The most valuable aspect for myself was access to the .net framework. If I couldn't figure something out using the objects that they had provided, I could bring in the .net objects and do so using similar logic that I would in a .net or C sharp coding language. Having that familiarity was helpful.
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Framework Reviews
Showing reviews of the top ranking products in Robotic Process Automation (RPA), containing the term Framework
Pega Robotic Process Automation: Framework
Automation Anywhere (AA): Framework
The initial setup is pretty straightforward. I've actually done installations of Automation Anywhere and I have no IT background. I've been able to set it up on a server and some virtual machines and get everything working.
The deployment took some time for us, but that was due to a lack of a good environment on our side. To do a clean install would take some three or four hours to get everything up and running, depending on what kind of machines you have. If you have all the accesses you're supposed to have it can take a very short time. But, if you're installing it in an enterprise environment, it can take longer because you might not have all the accesses. At least for me, coming from the business side, I don't have all the administration accesses that I would need, but that's not Automation Anywhere. Overall, it's pretty straightforward and doesn't take a lot of time.
For our implementation strategy, we started out with a pilot, together with a consulting partner. We automated two processes and created a proposal for an operating model, governance, and a framework. After that, we just tried to pump out new automations as fast as possible to prove the value to upper management. After a while, we got some traction and we went from being just me in 2015 to between 12 and 15 people now. Some of them are not working full-time on it but we have at least 12 full-time employees working on RPA across our organization. We started out in Norway, but now we also have operations in Sweden, Denmark, and Finland, with people working full-time on automation in all of those countries.
All the developers are doing some maintenance. We don't have anyone who is assigned to doing only maintenance because we all find that a bit boring. We share the responsibility among all the developers so that everyone has the chance to do new processes and maintenance when needed.
We have a two-pronged approach there. The processes that are important for business continuity, the business-critical processes, are often maintained proactively. We are notified that a change is coming to the system, so we need to test it out and make a new version that will work when the upgrade of the system is live. So we're proactive in those kinds of processes. Non-business-critical processes are maintained reactively. We try to do it in the most sensible way possible, but there's always room for improvement, obviously.
We put a lot of responsibility on the process owners. They're responsible for notifying the RPA team in case of any changes in the graphic user interface or changes to the process, because of new rules and regulations or any other reason. The process owner or someone in his or her team will always know if there is a change in the user interface or the process.
If there is an error in the code, it is the RPA team's responsibility to fix it and we do most of that ad-hoc, when it happens. We always have some resources available to do those kinds of things and that's taken into account when estimating how long we will spend on creating a new process. We know that something might happen during that week or those weeks, so we add some padding.
In addition to the developers, we have a lot more people using the Control Room to schedule the processes.
So we tried to run fast and then we took a step back and re-evaluated. We built an even better framework, redid the infrastructure, put more thought into the security aspect, and we have industrialized our implementation. We still have some issues when it comes to our operating environment, but that's not Automation Anywhere's fault; that's more in our IT department's hands.
It's pretty straightforward in terms of setting it up. It's not a lot of work, as compared to what you would do in Blue Prism, or even in or WorkFusion. I would say UiPath is the easiest to install and configure, while Automation Anywhere would be number two. Blue Prism would be way down because it's difficult installing and configuring it.
It doesn't take much time to deploy Automation Anywhere. We have built a script. We just run the script and within three or four minutes we are done. We don't really install Automation Anywhere by running it and then monitoring it, rather the script automatically installs it. That script lightens our load; we automate our own jobs as well.
In terms of implementation strategy, we have a set of requirements for the client's environment and hardware. For the environment, we need to look at the .NET framework, which version, the directory structure, folder structure, paths. And there are multiple items to be checked out regarding the hardware: We need to look at the RAM, the hard disk space, the connectivity. There's a lot of checking which must be done, but we do that through the script itself.
We have all the environments set up in one local place and once the script runs it goes and installs all the required software components. The .NET framework will be installed, the run-time engine will be installed, Automation Anywhere will be installed, and the policies will be set automatically for at least the end user, so that we can go and create more users.
