Automation Anywhere (AA) Reviews

Our primary use case is automation development supporting internal business operations at KPMG. We have 100+ live automations, with v10 and v11 deployments.

Using this solution has freed internal operations employees to do more "human value-add" work by removing mundane manual tasks. It has improved the quality of these tasks through automation and enabled us to do things we couldn't have previously done due to time and cost.

The most valuable feature so far is Task bot deployment. We hope to expand to IQ Bot this year.

Automation Anywhere's interaction with Excel is a key benefit.

Currently, Automation Anywhere's debugging functionality is minimal.  Most notable is that it works on only the top-level task (not on sub-tasks called by the top-level task).  This limits its practical usefulness.  Increasing the robustness of the debugging functionality would be very helpful.

Additionally, implmentation of a "global" variable concept (variables shared across tasks) would be very useful.  AA's variable mapping between tasks is cumbersome.  

We have been using Automation Anywhere for three and a half years.

Automation of AP 3 Way Invoice Matching Process. Details from PDF invoices with the corresponding data in terminal. This project involved applications like Outlook, Aurora Terminal, PDF reading by IQ Bot, and Excel. The current scope of the project was to process around 600 invoices per day from 20 different suppliers which has saved a lot of time for the end-user. It has been deployed in production and the customer is pretty much happy with the performance of the bot.

On-Premise installation of CR with 1 runner and 2 creator license.

IQ Bot

16GB RAM

It has improved a lot. We could identify a lot of manual processes that can be automated for our customers. The scope of automation by using Automation Anywhere has become wonderful. IQ Bot and AI sense are the incredible features provided.

The features and the architecture of Automation Anywhere make it easy to analyze any process and conclude good candidates for the automation. The flow chart view helped our customers understand the code pretty easily. The handover or knowledge transfer also becomes very comfortable. 

• The most valuable features I see on the actions added have a lot of commands that were unavailable in older versions.
• The concept of packages with the flexibility of adding our own package. The packages for running Python Scripts, different packages for excel, and it has the option to work with Excel if it is not installed in the machine.
• Exception handling with try, catch, finally and many other actions introduced.
• Concept of different data types.
• The different views for writing code like Flow or List or Dual.

1) We have encountered some issues in the actions like Terminal Emulator-> Send Key -> Page Down/Up not working.

2) We found difficulties while copy-pasting commands after the end of "IF" condition and "Loop".

3) A scroll bar will be good in the "Flow" tab.

4) When any command is double-clicked, if the command opens in a popup window as we had in AA desktop versions, then that could have saved some space for development as the code writing section seems to be less which creates difficulties when there are loops in the loop.

5) Email trigger was also not working.

I have been using AA for four months.

Currently, it is a beta version but has pretty good performance stability. There are issues in some packages. I hope with all the updated packages the solution will be much more stable.

For example: Terminal Emulator-> Send Key -> Page Down/Up command is currently not working.

Excellent.

Supportive but takes longer time to respond.

I always used Automation Anywhere from version 10.5 to A2019.15

It was easy and straightforward.

In-house.

ROI of the current project delivered saved 4 hours of time per day of the end user.

The setup cost is less than other solutions in market

Blue Prism. I personally did not like the way and features provided for developing bots.

It's an awesome solution for automation.

Automation Anywhere provides a tool for RPA. We can create software bots that mimic humans. The RPA solution is created to work for repetitive tasks and to use human resources for a creative perspective. Automation Anywhere provides the best feature to make a software bot for processes. We use it for SAP, HRMS, SQL, etc.

Environment: we have a V11.x environment and A2019 cloud-deployed environment on AWS Cloud. Right now we are doing a migration process from V11.x to A2019.

Automation Anywhere provides an RPA solution for my organization. We automated many processes through Automation Anywhere in which productivity increased. We also implemented the IQ Bot by extracting invoice data to CSV format and uploaded it to Oracle E-Business Suite. We implemented Automation Anywhere in many department processes. We have two unattended bot runners. We implemented more then 40 processes until now. I used both V11.x and A2019 and I like more A2019 than V.11.

Automation Anywhere provides many features for automating processes.

1. V.11 has three different recorders but A2019 Automation Anywhere created an all-in-one recorder called Universal recorder which more reliable to use.

2. One of Automation Anywhere's best features is the IQ Bot. In V.11 we created many instances & train many groups. In A2019 Automation Anywhere updated IQ Bot to provide more accuracy. They included Python scripting for validation. Before that, we used Macro for validation.

