IQ Bot Reviews

We primarily use our IQ Bot for scanning documents that we get from the vendors. That is number one. We also use it as an HR input tool. When we receive physical documents from an employee wishing to join us, we run them past our IQ Bot solution, updating the master for all employees.

Ours is a retail business, so we use the solution to do continuous management of our recruitment process. From this perspective, maintaining the records of our employees is one of our key challenges. We use the solution primarily for HR data input, although we also employ it for backups.

At times we have to carry the nutrition facts as these relate to our billing cycle in respect of employees and customers.

Should the employee or customer request this, we must scan the nutrition facts of all the treated goods into our system. Previously, this took time, as there were errors such as would be found with the different classes of sodium-potassium or something in a particular product. We do this with an IQ Bot, as well. But, this is at the proof of concept stage. We have not gone with the dark system, the HR system being light.

The extraction feature is the most valuable. Because the post-processing and the pre-processing are very standardized, even from a classification point of view, things are fairly simple, as you still need somebody to feed the data. But, the place where I found the IQ Bots to be a par change in comparison with the other solutions is on the Extraction piece, as it uses good and middle technologies to extract the specific data that we require from the documents.

While there is adaptability in terms of the data series, an issue that should be addressed concerns different sizes sitting on deck, for something that can be done respecting the terms of the sizing of the template that the bot should be. 

Another issue is that the user should be able to update the data libraries. When it comes to small matters, a person should not need to be at the mercy of an implementation partner or Automation Anywhere for the receipt of instructions to reach out to the technical helpers

For other matters, we worked proactively with IQ Bot to address pain areas that we had encountered in our prior experience, such as that of the design evaluation or of the work we had done with our hardware providers in terms of the quality of the scanning and compression technology. This we addressed because of the inordinate burden on hardware capacity when doing high image scans, something which tremendously raises the size boost. So, we have, over time, optimized that along with the Automation Anyway team.

For anything in a standard location, we have fixed the sizes and do examples in the time of the ULT. Our extensive proactive work with IQ Bot reduced our pain areas.

Furthermore, in the past, I had forgone solutions that are in the scanning mode, such as vendor invoice management or OpenText from this or from Kofax. We contemplated the advantages and disadvantages of a scanning solution, a matter we have been instrumental in addressing. We now refrain from trying to do every conceivable task and to scan the entire document.

I have been using IQ Bot within the past 12 months.

We are not using the latest version of the solution. We have employed the more minor of its two upgrades but not the one which matches the latest version.

The solution is reliable. This said, I always explain to people who ask me about any RPA solution that there are two challenges. The first is that a person will have to estimate the running cost of the IQ Bot throughout the life cycle use of a new plan. So, it should not be evaluated as a one-time solution, as there is a maintenance fee required. A license renewal fee of core EMC charges must be paid. All of this should be taken into account. 

Keeping in mind the licensing fees incurred by Automation Anywhere, a deal should be made irrespective of the number of pages.

Otherwise, one may find himself countering good value properties, such as if another license must be purchased after 50,000 or100,000 pages. This would defeat the purpose of the time and investment made in the solution.

As such, one should never view the account being offered as too high to preclude its use. This situation can be encountered faster than one would think. In light of this, it is always better to opt for an unlimited, rather than a limited, license.

It is difficult for me to assess the solution's scalability. We have around 2,000 employees and, assuming that everybody has eight to 10 credentials to be shared, we are attaching only 20,000 or 30,000 copies. So, we haven't, as yet, reached the full potential.

We did not need to make use of the solution's technical support. This is because we made use of our critical six month EMC contract, as part of the standard implementation ring, something we did with Tanium based on our past experience. This allowed us to address, during the six months of post goal life, anything and everything that was not working with the bot.

The initial setup was complex, because if you look at employee certification and data it comes in various forms and formats. It's not like it is with standard A4, A5 or Legal text. Since the shapes vary, we considered the building of a database of the forms and formats to be key, which reduced our pain area.

