4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Nov 30, 2016
This implementation was challenging, yet well worth the time spent into making it happen. CA partnered with us as well as a 3rd party premier partner of CA's. Combining their expertise with ours, we are much more ahead of the game and prepared to face future upgrades head on.
The roadmap for releasing new products is difficult to adopt, especally for larger organizations.
More involvement with developing testing plans and integration.
More thorough testing would need to occur. We tested on VM's as opposed to real-life scenarios with actual physical devices.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 16, 2016
mixed tool. Takes in a lot of data but only gives very limited information in terms of reports
reporting is very complex. plan ahead. Ensure that you have Jaspersoft installed. Everything is customized and costs a lot of money to configure. Make sure you have CLEAR REPORTING requirements prior to deployment.
Once the product is in place we do see benefit...but it is a Looooong drag to get there.
It will be interesting to see how this product scales into the Enterprise. Currently we have only deployed this to the IT organization. Initial reviews by the business has been very spotty in terms of the amount of time and overhead it takes to deploy this solution.
waited till we had jaspersoft. Training and Change Management was another area we had done differently.
go with cloud. There is definitely a lot of benefit with cloud vs on premise
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Sep 22, 2016
The product is excellent but requires ongoing investment, user training, and support as well as strong data governance. It also only valuable if fundamental PMO processes are in place prior to implementation and deployment.
Have had minimal issues that required direct CA support
Need very skilled and knowledgeable resources and they are typically not cheap
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Jun 8, 2016
CA was able to adjust to the level of knowledge presented by the State. This was critical to understand the difference between then and now. "Knowledge is power" and the ability to provide detailed requirements at the onset kept costs from being difficult to manage.
Have a solid vision of the outcome (reports) you expect.
Providing our initial stop light report we are pleased at the professional look and feel.
Too early to tell.
Vendor should not switch to a lesser level of support services when moved into production. The sense of "learning on our dime" is problematic for the team.
I believe we would have involved more of the PMO staff in the development of the detailed requirements. The lack of the involvement by the portfolio process owner was a mis-step.
Costs and readiness (on customer side) prevented integration. Entries are made manually.
2 out of 5.0, Reviewed Jun 6, 2016
The promises never delivered; implementation was not appropriate for our organization; assumptions were made and deployed without buy-in. Product never met the need, too complex, did not get the support needed to overcome the change.
Make sure that you have dedicated, knowledgeable staff to work with the vendor and get buy-in from Executive Sponsor and stakeholders to make the investment of time to define the process that the tool will help to manage. There was the misconception that the tool would do the job of a PMO, and the vendor did not dispute that.
It's the Cadillac of PPM tools and has the most impressive features and functionality and GUI.
Too complex - it's a Cadillac when all that was really needed was a utility vehicle.
Escalated and advised they could not proceed without executive buy-in and in-house knowledgable staff to guide them in designing the solution.
Would never have implemented without total buy-in from the organization. They left it to CA to put the tool in without first defining supportive processes. We have since implemented a PMO and have staff Project Managers that would be better positioned to gain stakeholder and sponsor buy-in. The vendor should have escalated to upper management rather than deploy a tool that was not supported.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed May 11, 2016
Pros: Product is very flexible, feature rich and easily configurable Cons: UX is very outdated (but functional), lacks support of data load using excel/csv (only option available is XML)
Interview number of implementation partners before making your final decision and do detailed reference checks for the implementation partners.
UX is very outdated.
Will bundle the implementation and licensing cost together in the procurement process.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed May 11, 2016
Product is customizable for our process flows and the vendor is responsive to cases when opened. We only use a small portion of the product's features, but hope to expand in the future.
Ability to customize for our processes.
The need to write code to produce a report or set up some processes.
Simplify the GEL scripts and reporting by using Wizards rather than needing to write code.
Increase knowledge of the underlying software prior to implementation - .NET, NSQL, etc. - or include additional SME on the project team.
Support purchased through third party (small business).