3. Automation Anywhere provides more commands in A2019 and also provides a feature called Packages through which we can update commands that we need.

Automation Anywhere changed OCR features in A2019. My suggestion is to improve the OCR command scope and usability. We use OCR for PDF data extraction as we use in V. 11.x product.

Automation Anywhere has a perfect structure of working. Automation Anywhere has the best product structure. It also provides support for customers and they respond in 24 hours.

They still provide updates on packages to get more accuracy in process creation. The automation has already improved very much.

I have been using AA for 1.5 years.

Through Automation Anywhere, we can create stable bots for processes.

Through Automation Anywherl, we create bost for process and it very scalable & secure. 

I only use Automation Anywhere tools V 11.x &A2019

The initial setup is easier than the migration. We have to follow the steps given by Automation Anywhere for the initial setup. If we have any issues with the setup, Automation Anywhere provides support.

We implemented in customer environment. 

We have to calculate ROI before the process creation to get clarification and to understand the benefits of automation. 

Automation Anywhere provided the best quality for products like iPhones. 

Before using Automation Anywhere I checked Blue Prism & Ui Path but I preferred Automation Anywhere because it is best in quality. It also has IQ Bot for unstructured data converting in structure.

I have been using A2019 for validating IC reports and scorecards that we publish every month for the client on a portal. As the reports are around 200, it used to take a lot of manual efforts previously to get this done, however now, A2019 has helped in automating the complete validation part. 

Apart from this, the other major use case is validating the child level reports with the parent. Though the underlying reports are generated from the parent itself, validating individual reports just to add another level of the quality check was a tedious task initially, however, A2019 has made it very easy in comparing the two excel based reports end-to-end

Automation Anywhere, specifically A2019, has helped me and my organization in automating the tasks related to quality checks and assurances. As a consulting firm, it is really important to provide correct insights, reports, and deliverables to the client and it involves a lot of QC checks and validations. A2019 has helped us in automating a major chunk of such tasks, thus helped in saving a lot of time, effort, and revenue. There are trainings going on every now and then, to spread the knowledge and access of this tool to other folks in the organization, so that more number of people would be able to implement this in their projects

The best part about A2019 is its ease of use. You don't need to be a coding champ or an expert to use and implement A2019 in automating tasks. It's very easy to learn, tweak, and implement in your day-to-day tasks, especially features like capture/record is completely marvelous. Apart from these, the Excel basic and Excel advanced features are really handy and easy to use. I personally have used them frequently in all my bots as most of my work is related to excel and stuff. Last, but not least, using A2019 for automating the tasks even on the virtual machines, which is one of my favorites.

One of the challenges that I face every now and then while working with A2019, is around the bot agent updates. Every week/alternate weeK, I receive an error while running my bots, that asks me to update the bot agent. I have to download the bot agent every time and reinstall it, in order to get the work done. This thing has also created an issue for me in the past, where I need to present something to my US counterparts, and then the bot was unable to run because the bot agent update notification came few minutes before the meeting. This was really frustrating at that point in time, however, fortunately, I got that resolved within minutes during the meeting by updating the bot agent. Hence, I believe, there should be some facility available, which can help me in running my previously implemented bots, even if there are some updates in the bot agent

I recently got involved in A2019 training organized within my organization as part of motivating folks for Automation. It's been around six months that I have been using this as a part of my day-to-day work.

I have been using this for the past six months and have been already utilizing this for my day-to-day work. The level of involvement of A2019 for me is increasing as time passes, as now, I see things from a point of view, where I try to automate major chunk of my work using this.

This can be used to any level of tasks/processes as it allows the bots to communicate within. This helps in automating major tasks into smaller bots and then coordinating them together to automate the complete process.

I used to have connections with Automation Anywhere folks every week/alternate week and I must say that they were highly professional and learned people. They always guided me before even implementing something and made me aware of all the nuances. Overall, I am really happy to get in contact with such folks, who not even helped me in shaping my imagination for automation, but also showed directions by demonstrating their example bots.

I have a little experience of working on Blue Prism in my previous organization. However, Automation Anywhere is far better it in terms of features and ease of use and implementation.

For me, the setup was quite straightforward. Yes, I did take some online help to get some issues resolved, however, the overall process was pretty easy.

