Automation Anywhere Reviews

We use this solution to automate tasks for which multiple steps have to be done.

We do it a very large number of times in a day.

We have been able to automate tasks that have a lot of repetitiveness.

The most valuable feature is the object cloning.

The user interface is easy to use.

While we have been developing over time, there have been issues with stability.

The speed of automation needs to be improved.

This solution is not that stable.

We have been able to scale ok.

I implemented this solution for my company.

This is a solution that I recommend.

We are looking forward to trying the IQ Bot to help with reading, scanning, and querying of files.

This solution has a wonderful concept, but the stability needs to be improved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I have done a lot of use cases. Recently, I have done SAP automation. I worked with MS Excel, a web application, a Windows application, and a mainframe application. We automated three to four applications at once. We automated them in a row where one application's output would be input for another application.

I have done development and production support. I have helped organizations with integration.

The Visual Studio development for the basic version, which they launched long back, that's amazingly good. It has a good design, which is better than Blue Prism and somewhat better than UiPath.

They have good people.

Citrix automation is unstable. It is failing on a frequent basis. With the bot, they claim a lot of things, but it is not the real picture. It is not as powerful as they claim. It is not up to the mark.

Once I'm friendly with a tool, then I'll start checking the stability and power of it. It is not there with Automation Anywhere.

The management people don't know the technicalities. The actual tool is not as powerful as they claim. They are pitching the IQ Bot, but it's not as powerful or as fruitful in real world scenarios as it should be.

The user analytics are not analytics.

Their Community Edition is awful. Every second day, it will fail. It will become corrupt.

Stability depends on your use case and what type application you are automating.

Stability is good, RPA is a emerging field, so you can't expect a lot of stability. You develop things and the maintenance is there. 

Stability depends on the applications being developed. E.g., if it's a Windows application, they are already stable. Doing automation is not a big thing, but doing automation with little maintenance, that is a big thing.

Scalabilty is good.

The technical support is good. 

Their marketing team is good.

The initial setup is good.

I am the person with does the integration. I am developer. I can develop an application in three weeks (done and dusted). After moving it to production, there are a lot of challenges. Then, I am spending three hours of my bandwidth being occupied every day with maintenance.

RPA implementation will be always fruitful. Return on investment will be always higher than the input costs.

Automation Anywhere is a bit more expensive. This is one of the things that we face when we talk to small start ups in Bangalore. They want to do an RPA implementation, but don't have the money. UiPath is the answer.

We have done a lot of complex automation using different RPA tools: Automation Anywhere, UiPath, and Blue Prism.

UiPath is a bit better. UiPath is a bit strong in fewer areas, such as Citrix automation. Citrix automation is like a thin client automation. For applications not present on your local machine and in the cloud, UiPath is more powerful. With RPA, you can automate things. Howe, are those automations stable? That is another question. In order to stabilize automation of thin client, UiPath is more powerful. There are few other features which are better than Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

UiPath has amazing scalability, while Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism are good.

UI Path is leading the market. There is no doubt about it. They have their own challenges. They aren't flawless. 

UiPath Visual Studio is not good. It is messy. Automation Anywhere Visual Studio integration is smooth and user-friendly. 

Automation Anywhere is good in some parts with their Smart Recorder that they they are launching in A2019, that is there but yes they are leading. They are putting in real hard work and emerging. They are in second place as of now in the RPA world.

We are an Automation Anywhere partner and we use it in the finance domain, in areas like B2B or B2C, etc. We also use it in HR and other domains for our clients. We have used it for vendor-invoice processing and recruitment. Those are our two major use cases as of now.

We have automated the recruitment and onboarding process for one of our clients. In that scenario, it has saved a lot of time. A process that used to take seven to ten days has now been reduced to half an hour. It has created a lot of efficiency.

It has also helped in terms of security because of all the off-boarding processes that we have automated. If an employee leaves, all his security access, email IDs, etc., are disabled on that same day. That person no longer has access to work on the company's domain.

IQ Bot is one of the most valuable features because it helps in processing different formats from different vendors.

As of now, it's only available on Windows machines. I would love if it were to also be available for Mac machines. That is something which is lacking as of now.

A cloud version was also missing, but now, with the new A2019 version, that's coming.

When I compare Automation Anywhere with the competition, some of the competitors have ready-made, off-the-shelf modules. For example, UiPath integrates with Windows AD. That is missing as of now in Automation Anywhere. If that became available it would also be great.

Stability-wise, it's a fine product. We haven't faced any major challenges up until now.

Scalability is also great. You automate one process and replicate it again and again.

For example, one of our clients has global operations. What we automated in one country, we were able to implement around the globe. We were also able to just keep on adding on new virtual machines in a given location, to have more and more processes automated. 

It's easy to scale.

Technical support is great. We have raised multiple queries over time and the results have been really good. The responses have been really good and fast. The feedback I have heard is that they get back to us same-day or, if not, the next day.

We had a good due-diligence process before we finalized. We compared different aspects like security, reliability, and compliance. AA scored high on the compliance front, so that's why we went with it.

