool (MS Project)
- Document Wikis developed by sub-teams with sign-offs
- Similar functionality to MS Groove (MS SharePoint Workspace 2010)
- Integrated workflow
These criteria are distilled from several sources, including “Advanced Project Portfolio Management and the PMO: Multiplying ROI at Warp Speed” (if they tried harder they could probably come up with a longer title). The image on the left is linked to that book. The experience of our team also played a major role in these specifications. From the book we extracted some common attributes for successful PMOs, listed below:
- Gather and report the initial portfolio information (see Table 14.4 for an example of the initial information required).
- Develop the goals, resource and asset portfolios (described in later chapters).
- Link project, goals, resource and asset portfolios, and perform an initial assessment.
- Determine the organization’s multi-project strategic resource (described in this chapter and in Chapter 17).
- Prioritize the project portfolio according to accepted criteria and the information currently available.
- Assess portfolio balance.
- Develop recommendations for improving ROI.
- Facilitate the Governance Board meeting and communicate the results.
Clearly, these attributes don’t include anything about managing a portfolio of proposals or a pool of project specific resources. There is also no mention of the project or resource accounting needs. However, once these considerations were added we had a reasonably complete set of requirements for our shopping trip for tools to manage our business.
We have neither the time nor the resources for an exhaustive shopping trip. We let the marketplace and our previous experience help us generate our short list. No one tool will address all of our needs so we included ease of integrating our main tool with other specialty tools, like accounting and project scheduling tools. The approaches considered are Google Docs, Microsoft Exchange/SharePoint, Itensil Knowledge Apps and Project in a box.
Google Docs offers a low cost, easily accessible solution to our basic needs. It definitely wins the cost comparison. The Microsoft products are very professional tools with an excellent support ecosystem (very important to a small group like ours) and some mature products. The Itensil Knowledge Apps is a tool from a small, new company that seems to have an intriguing offering and can provide more personalize attention. The Project in a box offering is very affordable and offers built in support for my preferred agile project management methodology, DSDM Atern. Every option has something to say for it, which is why they are on the list. The other tools most likely to be part of the solution are Microsoft Project and Intuit QuickBooks.
I will report on our selection in next week’s post. As always, your comments would be much appreciated. Stay tuned for the results…
Wrapping Up Timeboxes
In my last post I addressed our decision to use DSDM Atern for the projects generated by an SLR engagement. Now comes the decision on what I call the “engagement architecture”. What this phrase means is what are the tools we will use and how will we use them to actually execute projects. No one tool does everything needed to execute projects in an environment of empowered, collaborative teams executing an iterative methodology. Trust me, I’ve extensively looked for the “silver bullet” application that does it all and could only find several lead bullets and a couple of bronze ones.
We need to remember that we’re also talking about doing projects as consultants working with both our resources and the client’s. That means that the chosen approach must have negligible impact to the client’s IT infrastructure and not commit the client to additional long term recurring costs. When we leave the engagement, we must be able to fold up our tent and take our working environment with us. That certainly isn’t always true but our planning must be based on the most conservative scenarios. The only materials that must be left behind are sufficient documents to support SOX requirements and audits. For any client, the answer is one of three modes.
Mode 1 (primary)
The primary collaborative environment is Microsoft Groove 2007 (soon to be Microsoft SharePoint Workspace 2010). In this mode the client provides a copy of Groove to each team member. Groove functions primarily in a peer to peer architecture but has a server-based architecture available when/if needed. For small teams peer to peer is appropriate and convenient. That approach can definitely scale to larger sizes but at some point a server option may be more appropriate. I know many readers will start to groan at the mention of peer to peer. I have discussed the value of this approach before. A link to that post is here. It fulfills the requirement of leaving no lasting footprint on the client’s IT infrastructure (only user PCs), does not inflict a recurring cost on their business (there is a minimal onetime cost) and definitely provides a flexible collaborative environment for the project team. I will not elaborate on how Groove is used because I don’t want this post to turn into a pitch (it’s already more pitchy than I would like).
The brainstorming and creative component uses MindManager from Mindjet. I have found it to be very useful and its integration to Microsoft’s Office Suite is very beneficial. The use of the Microsoft Office Suite (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.) is assumed. For project schedule management we use the venerable Microsoft Project tool. For the methodology and document control we use Project in a box. We use the client’s storage/portal for archiving project information or we can archive it on our own SharePoint server. The use of all of these tools can be adjusted based on the client’s preferences or the client can just use our default engagement architecture.
Mode 2 (cloud)
Here the primary collaborative environment is one of several cloud-based project management tools. There is a wide assortment of them available and we have a few preferences. But the client’s preferences are what count so we’ll review the options with them and go from there. The reason this is not our primary approach is that I’m not satisfied that all the security “rude surprises” are all know yet for that approach (see this link) and it can inflict a recurring cost on the client. However, it’s all the rage now, very popular and growing. It will mature in time to address all of my concerns. We acknowledge that and will be happy to not fuss too much with the client about it if that’s what they want. The bottom line is that it can work for this requirement.
Mode 3 (whatever)
This is simply the case when the client is a larger, more IT-mature organization and wants to do it their way. If this is their preference we say “yes, sir”, salute and do it their way. This is true of any consultant in the world. We will do the best to adapt the core parts of our approach to that environment to assure of project success. We won’t let the client shoot themselves in the foot (or at least not contribute to it) but we will be adaptable.
