Sohodojo and Communities of the Future proudly host... M2 Product/Service Profile: Microsoft Project 2000 / Microsoft Project CentralDate: 16 Aug 2000 Copyright (c) 2000 Frank Castellucci Associated project: Specification Writing for Web-based Project Planning Software Project URL: http://sohodojo.com/techsig/project-planning-project.html sXc Project detail: http://sourcexchange.com/ProjectDetail?projectID=24 (SourceXchange is out of business.) Project coordination: Sohodojo Sponsors: Position open Sponsors (M1-3): Opendesk.com and Collab.Net Core Team: Jim Salmons and Frank Castellucci 1 OverviewThe intent of this document is to provide feedback from analysis of products that are comparable to the general goals of the project. The focus is on key technological areas with an overriding concern in regards to role collaboration capability. 2 Product/Service Profile [ All assessments, this topic ]2.1 Name of offeringMicrosoft Project 2000 / Microsoft Project Central 2.2 Publisher/Author/Service-providerMicrosoft 2.3 URL for more informationhttp://www.microsoft.com/office/project/default.htm 2.4 Type - one or more of local client, client/server, web service, etc.Three (3) tier thin client with central server for organization intranet. 2.5 Pricing/AvailabilitySee web site for single/volume licenses. 2.6 Assessment based on hands-on experience or info-only?The author has working experience with the Microsoft Project, the Project Central information, however, was extracted from a number of documents provided on the Microsoft web-site. 2.7 Reviewer commentsThe impetus for Project 24, as I understand it, was "for creating a web-based, open source, collaborative, project planning system like Microsoft Project". It would seem reasonable that most people understand what MS Project is and does. The remainder of this document will focus on the Project Central features that enable a web based collaborative/shared MS Project effort in an organization. 3 System Constraints [ All assessments, this topic ]3.1 Physical LimitationsNo comment. 3.2 Software Limitations (operating systems, plug-ins, drivers)Microsoft Project 2000:
Project Central Client:
Microsoft Project Central Server:
Miscellaneous
3.3 Implementation Limitations (number of projects, tasks per projects, users, roles)No 3.4 Does the software assume a specific project management methodology, if so which one(s)?While it does not assume a methodology throughout the system, there is a accept/deny/continue model (which can be disabled) and it does support programmatic extensions in all areas and events to enforce the business processing rules of an organization. 3.5 Reviewer CommentsThe system requirements are very reasonable, but of course it is closed source and therefore not a "seed" potential. 4 Collaboration [ All assessments, this topic ]4.1 What is the interaction model? (Real-time dynamic views, publish/subscribe, email, user queries, etc.)Real time dynamic views, e-mail, user queries, user defined icons for customized fields, user defined publish/subscribe web definition. Project Object Model access via Visual Basic, and COM development and addition to the framework. 4.2 When used in project planning mode, is team communication supported?Yes, communication is supported throughout the entire suite. With extensions for e-mail, annotation, and htmp/asp pages. Collaboration at the task level can be accomplished through defining additional attributes of the task, and rules associated with the events that can be generated when the content changes. The rules would/could include the ability to send as a message through e-mail, auto-accept/deny, and so on. 4.3 When used in project monitoring mode (more modest a target than project management), how is team member interaction handled? ('project-manager -centric' or peer interaction; is there an ad hoc issue management facility, etc.)There is a support bridge through MS Outlook messaging and collaboration client which facilitates interaction for team members. 4.4 What are the 'key indicators' used to keep project team members and stakeholders informed of the state of the project?Top to bottom reporting, views, drill downs, triggers, visual indicators, costs overun analysis. Project Managers can send "status requests", with guided field definitions to team members. Higher level stakeholders are provided with an action oriented view of project information, clear summaries of all projecs across the enterprise, with stop light indicators that provide real time status at a glance. Time and budget views allow development managers to see how projects are performing. For individuals, defined to the system as users, custom defined portfolios can be accessed which allow dynamic filtering and grouping of project/task/resource information. 4.5 Does the product or service's concurrency features facilitate or hinder team member collaboration?Fully facilitates the team member peer and management collaboration. 4.6 Security featuresBefore users can access project data, they must have an account on the Project Central server. Accounts may be setup by the project administrator or created automatically when the project manager sens the user a TeamAssign message. The project administrator oversees account management, adding and removing users from projects, assigning users to groups and roles, and determining what data will be available to each users. To ensure security, Project Central support both Windows NT Authentication and its own authentication scheme, which uses username/password pairs maintained by Project Central. Using both is the default behavior. 4.7 Reviewer CommentsMicrosoft has provided a very flexible and powerful framework for cusomtization to extend the collaboration functionality to any direction the enterprise desires. This is the theme throughout the Project 2000 and Project Central system. 5 Role Support [ All assessments, this topic ]A Role characterizes the system participants of in terms of responsibility. A role can be people or other systems. For example, a developer is a role that has different responsibility than a SQA tester. In this section, we will provide what provisions the system under review provides for describing the person/role, and what processing rules that it may imply. 5.1 What is the 'person/role' model?There are four (4) general roles defined in the tools:
