Greater Transparency in the Project Portfolio with BCS

Before implementing BCS, we primarily organized our projects using Office 365. Monthly project status reports were prepared using status slides and presented to a committee. This approach generally worked, but it had clear limitations.

We lacked a consistent standard for the project proposal and approval process. Our project management procedures were also inconsistent. There was no binding framework that all project managers could use as a guide. As a result, the level of project management expertise varied widely.

Transparency was particularly challenging. We could not reliably determine at any given time what the current resource situation was, where projects were falling behind, what risks existed, which budgets might be exceeded, or what dependencies existed between projects. Although this information was often available, it was not accessible in a centralized, up-to-date, and comparable manner.

For the PMO, this meant a lot of manual effort. Information had to be collected, consolidated, and prepared for reporting. That’s why it was clear to us: We need a tool that supports our project management processes, enables standards, and helps the PMO better fulfill its steering and governance responsibilities.

We conducted a structured search for suitable software through a request for proposals with the support of an external consulting firm. We compared several solutions and created a list of requirements that vendors had to review in advance.

Project and portfolio management, resource management, cost control, and web-based access were particularly important to us. In addition, the solution needed to be flexibly customizable, integrate various project processes, and support cross-departmental collaboration.

We became aware of BCS because our Corporate Organization management team was already familiar with Projektron from an event and included the solution in the request for proposals.

In the end, BCS convinced us both technically and economically. BCS met our requirements very well and was also competitively priced compared to other competitors. Another important factor was that Projektron focuses on exactly one product and brings many years of experience in the field of project management software.

We deliberately chose to roll out BCS in stages rather than opting for a “big bang” approach. Including the pilot phase, we went live after just under twelve months. This approach was important to us because we didn’t just want to implement a tool; we also wanted to refine our project management processes at the same time.

During the six-month pilot phase, we tested small and medium-sized projects across various categories in BCS. This allowed us to identify early on which settings worked well, where processes still needed refinement, and what questions arose among users.

Interface development posed a particular challenge. Importing organizational units, employees, cost centers, absences, and work time models took significantly longer than planned. It took us about six months to get these interfaces running smoothly. A solid data foundation is crucial, especially for areas like resource management.

Today, nearly 60 employees use BCS. Among those involved are IT, the Real Estate asset class as a pilot area, HR, and Marketing.

For the rollout, we conducted training tailored to specific target groups: for executive management, managers, project managers, and project team members. We then offered consultation hours to address questions directly and support day-to-day use.

Today, we use BCS in several key areas. One important component is our idea management system, which we have implemented in BCS as a project proposal process. Through this process, new project ideas are submitted in a structured manner, evaluated, and can then be converted into approved projects. This has significantly improved the quality of the project approval process and sped it up.

For employees, the personal overview is an important starting point. This is where they check their tasks and tickets on a daily basis. Project managers document important decisions in the meeting minutes and actively use BCS in steering committees. We have also created a dedicated wizard for this purpose.

The PMO and representatives from the business units also use BCS in committees to decide whether an idea will become an approved project or how projects should be prioritized. Once a quarter, we report on our project portfolios to senior management.

Before the system was implemented, a great deal of information had to be manually collected, consolidated, and entered into status reports. Today, about 90 percent of these manual tasks have been eliminated. That’s a huge relief.

At the same time, we have a much better overview of our strategic projects and their “health.” We can see more quickly whether projects are on track, whether budgets might be exceeded, whether delays are occurring, or whether resources are overloaded.

For the PMO, BCS is a decisive step forward. Only with the support of the software can we properly fulfill our actual management and governance responsibilities. We no longer have to focus primarily on gathering information and updating slides; instead, we can concentrate more on quality, standards, prioritization, and portfolio management.

We currently still handle a few topics, such as lessons learned, outside of BCS.

Resource management is a key priority for us, but it is still in its infancy. We are already seeing the benefits, as resource bottlenecks are identified earlier.

At the same time, the topic is complex. We’re still finding the right balance: It needs to be detailed enough to be useful for management, but it can’t get so granular that the maintenance effort increases disproportionately.

That’s exactly why it’s helpful that BCS gives us the opportunity to proceed step by step and further develop its use together with the organization.

The introduction of BCS was a major adjustment for many project managers. Previously, there was no centralized project management tool. Now, project data must be updated regularly and standards must be followed.

This is perceived differently by different people. Some still view the new transparency as a form of control and see BCS primarily as a reporting tool. The majority, however, has a very positive attitude and is gradually discovering new ways to organize themselves better—for example, using the Kanban board or project tickets.

We view this as a normal change process. Introducing a project management tool doesn’t just mean providing software. It also means clearly defining roles, processes, responsibilities, and expectations.

Today, our project proposal process is significantly higher in quality. Ideas are described, reviewed, and decided upon in a more structured manner. The approval process has become faster. Processes, responsibilities, and decision-making authority are clearer.

Overall, we are very satisfied with BCS. The biggest advantage for us is that we have everything in one tool at a glance. BCS helps us manage projects in a consistent, traceable, and transparent manner.

Customizations are possible, though our approach is to stick to the standard as much as possible.

We find Projektron’s consulting services to be very good. We hardly use the training offerings anymore because we onboard new employees internally and set up projects together with them. When it comes to support, the experience depends more on the specific issue and the person handling it; we see room for improvement here.

We would like the user interface to be a bit more intuitive in some areas. Those who don’t use BCS daily regularly come back with similar questions. At the same time, we see that many users are gradually discovering additional features and are increasingly making active use of the tool.

We would definitely recommend BCS.

We plan to continue expanding our use of BCS. If the two pilot projects in the real estate asset class are successful, we could eventually map additional construction projects and our product development for new funds in BCS.

We are also exploring whether to make greater use of time tracking in BCS in the future. Another possible step is to implement an additional interface to import material costs and further improve project controlling.

Our most important recommendation to other organizations is: don’t start with a big bang. A phased rollout, a clear pilot phase, and a strong focus on processes are crucial. The tool alone does not solve project management problems.

In our view, a PMO is a key success factor in this process. It ensures that standards are followed, questions are addressed, and the organization learns step by step to manage its project portfolio more professionally.