We are trained to notice when a particular form and factor is not present, something which would stick out to us. This would be, subsequently, fed as a master template into the system, at which point the bot would take over.

This way we reduced the error rate from the bot, updating the master accordingly and its basis for being taken forward.

This allows us to create and feed a format into the system, for recruitment purposes, so that the bot may reference it.

Consequently, our pain areas are dramatically reduced, eliminating much tedium.

The licensing is under usage per page, and I wouldn't recommend it. You should buy it unlimited rather than be restricted in terms of the number of pages.

The pricing has room for improvement. If I had to benchmark all three RPA vendors, I would say that UiPath is cheaper than Automation Anywhere. The second would be Automation Anywhere in terms of flexibility, which beats out UiPath and Blue Prism. This latter is just brewing in India and has yet to grow to the preferred size, as they do not have any customer care based out of the country. It is, instead, based out of the United States, something which does not help me. 

In my present company, I was the one who bought RPA and, as part of that solution, we had also gone ahead and bought IQ Bot.

We have a team of eight people who are using the solution. The bot is structured so that it is used by different people for a variety of activities. One is for master creation, both of an employee and a vendor being involved in the system. Therein we get third party documents, which can be read by the bot.

The second concerns the extensive use of the solution that we employ for the reading of invoice copies.

The third concerns the nutrition elements. So, we have roughly two to three people from each function who use it, meaning fewer than 10 people utilizing it at present. 

While it is a manned bot, everybody has a schedule. Every Monday morning, for two hours, we handle nine or ten with HR. The recruitment is dealt with on the first Monday of the week. That's when natives run by HR the nutrition or other items. We typically run it on Nemesis, because that's when we have twigged our back-end system to get the deliveries on the deal set date, whereby we can use the bot at one signal run.

This is the point at which we have done the scheduling to manage the bot. 

One should not implement this solution until he has the desire to do so. We received it as part of a bundled offer, meaning we had to look for solutions allowing us to make use of it. Only if there is a large amount of scanning, such as a case in which 90 letters produce highly voluminous activity, is an IQ Bot the best solution, absent which a person can manage without the bot. We had already considered HR, but only for the searching of around 20,000 or 30,000 tickets.

If a person has the desired volumes, I would rate IQ Bot as an eight out of ten.

We integrate IQ Bot with TaskBot in Automation Anywhere, so whenever we do invoice processing, we use IQ Bot, so this is its main use case.

What I found most valuable in IQ Bot is its stability because it's now getting very much stable. Automation Anywhere is continuously enhancing this product. Initially, while my team was doing the PDF automation training in IQ Bot, sometimes, the solution doesn't extract the data, but now, you can easily group the software in different folders and you can integrate with TaskBot easily.

Another valuable feature of IQ Bot is data extraction. The solution makes it easy to fetch data and extract data from PDFs. Without IQ Bot, it's very tough to do PDF data extraction. Now, I can extract data from more than five hundred templates easily through the solution.

I also like that IQ Bot has great functionality.

There's still room for improvement in IQ Bot because sometimes, my team has certain types of PDFs that need to be grouped, for example, five types of videos need to be sorted to get data, but it was impossible to do in the solution.

There's even an instance when I'm extracting data, for example, the invoice numbers, and I trained IQ Bot to do the extraction just for the invoice numbers, but it failed to do it. There could be some exceptions that the product developer is working on, but it could take time because sometimes IQ Bot works, and sometimes it doesn't, so the error isn't because of the developer. The error lies with the system.

Another area for improvement in the solution is that during installation, it makes your machine drastically slow. It requires you to have RAM of 16 GB and a 500 GB hard disk, but that's still not enough.

Slow downloading is also an area for improvement in IQ Bot because whenever you try to execute bots around 20MB to 100MB, for example, that will be downloaded from the cloud to local machines, and this process could take between seven to eight minutes, and this could be frustrating especially when you're trying to showcase it to a customer. Bot downloading into a local machine shouldn't be taking more than five minutes because it's embarrassing in front of clients.