I implemented it in an in-house setup. This has really become a part of my organization's work as the Business Operations vertical is using it very frequently.

I invested around 2-3 weeks in learning this and creating my first bot. Then it took me a week to use it for targeting parts of my day-to-day work. And now, I am using it for the past 6-7 months without any investments and saving a lot of effort on a weekly basis.

The costs are just a one-time cost, but the amount of savings it will generate is uncountable. So it's better to invest in something now, learn and start saving your time, effort, and money in the future.

One of the options was the level of features present in Automation Anywhere. It allows both back-office and front-office bots to automate. However, in the other case, only back-office bots can be automation. I personally like the UI and the overall features present in A2019 and level of ease, with which this can be implemented to any application.

The only con is the frequent updates in the bot agent every now and then. This annoys the user at times and (s)he may land up in some trouble due to this, as the bot would be able to run without installing the updated bot agent.

We have applied AA to our customers. KPMG another solution they use. 

Streams like HR, payroll are reasons that AA may have been chosen in an environment.

Use cases like report extractions, SAP interactions, HR data, and many payroll automations have been put into use.

We used UiPath and Automic before AA and I feel the difference very clearly and I am sure there's a long way ahead.

Sensitive data handling departments are usually not allowed or exposed to automation but I do not see such limitations when it comes to AA.

AA definitely did improve the scope of our organization but tools like Automic and UiPath still take a slightly upper hand in terms of business and market.

We have been trying our best to sell AA as our best tool and we are getting projects one by one eventually.

Not all tools give us the clear utilization of the infrastructure in place but this does and trust me, this has been proved far better than other RPA tools and that is why I see AA booming day by day.

We are pretty positive about AA.

Live executions on the prod machine with the player options is good.

I have been using tools like Automic and UiPath that has either an engine to run for Automic and Orchestrator for UiPath.

The versioning concept is pretty nice and increases the security and tracking mechanism.

Instead of packages like other RPA tools, I think the repo check-in and check-out feature enables the same in AA. 

Although it does the same, the ease of usage is fantastic in AA from my experience.

The line compare feature is another feature that I personally like the most but there is an anomaly as well.

Maybe not improved but I heard that the 2019 version is going to look more like UiPath, which is not ideal for a typical/classic developer.

The feel of parsing at the code is different from viewing object images for sure.

When comparing the code under version checks, although there is a change done, it doesn't say so because the change is done at the variable level and not in the line of code.

This is logically wrong, a line would contain n number of variables including object clonings, screen images, variables, etc so any change to any of these has to be captured and shown as a change done in the version history.

I have been using and working with AA for 1.5 years. 

I started with initial training, they gave me a project and then a certification as well.

I am AA Master certified, I did it around the start of 2020. Ever since I got certified I am working on the solution building for major clients, client proposals and enhancements for the existing bots on production.

Not all developers use a full fledged tool and that is where I am being considered to propose better solutions. 

We took new clients since April 2020 where AA is the only prime RPA tool being used and we have been enriching it since then day in day out.

I am sure AA is pretty stable.

Now that it's on its own framework, I am positive about the stability. At any point in time, I would preferably suggest sticking to the initial platform and framework that people like the most providing an overall package.

Scalability is always a sensitive topic when it comes to RPA.

For me, I look at it as availability in simple terms. The scalability factor has to be stretched to an extent where availability is never compromised.

I have personally had interaction only twice along with my onshore peers.

1st was with Mae Chang about v11 environment setup &

2nd was with one of the support engineers who helped solve the control room blank screen error.

So far so good.

I used ITPA tools like Automic (CA Technologies product, now Broadcom product) & RPA tools like UiPath and BluePrism.

For a classical and typical developer, we like code to be seen, written, and parsed but not objects. More importantly, security features like parsing, code versioning, ease of use, live executions, etc made us chose AA.

We haven't moved completely to AA for now but talks are in place with customers.

So, for multiple valid reasons, AA takes the first place when it comes to automation.

The setup was good. I wouldn't say straightforward but the process and steps were laid down clean so for us, it seemed to be cool.

It was in-house for the POC project and the customer himself for the account we hold.

Our setup was pretty clean and neat.

I would rate the customer level a 70/100. They haven't defined the scope, networks, security properly, and there is too much of JUST red tape. The process definitely takes priority but not at the cost of providing solutions. The optimal path has to be chosen.

