Celoxis vs. PAZO

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

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

PAZO is the best task management for both office work and those that work in the field. It has powerful functionality like assigning tasks, scheduling, sharing of information, and easy submission of reports. It does suit well organizations with needs like improving internal communications, better visibility, and empowering their employees.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Project planning
• Time log
• Efforts analysis vs plan

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

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

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

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

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Positive in most cases

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info