Hugo - Meeting Notes Software vs. Projector PSA

I think it's important to understand that software recommendations do not come up casually during conversations with your friends so recommending it with no agenda is off the table. However, if someone asks me for tips on note-taking during calls my first priority would be OneNote because it just has more functionality and is usually built-in, meaning you don't have to search for anything online. The second priority would be Hugo though.

We think Projector PSA is a great tool to track and manage people in a professional service environment like management consulting. This system is easy to set up, easy to understand and should easily suit the needs of smaller and medium sized firms. It may be less appropriate for firms that rely very heavily on project management through another system (like MS Project) or firms that rely very heavily on a sales pipeline tracking system. While still very much possible to use, you would (I believe) have to do some re-keying between systems

• Hugo - Meeting Notes Software removes ambiguity and uncertainty from discussions.
• Participants from both inside and outside the organization can work together on agendas and minutes before and after the meeting.
• The Hugo extension for Google Calendar may be used to arrange and follow up on meetings, both online and offline, as part of your Google calendar.

Incentivized

• Projector is a very well designed tool for project management. It has allowed us to eliminate a number of auxiliary tools for project timelines and WBS for the vast majority of our projects.
• Time and expense entry is intuitive and quick for our staff.
• Our forecasting and resource management capability has improved greatly with Projector and allows us to grow our team efficiently with minimal additional administrative burden.
• Reporting is extremely robust. It does require some time to really get a handle on the full functionality of the reporting tool, but once you do, you can get almost any kind of report you want out of the system!

• Platform is pretty simple and we use basic; there are probably many features we have not yet realized exist
• I don't think many other firms are using it, so can't use across the profession

Incentivized

• Release management process needs to be improved. Currently no facility is provided to test the impact of new releases in a sand-box. This introduces business risk if there are interfaces into Projector PSA as part of it's use in the business.

We have been using this tool for a year now and find our use of it continually evolves and broadens. We are also very excited about the overhaul that's under way and feel many of the improvements being put in place will help make us that much more effective and efficient. The Projector team is also very responsive and collaborative in terms of user feedback and improvement suggestions, which helps us know they will work hard to help us get what we need out of the tool.

Desktop interface feels complex to new users.

In 5 years of use we have never experienced an unscheduled outage.

The quality of support is better with Hugo. Ease of use is also good with Hugo than when compared to Coda. Hugo met our requirements, so decided to choose it over Coda. It is easier to set up Hugo when compared to Coda and it saves a lot of time.

Incentivized

We did pursue Quick Arrow another tool that was similar. We found that be in inflexible in use. Projector allows a lot of flexibility in setup. Our organization has very specific business processes and we were able to set up Projector to work with those processes. Several other systems we tried were not as flexible in allowing set up to our needs.

• Closing acton logs to set clearer paths to business goals
• Serves as good reference tool for important conversations that impact business objectives
• Fosters easy collaboration within the organization

Incentivized

• Even in the small time that I stayed to see Projector PSA reporting I saw ROI projections become more realistic. There was real data to analyze that proved we were spending way too much and charging way too less on some projects.
• Although employees were not used at entering their hours, this single reporting improved operations management and validated employees concerns that more people were needed to manage workload
• Project proposals were more realistic because they were driven by real data.
• Decision making overall for the department became more efficient and effective

Incentivized