Low Code (LC) and No Code (NC): A View from a No-code Expert about these two worlds.

Gabriel Paunescu is the CEO of Naologic, a company that specialised in no-code platforms that help small and medium-sized businesses build or customise their own applications

Is IT involved again?...

There are two types of people among those who have never tried these solutions:

· One is based on particularly good expectations, so trustful.

· The other type instead is completely distrustful.

Some technical people know the difference between LC & NC, and they also realise that LC can drive you to the point of complexity where Low code platforms will require IT or the external solution provider to write code.

Why?

People are not scared of coding; they are scared of writing lines of code. Users may ask to add/write a snippet here or there. Thus, there is the risk of being tied again to Internal or external IT, with backlogs and rising costs.

Another problem with Low code sits in the way of who and how to create a data model. Between business process owners and technical providers, the former knows exactly the processes and points where documents and reports should come out. While the latter does not. And as happened with ERPs, there is a need for a specialist who can be a business analyst or a consultant.

ROI expectations for LC?

In Gabriel’s opinion, despite what is promised, “10 times faster, 20 times easier, 100 times better“, the return on investment is lower because implementation + consulting can reach 5-6 times the license costs.

Not big players but local ones: what do executives need to evaluate in that case?

Some players could have rebranded their previous experience in delivering: Business Process Management (BPM) and Business Process Mapping Systems.

They could haven’t yet had data intelligence, ready templates, and residual code could be required. As with SQL (SQL is complicated for developers too). An element to check is if they are ready to have plain English written coding and templates.

Automation of processes-RPA

Gabriel’s view about Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is that they are successful because many legacy systems are not well-designed. RPA is used to automate processes that could otherwise be done manually if the software were more flexible and capable of automatically handling specific tasks. In that case, instead of using a robot on the screen (RPA), the process could be automated using APIs (application programming interfaces).

How do you define the resistance level within companies when you implement your solutions?

There has been a shift in the users’ perception of AI and ERP systems with progressive, positive evolution. When AI becomes an integration of ERP systems, resistance decreases, and organisations are more open to embracing this technology. However, he stresses the need for effective data organisation to fully unlock AI’s potential within an ERP system.

Artificial intelligence and the future of AI with legacy systems?

Gabriel believes that AI should be available within an ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) system at the points of need. Instead of exporting and importing data files, users should be able to click a button or ask questions within their ERP system to access AI capabilities. The goal is to make AI easily accessible and valuable to employees who are performing processes.

Thank you @Gabriel, for your precious time and insights that can help a critical reflection for Consultants, CEO or Managing directors and Executives looking for elements to facilitate their decision-making process.

Thank you, Gabriel, for your insights!