Once we have the hardware, and once we are ready to install the environment, it takes us about 15 to 20 minutes.
For deployment of Automation Anywhere, we don't need a lot of staff. But when we are deploying the bots, we generally have an experienced guy who will look at the deployment of the bots within the Control Room. That's a different scenario altogether.
We don't require a lot of people for maintenance. What we do is, we transfer some of the load to the client's staff, in terms of monitoring and scheduling. Of course, we have one person keeping an eye on the entire thing. We have one person on a chargeable basis per client location. And this person also doesn't have a lot of work, so sometimes this person moves among the sites if there is no problem at all with the installation.
Automation Anywhere was easier to learn for the developers. It has a lot of out of box features when it comes to SAP, Excel, and others. However, on the other hand, I did not like one feature which is a built-in linear code that is a straight line and it does not have the modular functionality of UiPath so the code becomes one long code and if you need to make changes you need to look through the entire code and make changes. After the code is returned, even if there are some changes in the process, the support cycle is really difficult because, with UiPath, it's modular in structure. For example, one variable changes so it's declared as a variable and you can just change it and the code automatically reflects the change. It creates a nightmare to maintain. That was the one key drawback from Automation Anywhere. The good thing about Automation Anywhere was learning the best practices of it and using the development framework was easier so getting developers who knew AA was relatively easier than getting developers who knew UiPath or Blue Prism.
Integrating this solution with other application has been good for the most part. A lot of the issues that I have are related to the actual applications than with Automation Anywhere. Any additional functionality which comes out in regards to integrating it better with more widely used applications, like Salesforce, Oracle, or Workday, is definitely beneficial and helpful at the end of the day.
I have been hearing great stuff in terms of upping the product's cognitive game. Anything that can be done to work with unstructured data sets would be helpful, like increasing the subjectivity of bots, and moving away from solely rules based processes to anything which actually requires subjective judgment. If Automation Anywhere could code that into the bot design and framework, having it sort of act like a human, that would be helpful.
Anything that can be done to increase the stability from a system standpoint in regards to large-scale systems, which are being used by a number of applications, e.g., Salesforce or Workday. This would help us, as well.
Automation Anywhere should work to continue maintaining its ease of use.
Automation Anywhere is removing the boring, repetitive tasks from the workforce.
I've worked on different models over different frameworks.
I do the coding as well as the deployment side. I prepare documents and the user ID. Sometimes, if the user ID is not prepared, then I jump into the process to get it done. With the technical feasibility of the document, I take the technical feasibility and do an estimation to code the bot. I configure the bot, then code it according to the entity and get it reviewed from the client. Then, I run the bot through the Hapi port, as well as different scenarios which might come up.
Once the client is happy, we have a couple of rounds of testing. We have a "You Ready" phase where we code for a few days and the client provides data. We run through the data and this give them the technical results. When they're happy, then we finally move the code over.
As far as how the product has helped us improve our organization, we may be a bit premature to just to say that it has already decreased the workload. But looking into the decrease in the ticket counts, it suggests that it is helping process customer service requests and that it definitely is going to help us more in the future as we utilize the solution better.
There is one user registration process in one application where there is no API which has been published by that framework. This is a very proprietary in one application by a third-party. So, there was a help desk, and whenever a call went to the help desk, they had a front-end where they created these user registrations. Now, this is completely automated for all employees who are onboarded. We receive the data, it is put it into Excel, and from Excel, it will update it into the particular tool where the registration happens.
On the service desk, they are using ServiceNow with a VPN connection. Now, they are logging using Automation Anywhere as a bot, which logs into a ServiceNow. It will then take that VPN request and create it on the server.
For anybody who is implementing this solution, I recommend they get help from Automation Anywhere to help understand the best way to do their automation. This will help with the development of the bots. This is what we did, and we now have a framework for building the rest of our processes.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
When we saw the tool capabilities, we were so excited. We tried to start using them but we needed to have the right structure and mechanisms in place from the beginning to identify the use case for prioritizing. This plays a major role.