The initial setup is straightforward. I don't see any complexity involved.

We have seen ROI in areas I mentioned earlier like time savings. We have seen good results.

The product starts at $10,000 and then it's up to you regarding how much you can consume. Comparatively speaking, the costs are higher for Automation Anywhere.

It's a good product. Compared to the competition, you can do multiple processes with one license. So there are a lot of savings in terms of license costs. It's easy to use and has good, UI-based interaction. It's easy to deploy as well. Clients can also train their own staff to do easy implementations, so they can save costs there as well.

I would rate Automation Anywhere at eight out of ten. There is always scope for improvement. There are a few ready-made things that they need to incorporate.

We are using it for finance and logistics-related tasks in departments that we are automating. E.g., for finance, we are using it for cash and bank reconciliation. For logistics, we automated eBay billing for the government portal before any goods can come out of the airport or get inside the airport for any package. We are using Automation Anywhere to create the transits IDs for this.

The product is deployed via internal cloud.

For the cash and bank reconciliation, we brought down amount of days it takes to do the reconciling and announcing the results. Previously, it took 10 to 15 days. Now, it takes two days.

It runs in the background.

It doesn't require any coding knowledge. Any business person can automate this process.

We started with attended bots and are in the process of migrating to unattended bots. We are facing a lot of issues with unattended bots as Automation Anywhere is not supporting this. When we run unattended bots in the background, the screen resolution changes. That needs to be improved because it might cause our IR operations or objects to fail.

Attended automation is fine but it is not the favorable because we are looking for an unattended bots. If we want to trigger bots manually, then we need a resource for that. Therefore, there is no point in hiring a resource only to run the bot. They need to improve the scheduler.

There are a couple of issues which needs to be rectified. Otherwise, Automation Anywhere is like using the Windows Scheduler. Aside from the Control Room, it's normal automation, and you can use other tools for that.

Sometimes, the ESX services will stop. We are working with IT to resolve this, as it's not our fault. Automation Anywhere is stopping the service, and during that time, the bot will be stopped. Right now, we are logging into the client machine and restarting/rebooting them, then restarting the services. As some of our processes run at night, we won't know that the service is down since our processes run 24/7. This issue is then escalated to the manager. This is the current challenge that we are facing, and we would like them to improve this.

Automation with bots runs fine only if it is an attended bot. With unattended bots, the bots run only 25 to 30 percent of the time.

We are not using it to its full scale. We have deployed only nine bots in production and two in development. We are only using three or four bots completely. Rest are going unused, so we are not looking to scale out anytime soon.

We hardly get a solution out of the technical support. I would rate them as a five out of 10. There is a lack of ownership.

In Juniper, we had automation for different tools, like dashboards and visualizations. We used Tableau. Therefore, we upgraded some of the manual gap, then we began to explore other tools at that time. That is how we came to know about Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Approvals are taking us more time than development. For the bigger products, it takes four to six months to scale. If it is a smaller product, then it can take 45 days.

We are using consultants who are developing our bots for us.

We receive help from customer support.

We have not seen ROI in the last year. We should see ROI on the platform in two or three years.

If we use attended bots, there is no ROI in the product.

Our annual licensing costs for the entire company are $100,000.

We did a PoC with UiPath as well. We felt Automation Anywhere was better than UiPath because of its features, like its Control Room.

UiPath is better for development because its workflow feature.

I would rate the solution as a six out of 10 due to the resolution issue. It is a major issue that we are facing with the tool.

Get the approvals done before investing. We wasted the license for six months. The licenses were unused because we didn't have the approvals for the application. We procured it and kept it for six months. Therefore, before investing, get the approvals internally, then go for it.

We have integrated Automation Anywhere with SAP (ERP system) and BlackLine (reconciliation tool). For integrating, we are using web scaping tools and object cloning.

I am certified Automation Anywhere RPA professional with Automation Anywhere University. I am looking for courses on solution architecture and would like to have something for this in the University.

We don't use Citrix automation.

We've done a lot of automation with the product in the last two years. We started with accounts receivable processes in finance. I would say like AR function is one of the most mature functions in the product right now because we almost automated all the aspects of accounts receivable.

We have also started looking at automating the accounts payable process as well. I've only mentioned finance at this point, but we also have done a lot of automation with IT, as well as with procurement. Right now the penetration is higher with the support functions but we are also looking at different ways to automate. For example, we would like to use automation technology in core engineering. We also want to be expansive and do projects beyond our current boundaries — outside of just India. We've already done a small PoC (proof of concept) with a company in China and we also automated three small processes with a U.S. entity.

We use it daily and have done projects with the support functions, such as financial services, IT, and procurement support. We have 50 to 60 processes that have been automated using RPA in all three areas put together. This is the breadth and extent of what we have automated.

We are using the on-premise deployment model.

The product is improving our company in a number of different ways through the automation it helps us to create. I would say like the AR function is completely automated right now, but we are in the stages where we are looking beyond AR, beyond finance, and beyond support functions. 

