I use the solution in different ways. There are different ways to deal with the documents and extract data using OCRs, et cetera. I focus on document understanding with machine learning capabilities baked into it.
I have worked on different types of documents. Both structured and unstructured documents as well as purchase orders, invoices, and time sheets as well. Depending on the type of the document or form, the solution would be different. If we have a structured document to retrieve the known information, then that would be easy. We would just use regular methods and simple extraction methods to get the data. However, if the documents are unstructured and the formats of those documents are different, that's where we would be using understanding and machine learning capabilities.
I've used it in healthcare, finance, and investments.
We're dealing with multiple vendors right now. When we deal with multiple vendors, each vendor has different structures for documents, and some of them provide data within papers while some of them provide just data as paragraphs. So for each of those types of documents, we have to extend the data based on the need.
How much the process is automated depends on the use case. It depends on the scenarios of the different types of formats of users. Sometimes there are different functionalities that we have to use within UiPath. If we're using Action Center, we probably would be able to automate almost all documents and that's where we would need users' input to validate the right information. In any case, we would be able to automate the majority of the documents since the bot would be able to expand the data. In such cases, the process might be longer. That's where we have to spend more time. However, if the documents are structured, it would be very easy for us to identify the data in those documents and then build the workflows.
The ability of UiPath to handle variant document formats, including handwriting is decent. Extracting the data is fine. However, it depends on what solution you implement and how much time you are ready to spend to implement that solution. If we have a plan to involve the Action Center within the solution, then that's where we would need a few inputs from the users to make sure that the automation is working fine, and that's where you would be able to achieve the majority of the success rate. However, if it is something that we just want to automate and we don't want to involve humans in it, then that's where we might result in a few exceptions as the data might not be right. That's where we would face some challenges.
The machine learning capabilities have been quite fine. We've been able to digitize and classify documents and use them in our processes. That said, when compared to AI fabric, that's where we need to spend more time creating our own packages for it and then deploying those packages into the workflows. We need to make sure that we have a handle on all the documents.
I have found that 70% to 80% human validation is needed if we are trying to deal with sensitive data or if we are trying to deal with some confidential data. In those cases, we need to make sure that all the data is right. So as long as the document is structured and is well defined, and well-formatted, we might leave it 100% to automation. If any of these details are confidential or if any of these details require evaluation, then we will need user interaction.
The validation process can be pretty quick. A code document doesn't take much time. It depends on the data. In any use case, I need to extract more than ten or 12 fields. If we're dealing with that number of fields, I'd estimate we need between two to 22 minutes.
The Average Handle Time, the AHT, depends on the cases. If there's no human involvement, then it would definitely take less time. If there's human involvement, the product could at least reduce the effort. The human involvement may drop from 20 to 30 steps down to one and they are just needed for validation. That scenario shows UiPath as a great time saver. Initially, we used to take 15 to 20 minutes to work on a document. Now, with automation, it might only take two to three minutes. It saves 65% to 75% in terms of time.
There's still a chance of human error or tasks taking a few minutes as users would need to input some data into the document in the Action Center. That said, there is definitely a reduction and less of a chance of human errors over there.
It's helped us free up time for other staff projects. That's the intention of implementing automation. Users can reduce their time on tedious tasks and focus on more important business needs.
Document understanding works fine, however, it depends on what information you are providing it with. If the data is right, the data is good, however, in cases where the data is not right, it gets a bit difficult.
They could work on the digitizing and classification of documents. That would play a major role in document understanding since that's where we need to make sure that bots are able to extract data from multiple formats or multiple structures of the documents. The better they get at data extraction, the better we can automate.
I've used the solution for two and a half years.
I have worked on different use cases. There was one use case where I just worked on a similar type of document that had data entries for more than 300 to 400 users. I have worked with more than 400 to 500 documents of different formats and different sources. That's where I had to use machine learning packages. Right now, we are working on documents, with set formats and different structures, however, the volume of the documents is about 400 to 500.
They have a good technical team that supports the needs of the developers.
It could actually take one year if you consider the effort which we had put into building that solution as well. We have a few developers working on it. We wouldn't see a return on investment within eight to ten months as we would just be starting with building the processes.
We have witnessed some ROI. For example, it reduces review work from 60% to 70%. That's where the full-time employees would definitely save their time and can then focus on much more important business needs, which could help them get more projects or increase revenue as well. That's where you would see the most ROI.
It definitely reduces the hours of work. The bots have the potential to also cover offline hours.
While it depends on the use cases, the document understanding is good. I'd rate it eight out of ten.