If you are a big organization with a center of excellence, you need to bring all the people together. The establishment will play a bigger role than just developing and delivering bots. Developing and delivering bots is a very small portion, which is doable by any individual who has a basic technical background. To be successful in your journey, having the right structure upfront will help.
We experimented a little bit with IQ Bots, but we didn't see much use cases in this line currently.
A lot of people interact with RPA and the industry is really excited about it. However, you need to pick the right candidate to be successful in your journey, along with the right framework for the development. This will give you a good output. This is what the business needs to test. Pick a solution based on the organization's needs as well as the right approach. Have an assessment with an approach framework will help.
Automation Anywhere is very good for rapid development. It has all the capabilities in terms of giving a stable automation framework. It has very cool technical capabilities, like MetaBots, dev controls, and object cloning.
In the version that we have, there are some challenges with the browser-based applications, the cloning of the objects, and the solution's stability.
Automation Anywhere must be able to maintain a consistent resolution.
The latest edition, which is enterprise A2019, has better analytics and the cloud all integrated into the bot framework.
The client version is getting challenging to use because you have to maintain a lot of infrastructure. You must have the machines to deploy the client. However, you don't need a large infrastructure, if you can do it on the cloud.
I would like a Bot Store for MetaBots. The MetaBot feature needs to be expanded. E.g., I would like a copy/paste from the top row of Excel where I don't need to write a keystroke. Instead, I could just use MetaBot for this.
It depends on how you develop it predominantly. Because it's not judged just by saying that it's not stable or anything like that, it's how you develop a framework and how you do it. That's how. From my experience, we have a good number of developers. On my team's, we have around five to six members who are working on this process. We have created a framework in such a way that we don't miss anything. For the past one to one and a half years, we haven't had any post-production issues. The amount of human errors that have occurred have been reduced to around 15 to 20 per person.
The solution is pretty stable, we didn't face many issues. Once the instalation is done the control room core architecture wont face many issues.there are quick fixes like service restart if anything goes off. but most of the time we hear AA support suggesting us to reinstall with the new version of software for performance issues, but with my experiance i hardly see that making huge differnce in fixing the actual issue.
Monitoring can be done through email alerts for the core infrastructure. Issues mainly in HA(High Availability) with cluster sync issues still not monitored at the dashboard level, which might be a concern if the cluster goes out of sync. At the bot implementation lot of things are dependent on the way we code so it's additional work for the developer to get the code keeping in mind all the events which might happen. I would have been impressed if the solution had framework at the control room level to keep track of the overal execution and transactions, hope they can bring that feature in future releases
Blue Prism: Framework
Blue Prism is lacking in document processing capabilities.
The addition of better testing tools, or some kind of test suite, would be an improvement.
If this solution had a framework for exception handling then it would be very helpful. As a developer, we have to put exceptions in as the first step.
This product does not have AI Fabric or process mining tools.
I think like any tool, like any software technology, you have to follow the recommended framework and use proper coding standards so it's easy to use, but I think to scale up and make it robust in a scaled environment, you have to have rigor, you have to have a solid operating model in place. But we've done that and yeah, I think it's a very stable product.
Feature-rich options to help easy implementation: It's flexible, scalable, and easy to implement. The time taken to create the bot is less.
The easy drag-and-drop options make it easy to solve the challenges within a short time frame. Another important aspect is the framework and other useful tools and templates available have that makes it easy to document the audit trail and also standardization.
- Asset management using orchestrator
- Very comprehensive framework (ReFrameWork) that helps the developer to build easy to read, scalable automations.
Image resolution affects Citrix automation. Means, the resolution of BOT system and development system should be same in order to successfully run Citrix automations. This drawback is getting resolved in Computer Vision backed selector automation feature for Citrix in 2019 version of UiPath. Also, unknown runtime errors mainly due to application integration issues can cause issues, although it's a very rare scenario. This issue can be resolved to a great extend by using RE Framework in your development, which is also integrated in UiPath in the latest version.
