Many organizations have invested in in-house automation. This investment has allowed them to see task-level time savings, optimized workflows, and streamlined resource allocation. However, automation that is developed in-house comes with an embedded cost that can erode the initial savings. The cost of managing and updating automated workflows to allow for new firmware and software can be substantial and is not always considered in an initial cost estimate for automation.

The decision to develop internal workflows is a valid one. It allows the organization to maintain control and use internal knowledge to develop customized workflows that are optimally aligned to the organization’s specific use cases. 

However, that internal approach also comes with limitations. Flexibility is assured, but at a substantial maintenance cost and with additional hidden costs that might not always seem obvious. Engineering teams such as the one that develops VxBlock Central Workflow Automation have the support of an extensive, multifunctional organization to ensure that all aspects of the software are fully considered. Scalability, governance, and security risk assessments are part of the overhead of workflow development. These assessments add substantial cost to the development life cycle and can be challenging to manage within the context of customized automation projects. Thousands of engineering hours are spent developing and refining best practices and procedures for the VxBlock Central Automation, ensuring predictable and supported outcomes.

The following figure compares VxBlock Central Workflow Automation with in-house automation based on Dell EMC VxBlock 1000 customer feedback. The figure shows key areas in which VxBlock Central Workflow automation can provide improved outcomes.

Figure 6.  Comparative analysis of VxBlock Central Workflow Automation and in-house software automation