Blue Prism Reviews

We were trying to integrate Blue Prism for an insurance solutions company. Without manual intervention, they wanted some bots to qualify and make some selection procedures easier for certain customers and integrate them with the CTI, which is a computer technology exchange. This means that when somebody calls up, they will go to a bot and CTI. They run a bot, and the bot will guide them about how they can answer some queries for the insurance customer.

It has a centrally managed infrastructure, and it is secure. Our client was using it because of its ease of use. They had already identified some workflows that were trained on Blue Prism RPAs. It was much more convenient for them to preselect Blue Prism as compared to other vendors.

Its pricing is sometimes higher. Its price can be better.

Its presale support should be increased. Currently, its presale support is very less. System integrators generally position Blue Prism in front of customers. Though they have an ecosystem, they don't have people who can train for the partner ecosystem. They have to increase the presales consultants for partners. In addition, their L1 and L2 support can also be improved. 

Its stability is pretty good. That's the reason why they have 98% of renewals.

It depends on how you code this.

People find it difficult to get L1 and L2 support. They're pretty weak at L1 and L2 support, so you have to have your own people for that. They don't have people to answer the queries. They want system integrators to do that for them.

It depends on the use case. Some use cases are pretty simple, and some use cases are pretty complex. It also depends on how the consultant would choose to configure it, but generally, it is pretty okay in terms of configuration. 

Its price is sometimes higher.

I would rate Blue Prism an eight out of ten.

We use this solution in all area of our business. The most common use case is related to our financial sector and loan applications.

The most valuable improvement in utilizing process automation is the cost savings, but we have also had cases where the customer experience is enhanced.

The most valuable feature for us is that our developers find it quite simple to develop processes, and they like to use this solution.

The licensing models for this product need improvement. Compared to other tools on the market, it is one of the most expensive.

We understand that they will be launching an OCR tool, and we are looking forward to this.

We would like to see some desktop automation, although we have been told that the product is not going to be taken in that direction. Rather, they will continue to focus on product automation and we will have to incorporate other solutions.

We have had some problems in the Blue Prism environment. For the tasks our robots are doing, our success rate is between ninety-two and ninety-eight percent. So, there are some things that are not being successfully created.

We have managed to scale it up quite well, so scalability is ok.

There are approximately twelve thousand people who benefit from this solution. We have around twenty developers, and there are between one and two hundred people who have a direct connection to the RPA deployments.

We have had problems with the solution, but between our vendor and the Blue Prism technical support, we have managed to solve them.

This was the first tool that we started to utilize when it comes to RPA deployments.

I found this initial setup to be complex.

Our implementation was done using both our in-house experts and some external manpower.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to have some expertise in-house, and not rely solely on the vendor. Similarly, I don't think that it is a good idea to develop and manage your infrastructure based entirely on advice or direction from the vendor.

This is the first RPA tool that we have implemented, and we do not have a lot of experience with other tools. We are satisfied, but there is room for improvement. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The only feature that stands out in Blue Prism, as compared to other tools, is security. This is the only reason for still having Blue Prism in our bucket. It is very secure and reliable, and it has also been in the market for a very long time. We automated a lot of federal and government automation processes very recently with this solution.

There are many reasons why many companies don't go for Blue Prism. It is not open, and the community addition is not available. Blue Prism provides support through partnership. You need to do a partnership with them, which is a major disadvantage. You contact a Blue Prism team, and they will schedule a meeting with you. They will give you a demo and help you set up everything, whereas with UiPath and Automation Anywhere, you can try the community edition, and if it fits your needs, you simply buy a license for that.

The initial setup of Blue Prism is complex. They simply provide a PDF or documentation for you to go through it, whereas, if you go with UiPath or Automation Anywhere, they have several videos and community support to guide you.

The documentation of Blue Prism is static. They don't have any sort of videos or open forums. Other tools have got a lot of community support, but Blue Prism doesn't have that. Its training is also hard to attain, and they also don't provide any certification.

Stability-wise, it is a good solution.

It has good scalability.

I never got a chance to contact their technical support.

Its initial setup is complex. It is not easy. 

They work on a big partnership kind of program with our organization, and they also give us a lot of discounts. Its price is pretty much comparable to the other solutions like UiPath and Automation Anywhere.

We primarily use UiPath, and we also use Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. UiPath, Blue Prism, and Automation Anywhere are the three leaders in RPA. We kind of make sure that we include all the pros and cons. Blue Prism provides a lot more reliability and security as compared to others. That's the reason it is still in the game.