It's good that Automation Anywhere provides a cloud version for IQ Bot, but if you're unable to execute it fast, then that's not very good. I was working for one client in Brazil and there was a time I was showing the bot to them and it was taking around seven minutes to get downloaded on the local machine, and I even tried to connect with the support team, but that still didn't get me anywhere.

If you're working on some code and you're executing a bot, you need to change one line and the bot will download completely, so it should be pipeline or SVN or Git. If you've downloaded a 50MB bot, you just change one variable name, but then you have to download the 50MB code again, and it makes you wonder why you need to download the complete code. You have to double-check if you already have the code in your folder, and why would you need to download it again. Only one line should be changed for the download time to decrease drastically, but right now, you need to be downloading the code completely, so if you're executing a 100MB bot fifty times, then that means it will be downloaded fifty times as well.

IQ Bot is not a straightforward solution, so my team is struggling with it. Currently, my company has been doing some R&D about the solution, and it has several main problems that need to be addressed.

What I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is support for unstructured PDFs because currently, it's a very good solution for structured PDFs.

I did the first POC with IQ Bot in 2019, and I'm still using it. I've been using the solution for three years now.

I would rate the stability of IQ Bot as eight out of ten. It's a stable product.

IQ Bot is not as scalable, especially in terms of scaling it based on what you've paid. At the moment, it would feel like you're paying too much, so my rating for the scalability of IQ Bot is five out of ten.

Initially, the technical support for IQ Bot was very good. Nowadays, it's getting worse. A few days back, I opened one ticket with a severity level of one, and I only got the message from support after two or three days. It seems that support is being downgraded quality-wise.

The initial setup for IQ Bot isn't simple. If you're a new user of Automation Anywhere products, and you want to install IQ Bot, for example, it'll be difficult for you. You have to do some R&D first, and you have to connect with Automation Anywhere.

Installation is not a straightforward process in IQ Bot versus the installation process for Microsoft Power Automate. Microsoft Power Automate is very easy to install while installing IQ Bot will even give you SSL certificate errors many times.

Pricing for IQ Bot isn't good because if you're paying a lot and you're still getting some problems from it, then you can't give it a good rating. You have to compare how much you're taking out of your pocket with what you're getting from the solution. For example, I have a client paying $30 or $40 for the solution, but sometimes, he's still getting exceptions or errors from it.

The cost of IQ Bot is too high, so people are hesitant to purchase the license for it. On a scale of one to five, with one being expensive, and five being affordable, I'm giving IQ Bot pricing a one.

I evaluated UiPath, and IQ Bot is far better.

I have hands-on experience with IQ Bot.

My rating for IQ Bot is eight out of ten. As the solution is from Automation Anywhere, it's one of the leading tools in the market and it's capturing eighty percent of the market currently. IQ Bot deserves an eight because you get resources easily and you get community support. It's also easy to use. It's user-friendly, and it's a very good tool that you can pitch to clients.

I work for a service-based company providing design and development services to clients, so the number of IQ Bot users would depend on the client, but in my company I use it with six others.

IQ Bot is good software, and our current version has good functionality. First, it helps to create an instance in the development environment. Then, it allows you to export this instance and import it to another environment like the certification or production environment.

IQ Bot works well when an application generates a document, PDF, PNG, or other extensions. For example, documents or files are generated in an application like Oracle EVS, making the IQ Bot work well.

In our company, we have only five processes and about 11 instances automated using IQ Bot. For example, one involves documents generated using PDF, and another uses PNG extension.

IQ Bot has helped my organization transform digital documents and files into information to be processed. We often receive files and digital documents in a path or shared directory, and IQ Bot does the work. For example, we receive 3,000 documents a month, transform the digital information and then get the necessary data to use in our processes.