All this time that we were using the product in the beginning, we chose to work on individual processes for automation. We are working in small pockets. We were identifying a project or a process as a small chunk of automation and we looked at opportunities within that particular function or a process and automated it step-by-step. 

For example, within the AR invoice process, there are different types of invoices that we do, like project invoices, manual invoices, past invoices, and other invoice variations. We had started building solutions for these things in isolation. We automated the SPA (Sales and Purchase Agreement) function first and then the project invoices. Then we saw an opportunity and made a change to bring all the invoices into the same platform. So now there is a bot which identifies what kind of invoice it is and it triggers a respective sub-rooting function what we have built-in. This is much more efficient. The AR function is something which we have automated end-to-end right now.

When bots start interacting successfully with each other, that is when we will see a true enterprise RPA (Robotic Process Automation) evolving out of using this solution. So we have benefitted a lot now, but expect that we will benefit even more in the future as we get better at using intelligence.

When we automate, we deliberately kept some manual toll gates. This was a very informed decision that we made. It's a conscious decision that we don't want to leave everything to the bot to do from start until the end because the accountability will not be there with any of the team members. This is one of the reasons why we have kept a manual toll gate in all our processes.

I would say the entire Automation Anywhere RPA functionality is the most valuable part of the product because it helps me to automate the mundane interpretative task. That is where most of my team members, who are part of the support team for product function, spend a lot of their time.

The IQ Bot is good. The pilot that we have done with one of our U.S. entities went well. Our accuracy has increased tremendously over the last two to three months. We have increased FTE efficiency. It's definitely a success for us. 

You spend some time trying to automate using RPA and then once a solution is created, they will gain back the time that they spent in development and then have more time to think about how they can further improvise and improve the process. That is all possible with the RPA. That is what we have been doing successfully in the last two years. The opportunity to customize and build out the platform makes it more useful and valuable.

We found it very comfortable because we are all functional experts. Nobody had any programming experience earlier. We all were able to learn Automation Anywhere in a four day classroom session that we had with one of the trainers from Automation Anywhere. With that, we started our own development. 

At least for our requirements, whatever version we have been using till now —  I think the current version 11.3.2 — is fantastic and more than we could use as we grew with the product. Any additional functionality I'm going to get in the upcoming version is a bonus for us as users. 

No product is perfect, so there is always some room for improvement. Right now we are most interested in cloud functionality. It could give us an additional option for managing everything in on-premises or in the cloud.

My experience and knowledge with respect to our initial deployment of Automation Anywhere were very limited. Had we had more experience, we probably would not have used the Intel landscape. We would have used something more relevant to our process and function. This compatibility might be improved.

I would definitely say Citrix automation is one area we have continued to struggle with for the last two months. If that can be an improvement in design for the next release it would be welcome. I know that a Citrix plugin has been already introduced by Automation Anywhere. If that can be made seamlessly integrated and easy to use, then I would definitely be very, very happy with that as an enhancement. The Citrix automation plugin that they have come out with until now has not been working for us. We are still in the process of figuring out how we can make that work. So, we are collaborating with the technical team from AA. There is an alternate solution where you can just move the system or application out of the Citrix environment and made it a standalone system. That will work. We know the workaround, but we still haven't figured out a solution to making it work in a Citrix environment. Hopefully, they will figure a solution in a month's time.

Any customer would look for advantages and changes in pricing. I won't say Automation Anywhere pricing is not good or not competitive. It is definitely competitive. But there are additional players in the market that they need to compete with and working on pricing could help. I believe there are competitors who do not charge anything for what is the AA Control Room (used for Bot creation). They charge only for the runners (Bot execution).

So there are other options available where you don't need to pay extra costs that may be more attractive depending on your usage. With Automation Anywhere I'm the creator as well as the Control Room. If Automation Anywhere could get a little more competitive on those aspects of pricing, I think it would be like heaven.

I would like them to combine a BPM solution with RPA. Sometimes you need to have BPM in place so your process orchestration will be smooth. It'll go through a standard process. On top of that, you are doing some manual activities that will be replaced with RPA. Automation Anywhere already has RPA, if they would allow us to create a simple BPM solution on top of it to use RPA that is the best resolution. It would solve most of my problems in my processing unit.

I have been using the solution for about 18 to 19 months.

I would rate the stability of the RPA as much higher than the stability of an individual manually handling processes. Because stability is pretty good, the machine will outperform an individual. With respect to individuals, there will be always some attrition — there will be some learning time and people will tend to do mistakes. That is not the case with respect to the RPA. So while that is not directly about the product, it does add stability to our processing.

Beyond that, whenever there is any change to your applications or environment where you have automated a function, that is when your processes or RPA can stop functioning. So it requires a little bit of customization, and again you upload it into the control group. Because the RPA is so flexible and so convenient to work with and easy to use, I don't think that is where the major bottleneck occurs at these junctures.

Beyond that, we developed a fallback plan. We test the fallback plan once a quarter by stopping all the bots in operations and then we invoke the fallback plan. We have this mapped out in a document where we ask the respective processors to do the processes and simulate a stability failure.

