Introducing G2.ai, the future of software buying.Try now
Compare IBM Targetprocess and Planview AdaptiveWork 
Featured Products
Sponsored
You’re seeing this ad based on the product’s relevance to this page. Sponsored content does not receive preferential treatment in any of G2’s ratings.
CAST Highlight
Visit Website
Sponsored
You’re seeing this ad based on the product’s relevance to this page. Sponsored content does not receive preferential treatment in any of G2’s ratings.
Archer Consulting Team
Visit Website
Sponsored
You’re seeing this ad based on the product’s relevance to this page. Sponsored content does not receive preferential treatment in any of G2’s ratings.
VOGSY
Visit Website
At a Glance
Market Segments
Mid-Market (41.9% of reviews)
Mid-Market (48.0% of reviews)
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Contact us for pricing
IBM Targetprocess
Star Rating
(242)4.3 out of 5
Market Segments
Mid-Market (41.9% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about IBM TargetprocessPlanview AdaptiveWork
Star Rating
(530)4.1 out of 5
Market Segments
Mid-Market (48.0% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
Contact us for pricing
Learn more about Planview AdaptiveWorkSummary
AI Generated Summary
AI-generated. Powered by real user reviews.
- Users report that Planview AdaptiveWork excels in task creation and assignment, scoring 9.2, while IBM Targetprocess falls behind with a score of 8.5. Reviewers mention that the intuitive interface of Planview makes it easier to create and assign tasks quickly.
- Reviewers mention that Planview AdaptiveWork offers superior project planning capabilities, scoring 9.2 compared to IBM Targetprocess's 7.5. Users say that the GANTT chart feature in Planview is particularly praised for its clarity and ease of use.
- Users on G2 highlight that Planview AdaptiveWork provides better resource management features, with a score of 9.0, while IBM Targetprocess scores 7.1. Reviewers say that the resource allocation tools in Planview are more robust and user-friendly, allowing for better tracking of team workloads.
- G2 users report that Planview AdaptiveWork has a more effective approach to task prioritization, scoring 9.3, compared to IBM Targetprocess's 7.7. Reviewers mention that the prioritization features in Planview help teams focus on high-impact tasks more efficiently.
- Users say that the analytics capabilities of Planview AdaptiveWork, particularly in forecasting and reporting, are superior, with scores of 9.0 and 8.8 respectively, while IBM Targetprocess lags behind with lower scores. Reviewers mention that the detailed reporting features in Planview provide actionable insights that are easy to interpret.
- Reviewers mention that the quality of support for Planview AdaptiveWork is rated at 8.4, while IBM Targetprocess scores higher at 8.9. Users report that while both platforms offer good support, IBM Targetprocess is noted for its responsiveness and helpfulness in resolving issues quickly.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
IBM Targetprocess
No pricing availablePlanview AdaptiveWork
Multiple Plans Available
Contact us for pricing
Free Trial
IBM Targetprocess
Free Trial is available
Planview AdaptiveWork
No trial information availableRatings
Meets Requirements
8.6
214
8.4
443
Ease of Use
7.9
228
7.7
447
Ease of Setup
7.4
106
7.3
184
Ease of Admin
7.8
100
7.8
185
Quality of Support
8.9
189
8.4
372
Has the product been a good partner in doing business?