I shouldn't be projecting this out but would say there is a grace ROI with our current clients.

I am not 100% sure. Revenue is nominal as of now. The business model defines it more in order to sustain a customer but I am sure it's doing well.

So far so good.

When it comes to 2019 and the AA cloud I think many are skeptical about the pricing and support model.

For example, we are already on our own cloud, AWS and azure so as a cost-effective solution we would obviously want to choose our own platform for hosting. Be it IAAS, PAAS, SAAS etc.

Now that AA is proposing a cloud as well, we are still in the thinking phase of the costing model to see if this fits us better in terms of revenue and margins.

We are looking forward to experiencing the AA cloud soon.

Like mentioned, we have been using Automic, UiPath, and BluePrism to a pretty good extent for about 2+yrs and it was good until we realized there is a better product in the market and who doesn't want the best.

It was not a one day's decision to chose AA. A big set of people, the cream of the project, were deployed to learn and explore AA to the maximum extent possible.

I lead the operations part of the existing automation project and so was I leading this POC project under AA as well. So all possible test cases, comparisons, ease of use, security, and many other factors were considered before we opted for AA and so is the product now.

My request would be to keep a little lower pricing for services like on call support, cloud, and other key services. Otherwise, the rest all seems to be very much feasible in AA.

We are using Automation Anywhere for multiple automation processes. There are multiple clients with KPMG who have many automations going on.

In finance and accounting companies, they ask for report generations and record fetching from some data source type of tasks. They want it to be fetched and exported into forms, charts, etc. using automation. The task will happen when triggers are required based on some data sources. It is the data that will be exported and sent over mail. These tasks are mainly focused on organizations.

No other competitor has this email trigger, so it saves a lot of time if you automate the process. We don't need to fix a time for a task to run. It gives the feature of on demand execution for any task. Whenever a user wants, it can send a mail and get the task done as soon as possible. That is our main feature, I feel. 

There are multiple features, like PDF integrations, which are coming up. Task-related features to PDF integrations are coming up nowadays, so people want those executed and improved a lot in Automation Anywhere.

For improvement, I would like to see Automation Anywhere integrating with multiple other technologies. As of now, it is integrating with .NET. When it come to future technologies, I want Automation Anywhere to integrate with Python scripts, and make the execution easier. That will be very helpful, having our cognitive technologies interacting with Automation Anywhere.

On the basis of rating, I'll give a 90 percent to the process being stable. The remaining 10 percent is based on the change in the environment. If you change the environment from development to production or some other environment, then there are minor glitches which come into the process. But, that also can be handled a bit easier in Automation Anywhere.

It is very scalable. If we come to the point where we need to increase the number of bots in a process, for different countries or teams, we can add multiple bots and Bot Runners to the process, then we can execute. This gives a lot of scalability to the process.

The technical support team was very helpful on on our development. There were many cases where we needed their support and urgency. They gave a lot of support to us. They responded well quickly. That's what is required for our development or developer team, so I'm a bit happy with our technical support team from Automation Anywhere.

It's a bit straightforward. If you go through the user manual of Automation Anywhere, the stuff with automation there is quite easy. A layman or common man, who is new to the Automation Anywhere can install it quickly. So, it's easy.

There are a lot of savings in terms of effort and time as well as costs. Automation Anywhere automates a lot of processes. It allows an organization to save the efforts of a lot people. It saves a lot of time because people can't work a whole day (24/7), but Automation Anywhere bots can.

I'll rate it near an eight (out of 10) for Automation Anywhere. I'm giving this rating because the first thing which can be improved is integrating multiple technologies like Python, which can enable the developer and the process to run in a much better, faster way. The second thing is the automation that is available in Automation Anywhere can be improved. This will help other use cases to run.

There is not one specific use case in the sense of what we use the product for. In the broader scope, it would be automation. But right now we have several applications. We started our journey with the tool in 2017, and we have automated several processes in finance, IT, and engineering. 

In finance, for example, we have automated cash application, billing processes, reporting, payment processing, and we are using IQ Bots to automate our invoice processing. We completed the pilot, which provided us with phenomenal results. So we tested with a small entity with 30000 invoices and around 300 suppliers with a high level of success.

The character extraction capability of IQ Bot is much, much better than the other OCR (Optical Character Recognition) engines that you have in the market today. So we are completely pleased with that, and we are planning to upscale our invoice automation processing.

