Trends & Tools Results of the PSA Survey 2005

1. Trends & ToolsResults of the PSA Survey 2005 Project Performance Improvement CoP Augustus 2005

2. Book: Trends in Project Performance Improvement • Third survey into the PSA solutions market • Previous versions published in 1999 en 2001 • The survey: • 153 suppliers were invited (100%) • 49 indicated they would participate and have received the questionnaire (32%) • 34 questionnaires were sent back (69%) • Questionnaire of over 900 questions! • Based on the PPI Process Reference Model • Six chapters with trends and developments • For each supplier a scorecard PPI Competence Centre

3. 34 scorecards • A scorecard per solution • Four categories: • Internal • External • Technical • Functional PPI Competence Centre

4. Approach • All answers have been analysed and used in this publication. The answers have been processed as follows: • Breakdown into process areas and processes based on reference model. • Each process received weight from 1 to 3, based on the relevance of that process for the process area as a whole. • Each question was given a weighting from 1 to 3, based on the relevance of the question for the process. • A “B-answer” counted for 4 points a “C-answer” for 1 (the function is only available by using a custom field). A “N-answer” for 0 points. • Formula for calculating the scores. • Answer * Question value * Process Value = Score for the question PPI Competence Centre

5. Some detailed findings (based on average results) • 34% offer the functionality to change the start or end date of a project in the portfolio view. So playing with scenarios (on a project level) is supported by a limited number of solutions. • 48%offer the possibility to use scheduling parameters to determine a programme planning. • 60% support what if planning on a project portfolio level. In 61% of the solutions a what- if planning can be compared with the original plan. • 28% supports adjusting a multi-project planning by drag-and-drop. • >90% offer support for multiple rates per resource (cost 94%, billing 92%, internal 82%). • 54% offer support for sorting a list of suitable resources by rate. • 57% show the results per resource per selection criterion. • 57% offer the possibility for the project manager to decide the level of time capturing (project, phase, task). Differences show on detailed, more complex questions. PPI Competence Centre

6. Trends Trends in the PPI market

7. Trend – Portfolio Management • Increasing interest in project prioritization. Scenarios are used to decide on portfolios. • Surprisingly only 71% supports assigning a priority to a project. • Priority is used by 48% for planning multiple projects on a programme level. • 60% supports saving scenarios for later comparison. • Increasing focus on formal business cases before starting a project. • 65% support planning future cash flowson a timescale. • Project transparency required on an enterprise wide level. • Traffic light reporting is supported(budget 74%,risk 66%, progress 88%). • Assigning a project to more than one programme (by a %) is supportedby 43%. PPI Competence Centre

8. Trend – Project based working is maturing • Increasing focus on formal programme management methods. • Organizations start to recognize programme management needs a different approach from project management. • Programme and project manager are more and more regarded as a role instead of a post. • Programme Governance Offices are positioned as line departments. PPI Competence Centre

9. Trend – Focus on metrics and process management • Metrics to evaluate and manage projects and programmes become more advanced. • When planning a new project data from from previous projects can be reused. For instance the roles needed (74%) and the average experience of the roles (60%). • Organizations are looking for support to register and track PM related KPI’s. • KPI’s per resource can be entered in 51% of the solutions. • Tools should support in easily managing project processes and procedures. • 70% have workflow functionality. • Only 48% offer the possibility to define a loop in the workflow (which is quite basic). PPI Competence Centre

10. Trend – Cost focus • Handling of invoices from external resources is changing to make it cheaper. • Reversed billing is supported by 63%. • Outsourcing of application management of PSA solutions. • 88% of the solutions can be used with an Application Service Provider construction. PPI Competence Centre

11. Scorecards Scores of our partners

12. Solution score Average score Solution score Average score Solution score Average score Solution score Solution score Solution score Solution score Average score Average score Average score Average score The scores of our partners PPI Competence Centre

13. Unique Selling Points: Graphical OBS A delegate can be appointed for timesheet approval per part of the organisation 100% score on administrate ledger Graphical GUI for creating workflows Points for Improvement: No calendars No role hierarchy A project manager cannot execute what if analysis It is not possible to drag and drop a project in a general (overall) planning No full text search on documents. USP and PoI for Assistance PPI Competence Centre

14. Unique Selling Points: Adjust portfolio planning by drag & drop Graphical OBS Points for Improvement: No internal cost rate for a resource Changes in a generic calendar do not effect a resources calendar No Gantt Chart available via web-access. VWC and FAM USP and PoI for Augeo PPI Competence Centre

15. Unique Selling Points: Graphical OBS A delegate can be appointed for timesheet approval per part of the organisation 100% score on administrate ledger Points for Improvement: No CRM No KPI’s on resource level No role hierarchy No full text search on documents. USP and PoI for BEN PPI Competence Centre

16. Unique Selling Points: Adjust portfolio planning by drag & drop A matching percentage per criterion A delegate can be appointed for timesheet approval per part of the organisation Points for Improvement: Limited number of project priorities The project manager cannot determine the level for time capturing (project, phase, task) A document has to be saved multiple times in database to link it to more than one object. USP and PoI for Clarity PPI Competence Centre

17. Unique Selling Points: A matching percentage per criterion 100% score on (fixed) asset management Graphical GUI for creating workflows Points for Improvement: No effective date for a rate change. It is not possible to request a certain level of expertise. USP and PoI for Mercury ITG PPI Competence Centre

18. Unique Selling Points: Document can be added by drag & drop. Points for Improvement: No rate per client, no billing rate No programme level No ideas No support for Adapt Portfolio No end date for a resource Project ID’s cannot be generated automatically A project cannot be set to the state closed. It is not possible to drag and drop a project in a general (overall) planning. USP and PoI for Microsoft EPM PPI Competence Centre

19. Unique Selling Points: Adjust portfolio planning by drag & drop Rate of a resource can be used as a matching criterion Document can be added by drag & drop. Graphical GUI for creating workflows Points for Improvement: FAM USP and PoI for Tenrox Tenrox answered the questionnaire combined with the possibilities Microsoft EPM offers. PPI Competence Centre

20. Who implements? Luckily most of our partners work for 50% or more of their implementations with an implementation partner. PPI Competence Centre

21. Erwin Dunnink Project Performance Improvement Capgemini Nederland B.V. P.O. Box 2575 3500 GN Utrecht Mobile + 31 6 1503 0434 erwin.dunnink@capgemini.com Purpose of the survey and the book • Collect and update data about the functional coverage of PSA solutions. Useful for acquisition and selection projects. • Propagate our thought leadershipTo be used in maintaining relations and create new opportunities. PPI Competence Centre