ETC Hours decrement, Actual Hours disappear when entering from MS Project

[Legacy User]

Inserting Labor Actuals without doing a timesheet?

RE: Entering Actuals via OWB for None Track Mode resources

 

CA PPM v14.2, on-prem, Oracle

 

Found a couple threads on topic, ranging from 2010 through 2013.  Wondering if there is more current information, solutions, workarounds.

 

Trying to use CA PPM on an Agile Scrum project (we don't have an Agile tool, yet).  Scrum manager wants

 

• To look at Task Assignments, see
  • Actuals
  • Pending actuals
  • ETC
  • Proposed ETC
• From
  • CA PPM timesheet users
  • Resources that don't use/don't have access to CA PPM
  • Including labor and non-labor resources
• With
  • ability to edit ETC and Proposed ETC in daily scrum meetings
  • ability to compare task actual hours to baseline hours to improve team's forecasting abilities

 

Currently, importing Actuals from MSP results in the following:

• Actual Hours are used to decrement ETC
• Actual Hours are then tossed, not stored in CA PPM
• Therefore, comparison of actual vs. baseline is meaningless

 

Anything new on this subject?

[Deactivated User]

When you say

Actual Hours are then tossed, not stored in CA PPM

did you try that with a project which has never had actuals entered with timesheets. That is the only case when it is supposed to work with OWB so I assume the same could apply for MS Project.

[Legacy User]

Urmas,

 

No, haven't tried with fresh project.  However, I'm expecting that the project would need to have Track Mode set to "None."

 

I tried changing Track Mode = None on an existing project, and the project disappeared from timesheet.

 

I need both types of resources on same project - those that use CA PPM Timesheets, and those that will have actual hours entered via MSP.

 

Dale

[Legacy User]

The project can have only one track mode, unfortunately there is no such thing as a Mixed track mode.

 

If timesheet has been entered to the project, even if you switch the Project track mode from Clarity to None, the actuals from MSP will still be tossed.

 

So no, you cannot have "both types of resources on same project - those that use CA PPM Timesheets, and those that will have actual hours entered via MSP."

 

 

[Deactivated User]

So you are saying that MS Project works the same as OWB in that respect???

[Deactivated User]

Just wondering again about the work arounds....

So if you first have track mode set to none and fill in all the actuals in MS Project and then switch track mode to Clarity that should work. Right?

Secondly you could split your projects into two - one for timesheets and the other for MS Project entry - and also the resources that should also work. Right?

[Legacy User]

Right

Right

[Legacy User]

Technically, the workaround of switching project Track Mode back and forth between None and Clarity seems to work.

 

Functionally, this will make daily team reviews awkward at best.

 

Running two separate projects where the two sets of resources are working on the same tasks?  That won't fly - that really twists reality to fit the tool, way too much.

 

The whole idea of having to use workarounds is crazy.  Projects, in reality, regularly have labor and non-labor resources, and often times labor resources that may not have access to a company's CA PPM instance.  And, half of the problem works already - when actuals are booked for Track Mode = None resources in MSP, the ETC in CA PPM is properly updated.

 

Why stop at half a solution?

 

Guess I'll be searching for existing Ideas on this, creating a new one if necessary.

 

Dale

[Legacy User]

yes. Same goes to XOG as well.

[Deactivated User]

and further only the one for timesheets and the other for MS Project entry needs to be a subproject.

[Legacy User]

We aren't using OWB, so I can't confirm operation is the same.

[Deactivated User]

That question about OWB and MSProject was more for Connie.

 

Are you saying

Technically, the workaround of switching project Track Mode back and forth between None and Clarity seems to work.

works more than once? It is not supposed to work more than once.

 

Until something like 12.0.x it worked any number of times, but then it was changed.

 

Just wondering if Connie_Fu would tell what is the data that stops entering actuals in the scheduler once they have been entered with timesheets and where is it stored.

[Legacy User]

[“Are you saying

 

Technically, the workaround of switching project Track Mode back and forth between None and Clarity seems to work works more than once? It is not supposed to work more than once.”]

Yes.  But, I haven’t included a timesheet posting.  Perhaps that makes the difference?

[Deactivated User]

Dale you have to spell it for me:

Did

you do enter actuals in MS Project while the track mode was none.

change the track mode to Clarity

enter time with timesheets

did not post timesheets

change the track mode to none

you do enter actuals in MS Project

save the project to Clarity

have the actuals entered in MS Project in Clarity?

[Legacy User]

Yes - you have it. Did this without posting.  See from Connie, today, that Posting causes something to change, such that this doesn't work any longer once a posting has occurred.

[Legacy User]

urmas I honestly don't know where that flag is stored. But it is stored once timesheets have been posted, and from that point on you will not be able to modify the actual curves except from timesheets and WIP transactions. I read the other thread where a 'private fix' was mentioned, I would suggest not using it even if it 'works' because it wouldn't be supported.

[Legacy User]

Understand - thanks for testing this further.  Posting causes a change which prevents workaround from working further.

 

Basically, we have something that we can do easily in MSProject, and can't do at all if we move plan into CA PPM.

 

Yes, can do if we run two projects, or use financial transactions - both significant complications that make this a non-starter for the groups we are trying to on-board.

 

Just want to track the actuals and ETCs of all our resources - why does the app take something that works easily and make it so complicated that users don't want to use the app?

 

May be working as designed, but if users don't want to use the app, isn't something wrong?