Hello ​@MGMullen, at NASCO we only use the Portfolio Manager role, Team Member and System Admin.  We then control access via permissions.  So all Work/Project Managers receive a R/O permission to all work. This way when they build a dynamic portfolio they can ensure they are pulling in everything. Some will also receive a R/O to all resources depending on their responsibilities. 

Our Team Members have the feature of View, and Use, Project and Resource Management. This way if they receive a R/O permission they can still access the PM/RM screens, however they cannot assign resources or change attributes even if someone accidentally gives them R/W permission. However, you are correct that there is the limitation of access to Strategy & Outcomes.  If they need to see that information then a Portfolio Manager role is probably a better option.

When it comes to financial information, like rates for individual resources, we have that locked down to only some licenses where we enable the feature of View Resource Rates and Cost.

So I think it depends on what screens you want them to be able to see vs not and then what should they be able to edit which is controlled by the permissions (or more granular with edit features on specific attributes). 

Hope this helps,

Pam Sargent

​@MGMullen 

Take a look at the User Role Matrix available here. You will see there is a Requestor licence type that we recommend for customers asking for your use case. 
The licence type/user role gets combined with the grants/permissions to determine what use can see and what they can see on it (features).
https://success.planview.com/Planview_Portfolios/Technical_Notes/Licensing_Matrix_and_User_Roles_for_Planview_Portfolios

​@MGMullen We have a similar use case to yours.  Since deploying the Strategy capability the Team Members license has become less useful, and I expect this to fall even further with the adoption of Logbooks, which we’re setting up at the strategy levels.

We have been using the Requestor licenses but have been informed that these are being deprecated - I’d appreciate views from other customers on this, have you been told the same?  Whilst they have their constraints, they are a cost effective mechanism to introduce Planview to stakeholders who may just wish to come in and view reports or perform a data oversight function.  The Admin overheads of aligning them to a common Portfolio across the whole Active Area hasn’t proven particularly problematic.

As our Requestor licenses are limited we have been adopting a similar solution to Pam - a full Portfolios license controlled by permissions, however if this is the route we’re forced to adopt, we are also exploring whether it is more cost effective to remove our existing ‘Requestor’ users from Planview entirely and provide them with access to the data through other means.   

Thanks ​@James Bonfield I had not heard of any changes to the Requestor license but I will follow up on that.   We do have a plentiful supply of Requestor licenses and fewer Portfolio licenses.     I do share you sentiment about pursuing alternative methods to retrieve data and am starting to think further about that as well.

​@mlea Do you know if that is true that Requestor licenses are being phased out?