PROJECT PLANNING/MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW - SECTION SUMMARY

SECTION: Project Proposal Management

Copyright (c) 2000 Jim Salmons and Frank Castellucci
All Rights Reserved

Associated project: "Specification Writing for Web-based
		    Project Planning Software" (sXc ID: 24)

Project URL: http://sohodojo.com/techsig/project-planning-project.html

sXc Project detail: http://sourcexchange.com/ProjectDetail?projectID=24

Project coordination: SourceXchange

Sponsors: Opendesk.com and Collab.Net

Core Team: Jim Salmons and Frank Castellucci


1 Introduction

	This document aggregates the feature and underlying model analyses of
comparable products and services in the domain of the project specification
requirements. During the comparables analysis phase, nine product and service
offerings were examined.

1.1 Format and Key to Abbreviations

	Each of fourteen sections of the Comparables Analysis Data Capture
Outline has a Section Summary file such as this one. Section 1 of each data
collection form is an Introduction statement explaining the project and the
assessment. Section 16 is a reviewer profile. Since all data was produced by the
core project team members, section 16 does not have a summary section.
	
	In a Section Summary file, we aggregate the analysis data within each
subsection of the raw data collection forms. Each data point from the raw
assessment outlines is presented in the following alphabetical order and
prefixed with the following identifying abbreviations:
	
	EN - Enact Enterprise System 4.2 by Netmosphere/CriticalPath
	EP - eProject Express by eProject.com, Inc.
	FT - FastTrack Schedule 6.04 by AEC Software Inc.
	MP - ManagePro 4.0 by Performance Solutions Technology LLC
	MS - MS Project 2000 by Microsoft Corporation
	OD - Opendesk.com by HBE Software
	SF - SourceForge by SourceForge (VA Linux)
	WP - WebProject by Novient
	XC - X-Community by X Collaboration Software Corp.

	The aggregated section data in each Section Summary file is the last
section of the file. In addition to the aggregated data, each summary file has
an optional section for the capture of summary insights or comments.

1.2 Section Summary Insights and/or Comments


====== SECTION SUMMARY DATA ======


8 Project Proposal Management

8.1 Vision/Goals specification

** EN **
	Does not address this function.

** EP **
	Does not address this function.

** FT **
	Does not address this function.

** MP **
	Since Projects map to collections of Goal/Subgoal elements, there is a
kind of 'de facto' tight coupling between project structure and goals. Extended
and configurable description fields along with Note and file attachments mean
that ManagePro's database can capture the data for and map to Project Proposals.
ManagePro has a flexible and highly-configurable Reporting subsystem that allows
dynamic document generation.
	
	The reviewer has developed custom configurations for real projects where
project proposals and similar complex documents were generated directly from
ManagePro databases using the powerful Report definition and generation features
within ManagePro. These reports can often be dumped directly to a printer, or
they may be written to files or to a desktop window where they can be captured
for further editing.

** MS **
	Functionality not supported in tool.

** OD **
	Functionality not supported.

** SF **
	User defined, not a feature supported by the system.

** WP **
	WebProject supports creating a project proposal which must be met with
approval before the project plan for it can be opened.

** XC **
	The Whiteboard/Notecard architecture is deceptively powerful. While
there is not explicit support for project proposal development, the general
feature of the 'Information Unit' model is sufficiently flexible and powerful
(in terms of easy version control) that is could be used early in a project
during its proposal development.


8.2 Business Processing Rules

** EN **
	Does not address this function.

** EP **
	Does not address this function.

** FT **
	Does not address this function.

** MP **
	Yes, but they are optional. ManagePro has a broad underlying
architecture which supports a performance measurement, appraisal and personnel
development system.
	
	Managers can develop complex measurement, appraisal and development
plans all within ManagePro. Manager-specific views help collect extensive
historical performance-oriented data from within the goal-oriented project data.
Formal and informal appraisal exchanges and feedback/recognition communications
are supported.
	
	Used in the extreme, ManagePro represents a broad, explicit Personnel
Management business model. ManagePro has a 'Management Style' configuration
setting which determines the extent that these non-project-goal-specific
management features are included in the Person/User's user interface.

** MS **
	Functionality not supported in tool.

** OD **
	Functionality not supported.

** SF **
	User defined, not a feature supported by the system.

** WP **
	When preparing the WebProject server for use, the administrator
configures the Project Approval list, which contains the e-mail address of all
those who's approval is required to accept a proposal as a project. When a
project proposal is made, the members of the list are notified by e-mail and
they can then approve or reject a project proposal.

** XC **
	Not explicitly.



8.3 Implementation Specific Rules

** EN **
	Does not address this function.

** EP **
	Does not address this function.

** FT **
	Does not address this function.

** MP **
	As stated above, ManagePro is highly configurable to support personnel
development and management dimensions beyond the basic project-definition and
work-assignment features. These customized configurations apply to all data in a
specific database. In the User maintains data for many projects within a single
aggregating database, all projects within that database will be subject to the
same set of business rule/process configurations.
	
	If implementation-specific rules are required, the User would create and
use a separate database.

** MS **
	Functionality not supported in tool.

** OD **
	Functionality not supported.

** SF **
	Not applicable.

** WP **
	There is no enforcement to configure an approval list. In this case, the
user that makes the proposal can accept it automatically and create a project
plan.

** XC **
	Not explicitly.


8.4 Reviewer Comments

** EN **
	None

** EP **
	None

** FT **
	None

** MP **
	None

** MS **
	None

** OD **
	None

** SF **
	None

** WP **
	This is really the only major nod to software development life cycle
(SDLC) methodology that is included in WebProject.

** XC **



DOCUMENT HISTORY

Version 0.9 - Draft
Version 1.0 - Final
 
### end of sxc24-02sect-comparables.txt (Version 1.0) ###