blogs.msdn.com/brismith ppmblog.org
TRANSCRIPT
Anaheim, CA | February 2-5, 2014
Peter KestenholzCEOProjectum
Project Worst Practise – Learning from other people mistakes (PC310)Brian SmithSenior Support EngineerMicrosoft
Ian WhiteArea SpecialistMicrosoft
PC310
• Introduction• Structure• Worst Practises:• Technical• Deployment• Organisational
• Q&A• Other Sessions• Close
AGENDA
Introduction
Photo-graphyWalking
11 years with
Microsoft
Attended every Project Conference
Delivered sessions at almost all
Brian Smith 9+ years
in support
blogs.msdn.com/brismith
ABOUT ME
Microsoft
CEO and Founder
Projectum
11 years with
Microsoft Project
M.A. Innovation and ChangeDegree in Business
Administration
Various executive programsHarvard, USA
Hong Kong University, ChinaCambridge, England
Peter Charquero Kestenholz 50+ PPM
Implementations
ppmblog.org
ABOUT ME
MicrosoftMVP | MCP |
MCTS
uk.linkedin.com/in/ianwhite/
Area Technical
Lead
6 years with
Microsoft Project
Delivered Sessions at SharePoint Conference, Project
Conference & Beyond
From Papertape to Solidstate
Ian White 25 YearsBusiness & IT Consulting
ABOUT ME
MicrosoftWestern Europe
Technical Worse Practises
Technical Worst PracticesDatabase Maintenance – or lack of it…RT*M – or TechNet or books or blogsCustom Fields – How long is a piece of string?Help us to help you – repro steps, logs and timesUn-publishing tasks – use it or lose itPatching – Control the client versions pleasePlanning – should we really need to do any of this?
Database Maintenance – or lack of it…Symptom: Everything is just so SLOOOOOWWWW!Without maintenance, your database does not run as efficiently as it can – it can slow everything in Project Server down
Index DefragmentationIn very active systems we have seen customers benefiting from nightly
maintenance70% fill factor recommended – but not set in our index definitionsWhy does this happen? Index pages get split when adding new dataBut it does get better in 2013!
Updating statisticAsync please
References:http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc973097.aspxhttp://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee662107(v=office.14).aspx
Index fragmentation• Why does it happen?• Inserting new random data tends to lead to split index pages• GUIDs in Project and SharePoint can be somewhat random (more later)
• What can we do?• Set a fill factor when rebuilding indexes (we don’t do this for you…)• Defragment regularly (as required)
• A bit like bookshelves…
GUIDs – changes from 2010 to 2013
RT*M – or TechNet or books or blogsThe worst support cases are those where customers have been struggling for a while before they call us – and the answer was out there all the time…Bookmark TechNet articles, subscribe to blogs, use Bing (other search engines are available)An example from very close to home – an internal e-mail with a subject of “Best Practices on timesheet management on Project Plans” and pretty much asking for guidance paper/blog or article.I gave the subject to Bing…http://www.bing.com/search?q=Best+Practices+on+timesheet+management+on+Project+Plans&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=best+practices+on+timesheet+management+on+project+plans&sc=0-4&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=22329eb211fc4161befd0ed65e96c9c3
Top hit - http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/project-server-help/best-practices-for-submitting-and-reporting-on-actual-work-HA102821971.aspx
Custom Fields – How long is a piece of string?Symptom: Slow save, publish, recalc…We specifically suggest no more than 5 task level formulae CFs, but all additional CFs will slow things down – task and resource level fields usually have more impact than project levelI have a flow diagram for this one…
Do you have lots of custom fields
Perhaps you DB needs some maintenance?
No
Yes Do you need them all?My server is slow
Still slow?
Yes
Yes
Help us to help you – repro steps, logs and times“I’m having a problem with this task?”Pro? PWA? SharePoint? Outlook? Workflow? Or is it an assignment perhaps… or a timesheet line.
The more you can give us – the quicker we can get started helping youWhat makes a good repro?
Detailed steps. Exactly what do you do? Menu? Ribbon? Keyboard shortcut? It can make a difference.Logs (ULS, Application Event, Client-side logs, IIS, SQL as appropriate)For Project Online – Correlation ID, Site Url and time
Un-publishing tasks – use it or lose itSymptom: “I entered some time on this task – but just went to my timesheet and it’s gone!”
See Best practices for submitting and reporting on actual work (Project Server 2010) - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-US/library/hh694531(v=office.14).aspxWhy?
In single entry mode, if you open a timesheet and the task is not in the published DB (Unpublished, resource not committed, plan deleted) then there is an existing timeline for that task – even if it has actual time entered – it will be dropped from the timesheet. Not hidden – but dropped.
Patching – Control the client versions please“All the users who entered time on this project say that their time has disappeared”We have fixed bugs in the client – but if you allow up-patched Project Professional to connect to your Project Server then bad things can happen!
