Summary of experiences and improvement ideas regarding TB, from the five in-person interviewees
| Mode of use | Experience in general | Main benefits | Main deficits | Required improvements | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Person 1; Director | Comprehensive understanding of the economy of the organization | Important part of everyday routines; Big picture for management, also the top management team | Big picture obtained; Forecasting enabled; Planning more efficient | Smaller technical details | Interfaces and linkage to other systems within the university |
| Person 2; Team Manager 1 | Operative project management; Unit and team management; Daily use | Necessary for the whole team and unit; Commitment to and digesting of team economy | Guiding operations, systematic organization of work, both individually and for the team as a whole; Security of information; Minimization of mistakes, less time consuming; Total control | Need for technical app development; Need for new features which are required during use | User levels reorganization; Reporting tools (graphs, etc.) |
| Person 3; Team Manager 2 | Management of vocational training; Team Management | Regular and active use, updating twice a month; Check with the team every month | Easy to use, real-time budgeting and follow-ups up to date; Planning | Minor technical issues, certainly easily repairable | Automatization with other systems; Facility to compare data with prior years |
| Person 4; Assistant Professor | Management of both teaching and research projects | Active use in own projects, awareness of the projects' and employers' situation | Excellent and easy usability includes much information from several sources | Still too much manual work | Visualization (charts, graphs); Interfaces to other systems; New user levels |
| Person 5; Controller | Economy and project management services at the university's level | Very important to have the big picture: ‐ Budgeting ‐ Follow-up ‐ Recruitment | Resourcing is easier in units within the projects; Follow-up improved | Still too much manual work | More efficient automatization; Compatibility with other systems; Reporting tools; Expansion to education |
| Mode of use | Experience in general | Main benefits | Main deficits | Required improvements | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comprehensive understanding of the economy of the organization | Important part of everyday routines; | Big picture obtained; | Smaller technical details | Interfaces and linkage to other systems within the university | |
| Operative project management; | Necessary for the whole team and unit; | Guiding operations, systematic organization of work, both individually and for the team as a whole; | Need for technical app development; | User levels reorganization; | |
| Management of vocational training; | Regular and active use, updating twice a month; | Easy to use, real-time budgeting and follow-ups up to date; | Minor technical issues, certainly easily repairable | Automatization with other systems; | |
| Management of both teaching and research projects | Active use in own projects, awareness of the projects' and employers' situation | Excellent and easy usability includes much information from several sources | Still too much manual work | Visualization (charts, graphs); | |
| Economy and project management services at the university's level | Very important to have the big picture: | Resourcing is easier in units within the projects; | Still too much manual work | More efficient automatization; |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.