Partial call-out of service phases
J
Jan Holländer
Service phases are often not called up chronologically or in full - such as parts of LPH 5 are brought forward in LPH 3.
We would like it if this could be mapped in Projo without having to create separate service phases for this purpose.
(If anyone here knows a good workflow, we'd be interested.)
W
Winkler, Simon
It wasn't even clear to me in terms of procedure that this wouldn't work in Projo - I would have solved this spontaneously via the contract status, you can create one of these yourself in Settings-> Projects, for example, you could create a status “Partial call xx%” or similar here, which employees can then also see...
If there is actually (as in some investor projects), for example, a type of LPH IV Light or key details LP V for a joint tendering procedure with later detail, I would honestly represent it in the contract structure as well or would we try to negotiate a contract from the call in such a way that there is no possibility, for example, to skip LPH (example in the case of early LP V would be that the advanced LPH is always completely together with the LPH must be commissioned in the course of time). We also use this in our Kapa planning and make it easier when you have two LPH packages in the right time sequence.
J
Jan Holländer
Hi Winkler, Simon, thanks for your post. Maybe I didn't write it in a completely understandable way, because it's clear that you can't “call up work phases chronologically” in Projo, because each phase can have its own processing period.
I am primarily interested in how to show in Projo that only parts of a service phase are called up. So only 5 out of 25 LPH5 points, but these should be achieved during LPH 3. It is often unclear when the “remaining performance” of LPH 5 will be retrieved.
From our point of view, it would therefore be good if the partial call could be displayed in projo.
Of course, I can do that if I set up a separate service phase for the partial call. On the one hand, however, this changes the contract and on the other hand, it can be quite tedious when you set up, process and maintain larger GP projects.
And that is my concern. To be able to map this partial call in projo.
Because this is important both for Kapa planning and for liquidity planning as well as for evaluating the project results.
Arne Semmler Have you ever had the topic on the PROJO side?
S
Simon Winkler
Jan Holländer Hi Jan,
Thank you for the clarification - with more complex contract structures, this is usually quite laborious, because it not only concerns one contract position, but, in case of doubt, relatively many trades about the position in GP contracts. We don't have that and would therefore be able to cope with the described “light/ manual” variant, but the question is justified!
Arne Semmler
Jan Holländer: The way you describe manually dividing services is the only possible and, in my opinion, the only sensible way in projo, both conceptually and structurally. Anything else would add incredible complexity to the database and the processes in Projo to use. I would therefore argue that we implement this “shift” of partial services into other service phases or the “division” of service phases into several packages elsewhere by an assistant, etc.; the fee calculator would currently be the point of contact for this - see https://projo.canny.io/feature-requests/p/hoai-rechner-teilleistungen-in-andere-lp-verschieben. This would then reduce or upgrade the HOAI services accordingly in the contract structure (when moving) or expanded to include additional services (when splitting up). This would be technically (in the database) the same as manual splitting, but a function for moving or dividing partial services would support this accordingly. The division would then also make it possible to set the partial service packages individually to “on demand”, “ongoing”, etc.