We had issues getting the data when we tried to use Tesseract, an OCR, because the OCR didn't get the exact information. However, with IQ Bot, 99 percent of the documents received work well and help send information to our clients.

With IQ Bot, we can transform an unstructured or digital document into structured data. It was our first experience using software to transform digital information into structured data.

We find errors with this solution if we have a document in paper format and use a scanner to convert it to a digital document like a PNG. As an additional feature, the technology needs to recognize signatures. Currently, there are issues with the technology identifying a signature.

We also used a previous version of IQ Bot about three years ago when we started our pilot and experienced some problems. We had issues exporting an instance and could not import it into another environment.

We have used IQ Bot for one year and use version 11.3.5, the latest version. Automation Anywhere is currently working on another version called A360.

We use on-premises architecture.

It is a stable solution. We have 11 instances and five automated processes. The use of these instances depends on the architecture and number of servers. Our architecture is enough, and we have three highly available servers that allow us to grow and use IQ Bot.

It is a scalable product. However, the scalability is a little complicated. For example, in IQ Bot, you need more servers because its memory and CPU capacity is high. It also requires a lot of hardware.

There are some improvements in the Automation Anywhere A360 new version with changes to the IQ Bot model. In this A360 model, IQ Bot RPI or Control Room automation calls are coupled. However, in the version we use, they are separated. Therefore, we must install Control Room on one server and IQ Bot on another.

I rate the technical support a four out of ten.

Neutral

We did not use another solution before IQ Bot. However, we practiced using Tesseract and considered Hyperscience, another technology with intelligent document processing. After that, we decided to stop researching other options.

Our initial setup was a little complex, and the installation and setup took about two to three hours. It was our first time using this solution, but it may have been easier if we had more experience.

We needed about three people to complete the deployment. We have one architect and an analyst for deployment and maintenance, and I am their boss.

We implemented IQ Bot in-house.

We have not evaluated our returns.

I don't have details about the cost, but we evaluated the unit cost compared to other solutions like Hyperscience, which were very similar. It will be good if the price is lower.

I rate this solution a four out of ten based on our experience. However, the rating may differ with a new version and new functionalities.

Regarding advice on this solution, firstly, I recommend choosing the best scenario and appropriate use case for a company. Secondly, investigate the technology and experiences of other companies. This is necessary because some companies declare that their servers work in different scenarios when they do not. Thirdly, make a proof of concept using this technology.

We go into companies and help them automate their processes — that's really what we do. If somebody wants to automate their processes, we have a couple of partnerships.

Usually what happens is, when our clients are scraping off the web, one client takes a report off the web, and then they publish it to their people. In the past, somebody would sit in front of the screen and they would type it in manually. Now, instead of doing that, a bot goes up, scrapes it up, and puts it into a file which they can then distribute.

We'll take that stuff and then generate a file — that's what we do. There's the data that has to be brought in from two files, or is brought in from the web. They would combine that data to create the file.

Our clients have more free time to work on other things thanks to this solution. Instead of having to copy everything from a web screen into a file, now it's done for you. You are free to work on something else.

Try to get every person working with a bot. That way, as soon as they get some manual work, they can cut over and give it to the bot to do. When the bot is done, it comes back to the person — that's the ideal state.

IQ Bot is easy to use compared to some of the other solutions out there.

They're always trying to make it easier. The whole automation industry is moving into what they call "intelligent automation", where they have started to bring AI into it also. That way, based on decisions, automation will happen.

I have been using IQ Bot for two years.

What we're seeing is that our clients had some problems initially, but now things are becoming much more stable. The competition has become much more fierce, and the industry is starting to mature a little also, so we're starting to see some improvements.

At first, our clients used to be really worried about scalability, but now they're able to scale quite nicely. If you really want to scale, then you want it to look at the cloud. With the cloud, there are unlimited resources.

The company has good support. When they're called on, they definitely help. 

