Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management vs. Quick Bid

The scenarios based on my experience where Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management is well suited and the primary reason for using it is that most current decision-making processes do not effectively analyze and well use the data needed to link among the strategic objectives and the implementation plans so Primavera solutions can help on that by combining the best-practice work control processes and the suitable evaluation metrics with the possibility to store and analyze all the relevant data and information hence Primavera Portfolio Management helps to achieve the strategic goals and deliver the best value.

Incentivized

This is more of an application for companies who are involved in mass bid submissions and do tenders for large scale construction works. In the scenarios of construction business the mass bidders can use this solution relly well. The calculations and reporting also helps with accurate estimations of tenders and bids

Incentivized

• CAC authentication is required in my arena, and OPPM can work in conjunction with a secondary application to allow for this added layer of security.
• Allows for security/permissions by customizable roles via user types and user groups. This keeps users in check with only certain abilities to edit or read, etc...
• All kinds of abilities to build custom reports, as well as built in. Export formats include: CSV, Excel, PPT, Word. Customers like reports, and OPPM does a good job at its offerings.
• Visual aids such as charts and graphs offer some eye appeal. This is useful for presentations, for depicting data.
• Has the ability to offer document storage via attachment. Attaching supporting documents is a must with portfolio management.

Incentivized

• allows users to divide the number of supplies by floor.
• generates report after analysing risk factors.
• provides support to contractors for making proper bid estimates.

Incentivized

• P6 is not as intuitive as other scheduling software. It usually requires someone who is trained in the program to use it exclusively.
• P6 can have multiple versions of the baseline schedule. This is not intuitive like saving a file, which usually leads to confusion.
• P6 is very costly for smaller companies to afford.

Incentivized

• The initial setup of the database can take a fair amount of time to set up, but once complete it can be used for years with only small additions to fit the users' needs.
• I have been waiting for the schedule of values option to be complete to help aid in billing. it was supposed to be released, but I have not seen it rolled out yet.

Incentivized

Very quick response whenever help is needed

Incentivized

Oracle is better laid out and has more functionality as well as end-user flow. The login process, billing, and construction management features are easy to find, easy to use, and helpful. The limitations on Quickbooks restrict users from the ability to view and bill full contracts if broken down, to track and show % complete. Procore is confusing.

Incentivized

Due to the fact that our company is typically "late to the show" when it comes to new technology and programs, we have been using an outdated technique for estimating, tracking, and organizing projects. Excel does not compare at all against Quick Bid. There are numerous amounts of benefits that Quick Bid has over Excel.

Incentivized

• P6 is critical to the execution of all of our projects. Without it we would have less control of our projects.
• One of our key business objectives is to deliver projects on time or ahead of schedule. P6 supports us in this goal and allows our superintendents to manage complicated construction projects.

Incentivized

• Helps with mass bidding
• Helps with estimations
• Professional reports help too

Incentivized