- Financial domain
- Excel automation
- SAP automation
- Citrix automation
- Usage of Orchestrator queues
- RE framework
- Automating password resets
- Security and governance
- Highly elastic scalability
- Work queues
- Rules-based exception handling
- Large group deployment
- Rapid development support
- Centralized repository for version control
- Execution logs and credentials.
Ease of implementation.
Extensible framework assists in plugging in required components from existing scripts, and in implementing intelligent automation utilizing the best in class machine learning algorithms.
The framework provided has good recovery mechanism and exception handling capabilities built in. It can be customized based on the requirements and provides an easier start for implementation and to showcase in a presentable manner.
- Automating the workflow using all the four types of recorders
- RE Framework
- Citrix automation, as it has unique features that are best in competition.
Better documentation of the tool, since some frameworks adopted by the community of the tool is still very nebulous to understand. ReFramework, the main framework adopted by UiPath for better use of the tool is poor explained in Academy Advanced Course.
- Arguing between scopes and activities is still confusing.
The mode of argument transfer of a scope (or activity) is done by a screen where a variable is indicated as output to which the subsequent activity (or scope) is indicated as input. In large projects, these arguments need to be identified in an easy, fast and unquestionable way. Assigns a variable value to then assigns that variable to the output argument, and then assigns an argument as input to another activity. I think this transfer should be done in the panel of variables and not in the properties of the activity
REFramework is good, but still very rigid.
REframework is a good template but besides being very generic it is also rigid with respect to error handling. Basically follows the default entry> processing> output which does not encompass part of the applications in RPA, we must remember that the tool is for scripting and falling into the programming vices is a mistake. Overall it is a good way to start processes but during development it will be completely changed
- Its ease of use
- The user interface is friendly.
- It has self-learning tutorials.
- It provides RPA advance training which provides a smooth path and helps in clearing the certification.
- All Excel and manual work can be done very smoothly.
- It provides REFramework which takes care of all the exception handling, and Orchestrator to remotely run the bots as per your convenience.
- It provides us with UiPath Connect which is a one-stop platform for all your additional needs and for resolving issues.
- Its recording feature is great and looking up to its upcoming new feature: computer vision.
- This tool is very easy and smooth to work with.
The first thing I dislike is it is not available in a Linux environment. I prefer to work on Ubuntu and would have liked if it is available for Linux systems. Secondly, There is very limited content on ReFramework on UiPath Academy. Assignments cannot be done just by reading the text. There must be a demo for ReFramework projects.
Suppose you have to work on open source development or Open Source project for a networking community. It requires to have a Bash. You cannot do that in windows. If you are running a script on daily basis for checking malware or something like that on your home networks using Linux (with the support of a GUI tool), you could automate it using UiPath if you had a Linux version of the UiPath RPA.
Secondly, when you learn for certification from the academy you have to pass level 3 in between. Which requires a good hands-on with re-framework.The academy lacks practice material for the same.
UiPath is a simple tool to be used, has a friendly interface and at the same time powerful and useful to automate most repetitive processes. From an academy with training courses that enroll anyone who wants to join the RPA area, teaching from basic to advanced takes around 20 hours. Available features, integrations with other applications, and a large amount of community-made frameworks that are very active are the things that make UiPath more feasible to use or choose from its competitors: Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism.
- Improve the documentation about the tool, since some frameworks adopted by the company/community are difficult to use.
- ReFramework, which is the main framework adopted by UiPath to improve the use of the tool is explained in the advanced course of the academy in a very confusing way.
UiPath framework is the best feature which I have found, and you need to be a pro in programming to use UiPath. UI Explorer and other data capturing techniques like OCR(Microsoft/Google) are amazing.
- Easy use of activities and flowcharts
- REFramework for error handling
- Different types of platforms to create a process are available like flowcharts, sequence, transactional, agent process, and REFramework.
- Depending on the type of the process, we can choose which of the above-mentioned type we can use.
- Version control like SVN, TFS is available in the latest versions.
Unfortunately, some things could still be improved. The documentation of ReFramework is very confusing, although there is the advanced course of UiPath, where the focus is ReFramework itself. I believe this is the most difficult, since certification is mandatory in ReFramework, and it is the Framework indicated by the company for the solution of problems.
