Automation Anywhere Reviews

Our primary use case for Automation Anywhere is to help our clients achieve efficiencies in their businesses and capture revenue opportunities that they would otherwise miss, either due to lack of ability or lack of speed.

We have automated a different variety of processes, anything from inbound communications, from clients to our customer. Those inbound communications have to be processed and digested, then acted upon, some of which can be straight-through process automated, which is a fantastic time savings for them. The ones that can't be, can be routed to the right folks in a very quick manner, rather than being manually read and inspected, then categorized and passed on.

We have also addressed financial processes around invoice reconciliation or accounts payable. There are processed around sales. If you think about how people use Salesforce and spreadsheets and other systems around Salesforce. There is a lot of copying and pasting of data in and out of Salesforce, then into those other systems. We can make all that go away, so their sales reps can focus on selling. So, there are a lot of great use cases like that.

One thing for our organization, Automation Anywhere has helped us find new clients and help those clients find new opportunities to improve their businesses that previously seemed out of reach to them. There are other ways that we could solve these problems which are more expensive and difficult to implement. With RPA, specifically with Automation Anywhere, it has really helped us engage with those clients and achieve the results that they want.

With Automation Anywhere, we have had good success, having folks with all different varieties of technical backgrounds. Both our most technical staff, as well as our least technical staff, have been able to engage. We can engage directly with our clients' representatives, their business users, and their IT users, then get them up to speed, so they can all be part of the process. Making everyone part of the process is what really makes it catch on in an organization.

When I think about Automation Anywhere, it's not a specific feature that really defines it. It is how the whole package works together and a type of holistic view of how you attack automation problems, particularly with RPA and IQ Bots. So, there is a real sense of the whole picture, not just one feature or specific thing that jumps out for me.

The areas for room for improvement are always going to be around experience, making it even easier to get engaged, and get started. Because lowering that threshold to get started is what enables an additional set of problems to be solved. So, I sort of look at it like a water level. If I can lower the water level, then there is more surface area of the business area exposed above the water, and that's the stuff that we can go solve.

As a partner of Automation Anywhere, I view it as part of our job is to create scale problems for Automation Anywhere to solve. To make the solution big enough that it finds those edge cases. We haven't had any problems with scale and stability with Automation Anywhere, so I hope to create those problems, then work with Automation Anywhere to solve them.

Our experience with technical support at Automation Anywhere has been great. They have been very helpful, especially during the PoC, processes which are sort of early on in their sales cycle, or when we were just starting with Automation Anywhere a couple of years ago. We got great support for getting it onboarded in-house and getting our team up to speed. So, we have found it to be a great partnership. 

Our clients use all types of software, whether it's process offer, decision management, RPA and they even use multiple tools of those. Our objective is to make sure we take care of the client, whatever we want to use. However, we've found that our clients are successful with Automation Anywhere, and it's been a good place for us to invest with our clients to achieve great results.

From two perspectives:

1. The initial setup, as a partner, was very straightforward.
2. The initial set up from a technology point of view, although it was unfamiliar to us when we started, was also pretty straightforward.

We measure ROI. The way we do it though depends on each client and whether we as a service provider have access to that information, which also depends on the client. But our clients, they measure it in a bunch of different ways. My favorite example is one where we were enabling service providers for them, basically a set of new sales reps coming onboard that have to be certified with government and have to go through an approval process. That process used to take months to run through, but with RPA, we were able to automate it and get it done in a week. So, from a revenue enablement point of view, we took all the friction out of that process, which has huge ROI for our clients.

Prior to working with RPA at BP3, we worked with a lot of process and decisioning technologies and also integration technologies. So, we have sort of a unique perspective on how RPA fits in and plays well with others. In particular, we're partnered with IBM and Automation Anywhere, and we saw them on stage together, presenting. I think Automation Anywhere, from a cultural perspective does a really good job partnering, but they also provide a product that works well with other products, so it's easy to integrate too. It's easy to include it in a solution and easy to use it to drive a solution which leverages other technology.

