Automation Anywhere Reviews

I primarily used Automation Anywhere to streamline and automate standardized business processes. This included tasks such as claims handling, policy registration, and document processing from customers. Our focus was on creating efficient and consistent workflows for handling routine documentation flows.

We aimed to solve the challenges of a hands-off, lights-out approach by implementing Automation Anywhere. The goal was to automate processes like claims handling and document registration, minimizing manual intervention and ensuring a more efficient workflow.

Anywhere contributed to increased efficiency, reduced manual efforts, and notable time savings across various processes.

There is room for improvement in terms of costs and procurement considerations. Additionally, aspects like procurement conditions, technical connectivity, and global reach with Automation Anywhere could be enhanced as well. As part of procurement, these factors become crucial, especially in a global operating context where using the platform in various countries is a key consideration.

We started using Automation Anywhere in 2018.

I wasn't entirely satisfied with Automation Anywhere's support. Cultural differences between them and UiPath or DDI were noticeable, and understanding their company perspective was crucial. Despite this, I handled it professionally, and it was generally okay with no major issues. I would rate the support as an eight out of ten.

Positive

Before using Automation Anywhere, we initially explored three different automation solutions. One was widely mandated across the company and had better pricing. The second was used regionally, but the local teams struggled to adapt to robotics process automation. 

When comparing Automation Anywhere specifically, the solutions were acceptable and useful, but pricing conditions and procurement leverage were areas that could be improved. Overall, the transition to Automation Anywhere enhanced our processes. The choice depended on factors like regulations and conditions. Automation Anywhere didn't have the ease of a global solution we experienced with another tool. We also used DDI locally, which was good in quality but needed transformation into a full RPA solution. Comparing Automation Anywhere with UiPath, UiPath was more global, scalable, and had better contract and pricing conditions.

Automation Anywhere requires limited maintenance, and at the time, three individuals were involved in maintenance and implementation. As the applications expanded, there was a need for a gradual increase in the team for ongoing support and enhancements.

Introducing Automation Anywhere to non-tech-savvy business users had its challenges. Some needed training to understand and develop their use cases with technical support, while others already grasped the requirements and could effectively communicate with developers. Managing this diverse group required a centralized approach. Training typically took one to three months, depending on individual skill sets, to bring non-technical employees up to speed on using Automation Anywhere.

We currently use standard RPA with Automation Anywhere, not incorporating Automation Co-Pilot. The challenge is identifying repetitive tasks suitable for RPA. We are exploring whether these functionalities are embedded in existing software or if direct engagement with RPA providers is necessary. The ongoing discussion revolves around the potential future integration of robotic solutions into software. For artificial intelligence, we distinguish between IoT, machine learning, and similar aspects, with development ongoing from both smaller players and major companies like Microsoft. The goal is to combine both robotic and AI solutions for comprehensive automation eventually.

Integration with other tools and applications with Automation Anywhere was smooth, especially for cloud-based applications. We did not encounter any significant difficulties, and the process was straightforward, meeting relevant requirements.

Automation Anywhere provided us with good automation at scale, and we did not encounter any problems with its ability to handle large-scale automation tasks.

Overall, I would rate Automation Anywhere as an eight out of ten.

We work with partners to implement the application on several customer sites, typically banking, financial security, and insurance. We work as a service provider. It's used, for example, in the banking sector to handle processes and tasks. It helps automate. 

We've implemented more than 3,000 business processes for customers. 

It helps improve performance and helps companies save time and money. Customers have been very happy with the experience so far. We've saved about 10% to 15% of time and costs. One robot can help replace a portion of the workforce. 

The security on offer is very good. 

AI has big potential right now. We're trying to support organizations that want to integrate it. We're trying to increase AI capabilities.

It's a pretty easy solution to use for business users that are not technical. They can learn the tool very fast. In maybe six weeks, even with no previous experience, they can go to the market to implement the service for the client. After a while, they can become very proficient in using it. 

It's easy to integrate with other applications. We can integrate automation into workflow APIs, business applications, et cetera. 

The product has helped increase productivity. 

There could be more training provided by Automation Anywhere. 

We've faced some economic problems based on the exchange rate. 

A major impediment to using CoPilot is that many of our users cannot access the cloud. They need to work with the on-premises version. 

I've used the solution for five years, since 2019.

The solution is stable. 

The solution has been scalable. 

Technical support is good. 

Positive

I'm also familiar with UiPath and IBM RPA.

How easy or difficult the setup is depends on the customer's level of knowledge. Most of our clients are in banking and require on-premises deployments. Even government entities cannot use the cloud. We are comfortable with deployments and find the process to be straightforward.  Sometimes it is difficult to upgrade from older versions. 

We have five people out of a team of 13 that can handle any maintenance. Maybe 20% of our team would be involved in maintenance. 

The pricing of the solution is flexible. 

We did compare Automation Anywhere with UiPath. Automation Anywhere could offer more marketing and training. 

I'm aware of the CoPilot feature. However, we do not have clients using it. We're trying to introduce the tool to the market and to the customer. However, it has the potential to be a good application. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

Our journey started with a migration initiative with something that already existed in an RPA solution. Then we started expanding and we started going into finance and HR activities. We use it in different entities and have been working with Automation Anywhere to build automation. We're seeing a lot of very good use cases that help deliver very good ROI. 

Our company is quite large. We have several hundred applications and systems, including legacy systems. As part of a recent merger, part of our work is consolidating these systems. There are a lot of challenges. Someone has to manually perform activities, for example, to be an integrator between two systems. We use Automation Anywhere to bridge the gap. Wherever we can find and remove the human from repetitive tasks, we use Automation Anywhere. 

This is a cloud solution. The framework we had before was on-premises. We wanted to move to the cloud, and that was a huge change. We're also able to redesign and refine processes that may have already been in place.

During our migration initiative, we were able to talk to different customer groups and revisit aspects to make things better and do things that may be needed. We were able to effectively optimize the processes and redo what was already in the existing platforms.

There is a lot of interest in operationalizing AI. There's a lot of buzz around generative AI. We've been reviewing different AI services. However, our focus has been more on orchestrating an entire end-to-end process, not just the AI. When we're talking with all the groups, we try to identify which steps can be automated, and add AI into the mix, if it is needed and it makes sense. We've had a lot of opportunities to work within legal, corporate, finance, HR, et cetera, and we're working to bring more use cases into production. Right now, it's all in proof of concept. 

The leadership is very invested in generative AI and doing a lot of research. There's a separate team that does InfoSec reviews. We're undergoing a stringent vetting process. We're in the analysis phase to ensure the data stays within the model and doesn't go outside the LLM for training. 

We are finding opportunities to implement some hyper-automation options. 

Automation Anywhere and even previous versions, which I've worked on, have good core functionality. The core functionality of being able to automate and build a solution that is local and low code is one of the key differentiators that's allowed us to find success. 

It's easy for business users who don't have technical skills. We try to build and help users build automation quicker. We've built a framework around it that's made it easier for everyone to build automation. 

The learner curve for users is okay. The curves are different for end users. We have a large footprint of citizen developers, and some take quicker or longer depending on prior project commitments. It depends on the amount of time they can commit to it.

We've used the automation copilot, which is quite useful.

We have a lot of internal tools. A lot of finance and HR, for example, have specific apps and platforms. We've established a lot of connectivity with other apps. If there's an interest that business users want to start building, we already have the framework in place, which makes integrations fast.

We get a seamless experience when using the packages. There are constant upgrades. It doesn't stay stagnant; there are new features added to it. The consistent growth of the packages has remained seamless.

We save time and money. I can't share exact details, however, we do have good ROI. We track time, compliance, cost avoidance, et cetera. Everything is heavily tracked, and we make it available for leadership to review. 

The improvements have already been rolled into recent releases, like better governance models. From a GenAI perspective, there are good releases like automation pilot and copilot that are already part of the product's release agenda. 

They need to improve the stability of the core functionality. If they keep the core constant and constant, they will continue to thrive. It needs to stay consistent. 

I have a long history with the solution. With my current company, we've been using it since 2021. However, in my previous roles, I've worked with it as well. 

The platform is highly scalable. That's one of the key advantages. We build at first on a smaller scale, and build it up over time. The scaling part has been really seamless. It's been good so far. 

We've had a great experience with technical support. They've partnered with us in terms of the challenges we face. We have a collaborative relationship and have had a positive experience. 

As the product evolves, it would be great to have more support and have them up to date on the latest and greatest. The teams should be constantly upgraded to ensure that if something goes wrong, they can handle anything - that will be important for the future.

Positive

We do use other tools that are low code/no code, such as ServiceNow, SalesForce, et cetera.

Everyone tries to improve their opportunities. This competitiveness has helped the product evolve. 

We've deployed processes within a week, while others might take four or six weeks, depending on the complexity. We have release schedules and release controls in place. Everything is streamlined, and we test before the automation goes live. 

We're on the cloud, so we do not have to upgrade anything. 

Maintenance is more on the partner-owner and device side. There might also be work upgrading and testing packages and new features. We do spend some time when a new feature comes out to test it before we actually upgrade our packages.

The licensing isn't an area I can discuss in great detail. 

I'd rate the product eight out of ten. They have been an industry-leading automation solution provider. They have a lot of experience, and the core functionality is great. Keeping up with the market and putting in new competence into the product - the constant innovation - makes the product impressive. 

There are many use cases for Automation Anywhere. One of these involved reconciling numerous financial reports in the company I work for, which deals in consumer products and goods. Specifically, we handle credit notes and debit notes from various customers. These notes serve as certifications of transactions, indicating whether we owe something to the customers or they owe something to us. The challenge is that these notes come in different formats, all in PDFs. Consequently, someone has to manually go through each of them, input the data into Excel, and compare it with an existing Excel report. After verifying the information and ensuring it matches, we input the data into the SAP system. This process is a part of our monthly activities and involves a considerable volume of documents, given that we are a multinational company focusing on AMEA markets. 

To streamline this process, we utilized Automation Anywhere, making use of OCR technology to extract data from the PDFs. Another use case for the automation tool involved generating aging reports. As a company, we deal with numerous customers who haven't made payments yet, and we need to monitor the time they have left to pay or identify if they have exceeded the due dates. This information is available on our SAP system and needs to be created daily and distributed to all our sales teams.

If someone without technical skills wants to learn to use Automation Anywhere, it's not very difficult. However, if we simply want to use the solution without any prior experience, it may not be possible, but with proper training, someone can learn it in a month.

The learning curve is relatively easy, and it just takes time. Getting comfortable with the tool is, in my opinion, quite feasible; it can be done. The other aspect of the problem is understanding the use case and how to design it. How will we design our system? How will we design our process? Because it's never just one process that someone wants to automate; it's usually a bundle of processes. When we obtain a bot from automation anywhere, we cannot get just a fraction of a bot. We have to get a full bot. And if we have a process that does not consume all of that, then our cost-benefit ratio doesn't work. So we need to have a bunch of processes and then figure out how to schedule each bot, and how to process it. There are multiple ways of designing the flow of a bot. We should look for the optimum way considering the context, it depends on our context. The templates keep changing, and the sales keep changing, so we would have to define it in a different way where we have templates that can be replaceable. But if we are dealing with something related to compliance, then we would prioritize reliability and robustness, and we may have to compromise on flexibility while designing a solution with robustness in mind. 

All of that comes with expertise, and all of that comes with experience. However, just understanding the product and the tool to a good, fairly okay level where a business user can create a small automation and do something with it even if they don't fully maximize its value can be achieved in a couple of months. But becoming a true expert and being able to call ourselves an RPA expert will take a lot of time and further exposure to various use cases.

By using Automation Anywhere, we observed a reduction in paperwork costs and the implementation of a reliable bot. When we require manual report generation, workflow execution, and other tasks. Its efficiency is contingent upon the availability of the person overseeing the process. With Automation Anywhere, the reporting, workflow executions, and other tasks are automated and thereby enhancing overall reliability. Additionally, a notable advantage is the development of a digital mindset within the company. Exposure to automation fosters a digital way of thinking among employees, leading them to identify opportunities that can be automated. These benefits are just a few among several others, including financial gains and improved compliance.

The benefits are seen typically after three to four months per process, depending on its complexity. For processes of low to medium complexity, it usually takes about three to four months for the board to start functioning correctly. The payback ratio varies depending on the number of products or processes we have and their complexity. If we have many low-complexity processes that can be completed within six months, we will see returns on our investment within that time frame. However, it's important to note that the payback period ultimately depends on the complexity of the process. I have observed instances where processes have not yielded returns even after several months, as changes were required at three or six-month intervals, leading to additional expenses. So, the success of the process is contingent on its specific characteristics.

Automation Anywhere is able to provide automation at scale.

Integration is truly beneficial; it serves as a significant advantage of Automation Anywhere. The level of integration is highly commendable.

Automation Anywhere has helped our organization increase its automation consumption by around 50 percent.

The way templates can be configured is quite simple - it's a matter of drag and drop. Within the console, which is easy to navigate if we've seen it before, we can understand how things work. This allows business folks to join calls if needed, and I comprehend what happens within the console. 

The Board Control room is a centralized place where we can monitor all our bots and see how they are running when they are scheduled to run, and how our CPU and CB usage are looking - basically, the entire orchestration. 

I noticed that they opened up to other service providers like Accenture and Avaya, which is not a platform feature, but it was very helpful for us. Automation Anywhere, being a product company, might not excel in service, so partnering with companies like Avaya or Accenture provided us with a reliable service operation. 

The capability of understanding and extracting documents is not very good. Therefore, automating unstructured documents or any structured documents that we want to automate on Automation Anywhere is not a good idea.

The UI is not intuitive and doesn't come across as smooth.

I would like the licenses to be transferable. Currently, we are unable to transfer a user license.

I have been using Automation Anywhere for three and a half years.

I give the stability of Automation Anywhere a six out of ten.

I give the scalability of Automation Anywhere an eight out of ten.

We saw a return on investment with 50 percent of our automation processes. 

I give Automation Anywhere a six out of ten.

It depends on the specific capabilities you require. When we started out as a team at Mondelez we were setting up all the necessary components. At that time, we were primarily focused on basic capabilities such as having a good service partner, efficient bot operations, and a manageable console. Figuring out the licenses was crucial, as some companies were unwilling to share their licenses with others. So, if you had the license, you were the one responsible for using it, and it couldn't be transferred to someone else. Certain software had this complexity, and we were also not considering advanced features like OCR back then. 

Our focus was on basic RPA without many complexities. About four years ago, we believed Automation Anywhere was a well-established player in the market, so we chose them. However, later on, we realized that automation had much more to offer than simply configuring and automating certain processes. We discovered the concept of hyper-automation, which includes low-code and no-code applications that business users can build themselves. Document-related automation became crucial, and we found that Automation Anywhere lacked proper support for structured documentation and didn't leverage artificial intelligence or natural language processing effectively. Consequently, we had to explore other software options. As time progressed, we recognized the need for more capabilities. Therefore, we adopted two approaches to address this. Firstly, we sought a solution that offered modular usability. Consequently, we included Power Platform and are currently exploring the UI part. Additionally, we ventured into using newer technologies like Blue Prism, experimenting with various possibilities. Ultimately, our aim is to stay on top of advancements and adopt the best-suited tools for our needs.

The preference for API integration over a robust process automation solution depends on the capabilities of our in-house tech team. If we have an in-house tech team, then API solutions are significantly better than an automated bot. Additionally, our cost-benefit analysis, in terms of tech capabilities, also plays a crucial role in the decision-making process.

We did not perform any maintenance on Automation Anywhere.

I am striving to provide individuals with more time to focus on value-add tasks due to widespread headcount reductions. For instance, in finance and accounting activities, we use Automation Anywhere to replace individuals in maintenance tasks or those that were previously unknown to be time-consuming. This is where we witness the greatest utilization of bots. 

Moreover, we employ bots to handle fines associated with individuals driving company cars. With hundreds of fines occurring each month, it used to be a nearly full-time responsibility for one person to receive the fine, identify the driver at the time of the incident, and ensure the fine was directed to the appropriate person for payment. Such activities lacked significant value and consumed a considerable amount of time for someone, but now the bot handles these tasks on our behalf. I believe that finance is the primary area where we extensively utilize Automation Anywhere.

When we began deploying the bots, we established Key Performance Indicators to assess the return on investment. For instance, if a bot could save one-third of an individual's time, we would evaluate the amount of time saved and dedicate it to value-add tasks. However, evaluating the exact monetary savings facilitated by the bots is challenging because the funds are not directly spent on low-value activities. Instead, they can be utilized differently. 

It is important to note that the bots never completely replaced human workers. No job was entirely taken over by a bot. Rather, it was an assessment of how effectively we spent money with the assistance of bots, as they enabled individuals to perform tasks more efficiently. Although I don't recall the exact details since it was in the past, we would reassign the equivalent of full-time employees to these value-added tasks instead of low-value ones. At the time of my departure from the RPA topic, we had 150 bots in production, and we had a clear understanding of how many full-time employees would be dedicated to higher-value tasks as a result.

The ability of Automation Anywhere to provide automation at scale is commendable. We have indeed achieved tangible business benefits. That is certain. I am no longer aware of the metric used to evaluate this, except for the fact that we have eliminated various mundane activities from the workday of numerous individuals.

Automation Anywhere has helped our organization increase its automation consumption.

From what I recall of the type of issue we had to deal with when we started implementing Automation Anywhere, it was the integration with the identity and access management system that the company might use. This is because Automation Anywhere has a vault where we store all the information related to the bot, including the password it will use to connect to the system. The feature, which might be interesting for companies that don't already have an identity management system, was a bit tricky because I would have preferred the system to directly rely on our corporate identity and access management system to manage the bot's credentials. This way, we wouldn't have to store this information in the bot as well. It's something to consider in terms of integrating with an existing IT landscape.

I have been using Automation Anywhere for almost six years.

We did not encounter any stability issues with Automation Anywhere during the time I worked with the solution.

Automation Anywhere is scalable.

The technical support was helpful and responsive.

Positive

We had previously been using UiPath, and in late 2017, we acquired an organization that was already using Automation Anywhere, which belonged to a much larger organization. Consequently, we began to explore that tool and benefited from our colleagues' positive experiences with Automation Anywhere.

They were able to provide suggestions on the setup and deployment of the solution. As a result, we ultimately decided to discontinue the use of UiPath and transitioned to Automation Anywhere. Without the acquisition, we might not have implemented Automation Anywhere and instead would have continued with UiPath or explored other alternatives. Due to the acquisition, we were able to recognize that Automation Anywhere was one of the market leaders and swiftly create a proof of concept.

The initial setup was straightforward. Although I was involved in the deployment project, the actual installation was carried out by those responsible for implementing the Windows servers.

We needed to acquire the hardware because we had an internal cloud at that time, so we still have it. I would say that we managed to allocate the servers. It didn't take long. We provided training for the people who would deploy and customize the product with the assistance of Automation Anywhere in France. The global deployment infrastructure was ready to be used within a few weeks.

The implementation was completed in-house with the help of the Automation Anywhere team.

We obtained benefits from the original price prior to the acquisition and had to engage in negotiations due to the expansion of the usage scope. We were required to purchase licenses and bot runners, which determined the permissible run times for the bots. We successfully achieved a fair price worldwide. 

I rate Automation Anywhere an eight out of ten. 

We primarily utilize an attended bot, meaning they are not created by users. We have made efforts to retain control over IT in bot creation to prevent it from becoming a new avenue for shadow IT. When we started in 2018, the final department had a dedicated team responsible for bot development. However, they eventually hired contractors who developed C-Sharp programs that interacted with SAP through APIs. The bot would simply launch these programs, which is not the ideal method for automation, as we believe the bot should directly interact with the application instead of relying on a separate program to communicate with SAP through an API. I believe the team responsible for this no longer exists. Presently, we have a process in place to identify relevant use cases, and we are collaborating with a subcontractor who creates the bots for us based on specifications provided by the business.

We utilize Automation Anywhere with an attended bot. This implies that after receiving the specifications from the business and creating the purchase, we establish an agreement on the bot's scheduling for execution. However, the user never directly interacts with the bot; they only observe the results of its actions. Therefore, there is no need to provide training for users to utilize Automation Anywhere. We maintain IT control over it, while the development itself is outsourced. Consequently, the issue of the learning curve is not applicable to our situation.

We didn't use a lot of APIs with Automation Anywhere. Instead, we simulated the user's actions on the application's user interface. I can't recall any instances where we relied on APIs to initiate actions in the systems we were connecting to. However, I am aware that APIs can be utilized. There was a point when we wanted to employ APIs to retrieve the password or the bot from our identity and access the financial system just before the bot was about to commence its task. Additionally, we intended to trigger an API to reset the password once the bot had completed its job to ensure that there were no potential security threats associated with the user IDs used for the bots.

For those who prefer using API integration instead of a comprehensive process automation solution, I would like to emphasize that it's not exactly the same approach. Integrated APIs require developing a program for them to interact with. In my opinion, RPA offers a more straightforward approach as it simply replicates user actions within an application. We already have a ready-to-use bot. However, I wouldn't recommend using bots for everything, especially when we encounter use cases that resemble interfaces. 

Essentially, it involves manipulating the user interface of an application to extract data and then sending that data to another application on a daily basis. This approach doesn't seem logical. I'm not sure about the usage of APIs in the context of actual IT program development, where we need to retrieve data from various source systems that provide APIs. In such cases, we genuinely desire bots that faithfully mimic the actions of real users within an application. Our intention was never to replace any kind of deployment with bots, which is why we wanted Information and Communication Technology to be involved in the decision-making process. We wanted to ensure that the distinction was made between tasks that should be handled by bots and those that should be treated as interfaces or programs, aligning with our understanding of process automation.

We have a team of three people in Spain who are in charge of the daily operation of the Automation Anywhere platform. However, deploying our new bot is a quick process. There is a test environment where the bot is validated, after which it is transferred to the production control room and the bot's schedule is updated.

The team responsible for the data operations of the platform, taking everything into account, including the intrusion of the new bot into the production environment. They also handle the platform's maintenance. I believe we have three individuals dedicated to these tasks.

Our company uses the solution for automations. 

As a portfolio manager, the key responsibility is to determine how to use our latest technologies for use cases. We identify use cases in various functions and buy software licenses for them. 

Once we buy licenses, we use the solution for end-to-end discovery of use cases, onboarding in-house technical staff for ongoing management, and collaborations for training or licenses. 

Our licenses are used by our technical team within our Center of Excellence. The team handles the end-to-end work that includes development, testing, quality assurance, and production. We are using the solution to its full capacity. Bots are at an optimum because we want to extract maximum value from our licenses. 

We plan to increase usage once we finish migrating from on-premises to the cloud. 

The solution has helped us embrace more of a digital transformation footprint, bring in efficiencies, and create an internal infrastructure.  

The solution's architecture is very nice. The three components are a bot, a control room, and a bot developer. 

The control room is quite a good feature. It is easy to use and gives you the power to manage your digital workforce. It gives you a sense of understanding in terms of how the audit trail happens. 

The solution should include an analytics dashboard. As the space is maturing, many vendors sell functionalities as separate components so this is not unique to the solution. If I am buying a license, I should at least get a flavor of my analytics with a dashboard related to operational KPIs. Right now, if you want detailed analytics, you need to buy the dashboard separately. This licensing structure adds to the overall cost. 

The solution should include bot insights instead of selling it as a separate license. From the bot and business perspectives, insights are important for operational agility metrics and managing KPIs. For example, I want to how many hours in a day or month a bot runs for human resources when it performs A, B, C, D, and E and gives benefits across D, E, and F. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable so I rate stability an eight out of ten. 

The solution is somewhat scalable so I rate scalability a six out of ten. 

We get the right support when we ask for it. Sometimes though, service requests are not handled within the timeframe we expect. Issues move in circles until they are placed with the proper technician. 

There is definitely an opportunity to lessen the response time so I rate support a seven out of ten. 

Neutral

I have prior experience with UiPath to a certain extent. 

The setup takes a good amount of time because you have to develop an infrastructure that includes servers and compliance. A lot of time is spent framing those requirements and signing contracts that are quite detailed. 

I rate the setup a five out of ten because it is not that easy.

We worked with technicians from the solution to implement.

There are some difficulties in migrating to a new platform. There are a lot of internal governance forms or approvals that can delay the process. Lots of things need to be reworked as you go through the process. 

For about four to six months, you can take on the fixed paper side to get all the needed approvals. In some cases, the process might even take eight months because everything takes time and other business activities may take priority. Separate contracts need to be created for automations and they are usually handled by another team. Many approvals are needed at all levels of the organization. 

We currently use the solution on-premises but are migrating to the cloud. This process is also not that smooth and requires nudging. We are going back to the drawing board to take another look at things and rework if needed. Most components should be scalable and reusable but we are having a few issues on that front. 

Ongoing maintenance includes our internal team working with two or three of the solution's technicians to resolve issues. The solution's team routes or allocates the right technician to handle our service request. Our internal team supports and helps their technicians to understand our unique scenario. 

The solution is definitely worth the money. It is up to you to add quality use cases and utilize the digital workforce along with the human workforce. The tools are there, but the actual metrics derived are your baby. There are many benefits to automation solutions. 

I won't give 100% credit to the solution. Perhaps UiPath would have given us the same results. The way you use a solution makes all the difference in ROI. 

Similar to how competing products are priced, the solution has separate licenses for features that should be included in a bundle package. For example, the analytics dashboard and bot insights are sold as separate licenses. 

No one wants to buy a product that is too complex because components are sold separately. Give longstanding customers these benefits as icing on the cake. 

The solution is not the least or most expensive. Pricing is good and in the middle so I rate pricing a five out of ten. 

The options were evaluated before I joined the team, but I believe the company also looked at UiPath, Info Sales, and XCL. 

No tool, product, or technology is 100% foolproof. Each has its own set of pros and cons, including the solution. 

The common sales approach across the solution and other vendors is misleading. They make it look like a utopia where you will increase productivity by 200% in six weeks. This is not possible because organizations can't do magic in six weeks. Some of the claims being made by developers or content providers are creating a false impression in terms of senior management. There is no magic wand. There has to be automation. It looks and sounds simple, but implementation is not that easy. Your program, team, and communications management need to move in tandem to give you the inputs or outputs for sensitivities around people, roles, responsibilities, and training. 

It is important to be realistic when launching a new product or partnering with a player in the market. Be open and honest with customers. Don't make things too glamorous because it will be difficult to achieve that expectation. Stop overselling it and just be natural. A lot of consolidation is happening in the space and customers are aware because they read Forrester and Gartner. You can't fool customers so be honest and let them know that the solution needs to be managed by human beings. 

The biggest lesson is to understand the functionalities you need before you buy the solution. Determine if the solution passes the litmus test. Be cautious about overselling it and instead set the right expectations. 

Ask upfront if some additional features can be bundled because that will really help with your automation journey. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

I use Automation Anywhere to automate the data input process and produce the forecasting output.

We store our data in Databricks, which is sometimes shared via email. To automate this process, I've created a pipeline using Automation Anywhere that extracts CSV files from emails, uploads them to Databricks, saves the resulting table on a selected AWS page, processes the data, and feeds it into the model.

Automation Anywhere is user-friendly, with drag-and-drop features for nontechnical users.

The learning curve is no more than one month.

It integrates well with other tools.

Automation Anywhere saves us one month per year.

Automated data processing is the most valuable feature of Automation Anywhere.

I have been using Automation Anywhere for 16 months.

Automation Anywhere is stable.

Automation Anywhere is scalable.

Automation Anywhere supports automation to scale.

The technical support is good.

Positive

The deployment is straightforward and can be completed within one and two weeks.

Before implementing, we want to ensure we have all the support and collaboration.

Automation Anywhere is affordable.

I would rate Automation Anywhere eight out of ten because it is practical and user-friendly.

I basically develop automations and also configure and create new scripts. I do user testing and separate testing as well.

We use it for legacy applications. We can automate legacy applications well, even with complexity.

It's very easy to use. It helps streamline manual processes. Manual work can cost the company a lot of money, but with an automation, work can be just a click of a button. That, and the work is more accurate and happens much faster. Any manual processes can be automated.

While it does use AI, we don't use it too much. We're looking at it. However, it's not something we prioritize.

I like that we can customize almost anything. You can create workflows fairly easily.

Even if users do not have technical skills, they can still use Automation Anywhere. It's not hard to learn.

I did training over one or two weeks. However, I did find some of the training challenging, specifically in areas where I didn't have any background. That said, I'm using it with legacy applications, which makes some things more complex. For most users, it would be very easy to get going. 

We did see near immediate results once we started using Automation Anywhere. Within a week or two, once we started testing it, we could see how useful it was. 

It's saved us time and money so far. We were able to do reports both before and after running Automation Anywhere and could compare the results and we were able to see that we did actually record savings on both counts. 

The scripting can be a bit difficult. 

I've used the solution for the past three years. 

The stability is very good. That said, it's not 100% stable. Sometimes it does crash.

I've never contacted technical support. 

The initial setup was fairly straightforward. Our team did not find it to be difficult. our deployment team was pretty small. We only had four or five people working on it. It was easy to upgrade as well. There is some maintenance needed, including the need to take logs. However, it doesn't take too much time. 

The price is a bit higher than other options. 

We did look at other options; however, we needed something that could handle legacy automation, and Automation Anywhere made the most sense. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

New users should be knowledgeable enough to write scripts, as that's the main issue. However, it's a good solution for automating small processes.