 |
 |
Hiya, > --What project management software are you using? Semantic MediaWiki, xSiteable > --What made you choose the system? Most project management software is written by geeks, not for humans. They all propose some methodology to go with their model, but either their model is inflexible (and crashing with yours), or it is so flexible that any tool might do the trick. Also, they are notoriously hard to configure on a cumulative scale of the people involved. Also, people hate putting in their data, so most software, even if they might just do the trick, fails for human reasons. So, a simple wiki with some added ontology cruff, and xSiteable delivering semantics and widgets across all people is enough. Simple todo's beat complex task management every time. > --Has the system met all of your needs? If not, where does it fail? It only fails when we need average to higher degree of data, again, a human problem. Oh, and it sometimes fails because the MediaWiki GUI sucks for non-geeks. I think Confluence is better and overal pretty good. > --Overall opinions? I could write you a sonnett or two, but I have very little trust in software helping much in project management (after having tried them all over a span of 20 years). A joint platform for documentation (and for heavens' sake, choose a Wiki that has a usable interface!) In fact, you'd be *far* better off getting "Making stuff happen" by Scott Berkun ( http://www.amazon.com/dp/0596517718?tag=scottberkunco-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0596517718&adid=1B6JF6HWHDT0S5RYZNNM), the best book I ever got. Honest, I'm not affiliated. :) > --What systems did you evaluate and decide not to recommend? Hmm, I think I've tried too many. I'm sure there's software out there that doesn't suck (ie. I hear good things about a few here and there), but far too often do I see this usability parred with human engagement problem crop up and ruin the best of software packages. > Any information would be great! Sorry to be so glum. I'm more happy with simpler approaches such as "project on a page" (ie. one Wiki page with short description, people, contacts, goals, and progress) and more agile ways of dealing with requirements and development (reduces the need for approved paper, easier to roll back bad decisions, etc.). The closest I get to a Gant chart is that one of our vendors insists on sending me one every now and then, despite that he has to come into the office and explain it to people every single time. In other words; use software to document and drive forward, never use software to measure progress and estimates. Regards, Alex (disgruntled ex-beliver in project management software)