Nintex RPA Reviews

We use the product to fetch particular records from Excel sheets and store them in the accounting system.

Nintex RPA is easy to use in terms of recording the steps. We can recognize and repeat the steps quickly. It has competitive pricing compared to other vendors as well.

It is complicated to detect an object using Nintex RPA. There could be some features to fix compatibility issues with firmware. The language on the product’s app could be easier to understand.

We have been using Nintex RPA for three to four months. At present, we use the latest version.

The product is stable, and it has an easy-to-understand UI.

We have less than ten Nintex RPA users in our organization.

The initial setup process is easy.

I implemented the product myself with the help of an installation guide. It took two to three days to complete the process.

The product has reasonable pricing.

We evaluated UiPath And Microsoft Power Automate. Both the solutions are expensive compared to Nintex RPA.

I recommend Nintex RPA and rate it an eight out of ten.

Nintex RPA doesn't require much coding, and you can drag and drop the activities.

Nintex RPA is not suitable for PDF automation.

I have been using Nintex RPA for the last one year.

I rate Nintex RPA an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for scalability.

I rate the solution’s initial setup an eight out of ten.

I am using the latest version of Nintex RPA.

Overall, I rate Nintex RPA a nine out of ten.

I primarily use Kryon RPA for attended and unattended bots and back-office automation. I've also used it for fulfillment cases in the retail domain, where it's been working quite well.

Kryon could be easier to use, especially in comparison to UiPath.

I've been using Kryon RPA for five years.

Kryon RPA is very stable - we've not had many disruptions, and the product is updated regularly.

The scalability's good, and it's flexible in terms of how you want to scale it up.

We've received good support from Kryon.

The initial setup is straightforward, without any issues.

Kryon is slightly more expensive compared to UiPath.

We evaluated Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism and found Kryon to be more approachable.

I would recommend Kryon to those thinking of installing it and would give it a score of nine out of ten.

We took all kinds of mindless operational processes, things we were doing over and over again and which cost us a lot of work time every day, or week, or month, and scheduled them to be automatic, with no human hand in the process.

We have a lot of examples. We make loans, although we are not a bank, for various purposes. Sometimes, people don't pay us back and the loans go to collection. We have to start all kinds of processes via lawyers, and when we transfer a case to a lawyer we have to prepare it. All the preparation for the lawyer is automatic now. All the letters for the lawyer with all the details about the loan, about the collection - everything is automatic.

Also, for each customer whose debt we transfer to a lawyer, we have feedback to our core system to update all the data in the system again. So all the data about the customer and the debt comes from the system to the lawyer, and feedback from the lawyer comes into the system. And all of this, of course, is connected to the loan itself, to the customer. Everything is aligned.

We are a digital company. We very quickly embrace all kinds of digital transformation. Kryon was just a part of that. We have engaged in digital transformation in many ways in our company. But the adoption of Kryon was very quick, and that is its advantage. Because it is a very quickly and very intuitively customized system, it helped us to adopt it through users who are not technical users. It really helped us to put a lot of automated processes in the system and adopt them very quickly. Now, my organization wants more. They say, "How did we live without it before?" It really helps us in our day-to-day processes, the ones that are not so complicated, not so involved, that we do over and over again.

Efficiency has increased. If robots are doing stuff we used to do, this increases the efficiency of the staff.

All our users have no technical background. But Kryon is really simple and intuitive. Our business adapted very quickly and easily. This is the main thing and it's why we love the system so much. It's why we are always trying to put more processes into the system and make more use cases: because of the simplicity and the intuitive nature of the system.

Our original plan was to do something like two robots, and a few processes, but because it was such a success in the company, we expanded it. We have 11 processes. The eleventh is due to go live in about a week. Some of them are not complex, some of them are more complex. It depends on the process itself, the amount of time, the amount of integration, if there are dependencies on another system.

In terms of plans to increase usage, for now we really want to see how the day-to-day is going with all the processes. More processes mean more licenses and robots, and we have to do ROI as the next step. I would guess we'll do more, but it's already a lot to have 11 processes in a year with four robots.

We, ourselves have not used Kryon's customer support. Maybe our third-party uses it on behalf of us. I don't know.

This is our first RPA solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was very quick, very understandable, very open. If we had problems, they were helpful. They assisted our third-party company. It was very easy to work with.