There will be always risk associated with anything that you do. It's all up to an individual to make plans as to how they deal with bottlenecks, how to structure plans for potential stability issues, how they mitigate these potential issues by having a proper solution and proper process in place. To me, that is where the secret of stability really lies. It is not really correct to blame the stability of the product when it is the fault of the process. It's all up to an individual better manage how to look at things.

I would say that scalability is a critical aspect of using RPA and maximizing efficiency. When you develop one bot. You can just use it for N number of ports with the same source code. So it doesn't require any retooling. Scalability is very high. There will be some process deviations or some nonstandard aspects associated with any process that may require rethinking and interaction.

For example, maybe because of the ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) or the different systems that we use or integrate at the time of taking over those processes, scaling may be influenced. The classic example for our company, I would say, is that we have grown manyfold by acquiring lots of companies in the last three decades.

Every time we acquired new divisions or companies, it is not only about the revenue or products. We also get legacy systems or along with those entities, there will be some processes and practices which are nonstandard for our organization. We'll need to incorporate these different systems in the ERP.

But scalability is always possible. With the RPA only those areas where there are differences need to be fine-tuned in your RP source code. Then you can redeploy it successfully. Beyond that, we also take this as an opportunity to evaluate processes because we don't look at the RPA project as an isolated project. It is an opportunity to grow and improve automation in various ways and not just this one project alone.

Even before we automate something, we look at processes to scrutinize what are the nonstandard activities we do. We look to see if there are ways we can make the process more lean, simple and straightforward. This can actually make the process that I'm trying to automate more efficient. Then it is also easier to accomplish the development, easier to integrate with other processes, and more adaptable when you automate the process. Working this way, I know for sure that what I am automating is going to be an efficient process. 

So scalability is very easy and very simple to achieve especially compared training individuals in a process. A bot needs no training. Making tweakings to the source code and deploying successfully in production is much faster and easier. Because of these reasons, I would say scalability is pretty efficient and easy to achieve using RPA.

We plan to increase usage in the future both in our current departments and new divisions of the business.

I would rate Automation Anywhere as one of the best in the world when it comes to customer service. I've had the opportunity to gain specific experience with certain members of their team and the service is consistent and excellent.

Initially, when we started with the IQ Bot project, we had some issues and experienced a bit of a learning curve. So we immediately raised those concerns. Our first issue took less than 24 hours to get fixed, and without adding any additional cost to the customer. That type of service and support of a product is an important thing.

I would say the customer service team, the project team, and even the aftermarket customer success manager are all fantastic guys. I know that the organization has people with strong capabilities and excellent talent. It is very, very evident when you interact with them.

I would definitely say Automation Anywhere is aggressive when it comes to driving success for the customers. They are very passionate about customer success and their focus on the customer.

Some of my team members have taken courses with Automation Anywhere. They still need to complete a few more assessments before they get their certifications. The courses are pretty good, the assessment is very cumbersome and complex (from what I understand). It's too technical for them. Maybe it is easy for technical guys, but not for functional people. I assume that this is the way it should be, because it's an assessment before you get a certification. It has to be tedious and cumbersome to crack it.

The best person in our organization to speak to the complexity of the initial setup is an IT guy from my team. He was responsible for a series of calls to the tech support team and he was involved in a lot of discussion with the Automation Anywhere team initially. Obviously we had contact with technical support so it may not have been so easy to do the initial setup, but I think that is quite acceptable or understandable. Anything which is new will probably be something you need to spend extra time on during the initial phase-in of a new product.

Beyond that initial setup and normal learning curve, I haven't seen any problem with respect to adapting the RPA technology in our company. It has been pretty smooth. The technical support team was great in terms of supporting anything we experienced in the way of technical issues. The only issues we experienced after that have been some issues with respect to using a Citrix environment. We are finding it difficult to automate on Citrix efficiently.

We have been continuously on calls and meetings with the technical support team. They have been coming up with a lot of innovative ways as to how they can fix that problem with Citrix. Of course, we are still in the midst of finding a solution to the issues. But I know for sure with the support that I get from the support team that we will definitely have a solution in the near future.

We did our own implementation with assistance directly from Automation Anywhere's technical support team.

There was a bit of a hand-holding in the beginning because Automation Anywhere developers came and developed a few bots for us. Beyond that, it is all on our own. We have been very independent. We hardly got support from the Automation Anywhere team after that. From our own experience, the tool is pretty easy to understand and start using.

The bot creation process has different processes depending on what we automate, e.g., accounts payable, IT, and procurement. These are miles apart. The complexity would differ based on the different applications that we trying to integrate using RPA.

We try to check the different applications involved for automation and whether they are compatible with Automation Anywhere. Then, we understand the process. We do a value stream mapping, e.g., what are the non-value-added activities that we are currently doing to make it lean, simple, and re-engineer the process. We identify the activities that can be automated using RPA, or any tool.

There'll be the extensive workshop conducted before we conclude what we want to automate, how we want to automate, and how long it is going to take to automate. We do an extensive study to determine:

• What'll be the return on investment? 
• What type of a return that you'll get by automating the process?

We document it and prepare it as a business case. We send it to the sponsor for approval. Once it is been approved, then we will kick-start our development. Once the development is completed, there will be UAT and we will roll it out to go live.

There will be a burn-in period where we will be providing the support. It's like a normal SDLC. It's the same model. However, we analyze the process in detail and a BRD will be prepared, then we will start the development.

A simple process might take somewhere around four weeks from start until the end. Something which is very complex in nature might take up to 12 weeks. Anything which is very complex, we would like to break into small pieces, then automate it step-by-step. We don't try to take the entire thing and digest it. We would rather try to break it into small portions, then move on. 

Calculating ROI for us is pretty simple. We identify efficiency at the beginning, then based on that we will just move the headcount out of the process. We try to compare with the cost spent versus the quote of the money that we have saved on the fully loaded employee cost. That's a simple comparison of what we do. This is a very crude way of calculating our return on investment because there are other benefits that are derived by doing an automation. Other benefits include:

• Improving the quality of the process.
• Eliminating some of the duplicate payments to save some dollars. 
• Making timely payments to the vendor to have better negotiation skills with them. 

These are some of the other overall business benefits that you can derive out of it, but they are too tedious to take into consideration when you're trying to do an archive. That's why we keep it very simple by comparing the labor cost saved versus the cost spent on the technology.

They are already coming out with a community license, which is really good. That's something that I wish to have.

We had looked at a lot of prominent players in the market and examined the different options as well, like Blue Prism and UiPath. Automation Anywhere was the one company who was flexible in terms of offering a PoC. We find this very comfortable. They were very approachable and aggressive, in terms of getting things done. This helped us make a decision in favor of Automation Anywhere. Also, Blue Prism doesn't have the functionality with attended automation that we would like to have. We are looking for the flexibility and convenience that comes with attended automation where you can still run your show.

We ended up choosing Automation Anywhere based heavily on their highly-approachable team. We thought of doing a PoC and Automation Anywhere was the first vendor to volunteer and say they would do PoC for us. That was not the case with the other vendors. They were very reluctant for whatever reason.

In terms of product, almost all the products are good. The differences are insignificant from the product standpoint. What makes Automation Anywhere a little different from the other players in the market is their presence in India. They have a very strong presence in India. They've an excellence sales team, very approachable solutions team, and technical team.

They are very approachable. They come and help you out in terms of creating a PoC, which is not the case with the other companies. The other companies are not that aggressive. They normally don't show that level of interest in terms of getting things done with the customer. They all come and approach for new business, but when it comes to going the extra mile to making something happen, that is where they are lacking. That is the difference for our decision of going in favor of Automation Anywhere.

But we got a lot of support from the company and they have always been willing to go the extra mile in terms of supporting the customer and making solutions happen. So that really influenced our decision, and that is one of the reasons why we want to go with the Automation Anywhere compared to other players in the market.

If I were to rate this product on a scale of one to ten where ten is the best, I would definitely rate them nine. It is not a ten because of what may be my ignorance of the entire Automation Anywhere platform. Probably I'm not aware or don't know the complete suite of assets. I'm not in a position to rate it a ten. To rate Automation Anywhere a ten means I should have complete knowledge of the product and I am sure there are things I have not yet explored. 

As far as advice, the normal tendency — and the mistake often made by organizations — would be to commit at the time of vendor selection by volume of features. They pay too much attention and focus on the product landscape. They think about one solution that has got 200 different functionalities rather than one which has got 210 different functionalities as being inferior just based on a number. But in reality, the users may probably not even be using even 10% of what is available in the tool or the platform. So they tend to give more weight to the product landscape. 

In our case, we made an effort to look at more than just features, but the qualities of the companies and vendors as well. For example, we learned about the leadership journey for each vendor, how long ago they started in this business, how much focus they put into coming up with the product development — the R&D. It is also important who the venture partners are and who the people are who are associated with the company and product.

We have done a lot of automation with our ERP systems. We also have some in-house applications which are on .NET that we have integrated with RPA. This should be the minimum expectation when you're signing for an RPA contract with any vendor. You would expect the RPA solution or tool to work seamlessly with any system. Automation Anywhere works well with no problems except for the Citrix environment. This is where we have had a bit of a challenge. Beyond that, we have never had issues with Automation Anywhere.

These details are relevant and important when you go to make a decision or when you take on a partner as an RPA solution provider. You are not just investing in a partnership for the next six months or a year. Probably some of the bots you are developing today you'll want to be using even after ten years. It's a long-term association what you're trying to make with an entity, the product, and with a company. So it's important that you go through all these checkpoints rigorously.

I've not used anything from the Bot Store.

Every technology has pros and cons with some limitations. There is no point in just harping on the limitations alone. You need to look at how you can make that technology work and solve your problems. This is where the human intelligence comes into the picture.

This technology is an enabler. It will solve most of my problems. It is up to individuals on how to make it work. That is where the trick of the trade lies. If you know how to work with RPA, you will not complain. I've seen many people complaining saying, "RPA doesn't work. It doesn't give you ROI." It's not the technology's problem. It's the people's problem. It's your mindset which is stopping you from getting automated and start using the technology. 

