Role Management

Discussion created by whole_milk on Jul 16, 2015
Latest reply on Jul 16, 2015 by Dale_Stockman

Team, I wanted to pick everyone's brains on resource role management to obtain some parallel perspective on how other orgs are operating their resource roles.


A decently consolidated roles master is key to properly capture functions and skill sets of resources in PPM.


I have seen two variations:

1. In bigger financial orgs, where there are several business units, they had the habit of localizing their roles. This is also a habit that was formed prior to version 13 when you can do only 2 groupings in the cost plan group by. And the best we could fit into the two happened to be:

1. Trans class / Role

2. Role / Charge Code

3. Trans Class / Resource Class


2. In other places, the roles are pretty much commonly named and they use OBS units and other forms in the team tab to denote resources/allocations who are currently doing the work in the project.


I worked in a bank where in order to differentiate by departments, they created copies of roles. For example, two groups - options and forex trading groups had their IT roles like:


OT App Developer

FX App Developer


When both of them constituted the same role. This poses some challenges to cross-range demand/capacity management when FX needs to borrow a resource from OT to staff a project, and then the PM/RM collectively managing both sets of resources and perform forecast utilization and other advanced things like that.


With version 13 and beyond, since we have the capability to include an OBS unit in the cost plan and have staff obs unit in the team tab, we can literally get away with having one role called App Developer and trading the role across departments or staff OBSes via the staff obs unit and such.


I am looking to propose a consolidated range of resource roles which will have common names without any department abbreviations prefixed before them.


Is anyone willing to share how their roles master is structured and how it is working for them. I would love to heard your thoughts.