Deployments depend on the process. We have been working with the system for a little less than a year. After about two months, we had the first process working. It's really quick. When I say two months for the first process, that means we sat with the customers, understood what they want, how to do it. We had them test it, we launched it, we optimized it in production. The whole timeline of the process was handled in that amount of time.

We asked our organization to set the priorities. We asked for a quick win, meaning something very small and very painful, or something which was taking a lot of time. That enabled us to win their appreciation and reduce the resistance to change. Some people may look at it as a robot is replacing me. We handled this too by making them a part of the implementation process. This way, they wanted it, were engaged with it, and wanted to do more. It gave them something that they hadn't seen before. It gave them a feeling of success. It's very important, through the process, to feel like you are succeeding in doing something new in a very short amount of time. The people involved have to see we're not really replacing them, and that it actually helps them to do more, to do better, to do things that have work quality to them.

The people using Kryon are from three departments: collections, services, and operations. Not everyone is using it, because we're uploading files to the system. There a few people in each department who are doing it. Overall there are about ten people involved with it, but it services the whole department. There are the people who operate the system, and the people enjoying the fruit.

Even when I purchased the license, it wasn't via Kryon. It was through a third-party. The product is Kryon, but the customization and all the agreements and the buying process were not through Kryon. It was with a third-party.

The reseller is HMS. All our connections to Kryon are through this company. All our processes of examination and solutions were through them. We are very pleased with the job they have done, with the service. They are very good and they helped us a lot.

But these days we are transferring all the knowledge, all the data, and all the operations of the system to our people, the employees of our company, so that we will be able to do it alone. The first year was through this third-party, and we have their support. And now our main goal is to be able to do it on our own.

Kryon has saved us money. We measure in terms of people. We haven't increased our employees in those departments, and we can say that we have saved nine employees, nine people we haven't had to hire.

I would expect that in the first year there is no ROI. It has to be measured over three or five years.

I wasn't part of the process. I had a colleague who did it.

It depends if you are doing it by yourself, with your employees or, like us, through a third- party or someone who knows how to work with the system. If you're doing it through a third-party, there is no problem and they have all the knowledge, all the data, all the know-how about how to do it. If you are doing it with your own people, training is mandatory and Kryon has it. Some kind of on-the-job training, or some kind of support, is necessary to be able to implement it quickly and the right way, because there is a right way, a way to do it properly.

Kryon was not involved in helping us find and prioritize processes that are ready for automation. We did so. They were not part of this process. We came up with the processes, we talked about them, not Kryon.

I'm not the one who uses the system every day. I'm not the one who uses the customization. We go through a third-party which does all the customizations for us. I can't tell you which part of the system I enjoyed the most, or what I'm using because I have a third party for that.

Kryon RPA is used in different departments such as Human Resources, Programming, Planning, Production, Commercial, etc. I use it when I program tasks for clients, in particular, to program the bots in client environments.

What I like most about Kryon RPA is the user experience. I also find the layout and design of the solution better for programming compared to other RPA solutions.

What needs improvement in Kryon RPA is the support. Sometimes, the solution has problems, so I contacted support, but I didn't receive immediate help from the team. You have to wait a while before the problem gets solved. This happens a few times in terms of getting cases solved.

It would also be better if Kryon RPA had a cloud version because currently, from what I know, it only has an on-premise version, though I could be wrong about that.

There isn't any additional feature I'd like added to Kryon RPA because it's a good service, but the support is very, very bad, so that area could be improved.

My experience with Kryon RPA is two years.

Kryon RPA is a stable solution, but its stability depends on the version installed in your environment. The most recent version of the solution isn't as stable and has a lot of problems that even the support team isn't able to solve. It's better to use an old version of Kryon RPA that's more stable than the newer versions.

Kryon RPA is not scalable. Other RPA software has more scalability.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is bad and ten is good, my rating for Kryon RPA support is four. The response time from the support team and the time it takes to solve problems need to be faster.

Neutral

The initial setup for Kryon RPA is very easy, and if you compare it with other RPA software, it's easier.

I saw ROI from Kryon RPA, but I don't have the exact values, and that would be confidential. If I were to rate ROI on a scale of one to ten, I would give it a seven.

I have experience with Kryon RPA for many versions, such as 19.3, 20, and 21. I'm a developer who provides services to clients, so I develop and create tasks in Kryon RPA for clients.