Biggest lesson learnt: You'll understand existing processes in a different dimension. You'll understand your people problems with the process in a better manner. It should not be just be looked at as an opportunity to automate it. If you look at the overall process to revamp and re-engineer it, then you can make your process efficient by making it lean, simple, and straightforward. On top of that, when you try to automate it, the overall process efficiency should increase tremendously. 

if you just look at RPA as a tool to automate everything, that is not a good approach. There are some things which can be automated efficiently using simple VBA Macros. Sometimes you might require a simple .NET solution to automate your end process, which is more efficient. You can make automation in the existing ERP, and that might work better. You have to look at different ways of automating things based on the process and complexity. You have to look at what is the ideal solution, then you have to pick and choose what you want to automate.

Don't look at RPA to solve all your problems. You need to use the right technology to automate, simplify, and minimize your problems.

I use automation for finance. For example, SAP, Oracle, and other applications. In the past nine months, I have automated approximately thirty-five hundred hours. Next year we expect to reach at least eighty-five hundred hours.

All of my leaders are pushing us to use automation because they're thinking that other companies are ahead of us. I am looking forward to working on the IQ Bot to see how it might make my life easier.

Recently, the auditors were looking for a tool to assist them with checking incidents. For the American region, there were between twenty-seven and thirty thousand incidents, which as a human we cannot search manually. For each one, they have to check what the incident is, and verify whether they have the proper data. Because the audit was only going to run for one or two months, they wanted the results in ten days. I spent about one and a half days building a bot and started running it. The bot was moved to production, and within seven days, I was able to get all of the details in Excel format to them. They can filter it, see whatever fields are empty, and they can do the audit. They got one hundred percent sampling, which they were happy about. Our plan now is to sell the Bot to the project owners so that instead of having the auditor catch problems, they can run it every month and see what improvements they need and where it is lagging. The bot will educate the team.

The MetaBot is a very good feature that allows me to do things that were not available in earlier versions. I can now run multiple commands, instead of just one.

It is easy to develop using this solution, and it doesn't take much technical skill. It is very easy to integrate any of the macros or DB scripts. It is easy to find people who can work with this solution, unlike Blue Prism, where it is hard to get candidates.

I would like to have the MetaBot screen name title dynamic instead of static. This would allow us to use wild card entries and make our lives much easier. As it is now, we cannot automate using MetaBot because the screen name changes. The only way it can be done is to use multiple MetaBots.

We are having a problem when trying to automate the opening of very large Excel files. One example is our 70MB Excel file, which normally takes approximately twenty minutes to open. Automation Anywhere crashes before it opens, so we moved it to Instaknow-ACE, which is another RPA tool. It imports the Excel file, creates its own database, and then you perform whatever operation you want. After this, it generates the output result without crashing. If this were fixed in Automation Anywhere then it would be a large benefit because we are in a phase of moving away from smaller automation. We are doing a lot with bigger data, and most of it is still in Excel files instead of a database. It isn't the fault of Automation Anywhere because it is Excel that is crashing, but we need to have a feature where Automation Anywhere can import Excel files directly.

The stability of this solution needs to be improved.

The OCR capability needs to be improved to be made more accurate.

Compared to earlier versions it's a lot more stable, but it still needs a lot of improvement in terms of the OCR. We are getting more OCR projects where we have to scan and get data from contracts and give it to the auditors, or other people. The data includes things like region and the product that was ordered. It is very difficult for me to scan because I can't tell customers that it isn't accurate. Sometimes, it will read the letter "I" as the number one, which is one of the issues we are facing. The upper management thinks that everything is ok, but as a developer, I know that there is a problem. If you were to come to me and ask for an OCR to be done, I could only guarantee you about eighty percent accuracy. If I tell the customer that there might be twenty percent errors, they may not be happy.

Scalability is very good. Compared to others, Automation Anywhere is on top.

We have more than eight hundred developers in our company, and most do not have a technical background.

I do not deal with technical support directly. We have a COE who deal with technical support, and my team speaks with them. If there is a problem that they cannot fix then they go to Automation Anywhere.

Our COE took care of the implementation of this solution.

What it takes a human ten hours to do, automation should complete it in one hour. In the past ten months, I have saved the work of two people. People are happy with the results.

We are still in the procurement process for IQ Bot, but I am looking forward to seeing how it is going to help me.

My advice for anybody who is considering RPA is to use Automation Anywhere because it is easier. You can learn it, but if you go for other solutions then it will be more difficult. Not all of the people in our company are from a technical background. Many are BCOM graduates and analysts, but they are being trained in using this solution.

This is a good solution, but it still needs improvement and there is a long way to go. Artificial Intelligence still needs to be added.

If they allow the direct import of data from Excel, improve the OCR, and allow variables to be used in the MetaBot start screen, then this solution would be perfect.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for automating our business processes that make up our daily operations.

We have a set of steps that we follow for each of our processes. We devise inputs for these steps and then prepare them for automation. The automation then completes and publishes the results.

The automation that we have run on a daily basis helps us by saving a lot of time.

