It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Project setup with multiple teams/timelines


Zachary K (19354339) | asked Jun 21 '11, 10:56 a.m.
Hello,
We're looking to implement RTC for our internal development teams. We're looking for guidance on best practices with the project area, team area and especially timeline setup.

In a nutshell this is what we need:
- Each team has unique but related timelines.
- All of these timelines will tie into an overall timeline.

What is the best way to structure and manage these timelines? As we all know, the introduction of multiple timelines in a project adds complexity. What is the best way to setup this up in RTC?
I'll appreciate any guidance and previous experiences one could share in this area.
Thank you in advance.

5 answers



permanent link
Zachary K (19354339) | answered Jun 22 '11, 1:46 p.m.
Thanks for the links, it explains well the RTC concepts.
However, our concerns are based on the presentation to the user of multiple timelines and the proper allocation and distribution of workitems to the "correct" timelines when submitted. As well there seem to be a bit of confusion of how to make sure work-items and relationships between the timelines make sense. So in other words how to make sure that the overall project timeline gets the right feeds of information from the "sub-timelines". Ok, sub-timelines don't exist in RTC but from an organizational perspectives this is what they are.
Any guidance and experiences along those lines would be appreciated.
Thanks.

permanent link
Geoffrey Clemm (30.1k33035) | answered Jun 22 '11, 8:03 p.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
I would encourage you to minimize the number of timelines, since
currently, you cannot have a single plan that spans iterations from more
than one timeline.

Work item 94056 requests the ability to do so ... please feel free to
add a comment to that work item to indicate your interest/support.

Cheers,
Geoff

On 6/22/2011 1:53 PM, zachary wrote:
Thanks for the links, it explains well the RTC concepts.
However, our concerns are based on the presentation to the user of
multiple timelines and the proper allocation and distribution of
workitems to the "correct" timelines when submitted. As
well there seem to be a bit of confusion of how to make sure
work-items and relationships between the timelines make sense. So in
other words how to make sure that the overall project timeline gets
the right feeds of information from the "sub-timelines".
Ok, sub-timelines don't exist in RTC but from an organizational
perspectives this is what they are.
Any guidance and experiences along those lines would be appreciated.
Thanks.

permanent link
Qiong Feng Huang (76911610) | answered Jun 21 '11, 6:18 p.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER
Here is a doc you might be interested in:
https://jazz.net/library/article/542#Adopting_Plans

permanent link
Qiong Feng Huang (76911610) | answered Jun 22 '11, 12:50 a.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER
One more doc: https://jazz.net/library/article/137

permanent link
kuo hao tah (1142830) | answered Dec 15 '13, 9:01 p.m.
Hi There,

My request is very similar to Zach's, to reword it, I'd like the ability for :
a) Multiple Agile scrum teams to exist in the same project area, each having their own timeline (as their iteration start and end dates might not coincide with each other), however all Agile teams have the same Release start and end dates
b) Ability roll up reporting across Releases for ALL Agile teams

The only way i can imagine this happening is to enable 'Sub Timelines' (this is currently not possible) so that story points can be rolled up across ALL Scrum Teams that each have their own sub timelines, to a 'Master Timeline' , from which the rolled up reporting view is produced.

Can anyone suggest any other workaround to get a rolled up release reporting view across scrum teams that each have their own iteration cadences?

Thanks,
KH

Your answer


Register or to post your answer.


Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.