Abstract
Robotic process automation (RPA) is a technology that is presented as a universal tool that solves major problems of modern businesses. It aims to reduce costs, improve quality and create customer value. However, the business reality differs from this aspiration. After interviews with managers, we found that implementation of robots does not always lead to the assumed effect and some robots are subsequently withdrawn from companies. In consequence, people take over robotized tasks to perform them manually again, and in practice, replace back robots—what we call ‘re-manualization’. Unfortunately, companies do not seem to be aware of this possibility until they experience it on their own, to the best of our knowledge, no previous research described or analysed this phenomenon so far. This lack of awareness, however, may pose risks and even be harmful for organizations. In this paper, we present an exploratory study. We used individual interviews, group discussions with managers experienced in RPA, and secondary data analysis to elaborate on the re-manualization phenomenon. As a result, we found four types of ‘cause and effect’ narrations that reflect reasons for this to occur: (1) overenthusiasm for RPA, (2) low awareness and fear of robots, (3) legal or supply change and (4) code faults.
This research is part of the projects PID2019-105455GB-C31 and RTI2018-101204-B-C22 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033/and ERDF A way of making Europe; grant P18-FR-2895 funded by Junta de Andalucía/FEDER, UE; and grant US-1381595 (US/JUNTA/FEDER, UE).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Syed, R., et al.: Robotic process automation: contemporary themes and challenges. Comput. Ind. 115, 1–15 (2020)
Aguirre, S., Rodriguez, A.: Automation of a business process using robotic process automation (RPA): a case study. In: Figueroa-García, J.C., López-Santana, E.R., Villa-Ramírez, J.L., Ferro-Escobar, R. (eds.) WEA 2017. CCIS, vol. 742, pp. 65–71. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66963-2_7
Lacity, M., Khan, S., Carmel, E.: Employing U.S. military families to provide business process outsourcing services: a case study of impact sourcing and reshoring. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 39, 150–175 (2016)
Richards, G., Yeoh, W., Chong, A.Y.L., Popovič, A.: Business intelligence effectiveness and corporate performance management: an empirical analysis. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 59, 188–196 (2019)
Sun, H., Ha, W., Teh, P.L., Huang, J.: A case study on implementing modularity in software development. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 57, 130–138 (2017)
Choi, J., Nazareth, D.L., Ngo-Ye, T.L.: The effect of innovation characteristics on cloud computing diffusion. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 58, 325–333 (2018)
Stople, A., Steinsund, H., Iden, J.: Lightweight it and the it function: experiences from robotic process automation in a norwegian bank. Bibsys Open J. Syst. 25, 1–11 (2017)
Kedziora, D., Kiviranta, H.M.: Digital business value creation with robotic process automation (RPA) in northern and central Europe. Management 13, 161–174 (2018)
Hallikainen, P., Bekkhus, R., Pan, S.L.: How opuscapita used internal RPA capabilities to offer services to clients. MIS Q. Exec. 17, 41–52 (2018)
Ratia, M., Myllärniemi, J., Helander, N.: Robotic process automation - creating value by digitalizing work in the private healthcare?, vol. 18, pp. 222–227 (2018)
Anagnoste, S.: Robotic automation process - the next major revolution in terms of back office operations improvement. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, vol. 11, pp. 676–686 (2017)
Fung, H.P.: Criteria, use cases and effects of information technology process automation (ITPA). Adv. Robot. Autom. 3 (2013)
Mendling, J., Decker, G., Reijers, H.A., Hull, R., Weber, I.: How do machine learning, robotic process automation, and blockchains affect the human factor in business process management? Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 43, 297–320 (2018)
Clair, C.L.: Building a center of expertise to support robotic automation preparing for the life cycle of business change. Technical report, Forrester (2014)
Tsaih, R.H., Hsu, C.C.: Artificial intelligence in smart tourism: a conceptual framework, vol. 89, pp. 2–6 (2018)
Czarnecki, C., Auth, G.: Prozessdigitalisierung durch robotic process automation (2018)
Holder, C., Khurana, V., Hook, J., Bacon, G., Day, R.: Robotics and law: key legal and regulatory implications of the robotics age (Part II of II). Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 32, 557–576 (2016)
Schatsky, D., Muraskin, C.: Robotic process automation. a path to the cognitive enterprise. Technical report, Deloitte University Press (2016)
Kanellou, A., Spathis, C.: Accounting benefits and satisfaction in an ERP environment. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 14, 209–234 (2013)
EverestResearchGroup: Robotic process automation (RPA) annual report 2018 - creating business value in a digital-first world. Technical report, ERG (2016)
Report: artificial intelligence is winning more hearts & minds in the workplace. Technical report, Oracle and Future Workplace (2019)
IT-CentralStation: Why do RPA project fail? And how to avoid it? Paper peer report. Technical report, ITCS (2019)
Wright, D., Witherick, D., Gordeeva, M.: The robots are ready. Are you? Untapped advantage in your digital workforce. Technical report, Deloitte (2017)
Leopold, H., van der Aa, H., Reijers, H.A.: Identifying candidate tasks for robotic process automation in textual process descriptions, vol. 318, pp. 67–81 (2018)
Kirchmer, M.: Robotic process automation - pragmatic solution or dangerous illusion. Technical report, University of Pennsylvania (2017)
Lamberton, C., Brigo, D., Hoy, D.: Impact of robotics, RPA and AI on the insurance industry: challenges and opportunities. J. Financ. Perspect. 4, 8–20 (2017)
Czarniawska, B.: Social Science Research, From Field to Desk (2014)
Taylor, S., Land, C.: Organizational anonymity and the negotiation of research access. Qual. Res. Organ. Manag. 9, 98–109 (2014)
Burnard, P.: A method of analysing interview transcripts in qualitative research. Nurse Educ. Today 11, 461–466 (1991)
Jones, S.E., Park, R.L.: Against technology: from the luddites to neo-luddism. Phys. Today 60, 59 (2007)
Baum, S.D.: Superintelligence skepticism as a political tool. Information 9, 1–16 (2018)
Lennerfors, T.T., Fors, P., van Rooijen, J.: ICT and environmental sustainability in a changing society: the view of ecological world systems theory. Inf. Technol. People 28, 758–774 (2015)
Scott, W.R., Davis, G.F.: Organizations and organizing: rational, natural and open systems perspectives (2015)
Amaeshi, K.M., Crane, A.: Stakeholder engagement: a mechanism for sustainable aviation. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 13, 245–260 (2006)
Norton, M.I., Mochon, D., Ariely, D.: The IKEA effect: when labor leads to love. J. Consum. Psychol. 22, 453–460 (2012)
Coombs, W.T., Holladay, S.J.: The Handbook of Crisis Communication (2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Modliński, A., Kedziora, D., Jiménez Ramírez, A., del-Río-Ortega, A. (2022). Rolling Back to Manual Work: An Exploratory Research on Robotic Process Re-Manualization. In: Marrella, A., et al. Business Process Management: Blockchain, Robotic Process Automation, and Central and Eastern Europe Forum. BPM 2022. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 459. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16168-1_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16168-1_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-16167-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-16168-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)