Since Microsoft claims an 85% market share for its project management software, the release of a new version is significant. Here are some ideas and recommendations. This material was gathered at their June half-day rollout presentation. [Early Experiences with MS Project 2003]

Changes

Microsoft claimed that the basic interface is so similar to the 2000 version that a casual user cannot tell the difference between it and the 2002 version.

There is still only one level of undo. The presenter claimed that there are technical reasons that multilevel undo can’t be accomplished. This difficulty provides all the more reason to provide undo! In the meantime, before every significant change I will save a new rev (myproject_1, myproject_2 … myproject_143 and so on) so I can recover from things that happen unexpectedly that I must undo. Hard or not, I believe that not having a multilevel undo is the cause of more rework than any other single missing feature. [more about protecting documents]

Smart tags have been added and provide options to the normal defaults. For instance, if you add a second resource to a task, you can now choose to double the work hours or half the run time. I like this feature in Microsoft Office and I expect that I will also like it in Project.

Two key features in 2002 that are not in 2000 are issue management and a document repository. The issue management feature may be useful; however I prefer to track all issues including product defects in a single problem database. It was reported that the repository feature does not support automatic versioning or check-in/out. [more about issue and risk management]

Server

The Project Server appears to be of most use for business-wide multi-project businesses with complex resource management needs. It was reported that many features are similar to what was in project 2000 but with usability enhancements. For instance, you can subset the company-wide resource pool to just those persons that you allocate and then select resources from a list containing just those resources. This is further enhanced by having skill labels, proficiency ratings, competency ratings, and job grade assigned to each person in the pool. During presentations, Microsoft claimed that “the resource tool is the biggest hit in 2002” That information may be great for picking from large resource pools, but personally I would not allow that detail about a person’s performance on any system other than a secure human resources database.

When using the Professional version and the server, the project files are on the server, not on the local computer. A co-located Project Web server provides secure project access over the Internet via Internet Explorer. Files can be copied to a laptop for use while traveling.

From the collaborative web interface, features such as progress reporting, notes on tasks, status reports, and many other items can be entered over the web. The project manager using the Professional version does not have to use the web interface to consolidate or manage the data. [more about collaborative business tools]

Reporting

The Project Server runs on SQL server and was called a “knowledge hub” and “Central Repository” by the presenter. The focus of executive reporting is viewing a “portfolio” of projects’ status via red/yellow/green “stoplights” that are rolled up from project detail. An executive can then drill down from any “stoplight” to review task or person detail. The drill down is presented in pivot tables which allow incredible flexibility of display (and a magnificent demo). Realistically, most executives I know would see a red-light and then get on the phone. (No cell phone joke intended)

The rolling up of stoplight flags to build management reports seems like a weak solution to reporting. Anyone wanting to avoid attention could rationalize not setting the flag. I strongly advocate standup reporting of project status to allow inquiry and dialog between the reviewers and reporters. [more about product development leadership]

The data warehouse reporting is impressive and sophisticated. It provides great tools for viewing a large organization including extensive use of pivot tables and Excel exporting or linking. The presenters acknowledged that complex reporting requires a large investment in the design and implementation.

Other Information

Approximate retail prices include: the Standard version for $600, Professional for $1000, a non-floating web license for use with project server for $170, and existing-customer upgrades to the standard version for $350. In my opinion the web license will meet the needs of people who need to view plans and update tasks. I expect that over 80% of users would be satisfied with the features contained in the web client version. 

Today 10% of projects are built from templates; Microsoft’s goal is to drive that to 95%. Building projects from templates is almost essential if common milestones are to be rolled up for executive reporting. In addition to building your own templates, you can now build your own process steps into the task pane help system.

Microsoft is “doing away with upgrades for this product” and moving to licensing programs. If you currently have many licenses and are considering upgrading, you should review and understand their new licensing terms ASAP.

Our Recommendations

If you manage projects for a team of 8 to 40 (the target audience for this newsletter) I believe that upgrading to this release would be a low priority investment. [more about collaborative project management tools]

The focus of this release seems to be on very large teams. Microsoft referenced their case study which claimed that Project 2002 is temptingly cheaper than Primavera for large organizations. If you have over a hundred people active in projects, a multi-project environment, frequent reallocates of pooled resources, extensive executive reporting, and have a support team that can host and maintain the Project Server, then you should consider this upgrade.

Home | Privacy