Celoxis vs. OpenText Project and Portfolio Management

Celoxis is a great option if you are looking for an affordable, easy to use, easy to integrate project manegement solution. It is very powerful for waterfall project management. I evaluated more than 15 platforms and could not find any with a close evaluation in terms of cost-benefit to Celoxis. Of course there are more powerfull tools, for 10 times the price. So far, for project management, there hasn't been a requirement I haven't been able to solve with some work. It really lacks features for Agile methodologies, even if it provides a Kanban view, so far it doesn't provide and additional agile artifacts. If an organization has already reached a very mature project management practice and needs to improve on program and portfolio management, Celoxis won't provide any useful feature. If the organization has the resources (skills and time mostly) to develop some workflows and customization, it might work but with a limit. Hopefully Celoxis addresses these features in the near future.

Incentivized

For Project Management, Micro Focus PPM includes all most every feature you need. You can manage your projects using work plans, project health, resource assignments, actuals, and costs. Additionally, you can get required approvals with workflows like sponsor approval or CR approvals. However, at project costing we need to make customizations due to lack of several outsource costs on it.

• Project planning
• Time log
• Efforts analysis vs plan

Incentivized

• Easy to manage tasks among project's stakeholders
• Satifying resource management capabilities
• Complete dashboard (fully customizable screens and integrations)

Incentivized

• Support is at times slow to respond.
• Not new user-friendly.
• Not able to pull in closer or zoom the interface.

Incentivized

• User Interface needs lot of improvement
• Too many clicks required to do the job
• Report creation is horrible

Incentivized

We have many business processes using it along with our project management staff.

Incentivized

GUI needs to be enhanced for today's technical and agile development requirements. It is very cumbersome and out-dated (at some pages)

Incentivized

We have a Change Management Team for internal support of Micro Focus PPM. So, they give close and quick support to our problems. They contact product support when it is necessary. They regularly upgrade the product. Generally, I can say that there is a good support for this product.

Have your methodology defined prior to the vendor coming on board to start any configuration changes.

Incentivized

I used an evalaution matrix built with input of several stakeholders in the company. In the end the matrix included 100 features (non of them was price related). The matrix was heavily focused on waterfall project management, agile related features were only 5 out of 100 features. Features were labeled as mandatory, required or optional. Products which lacked a mandatory feature (like providing technical support) were disqualified. Then a price vs features evaluation was made and only the products with the best combination were seleced to continue: Celoxis, ITM Platform and Mission Control. A final technical evaluation was made comparing the full evaluation but also the evaluation of only the 40 required features. Overall, Celoxis was the better evaluated (76% vs 65% of the second place), for the 40 required features, Celoxis got 91% against 78% of number 2. In the end we chose Celoxis even when it had higher licensing cost.

Incentivized

The vision of supporting DevOps, complementary functionalities with other software products of Micro Focus, native support for agile/waterfall methodologies made Micro Focus to be evaluated as more valuable against other PPM products. The complementary functionality with the other enterprise software products of Micro Focus (ALM, ITSM family etc) especially had a major effect on the selection.

Incentivized

• Positive in most cases

Incentivized

• More Streamlined
• Leadership is very informed now

Incentivized