Based upon our experiences with projects using various PPM tools, we took the liberty of comparing two project portfolio management heavyweights, namely CA Clarity PPM v12 and HP PPM Center 7.5.

When it comes to project controlling and project management, CA Clarity PPM and HP PPM offer the traditional multi-project and project management functions as a complement to tools such as MS Project or in standalone mode. Open and flexible interfaces to peripheral systems as well as additional standard interfaces to project management systems established on the market, such as Microsoft Project, are included in both products.

Support for project planning and project prioritization for an innovation process that is superordinate to the projects is provided in the tools as a standard feature and best practice processes for it are included.

Both manufacturers offer a workflow engine with which these processes can be converted into digitized workflows corresponding to the requirements. The workflow engine interfaces for administrators are quite different at the first glance. Defining workflows initially seems simpler in HP PPM because the individual steps are arranged graphically on the screen and then, similar as with CA Clarity PPM, they have to be defined in detail. The user’s view of the workflow to graphically depict where the workflow is located in the process is more appealing in HP PPM.

Generally, the CA Clarity PPM’s user interface is more contemporary. In order to use the drill-down feature from the Clarity PPM dashboard graphics, one must first install the Adobe SVG Viewer that is available free of charge; this is not necessary for HP PPM.

Both products offer dashboard functionalities with drill-down capability based on portlet technologies and largely adjustable interfaces. In this way, both products can be completely customized and expanded to one’s own needs and preferred usage.

In addition, both products offer functionalities that, in addition to tactically provided budgets and resource allotments, also allow a strategic alignment to higher-level business objectives.

Here is where the actual approach-related differences emerge in regard to supporting accompanying business processes such as resource, time, and financial management as well as comprehensive innovation management within the company.

CA Clarity PPM v12

CA Clarity PPM offers functionalities from idea-related decision-making to prioritization and analysis, taking into consideration existing resource allocations and a diverse range of budgetary perspectives. In the tool itself, one can carry out both strategic as well as tactical planning, including execution and controlling management for single or multiple projects, in a flexible manner.

The modular setup of the functional components allows the system to be optimally fitted to an organization’s level of maturity in terms of project planning and management. Extensive functions for graphic workflows, collaboration, and document management round off the tool’s functionality.

CA Clarity Dashboard

CA Clarity PPM offers standard interfaces to:

• Microsoft Project, OWB (Open WorkBench)
• CA Unicenter Service Desk, CA Software Change Manager, and CA Unicenter Asset Portfolio Management

Features and requirements that favor using CA Clarity PPM

• Detailed cost control by defining cost plans
• Scenarios at project- and department-levels pertaining to resources and working with cost plan variants
• Supplier management functions
• Direct charging and billing (internally and externally) for projects stemming from a single point of control application
• Portfolio-related scenario staging based on various cost-benefit plans in addition to resource requirements
• Parent / child relationships for master and department portfolios and organizational structure-related portfolios/programs
• Integratability into existing CA products

HP PPM Center 7.5

HP PPMC also offers functions to strategically analyze and tactically plan future projects. In doing so, HP PPM places greater emphasis on project controlling aspects to manage the project portfolio of an individual business unit.

The functions pertaining to supplier, resource, time, and especially financial management are limited. If necessary, these can be covered by the integration of third-party solutions on hand in the company.

By means of an integration platform, the HP PPM product is easily integrated into the HP BTO software portfolio. Interfaces allow one to deploy HP Quality Center and HP uCMDB for example directly from the workflows.

HP PPM dashboard

HP PPM V7.5 offers standard interfaces to:

• Microsoft Project
• HP Service Manager (HP SM), HP Universal CMDB (HP uCMDB), and HP Quality Center (HP QC)
• SAP CTS (SAP Change and Transport Management)

Features and requirements that favor using HP PPM

• Portfolio management field exclusively in the focus of an (IT) organizational department
• Use of “leading” human resource, financial, and controlling peripheral systems
• No planned enterprise portfolio management (EPM) activities
• No billing for projects stemming from the PPM system, but stemming from the “leading” financial application
• Integratability into existing HP BTO products
• Existing use of HP PPM as the application deployment system, e.g., Oracle Applications, SAP, and Peoplesoft, as well as the need for interfaces to these

Clarity PPM vs. HP PPM Comparison

Generally, CA Clarity PPM and HP PPM are suited for use as project portfolio management solutions. Business-related factors or a preference for a given manufacturer therefore play an important role in the decision. Nevertheless, one of the two solutions can be objectively favored based on a company’s detailed requirements.

• Requirements for a comprehensive portfolio management tool, including integrated aspects such as financial and resource planning, as well as company-wide deployment are arguments for CA Clarity PPM.
• Requirements for a project portfolio management tool for project controlling within a department or company-wide, then integrated into leading financial, resource, and planning tools make HP PPM a viable alternative.

Actual practice has shown that one can work successfully with both tools. Successful implementation of a software-based PPM solution depends less on the individual strengths and weaknesses of the PPM software, and more on how the workflows of the individual organizations are depicted, how the applications are integrated into the environment, and what implementation approach is selected.