It's pretty straightforward. I think the problem is usually tuning it up, and trying to get the best performance — that takes some time.

Deployment and making the best use of the software. Some companies don't properly train their staff so they take the wrong approach.

We usually try to get the company to build what we call a COE (center of excellence), where they have a group of people that have done these projects before, and they can help each of the groups in the company do it. As a result, they start to put standards in place on what the best practices are.

Then they pass it down to the rest of the people in the company. That's the way we try to get the company to move forward.

If you just try to wing it, you'll become sprawled; everybody's trying to do their own thing, without any standards. Then, when you want to upgrade or you want to make a change, issues will arise.

With the Cloud, the price goes up and down. You only pay for what you use. If it goes up, you pay for it, and then if it goes down, you don't pay for it. It really depends on what you use.

The cost can be a problem. You have to have a good strategy, and you also have to monitor what you use. If you're not planning properly and you're not taking advantage of the bots and the resources you need, there might be some issues.

My advice is to start with a good partner that can help build your expertise. Either bring in some people or collaborate with a partner.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. There's always room for improvement, and this industry is growing and changing. Still, IQ Bot is a leader.

We are using IQ Bot for document processing. The use cases are predominantly around NLP and document processing.

It has a lot of great features.

The solution has been quite stable. 

The capabilities meet our needs.

It offers a pretty simple setup process.

So far, the product looks like it can scale.

We've been happy with the product as a whole. There are no missing features.

From what we are operating from now, we don't see any problem areas or anything that needs improvement. 

I would like love to see pre-trained models based on industries. If I'm looking at an insurance domain, if the UiPath, IQ Bot has an algorithm that is pre-trained with the various formats that are available in the market, that would reduce a good amount of development time.

We've used the solution for almost a year or maybe a bit more.

The solution is stable. We have not faced any performance issues as of now. That said, it's still new and we shall see down the line when we cross a critical threshold, how it is behaving.

At this point in time, we are still onboarding use cases. The variety will increase, and the volume as well, likely in the near term. At that time we would come to an understanding about the processing speed and the scalability. Since it is a SaaS product, we have the confidence that it would be available on demand. 

We have been doing everything on our own. We haven't had to reach out to technical support for assistance just yet.

We found the initial setup to be quite simple and quite straightforward. It's a SaaS and therefore not complicated to deploy.

Right now, since it is a fresh and ongoing engagement, the same team builds, deploys, and supports. It's only when you complete the automation development that you would need a team for support. Therefore, at this point in time, there is not much support activity that I foresee. Only time will tell once we enter into everything, what will be the staffing requirement. 

Doing it as a SaaS takes a lot of headaches out. Only the operations would be required to just ensure that the bots have been running. I tend to believe it would not be much of a strain on personnel in terms of maintenance in the future.

Most of the support that we do is predominantly of the infrastructure, maintenance, networking, and all that stuff. On top of that, we will also have the patching, upgrades, and all of that. That is where we see most of the support going. However, for a bot operation, supports are not that high. It is limited. It would be around 12% of the overall team size and it would be in the build state.

We implement the solution for clients. 

I'm not sure of the exact cost related to the solution. I would not have the numbers as this is directly done by the delivery team, which is on the ground. I belong to the overall automation where the costs are billed directly to the project.

Whenever it's UiPath versus Automation Anywhere, and both numbers are looking the same, it's a little higher on the Automation Anywhere compared to UiPath.

In relative terms, Automation Anywhere is a little costlier - maybe 10% more than UiPath. However, UiPath recently increased its license cost. That happened just a few weeks before. 

We are using IQ Bots and they are gaining popularity. We have some solutions around the IQ Bots. In fact, for Automation Anywhere, mostly the clients have IQ Bots as that's around the telecom space and they've gone with the SaaS solution of Automation Anywhere.

