Many thanks to everyone who responded to my request for comments on the
relative merits of project management software. I had more than a dozen
replies with a fair measure of agreement - enough at least to encourage us
to proceed with MS Project. People had experience in a variety of contexts,
mainly IT-related projects, but also library building projects and other
research projects.
No-one had any substantial negative comments on this product, although some
people felt they did not get the maximum benefit from it because of
insufficient training or infrequent use, a few suggested that sensible use
of a spreadsheet (eg Excel) might achieve almost the same benefits. Several
people had become completely converted to the use of PM software as a
result, such was their enthusiasm - but this was often on the basis of
having only tried one product. Another person felt that PM software was
more useful / necessary for projects involving a team, rather than those
largely carried out by an individual. Someone made the obvious (but often
forgotten) point that the software is not a substitute for project
management training.
Two references were offered for those who wish to read further:
Lewis, Ainsley C. The use of PRINCE project management methodology in
choosing a new library system at the University of Wales Bangor. Program,
29 (3) July 1995, 231-240 (MS project was used here)
Eagleton, Michael. Taken to task [Group test: Project Management Software]
Personal Computer World, May 1966, pp166-170, 172, 174, 176, 179, 181-2,
185-6, 188-190, 193, 195 (MS Project scores gets a "Highly commended" in
the low-end packages, CA Superproject 4.0 is the Editor's choice)
********************************
Sheila Corrall
University Librarian
Whiteknights
PO Box 223
Reading
RG6 6AE
Tel 01734 318772
Fax 01734 316636
E-mail [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|