In conclusion
We’ve covered a number of tools at a very high level. Each of you has to find the combination that works for you. I believe these approaches work for us and our clients to deliver professional and successful results for each project. If anyone from the DSDM Consortium reads this please harass the Project in a box people to expand their tool from just a document repository to include some of the functionality described above. If anyone from Project in a box reads this please consider yourself harassed.
Thanks for stopping by. See you next time…
Project in a box
This post will be short and revolve around a handy new piece of software I’ve come across. I will not try to do a detailed software review. I will focus on the basics and identify my interests. I believe that my interests should be similar to many of my readers. So let’s start with my needs and drivers. While that means talking about StrAIT Advisors offerings, I will make very limited reference to them. A blog post should not be a sales pitch.
My needs focus on project management and a project management office. Our SLR methodology is about using various tools to identify business process and technology improvements for our clients which improve the business IT alignment. The result of that work produces one or more projects. Those projects will have a major software component. That component will consist of making better use of existing client software, purchasing new software and/or some custom software development. There may also be a related project addressing computer or network hardware. The result being multiple technology projects being managed concurrently.
Today we use Microsoft Project for schedule management and we manually manage project documentation. It’s that manual management of documentation for several concurrent projects that is the issue. That approach works fine for a limited number of smaller projects but obviously doesn’t scale well. That brings up the concept of a PMO, or project management office. A PMO is what you need to effectively manage multiple projects. To do that successfully you need a tool to manage all that documentation with an audit trail. Such tools can be large and complex content management systems. StrAIT Advisors doesn’t need that. We need something lighter than a big system but still able to handle a substantial number of documents.
While shopping for such a tool I can across Project in a box from Prosis Solutions, Ltd located northwest of London. There is a free community version for single users. There are also affordable, server-based versions. I tried the community version but quickly bought a server-based version. The free version can use the provided methodologies but cannot create any. I need to be able to build my own and work with others. The screen shot below can represent any version of the product.
This example uses the provided DSDM Atern methodology, which is actually of the most interest to me. I like the ability to include an image with click-able areas, as shown on the left of the screen. Clicking on the image loads the appropriate collection of documents, as show on the right.
The package comes with Prince2, DSDM Atern and some related methodologies. Since Prosis is a UK based company, their primary focus is on Prince2 and DSDM Atern. I’m in the process of adding a PMBOK methodology (from the PMI). Based on my needs, I think that the Atern methodology may be the best suited for StrAIT Advisors. It’s an alternative to Scrum, which gets more press in the US.
I like the version control and audit trail. It seems to be a very adaptable tool. For more detailed information I suggest that you check out their site.
With the links provided in this post you can keep yourself busy and immersed in project management reading for days. Proceed cautiously. However, if you have a need for a very useful and adaptable tool, I suggest that you check out what you can do with Project in a box. I will let you know it goes for me in future posts.
If any Prosis people read this post, please comment on my ramblings and add your thoughts. I’m just starting out with this product and would love to hear more. Your company has been very helpful so far.
Thanks for stopping by. See you next time…
Using mind mapping in BPM projects and methodology development
In thinking about this topic, it occurred to me that the core issue for me is really the visual representation of influence mapping and the transition from unstructured information to a more structured form. Initial ideas are rarely structured. They are organic, like the way we think. However, structured information, like lists, makes the implementation of those ideas much easier to execute. We use MindManager 8 from Mindjet for our mind mapping tool and to provide the transition to a more structured form for the information. You can check out their website for more information on that tool. You can also look here for more information on mind mapping in general. To make my point I have created an example containing three maps. Each map can represent a project, group activity or a methodology (a collection of methodologies is the case for us).
The solid black lines represent normal hierarchical relationships. The dotted lines represent connections of influence. For example, Topic B3 and Topic C3 both influence Topic A2. In our example, the bolder red dotted line represents more direct influence and the smaller blue dotted line represents less influence. You have to set your own standards, like bolder lines representing more influence or one color representing more influence than another. For StrAIT Advisors, our methodology needed to be influenced by other methodologies. A screen clipping is shown below to illustrate how that actually worked for us.
In our case, the dotted blue lines represent the influence of one methodology on our SLR methodology. Some steps were consolidated while others were not influenced at all. After any fine tuning needed for an individual client, the map is exported to Microsoft Project for project execution. In your case, the influences could represent the relationships between projects being handled by your Project Management Office (PMO). Influences between projects are much easier to show on this type of diagram than on a project plan composed of both projects and subprojects. They are much easier to change as well. In a project plan, the connections between tasks are actual dependencies, not connections of influence. Influence is too subjective and vague of a relationship for a project plan.
The need to capture unstructured ideas in team brainstorming meetings or just a casual meeting between collaborators is a vital part of the genesis of change. The conversion of those unstructured ideas into actionable projects is the next vital step. The use of mind maps periodically during the course of any project can be very useful, even if the ideas captured are just stored for the future. You can update them when ideas for improvement occur to the project team.
My core point for this post is that ideas start as unstructured things but must eventually evolve to structured things. Knowing how that process will happen is a key to being successful and adaptable. Identify your tools of choice before your project begins and make sure your leadership has buy-in into your approach. It will help in building credibility and communicating during the course of your project.
I hope this post has been valuable. Talk to you again later…