I would rate Blue Prism a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is automating data entry-intensive tasks interacting with in-house applications.

This solution has allowed us to free up time for more "value add" tasks, increased quality through a reduction in data entry errors, and has benefitted us with shorter turnaround times for some processes.

The most valuable feature is the ability to do surface automation, allowing interaction with legacy systems where terminal emulation is still in use.

I would like to see the vendor improve the efficiency of Blue Prism interaction with applications. There are instances where the human user can complete the process faster than the "bot". It does not support (at least not well) scenarios where attended automation (back and forth hand-off between human and bot) is required.  

This solution has increased the speed, accuracy, and happiness of staff involved in the activities for which RPA has been deployed. 

The most valuable features are the exception handling and versatility with interfacing to existing systems.

We would like to see intelligent process automation that integrates RPA and machine learning. 

We were using this solution for two main purposes. The first was to leverage the OCR capabilities, and the second was integration with Outlook to check email and retrieve attachments from email.

We were also looking at the workflow component, and how to orchestrate the bot and the process flow within Blue Prism.

This is all being done as a pilot project by one of our departments to assess the impact of implementing RPA.

An example of how this solution helped us is with our ticket creation process. When a client raises a ticket with us, we receive an attachment by email. We have to first read the content of the email and then the attachment. Next, we have to identify who the customer is, and based on that, we create a ticket and assign it to the appropriate team.

By using the automation in Blue Prism, we have reduced the manual activities of somebody reading those emails, figuring out whose account it is, deciding where it should go, and creating the ticket. All of these activities are automated.

The most valuable feature for us was the orchestration of the workflow. The way you design the flow and configure the activities for the bot is very useful if you are working with any of the BPM or local platforms. It made it very easy for the developers to work with assets.

I would like to see wider integration with other products. That way, while we work on other core systems like SAP or Salesforce, there are ready-made connectors that can get the data. It would make it easier for people to work with Blue Prism.

The next release would benefit from integration with artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies. For example, the OCR can populate fields in variables and proceed with a workflow. But adding intelligence to this, or integrating with a service such as AWS, would be useful.

We did not find any issues with respect to stability or performance. We performed testing around the number of emails that were coming in and tried to see how fast the bot was able to process them. We also tried scheduling the bot to run at a specific time and checked to see if it was able to do so.

We did not perform extensive load testing efforts.

An RPA scales as you add bots to your ecosystem.

We don't consider the number of users with respect to utilization. Rather, the solution is used by one of our departments. They have adopted RPA to handle one of its processes as a pilot project.

We have seen a lot of use cases, but it is still picking up. Not too many departments are coming up with RPA as a strategy, but I believe it will soon pick up.

The only contact we had with technical support was during our initial setup. It was a minor issue that was solved pretty quickly.

We did not use another RPA prior to this one. 

I do not want to call it complex, but it is not simple either. It is somewhere in between.

We set up our own sandbox environment to do the trial run and the POC. We did the initial setup, but we needed help from Blue Prism to some extent. I rate the complexity as medium-level because we needed help in setting up our infrastructure.

We had one developer involved, and there was a QA tester for the entire process. There was a back and forth mechanism between the developer and our tester. For deployment, there was an admin role who was taking care of our other system assets, such as the BPM and other platforms. The Blue Prism administration was taken over by the same person, so it does not require a specific admin.

We handled the deployment ourselves and did not hire anybody from outside of the company.

Other than your infrastructure, in terms of servers that you have to set up, I don't think that there are any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We did not do any formal evaluation of other products. We chose this solution because we are working with Appian BPM, and Blue Prism is a partner. This is what influenced us to look at this solution, and they work well hand in hand.

We performed quite a few POCs to help understand the platform.

One of the most important things while working with RPA is choosing the right process, understanding the process, and ensuring that you pick the right process for RPA activities. That was the key to our success.

The process should not be too complex, and not be too simple. If it is too complex then it will take too much time to implement. At the same time, it should cater to your immediate needs so that you can demonstrate the tool's features to the leadership.

My advice is to do a pilot project before adopting any RPA platform. Try one or two key integrations, such as the Outlook and OCR integration that we have chosen.