9.0
96
8.4
181
Product Direction (% positive)
8.7
219
7.8
444
Features by Category
Tasks
8.5
34
|
Verified
9.2
83
|
Verified
8.2
32
|
Verified
9.0
87
|
Verified
8.2
33
|
Verified
9.0
48
8.2
29
|
Verified
9.0
78
|
Verified
7.7
33
|
Verified
9.0
77
7.7
32
|
Verified
Feature Not Available
8.1
30
|
Verified
8.5
82
|
Verified
Feature Not Available
8.7
77
Projects
7.6
29
|
Verified
9.2
82
|
Verified
7.9
28
|
Verified
9.2
83
|
Verified
7.2
25
|
Verified
9.1
79
|
Verified
7.3
29
|
Verified
8.9
76
|
Verified
8.4
31
|
Verified
9.0
82
|
Verified
7.0
26
|
Verified
8.9
71
Feature Not Available
8.9
76
8.0
27
|
Verified
9.0
85
|
Verified
7.7
24
|
Verified
9.0
73
7.2
27
|
Verified
9.2
74
|
Verified
8.4
27
|
Verified
8.8
71
|
Verified
Resource Management
7.2
28
|
Verified
8.9
77
|
Verified
7.6
29
|
Verified
8.8
77
|
Verified
7.3
30
|
Verified
9.0
76
|
Verified
Project Monitoring
7.7
27
|
Verified
9.0
76
|
Verified
7.5
29
|
Verified
8.9
77
|
Verified
8.7
30
|
Verified
9.1
84
|
Verified
Generative AI
6.9
13
Not enough data
6.7
13
Not enough data
Agentic AI - Project Management
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Feature Not Available
Portfolio Management
8.2
22
|
Verified
8.4
110
|
Verified
8.5
23
|
Verified
8.4
125
|
Verified
8.4
23
8.4
109
|
Verified
8.6
23
|
Verified
8.3
95
|
Verified
Project Management
8.3
22
|
Verified
8.4
140
|
Verified
8.0
22
|
Verified
8.3
133
|
Verified
8.5
22
|
Verified
8.3
104
|
Verified
Resource Management
8.3
23
|
Verified
8.5
124
|
Verified
8.5
23
|
Verified
8.3
127
|
Verified
8.6
22
|
Verified
8.1
119
|
Verified
Data & Analytics
8.3
23
|
Verified
8.2
124
|
Verified
8.4
23
|
Verified
8.0
126
|
Verified
8.4
23
|
Verified
8.0
124
|
Verified
7.6
21
|
Verified
8.1
105
|
Verified
Strategy - Project and Portfolio Management
7.2
6
Not enough data
8.1
6
Not enough data
8.1
6
Not enough data
7.8
6
Not enough data
7.8
6
Not enough data
7.8
6
Not enough data
6.9
6
Not enough data
8.1
6
Not enough data
7.8
6
Not enough data
8.1
6
Not enough data
Analytics
8.3
14
Not enough data
Execution
8.6
15
Not enough data
8.2
15
Not enough data
8.7
15
Not enough data
Roadmapping
8.6
15
Not enough data
8.6
15
Not enough data
Communication
7.2
13
Not enough data
7.6
11
Not enough data
7.1
11
Not enough data
6.8
12
Not enough data
Goal Creation
7.5
12
Not enough data
6.7
12
Not enough data
7.4
11
Not enough data
7.1
12
Not enough data
Agentic AI - Objectives and Key Results (OKR)
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Customer Management
Not enough data
8.9
25
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.3
24
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.9
24
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.3
26
|
Verified
Project Management
Not enough data
9.0
29
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.9
29
|
Verified
Not enough data
9.3
27
|
Verified
Not enough data
9.0
29
|
Verified
Accounting
Not enough data
9.1
25
Not enough data
8.4
24
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.6
23
Not enough data
9.0
25
Not enough data
9.1
26
|
Verified
Portfolio Management
Not enough data
8.8
27
Not enough data
8.3
27
Not enough data
8.1
27
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.7
25
Analytics
Not enough data
9.0
27
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.8
30
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.5
27
|
Verified
Administration
Not enough data
8.5
27
|
Verified
Not enough data
9.0
28
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.8
28
|
Verified
Platform
Not enough data
8.5
26
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.6
24
|
Verified
Not enough data
9.0
27
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.9
28
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.4
26
|
Verified
Generative AI
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Artificial Intelligence - Professional Services Automation
Not enough data
Feature Not Available
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Agentic AI - Professional Services Automation
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Automation
7.9
19
9.2
52
8.2
19
9.1
