Multi Projects

[DavidC]

Hi,

I have a project that consists now of four 'sub projects'. The PM now wants
the leads for each of their own disciplines to take control over the plan and
activities that relate to them, hence the reference to four 'sub projects'.
They want to use a resource pool, but I suspect that the requirement will be
for each of the sub projects to be opened independently of each other and
possibly edited, and the overall master could also be opened and edited.
Using Master/submasters if the master file is opened with read/write it will
'lock' out all other users, if it is opened with read only then it cannot be
edited. Looking at the server option seems that it allows users to manage
their own individual tasks rather than a project comprising tasks resourced
by others, within the main project.

I am open to ideas and suggestions as to whether I should be perservering
with setting up a Project Server version or using the master/submaster
system, or simply retain the project as one overall file and use views to
access the relevant data. Each seems to have their own pros and cons.

Thoughts and ideas much appreciated.

Regards

DavidC

 

[Jan De Messemaeker]

Hi,

There's one thing inyour memo that I want to comment on:

(Quote)

Looking at the server option seems that it allows users to manage
their own individual tasks rather than a project comprising tasks resourced
by others, within the main project.

(end of quote)

Users don't manage tasks, they have the possibility to enter actual work
data into the server but it is stiill the project owner who decides to
introduce them into his Project file or not. The rules for one updater at
the time still fully apply.
Server can do many things but it doesn't solve even the beginning of this
multi-user-open problem.

For the size of the problem you are dealing with I fullheartedly recommend
the 4 files plus pool approach. Anw why would anybody edit the master while
the PMs are working on their files?
Who owns the plan data? In most organisations that is the PM.

Hope this helps,

 

[DavidC]

Jan,

Thanks for your response.

Agree my wording was not as accurate as it should be, and you have confirmed
my understanding of server.

In regards to 'ownership' of the plan. This is the complication. The
Project manager for the overall project wants the Project manager's for the
individual projects comprising the overall project to have ownership of their
plan.

The issue is though that the PM overall also has some tasks to monitor.
Thinking it through from your comments then it seems logical to make the
overall PM's task a separate file again and then make the master only that
with no other tasks at all.

It is really helpful to get other thoughts and ideas as I certainly find
that I can get into a particular thought train and find I need some lateral
thinking from outside to break the paradigm.

Thanks again Jan.

 

[Jan De Messemaeker]

Hi,

Very clear comments!