Two professionals take care of the deployment and maintenance of Kryon RPA. One specialist deploys it, and the other person is in charge of the IT infrastructure.

My advice to others looking into implementing Kryon RPA is to deploy in small blocks that can be reused in many jobs or many other tasks.

My rating for Kryon RPA is six out of ten.

The primary use case is process automation. We are a financial institution, a bank. We use it to automate routine processes which don't require any cognitive participation.

One way the solution has improved the way our organization functions is that we have used RPA to align addresses between systems. We have a few central systems which hold the customer addresses. Sometimes the addresses are different in different systems. We find it very convenient to align the addresses by extracting the address from one system and using Kryon RPA to simulate the process of updating the address in the other system. It simulates the work of a clerk who used to regularly do so. We automated it and now the systems are aligned. The alternative was to develop interfaces, in the backend, between the systems, but that would have been very expensive.

RPA is part of the digital transformation. What we are doing is actually advancing the digital automation, and Kryon is a major part of it. When we automate processes, that's part of the digital transformation, making the organization more digital and more automated. The experience of our customers is very influenced by it. For example, we had a process for when a customer needed to deposit money when paying back a loan. If he didn't do it, he was late in his payments, we moved the process to the collection unit. Now, the collection unit uses RPA. The process is more efficient and the customer experience is better.

Because the processes we have automated mostly involve routine work, the solution hasn't saved business analysts' time, since they don't do routine work. But it has resulted in operational efficiencies. For the processes that we have automated, the efficiency has increased by 100 percent. We take processes that require human resources and we make them fully automatic.

We use Kryon Studio to develop new wizards and we use the features to capture elements from the screen and automate processes. We use the product thoroughly. The screen capture allows us to interface with systems which don't have an API, or where the API is very expensive, and it allows us to do on-screen integration.

The automation process is very user-friendly and the usability is very good. Developers are very satisfied with the system.

We have found some difficulties regarding the integration with legacy systems where the screen has elements in the Hebrew language. The connection to Hebrew, right-to-left systems, is more challenging.

We are discussing development of the product with Kryon.

We have been using it for 2.5 years.

We have tens processes in production. As of now, we haven't had any stability issues. It's working great.

As for increasing our usage, we develop two processes per month per developer. That is currently on schedule. We've developed tens processes but we have created interfaces to different platforms in the backend. Now, with the interfaces developed, we expect the next automation to be developed faster. The goal of two processes per month per developer is realistic.

I would rate Kryon's technical support very highly. They are very professional and the service quality is good. They try to solve the issues promptly. We are very satisfied. And that evaluation is relevant regarding their customer service. Their Customer Success provides the technical service.

We did not have a previous solution.

The initial setup was a little bit complex because Kryon needed to obey bank regulations. We have very high security requirements. They were very devoted to solving the issues and it was great.

The deployment took a total of about three weeks. 

Our implementation strategy was done in a spiral way. We started with a single process. It took us two months to install the system, get the knowledge we needed about it, and to analyze and develop the first process. This onboarding process was accompanied by Kryon Customer Success. In the beginning, we had a kickoff meeting and we decided on a day, two months down the road, on which we would have the first process in production. We worked together to make it happen. And we succeeded in achieving this goal. Then we started to analyze two or three processes in parallel, and we continue to develop and analyze the next processes.

We were accompanied by Kryon's Professional Services and we are very satisfied with them. They helped us, first, in teaching our personnel how to work with Kryon, and then they installed the system on our premises. They were very helpful in solving problems. We have a very good relationship with them.

There are other advantages from automating processes, other than saving money. We consider the cost efficiency and other advantages, such as the quality of the process being highly improved. It's very hard to estimate the cost of errors that are eliminated. But we expect that automating processes does eliminate errors.

We have a yearly subscription.

We checked several alternatives but decided to go with Kryon due to their product capabilities and the local support.

We haven't used the Process Discovery from Kryon yet. We started with processes that we analyzed and found to be suitable for automation. We find that the product, the Kryon Studio, to be very good at doing task automation. We are now scaling out and going to new processes.

The decision we made to develop the processes by ourselves with our team was a very good decision. The onboarding process along with Kryon's Customer Success - if you work together with them and consider them as partners - will work very well.