51
8.1
18
9.1
47
Administration
8.1
17
8.9
48
6.9
15
9.1
47
7.8
19
9.2
50
Project management
7.5
19
9.3
51
8.1
19
9.2
48
8.0
17
9.4
50
8.0
17
9.1
50
6.6
15
9.3
49
6.9
14
9.0
50
8.3
18
9.0
51
Workload
7.4
16
9.1
50
7.9
18
9.1
50
7.8
17
8.9
49
7.6
14
8.9
47
Communication & Collaboration
6.9
14
8.9
47
7.0
16
8.8
46
7.7
17
9.2
47
Cost Management
6.7
16
8.7
46
6.8
18
9.1
48
7.2
15
8.6
45
Integration
7.2
15
9.3
39
7.2
15
9.1
39
7.4
14
9.1
37
Generative AI
8.7
5
Not enough data
8.3
5
Not enough data
Agentic AI - Work Management
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Strategic Planning - Strategic Portfolio Management
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Strategic Management - Strategic Portfolio Management
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Data Analysis - Strategic Portfolio Management
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Artificial Intelligence - Strategic Portfolio Management
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Communication
Feature Not Available
Not enough data
7.4
36
Not enough data
7.8
35
Not enough data
Planning
8.2
44
Not enough data
8.3
45
Not enough data
8.6
44
Not enough data
8.7
44
Not enough data
8.0
42
Not enough data
Workflow Management
8.1
42
Not enough data
8.4
47
Not enough data
7.6
34
Not enough data
Feature Not Available
Not enough data
Categories
Categories
Shared Categories
IBM Targetprocess and Planview AdaptiveWork are categorized as Project and Portfolio Management, Project Management, and Work Management
Unique Categories
IBM Targetprocess is categorized as Strategy and Innovation Roadmapping Tools, Product Management, Objectives and Key Results (OKR), and Strategic Portfolio Management
Planview AdaptiveWork is categorized as Professional Services Automation
Reviews
Reviewers' Company Size
IBM Targetprocess
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
Planview AdaptiveWork
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
Small-Business
(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market
(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise
(> 1000 emp.)
Reviewers' Industry
Computer Software
20.9%
Information Technology and Services
17.5%
Marketing and Advertising
6.0%
Financial Services
4.7%
Internet
3.4%
Other
47.4%
Information Technology and Services
14.8%
Computer Software
12.5%
Marketing and Advertising
8.6%
Financial Services
4.9%
Hospital & Health Care
2.9%
Other
56.3%
Alternatives
Discussions
Software and hardware requirements?
1 Comment
Official Response from IBM Targetprocess
The two most recent versions of the following browsers are supported:
Google Chrome (recommended), Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari (not supported on Windows),...Read more
What are the limits of the free team pricing plan
1 Comment
Official Response from IBM Targetprocess
The team pricing plan in Targetprocess is totally free. You can have an unlimited number of active users, with a licensing price $0 per user / month. The...Read more
Is it possible to integrate Targetprocess and Slack?
1 Comment
Official Response from IBM Targetprocess
It is possible to get selected alerts from Targetprocess to Slack, and submit an entity to Targetprocess from your Slack directly. Each direction is...Read more
How can we automate the flow and approval of QA testing and release?
3 Comments
DA
We also need help, but only in QA testing, we are currently severely lacking staff for testing. Who can I turn to for these services?Read more
Why when i am adding new milestone from a project, i need to add the name of the project? bug?
2 Comments
AS
Actually if you open the project plan (schedule) and you try to add a milestone Clarizen doesn't ask about the project name. I tested it and it works.Read more
How can I create more automation options at the Configure tab?
2 Comments
DG
Hi Christopher - our Customer Success site is quite well visited by Clarizen team and other customers so you can get good feedback there for questions like...Read more
Hunting for software insights?
With over 3 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.
