OpenText Project and portfolio Management Reviews

Many are impressed by OpenText Project and portfolio Management's functionality, finding it transforms time and effort management significantly. Although the overall impact is undetermined, there is hope for accelerated delivery. The deployment phase continues, with long-term benefits anticipated once fully integrated.

OpenText Project and Portfolio Management is perceived as costly, though some find it comparable with competitors. Pricing is transparent, with SaaS models requiring annual subscriptions and on-prem solutions using perpetual licensing. Concerns include high initial license costs, complex third-party licensing management, unexpected support fee increases, and some resistance to the base fee in the SaaS model. Larger organizations may find it more affordable than smaller companies, with no hidden fees in the pricing structure.

• "There is an additional cost for product support"
• "A large organization will find Micro Focus PPM affordable, but it may be a bit costly for a small or medium-sized company. The license is based on the number of users."
• "We have an annual license, and it is fairly priced in comparison to that of other solutions."

Organizations use OpenText Project and Portfolio Management for resource planning, project and program management, demand management, and time tracking. It aids in managing project delivery, control, governance, and prioritization. Users implement various modules like demand, resource, and financial management. It supports visibility and transparency in project delivery, shifting trends toward Lean Portfolio Management, and provides tools for provisioning, configuring requests, workflows, and customizations to meet organizational requirements.

Customer service for OpenText Project and Portfolio Management is regarded as responsive, with mixed experiences reported. Some rate technical support positively for prompt responses, while others face delays and communication issues. Scores vary, averaging between 5 and 9 out of 10. While certain users express dissatisfaction with issue resolution, others appreciate the vendor's focus on updates and enhancements. Satisfaction depends on whether support is from the vendor or third-party integrators.

Initial setup of OpenText Project and portfolio Management ranges from straightforward to complex. Some organizations find it easy and quick, while others experience challenges due to organizational maturity, unique customer requirements, or financial complexities. Configuration and consulting are often necessary. Timeframes differ, with some implementations taking weeks, others months. Migration from older systems adds complexity. Despite challenges, adequate vendor support and customizable deployment options aid in managing the setup process effectively.

OpenText Project and Portfolio Management impresses with its scalability, accommodating thousands of users seamlessly. Organizations reported no issues, effortlessly expanding from small to large user bases. The platform adapts to various needs, supporting extensive project management and timesheet functionalities. Users also appreciate its infrastructure guidelines, although some note the slow integration of enhancements. Portfolio management and resource features continually evolve, catering to growing demands and ensuring a smooth transition from on-premises to cloud-based solutions.

OpenText Project and portfolio Management is perceived as stable by many, with several noting no issues. Some experience stability problems, especially with resource management after certain versions. Transitions from Unix to Windows improved stability for some, while others report the need for continuous fixes and updates. Infrastructure demands are noted. Resource-heavy environments can lead to periodic performance degradation. Issues with defects and patch delays occasionally arise, indicating room for improvement despite generally positive feedback.