In today's market, you have to think about, how was RPA today and how would I rank it versus what it can be in the future? I think we're in the early innings of what RPA can be and what Automation Anywhere can be. We saw some indication of that in the keynote speeches. You can just get a sense for the scope of the vision and where they want to take RPA at Automation Anywhere. I won't try to rate against the future, but I think we're in early innings, two or three versus a ten. But, when you compare it to the state of the art today, I'm really impressed with RPA, and I think it's an eight or maybe nine (out of ten).

I would recommend if you're starting out to look at RPA and how to get started with Automation Anywhere. That is the first thing that I would do is. Find a couple of problems that you think are easy, then take a moment to really think about problems which are important to your business, because you have a limited amount of focus for your business. You business only has a few limited resources: time, money and focus. If you're going to spend that focus, spend it on something that matters. It's fine to do a research project or a pilot project, something that doesn't have a lot of risk. You have to do something that matters for your business, and if you're having trouble finding that and making it make sense in an RPA context, then I'd say work with someone who can help you reframe the problem so you can find those opportunities.

We have many solutions, like Data Rebate, for example. We need to compare this information, regardless of the information that we save in the Experian databases, against information in government websites, in order to ensure that everything is up to date. The information of the company address, for example, took around 47 minutes to compare, while using RPA it now takes around 10 minutes for each one.

Automation Anywhere has improved our company a lot, because we are currently trying to leverage automation in different departments to allow employees to work where more human intervention is needed. The SLA of some tasks that we need to deliver to some clients has improved greatly. The productivity has increased a lot in my organization.

Interaction with websites is the feature most valuable to us. Most of the systems are web-based, so using a very accurate web-based identification like objects, extracting information from tables inside websites, and checking websites differences using MetaBots is very helpful with Internet Explorer. This allows us to separate the functionality by using an object where we store all the assets, or screenshots of the webpages, instead of changing the logic of a website. It's very useful.

Ease of use of this solution depends on how complete you want to go. From my perspective as a system engineer, the curve was very, very low because you have a lot of understanding about technology. On the other hand, we have examples of people that the curve was a little bit high, but coaching them to improve their knowledge about Automation Anywhere and how friendly the interface is right now is very useful.

MetaBots and Control Room may have some room for improvement.

The bot store has a large amount of pre-designed bots. I made some tests related to language, browser scene, and image recognition. It was very nice.

I would rate Automation Anywhere as seven out of ten. There are a lot of things that need to be improved, especially related to the Control Room, but you can develop and scale with this tool very, very fast.

We have automated some fund management and fund reconciliation processes, which has been done successfully. The tool has been performing well. 

In our fund management and fund reconciliation process, we had a lot of headcount. Automation has significantly reduced our FTE count, investing that IT personnel into other work. Also, the quality of the work has slightly improved.

Our development time has been reduced because the solution is very user-friendly. You don't have to know a lot of things. It has an IDE with drag and drops, in addition to workflow development. This gives developers an edge to write code quickly.

I am a developer with nine years of experience in full-stack development. I have found this tool strikingly different, compared to the other tools, in terms of ease to use. Anybody can be taught it, and it has a very small learning curve.

Automation Anywhere has some limitation with its integrations. You can build your logic with MetaBots and .NET components, e.g., if something is not gathered by Automation Anywhere or built into functionality, you can write a MetaBot. A MetaBot is like an external component. You can write it through C# or .NET code, and make a DLL, and import it. This is not open to all data types or EXE functionalities which can be written through C#. You have to define your variable types, matching them with Automation Anywhere existing variable types. Because of the knowledge required, I cannot let another person, who doesn't know Automation Anywhere, build my external DLL code.

They are already addressing some concerns that I have been having, like having cascaded code blocks, which is very helpful for developers to use when finding and debunking codes. Until now, we haven't had collapsible cascaded code sections in Automation Anywhere. This is not typical, as any IDE will usually have it, on any language.

The current interface for business users is not intuitive, as it is a code-based view. A business user wanting to develop a process may find the interface a bit elusive. Automation Anywhere is now working on a process flow view with a drop and drop, which should be better for business users.

There is not much guidance for implementing DevOps, like continuous development. Nowadays, the technology has come for the deployment part, it should be part of Continuous Integration and Continuous Development (CI/CD). 

With Jenkins or TeamCity, there is a job, and I want to see them have integration with Automation Anywhere, so we can directly code check-in, run, test, and deploy. Now, we are doing this manually for deployment, but I want to see a DevOps job instead.

