Alex,
we work at the markets where it is almost impossible to find project planners that are ready to work. We always teach new people from the companies where project management is implemented. And I am sure that it does not depend on the tools that are used. It is not the software trainings - to learn the software is easy. The hard part is PM methodology, software application to the real life, simulating real projects, organizing data, reference-books, norms, approaches to cost analysis, etc.
Several years we prepare several dozens planners in a month and the market is still empty - to have 15 applications for project planner position is a dream.
In any case large companies with several billions per year portfolios (we have many such companies among our customers) train their planners. Each company has its own project management guidelines, databases, fragnets, WBS templates, etc. I repeat - the software training is the easiest part and costs very cheap if to compare with other expenses. Benefits of good planning are much higher than investments.
And again - try to understand that I don’t suggest to buy Spider Project. The same is applicable to Primavera. I just don’t believe that it is possible to find project planners that are ready to work in large organization without special trainings and guidance. Maybe in Australia it is different than in the countries where we are present.

Regards,
Vladimir

Dieter,
I agree with you and never stated anything that contradicts to your views. No project is performed in total agreement with the initial plan and this is why we need planning software - to be able to create new plan very fast.
And we recommend to analyze trends considering them as early warnings of potential problems.
Regards,
Vladimir

Hi Dieter!
The focus on "Does a software fulfil my needs" is perfect and this is what we always recommend to follow.
When I manage some project from the client and contractor perspective the needs are different.
When my task is to determine what resources to move to the remote project site and how to work to be able to finish the project to the specific date I will create the detailed model and will simulate project execution.
An example - Pipeline construction project where there was a need to determine a number of spreads, work direction for different spreads and crews, the number of heavy and expensive excavators, bulldozers, cranes, pipelayers, and other equipment, people of different specialities, where to create welding stations, etc. And be able to go through rice fields at the short time windows that are opened only twice in a year ...
Good model helps a lot.
Once more: I wrote about practice - not theory.
And it is really interesting to discuss the approaches to project scheduling in the corresponding track. Approaches shall not be linked with some special software.


Alex,
Primavera is a good tool. And for many projects its functionality is sufficient.
As I wrote earlier we do not try to take over the Primavera Space in Planning world. Spider is the leading software in Russian speaking countries and we are happy with this because the market here is growing very fast and we have a lot of huge projects that make us very busy. We also have customers around the world who needed the software with advanced functionality. We don’t want to sell Spider to those who will use it the same way they used Primavera or MS Project. We suggest different approaches and different methodology. We will be happy to have such customers who will not use Spider for drawing project schedules.
Some time ago I suggested you to try Spider. It was not an attempt to sell (I am afraid that you considered my proposal only this way) but the suggestion to get acquainted with the functions and features that are not supported by other tools. I have thought that you may be interested in discussing these new and unusual features. So excuse me for small market penetration in Australia, it was never our goal.
Regards,
Vladimir

Hi Vladimir
that is the reason for our different understandings. About 30 years ago I changed from working with the algorithms to Project Management. So my focus is: Does a software fulfil my needs and how to use it effectively. I am sure that you are much better in the theoretical models now.
You wrote: "...by penalties for not following the scheduled order" and "We recommend to require and to control’ an exact activity execution sequence because our mathematical model has indicated this is the ’ideal way’ to execute the project". Maybe I misunderstood this in the way that your schedules are carved in stone.

Let’s have some nice discussions again!

Regards and a nice Sunday
Dieter

I absolutely concur with Dieter.

To add a few points:
- your entire schedule is based on estimates, thus never entirely correct
- precedence relations and their durations are estimates as well
- Soft logic is often inside the activities. If not, you are likely to have a very detailed/prescriptive schedule, which will stifle the entire organisation.

I’ve seen many eager beaver PM’s who thought they could control the world with a mathematical representation of reality. (I’ve been one of them, once)

This is likely to blow up in your face, because the people executing the work are experts and ready to teach you a lesson on their own turf. Far better results have been achieved by giving people ample room to do the best job they can, but strictly within the boundaries of the key milestones in the schedule.

Have a great weekend - and it’s ok to disagree ;-)

Niek,
out of sequence execution can be justified only by risk event. And it is not a dream if supported by penalties for not following the scheduled order. Actually it works if supported by management. And I have an experience of project management in many industries including EPC and software development.
Regards,
Vladimir

I don’t reduce good planning to resource levelling.
Resource levelling usually is a part of good planning. If the model reflects the reality, including soft logic.
We recommend to require and to control’ an exact activity execution sequence because our mathematical model has indicated this is the ’ideal way’ to execute the project.