We have a process where we sell products, and using this solution means that we don't need to dedicate somebody to get this work done. Once we get the input file and prepare it, we run the automation. It completes overnight, and the next morning the results are available.

The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use. It has drag-and-drop features, which makes it very fast for us to gather the required data.

I would like to be able to look at the steps that are completed as a process is running.

It would be helpful if we could start running a process from a particular step.

In the drag-and-drop interface, it would be helpful to have interactive hints, or notes, about what is happening and what the different choices are. This would make it easier to learn.

With respect to stability, we haven't had any issues from what we have heard.

The scalability of this solution is really high. You don't think of it as a process, but rather, part of a process. Once you automate the individual parts, you tie everything together.

We have not used technical support for this solution.

We had different people come in and set up the process for us, initially. After that, I started putting in the automation myself, and it is becoming faster and pretty easy for me.

For anybody who is implementing this solution, I recommend they get help from Automation Anywhere to help understand the best way to do their automation. This will help with the development of the bots. This is what we did, and we now have a framework for building the rest of our processes.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are a solution provider and we use this solution to help our customers with internal processes. For example, we help them with the automation of information processing tools.

From a manageability perspective, this solution is very good. It's just understandable, and this has helped a lot.

The most valuable feature of this solution is drag-and-drop. You don't need to be a coding genius to create a bot. It has a simple interface.

From what I have seen with the IQ Bot, it is very impressive and I think it is going to solve a lot of problems that we face right now.

The cost of this solution can be improved. We have written applications that do the same thing as Automation Anywhere, but for less cost.

When it comes to stability, there are a lot of dependencies. The bot, itself, I would say has always been good for us. The only problems that we have had are when the tools change, the bot has to be enhanced. That is something that is unavoidable.

Compared to other RPA tools, I think Automation Anywhere is very scalable.

For example, we have written simple applications where they do one thing today, but tomorrow they may add something else to it. They're developing an additional, or expanded version of the bot, and it is always simple. In this way, the scalability is pretty good.

The only problem we've had is when we need to expand the userbase. This is because of the ports attached to it.

We do reach out to Automation Anywhere technical support and it definitely helps.

In the beginning, it was a little bit complex and difficult for us to understand how to get things running. We reached out to technical support for help.

Initially, we had planned on going simple. Then, we wanted to be centralized and have a cloud-based environment, which is where we were facing a lot of challenges. One of the challenges was DB connectivity for accessing SAP, which was a security issue. We also had some trouble automating web pages.

Initially, we did see ROI. The problem is that we could not re-use those licenses. One license is not going to be running for twenty-four hours. We considered planning and scheduling to make the best of this, but its split across multiple teams, so there are multiple license requirements. Not everything has huge savings attached.

I have worked with other RPA solutions, such as UiPath.

We are looking forward to having the capability of building the IQ Bots the way we want, using Python scripts. With our scripting, we can fill in the gaps and improve accuracy.

My advice to anybody who is researching RPA solutions is to consider several things. I can see that the path that Automation Anywhere has right now is going to take it to the highest levels. My suggestion is that if you have a lot of coding or scripting experience then I would recommend UiPath. It has its own plusses and minuses, as with every tool.

Instead, if you're looking for someone that can you you build a bot within a short time, who doesn't know any coding or have a background in programming, then I recommend Automation Anywhere. You cut out the cost of developers, but you add to your cost in terms of licenses.

Also, for manageability, Automation Anywhere is the best choice.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The primary use case is to automate any type of process, mostly for payments, wealth management, and loans.

The bots replicate human behavior in front of a computer.

We are automating all our mundane processes, making people more creative.

• The most valuable feature is its Control Room.
• It is a user-friendly tool for developers and easy to learn.
• The product is easy to integrate.
• As a tool, IQ Bot is easy to use, powerful, and very competitive compared to others.

I would like a better code migration solution, because this is something that we do a lot.

It is a complex solution to make stable.

It is a powerful tool for scaling that sometimes makes the process seamless.

It took one year to scale to the amount of bots that we are currently using.

The technical support is very helpful. We have almost 24/7 support. We also have a representative who works closely with us to make sure everything get resolved as quickly as possible.

We did not use another solution previously.

The initial setup was complex.

The first time, we used an integrator for deployment. They were good, but we don't work with them anymore. Now, we work with Automation Anywhere.

We measure our ROI by the money that we save.

Our annual licensing costs are about $500,000.

We did not consider another vendor.

It is a great company with a great product and support. You should consider this tool if you want something powerful and user-oriented.

While I haven't taken any courses through Automation Anywhere University yet, my team has.

My day-to-day activity was to take data from invoices and put it into an Oracle DB. I have already automated banking uses, which deal with some of the invoices. The second case solution which I had worked with was multi-bot architecture.

We have certain kinds of applications spread across our organization and the data coming into that organization is common. We made a solution as a multiBot: one Bot is working on one application and we have hundreds of applications. So a hundred Bots work together on the same set of data to integrate it.

The applications are different. Say one is Oracle, one is SAP (System Analysis and Program Development) and one is Salesforce. In the way we implemented this, we segregated the workload into parts: part as a master Bot, part as a worker Bot and part as the closure Bot. The master Bot will work on the input part of the data set, the worker Bot will work with the individual (designated) applications, and the closure Bot will consolidate all the data and feed it back to the designated user. This was the plan for our architecture.

The Automation Anywhere product has improved our organization with the speed of processing. It is very fast in execution time, it requires less support time, and it is a good value for the money.

The most valuable features I see right now pertain to dealing with the servers. That has become a distant concern. Because data is already on the cloud, I can use a controller and my client as one unit. That is the best thing. I can use Automation Anywhere in my mobile, I can run my Bot through an Android app. This flexibility and centralization without worrying about availability is a good thing.

I think that all the expectations I had for the new release of the product are covered in the coming version A 2019. I'm very happy about what I hear about it. I think once I use this A 2019 release, I'll come to know what the things are that I'll want in the future. We have access now to a community edition version, which I have to download and will be testing out shortly.

The first of the new features that I believe will do me the best is the customization of the commands. I can build my own package as per my convenience. Let's say we have a variable command. We already have the ability to use XML commands and we have some Excel commands that are provided by Automation Anywhere. Now Automation Anywhere is allowing us the opportunity to build something of my own in their environment and deploy that in production. Before I could imagine that component and not build or deploy it. I can build it now and that an important new feature for our progress.

As far as the stability of the product, it's doing well. My experience over the two years I have worked with it as a developer, going to the cloud has been good for reliability and accessibility.

We have not experienced downtime from the Automation Anywhere setup. When our infrastructure is down it definitely impacts my accessibility to Automation Anywhere. This is not actually the fault of the product as far as I have experienced.

I feel the one thing which I can tap to enhance the scalability of the system is the AI component of Automation Anywhere — that is IQ Bot. I think this is something which can really grow into a massive Bot solution with great advantages. I heard recently that the accuracy of that data reading for invoice processing is something like 70% accurate currently. I think they are trying for 90 or 90 % plus as a goal now.

We have definitely had the opportunity to use technical support and I evaluate them as very good. If I have any data stuck somewhere, I query to the Automation Anywhere support guys. If I have some problem with the 11.x version, they'll admit that there's a bug in that version for a particular process or function and they will develop a patch for it in a new upgraded version. We definitely feel confident going accordingly with that and patch the update as a solution.

Our reason for adopting the product and why most of our clients prefer it as a solution is that we talk with them honestly about what capabilities they will need and why this product fills the purpose. Everyone can choose to do their tasks in a different way and other solutions could work to develop automation. What matters for me is the way the product allows users to easily develop the Bots. I do believe that Automation Anywhere is giving me the opportunity to quickly and easily develop stable Bots and it is better at that than other competitors you might want to compare it to.

It is definitely not a simple setup. It is at a medium-complex level. It depends on what actually gets put into the brackets.

When there is a level of complexity, it's all related to the server, where I'm hosting my applications and my client. In the 11.x version, we control one server from another server. When we have to use many servers, the complexity of the setup begins to become more involved.

We developed our architecture on our own by our own, designed to fit with our needs and purposes. We have also done the initial setup now for a number of different customers.

In some ways, we have seen a return on investment. For example, we have one customer who is aware of the FTE reduction (Full-Time Employee) on the repeated Bot creation jobs. They have scaled up by having their workers work in a different way. We are actually automating the repetitive Bot creation jobs and reducing the FTE where that human effort is not actually required. The company resources can spend more time focusing on the creative part of the work rather than creating the Bots.

I don't know exactly what the pricing schemes are for the product as this type of negotiation is not my responsibility, but I think the basic pricing comes to $15,000. We have many employees and perhaps not so many doing Bot development and deployment. The Bots can service a lot of people and I think the rest of the pricing is based on usage.

For people looking for my recommendation for an automation product, I definitely would recommend Automation Anywhere instead of going for a more orthodox or older technology. With older tools, you are just doing the same things and not improving processes. With RPA a digital transformation is actually required for an organization to adopt a better way so they scale up and create an enormous amount of new opportunities for their organization to grow. It is a step to go in the direction where AI is going in. You cannot see the destination yet, but somewhere you have to start up using an RPA that is right for you. That is what I would recommend to my colleagues.

If you start talking about innovation as streamlining day-to-day processes, that is where to start from. It is where we started. We give clients various approaches, but we recommend that RPA is one thing which has stability and which is a good, long-term return on investment.

Once you invest you don't get the returns immediately. You have to wait some time while you work at creating the solutions by scaling the number of Bots you have and the processes you simplify and improve. After a time, your efforts will improve results. That is what we communicate with our customers. When we have them interested, then we come to a conclusion as to how we will go about implementing it.

On a scale from one to ten where ten is the best. I would rate this product as a ten-out-of-ten because the company and product have done everything to meet my expectations.

We used to expect new things in the A 2019 version and the company delivered on that. So, once I use this release of the product for some time again, I will probably have some new expectations. By 2020, I think we will send them feedback again.