multi-department/institutional considerations for Project Server (andPortfolio) 2007

[anovak]

We are about to configure Project Server (and Portfolio Server as
well) for our central IT department. We are one of 4 institutions
under a "System" umbrella.

It isn't certain whether or not use of EPM will go beyond even our
department to other departments within our own institution much less
multiple institutions.

Given that we will focusing first on a single department, from an
outline code standpoint (especially the hierarchical ones) and others,
would it be simpler to just go down our own road for now and modify
the custom fields later to accommodate other departments/
institutions? I imagine it would be more about adding levels above
and alongside the departmental model (RBS, "Performer" code, etc.).

I'd hate to go to the nth degree now (making it more complicated out
the gate) only to find that the expansion won't happen.

Also, I assume you wouldn't necessarily need an all-encompassing top
level (system level) entity. That is, departments or institutions
could be defined as "peer" branches that don't all roll up to a higher
level.

Please comment on both Project Server and Portfolio Server.

Thanks,
Andy Novak
UNT

 

[Paul Conroy]

It's not uncommon for different departments/institutions to have different
requirement for Custom Ent. Fields ie (strategic drivers, project sponsors
etc). If it's acceptable for this information to be visible across depts and
for users to select the data which is relevant then using a single instance
of Portfolio and Project Server is fine.

Another approach would be to implement seperate an instance of Project
Server for each dept/institution and have them all roll up into one instance
of Portfolio Server which can then report across the entire portfolio.

HTH

Paul

 

[Gary L. Chefetz [MVP]]

Andy:

You need to do the requirements work in all of the groups to make an
intelligent decision. A general rule of thumb is that if the organizations
do not share resources, and are not simply geographic representations of
groups doing the same work, then their requirements are likely to be
substantially different and will be better served with their own instance.

--

Gary L. Chefetz, MVP
MSProjectExperts
For Project Server Consulting: http://www.msprojectexperts.com
For Project Server FAQS: http://www.projectserverexperts.com

 

[anovak]

Andy:

You need to do the requirements work in all of the groups to make an
intelligent decision. A general rule of thumb is that if the organizations
do not share resources, and are not simply geographic representations of
groups doing the same work, then their requirements are likely to be
substantially different and will be better served with their own instance.

--

Gary L. Chefetz, MVP
MSProjectExperts
For Project Server Consulting:http://www.msprojectexperts.com
For Project Server FAQS:http://www.projectserverexperts.com

I guess what I'm asking is whether or not it would be technically
possible (from an EPM system standpoint) to just start with our
department now, and then mod the codes if need be if this initiative
expands (assuming sharing of resources in the long term but not now-we
are pioneering the effort which may spark interest in other
departments later).

As in:

IT
Director 1
Director 2
Group 1
Group 2
Team Member 1
Team Member 2


then it becomes later


Institution
Vice President 1
Department 1
Team 1
Team 2
Department 2
Vice President 2
IT
Director 1
Director 2
Group 1
Group 2
Team Member 1
Team Member 2