Today’s contractor is faced with an interesting dilemma with more choices in Project Management solutions than before, but also more complexity in choosing the right solution for their organization. Burger Consulting Group has been monitoring the construction software industry for nearly two decades and has been assisting contractors in making good software decisions for their business. We have observed the number of choices available for project management and collaboration ebb and flow depending largely on the software developers strategy and resources, more so even than the demands of the market which have changed only modestly over the years. Today, contractors want mobile access, strong collaborative platforms, and document sharing, but they also need high performance platforms for RFIs, submittals, change orders, cost management, issue tracking, and meeting minutes among many other critical functions.
In part one of this article, we looked at the larger considerations when looking for a PM solution. Let’s take a look now at the secondary factors to consider.
IMPORTANT SECONDARY FACTORS
Cloud/SaaS deployment: You might be surprised to see this here instead of discussed in the larger considerations in part one of this article. While how the system is deployed has some impact on user experience and cost, IT should be able to deploy almost any solution if it is the right one for the organization. The question of on-premise, hosted, or cloud deployment impact IT more than they impact the project manager (assuming IT can deliver a high performance solution to the field). The differences in cost over the short term may appear significant, but even out over some number of years before diverging again.
Reporting: PM solutions need to provide logs, reports, and alerts according to company standards, as well as frequent customer requirements. A predeveloped set of reports and logs are useful to be sure for use upon implementation, but without report writing capability, the users will feel handcuffed in terms of meeting unique requirements as they come along. This will drive users back to spreadsheets to meet owner expectations. Just because someone says you can get to the data with a reporting tool like Excel or Crystal doesn’t mean it will be easy. Sometimes the drivers are there to integrate with the back-end data, but the data itself is not organized well or labeled properly for access by a user.
BIM integration: For those looking to the future and near future, PM solutions are likely to be integrating with the building model. They will be exchanging COBIE data, elements of cost and time, RFIs, and issues. Eventually the model and the preconstruction software applications will be tightly integrated and this includes PM and procurement. For now, this isn’t a primary criteria; but, your chosen vendor should have a position on this and a roadmap. If BIM is part of your process today and is likely to continue to grow, then you need to be sure your PM vendor has that in their plans for the future and is able to articulate in some level of detail what and how.
Owner involvement: If you are building for larger institutional owners and they have high demands for document and data transfer at the end of the project or even want you to remain to operate or maintain the facility, you might consider a PM solution that is equal part PM solution with an owner’s perspective. There could be some compromise involved in base PM function like submittals, but there is going to be stronger functionality at the back-end process like FM, compliance, and maintenance work orders.
ECM (Enterprise Content Management): An earlier program by this firm examined the differences between document collaboration platforms (like Box or DropBox) and ECM solutions (e.g., Construction Imaging, OnBase, Laserfiche). It’s clear that these tools have important capabilities, but at the end of the day, don’t have RFI, submittal, or change order processing built in. This firm feels that good PM solutions will ultimately have integration APIs that work with ECM solutions for long-term storage of important documents, photos, drawings, and the like. This will then facilitate easier turnover at the end of a job, as well as retrieval of important documents relative to a project, a sub, or a process on demand.
Mobile deployment: Another important secondary consideration is mobile deployment. There is not yet a true mobile app for all PM functions. Most are web-based that can run on a mobile device like a tablet. The question becomes should you hold out for comprehensive PM solution that is built for mobile devices, make do with the web-based solution that performs well on a mobile device (form factored), or perhaps find a solution that integrates with several of the many purpose built apps for PM functions? This should be a conscious choice rather than a by-product of the decision.
CONCLUSION
While your firm’s needs may ultimately take a different view of the relative priorities of these criteria, these appear to be the primary ones. A company pursuing a PM solution for their organization should give consideration to all of these criteria and weigh them before setting out into the marketplace. Complete your due diligence with a smaller number of qualified vendor candidates while also getting good buy-in from your organization. ■
About the Author:  Christian Burger is the president of Burger Consulting Group, an IT consulting firm based in Chicago. Christian has worked within the construction industry for nearly 25 years, originally with FMI before starting his own firm in 1997. Much of his work at the firm is focusing on IT strategy and leadership for BCG clients. Christian is also involved in best practices process work during the implementation phase.
_________________________________________________________________________
Modern Contractor Solutions – June 2016
Did you enjoy this article?
Subscribe to the FREE Digital Edition of Modern Contractor Solutions magazine.
BUTTON_ClickHere