We use resource loaded (or role loaded schedules) for our larger projects (>$5M), first of all to do a bottom-up verification of our (top-down) estimates, secondly to see if we have the manpower to do the project within the desired time-frame.

Resource leveling is nice from a theoretical perspective but ultimately it’s down to the people executing the work. You can’t ’command and control’ an exact activity execution sequence because some mathematical model has indicated this is the ’ideal way’ to execute the project. (Soft logic is not in the schedule so not taken into consideration)

We sometimes use leveling for keeping very scarce (expensive) resources as busy as possible, but that’s as far as it goes.

H.T.H.

Yes, but not only this.
Did you meet many schedules that were resource loaded and levelled, and activity durations were calculated basing on physical quantities of work to do and assigned crew production rates?

Oliver,
I didn’t try to compare with MSP. Schedules that are created to visualize manual planning - this is the common problem.

Vladimir
There are Powerpoint schedules in Primavera, too, but I don’t agree with most. The planner’s quality is not that bad.
My concern was that with P3e you are forced to work following a structure, in MSP absolutely not.
Regards
Dieter

Dieter,
most users of Primavera also create powerpoint presentation instead of the schedules based on the corporate norms, physical quantities, resource restrictions.
It is a common problem of these tools.
Regards,
Vladimir

Realising that this topic is always down to personal opinion, please allow me to share a few thoughts on Primavera, and make some comparisons with MS Project (as far as that makes sense). Having worked with P3 WIN and P3 Enterprise (currently known as P5) for a decade now, and being an MS Project user since version 1.2 (which was Apple Mac only, because Windows didn’t exist yet) I dare to make some statements that I think people will adhere to. I haven’t really worked with any other products because most of them are insignificant in my industry and to the majority of the Fortune 500 companies we are doing business with.

Over the years, I’ve found Primavera Inc. a very reliable software company, completely dedicated to producing high-quality software, with a profound understanding of project scheduling & cost control landscape. We’ve had a few glitches in the past, and the early versions of P3e were short of features in comparison to P3 WIN (a.k.a. 3.1) but in the end it is safe to conclude that Primavera software never ever really let us down.

As already mentioned by other contributors, Primavera P5 will typically be more appreciated by people working on large projects, where multi-user capabilities, multi-project scheduling, shared resources, and shared responsibilities are a fact of life. On top of that, those who have had a formal education in project management and who understand the value of standardised scheduling (PMI/AACE) terminology/practices, will also find Primavera products a pleasure to work with.

Now, where does it grumble?

Referring to P5 windows client:

The report writer is probably the weakest aspect in P5; it is cumbersome to use and not exactly WYSIWYG. This is really a pity because most people judge a book by it’s cover. A professional report writer, with graphical capabilities, that goes through the application security layers (rather than straight to the DB) will definitely improve the product. What I gather from the P6 announcements, something will come. (although I’m not sure that data replication, for reporting purposes, will always work)

Related to reporting but also to the application itself, is a feature called calculated fields. Currently, you have to use global change with UDF’s to achieve this, however this is error prone because these fields don’t get updated automatically after a change in the schedule.

Global change in P5 is still a bit limited if you compare it to P3.1 and furthermore it would also be nice to have a macro function for repetitive tasks.

The financial period mechanism (added since P5) doesn’t really work in its current form, because it solely relies on snapshot data from the previous period and the cumulative of the current period. This sometimes results in negative EV numbers after a baseline change and other unwanted side effects.

In some rare cases, the grouping mechanism in the assignment view doesn’t allow you to use certain fields. (project codes for instance) in which case you need to find a work-around.

Most the above points however have to do with the functionality, and because the architecture is sound, these issues can be solved relatively easy. The real important part is that it doesn’t grumble when opening 500 projects simultaneously; it doesn’t grumble when scheduling 25,000 activities; and it doesn’t grumble when supporting thousands of concurrent users.

I think that’s the reason why many people (including me) are enthusiastic about Primavera; it’s not perfect but it’s pretty darn good!!

What about myPrimavera?

As far as the web based version / myPrimavera is concerned, I haven’t seen a single reason why anybody would like to use this (except for time tracking). The P6 version may change my mind, because it uses RIA features (for grouping and sorting, for instance) and is therefore probably worth to take a good look at.

What about a comparison with MS Project?