Today while we look at the opportunities in front of us, our customers are expecting us to be more productive and execute with greater speed to be relevant and competitive in the market. The expectation as far as the accuracy is really very high, and we need to be compliant. We have experienced that the more manual and hands-on that we are that there is a higher risk of being non-compliant.

There are skilled companies who are spending more time on transactional activities. For example in the engineering field, there are engineers who are spending time on transactional activities and there are finance guys who are spending time on transactional activities that could be automated. 

We can use intelligent automation with great value in helping these people upskill themselves into newer areas of analytics, new roles in reporting, and project accounting in finance. We're trying to eliminate these transactional activities, be faster over time. We started by looking at specific activities and we looked at the processes. Now, we are looking at a complete value chain. When you look at the complete value chain, that's when you actually begin driving positive change in business results. That is our projected approach for the next couple of years. We'll be looking at the complete value chain and see how bots can help us make our process more efficient.

The most valuable feature is the IQ Bot's ability to extract information accurately. It can do things like process table-level information, line-item level information, etcetera, and the accuracy is really very high. All of our users are accountants rather than programmers or anybody with an IT background. The accounting people can easily learn Automation Anywhere. We tried a few other tools but our folks were more comfortable using Automation Anywhere. They felt that it is easy to learn, and it was easy to train them as to how to use it.

In the next release, I think it has to be more compatible when deployed with the Citrix environment. That's one bottleneck that we have seen. Technically when we used the IQ Bots, we couldn't work directly through the Citrix environment. With our ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) setup, we needed to access it through the Citrix environment. Because we were not able to do that, we had to have a workaround. We are currently working with Automation Anywhere to have that fixed. They have given us confidence that it can be done.

When looking at stability, we have to remain ready for any surprise even if we have not experienced any stability issues. We don't know what that kind of surprise will be, but we have backup plans in place.

In case the tool fails, we may not be as fast as the bots, but we have a BCP (Business Continuity Plan) but we know we can't be specific on what challenges will come, because we don't know.

In two years, I think once in one process where a bank changed its user interface on the bank website, a bot failed. We had to go and correct it. It was a fairly quick fix because to create it doesn't take much time. Changes like this are not predictable.

If you look at our shared services, we are growing and we need to keep our costs flat. This means I cannot hire more people. This need for greater efficiency is made up by what I have been able to gain out of the automation. We are actually using automation to move more processes into our shared services. Ours is a private business and we create big cement plants. One project could last for five years. When we land a big deal our volume spikes. It's a very cyclical business. It has been very easy for us to deploy scalable solutions now.

The company is very service friendly and willing to work with us when we need it. I would give them high marks for attention to customer service.

Our decision to go with an RPA solution was one that I made. One of the reasons I was hired into this organization was to drive automation. There was a specific goal for that which I was tasked with.

When looking at other options in the market Automation Anywhere seemed to be the company for us for a couple of reasons. One is that when we had our first engagement with Automation Anywhere we felt that they were very customer-focused. We did not see that with the other service providers. They really came prepared when they first met with us. They had all their books, IT, operations, delivery plans and such, so they were able to answer all our questions. They were very flexible in meeting our requirements and needs.

They were willing to go out of their way to support us and to ensure that we would succeed in the journey. Some of the service providers even refused to create POC's for us. But Automation Anywhere said they would and they went ahead and created them.

I thought the initial setup was straightforward and easy.

We did not use any consultants for our deployment. We worked directly with Automation Anywhere. Our belief is that we know our business better than anybody so we opted for maximum direct involvement.

Before deciding to go with Automation Anywhere we looked at other products for comparison like UiPath. We looked at the desktop automation tool, I currently don't even remember their name. The choice seemed obvious from the first impressions.

If I have any advice to give to people who are considering this product as a solution to their automation needs, I would say don't waste time thinking too much about adopting it and just go ahead and start.

On a scale of one to ten, with ten being the best, I would rate Automation Anywhere as an eight.

If you look at the first year we had the product, we had a 6% efficiency gain. This year we are looking at 10% in finance and 12% in IT. The more we discover ways to use it, the more efficient we will become.

My company' objective in using this tool is to automate every rule-based operation possible. We're looking forward to automating anything that does not need a human to make a judgment call. We have automated most operations in several applications, including mainframe, Linux, web-based URLs, Citrix automation, and in Excel extensively. We have done a variety of projects but we are looking forward to growing more into other areas that we have not yet explored.