Regarding the solution's ease-of-use for business users, we use unattended automation so business users are not part of the process. For us, businesses users do not interface with the system.

In terms of finding and prioritizing processes that are ripe for automation, Kryon offered its service in analyzing processes and finding the right candidates for automation. But we were working with a consultant from Strauss Strategy. We are working with them in finding the processes.

We have a center of excellence team which contains two developers and there is a team leader who is responsible RPA. So we have three persons working with Kryon.

We only use unattended bots right now. We build processes to help business departments in our company to improve processes through automation of pretty easily "bot-able" ideas.

We have a bot that creates a proposal using a request-for-proposal template that people fill out. We then create the proposal, based on that information, on our internal site. Another one is where we mail out payroll files that come in by reading a portion of the file to get payroll dates and the like. Those are two of our really big ones. The payroll bot saved 15,000 hours last year. For the other one, while I don't have specific metrics on total time saved, it went from a 30-minute, manual prep process to an eight-minute bot process.

It has helped us to find and prioritize processes that are ripe for automation, when we go searching for ideas. We just haven't been able to reach every department in our company yet because we're a big company and there's only so much time.

Our business users love it. Those 15,000 hours saved are a fantastic result and we're at a 99 percent success rate. Our bots very rarely fail, and if they do, most of the time it's because something is wrong with one of the websites that we are using and an unexpected error pops up. But they are loving it.

Finally, it has helped to reduce employee errors.

We do have bots where we use .NET plugins to make some of them faster, but other than those, I have built most of the bots that we have. Even though I'm in IT, I'm a business analyst. As a business user, it's so easy to use. With the recording of the processes, we didn't need to hire a specific developer. We do have one now because there was only one of me, but we are able to build most of our processes without having to develop the actual development skillset. It's nice to have that skillset here, because we can scale by using .NET, but the simplicity is the biggest win.

At first, we had problems with the object detection but in this latest release it has been better, and I think it keeps getting better. They also came and trained us a little bit so that helped.

There are some known defects that are on our list for the next release, but that happens. It's technology. They're aware of them and they're working on them.

The stability has been great. We've had one incident in a year-and-a-half, where we were down for about four or five hours. It affected everybody, not just our company. As far as I know there was a hotfix that they had to put out. But in all that time there has only been that one day.

The scalability has been good because of the .NET aspect. If it wasn't for that, they wouldn't scale.

For example, we had one bot that we built which needed to run every day to download documents off a website. It had to go download a lot, sometimes up to 500 documents a day. It never finished because the website wasn't stable enough to run for hours and hours. The bot would end up failing because it took hours. Now, we download one document now from the website and use .NET to split out the PDF files for each separate document that we need. Instead of downloading one at a time on the website, we use .NET to download one, and separate all 300 of them. If we didn't have .NET they wouldn't be able to scale.

With that capability I don't see any limitation to that scalability. .NET has been a lifesaver.

We had another one that we had to change recently because it took the bot six to eight minutes to do the whole process the way the business users were doing it. We needed to do 900 in a day. Even running it on two different servers, it wasn't going to get everything done in the time that we needed it done. Instead of throwing it away saying, "Sorry, we can't use it," we changed the process for the business users and said, "Hey, can we do it this way?" and used .NET. There is a little more front-end work that the users have to do if there are errors, but not very often. Most of the time it goes through. With .NET, it does the process in 30 seconds.

We use the. NET plugin everywhere that we can because it makes things faster.

Their tech support is pretty good. The people I've worked with have been good. The time zone issue sometimes was difficult at first, but they've fixed that with a USA support team now. It's gotten much better.

In terms of customer service, everyone that I've worked with is great. Ryan is our guy and he's very good. Whenever we've had to escalate things — we've had some issues with bugs and things that we weren't expecting — he has done all of the escalations for us. 

They came out here and gave us a four-day-long training but it just wasn't going to work for us to go to them in September or October when they were going to have more training. So instead of us going, they offered to come to our office and have a mini-training session with just us. That was awesome. That was part of their standard service.

We did not have a prior solution.

I was not included in our initial setup. That was done before I was brought onto the team. But I am familiar with upgrades. 

The first upgrade that we did was not fun at all. It took seven or eight hours. The second time, when we upgraded to the 19.1 version, it was an hour-and-a-half, both because we got better and because they provided better documentation. We also got a QA environment, which we didn't have before. When we installed our QA environment, I don't think it even took half a day.

