Does Syncro have project management?
Syncro is a capable SMB all-in-one, but its 'projects' are stacked tickets. Here's what it can and can't do — and where that leaves you.
Not in any real sense. Syncro is a popular SMB all-in-one that combines RMM, PSA, and billing at transparent per-technician pricing, but it doesn't have a dedicated project module. In Syncro, 'projects' are handled as parent/child tickets — there's no Gantt chart, no critical path, no task dependencies, no milestones, and no portfolio view.
What that means in practice
For a quick multi-step job, nesting child tickets under a parent works fine. But for anything with sequencing — an office move, a data-center migration, a multi-site rollout — you can't model prerequisites, see the longest dependent chain, or reflow dates when a step slips. You're tracking a checklist, not managing a project.
Syncro's real strengths
Credit where it's due: Syncro's appeal is simplicity and price. One tool for remote monitoring, tickets, and invoicing, with straightforward per-tech billing, suits smaller shops that don't want to stitch a stack together. Project management just isn't what it's for.
Adding real project management
Current gives any MSP a genuine project layer: dependency-aware scheduling, a native critical-path engine, Kanban and Gantt, milestones, a portfolio view, and PTO-aware back-scheduling. In Current-native mode, Current is the source of truth and makes no PSA calls at all — so you can run real, sequenced projects even when your billing lives in an all-in-one like Syncro.
What you actually lose without a project module
Parent/child tickets fail in a specific way, and it is worth naming it. Ticket systems model work as a flat list with a status each. Projects model work as a graph: task B cannot start until task A finishes, task C can run alongside both, and the go-live date is whatever the longest chain of dependent work adds up to. A ticket list cannot express that chain, so nobody can answer the two questions that matter on a delivery project — which task is currently driving the finish date, and what happens to that date if this one slips.
The practical result is that estimates become guesses and slips are discovered late. A technician marks a child ticket done three days behind and nothing recalculates, because there is nothing to recalculate. The client finds out at the status call.
Where the line actually falls with Current
Current adds the layer Syncro does not have: dependency-aware scheduling with all four dependency types, a real critical-path calculation, an interactive dependency map, Kanban and Gantt views, milestones, a portfolio view, and back-scheduling from a fixed go-live date.
Be clear about the boundary, though. Current can run projects in a native mode where it makes no PSA calls at all — which is what a Syncro shop would use, since Current does not integrate with Syncro. In that mode Current owns the plan: sequencing, dates, dependencies, assignments, and progress. Time entry and invoicing stay in Syncro, because Current only pushes time into a PSA it is connected to. You get the planning layer, not a billing migration.
Who this suits
- Syncro shops running genuine multi-step delivery work — migrations, office moves, multi-site rollouts — who need sequencing their ticket queue cannot express.
- Shops where a slipped task should visibly move the go-live date rather than quietly surprise everyone at the end.
- Teams who want clients to watch progress without seeing internal financials, which a ticket queue cannot safely expose.
If your project work is genuinely a short checklist, Syncro's parent/child tickets are fine and adding a second tool is overhead you do not need. The moment sequencing matters, a checklist stops being enough.