We had couple of Windows' tools that we automated. The stability is remarkably good. 

In some cases with RPA web development, where we had to integrate with some websites, there were some problems in terms of reliability or stability. The issue is not constant. Different browsers, like IE, work well, where others, like Chrome, don't work well. With legacy websites, based on old technology, it also does not work well. 

The scalability is fine. You can create small, repeatable tasks. You can expand through different bots. So, you don't have to recreate the same stuff. Automation Anywhere provides the facility so you can reuse components to make a scalable solution.

We are improving scalability on a daily basis, as RPA is new to us. Our code is now more scalable and reusable than we developed our basic structure. Going forward, if we have to create a new bot with any given scenario, it will take 20 to 40 percent less time to create. This is because we have already made the scalable, reusable components.

In terms of accessibility, the Automation Anywhere technical support is the best. Out of all the RPA tools that I have used, their support forum is more agile and responsive. For any issue, we just have to create a ticket and a technical person will get assigned in no time. They are the best in terms of responsiveness, but I have mixed feelings about the quality of those responses. I feel sometimes to support their fast responses that they probably compromise their quality.

We used to get a lot of emails from the original fund management users (the consumers) asking about their estimated stock prices: monthly and biweekly. This information comes through a lot of emails. We had to read those email, classify and categorize them, then go into a different portal to get some more data, and finally, send them a result in an Excel format.

We used a consultant, and the deployment was very smooth. We have been maintaining three environments: development, UAT, and production. The deployment procedure is pretty simple. We just have to export from one to another environment where the dependency is just a package file. 

We are thinking of implementing Bot Insight and the CoE dashboard to calculate our ROI, since our bots are not analytics-based. We are just using our bots as a bot. They are not integrated with any analytics. I know that they have a CoE dashboard, where you can define parameters to automatically calculate ROI. At the moment, we are manually calculating our effort savings.

I don't agree with the IQ Bot licensing costs, which depends on the consumption of the document rather than per bot or user. This is confusing for me, because most of the cases for us in a possible future scenario, there would be a lot of invalid data to be scanned to get to real data. E.g., we would have to supply approximately 100 pages of scanned data to extract two pages of original data. In these type of cases, the IQ Bot might be a costly venture.

The company also looked at UiPath. From my understanding, Automation Anywhere was chosen for ease of use and licensing.

The IQ Bot seems interesting in the terms of populating semi-structured data and gathering intelligence of its own. Though, I haven't implemented in my project yet.

I didn't know Automation Anywhere seven to eight months back. All my learning came from the Automation Anywhere University. Though, I have experience in other RPA tools, the courses are really helpful, as they helped me to gather the knowledge needed to implement and master the product. Right now, I'm applying the information to my domain and company.

I haven't used it in a Citrix environment.

I very excited to see the next version of this product.

As part of our retail banking group, we are using Automation Anywhere for various processes within it. In addition, we are using it for our risk and compliance teams for money laundering investigations and fraud investigations.

We are using it primarily to remove out the human element of various processes.

It gives us the capability of leveraging our investments in different applications. I can use Automation Anywhere to tie a number of applications or processes together, without having to do in-depth coding to automate something.

It's been pretty good at integrating with our other applications and tools that we're using.

We started out with three production bots last year. From the time that we were deploying them into production to being able to use them in a production mode, it took somewhere between four to six months.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. 

One of the things that we did was purchase the solution originally through IBM, as they had an value-added layer on top of it. Once we had another group come on, they purchased additional bots directly from Automation Anywhere, and they wouldn't integrate well. We had to uninstall the solution that we had purchased from IBM and reinstall those bots to move forward. 

Now, we purchase our bots directly from Automation Anywhere, because this other layer from IBM put us behind, and I don't know if IBM has resolve this issue or not. It was a bit disturbing and surprising, that during the sales cycle, we were told by Automation Anywhere that this layer/enrichment was not seamless to the upgrade process.

We did use an integrator, Cognizant, for the deployment. 

It frees individuals up from mundane tasks so they can concentrate on being more active and creative other things that they need to do. There are two use cases that we have around for this: 

1. We receive benefit and reduce tying up of valued resources. 
2. For processes which are executed less frequently. E.g., there may be monthly processes with one to two people, and instead of relying on those individuals to run those processes, I can automate them. Then, I can get more consistent results when relying on a process which is manually driven.

