Best for
Best for professional services teams that want staffing, hours, invoicing and project margin in a single system.
- Small and mid-sized
- Enterprise
Resource Planning Comparison
At a glance
Best for
Best for professional services teams that want staffing, hours, invoicing and project margin in a single system.
Resource Management by Smartsheet
Best for
Best for professional services and agency teams already on Smartsheet that need capacity planning and utilization reporting.
Cataleo does not name a winner. Both statements come from the vendors themselves.
| Criterion | Birdview PSA | Resource Management by Smartsheet |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | From $9 / user / month Lite is billed yearly for 1 to 10 users, Team is $24 / user / month billed yearly for 5 to 100 users, Enterprise is quoted. These are the Birdview Project Management plans; the professional services plans are quoted separately. | Price on request Smartsheet shows no figure for the add-on and asks for a demo request instead. |
| Free trial | 14-day trial | Not stated |
| API | Yes, RESTful API | Yes, a REST API against the Resource Management database |
| Hosting | Cloud, with hosting in the USA, Canada and Europe; single-tenant deployments available | Not stated |
| Made in | Canada (Toronto; formerly Easy Projects) | Not stated |
| Resource planning | Yes, workload per person and week, capacity against demand, skills-based staffing suggestions, hiring forecasts and drag-and-drop rebalancing | Yes, matching people to projects by skills and availability, workload and capacity views, staffing forecasts and what-if scenario planning |
| Task planning | Yes, projects and task workflows in table, kanban, Gantt and calendar views | At phase level: a project splits into phases with their own dates, budget and bill rates, work items and tasks sit under a phase in the worklist, and the schedule is an interactive timeline where phase and assignment bars are dragged to new dates. Phases carry no dependencies between them |
| Time tracking | Yes, time entry on mobile, desktop and calendar with weekly approvals that flow into invoicing and project actuals | Yes, optional, in half-day, hours-and-minutes or itemized modes, with expenses against the project budget and an approval step |
| Reporting and controlling | Yes, more than 250 prebuilt reports and dashboards, estimate-at-completion tracking and margin alerts | Yes, pre-built utilization, time and fees, expense and budget reports |
| AI features | stated Yes | No |
| Deployment | Cloud (SaaS), Browser-based | Cloud (SaaS), Browser-based |
| Support | Chat | more entries Email helpdesk, Community forum |
| Onboarding | Documentation and knowledge base, Guided onboarding | Documentation and knowledge base, Personal consulting |
| Company size | Small and mid-sized, Enterprise | Small and mid-sized, Enterprise |
| Integrations | more entries Microsoft Office 365, Microsoft Teams, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Project, SharePoint, OneDrive, Jira, ServiceNow, QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite, Sage Intacct, Adobe, TimeControl, Zapier, Workato | Smartsheet, Zapier, QuickBooks, Google Calendar, Outlook, Apple iCloud |
Adds a column to the table, from the tools in this category.
Row where the values differ The small markers point at the lower number, the longer list or the stated feature. They describe the data, they are not a verdict.
The short version
Every line is one datapoint from the table above, picked automatically. Nothing here is written text.
The trade-offs
Birdview PSA
Strengths
Limitations
Resource Management by Smartsheet
Strengths
Limitations
Plans
Birdview PSA
Resource Management by Smartsheet
What users say
Birdview PSA
No reviews yet. Nothing has been published here yet, and no score is shown. How a review is checked before it appears is described below.
Resource Management by Smartsheet
No reviews yet. Nothing has been published here yet, and no score is shown. How a review is checked before it appears is described below.
Before sending, the author has to confirm three things: that they have used the product themselves, that they work neither for the vendor nor for a competitor, and that nobody is paying them for the review. We also ask whether the vendor invited them to write it. That answer is required, either answer is accepted, and it stays with the review.
Every review is read by a person before it appears. An email address is required and is confirmed: we send a link to it, and a review does not reach us until the author opens that link, so a review has a sender who was reachable at least once rather than being anonymous. Where what somebody writes needs backing, we ask them for evidence that they used the product, and a review that does not get it is not published. We publish positive and negative reviews alike, we pay nothing and offer nothing for a review, and we accept none that was bought or incentivised.
What we cannot do is verify a purchase. There is no shop here and no account, so whether the author really used the tool rests on their own declaration, on whatever we ask them for, and on the plausibility of what they write. We say so rather than implying a check that does not exist.
A vendor cannot buy a review, and cannot have one removed or changed because they dislike it. We remove or edit a review only if it breaks our rules or the law, for example a false statement of fact. Paid placement has no effect on which reviews appear or on any score.
Where this comes from
Birdview PSA https://www.birdviewpsa.com · no check date recorded yet
Resource Management by Smartsheet https://www.smartsheet.com/platform/resource-management · no check date recorded yet
This table lists factual criteria taken from information the vendors publish themselves. For how we put it together, see the methodology.