With IQ Bot, you need to ensure that you have the right amount of database freedom. If you train with less amount of data, your accuracy goes down, and the confidence score goes down. Then, you come up with the problem of inaccurate executions. When training, it's important, to have the right amount of data and what we are extracting. I'd also advise adopting a co-bot approach for the initial attempts until you believe that it is well trained enough to make it automatic.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Our clients use it to extract details from purchase orders, like purchase order dates, purchase order numbers, and other details. It will extract it from that particular purchase order for a particular customer, and then it will feed it back to our ERP system.

I personally feel that the "See extraction" feature is valuable. After training it for a particular document, we can see the extractions there. Other than that, it has other features like Python scripting in-built, and these are the features that I feel stand out.

It would be better if they had some in-built formats for nonstandard requirements. Currently, the invoice has a thing, purchase orders has a thing, and other details of employment and onboarding are all easy. But if I have to put something out of the box, let's say if I want to read a rental agreement or if I want to read a property agreement, there isn't an option for that. 

Initially, there was one issue when we were trying to switch from a development environment to a production environment. We needed to transpose or expose a bot to the production environment. There we had some issues where the in-built input feature stopped working for extended periods. It was an API to kind of input the versions from development to the production environment. But I think it has been fixed in the upcoming one.

I think Automation Anywhere has a partnership with Google. I hope they integrate Google's OCR engine in some way with IQ Bot because the OCR engine that Google produces provides an in-built accuracy of close to 99%. That is the integration we are looking for, but we need to pay for IQ Bot. If they can integrate both and come up with better pricing, then it will be a huge boost because, in that case, the quality of an image or PDF quality is taken completely out of difficulty as Google tends to extract the data. That is something I am looking for if this happens.

I have used IQ Bot within the last 12 months.

IQ Bot is definitely a reliable solution. But it has a dependency on the quality of the files that are uploaded. Better OCR is available in the form of Microsoft and Google. But if you are looking at the entire product, I think that's a spectrum, and I think it is quite stable.

It is scalable provided it already has the OCR engines inbuilt. Other than that, we want to add Google or Azure, or Microsoft. Ideally, if Google or Azure OCR is in-built, we could just integrate it in the premium versions of Google and Azure OCR. It does allow us to integrate with others things. We are a service provider company, and our entire team is about ten people. I have been using the IQ Bot for one customer.

Technical support is definitely responsive. They have the tech support flexibility to categorize it by being the least important to completely fatal for production emergencies. From that perspective, we do get responses, and it varies from one hour to two hours.

The initial setup is pretty much straightforward. The only complexity that I had was to add some security certification. The tools were set up in a separate drive, and that is where the complexity comes in. But it is something that can be handled completely. 

It is based on the stages and on a yearly basis.

I would advise potential users to go for IQ Bot if they have a standard format for a particular PDF. Even if there are multiple types that are configurable and if the quality of the images is good, this is definitely much better than others. It does a commendable job.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give IQ Bot an eight.

We have invoice data in the form of an image. With a normal task bot, we cannot extract the data from that. So, we are using IQ Bot to extract information or invoice data.

I have worked on version 11.3.6, but Automation Anywhere has released Automation 360. I have been working on that for the last three to four months, and it has many good features as compared to version 11.

The best feature is that we can extract data from an image. That's why Automation Anywhere implemented IQ Bot. Otherwise, you cannot extract data from an image. Nowadays, every industry is scanning invoices and uploading them to some website or storing them on some shared drive. IQ Bot can do data extraction from the PDF format and the JPG format.

The percentage of accuracy is very low. When I put documents in IQ Bot and the document format gets changed, IQ Bot puts that in the validation queue. If you are uploading 100 documents, the IQ Bot accepts only 60 documents. 40% or 30% of documents go to the validation queue. Accuracy is way low. They need to improve their accuracy level. It should be at least 90%.

Another major limitation is with the handwritten applications. If I write a new application with a pen and scan it and store it, IQ Bot cannot access that information. It doesn't accept handwritten applications. It should accept the handwritten application.

