Automation is the new über buzzword. This is ironic since automation has long been the primary driver of technology adoption.
The very first computer, in fact, was called a “computer” because it automated the job of long-hand math calculation that people, called computers, did as their job.
The vast majority of how organizations use digital technologies today is still in service of automating otherwise manual tasks and processes. Therefore, it’s doubly ironic that some of these technologies (such as robotic process automation, or RPA) seem to be attempting to corner the market on using the automation moniker, as if it’s the only type of automation that exists.
The issue is about more than lexicology, however.
Automation began as a relatively mundane way to improve efficiency and reduce costs by applying technology to manual tasks. But the advent of digital transformation and the fact that automation now powers virtually every aspect of how organizations function and compete has transformed automation into a business-critical activity — and something far too important to be constrained to a one-dimensional form.
The RPA Distortion Field
We probably wouldn’t have been having this conversation just a few short years ago. Until the meteoric rise of RPA, the term automation was primarily used in a generic sense. If you were applying technology to a problem, you were automating it.
But because the “A” of RPA stood for automation, and the fact that it offered a cool-sounding solution to a long-intractable problem (namely, automating manual tasks performed on legacy systems), the industry gladly co-opted the term as short-hand for their particular brand of automation. Unsurprisingly, other forms of one-dimensional automation soon followed suit.
And there’s no question that RPA delivered real and immediate value for organizations that were struggling to adapt while burdened by the weight of these generation-ago systems.
However, the success of RPA created a distortion field in which all automation was somehow conflated with RPA and vice versa — and that’s a problem.
The funny part about it is that you don’t need to dig very far beneath the surface to recognize the fallacy of this particular foible.
We experience countless forms of automation in our daily lives — everything from the smart assistants in our home (or watch) to a fully automated McDonalds drive-thru.
Not only do none of these examples involve RPA, but unless you work with RPA systems directly, there’s a pretty good chance you’ve never interacted with an RPA-bot.
The fact is that RPA is just one form of automation and, despite all the hype, one that only automates a small part of the enterprise business process stream.
And that last fact is why focusing exclusively on it (or any other one-dimensional view) when you think of automation leaves you at risk of missing the more significant opportunity.
Taking an End-to-End and Orchestrated View of Automation
RPA and other one-dimensional views of automation focus on applying technology to automate a single task or small group of tasks, such as processing incoming invoice payments, for example.
While this task-oriented approach to automation has a long history, it was primarily a function of the limits of technology. By focusing on a small set of discrete actions, technologists were more likely to create automations that functioned effectively and reliably. Step too far afield, and things were prone to go awry (you wouldn’t want that payment processing bot to handle quote processing, for instance).
But that doesn’t mean that automation should be limited to this task orientation.
Taking this task-centric approach rapidly runs into both limitations and challenges. The reality is that business processes are tightly interrelated and interwoven throughout an organization’s operating model. Staying with our example, both payment processing and quote processing are part of your end-to-end quote-to-cash business process. Automating one small element of that process will drive a degree of efficiency — but multiplying that automation across the end-to-end business process delivers exponential results.
This exponential gain is the result of two factors. First, the most egregious inefficiencies almost always exist in the hand-offs between process elements (think of a baton pass in a relay race). Automating end-to-end allows you to address those critical process junctions.
Second, and more importantly, the value of a business process is often greater than the sum of its parts — particularly if that business process results in a direct or indirect customer interaction (which is most of them). The value of those business processes and their impact on the customer or employee experience is often greater than any task-driven efficiency gain.
From both an optimization and experiential perspective, therefore, an end-to-end automation is almost always going to deliver better returns than a task-oriented automation. But this type of end-to-end automation is challenging — part of the reason most technologies don’t attempt to tackle it.
That’s why the key to delivering this type of end-to-end automation is bringing the various forms of automation together and orchestrating them to provide that exponential value. And central to this proposition is the ability to seamlessly integrate those automations at both a technical and process level.
The Intellyx Take: Choosing the Right Tool for Your Automation Job
Imagine building a house with only a hammer at your disposal. Or make it a saw — or any one tool of your choosing. It just can’t be done. Or if you do it, make sure you let me know, so I never step inside!
In virtually no part of our lives do we rely on a single tool to do every type of job (my kitchen drawer full of gadgets is proof positive if you’re somehow on the fence!). So, you definitely shouldn’t think in these terms when it comes to automation.
Instead, you need to expand your view of automation and the transformational role it can — and should — play in your organization.
By starting with an end-to-end and orchestration-first perspective — what some call enterprise automation — you will see the full value that automation can offer. This need to take an orchestration-first approach is why many organizations are turning to companies, such as Workato, that are delivering on the enterprise automation promise.
More importantly, this top-down, outside-in perspective will enable you to both prioritize your automation investments and ensure that you’re choosing the right automation tool for the right part of your end-to-end automation.
While you may not (and probably won’t) implement your end-to-end automation all at once, taking this longer view will position you to best leverage your efforts to drive both short-term and long-term value throughout your automation journey.
Copyright © Intellyx LLC. Workato is an Intellyx client. None of the other companies mentioned in this article are Intellyx clients. Intellyx retains full editorial control over the content of this paper. Image credit: David B. Gleason.
Comments
Comments are closed.