Part of the difficulty with the upgrades was that we didn't know any steps that we should have taken, because their documentation wasn't step-by-step. So we were on the phone with them, walking through the upgrade the first time. We missed steps because the documentation wasn't there. But the second time, the documentation was great. We knew exactly what to do. Our app engineer had all the setup stuff done before we had our meeting with Kryon, and we just walked through it. It was awesome.

There were two of us, from our organization, involved in the upgrades. Kryon had people on the phone but they weren't doing anything. They were just watching us.

In terms of maintaining the solution, there's one person who handles all the bot servers and there's one admin on Kryon but he's super-part-time. It takes maybe five percent of his time. I haven't had to talk to him for weeks. And there are two of us on the team who handle the support and the bot building. There are six departments that we have built bots for, and I don't know how many people are in those departments, but they don't handle anything with them. They don't have access to Kryon. We handle everything.

The OCR reader, to help read non-digital PDFs, has a separate charge. We don't have that plugin. The only other cost that I know was separate, at the time, is the Process Discovery. I don't know if that's included in a bundle now.

We evaluated Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. I wasn't involved in all of that process, but the biggest thing in our decision to go with Kryon was that IT didn't need to own it. Although our IT has it right now, a process improvement team could have actual business users building processes. It can't just be them, because we have to have oversight with the .NET stuff. But with the easiness of it, we just had to go with Kryon.

The biggest lesson we've learned through our time using it is the .NET component for scaling. One of our biggest lessons is to use that wherever possible because it makes things so much quicker. Also, if you look at some of our old bots that we built versus some of the bots we build today, it's crazy that we even knew what we were doing. The process flows and understanding what can and can't be bot-able, have gotten way better.

My advice would be to have a team. Make sure there's a developer so you can do plug-in things and make sure that you understand the setup and the admin tool. That was a huge lesson learned for us, going back. The way we did the setup was incorrect so we had to re-record all of our bots the first time, and that was a disaster. We didn't have it set up right because nobody told us how to do it. We didn't have that support at the front-end, for the setup pieces, for everything we were doing. 

And always have a QA environment first. We did not have a QA environment. When we first went live we didn't know it was an option, and I don't know if it was an option at the time. I imagine it's standard now. We have a QA environment now, but we don't have any data set up or any automation to set data up so we can't test bots in QA. We have to test them in production because we didn't go through that work. Testing was a mess. That's no longer true for our current bots, the ones we're building today, but it was a mess for all of our old production bots, anytime changes were needed. So always have a QA environment or a Dev environment.

It's been hard to get it off the ground. We have a really small team, so there are not very many examples. We have quite a few bots that have saved a lot of time, but I know that we could have way more. We just need a team, and I think we're going to get one, although not right this second. Kryon hasn't helped our workforce embrace the digital transformation of our organization because we only have that small team right now. People are seeing things and say, "Yeah, that's awesome," but we can only move so fast because we're so small. So people are not super-excited about it yet. They still need more exposure to it. We have about 15 bots in production right now, but it's pretty much focused on one section of our organization, and we're a huge organization. We have plans to increase our usage of the solution. There's a whole new process improvement team coming. Once we get out there more, I'm sure it will expand.

The Kryon Process Discovery is not included in our license right now. We just haven't done it yet. We've looked into it but we haven't done it yet because it's pretty complex. With the version that we saw originally — it might be different now — when it first came out, you needed special computers for it which we would have had to buy and deploy for the users who use the processes. It wasn't something that we were going to do at the time. It's not something that we have thrown off the table, but at the moment we're not using it.

Just learning what bots do, what RPA does, what I can and can't do, has been part of it. I can go to any business unit, now that I've built bots, and say, "Yeah, I can do that," or "That's not a good idea." I know exactly what I can and can't do in Kryon. I don't know if any other tool can do things better because I've never seen any other tool, but I know what I can and can't do in Kryon.

The original training that we got was a week long and we were trying to build bots in that same timeframe. So we didn't get a whole lot at that time. When we took their training classes online and had them come to us and train us in more in-depth, it helped a lot.