There should be some more activities that can replace others where coding is required. You can build a solution without coding knowledge, but I would recommend at least some prior knowledge of the .NET Framework.
I believe that a better explanation of ReFramework and license costs would be something to rethink.
It is very easy to make beautiful, clear, well-documented workflows that clearly reflect the process. This is an achievement that is not always feasible with regular code. Even though each activity in UiPath is like a line of code, the user interface in Studio and the use of states, flowcharts, and sequences make it so easy to understand the overall process and get an overview of what is actually happening.
UiPath is easy to use, and it CAN be used by non-programmers, but it is even better to use for programmers. It allows us to make very robust and effective solutions because we have all the functionality of the powerful .NET Framework library within reach, all while the UI makes it possible to create truly beautiful solutions.
We have used the customer support. Our main issue with them is they need to understand the problem that we are writing about, and not reply too soon with a standard answer.
All our developers are using UiPath Academy and are RPA certified. While they like some thing, some of the frameworks which were used in the Academy examples, the developers didn't agree with. This is probably because they are IT professionals themselves and are used to doing things a different way. Whether it's because the use case wasn't good or they were just used to something else, this was the main gripe.
Screen scraping credentials of whatever features that it has. The robot can log into the system, scrape the data, and enter the data into the system. This eliminates a lot of the manual work that the team had to do, which has improved the performance. Our teams used to do a lot of data entry, and this repetitive work has been reduced. The same resource can now work on some high-end work.
The ease of the use is good and exceeded my expectations. The implementation became easier and more standardized. Also, our development time has been reduced. Using ReFrameWork, we saw that the code become organized very nicely by UiPath and the implementation became easier and more standardized with more prebuilt components, which reduced development time. If you load the ReFrameWork nicely, you can do things faster and more standardized.
My only complaint is that I hate VB.NET. If I had to pick a language, it would not be VB.NET. That whole .NET framework is just overly complicated. But I can understand why it's necessary for the use case of RPA.
This is going to be an interesting answer, but the most valuable feature of the software is not the software itself, but the community that supports it. When I first started learning the software to support a program, I had to self-teach; there wasn't a budget for training. But going through their learning platform and then connecting with the community when I didn't understand how to utilize some of the functionality, that was far more powerful than the product itself. The network around the product is amazing.
The great thing about the UiPath RPA Academy is that it's not stagnant. Even though my first go at getting certified as a developer was three years ago, I literally have to go back the Academy and learn it every year because there are new features and new functionality. An example is the RE Framework they've incorporated. The living nature of the Academy gives a lot of value. But hands-down, the way that they give practical exercises, the fact that they give you applications you can download to learn how to interact with bots by simulating an actual operational environment, makes it a very impactful learning experience.
In addition, I find the solution easy to use. I have personal experience using all three of the major software vendors that are in this space right now, including Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, and I would put UiPath as number-one, specifically from a learning perspective. I've been able to take people with absolutely zero technical background and quickly scale them up in a matter of weeks so they're building bots. I haven't been able to accomplish that same feat with the other platforms.
I would rate its ease of use as about four out of five. It's not so easy, but it's also not difficult. We have a great UiPath Academy and it's really useful and helpful. Sometimes we need to do difficult operations and use other frameworks, through activities in UiPath. I think this mechanism is very nice, but in implementation, the customers are pretty close. Sometimes we must do it.
This solution helps to eliminate human errors. The amount depends on the process and the customer. Even unattended robots don't provide 100% automation. Sometimes a robot interrupts and waits for a human to make a decision. There is a process when unattended robots do fewer steps and after ten interruptions are waiting for a human to go on. I would say there is about a 70% reduction in human errors when using an unattended robot.
UiPath also helps save time. One unattended robot works 24 hours a day because a robot doesn't get ill or need to sleep.
The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. It just works. You download it from the cloud and install it on your computer. You might have to update your .NET framework, so make sure that it works. It is very visual and very intuitive, so you're up and running in no time with Studio. With Orchestrator, it takes a little bit of getting used to in terms of matching up Orchestrator with the computers that it's linked to but it took hardly any time for us.
