"Before Project Center, we were constantly exploring different ways to ensure that our customers' most urgent requests were scheduled and implemented with the appropriate priority. First, we were relying on Bugzilla for this, but Bugzilla queries were too noisy and did not clearly show how low-level tasks related to high-level customer objectives. Then, we developed an "Action Plan" Twiki page, but the static list of planned tasks still did not provide the level of insight and flexibility that we needed to effectively prioritize and schedule the dynamic business requirements we were trying to address. Moreover, it was not terribly helpful for estimating whether we could complete all of the necessary tasks in the expected time.

"Using Project Center, we gained the realistic project view that we needed to continuously assess whether the project was on track to meet expectations. To start, we divided the project into iterations, created tasks for implementing each of our key customer requirements, then distributed these tasks into the various iterations. We then assigned the tasks to team members and asked them to do a time estimate for each of their assigned tasks. With those time estimates, we were able to determine in advance that we could not predictably meet our estimated release date with our available resources. We didn't want our organization and our customers to expect a release date that we risked missing, so we used this information to determine a revised release date that we were confident we could meet.

"Project Center also helped us to effectively prioritize and distribute tasks related to the steady stream of new and changing business requirements we had to address. To give you some idea of how dynamic the requirements are, we had about 140 top-priority tasks planned for the release—and in the past two months, we have had approximately 140 more tasks created to accommodate additional customer requests.

"Project Center helps me determine if we have time to implement these new tasks. And if the project view indicates that a task can be accommodated given our current resources, I can also use Project Center to determine which developer is in the best position to work on that task. For instance, if I see that a developer has only 3 assigned tasks, and that these tasks are all near completion, he's a good candidate. I don't want to pile more work on someone who is already struggling to keep up because this will inevitably end up delaying the project.

"Moreover, by looking at Project Center's real-time report of each developer's workload, I can proactively identify whether re-balancing tasks would help my team deliver the expected functionality faster."

"Project Center's high-level perspective is especially helpful when I'm trying to balance new requirements with other priority tasks. When we were working off of Twiki pages, we had only limited visibility into our current status. The Twiki pages would only indicate if a task was marked as completed or not—and I have to admit that this was not always as current as it could have been, since editing a Twiki is somewhat of a distraction from the development activities we like to focus on. Project Center always gives us a real-time assessment of each task's current status—as well as an indication of whether it's truly implemented (meaning that a test case has been created for it, and that test case is actually passing).

"Another thing I really like is that it helps me ensure that the developers and I are on the same page in regards to what's really expected for certain tasks they've been assigned. For each task, I have the task owner estimate how long they think it will take them. Then, I review it. If I agree with their estimation, that becomes their goal. The estimation might not be exact, but it's helpful to have something to aim for. If I don't agree—for example, if I see someone has estimated 2 weeks to complete a task that I think should take only 2 days, or vice versa—I go to the developer and ask him why he estimated the amount of time he did. Often, this discussion ends up exposing that he and I have different expectations about what the task really involves. Maybe the task definition did not accurately capture the true scope of the related customer requirement. Or maybe there are additional complications that I need to be made aware of.

"By dealing with these issues when a task is first assigned, developers end up working much more efficiently, with less time wasted on avoidable rework. Plus, the team gets more accurate task estimations, which allows us to more accurately predict when each iteration—as well as the project as a whole—will be completed."

"Through Project Center, I can see the status of my own tasks, as well as the status of other developers' tasks. It gives me a good perspective as to whether I'm falling behind or keeping up with my teammates.

"More specifically, I can see what those tasks are, the roles that they're filling, and how my work fits in with the overall project. By seeing the items that are being addressed in the current iteration, I gain insight to my position in the overall process of the product release—where I stand, how I'm contributing—and where the entire project is going.

"With Concerto, the development process seems to be more reined in and organized—less nebulous. I can clearly see what I need to do, what other people are doing, and how much work is necessary to get the release out.

"A task list is maintained automatically for me. Plus, when I check in my code, it is automatically associated with the task that I'm working on. Project Center keeps all of us focused on completing our set list of tasks within the current iteration. When those tasks are complete, the iteration is finished and we have a product that we can release.

