Nintex RPA Reviews

Our primary use case for Nintex RPA involves getting documents from emails, reading those documents, and transferring them from the IRD to finance. We are also exploring the LP and Intech features for more advanced use cases.

Nintex RPA helps our government and public sector customers with automation. It is especially useful for operational tasks like handling statistics and services.

While we have only explored the simple use cases so far, Nintex RPA has good integration capabilities, such as working well with Gmail and Outlook to automate document handling and notifications.

We need better training and community support in Indonesia. It would be helpful to have more representatives who can provide training and share knowledge, as our team lacks the deep skills required for RPA.

We have been working with Nintex RPA for one to two years. During this period, we have been collaborating with our internal team for various use cases.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the stability of Nintex RPA as an eight out of ten. It is quite stable.

I would rate the scalability of Nintex RPA as a nine out of ten. It is quite scalable.

The support from Nintex is very good. I would rate it as nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was managed by our distributor as we do not have the expertise to handle it ourselves.

Our implementation was done in collaboration with a local distributor in Indonesia who handled the installation due to our lack of specialized skills.

Although Nintex RPA is expensive, it is somewhat affordable considering its features. I would rate the cost aspect as an eight out of ten.

We are also partnering with other vendors such as Microsoft, Oracle, and IBM.

I'd rate the solution eight 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.

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.

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.

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.

As a company in the insurance industry, we use it for various functions within finance, such as identifying duplicate invoices, reporting, some operations functions - moving information from one system to another - as well as claims-processing.

Kryon has saved us a bunch of money and time. Specifically, it sends reminders out for claims that have not been actioned after a set period of time; for example, dormant claims, which haven't been updated or touched in five years. We actually created a job to send out reminders to the brokers to try to get updates. Since then, we've been able to close numerous claims and therefore reduce our reserves by literally millions of dollars.

It has provided overall money savings and overall time savings. We've got dashboards that show our overall stats from all our jobs. So we can say robotics has saved X amount to date, Y hours per department. Some of the jobs measure finances. There are literally hundreds of hours and millions of dollars in savings.

The solution has also increased operational efficiency. The percentage varies per department, but there are some departments that are saving two hours a day of people's time, so that's quite significant. If you think about an eight-hour day, that's 25 percent for a department which is already stretched thin. Time is extremely valuable when resources are slim.

We have also seen a reduction in employee errors. One of our jobs for finance looks for potential duplicate invoices. There were instances in the past where duplicate invoices were sent out, bills were paid twice, etc. It has dramatically reduced that. I don't think we've had one since we implemented the job. The automation searches for anything that looks similar in specific fields, using search criteria, and then produces an exception report. Instead of having someone go through 10,000 lines in a spreadsheet, they then have about 50 lines to compare. Obviously, it's much easier to identify duplicates in 50 lines as opposed to 10,000.

Finally, Kryon has helped our existing workforce embrace the digital transformation of our company. There is, obviously, resistance to change no matter where you go. Certain people will respond differently. But overall, the response has been really supportive and positive, especially from management. They're very happy with the way things are developing, the way time has been freed up. Most of the developers, and most of the people who use the automation, are also happy. There are only one or two people who feel a little threatened by it still. They don't really voice it. It's just that you can sense the resistance. I think it's a fear of their jobs going away. In our case, there's enough work that people just need to be repurposed and do other work. There's more than enough work for everybody. It was never one of our objectives to eliminate full-time employees.

The recording capability is valuable because of the amount of data it captures automatically. It's quite good. It means less development, and fewer configuration settings to fill in after you're done.

It's quite easy to use, end-to-end, minus the Process Discovery piece. The ease of use is probably the best part about it. For developers, the program is very user-friendly.

Process Discovery currently is not working for us. It's not giving correct information, correct stats. It's an issue that is currently open with Kryon as a ticket that they are investigating. In our instance, it did not function as advertised. As a result, business analyst hours haven't factored in because Process Discovery is generally the piece that's supposed to save business analyst time. As of right now, we've saved no time in that area.