Sometimes, the quality is not good, but it also depends on the quality of the document. If the quality is less than 600 DPI or 300 DPI, IQ Bot will not process the document.

I have been using this solution for more than a year. I'm working as a technical architect. Sometimes, I use it myself, and sometimes, I provide solutions to developers.

It is not that stable when the documents have different formats. When the format changes, the document goes to the validation queue.

It is scalable, and we can put 100 documents or 1,000 documents, but the percentage of accuracy should be more.

In terms of its users, currently, six to seven developers are involved in the invoicing process. It is being used daily. When IQ Bot is not able to handle the data, the document goes to the validation queue. They open the documents that come to the validation queue and retrain the particular document. For that purpose, support people are needed.

They're responsible, and they provide very good support. They are supporting us very well. They are knowledgeable.

It also depends upon what kind of support contract you have with them. Sometimes, there are restrictions on the number of tickets. You cannot create more than 10 tickets. If you create more than 10 tickets, they can charge you or something like that. It depends on the support contract. In my organization, the support contract is good.

I would rate their support a four out of five.

Positive

I never used any other product, but to my knowledge, people are moving to Python script. They are using Python script and going for the AI/ML level. Through Python script, accuracy is more as compared to IQ Bot. If you're using the Python script library, at the code level, the accuracy is more. The code control is in your hands. You control the code and you can modify it, but with a product, the control is not in your hand. 

I am not aware of its setup. Its setup is done by the infrastructure people. They set up the IQ Bot server because IQ Bot needs a server. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

IQ Bot has the ability to easily capture objects. The latest version is far ahead of the competition. Most of the features are excellent, valuable, and easy to handle.

When you update to a new version, you have to migrate your applications. That should be automated because it should not affect your ability to complete the task. If the version of the application changes, then you need to automate some part of that again. 

IQ Bot is a component of the newer version of Automation 360. We started using it about a year and a half ago. It was introduced in 2020, and we started using it in September 2020.

If you need an application to do some repetitive task, then you are going to create the bot. And as for the requirement, you are creating some IQ Bots and master bot and you're handling errors altogether, so obviously it will be stable up to 98%.

IQ Bot has to be scalable because it contains a lot of data and multiple features. You need to provide some services as well, so scalability is a part of it. 

If a client has a massive amount of data that needs to be processed, it's more likely that there will be errors in the data if it's processed manually. Automating the process gives you greater accuracy. 

I rate IQ Bot support nine out of 10. You might have technical difficulties requiring some tweaking or minor issues that can be resolved in a single call.  Those are easy to handle. For example, maybe some tabs are missing, so support will go inside and check the code to find out what happened.

You are provided support for one month after deploying then there are levels of support: levels one, two, and three. You raise a ticket for a specific issue, problem, or application. Maybe it's a data issue or an application-related problem. For example, perhaps some content is missing. You send a screenshot and some information to the technician. They solve minor problems in an hour or two, but something significant might take one or two days. 

Positive

The ROI varies among clients, but a customer will only implement automation if they expect a return. There are two or three points to consider when providing a solution to the client. You need to look at how much you can reduce two categories: full-time equivalent and AST.  

You should think about the headcount that can be reduced. Let's say there are three people working for 24 hours, and one bot can complete those tasks in less time. Suppose a ticket that takes two hours to resolve manually can be handled in five minutes by bot. That ROI structure is provided to the client. The price structure and an analysis of workload management must be included. You will need to create some remote machines and divide the task into different levels among various machines. 

I rate IQ Bote nine out of 10. If a process is divided into use cases, it should be at least 95 percent accurate. My advice to prospective users depends on the requirement. You have to consider the complexity. If it's a simple task, you can do everything by hand, but if it takes 10 team members to do the task, you might consider automation.

I suggest automation for a complex use case involving complicated processes, multiple applications, and lots of data. If the client is working with semi-structured data, we can offer automation. We only recommend this if we can automate 55 percent of the processes or more.