The total investment will be lower, not because lower cost resources are used, but because effort itself is far lower. This affordability is not just for the initial investment but also for maintenance support and modifications applicable throughout the life cycle of usage of the software over years and sometimes even decades.
In conventional approaches to development, the time taken to gain from the software investment is far longer, often leading a competitive disadvantage. RPA reduces timeframes to almost 50% compared to conventional approaches
Multiple visual reviews and a rigorous specifications approach using www.SpecMyApp.com ensures that the solutions is exactly in line with what the business needs. In conventional approaches, users get to see the solutions only during the Acceptance Testing Stage. Here users get to review the application in its visual and near ready form at prototyping stage itself, avoiding deviations very early in the cycle.
Teams can work from anywhere. User teams, business analysts, designers, developers, testers and implementation consultants can perform from their own respective locations by leveraging the delivery tools that are available for all stages of the life cycle. Hence one can get the best resources at the most optimum prices
In areas which are common across organizations - like financial accounting, payroll, human resources, inventory, RPA leverages the standard products available from KServe (KServeERP, KServeHRMS) , or can integrate with proven mass sold products already available in the market. In addition RPA has a large number of productivity utilities in areas like workflow, role and user management, dashboards, reporting utilities, alerting mechanisms, help texts that have been accumulated in over a decade of market presence. Hence delivery usually involves assembly of reusable components and very little development.
Longer cycles and more complexity in the conventional development process often leads to loop backs and risks. Since there are multiple groups involved in the delivery process, from specifications, design, development, testing, deployment, implementation, risk levels are higher in traditional as well as agile approaches. All the points mentioned previously contribute significantly to lower risk in the RPA approach. Project risk levels are reduced so much that success is almost guaranteed.
If you have a product that fits your business well, Rapid Personalized Assembly (RPA) is not the better option. Go for the product that provides you a near 100% fit. However, if you don’t find a product that fits your business, RPA is better for the following reasons
When the product does not fit it usually leads to force fitting. Force fittings make users very unhappy. They have to perform multiple manual steps to perform any task on a recurring basis, reducing productivity and increasing errors.
Customization of a product is usually bad because the code is not maintainable and usually difficult to upgrade
Many businesses have unique business practices that are lost by the introduction of generic products. With a generic product, you are only as good as your competitor since they can also implement the same product. Here you could adapt your processes to these practices and gain a business advantage
Common best practices in generic and backbone areas like accounting, hr, payroll, inventory and such areas can still be leveraged by using back bone products like KServe (KServeERP, KServeHRMS) from Kallos Solutions or from other products which are mass sold in the market.
In case the vendor shuts shop, sells itself to or is unable to support, you will be forced to migrate fast. This is very difficult in enterprise environments. With RPA you don’t have to depend on the vendor, including Kallos since the solution is developed for you.