The biggest value that I see from the product is the way it works in general. The unattended mode that Automation Anywhere promotes, works great. That is the best thing, I would say. It runs code that performs on a virtual machine unattended. No one gets involved in the triggers because the bot controls the tasks. When you use a person to manually monitor a task, such as getting a quality check done, automating the task to work unattended eliminates all the human effort. It's a solution that is quite simple and straightforward to implement and is available 24/7, 365 days. No disaster recovery is required as the server is always intact because processes run to assure uptime, security, etcetera.

We are aiming to have 100% unattended runs. We don't want attended runs because it increases bandwidth which is not great for support guys and clogs the system. Also, you can have some unattended InfoSec (Information Security) breaches and things. We constantly aim to have the best. At the moment performance is not 100% but I would say it is constantly improving.

Automation Anywhere has helped our organization to operate by working on AA-level development without all the trouble of having VMs set up, setting up ports for it, having the environment so that the developers can work on it, etcetera. With Automation Anywhere, I don't think we need a technical guy, an IT guy, or specifically a specialist engineer to accomplish things. Automation Anywhere is that good. A layman who has a keen interest or even a little bit of curiosity can learn the product end-to-end, sustain himself if he wants, learn how the VM is developed down by the ports. The product and support make it easy to learn. The knowledge is readily available.

The whole package that Automation Anywhere offers is really good. The variety of commands that it offers made to play well with other integrations. It could be using a C# module, code on JSM, the APIs — I want to use database XM. Ultimately, I want to use anything that makes it friendly for me to accomplish what I need to. That is a help because it often will be something I have already learned, it will be easy to access, easy to build, easy to sustain — as long as the commands work as expected.

Unattended Automation is the best feature for me. Because I use it extensively, it is also one feature I am very familiar with and so it is also one of the areas that I would like to see more improvements on. Any time I speak with people who promote automation and say that it is unattended, they may have a machine perform an operation. Very few understand that each unattended operation packet is unattended at all times. No matter what time of the day, if you just click Run once and it operates to get something done. You don't continuously relaunch it.

In my current role, the only thing that I focus on is how sustainable the code is. It has to run for a long time — years. I am expected to run extensive testing. So, in this position, I'm working on the current stability of all the commands and how that can play into the future. I'm not looking for new features. Really the opportunity for automation is already offering this opportunity to create your own features. Adding new features is almost too much. If I've got enough tools to use, I should learn to utilize them first. Use them and then maybe get something new once I have exhausted the possibilities. There are already enough options that AA provides to use. The commands that it offers out of the box are okay for people to begin to work with it. If you don't know it, all you have to do is ask. 

It is not an end-to-end solution for everything, but it is very good at what it does with allowing automation and freeing up other resources — both human and hardware. It is not an end-to-end solution for everything.

The only area for me that I would consider as an improvement is sustainability in areas I face every day. On CSM (Central Management System), for the most part, it works every time, but those areas exist where it does not perform as expected. For example, we had a problem with our ticketing system. What we do is we have a ticket open so that the issues stay open for a week even if we have it fixed. It is supposed to stay in the system continuously for a week — a hyper-care period — so that the issue stays open and we are sure the issue is fixed. That hyper-care period never seemed to end in the application. The problem was it extends a week, to two weeks, to three weeks, but we did not achieve that four-week period of no error of the full runs for the solution.

We worked at resolving the issue and thought we fixed it permanently. We locked in the solution. We were happy. We almost won. Then in a week, we had a reversion to the same problem without making a change. It was not possible to explain. It is my only concern that some things get handled erroneously or changed. 

Without question, Automation Anywhere is generally a stable product. It's not like I can bank on it always performing. I know a few bots we created are not perfect, but I also know that most of them — 60% of my bots — are good. No one calls me about them from the time they're deployed. I haven't had a single escalation or a single error reported about them. This is great.

I still have the other 40%. I think some things go wrong in situations you face unexpectedly or an error occurs. This is not the way it is supposed to be. It's supposed to be really easy: just plug it in and you have the service. But it doesn't work sometimes.

It is frustrating at times to experience this instability, but we do find a solution and we are working on it to be better. With the new version and features that AA is proposing, it looks promising that we can achieve that goal. It looks like the new version will be really stable compared to the version I am currently in, but I will never be sure until I use those new versions.

