In yesterday’s post, I talked about how generic resources within the Enterprise Resource Pool impacted resource capacity calculations. My conclusion was that generic resources should be set to a Maximum Units of zero to avoid invalidating some of the resource capacity calculations within Project Server.
In this post, I plan to continue my investigation, and to see how generic resources impact the resource availability figures within the Project Server 2010 Portfolio Analysis module.
To test this out, I created two resources, one generic and one named. I created a custom resource field called “Role” and assigned the role of Developer to the two resources. I left both resources with a Max Units of 100%.
I then created a single project, called “Test,” and added the project to a portfolio analysis scenario. Skipping forward to the part where resource availability is analyzed, I get the following results in the Deficit Surplus Report:
So, at first blush, indeed it does appear that generic resources are excluded from the resource capacity figures in the portfolio analysis module. What about demand though? Shouldn’t generic resources show up as part of the project demand profile?
…well, it appears that they do. The generic resource is booked against the project requirements, but does not appear in the available capacity – which is exactly how I would like generic resources to work.
If you didn’t read yesterday’s post, you can probably stop there. If you did read yesterday’s post, then you’ll note that the Enterprise Capacity is calculated differently in the Resource Center and Portfolio Analysis modules.
In the Resource Center, generic resources count towards available capacity unless you mark them as having a Max Units of
100% 0%. In fact, I’d recommend setting them to 0% just to avoid inadvertently displaying resource surpluses.
In Portfolio Analysis, generic resources do not count towards the capacity, but do count towards demand – regardless of whether or not the generic resource is set to a Max Units of 0%.