KEYS TO RPA SUCCESS

[Pages:15]Keys to RPA Success

Executive Research Report



KEYS TO RPA SUCCESS

Part Two: Resolving Key Selection Challenges: Sourcing, Platform and Total Value

How Blue Prism Clients Gain Superior Long-Term Business Value

By

Dr. Leslie Willcocks Dr. John Hindle Dr. Mary Lacity

August 2018 With market adoption of Robotic Process Automation reaching levels that support rigorous quantitative measurement and analysis, Knowledge Capital Partners has developed proprietary research tools and assessment models with the goal of establishing evidence-based performance benchmarks to inform technology selection and deployment. This report summarizes the key RPA management practices that have produced superior results and value for Blue Prism customers as revealed in multiple quantitative surveys and live deployment analyses.

Overview

Blue Prism, the inventor of the term Robotic Process Automation (RPA) and the market leader in enterprise RPA, recently engaged Knowledge Capital Partners (KCP) to survey their client deployments. We used proprietary KCP research tools, and this report summarizes our findings. Based on finalized quantitative survey results as well as our ever-growing library of qualitative case investigations, the report analyzes the management practices and behaviors that underpin the exceptional value achieved by Blue Prism customers as outlined in our January 2018 report "Robotic Process Automation: Benchmarking the Client Experience."

Copyright ? Hindle, Willcocks, and Lacity 2018



2

Contents

Introduction:........................................................................................... 4 Sourcing Approach:............................................................................. 5 Tool/Platform Selection........................................................................ 8 Cost/Benefit Measurement Models: From ROI to TVO.................................................................................... 11 Conclusion.............................................................................................. 14 Research Base........................................................................................ 14 About Knowledge Capital Partners................................................. 15

Copyright ? Hindle, Willcocks, and Lacity 2018



3

Introodduucctitoionn: :

In "Becoming Strategic with RPA," the first paper of the series, we examined the exceptional results Blue Prism clients achieved with their RPA deployments from taking a disciplined, strategic approach. In this paper we analyze their approach to the key selection challenges facing buyers in three areas: sourcing model, platform selection, and value measurement.

In choosing a sourcing model, we have identified in our research five major risks facing organizations as they decide how to introduce RPA. We have seen clients choose to self-administer their automation program without recognizing, developing, or acquiring the required skills. We have seen others pick the wrong advisors or partners, or pick the right ones too late. There are clients who have gained suboptimal value from choosing to rely too heavily on their business process outsourcing (BPO) providers. And while cloud-based RPA-as-a-Service offerings have emerged as an attractive sourcing option, they can bring extra data protection risks for clients in highly regulated industries.

Tool/platform selection can also be hazardous. Given pervasive hype and confusion in the marketplace, clients risk choosing the wrong tool(s), too many tools, or bad tools. The proliferation of vendors marketing `RPA' ? over 45 vendors claiming RPA offerings as at summer 2018 ? has not helped. In fact, even amongst the top three vendors, products vary significantly. The follow-on risk from initially choosing the wrong tool can mean costly `lock-in' and a complicated exit path.

There are reliable ways of mitigating these risks, as we have established in previous publications.i In this paper we enrich this analysis, then introduce a further key practice identified in our research-inprogress on delivering RPA business value: measuring Total Value of Ownership.

CoCpyorpigyhritg?htH?inHdlien,dWle,illWcoilclckosc, kasn,daLndacLitayc2it0y128018

knwowwwle.kdngoewclaepdigtaelpcaaprtintaelrpsa. 4 4

Sourcing Approach: SSoouurrcciinnggAApppproroaachc:h:

IInn oouurr rreevviieeww ooff tthhee ggeenneerraall mmaarrkkeett,, wwee sseeee ffiivvee mmaaiinn ssoouurrcciinngg aapppprrooaacchheess::

I?nInosu?orurrecvIinniegswo(uDorfIcYtihn)eg g(DeInYe)ral market, we see five main sourcing approaches: ? Ins??ourcIIinngssoowuuirrtcchiinncggon(wDsiutIhYlta)cnocnysultancy ? RPA?? seIRrnvPsicAoeusprecrrionvvgicideweiprtshrocvoidnesrusltancy ? BP??O seRBrvPPicAOesspeerrrovvviiccideeepprrsroovviiddeerrss ? RPA?? -asBR-aPP-AOS-easrsev-ircave-icS(eeclrpovruiocdve)id(celrosud)

