Biting the bullet on ease-of-use

Sure, we all want easy-to-use software. But beware that you do not confuse ease of use with uselessness. I strenuously object to recent articles, in non-project management media, that have complained about how difficult it is to use project management software. These articles and columns, written by people who have no business pontificating on the subject, suggest that project management software should be able to be used by any computer user, regardless of his or her understanding of project management or their possession of skills in that complex (and somewhat arcane) discipline. And they advise that such software should be priced no higher than $99.

Hogwash! How dare they? How dare they, who know so little about the functions employed in project planning and control, try to compare the functionality and use of project management software to the use of PIMs (personal information managers) and other clerical utilities? If they knew anything at all about the subject, they could not write such drivel.

For the past year, this column has delved into the intricacies of the use of computers for planning and control. We have found that there are subtle, but important, differences in how the various products support traditional planning and control functions. Let's set the record straight. Project management software is a tool to support the traditional processes involved in the planning of projects (scope development, task identification, task timing, resource scheduling, and budgeting), and the tracking of progress against such plans. It (project management software) is a planning tool, and a communications vehicle, for planners, project managers, functional managers, senior managers, and other project stakeholders. The work that these people do, and the plans that they execute, are very involved and critical. Therefore, the tools that they use must be as equal to the task as are the personnel. The tools must be able to interactively support the process that a projector functional manager goes through in the practice of planning a project and allocating resources. Let's not reduce this software to a toy for magazine editors and freelance writers. Nor should we suggest that it is a tool for those unskilled in the process.

This is not to say that I do not appreciate or advocate ease of use in project management software. Since 1962, I have watched with delight the move from a punched-card mainframe environment (where it typically took a week to turn around a project update), to terminal entry directly to time-sharing systems, to dedicated minicomputers, to the microcomputer revolution. Even the power users have embraced the PC for project management, and with good reason.

But to advocate that the software should be emasculated to suit people who wish to dabble in project management is ludicrous, indeed. Project management software must, as its first objective, be functional. It must allow qualified users to create models in the computer that simulate the planning actions and options that these personnel employ in the normal execution of their work and resource management efforts. Do these non-project management writers really understand what is involved?

For instance, let's look at the functions and options involved in just the resource planning segment of the project management process. I am in the midst of a detailed evaluation of how project management software is used for resource management, and of how today's products are supporting this process. Consider just a few of the functions and options that a resource planner might use. These capabilities are available in some, but not all, project management software.

Are we to accept that the advocates of $99, idiot-proof, pseudo project management software truly believe that most of these functions are not present in the real world of project management? Or is it just that they don't know any better? Are we to accept that these functions do not contribute to refined and accurate planning models? I, for one, truly believe that these are real functions, essential to an effective, realistic planning operation. Therefore, I cannot see how a project or resource manager can make effective use of any project management software package that did not employ at least some of these capabilities.

I realize, that writing in the PMNET-work, I am preaching to the converted. I will try to get the word out to those who need to know. If you support this hypothesis, you can join me in spreading the word, and in preventing our colleagues from falling for this “buy an easy-to-use toy” trap.

By the way, don't be alarmed if you are not fully familiar with all of the resource planning elements listed in the sidebar, the January column will be devoted entirely to a discussion of resource scheduling, and of which products feature the described capabilities and attributes.

The July column featured a survey of new products and significant upgrades. We need to bring two more products to your attention.

Welcom Software Technology is now shipping Open Plan 5.0, for the PC. The latest version of this $4,200 product has added several of the advanced resource planning features discussed in this column. Included are alternate resource scheduling, resource skill scheduling, and rolling wave scheduling. Coupled with the consumable resources and splitting, stretching and re-profiling features from version 4.0, the latest Open Plan offers the highest degree of resource scheduling options among PC-based project management software products.

Open Plan 5.0 has also added a what-if function, global editing, and seamless data exchange with Texim Project, WST's Windows-based project management software. Open Plan 5.0 requires FoxPro (version 2.0 or later) or dBASE IV (version 1.5 or later). Support is available for any NETBIOS compatible network, with network pricing starting at $10,040.

With the new Windows version of Primavera due out later this year, users will have a choice of high-end products with improved functionality and usability. This will help to maintain the differential between so-called low-end and high-end products.

This differential has been under steady attack from products in the under $1,500 class. The latest attack has been launched by Scitor Corporation with its new Project Scheduler 6. Due for release in September, PS6 builds upon the non-Windows graphical Project Scheduler 5. While the most obvious change is the full implementation of the Windows interface, PS6 also incorporates several advanced features, or capabilities not previously available in a low-end product. Sophisticated calendar support now provides calendars for tasks, resources and relationships (links). PS6's advanced resource tracking spreadsheet provides time-period by time-period resource planning, baselining, and tracking in a spreadsheet mode. An object-oriented report writer allows for totally customizable report design. PS6 provides support for ODBC compliant databases, for enterprise-wide data repository operations. The new Project Scheduler 6 retains the excellent multiproject (group) support and the capability for task summarization by WBS and OBS, and resource summarization by RBS. PS6 now features full outlining by all three of these roll-up structures.

Undo/redo features support what-if scheduling. All traditional views have an associated spreadsheet, which can be modified by the user. PS6 is designed to make full use of the latest Windows capabilities and standard functions and hot-keys. PS6, with full LAN support, will be priced at $695. With the new features and excellent user interface, we can expect PS6 to challenge its low-end colleagues to raise the bar yet another step higher.

And if the features and sophistication of Open Plan 5.0 and Project Scheduler 6 challenge the users to be more knowledgeable and competent, then I think that we in the project management profession are up to the challenge. I, for one, feel that we should push for the best tools that we can get, and then push for our organizations to staff up with fully qualified specialists to use the tools effectively. Anything else would be a waste of time, money and resources. Unfortunately, there is a trend, among the newer firms moving to project management, to underestimate the special skills required to manage projects and to implement effective project planning and control. Hence, they cannot fully appreciate the advantages of strong project management software, nor do they employ personnel to effectively utilize the software.