I like the layout and design of the Studio using the RPA framework. It makes sense to me. It's very easy to get started. I've been a fan of the current debugger. I know that UiPath is releasing an updating debugger but I think that's been very intuitive for me as well.
I would rate the ease of use of the platform for automating my company’s processes a four out of five because, for me, there's still a lot of clicks and keystrokes I need to do for development. I know that UiPath is releasing StudioX, which is something that is needed, for people like me who aren't super technical.
I would rate UiPath Academy RPA training a five out of five. It's one of the best. Compared to its competitors, it's intuitive and it's robust.
It's everything that UiPath is moving forward towards, intelligent, machine learning, and AI. I embrace the fact that the direction it's going especially for me personally.
It probably took us about nine months to deploy, from the initial UiPath license to implementing the first robot in production. The reason for that is the learning curve of the team as well as the education across the operational teams to bring them up to speed and make sure that everyone's on the same journey. We were also working very closely with IT to make sure that we've got the right infrastructure in place, as well as support models, governance frameworks, etc. Without it, you can't really get anything done. It's a new technology and it was a new concept for everyone. Needing a robot ID, for example, was something that was never discussed before. Lengthy conversations had to be had to make sure that we weren't putting anything at risk with data privacy, for example.
The setup was both straightforward and complex, really. Some bits we're quite straightforward, but other parts were more complex. Especially the infrastructure we're still dealing with now one year on still has some complexities. We're still thinking about credential management versus the use of virtual machines and whether we should be using high density or not. There is also the matter of all the different types of offerings. There's a matrix that you have to abide by and I don't think UiPath is even aware of all the conflicts between the different options. That's something that we're still working through right now, but I'm sure they're going to address it.
We are using Studio, Orchestrator, attended and unattended robots.
Our primary use for this solution started with automating processes in finance, procurement, and HR. Now, we are researching various directions in logistics.
We do not run our automations in a virtual environment. This is something that we are trying to avoid.
With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a four. I'm an IT-based person, and for IT people it is easy to learn. UiPath claims that it is easy to learn and it's for everybody, but it's not true. For business people, it is hard to learn and hard to understand how to code to make things work. They need a lot of help with things like exception handling. If somebody lacks technical or programming skills then it makes it much more difficult to use. Although UiPath is getting closer to business users, there are still some basic skills that they need to have to make it work.
On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. When I get new hires it doesn't matter whether they have previous experience in RPA or development, they have to go through all of the basic training from the Academy. This includes the Orchestrator and I've been recommending SAP training because we are experiencing growth in the use of SAP. Going to my team, this is the base, and then we have created our internal framework and standards that also require training. Some people may already have experience with UiPath or Blue Prism, but they still need to take the training from the Academy.
Before I arrived at the company, there were already some automations running. However, fifteen months ago we shut down a couple of robots because they were failing terribly. From that time, it took us five months to create the first robot.
On a scale of one to five (where five is beneficial), I would rate the UiPath Academy as a four. There is some stuff that they could do better. I sampled the advanced, which is really difficult because it's just PDF. I had to use some YouTube videos to understand the framework that you need to pass for developer. They could do more videos on that.
They have three parts. The first is the foundation, and they are a lot of videos. The third part of it (advanced), there are no videos except one. That's only those PDF files, which you have to look and read through. I was like, "Okay, I probably can't do it." Then, I fell upon some community YouTube videos from other developers who just demonstrated it. This would be great if UiPath offered that, because I found out later that the developers made mistakes in their videos.
In the foundation, they get into much detail in the beginning. You're overloaded with information. You have to go through videos like three times to get it correctly. They could remove some stuff out of there. Those quizzes are really frustrating too. They are too detailed. If you sat with Uipath, you think it's really easy. However, it's not so much, if you get into those details.
Studio is a bit overwhelming in the beginning. They could get add some details, but not so many, into the foundation training. I've seen StudioX and loved the colors. Please get the colors into Studio. I loved the flow and that you got all these activities and colors too. It was so much easier. It was visually easier to understand where to click. It was really user-friendly.