• Pega seems a lot more hands-on with technical capabilities. They also seemed like if I wanted a steak, I had to buy the entire cow, then eat it.
• UiPath seems to be more of a recording type application, and if I want to change something, I have to do a rerecording.
• With Blue Prism, it is like they wouldn't really engage except through a third-party partner, which was sort of a turnoff.
• Automation Anywhere is in the middle ground. It allows me to easily drag and drop things into the development platform. I can also do recordings. However, if I'm having issues, I can dig down into the flow of the code, if necessary.

Take a good long look at the processes that you are trying to automate. Look at the talent pool that you have to develop the bots. Do you want to become a development shop? Or, do you want some of the capability to be put in the hands of business users? In our case, we wanted that mix of technical and business users having capabilities around this application. Some of the other products didn't offer that. This was one of the things that we drew us to Automation Anywhere.

We have some of our developers taking courses around Automation Anywhere University.

We're an insurance company and we use it to automate what would normally be done person-to-person by hand. We're gluing together the applications, going from one to the other to collect information to process them.

I can't speak for the bigger picture, but we have had a great deal of success with gluing together some of the old applications. They were built, isolated, and somewhat siloed. We have this one where you go to get this information, and we've got that one where you go to get the rest of the information. Now, rather than the team going and collecting all of that information, we can have the bots do it, and that has been fantastic.

We've had a number of processes plugged into this that have become the daily job schedule. There was a ridiculous amount of old work: Request this report, download the PDF, grab the numbers off of it and entering them. Having the automated system, while I can't put numbers on it yet, it's very easy to sell the value of the product.

I really like the way the bots are built, being able to take some old, clumsy screen that someone built and put your keystrokes and your information onto it. It's fairly simple as well.

I would describe bot creation with the word "exciting." We've had a couple of team members who have been working on projects who say, "Let me do it!" They're familiar with the product and they're very comfortable with the building process.

I also very much like the integration of this solution with other applications. We have some old web applications that we've been using, and we've been writing some of our own DLLs to integrate with it. It has worked really well. We're able to have the bots take over what would have been a lot of training and a lot of meticulous work.

I love the XML feature behind the scenes.

If there were one thing I could ask for it would be a text-based language. Right now it's proprietary, so you always have to go through the tool, even for things like basic compares. What we're trying to do is spin up other teams to get them using more and more of it. That would help, the basic .NET for basic tasks. The language itself has been working well. They should just keep doing what they're doing.

We just got onto Windows 10 and that has gone absolutely flawlessly. Not only has it been working well, but we're seeing a huge performance upgrade. They are running considerably faster. I'd give a thumbs up on the stability.

Scaling has gone remarkably well too, the ability to literally just spin up another bot. We have a collection and we'll add a couple more and no big deal happens to the scheduler. It has worked well.

To scale from pilot to the number of bots we’re currently using has taken about two years. We did a lot of experimenting before we committed to it, but once we got through a couple of those experimentation projects, we were able to form a team, figure out exactly what we were going to have to accomplish from a business point of view, and dive in. After those couple of pilots, it took about a year from when we initially startied playing with it. There was a little bit of getting our feet wet, feeling comfortable with it. But now, we have several teams and it's working great.

I have not personally had to call much, I'm not part of the team that would do that, but they've been fairly responsive. We've found one or two problems that we had to come up with workarounds for and they did that fairly quickly. Then the permanent solutions came along fairly well. We have a very good relationship with them; being able to call and get that help right away.

It was really straightforward and made sense to me. Put it this way: I have always been able to see where the product is going. It seems somewhat impressive the way it's designed, and that's why it made sense. Some of it might have been due to the fact that I took the classes at Automation Anywhere University. I got to talk to the developers, so I could see exactly what they were thinking, and it made sense.

The nice part about being on the software development side is that we have don't have to deal with licenses etc. I've had to in the past. Put it this way: It becomes easier and easier to sell when they can see what we're doing.

I was brought in right as our pilot was getting ramped up, so they had already made the decision. I did hear about the other ones but I don't know exactly what the decision process was.