Save for sharing anyone?• 2010 - Server Settings, Additional Server Settings, Project Professional
Versions• 2013 – Central Admin, General Application Settings, PWA Settings,
Manage, (select the right instance), Additional Server Settings, Project Professional Versions
• Project Online – no option for the customer to set thisIn the Cumulative Update release blogs I generally give the versions – be careful with 2013 – this also controls the schedule web part.
Planning – should we really need to do any of this?I think Ian and Peter cover this one…
Deployment Worst Practises
Deployment Worst Practises• Poor User experience• Task constraints everywhere• Master Projects - yes or no?• Poor ODATA performance• Wrong use of RBS*• OLAP cubes – a new game?• Bad client performance• Slow PWA/client performance• Chaos in the client
• The fix• Create an attractive portal• Use simple tools such as PowerPoint• Add “zones” to the images using free tools (http://www.image-maps.com/)
• Deploy to the clean UI to a new PWA front-page• Remember to keep the design in subpages (PDPs, Timesheet etc.)
• Learn more• Watch session webcast [PC261 ]
Problem 1: User experienceSpend the same budget on UI as done with BI
The fix• Milestones and phases
on the same WBS level• Link the phase to the
supporting milestone• Set the phases and
milestones to “Auto Scheduled”• Use baselines to track
changes• Remember to still use
constraints where actually needed
Problem 2: Task constraints everywhereDon’t make the client behave more complex than needed
• The fix• Think of program managers as someone who needs to know what goes
on in specific projects• Not someone who has to change anything in the supporting projects
• Use Project Center to create a temporary master project• Use the new reporting tools to get the insights needed
Problem 3: Master Projects - yes or no?Program Managers think they need a master project
QUICK DEMO
• The fix – Trim your data connection• Use simple tools such as notepad to edit your Odata connection• Add relevant custom and standard fields using simple brackets• Not trimming/using Select* statement pulls all data and slows down refresh performance
dramatically
Blog article from PPMBLOG.ORGhttp://ppmblog.org/2013/05/15/project-online-and-odata-refresh-performance/
Problem 4: It takes minutes before my simple report is refreshed in Online
• The fix• Map you organization hierarchy in your
RBS structure e.g.• Each level is a manager to resource
relationship• Once setup it will show who reports to who• Use a correct RBS to automatically control
access to projects and resources
Blog article (PROJECTSERVEREXPERTS)
• http://www.projectserverexperts.com/ProjectServerFAQKnowledgeBase/rbsprimer.aspx
Problem 5: No control of who can see what The RBS structure is often used to map competencies
Projectum
Denmark
Consulting
Developme
nt
Sweden
Consulting
Developme
nt
• The fix• Enable the OLAP cubes• http://
blogs.msdn.com/b/brismith/archive/2012/11/12/project-server-2013-requirements-to-build-an-olap-cube.aspx
• Understand the 11 standard Project Server cubes• Use department fields to control correct access• Remember that only look-up values are available in the cubes• Deploy to the business through training (Excel Pivot table)
• Blog article from TECHNET• http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff465339.aspx
Problem 6: OLAP cubes – a new game?The business doesn’t know what they are
• The fix• 64-bit Project client needs a minimum of 2 GB ram• Many laptops only have 2 GB ram and a slow processor• Working with big plans (1000 activities+ requires power)• Not having a machine that exceeds minimum requirements will have
you hanging while project does it calculations (client side)
• Blog article from TECHNET• http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee624351.aspx
Problem 7: Bad client performanceDue to bad laptop specifications
• The fix• Upgrade to 2013 (or Online)• If using 2010• Don’t use custom fields to time phase your project level data• Use other financial add-ons such as UMT, Projectum, SharePoint list
• Know your server farm size and play by the rules• E.g. small server farm equals no more than
• Blog article from PPMBLOG• http://ppmblog.org/2012/10/31/project-server-2013-choosing-a-farm-ver
sus-limitations/
Problem 8: Slow PWA/client performanceDue to not knowing about custom field limitations
SEE NEXT SLIDE
2010Entity Description Small Medium Large1 Projects 100 5000 20000
1 Tasks 17125 856250 3425000
1 Average Tasks Per Project
171.25 171.25 171.25
2 Task Transaction History
10 100 1000
1 Assignments 22263 1113125 4500000
1 Average Assignments Per Task
1.3 1.3 1.3
2/3 Approvals 50 600 3000
Users 1000 10000 50000
Custom Fields Project (Formula)
3 20 25
Custom Fields Project (Manual) 2 40 50
Custom Fields Task (Formula) 6 12 15
Custom Fields Task (Manual) 4 8 10
Custom Fields Assignment Rolldown
50% 50% 50%
Custom Fields Resource 10 20 25
Custom Fields Look up Table Custom Fields
2 15 100
1 Timesheets (per year)
52000 780000 8,320,000
1 Timesheet Lines 5 10 10
2013Entity Small Medium LargeProjects 20 100 5000
Project Sites 20 100 5000
% Projects in Managed Mode
0% 10% 80%
Tasks 1250 25000 1250000
Average Tasks Per Project 62.5 250 250
Task Transaction History 10 10 100
