Kryon RPA Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

My experience with Kryon RPA is two years.

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

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

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

Neutral

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

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

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

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

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

My rating for Kryon RPA is six out of ten.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We are discussing development of the product with Kryon.

We have been using it for 2.5 years.

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

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

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

We did not have a previous solution.

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

The deployment took a total of about three weeks. 

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

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

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

We have a yearly subscription.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Finally, it has helped to reduce employee errors.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We did not have a prior solution.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The primary use case is for back office processes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is a very stable product.

It is a very scalable product.

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

All users can use the processes.

We require two staff for deployment and maintenance.

The technical support is very good.

The vendor's customer service is very good.

We didn't use a previous solution.

The initial setup was deployed by Kryon.

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

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

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

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

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

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

We would recommend it.

We don't use Kryon Process Discovery.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Their logging features are minimal. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The initial setup was straightforward. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It saves our business analysts a couple hours per day.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We have two primary use cases. One is the back office. We're a bank and we are automating some work of the bankers - mostly manual jobs like typing Excel data into our legacy systems and the like. The other thing is automating testing. We have really difficult scenarios involving both legacy and web systems. We hadn't found the right tools to take testing all the way from start to finish. But we have found Kryon very effective in that direction.

One way Kryon improves the way our company functions is in testing. Previously, we didn't have full coverage and we couldn't run a full regression day by day, or after major activities such as updates. We had to do it all manually and we didn't feel confident. Now, it's a completely different thing. We're trying to build a strong regression area where we can run a full regression of all our systems by clicking a button. We're not there yet, but we're heading that way. It's going to be a complete change in the way that IT acts because it gives us much more confidence.

One of the main features is its ability to connect into literally everything we've got here. Some of that was easier; some of it took some extra labor. But all in all, it has the capability to connect and to interact with almost every system that we have. That's the main feature. 

The next feature is the triggers. It's relatively simple to activate it. You can activate it via Control-M or via email. It has a lot of built-in triggers which enable us to easily activate the jobs.

The third is the support. We have great support from the guys here. It's not the product itself, but let's call it the "ecosystem" of the product. We have a strong product owner, and they respond very quickly to every question we have. That's a good thing.

The cognitive part, the OCR could use improvement, but I know it's on their roadmap. 

We need stronger governance to know, when a transaction is done, whether it worked or failed; strong logging. That would be helpful.

It's pretty stable. I can't think of a major crash.

We're not there yet, regarding scalability. It's fairly easy to purchase and make another robot, another machine, but we're not there yet. We're not at the limits of use of our first one.

Selenium was only good for web applications and most of our business processes involve more than just web applications. So if we wanted to run a complete test, end-to-end, Selenium didn't really help.

The initial setup took a while because we're a bank, so we have all the security requirements. It took a while but the setup was not very complex. The go-live took a couple of weeks but that was not entirely because of Kryon. It was due to the bank system itself, the firewalls and security.

Our implementation strategy was to go to the back office. We took ten nominees and we tried to pinpoint the one that would be most useful yet which was not too complicated. We gave it to Kryon as a PoC. They came and we said: "Let's take it step by step. Let's see if it works." If it did, we would try another one. We would then try to spread it among our core systems. We would connect it to each core system and have at least one active job in each of them. From there on, we made set up a center of excellence within the bank for automation, and people come to us now and ask us.

A Kryon consultant helped us with the primary deployment, but now it's our own team. Kryon guided us. We went to a three-day workshop with them where they explained it and gave us the primary technological understanding. Our experience with Kryon consulting was that they were helpful and professional. It was okay.

We're connecting with on a daily basis when there is a problem. But we have since made our own team.

We're a relatively small bank. So even if we can automate a decent scenario, we still don't have a lot of users or transactions. So the ROI is going to take a while in that area. In the testing area there is a good ROI, because we're now capable of doing things that we couldn't before. Completely. It's a game-changer.

For example, in the scenario of making a loan, part of the process was typing things into our legacy system. Selenium, the solution we had before, just couldn't do it. We had to abandon the goal of automating the scenario, and now we can. It's a game-changer in that respect.

The truth is, when we brought Kryon, we didn't think about automating testing, and they didn't recommend it. It was not meant to be a Selenium or testing tool, but we thought it could be useful, and it turned out that it was.

We did not evaluate other vendors. We quit using Selenium and, once we got Kryon, we said to ourselves, "Why not try to use it in place of Selenium?" It turned out to be much more useful and much cheaper, because we already had the license so we can use it whenever we want. Selenium was expensive and it only gave us certain aspects. So all in all, going with Kryon was a good thing to do.

There is a vast field of RPA tools. You have to know what you want to do and how to add value to your business. You need to see if what Kryon gives you is the best fit for you. For us, as beginners in the field, it was good, because of the support and the willingness to help us and to be cooperative. That was very helpful at the beginning. So you have to evaluate which step of the RPA lifecycle you are in. I can tell you more, in a year or two, if I'm satisfied when I am more advanced. But for starters, it is a good decision.

In terms of using the solution for the full cycle of automation, from the discovery of processes to turning on the automation, and scaling it up, it's a little bit early to say, because we don't have a lot of experience. And I can't compare it to any other thing that we have, because we're really at the start of it. But so far, it has met our expectations. I didn't think it would go as fast as they described it, and it didn't, but it was fairly rapid, and it has its ROI. All in all, good.

It's not for end-users, absolutely. It's not that. For developers, it is interesting. We didn't actually use developers to work with it. We had more, what I would call an "implementation guide." It takes knowledge and it takes time. There are a lot of technical issues, not only because of Kryon but because of our system and the integration between Kryon and our system. It's definitely not for end-users, regardless of what anybody says. It's not. But it's fairly decent for developers. 

We have our four developers who actually touch Kryon. We have two-and-a-half to three people who are dedicated to deploying and maintaining it, and another one comes and goes. We definitely have plans to increase usage. At the moment we do about 1,000 transactions each day, but we want to get do more.

As for helping our organization embrace digital transformation, we're heading that way. It's only the start, but we have a good vibe here. I could answer that question more comfortably in a year. But I see the way. I see the light.

We had an outside advisor, not Kryon itself, to help prioritize processes that are ripe for automation. We preferred it that way. Maybe Kryon could have given us that service, but we preferred to take an outside advisor.

I would rate Kryon at eight out of ten. It's not as rapid as they describe it and it has its limits. We have met with Kryon a couple of times. The guys were very helpful and said, "We'll bring that into the roadmap," etc. But we hit the limit of the product. For starters, we expected that to happen in year-two or year-three, not three months after trying it. But all in all, it has been a good experience.

I primarily use this solution to substitute processes where humans perform checks that do not need human judgment. These include onboarding, offboarding, and changing a contract. 

Kryon will allow you to automate processes fast and easy and you do not need to be a developer to automate processes. The advanced command will let you integrate with other systems quite easy.

Apart from the usual advantages (recording etc), I think the process that is presented as  'Powerpoint' slides makes it really easy to close the gap between the subject matter expert and the person configuring the robot.

It could be more reliable in spying HTML. I did expect this to be better in the 19.4 version.

I have been using Kryon RPA for almost one year.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The support is really good. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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