Blue Prism Reviews

The solution has cross-application features where it can be set up with SAP, email, or SharePoint.

The solution could be more user-friendly. I would like the see the inclusion of a recording feature as in Microsoft, SAP, and other legacy systems. Users can play the recording and use it for future use cases. The recording can help with the automation and configuration. I would rate the tool’s interface a seven out of ten. It needs to improve.

We have been using the solution for around two to three years.

The product is quite stable.

The solution is scalable. We have around 100 users for it in our company and we intend to scale up the numbers.

We have never contacted the tech support team since we have our own internal technical team.

The solution is enterprise software so we will try to maximize our usage during the available slots. We will get ROI with the high price since there will be some value added with automation. I think that after doing a cost-benefit analysis, we are on the positive side.

I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We have various use cases for the solution and deploy it on AWS Cloud.

When we need specific reports, the default reports posted in the interactive clients are not helpful but can be useful. However, this means we can utilize only the minimum level, but we want to use more input data from the Blue Prism tool, which means we need to fetch more of the data from the table side, and for this, we need to integrate many tables for this integrating of data. So it becomes difficult to get a BP database onwards.

We are additionally migrating the Blue Prism database to different clouds. Blue Prism currently supports SQL Servers, and structured data, it is stored as an income performer. When we migrate to a process from a different environment, we either need to go with the complete restoration of the GP or we need to lose the data. This is because if you have ten processes, five processes may complete the testing. Other processes may still depend on the current environment when we move to live production. So since it can take weeks or months, we may lose the data while waiting, and we cannot integrate both from different clouds. 

Hence, the solution can be improved by enhancing the process's data storage and by including a common check. Sometimes, if the developer fails to identify a timetable directly, it will impact other processes. Currently, all processes are stored on the various tables in the Blue Prism, and the pre-check can ensure the developer is notified.

The solution can be improved by switching off data DB and including a report section with a morphing feature, like more reporting waste.

We have been using the solution for a year and a half, and we are recently migrated to version 6.10.2.

The solution is stable. I rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate scalability an eight out of ten, but when we interact with different environments, it is difficult to communicate, and DB synchronization is problematic. We currently have approximately 50 people utilizing the solution in our organization.

Technical support is often delayed as it takes four to five days to resolve issues since some people work across different time zones under constraints. Additionally, they are not traceable when we need to forward the case to a high level, and it takes another week to escalate to a higher level, which is unacceptable.

Deployment depends on the process' complexity level. It depends on if you want a straightforward process or gradual deployment over two weeks. For example, one week for the UIT testing and another week for SIT testing, four days for UIT testing and working at the QI level, and the following week for production, and in one month, we can take up hyper care. This is the best practice.

We did light scale mode for the deployment process, so when one process came into the picture, we ensured that the production environment would be ready for that process. So far from size, without any delays in the project deadlines and once the process is developed and code reviews are completed, we take internal approval to move the code to the following environments. So we can use duplicate and use different tools for pushing this code in the CIPD environment level or move this cycle management, like import and export processes.

We implemented it in-house.

The license is expensive, however, I cannot share the exact cost.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case for the solution varied, and some of the use cases were in financial and billing, while others were in managed services and automating infrastructure. It is deployed on-premises.

The biggest benefit the solution provided was in the financial sector. Specifically, in billing and processing orders for customers. So it focused on processing manual data that was coming from various systems or interfaces and putting it into the billing platform.

We find the stability and the ease of reusing code design valuable.

We had a lot of challenges managing authentication and reusing or using external authentication providers. For example, in API interaction, we need to get tokens from a centralized authentication platform that was always running for us. The solution can include attended robots similar to UiPath in the next release.

We have been using the solution for approximately five years and are currently using version 8.6.

The stability is good, but it is not perfect. I rate it an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability an eight out of ten and it could be improved.

We had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I was not part of the initial setup.

We implemented the solution in-house, with an internal IT support operational team consisting of approximately ten people covering shifts so that they will be able to monitor and maintain the robots 24/7.

Based on the project, the solutions have a return on investment or breaking point at roughly 18 months. I rate the overall ROI a six out of ten. It is just a little bit above the breaking point but it is worth it. It does not have much benefit in the long term because our businesses are changing, and the time to use the robot was short.

The solution is costly. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten, with ten being the highest price. It was approximately 700 euros monthly. Additionally, there was 25% included on subscriptions for maintenance but the percentage varied from year to year.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. The solution is good, but its authentication features can be improved, and the price can be more affordable. I advise new users to have a clear business value and a good process defined before implementing the solution.

I am using Blue Prism for my RPA enterprise project. I haven't used the cloud version, because I work from a financial institution and we are very strict about the confidentiality and the security of the data of our clients.

Blue Prism is a great enterprise and it has offered the solutions that I have been needing in order to give my organization an RPA.

The most valuable features of Blue Prism are the Control Room, autonomous bot, unattended, attended bot, and Decipher. I have been using the decipher functionality recently, and I want to explore the Capture functionality in other works that I have.

Blue Prism has given me the features that I need.

Blue Prism is a little behind Automation Anywhere in the topics related to maintenance and report building.

The report in Blue Prism could improve. I am in version 6 and they are already in version 7. The features or changes I need could have already been resolved in the newer version.

I have been using Blue Prism for approximately three years.

They have a call every three months with me to understand what are my needs at that moment. If they can adjust something in our contract, they have been very kind and very friendly. That has allowed us to adjust our agreement, functions, and training that my team needs in order to boost Blue Prism in my organization.

I chose Blue Prism because it is priced well. The pricing was right for me at that moment even though Automation Anywhere is better in other aspects.

I rate Blue Prism a nine out of ten.

The solution was deployed on-prem. We have about 100 users.

We were partners with Blue Prism.

There has been a huge amount of cost savings and freeing up. Employees got more vacation time allotted. That was a direct result of the time saved by RPA.

As a developer, I liked the layout and UI, specifically when it came to testing. Dragging and dropping stages and actions made development quick and easy to learn. The UI, allows you to watch as the bot moves through each step of the process at the same time it launches, interacts and closes applications, which really aids development and troubleshooting, unlike with AA and UiPath.  

I don't have an suggestions for improvement, at this time.

I used Blue Prism for five years. The last time I used it was a year ago.

The solution was stable.

Scalability was easy.

Technical support wasn't great. On a scale of 1 to 5, I would give it a 3.

Initial setup was straightforward. On a scale of 1 to 5, I would rate the difficulty of setup a 4.

Deployment took a couple of months from development to publishing it into production. We didn't have an implementation strategy. 

We had 25 developers for deployment and maintenance. We had about a dozen in production for support.

Deployment was done in-house.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

I'm one of the senior consultants in the company I work for, we are a service provider and we provide IT services to our customers. One of these services we provide is automation, using tools, such as Blue Prism.

We are upgrading to version 7.01 of Blue Prism in a few months.

We are using Blue Prism recently for statistics processes, which is the automation of SAP transactions for our logistics departments. Additionally, it is being used for SAP transactions within our IT finance service department. We do many things with it, such as partial reset and ticket re-keying. We have incident tickets logs from the IT department, which can be from emails, and we do re-keying exercises.

Blue Prism can improve a lot. The interaction with Google Chrome can be massively improved. I know in the next version there are slight improvements. We don't know how much, but we are comparing them. At this moment, Google Chrome is a massive issue within the toolset, due to the way Google Chrome receives updates regularly but Blue Prism is unable to cope. The spy method of Google Chrome is not as user-friendly as Internet Explorer is. However, Internet Explorer is being discontinued from their support, therefore it's not the best browser to be using. This has caused us major issues in the last six months. 

Our customers go through platforms, such as CyberArk and Citrix. The way that Blue Prism interacts with these applications could improve. There are a few other issues, such as memory, but these are the key problems that have offered issues in the past six months or so.

I have used Blue Prism within the past 12 months.

We have had a mixed experience of the stability of the solution. The problem that we have faced might be our infrastructure. The application itself can't be completely blamed. I think some of the issues are down to our VM infrastructure, the application service that we use, and the host that the servers are hosted on. In terms of the application, we have not seen many issues.

The technical support is very good.

I have used UiPath previously.

You don't need to be a technical developer to develop in Blue Prism, you follow the natural way you have developed. Whilst with UiPath, you need some development background to be able to develop in it.

We have been using Blue Prism for approximately eight years and when we first set it up it was a bit complex, but we always had support from the license of Blue Prism and other providers that we have within our organization. The whole process was fairly easy because of the support we had.

My advice to others would be to make sure they fully understand the use cases. If they are implementing it for customers, you're going to come across connectivity issues and make sure that you fully understand that it's not going to work right away. You're going to have to have a few releases into production, be mindful of Google Chrome and the issues that you may come across.

I rate Blue Prism an eight out of ten.

As for primary use cases, we have done purchase order processing for close to five countries, and we also do non-compliance in terms of the field assets deployed by a company to hospitals. That is, we use it as an asset tracking solution.

From technical perspective, Blue Prism is pretty good.

Overall, it's a stable and scalable solution. Installation is straightforward as well. 

Blue Prism could be compatible with Oracle's suite of ERPs. We have seen some issues related to this.

They could do much better with their intelligent document processing solution. They're pretty behind and don't have attended bots.

I would also prefer a better UI in the administration screens The user interface is pretty bad from an administration perspective.

I would like to see a lot of features like process mining.

I would also like to see a lot of different innovative solutions like human-bot interaction, handover managerial systems, and collaboration systems for process capturing, storing, and evaluating and getting discussions done within businesses.

We have been providing Blue Prism to customers for more than three years now.

From a platform perspective, we see compatibility issues with Oracle's JD Edwards software sometimes, but overall, to my knowledge, the solution is stable.

It's a scalable solution, and scalability is not a problem.

With regard to the initial setup, it's a pretty straightforward from Blue Prism's perspective. It's not as complicated as the installation of a WorkFusion solution, for example.

The actual installation, that is, setting up of the environment, can be done in less than a week from scratch.

We have four or five customers using this solution, and I have close to 50 or so people working across these customers. We have a combination of staff, such as architects, developers, managers, infrastructure engineers, etc.

Our customers pay for an annual license.

The product is good even though there are a lot of shortcomings. Also, the access to the company itself is very difficult. Obtaining a partnership is difficult, and getting support is difficult as well. So, I'd rate them at seven on a scale from one to ten.

In one of the use cases, we import Excel tables. We extract the Excel data from the output of a proprietary application. This application produces Excel tables as an output, and we then create PDFs for certificates for the people who are flying. They have to do training, flying hours, and things like this. In this project, we closed the gap between the proprietary application, provided by a different team, and the HR application.

It is deployed on-premises. Due to security issues, we are not allowed to use cloud services. We only have centralized application servers that are operated by the central operations team. It is not on users' desktops, which is possible, but it is not our focus.

RPA processes are helpful when we need interaction with different applications and close the technical gaps between them. In one of the use cases that we evaluated, there was a single Excel template from a vendor. The Excel file has 7,000 objects, and it included information about the part numbers, prices, and some of the details about each object of a complex maschine. This file had to be input to SAP, so a human had to enter these 7,000 objects one by one, which is a pretty mechanical and uninteresting task. The RPA bot was easily able to import this file. Without RPA, this import had to be done by a person who had to do the same task 7,000 times just to import one contract. This is where RPA processes and RPA tools are very helpful. RPA tools have the possibility to close media gaps. RPA tools are like macros on steroids. They now have got the maturity level for big data centers.

We see some security issues in Blue Prism. The German vendor Servicetrace is better at this point. This is also reflected in the Gartner report where Servicetrace is mentioned as the tool of choice in high-security environments. So, security, particularly in terms of administration, needs to be improved. We must have the possibility to prevent the administration from taking a look at the ongoing process. When we have restricted data flow, the operations team should not be able to take a look at the data that is processed.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

It has been pretty stable. Most errors are human errors in the input files. When we have issues, they are usually because of the content of the input file. There are no technical issues with the product.

It is not currently an issue on our side because the company has pretty strong and fast machines. Because these machines do only RPA and nothing else, they can handle the work of a lot of employees and do a great job with that.

I'm not sure if our contractor has many tasks to handle with the vendor itself. During the software evaluation, we had discussions with the vendor about product details, but the support is taken care of by the contractors, and I'm not sure how often it is required.

The installation itself was pretty straightforward. The installation of the software is pretty easy, but it can get tricky when you go into bot development and have to close the gaps between different applications. The most complex use case took us about two and a half years.

We have a project team of five to six people for implementation. Operations are handled by three people. The project team is extended by external persons or contractors. The basic operations are done internally.

We definitely save money by using RPA.

Due to our financial structure, we need fixed costs. So, a license based on the usage would not be feasible. If we have a license model that is based on tasks per year or something else, it could create a very dynamic range of costs. Due to our public financial input, we have to know what it will cost. So, we have licenses per server. This helps us in planning, and we know exactly when we need additional servers. We can then request additional money for them.

It is a pretty good solution. I would rate it an eight out of 10.