As a form of automation, the same concept has been around for a long time in the form of screen scraping but RPA is considered to be a significant technological evolution of this technique in the sense that new software platforms are emerging which are sufficiently mature, resilient, scalable and reliable to make this approach viable for use in large enterprises (who would otherwise be reluctant due to perceived risks to quality and reputation).
By way of illustration of how far the technology has developed since its early form in screen scraping, it is useful to consider the example cited in one academic study. Users of one platform at Xchanging - a UK-based global company which provides business processing, technology and procurement services across the globe - anthropomorphized their robot into a co-worker named "Poppy" and even invited "her" to the Christmas party. Such an illustration perhaps serves to demonstrate the level of intuition, engagement and ease of use of modern RPA technology platforms, that leads their users (or "trainers") to relate to them as beings rather than abstract software services. The "code free" nature of RPA (described below) is just one of a number of significant differentiating features of RPA vs. screen scraping.
Software robots interpret the user interface of third party applications and are configured to execute steps identically to a human user. They are configured (or "trained") using demonstrative steps, rather than being programmed using code-based instructions. This is an important concept in the RPA market because the intention is not to provide another "coding" platform for IT users (who already have the benefit of mature and tested software development and middleware platforms). Rather, the intention is to provide an agile and configurable capability to non-technical "business" users in operational departments. The paradigm, in summary, is that a software robot should be a virtual worker who can be rapidly "trained" (or configured) by a business user in an intuitive manner which is akin to how an operational user would train a human colleague.
The benefit of this approach is twofold. Firstly it enables operations departments to self serve. Secondly, it frees up the limited and valuable skills of IT professionals to concentrate on more strategic IT implementations such as ERP and BPMS rollouts. Such programs are often upheld as being transformational in nature, delivering huge returns in the medium to long term, whereas RPA is typically focused on immediate operational effectiveness, quality and cost efficiency. RPA is classically seen therefore as complementary to existing automation initiatives.
According to Harvard Business Review, most operations groups adopting RPA have promised their employees that automation would not result in layoffs. Instead, workers have been redeployed to do more interesting work. One academic study highlighted that knowledge workers did not feel threatened by automation: they embraced it and viewed the robots as team-mates. The same study highlighted that, rather than resulting in a lower "headcount", the technology was deployed in such a way as to achieve more work and greater productivity with the same number of people.
Conversely however, some analysts proffer that RPA represents a threat to the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) industry. The thesis behind this notion is that RPA will enable enterprises to "repatriate" processes from offshore locations into local data centers, with the benefit of this new technology. The effect, if true, will be to create high value jobs for skilled process designers in onshore locations (and within the associated supply chain of IT hardware, data center management, etc.) but to decrease the available opportunity to low skilled workers offshore. On the other hand, this discussion appears to be healthy ground for debate as another academic study was at pains to counter the so-called "myth" that RPA will bring back many jobs from offshore.