Also, troubleshooting and debugging could be improved. It's missing a proper debugger. It's very difficult, based on the log files and the fact that it doesn't have a proper debugger, to troubleshoot issues. It will sometimes end with no indication as to why it ended and it becomes a bit of trial and error. Obviously, that is not a great use of time. If there were better debugging tools and logging, we'd be able to find the issues more quickly and fix them more quickly.

Right now we're having issues, so you've caught me at a bad time. Once you get it in and working, it's quite stable. Part of the problem goes back to the development. Our biggest frustration at the moment is the time to develop, because we are doing a lot of trial and error. It goes back to that debugging and lack of logs. It takes quite a while at this time, longer than we would like, to move a job or prepare it for production. Once it's done and in production, it's very stable. It's the development part that is the problem. Once in production, it is really stable.

We are a small company, so we haven't really scaled that much. We have about five departments using it and we have under 25 jobs. We're not that large at all.

In terms of creating new automations, implementing new robots, we haven't seen any issues at all. It's very simple to scale. Creating a new job, adding new robots, are both very easy to do.

All our bots are unattended, so very few people actually "use" Kryon in our company. We have approximately seven or eight developers in total during different periods of the year. Some are more active than others. For example, in finance, when it comes to quarter-end, they don't really develop. They leave the automation alone for a couple months while they take care of their busy time of the year. It comes in waves.

We have five robots in production currently. As of now, we have no plans for increasing. We've got lots of time to add stuff.

The support is really good. 

Their first-level support needs a bit of work. If we put in tickets, very often we get a bunch of questions from level-one but that information was already in the ticket. We get repeat questions. 

The only complaint I have, if you want to call it that, is that I would like to be able to pick up the phone and call someone. If we enter a ticket, by the time someone replies to it, we have continued working on our issue. The job has often changed, the situation's changed, or the issue may be resolved by the time someone replies a day or two later. Being able to pick up that phone and talk to someone immediately would be a tremendous benefit.

They don't have an extra level of support that you can purchase. There is just our client manager. If we have issues that support is not addressing quickly enough, we just escalate and then they take care of it from their side. They get someone to get in touch with us. But it would be nice to be able to pick up the phone and not even have to enter a ticket. Half of our questions could be answered immediately if we talked to someone directly, as opposed to going back and forth via email. Once it's an email, it's stretching out from a five-minute phone call to three days later before we get the end answer. I'll ask a question; they'll ask a question in reply. It goes back and forth in an email exchange.

There's no live support available unless we pick up the phone and call someone directly, but for that there's no support desk. I'd be calling our client representative who's really a sales guy. He's not a tech support guy. He would follow up with someone in tech support to get in touch with us.

With this client, there was no other solution in use. I use some, myself, as a consultant with other clients. I've been here for the last almost two years. Prior to that, I used Cherwell which is more like an IT service management, workflow-type tool.

The setup was very straightforward. Kryon dialed in remotely and did most of the work, along with our infrastructure guys. There were no issues there. It was really smooth.

They did it in sync with our guys. We had someone with the proper access and rights, so if they needed to do something on the server, for example, we had an engineer with admin rights on the call and able to assist them remotely. They worked closely with our lead engineer for IT to get it in and there were no issues at all.

The installation itself was just hours, literally. It was really quick.

It's the same with upgrades. Upgrades are very smooth and they don't take very much time at all. Kryon staff do the updates as well.

As far as the installation of application goes, there was no strategy. We just followed the steps in order.

Where implementation of robotics as a program is concerned, the strategy was to get some low-hanging fruit, some easy jobs with high ROI, and try and to show success. With that success, we rolled it into buy-in from the rest of the teams. Something else we did as a strategy was that we put a developer in each one of the departments, so it wasn't someone from IT doing the development, it was actually business-users. That way, people's peers would be designing, implementing, and developing whatever is being used in their departments. We got the subject-matter experts to actually design their own jobs. They chose what to automate, when to automate it, and then they would automate it themselves. It wasn't "Big Brother" pushing things on people. What they wanted to automate, and when they wanted to automate it was determined within the department. That created a better buy-in for implementing change and for change-acceptance in departments.

People always have their backs up against the wall if it's someone forcing something on them: "Oh, now you have to use this application." The response is often, "Well, I don't want to."