The biggest advice I could give is to just be patient. There's a lot to learn and you really don't know, at first, exactly how you go about it, how does this happen?

I started approximately two years ago, and having seen improvements to the software, I'm so excited right now about finding out where they're going. I've seen a great deal of the investment in the product as they develop it. so I'm fairly excited to be using it.

Sadly, I have not gotten into much of the solution’s cognitive document processing (IQ Bot) yet. It's a matter of learning more about it and then taking the next step. It's a matter of finding out what else we can do and we can start developing that.

I took a few courses at Automation Anywhere University when we first started. The more people that we've had on Automation Anywhere, we've found it's been working extremely well. It seems as though we're able to get them up to speed relatively quickly.

Right now, I would rate Automation Anywhere at about eight out of ten because it's obvious there have been huge improvements and it's nice for us to work with. There extra two points would come from the improvements that we're looking for: simple things like the programming interface, they could clean that up. And the compare windows are small, it would be nice if those were bigger. There are always refinements they can make. And we've seen some already. It has become faster, cleaner to use.

We use it for finance, and it performs very well.

We have automated every finance-based operation, from collections to invoice processing. We have also worked to implement the solution with customer service, operations, and IT.

It has streamlined many manual processes, eliminating errors and inefficiencies. It has also allowed us to introduce metrics, so we can generate operational reports and improve our overall business.

• Its large command set
• MetaBots and IQ Bots are great features, which have been improving.
• The Bot Store, with its extensive number of MetaBots, has been very helpful.

I have been very impressed with the Bot Store. We have used several MetaBots already, which has saved us many weeks of development.

We have been able to implement several bots from non-developers in the finance department. They were able to implement solutions for existing business processes with no technical programming background.

• The development environment needs to be improved. 
• Making edits across files is hard. 
• Not being able to resize Windows has proven challenging.
  

We have seen vast improvement in version 11. We are still hoping to see improvements in its ability to have the client answer automatically and reconnect when Windows updates are applied. 

I would like to see improvement in its scalability. While workload management is a nice feature, from a practical usage and client usage standpoint, we would like to see improvement.

We usually start a pilot automation with a single Bot Runner. Then, based on volume, we will increase it to two. Afterwards, we'll increase exponentially from there based on volume. 

I've received different levels of support from Automation Anywhere. It has thoroughly improved, and I have seen quicker turnaround times from my questions.

We switched to this solution because our previous solution needed to be updated.

The installation of version 11 is fairly straightforward. I do like the new server architecture based on Java, as it is very straightforward.

We are an integrator and consultant company. We work with clients to do the deployment.

We initially started with a number of full-time employees (FTEs) who we can now reassign. 

For example, with the collections process, millions of dollars might be gained by a company, because now the automation can handle the collection of unpaid bills. Previously, it was too much for human workers to handle.

Time and monetary savings can range from 20 to 90 percent.

Costs varies per client.

The other vendors that clients wanted to review have been UiPath and Blue Prism. In some cases, those vendors were selected.

We have used Automation Anywhere for both attended and unattended automation. 

We have automated PO processing, PO-to-order booking, and various website flows, such as ticket generation, timely uploads of files on the website, and report generation. We have also automated report delivery to all end-users.

Manual efforts have been reduced and the accuracy has increased. In the processes I have done, the accuracy has reached 100 percent, and manual load and time has been reduced.

Object cloning and Excel operations are what we use most.

The ability of Automation Anywhere to provide automation at scale, on a scale of one to 10, is a nine. Integration of its RPA bots using APIs is an eight out of 10.

More and more innovation is going on, and they'll have to keep adding features to keep up with the market. They have generative AI on their platform, but that's a new part. They are working on it. It's not 100 percent foolproof, but eventually it will get better. They need to work on their AI capabilities.

I have been using Automation Anywhere for four years.

The new version is stable now. When we first started, the platform was not stable, but it became stable when we shifted to A360.

If we are stuck anywhere, their technical team is always available. We have raised one or two issues with them and they were able to help us out and turn them around.

We haven't required them very much, but they are available if we need them.

Positive

I've worked with Microsoft Power Automate, but at a very basic level.

The initial deployment is easy. The documentation is clear. Implementing A360 on-premises, a complete end-to-end installation, takes four hours. We just need the server team for administrator passwords.