5.2 How are 'person/role' elements related to 'organization/group' elements?Through resource groupings, resource pools, enterprise codes, and custom fields. 5.3 Can one person fill many roles? Can one role be filled by many persons? (resource/skill pools, etc.)Yes and yes. 5.4 Reviewer CommentsWhile there are no suprises here, the addition of the Project Central fully facilitates the inclusion of all stakeholders of the project(s) across the enterprise and user community. This is essential functionality. But this also emphasis the need for more intelligent role modelng and support for internet/extranet access on a global scale. While the Project 2000 roles are clearly fundemental to project planning and status, and the many "types" of these that truley exist, roles such as analysis,and design and requirements are but a taste of what else should be considered. 6 Concurrency [ All assessments, this topic ]Concurrency is defined by the implementations locking and transaction model. As such, the granularity of the locking will determine the liveliness of the system. The finer the granularity of locking, the more lively the interactions may be. Another aspect of concurrency is in regards to work-flow and the transaction model, does the system support "conversational or long-term transactions" for example. Concurrency is defined by the implementations locking and transaction model. As such, the granularity of the locking will determine the liveliness of the system. The finer the granularity of locking, the more lively the interactions may be. Another aspect of concurrency is in regards to work-flow and the transaction model, does the system support "conversational or long-term transactions" for example. 6.1 Single or multi-userMultiuser 6.2 What is the implementation technology supporting concurrency?Centralized database on networked servers. Thin client user interface enabling server side logic modules. 6.3 Revision ManagementFunctionality not defined. 6.4 Reviewer CommentsAs expected for a multiuser system. 7 Accessibility [ All assessments, this topic ]In this section, we wan't to capture how accessable the system is from both a human interaction capability as well as support for the interchange of information from other systems. 7.1 Web-basedYes 7.2 Interchanges support (MS Project, XML, RDF, etc.)Project 2000 and Project Central support extendability at the server level (as project data is stored in SQL92 compliant form) and is therefore accessable to any specialized input/output systems (ODBC, COM, etc.). 7.3 Import/Export (MS Project, text, etc.)Details not available at this time although certainly import/export to other vendor project tools has long been a staple of Microsoft Project. 7.4 Mobile UsersWeb access, RAS (Remote Access Services), and offline work synchronized with central server on reconnect. 7.5 Reviewer CommentsAs expected. In addition, there is the content accessability aspect in regards to business processing that is not itemized in the outline, but Project 2000 supports rule definitions for every activity associated with project data manipulation. This adds a significant benefit to overall project management capability. 8 Project Proposal Management [ All assessments, this topic ]Is there a business processing rule that supports the tenet that before a project there is a proposal? If so, what are the processing rules that govern it's description and acceptance? 8.1 Vision/Goals specificationFunctionality not supported in tool. 8.2 Business Processing RulesFunctionality not supported in tool. 8.3 Implementation Specific RulesFunctionality not supported in tool. 8.4 Reviewer Comments9 Requirements Management [ All assessments, this topic ]The tasks of creating a software system are usually (but not always) bound to initial requirements elucidated by analysis of the problem space. To what extent, if any, does the system under review support the requirement phase of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC)? 9.1 Documentation ControlsFunctionality not supported in tool. 9.2 Relationship to Task ManagementFunctionality not supported in tool. 9.3 Implementation Specific RulesFunctionality not supported in tool. 9.4 Business Processing RulesFunctionality not supported in tool. 9.5 Reviewer Comments10 Task Management [ All assessments, this topic ]10.1 What is the 'activity/task' model?Project 2000 further defines the task model, including:
10.2 How are roles related to activity/tasks?Resource Managers assign resources (team members). Team members maintain information on tasks assigned to them. 10.3 Is the product/service 'project-manager-centric' or can team members extend and/refine the plan within the realm of their own activity?Project 2000 and Project central enable "bottom up" scheduling. With this model, project managers create the initial project plan using summary tasks, and team members or lead creates the tasks or subtasks beneath the summary task, and may delegate these tasks to the appropriate team members. The proposed tasks are then sent to the project manager, who can review individual tasks, as well as delegations and assignments, before accepting them in the master project plan. Task delegation is controlled by the project administrator, and can specify which projects and resources this is allowed for. 10.4 Views: Predefined, user-configurable or bothBetween Project 2000 and Project Central, users can view all aspects of the project in real-time using pre-defined views, or fully customized views can be created. Default views include:
10.5 Status reporting mechanisms (percent complete reports, 'flag-raising' or issue management features)Default views indicate overruns (time, cost, availability, etc.) using a number of graphical indicators to alert viewers of project status. In addition, custom indicators can be attached to custom field content. 10.6 How are consumable/required task-specific resources handled?Consumable goods (materials) can be specified as resources and assigned to tasks. 10.7 Reviewer CommentsThe maturity of Project, coupled with new features keeps this project planning aspect ahead of the pack. Microsoft has shown, with this release, that collaborative, informative, and useful project planning tools can be enabled across the globe without sacrificing functionality. 11 Task Constraints [ All assessments, this topic ]11.1 Task Dependency Internal (intra-project)Fully implemented. 11.2 Task Dependency External (inter-project)Fully implemented. 11.3 Resource constraints (expressed as percentage)As would be expected, with a very cool new feature call "Contoured Resource Availability" . With this feature, users can create plans that incorporate time-phased resource availability information. For example, they can show that a resource's availability increases from 50 percent to 100 percent from one period of time to another. 11.4 User defined constraintsNot a feature of the product, but can be implemented over the data/logic layer. For example, further semantic validation according to business processing rules. 11.5 Reviewer CommentsIn addition to the standard constraints, and the flexibility of the newer features, coupled with the constraint satisfaction engine that has been a staple of this product line for years, Project is the ideal model of what can/should be defined in a project planning/task management system specification. 12 Reporting [ All assessments, this topic ]12.1 Pre-defined, user-defined or bothBetween Project 2000 and Project Central, users can view reports on all aspects of the project in real-time using pre-defined reports with full customization capability. In addition, as the data is centrally stored, organizationaly defined reports can be created. 12.2 Publisher-push by project manager or team member dynamic views?Both fully supported. 12.3 Stakeholder-specific views?Fully supported through Project Central. 12.4 Multi-project analysisFully supported through Project Central. 12.5 What-if analysisFull resource leveling and recalculation model with two-phase commit and baseline protection to protect master project from accidental corruption. 12.6 Security featuresControlled through user administration. 12.7 Reviewer CommentsIn addition to this, Project 2000 and Project Central can be fully customized, from views to the entire interface of the implementation, using templates and HTML/ASP programming. 13 Multi-project Management [ All assessments, this topic ]13.1 Role Template library?Resource pools are supported across the enterprise, and enable through Project Central. 13.2 Repetitive Task library?Task templates are support across the enterprise, and enable through Project Central. 13.3 Reviewer CommentsMust have feature for every project management tool. 14 Post Mortem [ All assessments, this topic ]It is often desirable to look back upon a completed project and enumerate what problems arose, the quality of how they were handled, and a gauge to the positive or negative effect on the baseline plan. This is primarily used as an quality accounting about the software development process. 14.1 Analysis and ReportingWhile the tools certainly have a plethora of devices to report on "success/failure" aspects of a project, there is no explicit feature for supporting post mortem. 14.2 Is there an interface to a 'reputation-building' rating system for team members? If so, is there a 'disputed assessment' system to resolve conflicting opinions.Functionality not defined. 14.3 Reviewer CommentsA shame, given their reputation for a project management system that this is still no-where on the product radar. 15 Subjective Impressions [ All assessments, this topic ]15.1 User Interface: Strengths/WeaknessesThe variety of interfaces (web based, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Office based) will fit most peoples needs or tastes, and that the web interface is fully configurable, there is nothing but strength in this product. 15.2 Project Modeling: Strengths/WeaknessesWhile what is available is the best you can get, the lack of Requirements Engineering and Post Mortem analysis functions require enablement work after the installation. 15.3 Technology Platform: Strengths/WeaknessesBoth it's strength and weakness lie in the "Windows Only" mentality for the majority of functionality. But the accessability to the central server, being open, enables other technologies to participate in the organizations software development life cycle requirements. 15.4 Overall 'Wow' factor: 1 (low) to 5 (high)SDLC = 3, Project Planning = 5, Project Management = 4, Product Development = 0, Product Maintenance = 0 15.5 Reviewer CommentsNone DOCUMENT HISTORY Version 1.0 - Final ### end of sxc24-m2-msproject-comparables.txt (Version 1.0) ### © 1998-2010 Jim Salmons and Timlynn Babitsky for Sohodojo except as noted for project deliverable and working documents.
Our Privacy Statement |
Community Collaboration Platform Project
Complaint? Irritation? Suggestion? |