Is default automation phases of business review, technical review, development and live customisable?
An alternative automation phase would look like:
- Development - Citizen developers have already identified and started bot building immediately
2a. Business Review - Citizen developers submit to CoE business lead for business justification, time-savings, etc.
2b. Technical Review - Citizen developers submit to CoE technical lead for code review (compliance to organisational standards, security, etc.)
- Live or Production Monitoring - Citizen developers are notify if issues arise with production bots
Development started first because the ROI (time-savings, etc.) may changed or original business justification may change. Citizen developer may re-engineer process steps/tasks during bot development phase. Where the citizen developers are assigned by business unit, there is lesser need to get business unit approval before commencing work. Citizen developers work in collaboration with business unit process owners or citizen developer is the business unit process owner.
With Governance policies and Workflow Analyzer, citizen developers can build bots with some assurance that it is already compliance with standards.
Live: approved bots are shared centrally for all CoE team members, before starting an RPA project, CoE team members query the approved bots list, bot snippets, libraries, in-house frameworks, etc. for bot reuse or adaptation.
Technical Review: can also download and refactor existing bots, upload libraries (Object Repository), bot snippets, etc.
Business Review: submit their RPA blueprint for purposes of:
- tracking process identification… etc.
- assigning identified process to citizen developers