"I feel like I'm getting tasks crossed off my to-do list and working toward a concrete goal. Now, it's more that the goals are dictating the release as opposed to the release dictating the goals. Concerto has definitely given me higher morale about the project. I feel more connected to both the project and the team."

"When you're working on a project, a lot of unexpected things come up, and you often have to switch gears. When our team needs to do this, Project Center helps us ensure that we don't lose sight of the business goals that are really driving the whole project. For instance, if I get a new requirement, I can use Project Center to re-assess whether that tasks fits into our project goals, and—if so—accurately predict whether we have time to insert the task into the current iteration or subsequent planned iterations.

"Also, I've found that with Project Center constantly feeding our team actionable information based on the priorities I set, we have a lot more time to spend on useful and interesting tasks, like actually designing and implementing requirements—rather than wasting time querying Bugzilla and constantly trying to figure out should work on what next."

"One of the things I like about Project Center is that it eliminates a lot of the guesswork regarding what I need to do to satisfy the team's expectations. "First of all, Project Center always gives me a clear view of what the overall plan is. Before, when we were using Bugzilla to schedule tasks, it would be difficult to determine which of the high-priority PRs I should start on first. With Project Center, it's much easier. First of all, I don't have to search through all the PRs—instead, I just look at the tasks assigned to the current iteration. Then, I can go within the iteration and look at the tasks' assigned start dates to determine which of the tasks really has the highest priority.

"Another helpful thing is that it makes it easier for me to follow the team's policy for having a passing test case for every task that we complete. When I look at my tasks in Project Center, I can instantly determine if I still need to add a test for a task I completed—or if a test that I previously added is passing or failing.

"The final thing I want to mention is how Project Center relieves me from having to worry about recording exactly what files I'm changing for each task. Our team has a policy to record what files are changed when working on each task. We used to manually document all the files related to a particular task. Trying to keep track of this was distracting, and there was always a chance that you could overlook a file or two that was committed for that task. Now, that list of correlations is created automatically. Project Center tracks the code changes that I check in for a task, correlates that with the task itself, and lets us track of these associations via the Web interface. This not only removes the work required to comply with that particular policy, but it also lays the groundwork for change-based testing."

"Before, we were trying to manage scheduling and requirements for our agile iterations using Bugzilla, a list of build numbers and dates, and a Perl script to synchronize the two— to see what was pending, what was scheduled, what was actually implemented, and so forth. The problem with that approach was that it was difficult to get a good overview of what was going on. It was also difficult to see all our iterations in a single view. We wanted this so we could more easily see how the various tasks and iterations fit into the larger picture.

"All this is easier and more accurate with Project Center. Instead of just a low-level view of the PRs and FRs slated for a single version or a group of versions, we get a clear, comprehensive view of what high-level tasks are associated with all of the recent versions. This makes it easier to schedule and manage the different versions, as well as to track what's associated with each. Before, we would occasionally have people install a build expecting some feature to be available, only to find out it will be in the next version. Now, expectations are set more clearly and met more consistently.

"Also, the manual testing functionality really allows us to streamline the manual user acceptance testing we perform to ensure that our key functionality works across various development environments. Before, we had MS Word printouts for the manual testing steps. Different people would run the tests independently, while taking notes on their own printout of the Word file. One team member would then go through all of these notes, add them into a master Word file, and then manually compile a report showing how the results from each set of manual tests varied from version to version. Now, using the manual testing functionality provided in Report Center, this note-taking, correlation, and reporting is all done automatically.

"For example, looking at the new automatically-generated reports for our various user acceptance tests, we can very quickly see a high-level, graphical breakdown of the progress made on each platform, what passed, what failed, and the time taken to complete the tests. We can also drill down to see the test steps and notes (for example, a particular test failed at step 8 with a segmentation error)."

"Also, it tracks the time that elapsed between the start of the test and the end of the test, then it reports the total time for the test. Once I do this a couple times, I know how much time is required for testing. This way, I can better allocate resources for testing. With a good idea of how long it will take to run all of the manual tests, I can determine if I need to start earlier or add more testers in order to meet our deadlines.

"It's also nice to be able to look at the progress of manual tests to see if someone seems to be getting stuck. I imagine this would be especially helpful in a large company. Here, a manager can easily keep tabs on many developers or testers by looking at the manual test progress and noting if the results indicate someone might need help. This way, they can proactively identify problems without being intrusive."