I would rate the ease of use of the platform for automating our company’s processes as a four out of five (with five being very easy). I would rate it as a four because it didn't work in the beginning to get my bots active. I had to get into a lot of videos to get them running. I didn't understand how it needed to be designed or coded.
The Orchestrator training was much better, but I still somehow missed some details which I needed. However, it's not just do it, then it's done. You need some time to get into it. Though, it's much easier than Studio.
The integration with Outlook is not that good yet.
We are using Studio and Orchestrator.
Our primary use case is automating data processing for clients translating into other systems.
We do not run our automations in a virtual environment.
With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a three. I think that the technology that we use in the printing industry is a little more difficult to automate.
I am currently involved in the UiPath Academy training. We have third-party contractors who have been doing the development, and I am the first internal employee who will be developing. I find that the training is good in the first step, and also in the second step where we're learning about Orchestrator. However, when it moves to the third step and they are talking about the framework, I think that it is a pretty big leap and that is where I'm struggling. This is the section that I am in right now.
There was one project that was completed before I started, at my understanding is that from the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was less than six months. For my project, it has taken two months.
The workflow was able to handle the exceptions gracefully. The solution followed the ReFrameWork template of UiPath.
This solution is intuitive, user-friendly, and has a specific framework that allows for quick robot deployment. Most of the time, all you need to do is simple drag-and-drop, which allows regular users to interact and work with the solution to create their own robots.
Since I am not an expert, I am looking to the training lessons. The training could be improved by clarifying more and more at every step.
We would like better integration with custom environments and external inputs like forums or integrations with other robotic frameworks.
We use UiPath for:
- Financial domain
- Excel automation
- SAP automation
- Citrix automation
- Usage of Orchestrator queues
- RE framework
- Automating password resets
- Security and governance
- Rule-based exception handling
- Large group deployment
- Centralized repository for version control
- Execution logs and credentials
We are using the RE framework and it's very helpful for delivering the product on time.
The image-based automation is working as expected, using different levels of accuracy.
Orchestrator is the feature that allows making use of robots for remote location systems. The work queue is the added advantage to maintain the bot data.
The inbuilt RE Framework makes development easier and fast.
UiPath helped me to automate the various complex and mundane processes. You can also run your Python and .NET code in UiPath, which makes the development easy.
The UiPath interface is very user-friendly and also it is easy to learn and use.
There are many online certifications in the UiPath Academy, so it helps the user to become a certified developer and learn everything from the online courses.
Support from the UiPath community is very good.
RPA - Novigo Automation Framework Solutions - Setup an Automation Factory Model.
Automation Focus has been Productivity, Quality, Cost, Process Optimization, and compliance.
Focused on delivering Process Automation for Oracle EBS ERP application for various departments including IT, Finance, Operations, Engineering, Sales .etc
- Manufacturing: Master data maintenance & monitoring Inventory transactions, BOM error fix & transfer, WIP issue & complacent
- Finance: Financial closing, IC transaction, security & FA master & transactions, Master data, duplicate check, auto-CM creation & auto-payment, Customer Master, running letter, print errors & auto-receipts
- Supply Chain: Sales order Integration with the portal, shipment, RMA, digital shipping & backorder, item cost update & inventory interface, procurement, receiving & monitoring
- System Admin: Access provisioning, - Creating responsibility, Monitoring pending transaction & analyzer.
Kryon RPA: Framework
For the setup of the whole Kryon environment I was only involved in the framework, just to make sure that our system group prepared the server and installed the SQL server they requested, and to make sure they had all the permissions they needed, but nothing more than that. The consultants did all the rest.
Maintenance requires just my colleague and myself.
