New Behavior in Timesheets with Project Server 2007 SP2: Timesheet Pre-population Goodness
Brian Smith writes here about a new behavior added in SP2 around timesheet pre-population and some reports of some customer dissatisfaction.
The ‘Gist’ is that with SP2 if you have the ‘Current task assignments’ option in the Default Timesheet Creation Mode then even after a user creates their timesheet new tasks assigned to them that fall within that timesheet period will still be added to the timesheet. Pre SP2 these new task assignments would NOT show up in the timesheet. The user would have had to delete the timesheet and recreate it. That was a HUGE bummer and the new functionality is VERY cool.
As Brian states there are a few customers that have users that want to delete a line from their timesheet but now, with SP2, if the line was a task from a Project the timesheet line comes back the next time the user opens their timesheet. The timesheet will now ALWAYS contain all tasks to which the user is assigned (that fall into that timesheet period.) These customers are unhappy with this behavior.
I think this is the best thing that could happen for these users. Basically, we have a situation here where a team member has been assigned a task by a project manager so it shows up on their timesheet. Then for whatever reason the team member feels that the task should not be on their timesheet. Either they feel that the task should be done by someone else or they feel that it should be done next week or some other reason. So they delete the line but then it comes back. So the good part of this is that it will encourage this user to talk to their project manager and explain why they think the task should not be on their timesheet. If the PM agrees then they can remove the assignment or move the task to a later week and it will drop from the users timesheet.
This feature not only makes timesheet task population dynamic but will now also encourage team member-project manager communications! Now THAT is a good feature. :-)
UPDATE (on 6/30/2009):
Here is the KB on this issue. Funny…it actually links back here and to Brian Smith’s blog. :-)