? RPA-as-a-Service (cloud)

Which ttoocchhoooossee??AAmmonognsgtsBt lBueluePriPsrmismcliecnlitesntthsethoeveorwvehrewlmheinlmglyinpgrlyefeprreefedrorepdtioonpitsioinnsiosuirncsinogur(cSinege WFFaA(Snii-gghSeRuuieecrrPhreeFvAiti11cgoo,,eurcbbr(hBeecolllPoo1ooOww,usdbe))p,,)e?,rwwlootAhiivwttmohhid)u,oeaagnwrhmmgiitsswhaatprreaggBrawiilcnnucolaaeetuillcaPlppedrrrrdmeeiesffxbmaeepyjrroeeecorcnnlinitteccyltyeenhati1sffsloos5ttorr%hoiienni.rniccOsoclleuulvnuddealdyiirsnniwn1ggcgh1leo%ccluomodonnifnscsBugoullmlltytuaaeepnnsrcPceytyrofiesssbrmuurepepcpdpploeoioerrrptcnt ett((is77oiv00nwe%%deisr))ae..insOOusluseuoitstunsssrgoocruuiRinsrrcPcgkiiyAnn(SgagAnetstodeoan RPA or BPO provider is practiced by only 15%. Only 11% of Blue Prism clients were using RPA AsAis-Sexeprveircieen(cceloduads), mthoorueguhswaeblweofourldaegxrpeeactet trhriasntgoerisoef taasskcslo.ud comes to be perceived as less risky and iTsheexspeeprireenfceerednacsesmsotraenudsianbmleafrokread gccrooennatttrreaarsstrtattonogooeuuorrf22t0a01s18k8sf.fininddininggssoonnththeeggeenneerraal lmmaarkrkeet,t,wwhheerere7722%% of clients reported tthhaatt tthheeyy rreelileiedd oonn tthheeiirr ccuurrrreenntt sseerrvviiccee pprroovviiddeerrss ttoo aauuttoommaattee services for them, These preferences stand in marked contrast to our 2018 findings on the general market, where 72% of clients reported that they relied on their current service providers to automate services for them,

Which best describes your RPA sourcing approach?

Which bWehsitchdbeesstcdreisbcreibsesyyoouurrRRPAPsAousrcoinugracpipnrogacah?pproach?

RPA Sourcing Approach

Insource and consulting

RPA Sourcing Approach

40.6%

Insource and coInnssouultrinceg

29.7%

40.6%

RPA SourcRiPngA SAopuprcoiancghApproach

CloudIn-ssoouurrccee

10.9%

29.7%

Outsource to an CRlPoAudp-rsoovuidrceer

7.8% 10.9%

Outsource wOiuthtsaoutrracdeittoioannalRBPPAOpprorovvidideer

77..88%%

Outsource with a traditional BPO prOotvhideer

3.1%

7.8%

n = 64

Other0.0% 0.0%

35..10%% 5.0%

10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% Percent of Respondents Choosing Each Sourcing Approach

10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% Percent of Respondents Choosing Each Sourcing Approach

40.0% 40.0%

45.0% 45.0%

n = 6F4 igure 1 ? Sourcing Approaches of Blue Prism Clients Figure 1 ?FSioguurrcein1g ?ApSporuoraccihnegs AofpBpluroeaPcrihsmesColifenBtlsue Prism Clients

Copyright ? Hindle, Willcocks, and Lacity 2018



5 5

5

while 23% used RPA-as-a-Serviceii. Given the very positive results Blue Prism clients have achieved compared to more modest market trends, this suggests that building internal capabilities (augmented by expert consultancy) and fostering internal learning at the early stages of deployment are strategic keys to effective RPA performance, rather than leaning heavily on service providers. Drawing on external advisory expertise also seems to be a common and helpful practice.iii We note increasing use of RPA-as-a-service over the last year amongst Blue Prism and non-Blue Prism clients alike.iii

It would seem, then, that Blue Prism clients are seeking long term benefits from owning the RPA solution, and are more willing to pay for the learning curve and resource commitment required (see Figure 2, below). For clients using their BPO or RPA service providers, the benefits include a full suite of integrated services that combine labor arbitrage, process excellence, change management maturity and technology expertise. A downside, of course, is provider-lock in ? switching providers may mean having to re-jig automation with the new provider. We have also seen some BPO providers reluctant to share the full gains and benefits from automation, or adopt less radical kinds of automation to avoid cannibalizing their existing labor arbitrage model.