Its ability to work with multiple platforms within the same application or "wizard". Some of the SQL functionality has also been extremely helpful. All of our platforms are homegrown. We don't use an out-of-the-box software, which makes our availability to using RPA software suites pretty limited. Then, you have a product like Kryon which is flexible. We use PowerBuilder as our application building codex. Kryon adds flexibility when we have the functionality of SQL, where we can take sets of data out of the back-end and run complex computations or do a bunch of data validations inside the wizard. It can save us sometimes dozens of steps, then if we were to try and do those same reviews using the user interface completely. The balance that we get from using Kryon RPA, alongside being able to screen scrape and frequent screen, gives us an advantage that we haven't had previously with any of our other attempts at robotic process automation.
Kryon Process Discovery is a very exciting thing. We are rolling it out to approximately 100 VM machines, but we will be using it comprehensively for the next few years, as long as we can get it rolled out here soon and start gathering more information. It's been a very exciting thing for us here at LTCG.
We haven't finished rolling out Process Discovery. We only have it on three computers right now for the test environment. However, one of the most complex tasks that we are using two full-time employees to do was have it record and monitor these employees, along with all its variations, and how they are working through a process. We then exported that from Process Discovery into Studio. Now, instead of starting from scratch on a process that a developer wouldn't know, we have a framework and outline on how to make that work from end-to-end.
Spend time focused on standing up your center of excellence around the solution. Kryon gave us some great advice on that in the sales process regarding defining what we're trying to do with it. Get key sponsors and then get a key team that works through the implementation, together.
What we're learning from using the solution and what we're really still trying to figure out is what is a good candidate for an RPA process, versus the other ways we could automate, whether it's process elimination or deploying some of our core engineering teams to write different tools. We're still trying to figure out what the framework is for picking the best processes.
The processes that lend themselves to RPA are processes that are highly repetitive, high volume, low-judgment types of processes, where you can write down the process in a Word document, write down the logic, and then turn that into an RPA solution.
We haven't been able to make that leap yet, in terms of Kryon's full cycle of automation from the discovery of our processes to turning on the automation and scaling it up, but we see the potential there. We haven't quite gotten to that point yet, given how early on we are in our journey.
When it comes to using the solution, for both business users and developers, you do have to have some technical background to use it. It's unlikely that you would deploy it to somebody who doesn't have any background in it. But people who are somewhat technical have been able to use it pretty successfully.
I would rate Kryon at eight out of ten. It has a lot of potential and we see that potential. It needs a few more iterations for me to bump that score up higher. It has been a good experience so far and we're looking forward to the future.
I think that the governance framework is completely missing from this solution and something needs to be done about it. Other products are ahead of BotFarm in this regard.
Having the validation of the bots is something that can be improved.
Pricing for this solution can be better.
I would like to have access to self-service support.
WinAutomation by Softomotive: Framework
I think the primary thing that needs improvement in this product is the stability. It looks like it is easy-to-use and that is very nice, but it is more important to have a stable product and not just one that is easy-to-use. If I am working to create a simple process, odd errors occur quite often and in the middle of creating the process.
The additional features I might like to see in the next release would be adding in some capabilities that other products already have. For example, some RPA process management framework. UiPath has something like that, RE Framework (Robotic Enterprise Framework), which is something in Softomotive we have to develop by ourselves. They have some premade processes in WinAutomation, but in running a process they should have some kind of error handling. For example, if there are tasks that should be run like 100 times and maybe it will freeze up at the 50th cycle, then the process should start again from 50, not from number one.
If they can come up with some kind of framework and error handling, that will enhance the stability of the running processes made out of their solution. Right now I cannot resolve these main issues on my own and they should be added to the product.
Microsoft Power Automate: Framework
The initial setup is really straightforward. It is immediately available out-of-the-box when you have Microsoft Cloud. You just click on the button and it is there ready to use.
Our deployment took maybe a week or so. Most of that was just to play around and get familiar with it and become ready to start doing actual projects. Because you are building your own little mini-applications inside of it and the framework is available already, it is just a matter of learning how to work with the tool. You need to learn how to use it to build what you want to build.
There were only two people involved in the deployment process. It did not require a lot of effort. It was just a couple of minutes to be ready to start using it and a week to get to the point where we could be productive.
The framework for the product is maintained by Microsoft. Any applications that we build inside of it is all we need to maintain ourselves. So we do not have to maintain the framework at all.