Consultants' Advisory Home Page Consultants' Advisory Home Page Reports Archive Register(Free) for the Online or Printed version of Consultants' Advisory

Business & software reviews
visit evaluationcentre.com

The Evaluation Centre's aim is to be the No.1 Software and technology assistant to decision makers with their IT requirements. Providing detailed Vendor reports, White papers, Case studies and Best practice guidelines

   

Home > 2004 > Enterprise Project Management & PSA (May) > Market Overview - Part 2

You are not signed in to view the full issue > Sign In

Summary of Reports


 Artemis International

 Epicor Software

 IFS

 SharpOWL

 Tx3 Solutions



Management Briefings



 Market Overview | Part 2 | Part 3

 Round Table: Experts from Aberdeen Group, Ovum, Atos KPMG Consulting and Z/Yen | Part 2 | Part 3

 Benchmarking: Tony Kippenberger from the Centre for Strategic Business Studies | Part 2

 Expert Opinion: Kelvin Kirby of Technology Associates

 Software Capabilities: HKL’s Jonathan Hirons | Part 2

 Case Study: How IT specialist Touchpaper automated its consultancy division | Part 2

 Market Direction: Gareth Lewis of Pserendipity | Part 2

 Project Delivery: Janice Southway at Boxwood | Part 2

 Market News: All the latest news from the UK and global consultancy industry | Part 2

 Annual Consultants' Forum | Part 2

 Industry Report | Part 2

 Vendor Choice: George Elkington of Deloitte

Issue Summary

The adoption of enterprise project management and professional services automation software is patchy, according to our latest research. Pat Sweet finds out why.

Uphill battle - Part 2 | Part 1 | Part 3

But looking at how the software works in more detail, there is clearly scope for improvement. For example, 60% claim their current tools support consolidated views across projects, which is vital if a company is to be able to accurately analyse staffing and skill requirements by taking a strategic view of what is going on.

However, half of the sample concede that it is either ‘difficult’ (36%) or ‘very difficult’ (18%) for their organisation to manage a portfolio of inter-dependent projects using their current software (see Figure 2).

Read the rest of this article...

If you are not registered with the site, please register now to read the rest of this page.

If you are registered, please sign in to read the rest of this page.


Home > 2004 > Enterprise Project Management & PSA (May) > Market Overview - Part 2