In my mind, comparing P5 with MS Project (Server) is about the same as comparing a Land Rover with a mountain bike – or multiple mountain bikes when talking about MSP Server. Each product serves its own purpose and despite Microsoft’s attempts to bring a single-user desktop application to the enterprise, these products do not cover the same ground. So let’s not compare Primavera with MSP, but look at the core functionality of MS Project itself.

On the surface MS Project looks very simple, and (for instance) the summary task mechanism is very flexible, however it can get you into serious trouble if you don’t use it properly. For instance, you can easily end up with summary tasks in your network, resource assignments to summary tasks, and mutually exclusive combinations if you are using outline codes.

Furthermore MSP sometimes doesn’t always do what it is supposed to do: Earned Value calculations are wrong, it adds (and overwrites) constraints when rescheduling the remaining work, milestones can have a duration and assignments, you can’t insert or delete activities when they are grouped by outline code, etc. etc.

Over the 20 years that I’ve worked with MSP, I don’t find it a very good product to be honest, and certainly not for the novice scheduler. It suggests simplicity but there is a lot of ‘under water’ functionality that has devastating consequences; try “auto-link inserted or moved tasks” for instance. This option is switched on when Project is installed out of the box!

What also annoys me is that Microsoft still seems to be trying to create its own scheduling jargon as it doesn’t follow the common standards defined by ANSI, PMI and AACE. Microsoft is absolutely to blame for diluting our scheduling profession. For instance, it’s an Activity On Node network and not a Task On Node network. A summary task doesn’t exist in ‘real’ scheduling terminology, and segregation between the WBS and the activity network is absolutely essential for a good schedule.

The pity is that if MS Project would perform the basic functions well, it could actually be a very good product. Especially the calculated fields in combination with indicators, and the possibility to add VBA programs could make an extremely powerful tool. But the mere fact that I simply can’t rely on the output and that it crashed under my hands (destroying hours of work) so may times makes it a Mickey Mouse tool.

I.M.(maybe not so) H.O.

I believe there is no PERFECT planning tool.
We all try to use the best tool for the job.
Power project is very popular on UK construction projects because;
1. When first released it was VERY simple to use
2. Most UK construction project plans are not fully resourced with either labour or cost.
3. It produces 1st quality presentation output.

Primavera in all its forms is a far better "number crunching" tool. I would say that some of the better functions in P3 have been sacrificed in the move to the Enterprise format of P5.


I my mind the best software is one that schedules the project data robustly and produces output in a user friendly format. We can produce the best programmes ever as planners, but if their message cannot be conveyed to end users (The Managers) then they are of little value.

Oliver,

Absolutely I agree, P5 , MSP, is superior tool and P3 now becoming imperior and will soon obsolete

I am afraid that my point was not understood. Nobody objects to the fact that most members of PP for some reasons (client requirement as one of them) use Primavera.
But:
1. The statement that Primavera is superior means that you tried all other products including Powerproject (as I understood this product successfully competes with Primavera in GB) and Spider Project (market leader in Russian speaking countries).
2. Comparing different products you shall define the criteria.
3. The requirements to the software are defined by the projects requirements. Advanced features necessary for some projects are not useful for others. So people choose the software that best fits to their needs. Even MS Project may be considered as the best tool for some kind of projects.
Regards,
Vladimir

Ulysses

What would you prefer to use then

Alex,
I agree that Primavera is wide spread and that this product marketing is superior.
If you agree that other products can do more and are more functional then there are no contradictions between our oppinions.
Regards,
Vladimir

Alex, you wrote:
"Yes there are limitations, but compare to its competitors, Primavera is far superior and far more users."
It is obvious that Primavera is most popular among PP members. But the statement that Primavera is far superior has no ground. It is just your oppinion that is not based on the knowledge.
Regards,
Vladimir

Vladimir

I am try to as objective as I can be but Primavera without double is the leader in this industry. Although you might think otherwise but the fact is overwheaming.

Alex

Forgot to mention, its all down to personal opinion to.......

Sorry, Alex.
You have made a statement that was not proved.
You have no rights for such statement since you don’t know other software.
Best Regards,
Vladimir

Vladimir makes a good point.

Alex,
add "in my country" to your last sentence.
Regards.
Vladimir

Its a very old link. need to spend some time what kirby has written, might be of some use.

Need to check advantages of P6 also over previous versions. Available on www.primavera.com

http://www.planningplanet.com/forum/forum_post.asp?fid=&Cat=11&Top=3061

:-(