Another form of stability is in upgrades. Currently one of the pain-point areas on my to-do list is migration to 11.3.2. We have been working on it for almost a month now. We haven't reached the deployment stage. When I migrated to 10, I had some bots that no longer worked after the upgrade. It was not expected. We got on a call to support to explore the problem and had to resolve them.

Right now, I'm not really sure when to migrate. We have 50 bots and every fortnight, there's a part that goes wrong. If I have to take the action and migrate into a new platform — 11.3 2019 A — there is something of a leap of faith. I'm really not sure that I can take that leap now considering the relative stability that I'm experiencing at the moment.

Working with Automation Anywhere, I have been taking steps to use more of the functionality in the product. In a migration, I will want to use the new version as extensively as I have used the current version. At each step, the newer versions were better than what I have used in the past and I have used version 8, version 9, and now version 10. I've used these three versions and there have been improvements each time. We're seeing improvements to come, which I'm looking forward to exploring. But we have to be sure the migration point is realistic.

A lot of times that I have raised issues with support, the command in question is simply not performing. Object learning may not be working as expected, an action's not executing or it is not connecting to the database at all. The simplest solution is often to copy basic commands and replace them and it works. With the number of calls I made to Automation Anywhere, the guys know me now because I have so many issues. They work with me on it. We try to find solutions. At the end of the day, we find some way or other — a shortcut, say, or copy and paste — and get the code to work. We may not be able to figure out the root cause as an answer so that it doesn't happen again. The bottom line may be that the code might be corrupted, my part of the implementation is corrupted, the ATMX (Automation Anywhere Task Files) part is corrupted, etcetera. But the patches are not a perfect solution when I'm in charge. It's a lot to know a process well enough to fix the root cause of an issue. But these concerns remind me that Automation Anywhere as a tool is great, but there are areas to improve.

Automation Anywhere is definitely scalable in several ways. It's easy and accessible. It's designed the best — almost perfect. It has many more usable components than I was familiar with, and I had so much to learn. Now, with some experience, it is not foreign, and we just don't need to build to get what we want. But to get that you need to start at the design phase, you should not start at development at all. People try — even me — when you're starting, just to aim at building usable components. We can ask a developer to do that, but then the developer will not design to build a reusable component. It will only be specific to his assignment, the development, his process, and he will get it done to complete the job.

Scalability starts with a designer who is the one who makes the call. They need to know what to standardize or how to do things by thinking globally to make sure that a resolution is usable and adaptable if desired. That is the standard we adopted. Other big companies have more bots compared to our 50. They may think what they have is a lot more scalable than it is.

We have ongoing support from AA. I appreciate Automation Anywhere support when I talk to them. There are quite a few hiccups as we go along. At times I don't get straight to the support people when you need them as they are busy supporting other users. But the response has been great.

The setup is a bit complex but it is not so bad if you are a little interested and a little curious in learning about the product. It helps to have a little background knowledge on how it works, what are the features that you need to look for, what logs you need, etcetera.

Some basic guidelines will help you along in the initial setup — a basic brush-up on what to do and expect can suffice. Of course, there is the AA's guide that you can follow if you don't know what to do. Initially, when we didn't know the server, we didn't know what are the application calls were, the documentation did help. It was not that complex to do the installation, but the IT guys did not support it. They were surprised I wanted to learn about everything and work with another product when they had resources to accomplish what was needed.

If you choose to try it out, when you need to know more, ask for help. If you're ready to set up deployment, start from some base and set a restore point.

For those who are considering Automation Anywhere as a solution, I would ask how good their team was already. To take on a new product and take a chance that people will try to enhance their skills by learning it may not be the best course of action. Many will have to learn something new and do better than they did with previous solutions by learning and using AA. If the response is that they have hardcore developers, web designers, C# developers, etcetera. They may be looking for quick resolutions, hardcore development and coding bit. They will want any other product or UI that appears to give you far more than AA. AA does all of that — it is not that it isn't able to do it — but it's easy and it is different. With other solutions, you will need someone with that knowledge and ability to code in a particular language. But AA is a platform that can be used as an opportunity for people to up-skill themselves. That's something that is different compared to any other code.

AA commands are not the same as other languages. It has its own dictionary, its own library, its own way of working. I see that this is the same thing mentioned by others as to what they think about the product. It is possible to learn it by just using the Q&A.