Comparative Sourcing Options

Benefits: Cons:

Do It Yourself, and DIY + Consultancy

Own the solution Maintain independence (no tool lock-in) Capture all gains Reshoring opportunity in cases of "offshoring fatigue"

Technology learning curve Upfront investment costs Time/cost to build or acquire skills and capabilities; CoE

Service Provider (BPO or RPA)

Bypass learning curve BPOs may be best positioned to "take the robot out of the human" (they already do the work) Providers bring cross-client, cross-industry experience Expert at retraining robots when IT or business environment changes Receive an integrated, managed service

Tool lock-in Benefits shared with BPO provider

Figure 2 - DIY vs. BPO/RPA Service Provider

Copyright ? Hindle, Willcocks, and Lacity 2018



6

How do Blue Prism clients choose RPA providers? Reputation, reference site, and advisor

recommendation are the top three criteria cited, in descending order (see Figure 3, below). Underlying

that overall ranking, a prior relationship with the provider is the strongest relatively weighted decision

fHaocwtor d(folloBwlueed bPyrirsemputcaltieionntsancdhaodovsiesorRrePcAomprmoevinddearsti?on). RTheepruetaistioan,anreofneyrmenocues bsuitsei,neasnsdapahdovrisomr

trheacot mimghetnwdaetliloanpaprlye htheeret:op"Athllrteheingcsritbeeriiangcieteqdu,ainl, ydoeuscdeonbduinsginoersdserw(istheepeFoigpulereyo3u, bkenlow)a. nUdndtreurslyt;inagll

thiantgosvbeerainllgraunkeiqnuga, la, yporuio(rsrteilla) tdioonbsuhsipinwesitsh wthiteh ppreoovpidleeryiosuthkenoswtroanngdetsrut sret...lat"ively weighted decision

factor (followed by reputation and advisor recommendation). There is an anonymous business aphorism

that might well apply here: "All things being equal, you do business with people you know and trust; all

tWhinhgsabteainWgrheautnaterhequethael,TTyOOoPuPth(rsettehillc)rreidteoeribauycosuirnrietoesrgsarnwiaizitahtyiopnoeuouspelrdetoyoocruhgokoanseonwthizeaaRnPdtAitporurosnvti...due"rs(se)?dPleatsoe place in rank chooseordtehr, 1e(fiRrstP),A2 (specornodv), aidnde3 (rt(hsir)d?). Please place in rank-order,

1 (first), 2 (secondTO)P, TaHRnEEdCR3ITE(RtIhA iUrSdED)T.O CHOOSE RPA PROVIDER (N=62)

Radevpiustoartrioenco,Womrredhmfeaerter,ean1nrde(cafeittrihssoeitnt)e,Ta,O2raeP(nsdtehcroenedTc)im,reiastRenanrdkiead3Fiyr(stothuirrTdoim)re.gs Raa0nnkeidzSaectoni5don

Times Ranked Third

Mean Rank

us10ed to15choo2s0e the25

(1=First

RPA

to 3=Third)

3p0 rovid35er(s)4?0

Plea45se

pla50ce

in

rank

top 3 criteria cited, in

REPUTATION

18

16

9

1.79

descending order; underlying TOP THREE CRITERIA USED TO CHOOSE RPA PROVIDER (N=62)

Ratdtrtriw(asfohheeddeeoelltpaavvspaalhittlcgiittuo3sseeiioohtoooowncavvstrrnneretdeetissrrriddtrriooeehhneaandnccbiigllrpplloo,eigyaorrmmrecwwaarericsennsdmmiiftittieptkkeohhereeruiirennnednn;tttlggnhh,aafddua,,citeetaannicieaaovttdpptiienpposooerriloorrrrnntyaiilevvoo)ynaii,irrdddPrnaEeeegnErrRdC

S TTRimOeNs ADVISOR R O M PSATNRYO NR

GRanRkEedF EFiRrsEt N C E E C O MRMEEPNUDT AA GE CROEMF EMREENNDCAE

TSimI TeEs TT II OO NN TSI IOTNE

Ranked Se7cond

0

5

10

57

is the strongest relatively weighted decision factor

A D V I S OF RI NRAENCCOI AMLMREENSDI LAI ETNI OCNE

4 103

(followed by reputation and

Times Ra1n2ked Third

Mean9Rank (1=Firs2t .t0o73=Third)

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

18

9

6

116.84

9

12

7

2.109

2.07

12 9

2.426

1.84

"All9 things1.7b9 eing equal, you do business with people you know and trust; all things being unequal, you still do "dbkAnouloslbiwtnuhesainsinnsgdeswstbsirteuhwisnipttg...ehoe"pqpe(ulaoeanpylo,loenyuo)yuou

advisor recommendation) PR IO R E S TA BLIS HPEEEDRRCEOLAMTPIOA NNYS HRIEPCWO MITMH EPNRDOAVTIDIOENR

59

92 3 1.57 7

2.10

know and trust; all things

Times Ranked First

Prior established

rFelIaNtioAnNshCipI AwLithR provider

E

S

I

L

IFEinNanCcEial

Resili4ence

3

Peer company recommend1at2ion

9

4

5

Advisor rec2o.m42mendation

10

being unequal, you still do Strong referencbe suitesinessRepwutaittiohn people you

7 know and1t8rust..." (anon)

n = 62

Times Ranked Second

2

3

P R ITOimResERSaTnkAeBdLTIhSirHd E D R E L A T I O N S H I P3 W I T H P R O V I D E R 12

9

9 2 7 3 1.57

9 6

12

16

9

9

Mean Rank (1=First to 3=Third)

1.57

2.42

2.10

1.84

2.07

1.79

n = 62

Prior established relationship with

provider

Financial Resilience

Peer company recommendation

Advisor recommendation

Strong reference site

Reputation

Times Ranked First

9

4

5

10

7

18

Times Ranked Second

2

3

9

9

12

16

Figure 3 ? Criteria For Choosing An RPA Provider Times Ranked Third

3

12

7

6

9

9

Mean Rank (1=First to 3=Third)

1.57

2.42

2.10

1.84

2.07

1.79

Figure 3 ? Criteria FFoigr Curheoo3si?ngCrAinteRrPiaAFPororvCidheor osing An RPA Provider

Copyright ? Hindle, Willcocks, and Lacity 2018



77

Tooooll//PPlalatftoformrmSeSelelcetciotinon

There are four major archetypes of process automation technology labeled `RPA' in the marketplace (see Figure 4, below). We see some clear trends: different types of buyers, with differing business and stakeholder objectives, and different technical backgrounds, will buy different kinds of RPA. For example, business operations managers seeking quick wins and independence from the IT queue often go for "recorded" RDA tools (Robotic Desktop Automation). Those wanting to customize the tool heavily, and `own' the technology, tend to go for offerings with extensive software development kits (SDK).

Automation TAeuchtonomloagtyioAnrcTheectyhpneos logy Archetypes

Realm of RPRA ealm of RPA

RealRmealmooff CCAAAI AI

Structured Data StructRurueldesD-abtaased Processes RulesD-beatseerdmPinroicsetiscseOsutcomes

Deterministic Outcomes

Unstructured Data InferencUen-bstaruscetdurePdroDcaetasses ProbabiInlifsetriecnOceu-btcaosemdePsrocesses

Probabilistic Outcomes

Variety of Tools

Desktop Enterprise Professional

RPA Server RPA IT software

development

Desktop RPA

Enterprise

tPoroolfses(sSioDnaKl)

Server RPA

IT software

Copyright ? Lacity and Willcocksde2v0e1lo8pment tools (SDK)

Cloud RPA

Cloud RPA

Copyright ? Lacity and Willcocks 2018

? Unstructured data into information ? Natural language processing ? Reasoning ? Prediction ? VUanrideetyrsotfaTnodoilnsg why events take

?pUlansctreuctured data into information

? Natural language processing

? Reasoning

? Prediction

? Understanding why events take place

Figure 4 ? Four RPA `archetypes'

Figure 4 ? Four RPA `archetypes'

Blue Prism clients express a clear preference for an RPA platform that is scalable, and that provides a secure, enterprise grade solution (see Figure 5, below). Speed to adopt and ease of use are more secondary, with lower priority also given to reusability, auditability, multi-skilling capability and cost. That said, we found Blue Prism clients registering high satisfaction levels on all these criteria, as well as on employee satisfaction, service quality and business value.iv

CoCpyorpigyhritg?htH?inHdlien,dWle,illWcoilclckosc, kasn,daLndacLitayc2it0y128018

knwowwwle.kdngoewclaepdigtaelpcaaprtintaelrpsa. 8 8

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download