I had already tested and tried it on a development server, so I had all the steps written that I had to follow for deployment to production. It didn't take much time. I read the installation guidelines and documentation from Automation Anywhere and it was easy for me to do it.

We have about 25 end-users of the solution in our organization, and three of us take care of maintenance. In terms of bot maintenance, not much time is spent unless and until there's a change in the process or the environment.

For business users who do not have technical skills, it is easy to use the product. They understand what is possible with the tool over time. Within a year, they understood what needed to be automated and what not. Training non-technical employees on Automation Anywhere usage takes three to six months.

I did it myself.

It's an ongoing process. I have done more than 400 processes for our client over a four-year period. The time a process takes to automate depends on the complexity of the process. Within three or four weeks, a process is generally completely done, from development to production.

We tried UiPath at the time, but Automation Anywhere was more promising. It was easy to scale the bots in Automation Anywhere, and the implementation using Automation Anywhere was simpler compared to UiPath. However, I've heard from people working with UiPath that it's faster compared to Automation Anywhere. The execution time for Automation Anywhere might be 10 seconds, whereas with UiPath it might take six seconds.

If someone is considering an API integration instead of an RPA solution, that means the API has to be available. Using Automation Anywhere, you can automate any process completely, end-to-end. It doesn't need an API. We can automate front-end, Excel, Word—anything. That is more helpful compared to an API integration.

We are using MS 2007 Windows OS mostly with IE and Excel operations. Anyone can write code with AA software with basic coding knowledge, we just need to know which command will help to build the next step. We had developed almost eight major processes and a few POCs for different clients. As we worked mostly with Web and Windows applications, we had used most of the commands related to Web and Windows applications. We can say bot accuracy was 95% in the final result. Bot consumes around 12 minutes to process 1 application, where if a human performs the same they would take a minimum of 18 minutes on average.

AA application is very good for running the application on a schedule. But a few times, the client requirements were 24/7 so it stops every few days. We found three drawbacks with the product in production:

1. For 24/7 running applications Bot Insights won't be generated.

2. For 24/7 running bot stops every few days, it might be an environmental issue or something.

3. the Same name of Mebabot cannot be uploaded to CR.

4. We tried to upgrade to 11.3.4 but there were few bugs while performing actions in Excel. (You may have fixed later stages).

WLM & Device Pool, where multiple devices perform the same thing parallel and complete the tasks at the same time. The Credential Manager for security is one of the most valuable features for storing credentials and providing security between the developer usage and future maintenance where passwords expire every 90 days. There is no need to touch the code and just update the CR locker section. CR UI is also user-friendly for creating deleting and updating users, roles, etc within the CR. The Audit Log section is also good for logging all the operations done in CR.

It would be better if they could extend the support for AA version 11 for a few more years, as most of the companies have tasks completed in AA version 11, and A2019 is much slower compared to AA 11. It keeps on downloading dependencies, and time-consuming while running the tasks. In AA version 11, if the bot stops uninterruptedly it's better if it could resolve itself and back to normal and process the applications.

You can give clients some more time to get used to A2019 and find and fix the concerns observed till then. That way you can add more features and easy to implement for the development team. If you ask all the clients to migrate to the latest version. Few are still thinking about the migration of code from the old to the new environment and various other factors.

Bot Insight for 24/7 tasks is limited in the AA 11 version. If this gets fixed a few more clients will renew this license as well.

I have been using AA for the past three years. 

We need to train the bot to handle all kinds of conditions. So it will behave accordingly when that situation occurs.

The technical support team were very responsive, they were available 24/7 and for severity 1 issue's for the production part they used to reply or communicate with us in maximum 45 minutes.

Other than the CR set up with the database will take little time. Client installation and configuration was straightforward.

We are a vendor team and worked with the client's environment along with their in-house team. Our clients are always happy with the product and its performance. There are few scenario's due to system instability they used to complain, we used to check and revert back to them what is the problem.

I don't remember the exact number, in one of my bot runner I had seen a $5million change.

Pricing depends upon the number of licenses required by the company. They can implement using the community version. If their business can be automated based upon the business process workload they can decide a number of Bot runner and Developer licenses are required.

To use other tools you need to have knowledge with VB script. But using AA no need of that.