This way, it was them and their peers deciding what they were going to automate. It was much easier to get their buy-in. They determined as a group what they wanted to automate. It created a better culture for change-acceptance.

Automation Anywhere was the other one they were considering. I think they looked at a couple of others, but that was before I was here. I saw the paperwork comparing the final two and they were Kryon and Automation Anywhere.

You do need someone with some development knowledge. Not necessarily everybody involved has to know development, but as a resource, it would definitely be important to have. A straight business-user who isn't strong in IT or development wouldn't be able to do half the things that we've done. Having someone with a development background, at the very least as a support person, internally, is tremendously valuable.

As for saving time when launching new automations, we don't have anything to compare with because we didn't have an automation solution beforehand. It's new to the company. I would say our developers have gotten more proficient, so we've become quicker at development. As far as the launching now, though, it all takes about the same amount of time.

Regarding business users, with no technical background, it definitely can be used. We have users of all levels of technical skill. Business users can create some basic jobs, but there are some limitations to the product. More technical users can get around the limitations using scripting with JavaScript and the like. If people are familiar with that, it definitely makes the development phase much easier. It's totally possible for business users to use it. We've had users who have done basic jobs, but when it gets to more advanced things or quicker ways of doing things, a little bit of development knowledge goes a long way.

For deployment, maintenance, or upgrades of Kryon, there are two of us. I'm involved in coordinating and our lead IT guy works with whomever they assigned from Kryon. I'm not even necessary for those tasks. Really, just one person is required. I do the change request. I take care of the bureaucracy and the red-tape approvals and the like. Once all that's done, we hand it off to the technical team and there's a single person that does it all. He is the IT lead. As needed, he'll pull in DBAs or whoever, if the situation calls for it. He coordinates with his team.

The primary use case is for back office processes.

It has improved our organizational process in inbound and outbound tourism. The previous process was very complex and took at least a day for the users. Now, it is fully automated and saving a lot of hours for our back office.

The product is very useful for our organization. The process takes approximately a month.

Our organization has nothing between the digital and back office processes.

Because of this product, we started to look for more processes to deploy.

The most valuable features for our organization are the automatic processes which save main power in the back office.

From our experience, the product is not suitable for end users.

It is a very stable product.

It is a very scalable product.

The product is used very extensively. We have plans to increase usage.

All users can use the processes.

We require two staff for deployment and maintenance.

The technical support is very good.

The vendor's customer service is very good.

We didn't use a previous solution.

The initial setup was deployed by Kryon.

Our implementation strategy was evolution strategy, process after process, and be the leading business user.

We used a third-party, HMS, who has very good knowledge in the product

There is no doubt that there will be ROI. However, it is too early to provide data.

This solution has saved us time when launching new automation processes, but it is too early to give the amount of time.

There is not enough data to determine if the solution has saved us money, business analyst hours, operational efficiency, or reduced employee errors.

In addition to the standard licensing costs, there are manpower costs.

We would recommend it.

We don't use Kryon Process Discovery.

I use Kryon RPA to make bots for the telecommunication and banking industries. 

I like Kryon RPA's ability to use automated and manual processes with any bot.

Kryon RPA's integration with other solutions could  be more seamless. 

I've been using Kryon RPA since 2019. I started at my previous company about four years ago, then I took another position at Banco Pichincha Ecuador. I'm a development architect working as an independent consultant at the bank. 

Kryon RPA is scalable. It's easy to create bots and schedule when they should run.

Kryon RPA's interface isn't as developer-friendly as UiPath's. I'd also like to see more seamless integration with other solutions. For example, with UiPath, we can use a lot of APIs. I also like Orchestrator from UiPath. We can control all of the robots that we're developing in the machines in the bot runners. UiPath Apps is a new tool that I like.

Microsoft also has some amazing tools, like Power Automate Desktop, Power Apps, and Power Automate Online. These tools can integrate with bots on Power Automate Desktop.

I Kryon RAP 10 out of 10. I recommend starting with easy processes. You should discuss the processes with the client, and go over things like cost, tools, time, and other things that are critical for the business.