Skip to content
← All comparisons

DeliverySheet vs enterprise PPM

The short answer

Enterprise PPM suites — ServiceNow SPM, Planview and their neighbours — do demand management at portfolio scale: resource pools, financials, stage gates, program hierarchies, a rollout measured in quarters. If you have a PMO running hundreds of projects, you are a PPM buyer, and this is not that. DeliverySheet is the same governance idea at the scale of one engineering organisation: a request cannot become a promise without an owner, a team-agreed capacity figure and its unknowns on the record — working by Thursday, without an implementation partner.

The same idea at two scales

Strip the vocabulary and both products enforce one rule: requested work must be decided, not accumulated — shaped, refused or committed against real capacity, on the record. PPM suites implement the rule for an enterprise: every department's demand, every resource pool, every budget line, rolled up for a portfolio office whose full-time job is reading it.

DeliverySheet implements it for the altitude where most misses are actually decided — a head of engineering, their teams, this quarter's promises. The machinery an enterprise needs at portfolio altitude is deliberately absent, because at one-org altitude that machinery is not rigor; it is drag that gets the whole process abandoned by March.

Where a PPM suite is simply the right buy

  • A real PMO exists — people whose job is portfolio governance, who will configure, administer and read it.
  • Resource management across hundreds of people, shared pools, cross-program financials and actuals.
  • Stage gates and compliance workflows that auditors expect to see, in regulated delivery environments.
  • Enterprise procurement is the path anyway — SSO mandates, vendor reviews, an implementation partner budgeted from the start.

None of that is failure. It is a different job, done properly by tools built for it.

Where the suite's weight becomes the problem

The common mismatch: a 50–300-person engineering organisation adopts portfolio machinery because "demand management" was the phrase in the search box. The rollout takes two quarters, the configuration calcifies someone's first guess at a process, and the teams experience governance as data entry for a report they never see. The core idea — evidence before promises — gets blamed for the weight around it.

The one-org version keeps the core and drops the weight: a readiness bar a demand clears before commitment, capacity per team in FTE-months the teams themselves gave, a recorded exception when a real deadline outruns readiness, and an honest close. First demand to first governed commitment is an afternoon, because there is nothing to configure — the states are the product.

The test

Count the people whose full-time job would be running the tool. One or more: buy the suite, sincerely. Zero — the governance has to run itself inside the delivery work, or it will not run: that is the product this page belongs to, and the layer it owns is the same one the suites own, minus the portfolio floor above it.

Common questions

Is DeliverySheet a ServiceNow SPM or Planview alternative?
At portfolio scale, no. If you have a PMO running hundreds of projects with resource pools, financials, stage gates and dedicated administrators, you are a PPM buyer and this is not that. DeliverySheet is the same underlying idea — demand cannot become commitment without evidence — built for a single engineering organisation that needs it working this week, without an implementation project.
What does enterprise PPM do that DeliverySheet does not?
A great deal, honestly: program and portfolio hierarchies, resource management across hundreds of people, financial planning and actuals, stage-gate workflows, PPM-grade reporting, enterprise integrations and SSO, and a vendor org that can support a multi-quarter rollout. None of that exists here and none of it is planned as enterprise PPM does it.
What does DeliverySheet have that a PPM suite makes hard?
Adoption without a program. The governance core — a readiness bar before commitment, per-team capacity in FTE-months given by the teams, a recorded exception for committing early, an honest close against the promise — works from the first demand, with no configuration phase, no dedicated administrator and no training rollout. In a suite, that same core exists but arrives at the end of an implementation; here it IS the product.
What does it cost, compared?
$189 per month per workspace, flat — unlimited members and demands, no per-seat pricing, no implementation partner, cancel anytime and the workspace becomes read-only with your data intact. Enterprise PPM is priced per seat plus rollout; if that price is worth it to you, you likely genuinely need the portfolio machinery too.

$189/month per workspace, unlimited members, 7-day free trial. I answer the support email myself.