Everything that we do use, that we know how to use, works nicely. I love it but I'm not going to give it a ten out of ten because there are issues. I would go with an eight. They've gotten so much better at all their stuff. The tech support was part of our issues for a long time, but it has gotten a lot better. They're getting all the training classes online and they keep those pretty updated. They have a community now. They're learning and growing and they always ask us for feedback on every aspect. They put that in their backlog for future prioritization. They're listening to us.

We manage customer accounts: their orders, modifications, account cancellations, and back office stuff. For example, our clients are network marketing teams. Therefore, they will have accounts for multi-level marketing (MLM). They want their orders and accounts modified. For some of them, we want to change their subscriptions or cancel their accounts. These are all submitted as requests through online forms. Then, we will take them and do the modifications. We do this process automatically through Kryon.

All our bots are actually licensed for unintended, but we are not able to use them. So, we have currently 15 bots and all of them are attended only.

It has been helpful in reducing the manpower and error rate since we are able to run tasks 24/7 without interruptions. As humans definitely take breaks and there may be absenteeism that is unexpected, the solution provides continuous work. Humans tend to make errors once in a while, but the solution has almost zero percent errors.

We are able to cope with our clients's demands. No matter how much volume they throw at us, we are able to get it done quickly. That is where we see the biggest returns.

If a client gives us a new task, and it is a recurring volume, procedure, or SOP, then we are able to automate it within approximately a week. Then, they will be up and running with that automation. 

If it's a very simple task, we can automate it within about a week. If it's complex, then it will maybe be a couple of weeks to three weeks at most. We mostly differentiate simple and complex tasks by the number of steps involved. Sometimes, we need to cross check multiple accounts for a single request. We need to ensure all the information comes back correctly and that the logical calculations are done correctly. The more number of steps, the more complicated task that we will consider it to be.

We do code level modifications, which are already prewritten, and everything is with us. We don't use any of the advanced features of Kryon.

The simplicity of it: Kryon was very easy to learn and implement. The learning curve was very small. It didn't take a lot of time to set up or go live.

It is easy for business users to utilize. Mostly, it is a visual based tool. You don't need any expert coding knowledge. Even if you don't know anything about coding, a couple of weeks training should do the trick, as long as you are able to identify the logic behind whatever task you're going to automate.

While it does help reduce manpower, we still do require manpower because there are some processes and steps that we cannot do with automation. It may be too sensitive to be done by automated processes. In those cases, we still need manpower.

It does help to identify which tasks can be automated based on Kryon functionality, until you have close to 50 multiple tasks from one client. As soon as we automate any one of our top volume drivers, we try to understand how we can automate the next one orthe next highest volume driver. We have tried to use Kryon's functionality to the max, but still there are some limitations that don't allow us to automate all the tasks. E.g., anything that involves free form text is a major drawback. We use forms which get their data from our customers along with their account details. So, their form details are always the same. They don't change the fields, only the values are different. If it were an email, every customer would use their own words to describe the problem. It's difficult to write simple logic that is common for all types of words. I think free form text requires artificial intelligence. However, the lack of AI is not a big issues.

Another major drawback is OCR. We are not able to read scanned documents correctly in a reliable way. There is always some margin of error. Some of the processes require us to read scanned documents, and you need to ensure that it is 100 percent accurate. Without that level of assurance, you can't automate such tasks.

Our client uses Citrix NetScaler Unified Gateway. It is a virtual machine. All the tools that we use run from the client's location and through a virtual machine called Citrix. It is projecting the remote screen onto our screen. Kryon is not able to identify individual applications behind Citrix. All it makes is a screen by taking the image. So, Kryon's functionality is limited to screen reading. Because of this, we are not able to take advantage of the Windows functionality or web server functionality. like browsers. They are not able to identify whether it's a browser, etc. It can just read from the screen. Being able to identify applications inside Citrix would be a huge advantage for our processes.

Their logging features are minimal. 

Reporting-wise, there are some reporting options, but I don't think they are very practical from the point of developers.

We haven't had any instability. It is very stable.

So far, the upgrade process has been smooth, but it does take a few hours. The upgrade process could be better. Right now, it takes a few hours for them to set it up. We must wait to have a shared meeting. They have to wait for us, and we have to wait for their availability. It would be better if we don't have to wait for them, and similarly, they don't have to wait for our availability.

