Evaluation of software for project management in the field of IT: Problems and prospects

   Aim. The presented study aims to develop a model for evaluating software for project management in the field of IT and to outline opportunities for its implementation in an IT company.
   Tasks. The authors substantiate the problems and prospects of using software for project management in the field of IT; describe existing software for IT project management; develop an activity model reflecting the operating principles of the system for evaluating software for IT project management; substantiate opportunities for the practical application of the developed model; identify key criteria for selecting software for IT project management.
   Methods. This study uses the methods of theoretical analysis and synthesis, comparison, generalization, juxtaposition, abstraction, deduction and induction, content analysis, design and modeling, observation.
   Results. A model for evaluating software for project management in the field of IT is developed and substantiated. The possibilities, priority directions, and ways of its implementation in an IT company are described. The scientific and practical significance of the study consists in the argumentation for the conceptual framework of a model of a score-rating system for evaluating software for project management for the needs of an IT company. The model can be used when comparing software based on functional and score characteristics. Prospects for the development of the presented system include testing the model on various software for managing IT projects and adapting the model and its internal characteristics to the needs of the IT company, adjusting the proposed mechanism and conceptual framework of the evaluation system.
   Conclusions. The study establishes that the prospects for using the presented model are good in cases of a generalized cost-functional comparison of a wide range of software; detailed evaluation of the best software in terms of functional diversity (for example, a score comparison of the three best programs in terms of the total number of functional characteristics), which would reduce the final load on the user during evaluation; comparison of a small number of options when choosing from the most preferable software tools.

1. Rybkina E. A., Gilmutdinov S. R. Project management: Area, methodology, system. Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii = The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology. 2014; (1): 36-39. (In Russ.).

2. Valieva E. V. Analysis of IT project management practices. Obrazovanie i pravo. 2020; (10): 156-161. (In Russ.). URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/analiz-praktik-upravleniya-it-proektami

3. Torosyan E. K., Tiulkina A. S. Selection criteria for IT project management. Peterburgskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal = Saint-Petersburg Economic Journal. 2020; (1): 99-108. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.25631/PEJ.2020.1.99.108

4. Yakovchuk A. I. A hybrid approach to event project management. Ekonomicheskii vector = Economic Vector. 2022;(1): 56-60. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.36807/2411-7269-2022-1-28-56-60

5. Meshcheryakova M. M. Economic essence of forming a portfolio of projects in an organization working on the principles of agile-manifesto. Innovatsii i investitsii = Innovation & Investment. 2021; (12): 22-24. (In Russ.).

6. Naydis I. O. Agile method in project management: Method implementation, competencies of team members and project manager. Vestnik Astrakhanskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika = Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. Series: Economics. 2020;(4): 15-24.(In Russ.). DOI: 10.24143/2073-5537-2020-4-15-24

7. Pervoukhin D. V., Isaev E. A., Rytikov G. O., Filyugina E. K., Hayrapetyan D. A. Theoretical comparative analysis of cascading iterative, and hybrid approaches to IT project life cycle management. Business Informatics. 2020; 14 (1): 32-40. (In Russ.: Biznes-informatika. 2020; 14 (1): 32-40. DOI: 10.17323/2587-814X.2020.1.32.40.

8. Kundu J., Bishoi T., Bhattacharya M., Chowdhury A. Project management software-an overview. International Journal of Current Innovation Research. 2015; 1 (4): 105–111.

9. Pellerin A., Perrier N., Guillot X., Léger P.-M. Project management software utilization and project performance. Procedia Technology. 2013; 9: 857-866. DOI: 10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.095

10. Stepanov A. 10 project management systems: Powerful, reliable, efficient. Ganttpro. Feb. 04, 2022. URL: https://blog.ganttpro.com/ru/sistemy-instrumenty-servisy-upravlenie-proektami/ (accessed on 17. 10. 2022). (In Russ.).

11. Zavartseva E. V. Definition of integrative features of a system model for the project management in training economists-managers. Integratsiya obrazovaniya = Integration of Education. 2011; (3): 26-33. (In Russ.).

12. Setyaeva E. Yu. IT component of an integrated approach in project management in the enterprise. Transportnoe delo Rossii = Transport Business of Russia. 2010; (3): 14-16. (In Russ.).

13. Kotlyar E. V. Pushkareva E. M. Kanban project management system. Biznes-obrazovanie v ekonomike znanii. 2020; (1): 57-59. (In Russ.).

14. Rybalkina Z. M. Modeling the project management system. Mezhdunarodnyi zhurnal gumanitarnykh i estestvennykh nauk = International Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences. 2017;(10): 172-174. (In Russ.).