Assignments 1625 32500 1625000
Average Assignments Per Task
1.3 1.3 1.3
Average Tasks per My Site User
50 250 5000
Approvals 5 50 600
Resources 50 1000 10000
Average Resources Per Project
2.5 10 2
Average Assignments Per Resource
32.5 32.5 162.5
Users 50 1000 10000
Calendars 3 26 100
Issues 20 400 20000Risks 20 400 20000
Deliverables 20 800 40000
Enterprise Project Types 5 50
Workflows 2 30
Average Projects Per Workflow
50 167
Phases 5 50
Phases Per Enterprise Project Type
20 20
Stages 15 150
Stages Per Workflow 20 40
PDPs 10 100
Custom Fields Per PDP 10 10
Number of Departments 100
Average Projects Per Department
50
Average Resources Per Department
100
Timesheets Per Year 2600 52000 780000
Status Reports Per Year 26000 260000
• The fix• Create views that support your
project model/way of working• Only ask for information that are
relevant for the specific stage• When maturity is low aim for 3
simple views e.g.• Create, Track, Close
Problem 9: When PMs complain about the Project client being to complexIts almost all times due to not using “views”
• Blog article from TECHNEThttp://blogs.technet.com/b/brookswhite/archive/2011/12/13/how-to-create-custom-views-in-project-professional-2007.aspx
Organisational Worst Practise
• Failure to plan• Are we all on the same page• More haste…• Short term gain, long term…• Knowledge does not transfer through
osmosis• If only…• Demarcation – drawing the lines• We have the time and the skills
Organisational Worst Practise
Failure to plan……The cause:
Organisations can often get quite excited by merely making a decision to proceed with PPM
The symptom's:
PPM deployment projects suffer some of the poorest Project Charters and resource allocation
The effect:Leads to confusion, lack of a clear set of goals and often poor technology choices. Focus often shifts to minor issues with a loss of sight to the big issues
Are we all on the same pageThe cause:
The selection of a PPM solution can be quite introverted the budget holders have an iron fist
The symptom's:
Other key stakeholders are not engaged
The effect:Frustration and turf wars and often loss of access the skilled people who could add leverage to a successful deployment
More haste…..The cause:
Unrealistic deployment objectives are set for a PPM deployment
The symptom's:
Focus is often on delivery dates without the corresponding functional mapping completed
The effect:Morale can be impacted as the realisation of an inability to complete on time becomes clear, often bad news is held back to avoid confrontation
Short term gain, long term…The cause:
Quick decisions are made (this is sometimes good)
The symptom's:
Six months into a operational system, performance, functionality, reporting or integration become troublesomeThe effect:
The system needs to be rebuilt, frustration builds up and blame gets thrown around when
Knowledge does not transfer though osmosisThe cause:
Lots of effort has been made in ‘selling’ the new system internally, but insufficient focus on education in process, skills and ‘outliers’ has taken place
The symptom's:
Colleagues are not adopting the new environment, old habits (Excel, free-standing plans) are re-emerging
The effect:The new systems lose accuracy, management lose faith, even ‘good’ citizens revert to the old ways
If Only…The cause:
Lack of planning vision, too much focus on the problem in hand. Blue-sky thinking should always play a part – just in case
The symptom's:
Unexpected problems arise such as not meeting management reporting needs, integration with systems that weren’t foreseenThe effect:
Additional cost to transform the system to allow for integration, unhappy management who thought ‘they could get anything reports’ they wanted.
Demarcation – drawing the linesThe cause:
Ownership is unclear – competing departments demands are not arbitrated - there is no PPM Enterprise Architect.
The symptom's:
Different departments demand incompatible structures, deployment decision are not consistent with any structured plandThe effect:
Deadlines are not met, unnecessary complexities creep into the PPM environment, it all turn a bit ‘ugly’
We have the time and the skillsThe cause:
IT are convinced they should be the prime contractor to build, configure and deploy the PPM environment
The symptom's:
Six(?) months after an adoption decision has been taken little or no progress is visible
The effect:IT can be reticent in bringing in Process, Technical and other external SME’s, losing impetus and frustrating the business.
Q&A
• PC326: Chalk Talk and Q & A: Running your PMO with Project Web App and Project Professional
• PC206: First Impressions supporting Project Server 2013 and Project Online
• PC209: Troubleshooting Tips for Project and Project Server
• PC325: Chalk Talk and Q & A: Project Server IT-Professional
Other Sessions
Close
MyPC fill out evaluations & win prizes!
Fill out session evaluations by logging into MyPC on your laptop or mobile device.
Evaluation prizes daily! Claim your prize at the Registration Desk on Level 1.
www.msprojectconference.com
After the event, over 100 hours of resources; including all of the PPT decks and session videos will be available.
© 2014 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries.The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.