Everything is managed by our console and the Kryon admin. All we had to do is get a license, add the system name, and the bot is simultaneously up and running. So, stability is very simple.

We have two types of roles: developer and tester. Developer does the coding work and shows new tasks are deployed. Once they are deployed, the tester's work would be to ensure the tasks are running correctly. We have a license for an unattended bot. However, because of the Citrix issue, we still need to have at least one person on the floor to monitor the bots in case anything gets stuck, the tool is not responding correctly, or ground does not direct the total Windows, etc. 

We have seven people covering all the shifts 24/7. Apart from developers, we have four testers. One developer is enough for development and maintenance, but we still have three to ensure that all of our shifts are covered. Thus, we can work on multiple task at the same time.

The customer service is pretty good. The only problem is availability. Because of our high transaction volume, we have to give a scheduled time to them. Similarly, their experts also need to schedule among other customers. So, there is no dedicated support, but I know they are available and very helpful. It just takes a bit of time to contact them with both of us trying together. On average, it takes three or four days to schedule something with the customer services. 

If it is an emergency that makes our bots go down, they will make special arrangements with us. They make sure that they are available immediately. We haven't had downtime for more than 24 hours, so far. The customer service is great in supporting us.

This is our first RPA solution. We did try automation with Visual Studio, like encoding, but it was a failure. We thought RPA would be a better solution: easier to implement and error free. It made sense at the time, and it's still helping us out.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

The deployment took a couple of days: One day to set it up and one day to review.

We just have one environment with multiple bots. We straight away went into production. We didn't have a testing environment or equivalent.

There were Kryon people who took care of everything. They just had to arrange the requirements. Once that was done, they were able to take up a remote connection and set up everything. They were helpful, ensuring everything was properly working and up and running.

At the beginning, we had fewer bots. So, we just went straight into it without a plan. We asked the Kryon team to set up a server, and they did. From there, they licensed us the bots. Once that was done, we started coding and straight away implemented them. Anytime that we have required an upgrade, we will just add additional bots.

If they need to upgrade the version, they will let us know that a version is available. We give them a suitable time and they will schedule a meeting to upgrade it remotely.

Error rate and manpower has been reduced. The error rate has been reduced almost to zero. Though, sometimes, some of the tasks are done better with humans than Kryon.

We are not exactly saving money at this stage, because we have invested a lot in Kryon. Our transaction volume and cost that we are receiving has not yet equated in a profitable way. We are moving to a more profitable way going forward, but it will take a bit more time. In maybe another year or so, we will see some improvement and ensure that this solution is profitable.

It saves our business analysts a couple hours per day.

Our workforce management (WFM) team is managing the licensing costs.

Kryon was our choice. Our project manager brought in Kryon team for a demo. Once we saw the features, we did a test with their training specialist, then we were convinced that we could utilize this for our requirements. We didn't look at any other options at that time.

It is a good solution if you're not using any virtual machines, like Citrix. 

It would be better if you get a demo or automate a simple task using Kryon. Get them to show you a proof of concept so you can understand what other challenges that you will have rather than blindly implementing it. Definitely, get a demo to see how efficient it is. Seeing it in action helps a lot.

We are not completely moving to a digital transformation. Even our management doesn't agree with 100 percent digitized solutions. They still want some level of human involvement, as well as for auditing.

The humans in our company have been concern about the robots taking over their roles. The robots take up most of the redundant tasks and focus on those. This ensures that our agents do the more complex ones or the low volume drivers. The agents do all the ones that require more logical reasoning, installation processes, or secure processes. We train our agents on these tasks and reassign their skill sets. We give them more training, giving them more complicated tasks. We aren't trying to lose our agents, even though manpower reduction is there. We just trying to retain them, but for different types of tasks, ones that require more human involvement and thinking.

We don't use Kryon Process Discovery or any of their web related services.

Automation takes up most of the walling that we get from our clients. Ground is being used extensively. However, the limitations are caused by Citrix, which is making us rethink our strategy sometimes as to whether we will be able to increase with the product. We want it to be faster and more reliable. We want to ensure that with any errors which occur, it is able to identify those errors, and it's able to rectify them or at least log of them. We want to take a look at them or notify people. Currently, only because of the Citrix issue, we are constrained. We might need to take a look at another software that supports Citrix more efficiently. Currently, there's no plan to increase usage, but it is part of our major usage as of now.