I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

Everyone has access to it, so around ten people are using Kryon RPA in our organization.

Scaling is simple and very quick. The longest piece of adding any more robots is creating the VM piece and installing all the software that we need onto that virtual machine. Once infrastructure does that piece and hands it off to us, it takes minutes to configure a bot, point it at the server, name it, and get it credentials, then adding it to a production group within the console is very quick. That piece is quite easy.

For part-time use, there are about five of us who are developing it.

There are 50 to 60 people now who interact with the bot by feeding the bot information to trigger it. Also, in our finance space, we have the bot doing some automated work. It doesn't post anything, but it prepares what is called a journal in our system. It prepares a journal, then someone from our finance team will go and review it, making sure everything is accurate before posting that. They are a customer of the bot at that point. That is just a time saver, so they don't have to manually build anything. They can look it over, then they're good. 

There are a lot of people who are receiving reports from the bot. I don't know how many there are. It is probably in the hundreds of thousands.

We would love to increase our usage here in IT. We see such value with it. The biggest challenge that we have isn't even with the tool, it is internally funding the tool. The strategy around it is to automate time, then take that time and have a chunk of that time go back to funding more resources to do more automation. It's a self-feeding model and self-funding model. We're still so small that we haven't hit critical mass where we can start really adding more people to it.

Scalability is still a possibility for us, as we will probably need more of the solution in the future. I don't have any concerns about scalability at this time. We do have plans to increase usage. 

We have two attended machines, because we have such a low demand for it right now. However, we do have nine unattended machines that run daily. We average about 1200 to 1300 wizard runs a month.

We have five developers, all from different subsets of the business. We have some that specialize in finance, account management, or those of us who came from more of an IT background (or a more structured IT role). We have a good mix of of SMEs with some IT mixed in there.

It is very scalable. The solution will scale for whatever you build it to scale to. If you take the time to make sure that the design that you are implementing for processes are scalable and able to ramp up, it'll scale to do whatever volume you need, as long as you're able to throw the machine resources at it to provide the processing that it needs. In our case, we have one environment that manages rates for an entire brand of hotels, and we're looking at expanding that out to more brands.

We have three environments for the unattended side. We have a production, user acceptance testing (UAT), and development environment. 

• Production is the environment where we use it for anything which will be running and affecting real data and real environmentals. 
• UAT is strictly a testing environment. It gets used as we have processes which are ready for testing before we can deploy so we can make sure it's performing as the end users expect.
• Development gets a lot of use from the developers because that is where we are building our processes and testing them out prior to exposing the user to them.

In addition, we also have a very widespread attended side deployed across a lot of our hotels in North America. We have about 10,000 PCs with the application installed to provide training and support for the properties.

For actively developing in Kryon, there is only a handful of us. That is all we do. We work with the departments to identify the processes to automate, then determine the steps needed to automate those processes and work through that.

We have about 40 revenue managers who are working with that automated pricing system that we have. There is also a handful of other users out there who are either developing content for the attended side of things or leveraging some of the automated tasks that we have. We have built out for them to free up time to work on more important things. Right now, outside of the revenue managers, there are probably another 20 to 30 users.

To analyze and make sense of the data generated by Kryon process discovery can be a lot of effort. It's not as automatic as some might think. It really depends on how many processes you have and how actively you use them. 

But the scalability aspect isn't necessarily about deployment or technical maintenance. It's really about how you analyze and gain insights from the data gathering.

I'd rate the scalability a seven out of ten because the solution has been scaling well for a long time. It's very easy to deploy. But getting value out of it at scale can be a challenge, just like with any deployment.

We use it mainly for process discovery. We actually proceed it from different teams. So, we have 15 licenses that we rotate with different people, actually through different teams. 

So, we do discovery for the online team; we gather the results after about two weeks to a month. We analyze those results, and then we deploy them again on the analytics team.  We regularly deploy it to different teams. So, it's in constant use.

It just runs on the systems through discovery mode most of the time.

We haven't explored the scalability yet. There is room for many more implementations on the one license that we have.

Most of my deployments have been pretty small. On average, they're about 50 users at the end of the solution. We don't have thousands of users sitting at the end of these things. The console that manages all the bugs you deploy is really good. The chances of our company getting involved in a big telco are very, very small. We're using Kryon RPA mainly for organizations with 200 users and below based on per division. Kryon RPA is well suited and well priced for organizations with 200 users and below based on per division.

Currently, the two customers that use Kryon RPA are in maintenance mode with us regarding change control and management. Our clients are medium sized businesses.

Based on my experience with other RPA products, I rate Kryon RPA an eight out of ten for scalability.

We are now doing close to 20 processes. It still works fine. There are no issues from the scalability point of view.

The scalability's good, and it's flexible in terms of how you want to scale it up.

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

The product is becoming more and more scalable. On the Process Discovery side, you can collect a lot of data very quickly, so there is opportunity there. But overall, it's working pretty nicely.

We want to deploy Process Discovery across the majority of our company, which consists of about 1,200 or so people, to identify what they are doing. Over the next year, we are likely going to be deploying it on at least a couple of hundred users' machines.

We have room to grow. We just have to figure out where we need to go from where we're at now. Right now it's a waiting game to get things fixed and running.

It is very scalable. All we need to do is to set up the robot accounts and assign the access to it. Once it is done, we have to configure the trigger for the robot. Scaling up and down can be done in just a few steps.

The scalability has been good enough for our needs.

Our original plan was to do something like two robots, and a few processes, but because it was such a success in the company, we expanded it. We have 11 processes. The eleventh is due to go live in about a week. Some of them are not complex, some of them are more complex. It depends on the process itself, the amount of time, the amount of integration, if there are dependencies on another system.

In terms of plans to increase usage, for now we really want to see how the day-to-day is going with all the processes. More processes mean more licenses and robots, and we have to do ROI as the next step. I would guess we'll do more, but it's already a lot to have 11 processes in a year with four robots.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

We don't yet have a lot of processes in production, so I don't have experience with its scalability. I don't see any problem, why the product would not be scalable. But we don't have a mass of processes, so I can't say anything further.

So far, we have automated six processes, about one process a month. Of course, we have plans to try to put through two processes a month into production. We're planning on doing tens of processes in the next year. We want even more, but that depends mainly on us.