HP Service Manager is used to administer and process tickets within the framework of IT Service Management. The Service Manager adheres to ITIL V3. Various modules are used, such as incident, problem, change, etc. With the ESS (Employee Self Service) Web control surface, end users can issue their own interaction tickets, which a support technician can then use to open an incident. If no solution is found, the  Service Desk can transfer incidents and interaction tickets as well as track problems and changes.

HP Service Manager shows limits with Change Management

Simplified workflows are certainly possible with Service Manager. However if comprehensive Change Management is in operation, requirements exceed conventional ITIL functionalities. The administration of all relevant objects is of utmost importance. Information about infrastructure as well as about organizational (organizational units, roles, security aspects, etc.), technical (programs, change requests, transactions, etc.), and descriptive (documentation, concepts, test cases, etc.) objects – and their relationships – should be represented. This is beyond the scope of HP Service Manager. As soon as requirements increase and greater flexibility is needed, a tool such as the HP Project and Portfolio Management Center (PPM) is necessary. PPM provides extremely powerful workflow controls with a variety interfaces to additional tools and to the Service Manager. In addition, PPM allows control of any number of commands to be performed and external Web services to be controlled. This allows for example control of SAP transports, administration of Quality Center (QC) requirements and defects as well as an additional configuration database, such as HP UCMDB, to be updated. Compared to more technically mature PPM workflow controls, Service Manager demonstrates significant weaknesses in flexible administration and process configuration.

By integrating the change process into PPM, a change request issued in the Service Manager – in which no longer just the Service Desk but also other teams, tools, and processes are integrated and a broad range of decisions for controlling the change process are required – can be transferred to PPM. Because processes in PPM can be better and more flexibly modeled, the change process is completely administered through PPM. A change ticket in the Service Manager still receives only the requested status updates so that the Service Desk knows for example that a development has been launched or that a change is being tested and nearly complete. Users are continuously informed of status.

Integration change process: PPM-Service Manager

Integration with HP PPM

Through a PPM add-on called MAC (Managing Application Change), integration of different tools is possible. Necessary Java classes and configuration examples are provided during installation. All communication between PPM and Service Manager is based on the Web service interface in the Service Manager.

First of all, the Web service for the requested module must be configured in the Service Manager, in our case Change Management. When all necessary fields as well as any number fields and functions are available through the Web service, the Java stub for PPM can be produced from the Service Manager WSDL file. Through this stub, PPM can communicate with the Service Manager. Of course it is also possible to access the Service Manager from PPM or any other Web service.

At a determined interval, PPM searches the Service Manager to determine is a new change has been opened. This change is then fetched and opened in PPM as a new request. It is also possible to send status updates to the Service Manager, thereby informing the Service Desk about the progress of the process. When the process is complete, the same interface is used to send the message back to the Service Manager and close the change.

Conclusion

Service Manager workflow controls are not sufficient for implementing and automating a comprehensive change process from start to finish, for example test management in QC, expanded configuration management in the uCMDB, or transport administration in SAP.  However the possibilities are open upon integration of the change process into PPM. Configuration necessary to integrate the tools is nonetheless somewhat complex: the stub must by newly constructed as soon as the configuration of the Web service has been changed, mapping of fields takes place through JavaScript code and without a configuration control surface, time formats must be correctly converted, files must be repeatedly deleted, a small mistake results in the entire integration not functioning … In summary, integration appears to remain rather underdeveloped, and experience is necessary to achieve successful and efficient implementation.

However, when integration runs as desired, and all fields are correctly copied and converted, its usefulness is enormous. The most diverse processes are thoroughly integrated: from issuing tickets by end users and development to testing and deployment. This also includes dashboards, notifications, and reports that can be flexibly and process- as well as project-comprehensive generated, administered, and customized. Every participant stays informed, and changes to systems are controlled and thus implemented with lower  risk.

The most recent Forrester Wave (Q3 2008) examined the six biggest developers of functional testing solutions. Based on the current offer and the strategy regarding the direction the corresponding [...] Continue Reading…

Security is especially important in online applications, yet far too little attention is paid to it. Perform a quick risk assessment just prior to implementation, jerry-rig a plug for [...] Continue Reading…

The new Version 10 of the HP Quality Center (QC) is now available. Yet what are the actual advantages of the new QC compared to its predecessor from a [...] Continue Reading…

The new concept of the Enhancement Packages (EhPs) from SAP is ingenious from a technical perspective. It’s actually too bad that SAP, the supplier par excellence for business software, [...] Continue Reading…

A Gallup poll from last year in German companies shows: 67 percent of employees make work to rule. Cause was the lack of leadership culture, of real self-evident characteristics [...] Continue Reading…

HP PPM in combination with beteo’s SAP Change Control Current Practice can help SAP customers to reduce cost and risk the SAP change process.

This article summarizes the potential benefits, [...] Continue Reading…

Testing departments use HP Quality Center (QC) for quality management and testing activities. Besides managing test requirements, it also helps them to compile test plans, and to conduct and [...] Continue Reading…

In a highly interesting and descriptive blog posting on the SAP Community Network, Tao Zhang, who works for Benteler Group, discusses the SAP consolidation process. His article focuses on [...] Continue Reading…