Another important point is that there might be some fear in the team. Some people are concerned that bots are taking away jobs. It is important to ensure confidence in the team that the RPA will not replace humans. Rather, it will enhance their capabilities in terms of resources that are being used for mundane tasks. The message to take to the organization is that bots will handle the simple tasks, while humans can do more intelligent activities.

We have not fully explored the platform, but it is enough to capture our requirements.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for finance, specifically accounts payable.

The solution has improved our organization in that our AP administrators and AP clerks don't have to put the information into the ERP. The RPA does the transfer upon approval over to the ERP system. You don't have to code and create backend APIs or custom code to integrate the systems. It makes things much easier overall.

The object modeling is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's been quite helpful for our organization. The reusability of it has been great. Being able to create an object and use it for multiple processes has been very useful for us.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The reporting system, specifically the system admin reporting could be improved.

If there were more business analytics, that would be quite helpful.

In general, however, the solution isn't really lacking any features.

I've been using the solution for three years. It's been a while at this point.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's extremely reliable in terms of performance. 

The scalability has been good so far. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so with ease. It's not a problem.

We have several hundred users on the solution currently. Blue Prism operates on the enterprise level and the activities of the digital workers happen on the servers. So virtually no one needs to interact with it directly. It's mostly on an administrative level that there are some people accessing the application and its reviews, exceptions, and things like that.

I have limited familiarity with other RPA products.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not overly complex. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process.

The installation itself takes maybe a couple of hours, however, the customization, depending on the complexity of the process, can be anywhere from six weeks to eight months. It really depends on the complexity.

Per five digital workers, you need one or two individuals for maintenance.

We are an integrator. We are able to help our clients set up the solution.

We are a reseller of the product.

We've been working with the most recent version of the solution in our organization.

I have been happy with this solution overall. I'd rate it at a ten out of ten.

In one of the use cases, we import Excel tables. We extract the Excel data from the output of a proprietary application. This application produces Excel tables as an output, and we then create PDFs for certificates for the people who are flying. They have to do training, flying hours, and things like this. In this project, we closed the gap between the proprietary application, provided by a different team, and the HR application.

It is deployed on-premises. Due to security issues, we are not allowed to use cloud services. We only have centralized application servers that are operated by the central operations team. It is not on users' desktops, which is possible, but it is not our focus.

RPA processes are helpful when we need interaction with different applications and close the technical gaps between them. In one of the use cases that we evaluated, there was a single Excel template from a vendor. The Excel file has 7,000 objects, and it included information about the part numbers, prices, and some of the details about each object of a complex maschine. This file had to be input to SAP, so a human had to enter these 7,000 objects one by one, which is a pretty mechanical and uninteresting task. The RPA bot was easily able to import this file. Without RPA, this import had to be done by a person who had to do the same task 7,000 times just to import one contract. This is where RPA processes and RPA tools are very helpful. RPA tools have the possibility to close media gaps. RPA tools are like macros on steroids. They now have got the maturity level for big data centers.

We see some security issues in Blue Prism. The German vendor Servicetrace is better at this point. This is also reflected in the Gartner report where Servicetrace is mentioned as the tool of choice in high-security environments. So, security, particularly in terms of administration, needs to be improved. We must have the possibility to prevent the administration from taking a look at the ongoing process. When we have restricted data flow, the operations team should not be able to take a look at the data that is processed.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

It has been pretty stable. Most errors are human errors in the input files. When we have issues, they are usually because of the content of the input file. There are no technical issues with the product.

It is not currently an issue on our side because the company has pretty strong and fast machines. Because these machines do only RPA and nothing else, they can handle the work of a lot of employees and do a great job with that.

I'm not sure if our contractor has many tasks to handle with the vendor itself. During the software evaluation, we had discussions with the vendor about product details, but the support is taken care of by the contractors, and I'm not sure how often it is required.

The installation itself was pretty straightforward. The installation of the software is pretty easy, but it can get tricky when you go into bot development and have to close the gaps between different applications. The most complex use case took us about two and a half years.

We have a project team of five to six people for implementation. Operations are handled by three people. The project team is extended by external persons or contractors. The basic operations are done internally.

We definitely save money by using RPA.

Due to our financial structure, we need fixed costs. So, a license based on the usage would not be feasible. If we have a license model that is based on tasks per year or something else, it could create a very dynamic range of costs. Due to our public financial input, we have to know what it will cost. So, we have licenses per server. This helps us in planning, and we know exactly when we need additional servers. We can then request additional money for them.

It is a pretty good solution. I would rate it an eight out of 10.