The Organizations feature was introduced to replace Groups as the primary mechanism for resource demand management in Cora PPM. This page explains why it was created and what it replaced.
Why Organizations Were Created
Prior to Organizations, Cora PPM relied on Resource Groups to manage both access permissions and resource demand alignment. While effective for smaller implementations, this approach had significant limitations at scale:
Scalability constraints: For customers with thousands of users and complex resourcing structures, Group-based management became restrictive and difficult to govern.
Manual overhead: Moving users between Groups was required whenever resourcing alignment changed. This is a time-consuming and error-prone process.
Static demand model: Groups did not support dynamic linking between user profiles and project demand, making it difficult to automate approvals or handle cross-team resource requests.
Organizations were designed to address these pain points directly, introducing a hierarchical structure that enables automation, scalability, and advanced resourcing capabilities that Groups simply cannot support.
Organizations vs. Resource Groups
Organizations and Resource Groups are complementary, not mutually exclusive but they serve very different purposes. Choosing the right approach early is critical for scalability and governance.
Capability | Organizations | Resource Groups |
|---|---|---|
Resource demand management | ✅ Primary use case | ❌ Not supported |
Access control / permissions | ⚠️ Indirect (via Org) | ✅ Primary use case |
Supply & Demand Manager roles | ✅ Required | ⚠️ Works, but limited |
Bulk user-to-project assignment | ⚠️ Possible but indirect | ✅ Straightforward |
Large-scale implementations | ✅ Recommended | ⚠️ Works, but limited |
When to Use Organizations
✅ Resource Demand Management
Use Organizations when implementing the Organisational-level resource demand feature. This links users and projects via their assigned Organisation, enabling automated access and streamlined resource allocation.
✅ Large-Scale Implementations
Recommended for customers with thousands of users or complex resourcing needs. Organizations provide a more robust and scalable structure than Groups in these scenarios.
✅ Team-Based Capacity Planning
Teams functionality (e.g., squads) only works when Organizations are enabled. Teams are tied to Organizations for capacity and approval workflows.
✅ Demand-Supply Roles
Supply Managers and Demand Managers operate based on Organizations. This is essential for approval workflows and cross-organization resource requests.
When to Use Resource Groups Instead
✅ Access Control Only
Groups are best for managing project access permissions (e.g., Project Owner, Project Manager, Read-Only) across multiple projects where resourcing logic is not required.
✅ Quick Bulk Assignment
Use Groups to bulk-assign users to projects or programmes for visibility and permissions without impacting resource demand logic.
✅ Legacy or Simple Implementations
If the customer does not require advanced resource demand or organisational-level approvals, Groups may suffice.
When NOT to Use Organizations
⚠️ Caution: Organizations add configuration complexity. Avoid enabling them unless the customer has a clear need for one or more of the use cases above.
❌ Small Implementations
For customers with a small user base and simple resourcing needs, Organizations may add unnecessary complexity with little return.
❌ No Resource Demand Requirement
If the customer will not use the Resource Demand module or advanced capacity planning, Organizations are not needed.
❌ Static Access Model
If access control is the only requirement, with no dynamic resourcing, Groups alone are sufficient and simpler to maintain.
Was this article helpful?
That’s Great!
Thank you for your feedback
Sorry! We couldn't be helpful
Thank you for your feedback
Feedback sent
We appreciate your effort and will try to fix the article