How to Survive in the Robotic Process Automation Skills Market
Robotic Process Automation, Intelligent Automation, Rapid Automation; everyone is talking about it, but very few have got it right yet when it comes to hiring.
As Rob King pointed out in his recent article on the key roles that make up a centre of excellence, https://bit.ly/2pZdDR0 there are essentially 6 roles needed to start out on your RPA journey. In our view, there is not one correct way to hire into these positions, but it is important to take a strategic view on the variability of demand and cost of these resources to ensure you are able to attract, reward and retain the limited pool of talent that does exist.
The market for skills in RPA is following a typical niche skills curve. People are being unskilled by their current employer, getting certified, working a few lifecycles, and going contracting. There is no escaping the fact that these skills are at a premium right now, and anyone being certified internally may end up leaving and chasing the money as soon as they get the letters against their name.
So how do you ensure you can compete in this skills market?
The first thing is to map the skills needed to set up a CoE and figure out where to attack the external market, where to utilise the SI’s, and when to benefit from skills you already have internally.
Simplistically, if the skills are:
Volatile and Core to your Business – Partner with consulting firms or SI’s who can provide expertise, flexibility and a bench.
Volatile and a Commodity – Use external contractors to deal with peaks in demand
Sustained and Core to the Business – Build your team internally. Develop the skills of your perm employees
Sustained and a Commodity – Buy the service through third party contractors
You are going to need to attract or promote an RPA leader to lead a centre of excellence and provide the strategy and vision for RPA. These people cost money, and have plenty of options on the table, so you need to make your proposition compelling and move quick.
You should be able to up skill current business analyst’s / process analyst’s to create the criteria around opportunity identification, but be conscious that these people will quickly be on the radar or the competition and recruiters. What are you going to do to keep them with you?
Architecture, tech stack and development will either need to be satisfied via your System Integrator relationships, or the external skills market. If you have deep pockets, the advisory firms should be able to provide you with a wraparound service, but for a product that sells itself largely on how intuitive and simple it is to automate a process, this cost may be prohibitive for most, and will certainly remain the preserve of the enterprise.
If you do decide to dip a toe in the water of the external skills market, you need to remain focussed on how your business is being portrayed to the candidate community. Every interaction that you, your HR, internal recruitment, or a staffing business, has with a candidate, has a real impact on your ability to hire RPA experts.
A scatter gun approach to recruitment and a lack of prioritisation in the hiring process will never be successful when candidates are so in demand. You need to ensure that you have a single, dedicated voice to the market; a partner who can tell the story of the opportunity in a compelling way and ensure that your attraction and on-boarding process is slick and effective, whilst working with you to forecast future demand, ensuring an enduring pipeline of the right talent when you need to scale.
In such a rapidly evolving and in-demand market, you either prioritise your talent strategy or lose ground to your competition as RPA initiatives move on at a pace.
Automation, Innovation & Thought Leader
7 年Having a leader with the vision, drive and passion is a key ingredient - whilst these qualities can be instilled in someone, someone who has these qualities naturally will stand head and shoulders above others and be visibly seen as a leader. Many of the other skills can be grown in-house and from that point of view, I echo what others have said that RPA is not new or particularly difficult to learn. If you are a good BA, then you are not a million miles from being an RPA BA. Having strong mentors and coaches within the organization to allow & encourage in-house resources to develop the required skills, is an important capability to have, within an organization that wants to do RPA in a sustainable fashion.
Global Leader -Financial Services at Mphasis
7 年David - Since RPA is not a New Innovation. Setting up a COE and post that trying to drive is way old approach. This has not been successful a lot. The innovation in the way solution is approached is the key. Solutioning is the key for the success of RPA deployment. Once you set up the COE the other stake holders feels left out and post that it becomes a war of doers and not doers
Head Of Solutions specializing in Intelligent Automation at Virtual Operations
7 年Totally agree with Francis Carden! RPA, like any other technical business initiative needs to be approached as a proper project. This includes resourcing, infrastructure, planning governance and reporting to name but a few. I am allergic to the sales hype that says "its easy .. any one can do it". I have seen organisations which have trained small armies of graduate level people, and then said "go and automate everything" ... Imagine what happens there! Like everything else - it's easy when you know what you are doing! .... As the article says - getting the blend of resource skills correct is paramount for success. At the core of the team you will need technical people with process, software development and database skills. These people will create the foundation of RPA within the organisation, and also provide support, mentoring and coaching to the graduate level folks, and also those business SMEs who are cross-training to be RPA experts. In my opinion, "Dive in and Do", is the best approach. Other organisations try to boil the ocean and plan everything - What's wrong with automating 70% of a big process, and leave the complex bits for later, or in the realms of human colleagues?
Analysis.Tech | Analyst | CEO, Founder, Automation Den | Keynote Speaker | Thought Leader | LOWCODE | NOCODE | GenAi | Godfather of RPA | Inventor of Neuronomous| UX Guru | Investor | Podcaster
7 年Rob, I concur that we should applaud organizations for trying but RPA is not new and there is clearly a right and wrong way to do it. Every week, I'm seeing companies coming to me after "trying" for a year or two who reach a fraction of the promised bots they were led to believe they could have deployed. That time is a significant lost opportunit.
Delivering Transformation through Business Improvement, Change and Innovation, developing and executing strategy for Information Governance, Digital Transformation and Robotic Automation.
7 年It agree with your sentiment Francis Carden but I equally applaud organisations who test and learn, which means sometimes getting it wrong. "Do it right or don't do it at all" is a bit too strong for me personally because I feel it's better to get started than do nothing at all. Having said that, there is far more experience on good practices to call upon and I support wholeheartedly that means a CoE with the right mix of skills and leadership. Also, thanks for the link to my article David Otter