undefined | Better HN

0 pointsethbr05y ago0 comments

The most beneficial model I've come up with was a cooperative one, where RPA is the wireframe / prototype of business automation requests to IT.

IT promise to business: "You can use RPA if we tell you we can't build a thing in time."

Business promise to IT: "We'll turn off RPA at such time as you deliver us a working solution."

And then be very particular that business needs to have documentation of their RPA in order to implement in production (business process / ask, notsomuch technical).

This accomplishes a few positive things: (1) takes {insert dumb / hard / bad ROI business request off IT's priority plate}, (2) forces business to think about what they actually want, (3) forces business to document what they actually want, (4) provides business the flexibility to change their automation, when the realize they don't want what they thought they wanted, & (5) burns not-developer time learning all the intricacies and quirks of {legacy software / website / data}.

In the end, when IT comes back around knocking, their business counterparts actually have gasp documentation. And furthermore, documentation that's actually been battle tested and seen prod systems & data.

(It's an admittance that most IT projects fail not for lack of technical feasibility, but for incomplete or shifting specs)

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

ajcp5y ago· 2 in thread

>IT promise to business: "You can use RPA if we tell you we can't build a thing in time." > >Business promise to IT: "We'll turn off RPA at such time as you deliver us a working solution."

This is the _whole_ life-cycle of a correct RPA implementation. The only successful RPA automation is the one that gets turned off because it has been solved for in the enterprise application level.

Mister_Snuggles5y ago

In my experience, the lifecycle is more like:

* Person in the business area implements RPA. Business area is happy.

* Person who implemented RPA moves on to greener pastures.

* RPA breaks, business area calls IT.

* IT is horrified at the unsupportable mess that's just been dropped in their laps.

jwally5y ago

1000% this.

I’ve seen it happen with excel, access sql-server; and RPA. Some some Frankenstein’s monster is cobbled together to solve a problem whose best solution would be “stop producing the report that nobody looks at” only to have it slowly decay out of orbit.

The other major flaw with RPA is non-engineering LOB employees (in my experience) are incredibly myopic and implement solutions to get shit done now without thought about future consequences of their decisions. They try to replicate the 800 steps they take to make something work instead of asking “more steps adds opportunity for failure; what is the minimum I need to do to reach goal”.

/soapbox (Sorry)

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse