UiPath Platform Reviews

We primarily work with banking clients at a high level, automating solution points, nodes, and bot processes to reduce demand. For example, if a task was previously performed by a hundred people, we have now limited it to around five to ten people by implementing automation to closely monitor the bots in real-time to ensure their effectiveness.

Building automation using UiPath is easy and in most cases can be done with a single click. There is no need to write coding. We can insert and delete columns or remove duplicate frames easily. 

We have already implemented a couple of solutions, one of which is a maintenance automation database. The users of the database want to send emails with attached files and other artifacts, and previously this was done manually. Each day, up to 300-500 items were manually processed by 50-60 people who would navigate to a separate application, search for the file, upload it, and send the email. This was a tedious task and accuracy and reliability were questionable, requiring manual verification. This process was repeated monthly for around 10,000-12,000 items, taking around 25-30 days to complete. We automated this process and provided a high-level solution initially, which was later built, bought, and deployed. The bot we created is capable of processing 900-950 items per day, meaning that all 10,000 items can be processed within eight to ten days. This reduces the processing time by one-third and the cost from 100 to around 12 months, as we only need three to four rotational shifts to monitor the bot. Sometimes the bot may disconnect or encounter issues beyond our control, but we address these promptly to reinstate the process. This is the work we are doing in our organization.

End-to-end automation is a crucial aspect of completing tasks within the specified time frame. Clients do not want to wait for extended periods, such as a month or two, and prefer to see progress at least one-third or one-fourth of the way through. This ensures that clients are not preoccupied with a single task and can focus on improving their business while also increasing accuracy. UiPath aims to provide clients with a high return on investment from both the software build and business development perspectives. This is achieved by delivering effective solutions that meet clients' needs.

We are satisfied with UiPath's community. Occasionally, we encounter some queries or doubts, such as whether we should use a particular feature or MAC code, or whether we can use a certain file. While we cannot always rely on direct support for such minor issues, we found that the UiPath community can be a helpful resource. We search for similar issues that other users may have faced and posted about, and we often find solutions to our questions in a timely manner. Overall, we find the UiPath community to be effective and useful.

UiPath has helped our client reduce their on-premises footprint. This decision is purely based on the client's interests and has nothing to do with our personal or company interests. Generally, clients prefer cloud integration as they want their systems to be up and running 99.9 percent of the time. However, sometimes they may opt for on-premises solutions based on the CDRT of a particular application, which refers to the sensitivity of the data involved. We have some limited automation that deals with sensitive information, such as credit-related automation, which the client cannot access. In such cases, clients may prefer an on-premises solution, but overall, cloud integration is becoming more important.

With the implementation of AI, we can utilize UiPath for automation, which is more dependable.

UiPath reduces the cost of digital transformation.

Our clients are highly satisfied with the nearly 99 percent reduction in human error achieved through the use of UiPath. This includes both individual and team errors. However, during the development phase, some human input was necessary to create rules for the bot to follow. Any potential issues were identified and resolved during testing by our IT and testing teams. Overall, our clients are pleased with the system's reliability and performance.

The architecture of UiPath is a unique feature compared to other solutions. 

The ease of integration is a valuable feature.

Debugging files is easy to do using UiPath.

Some of our customers have experienced performance issues after the latest update.

The licensing cost is high and has room for improvement.

Some of the APA integrations are complicated and have room for improvement.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

In general, UiPath is a stable platform. However, the performance tends to slow down frequently after updates.

UiPath is scalable.

The technical support and documentation are good.

Positive

In 2017 and 2018, we utilized Blue Prism in the preliminary stage. However, we subsequently discovered that it was not appropriate for our clients due to its intricate architecture and high cost compared to UiPath. UiPath, on the other hand, offers a more user-friendly experience by integrating everything into a single platform.

The initial setup can be described as neither straightforward nor complex. I give the initial setup a five out of ten. We experience smooth operation once we finish setting up and deploying. If a person has three to four years of experience and is familiar with all the necessary processes for deployment, I believe that only one or two people, excluding the developer and tester, are needed to deploy the entire package to the host. Sometimes even just one person can handle the task, but we can assume two people will be sufficient. They will be deploying the product on the cloud, as there is a single package that has been moved from the latest enrollment.

We implement UiPath for our customers.

UiPath has been instrumental in saving our customers money, which is the primary reason why they have adopted it. Instead of using the traditional method, UiPath's automation has streamlined processes for over 10,000 products, leading to a reduction in manpower by almost 90 percent. This has significantly decreased the turnaround time from 28 days to 12 days, making clients exceedingly satisfied and unwilling to risk their business due to potential delays. As a result, UiPath has provided us with a tenfold return on investment.

The licensing cost is high.

I give UiPath a nine out of ten.

UiPath does not require maintenance, however, it does require a person to monitor the bot and ensure that it is functioning properly.

UiPath's architecture is simple and straightforward. I recommend the solution.

We use it for handling processes that involve human effort savings. We are currently focusing on processes and problems that our users are facing in their day-to-day activities. It is used for the automation of business problems that are repetitive and error-oriented with a huge number of users working on them. We list down a set of processes where users are spending a lot of time, then we verify whether the use case is valid for automation using RPA. Once that is complete, we start programming the bot based on the requirements given by the user. We try to mimic each and every action performed by a human being by using UiPath Studio. It replicates what a human being does.

In terms of setup, the development happens in Studio that's on-premise, but the deployment of the robots is done on the cloud. They have their own cloud service called Orchestrator. UiPath hosts that, and it is available at cloud.uipath.com. It is basically the UiPath Cloud. The interface is completely handled by UiPath.

The biggest benefit is that before implementing automation, the users were spending a lot of time doing mundane and manual activities. Implementing the robotic process automation for processes that they were involved in helped them to avoid doing these manual activities and focus on more value-added processes. On the whole, it has helped the users to spend their time more wisely and also get more benefits for the same time spent. It helps us to improve user satisfaction by improving their working methodology because they are only doing things that are value-adding.

We are automating all the manual activities that can be successfully handled by the robots. So, the users are really happy, and we are getting good feedback from the users in terms of time savings. We are also achieving 100% accuracy in the output, which was not the case when the users were performing these actions. When they were performing the actions, the users had to validate the outputs, and the outputs were not as per the requirement. There used to be an error rate of at least 10% to 15%, but with automation, the error rate has been reduced to zero. So, the removal of manual activity and the reduction of the error rate to zero are two of the main benefits.

We are using it in our finance operations for our accounts payable process to process invoices. For this process, we were receiving invoices at a rate of more than 50 per day, and having humans perform those actions was not sustainable in the long run. So, we developed a robot that would automatically process invoices that we received through email. It extracts and updates the data into our ERP, and then, it sends an email to the users telling them that the invoice has been received, verified, and uploaded into our ERP. Now, we have a process that saves approximately two hours for five or more users on a daily basis. At an annual rate, we can save approximately 10,000 hours. We develop the bot in UiPath Studio and then deploy it in cloud Orchestrator via an unattended bot, which is a bot that runs on a predefined schedule. We have a particular time when invoices arrive in our inboxes. We set the robot to run at that particular time, and then the robot is able to process those invoices and proceed to the next action.

We focus only on processes that can be automated end-to-end, completely eliminating human activity. UiPath is flexible, and it allows us to build robots that prevent human intervention right from the start and all the way to the end. Then, we are able to deploy it on the cloud by using the Orchestrator solution. From start to finish, we have completely eliminated human effort, supporting our mission of end-to-end automation. For process analysis, we use a UiPath tool called Task Capture to understand the business case and draw a flow diagram for the steps involved in a process. UiPath has all the solutions required to implement end-to-end automation, and we are successfully using them for all our business problems.

This end-to-end coverage is important. Basically, we select processes where we can avoid human intervention. End-to-end automation is one of the key KPIs that we check before we even start automating a process. It is the first thing that we look for because we prefer no human intervention at all, be it for any kind of input, validating the output, or checking the logs of a process. All of these are predetermined and handled by the robot.

It is cloud-based. So, we do not have any infrastructure costs for maintaining the servers, etc. That is a big advantage. Also, Studio updates for development are pushed automatically. We receive the updates and just click on them, and Studio is updated. Overall, it saves a lot of time for the IT team because there isn't any involvement from IT resources after we deploy or install Studio on our system. From there on, there is literally no involvement of the IT department. That is how beautifully they have designed the tool for the updates as well as overall maintenance.

We went for the cloud to avoid any on-premises server costs that we might need to take care of on a recurring basis. The cloud was a big advantage for us. We are able to save approximately 15 lakh Indian Rupees, which would be $10,000 to $15,000, by not going for the on-premises setup. We were able to save that sort of investment in server costs by going for a cloud-based tool.

We were able to synthesize the value of this solution right from the inception. As soon as we deployed the bots, we were getting actual analytics for the run rate of the process and the total time of bot execution. Indirectly, the time during which the bot executes is literally the time that is saved from human effort. We get proper metrics of the time being saved by using Orchestrator. The other important thing is logs. In case a process fails, from the logs, we are able to derive insights about when exactly a process is failing. We are then able to develop a solution to handle these failures and re-implement them. So, overall the cloud solution gives us insights. It adds value to even developers' time by giving us an overall metric of the time saved as well as utilizing the logs for insights about the process runtime, et cetera. Overall, the cloud functionality is a great value addition.

It affects our ability to scale up automation. When we develop and deploy a process, other users in different departments take a look at the processes, and they are getting confident about the fact that this can solve their problems. We have been receiving requirements, and in that way, we are able to scale up the automation. On top of that, we develop the robots in a way that is modular in nature so that when we implement a process, we have reusable components that can be plugged and played into the new process. This improves the speed at which we can automate processes.

It has indirectly brought innovation from the users' perspective and developers' perspective. The users are saving time, and they are getting innovative in their day-to-day activities. In terms of development, we are on a constant learning path. When the vendor releases new software updates, we are able to effectively utilize those and implement them into our processes on an immediate basis, which improves the speed of delivering a process and the quality of output.

We can scale automation without having to pay attention to the infrastructure for doing so. We don't have to be worried about the cost involved with the on-premises setup. It is a cloud-based solution. So, when a requirement comes up and a bot is developed, only then we need to apply for the license and procure a bot. It has been beneficial because we don't need to pay any upfront cost until the bot is developed and ready to be deployed, and because the bots are delivered completely through the software service, that also indirectly proved very beneficial for global deployments and scaling of processes.

Its AI functionality is helpful to learn from the existing use cases and then implement the learnings on the new and upcoming test cases. As a developer, we need not spend any time developing templates for the extraction, etc. The AI module in itself has the capability to understand new forms of data. It can then accordingly extract and plug in the data to our templates without much effort. So, AI functionality has saved a lot of our time in developing a solution as compared to doing it the manual way.

We had one process where we had to use AI functionality, and we were able to eliminate any manual efforts. Previously, we had somebody who was verifying the output of the bot and after that only processing went to the next step, but with AI, we got the confidence that the bot has the ability to complete the action without manual intervention. That is one great example where AI helped to eliminate manual effort and improve the quality of the output.

It has significantly reduced human errors. Bots have quite a high performance rate with minimal or zero errors. The errors only occur because we haven't updated the business case in the bot. Once the business cases are updated in the robot, we do not see any errors. The bots follow all the steps as programmed and do not deviate from the set of rules defined while developing them. This reduction in human error has had a positive impact on users. The users had been feeling more comfortable using the robot output rather than relying on their own output, which sometimes had errors. So, overall the confidence level has improved and the lead time in delivering the output has also improved. The time they were earlier spending on the validation of their output has reduced. 

It has freed a lot of time. We only automate processes where we find huge time savings. We count it as full-time (FT) employee benefits. We only pick processes that have three or four cumulated FT benefits. With automation, we are saving at least three or four hours on a daily basis. This time is being utilized by business users in completing any other backlog work, focusing on other important things, improving their own work skills, etc.

Excel automation is extremely reliable. Excel integration is one of the top features that I have been using. We also have a feature called Document Understanding for processing the PDF format of an invoice by a bot. It has the capability to scan an invoice and then pick out the required fields, such as the name of the vendor, the details of the products being sent, or the cost of the product. There is an AI functionality that allows a user to program the required fields to be extracted, and the bot automatically follows those rules and extracts the data. Therefore, the AI functionality of Document Understanding is another important attribute that I personally like about UiPath.

I also like the Computer Vision functionality, where UiPath provides image processing abilities for robotic process automation. This provides a big advantage because images can be automatically processed without involving any additional tools. With an API, we can automatically link the Computer Vision engine and start extracting and processing images at a quick rate.

UiPath is a low-code platform, or mostly no-code platform, where coding is minimal. We can drag and drop all the required steps and then develop a bot in very less time. I am good at programming, but even a user who doesn't know programming can easily pick up the tool. The ease at which anybody can learn it is quite high. Overall, it is a 10 out of 10 in terms of usability. It is really easy to use with the tutorials that they have in place. Everything about it is quite simple.

We use Orchestrator to keep a track of all the robots that are deployed, monitor the logs, and deploy the robots on the runner machines. We use Orchestrator to upload the bots from Studio to the cloud and then deploy them to runner machines across our virtual machines. Once a bot executes, we get the logs, and if needed, we can monitor them to check that the processes are coming in smoothly. In case of any failures, Orchestrator also has the functionality to re-execute the process. So, we are utilizing the cloud to a greater extent for managing our robots.

The UiPath community is wonderful. It is one of the best communities where we can get a solution for any question that we post in a matter of minutes or hours. Whenever we post a question about any doubt or a bug, someone from the UiPath support team or community replies. Their knowledge is useful for other users who might face the same problem in the future. They have an MVP promotion where if I answer more than 100 questions, they provide us freebies or maybe certification vouchers. That's a good thing that they're doing to grow the community. I'm really enjoying the community members' involvement as well as their support shown during any problems that we face. I have also used Power Automate, and the community support of Power Automate is not that great, but the community of UiPath is very responsive.

It is expensive. Its licensing structure should be improved. They can introduce a license structure where they charge you on a per-minute basis rather than a full upfront payment. 

In UiPath Academy, the certification that they provide at the end of every course can serve as a good motivating factor for somebody who's learning it. That is a good thing, but one of the negatives is that previously, the certification program was free of cost, which helped a lot of developers to become certified developers, but recently, they introduced a paid certification course. I wasn't expecting that move from them. I would like them to go back to their initial certification method which was free of cost.

Sometimes, we do find that the bots misbehave or there are bugs that prevent the bot from executing even when the business cases are completely listed out. It could be that the cloud Orchestrator doesn't send the trigger to the runner systems to start the process because of small internet fluctuation. Sometimes, we find that the processes are killing the execution themselves and going into a halt state without any errors in the program. So, we do see some reliability issues, but these happen once in 20 or 30 instances. They are not on a regular basis. However, when that happens, it does create panic, and we have to immediately rectify it. If they can focus on that, it would be good.

I have been using UiPath for three years.

It is great. We are able to scale at a rate faster than what we had thought of because of the way we are able to develop our processes. UiPath literally automates most of the processes that business users are doing. So far, we haven't had any use cases that cannot be handled with UiPath, which helps in scaling implementation at a faster pace.

We have about a four-member team with analysts as well as developers who work with it, but the developers basically handle all the IT-related tasks. 

We are a manufacturing company, and we have deployed our solutions in almost every department. We have finance, planning, control, human resources, sales, and supply chain. We have 15 to 20 in each of the departments, and they are saving close to three hours individually. Overall, our estimated time savings are upwards of 100,000 hours annually. 

Our current usage of it is 30% to 40%. We still have a lot more potential to tap. We are still on the journey to reach 100% of user involvement where everybody is aware of the process. We are yet to hold the discovery workshops with all the users so that they're aware of the process. Right now, it is limited to a few people within the departments, but its usage will increase with time as we continue to automate processes at this rate.

We use UiPath Academy for the certification or onboarding of new members. When we onboard new members, we tell them to go through the UiPath Academy to get an understanding of the tool. It is free of cost, and it covers all the required modules for becoming an RPA developer. We use it extensively during the initial days as a developer, and over time and with experience, we learn directly from the tool.

They have a very responsive community. Sometimes, within minutes, we get a response to our query. We are quickly able to understand the solution that they provided and implement it. If it is a complicated problem, sometimes, the UiPath moderator from the UiPath company responds to the query and resolves it. If it is not resolved, we can directly contact their customer support. We are enterprise users, and we get quick responses to the queries that we raise. I would rate their support a 9 out of 10.

Positive

In between, we used Power Automate just to see the functionality, but we did not find it as intuitive as UiPath. We gave up on Power Automate, and we are now full-time users of UiPath.

I was around when it was set up. I had personally taken care of the installation. I found it easy and not at all time-consuming. I was done with the process in a couple of hours. In about four or five hours, I was done with the installation and setup of Studio and Orchestrator, listing the licensed accounts, and deployment of the random bots. Everything was completed in a matter of no time. I am not directly related to the IT department. I am just a developer, but I was able to handle it with no external support.

We did it in-house. We only contacted UiPath. They delivered the license keys, and we just keyed in the license keys, and it started working. That's it. Nothing else.

It is lightweight in terms of maintenance. There's no maintenance at all. It automatically handles all the upgrades via the cloud. There are no issues. It requires zero effort from IT.

Overall, you don't have a lot of savings because of expensive licenses. The licenses are quite expensive, and they are not cheap. It saves money but not significantly. However, we are not focusing so much on the monetary benefits. We are focusing more on the quality of output and time savings.

It does reduce the cost of digital transformation, but that happens after a year or two from deployment. Immediate benefits are not evident, but within a period of one to three years, we are able to make a huge amount of savings in terms of time. 

This digital transformation doesn't require expensive or complex application upgrades or IT application support. We didn't have any issues, and we never needed IT to support the UiPath tool. We have been directly using it as it is without making any changes. The impact of this digital transformation on our infrastructure was zero. There were no costs involved. It was used as it is without any changes in the infrastructure.

During the initial two years, we hadn't reached a breakeven point. When the development was going on, we had both costs. On one side, the manual effort was going on, and on the other, there was the licensing cost. So, we didn't have cost savings. After the bot was implemented or after about one and a half years, we were able to receive proper monetary benefits or what we call a breakeven point. So, when we started eliminating human activity, that got converted to cost savings. The accuracy of the process also indirectly improved our customer satisfaction. All in all, we were at a breakeven point, after a two-year period. That would be the general thumb rule for most organizations. So, at an immediate level, we did not receive monetary benefits, but after a period of about two years, we received monetary benefits or savings.

We rely on UiPath Academy for knowledge during the initial days, and it saves a lot of time. We don't have any monetary spending for setting up training because it is available for free. So, we have made some savings. It has saved us time and money, and it has been helpful in getting employees up to speed on the solution.

It is expensive. Every product or component is built separately. All the components have a separate fee. UiPath Studio has a license cost. The cloud has a license cost, and bots have a license cost. These costs are recurring on a yearly basis. So, every product or component has to be licensed for a year, and on expiry, you have to renew it.

Their licensing structure should be improved. The cost of a bot is a lot. It is more expensive as compared to some of the competitors. It is probably $8,000 for an unattended bot. When I did a search on the internet, I found that other vendors offer much better plans. I would like UiPath to introduce some flexibility in the licenses. Instead of a full license, they can maybe introduce a license structure where they charge you on a per-minute basis rather than a full $8,000 upfront payment. If I'm just spending eight hours on the bot, the bot should only be charged for that time. There could be a per-hour rate. A plan like that would be beneficial.

Initially, it will be expensive, and it also won't be as per the initial thoughts that it is going to be a quick solution that saves a lot of time. With time, you can achieve cost savings but not immediately.

We had our eyes on UiPath from the beginning. We did not focus on others.

My advice would be to not use RPA as the only solution. You also have to use other complementing features, such as optical character recognition, so that the overall solution is usable. Just RPA can't solve all the problems.

There should be proper change management to bring awareness about the impact of RPA. A lot of time, people misunderstand and take it in the wrong sense that they might lose their jobs. The fact is that RPA can't automate everything, and skilled people will still be required for doing activities. We can only automate a certain set of manual activities.

I would also advise taking one step at a time. Automate a few solutions, check the user feedback, and then start scaling up rather than immediately scaling up without getting the user feedback.

I would rate UiPath an 8 out of 10. Overall, I have no complaints. Studio, Orchestrator, and all the other tools are top-notch. They are being updated with new features on a daily basis. The product is extremely good, and I have no complaints regarding that, but the license is something they can focus on. They can introduce some innovative plans for procuring the license.

I mostly use the UiPath Platform for robotic automation.

We use both attended and unattended automation options within the UiPath Platform. The unattended automation is good, but we have some performance issues with some of the systems we are working on. However, it fulfills the purpose for our work.

The best features I appreciate about the UiPath Platform include the ability to enable some components to be used, as well as the dashboards for logging and the bots' performance after deployment. It is also easy to use.

I assess the impact of the analytic capabilities on my decision-making process positively, as we provide this for customers running their business to see how much they're saving on efficiency or I advise them on the best use cases to invest in.

We haven't worked much with AI features, but I am looking for some features there. Overall, it provides us with what we need the most. 

They can perhaps make the customizations and configurations for reuse easier for the developers, as it would help to expedite things.

I have about four or five years of experience.

We do not have downtime with the UiPath Platform, although we may have some minor issues or unhandled exceptions, but it's fine. I can say that we do not have downtime. I would rate the stability of the UiPath Platform as a nine out of ten.

The UiPath Platform is fulfilling the purpose so far. We don't have issues.

In my organization, around 150 specialists work with the UiPath Platform. Most of our clients are enterprises in care services or telecommunication.

I would rate the UiPath Platform's technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I didn't do its deployment myself, but from the feedback I get from the team, it's fine. It's not complex.

For my clients, the average deployment time is days.

It is based on the use case. If the use case needs several bots, it gets expensive.

I find the UiPath Platform much more efficient and easier than Blue Prism, and it offers many more features than Power Automate, so it strikes a perfect balance.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the tool for robotic process automation to automate mundane business processes prone to human error.

Some of UiPath's best features are its ability to interact well with applications and its less proneness to errors. It allows us to implement end-to-end automation, which is very important for our organization since we have many time-consuming job runs.

The tool has improved our organization by reducing operational costs through process automation and cutting FTEs. We can do more regression testing for test automation, leading to better products. It's helped minimize our on-premises footprint to some extent and aided organizational restructuring.

We've used the academy courses, which are good for beginners and advanced users. UiPath has sped up digital transformation, allowing quick fixes without building entire new solutions. It reduces human errors by 60-70 percent and saves us around 2500 hours.

UiPath is pretty easy to use for small—and medium-scale automation. However, maintaining the code becomes a bit more difficult when building large-scale, enterprise-level automation. Areas for improvement include versioning for collaborative projects and reporting features currently lacking.

I have been using the product for six years. 

As for stability, I'd rate it as six out of ten. Once a project is built, we face many issues, and we often have to go back to UiPath. So, in my opinion, stability could be improved.

My company has 10-15 users. Based on my experience, I would say UiPath is a scalable solution. I'd rate its scalability around seven or eight out of ten.

The user community for UiPath is great. We can ask about any issues we have on the community forum and usually get them resolved. Regarding technical support, it's amazing that they respond quickly. However, their level one engineer could be better educated on the tool before moving to level two support.

Neutral

We previously used an open-source Java Selenium solution but switched to UiPath for better security and platform capabilities.

We have the tool deployed in the cloud version. The deployment process was straightforward—it was pretty easy, mostly just drag and drop. Because of the number of projects we have, the initial deployment took days to months.

We use UiPath in multiple locations globally, including the US and India. The solution requires maintenance, particularly from a coding perspective.

I'd estimate UiPath has helped us save around 10-15 percent in costs.

UiPath is a pretty expensive tool compared to what the market offers, including open-source alternatives that can do similar things.

Overall, I would recommend UiPath to other users. The main reasons I like it and would recommend it are that it's very user-interactive and its capabilities are really good.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it overall around eight.

We use UiPath for intelligent automation integrated with machine learning models.

We previously did many of these processes by hand, and our team found that frustrating because it took a lot of time. There was a chance we could have errors in reports that are critical to the organization. UiPath processes are around 90 percent accurate. Since we implemented UiPath, it has become essential to our organization, and we cannot live without automation now.

UiPath has helped us reduce our on-prem footprint. Its AI functionality has helped us automate more processes while speeding up digital transformation and reducing costs. UiPath has saved team members' time, allowing them to spend more time on valuable tasks instead of tedious, repetitive jobs. 

What I like the most about UiPath is that we can build custom activities. If we want to customize functions based on our logic or use case, we can do that. 

We also like the UiPath community. It's the best help you can find online. If you have any issues, you go to the UiPath forum to find answers to existing questions. If you can't find the answer you're seeking, you can post your question and get an answer quickly. The UiPath Academy has some hands-on activities to practice, and they offer a certification. It's a great way to grow your knowledge. One drawback is that the cost of the certification exam is pretty high. 

The most valuable features are document processing and integration with AI/ML models. Using the solution's AI functionality was a bit challenging initially, but once we researched how to use the intelligent automation, it was fairly simple. Overall, building automated processes is easy. The end-to-end automation capability is crucial for large organizations because it reduces time and energy. 

We use intelligent automation for things like document processing. There is a validation center where the ML model extracts some values, and we can validate if it's correct. That aspect could be improved a little. The percentage of values extracted without validation could be increased. It's currently an attended process, but they should give you the option of making it unattended. 

I have used UiPath for more than four years.

I rate UiPath eight out of ten. 

I rate UiPath 7.5 out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. 

Positive

I have used Automation Anywhere. It's also a good solution that's easy to use, but I like UiPath a little more.  I prefer UiPath because I've done more projects on it.

Deploying UiPath is straightforward. The implementation took a few months because our use case was so complex, and we had to optimize the processes to make them more efficient. Our development team has four people. After deployment, the bots require some maintenance. Admins need to update the automations and ensure the bots are running. 

We've realized considerable time savings with UiPath. We were previously reading and inputting information from documents manually. One document took almost two or three hours. UiPath automation brought that down to two or three minutes. 

UiPath is relatively expensive. It's not expensive if you only need to automate one or two processes, but if you need to use more, it's somewhat costly. There's also a free community version.  

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. My advice for new UiPath users is to complete the training first. Get all the knowledge you need to implement automation before you start working on it. 

We're a tech consulting company that works for insurance companies. We use UiPath for tasks related to payment processing, deductibles, and denial of coverage. We check each part of the process to ensure that the patient has met a set of criteria. We're checking the deductible to see if it has been met, and we update the notes on the platform. UiPath is useful for all of our clients regardless of the industry. For example, we have used it for payroll and payment processing at Citibank and Doshi Bank. 

A bot can run 24/7, reducing the human labor required. That is UiPath's major advantage. It reduces the number of manual tasks while also improving and enhancing human labor. A manual task that took 10 minutes in the past can be completed in two or three. We are saving a lot of time. 

Let's say we have eight people doing a particular task eight hours a day on a five-day work schedule. Once we automate that task, we can run the bot 24 hours a day Monday to Sunday. Automation reduces our costs and human error. The accuracy and data security are high. It's beneficial all around.

Uipath facilitates data sharing between systems. We have some shared folder packs that enable us to share the data from one system to another. This functionality can be important, depending on the project and type of data. We use some encrypted features. If we want to share data in encrypted mode, we can put it in an Orchestrator folder on-premises so only those with access can see the data. 

The business will share the data, including employee and patient records. All the data is shared within the database.  Either the employees can send data over, or they can access the data from that particular folder. UiPath offers a central portal for managing patient information. We've done a lot of things to extract and utilize patient information, ensuring that it can be accessed by the appropriate teams. We have to train our bots to capture the right information, like the patient's name, address, ID, location, etc.

UiPath is good for data scraping and extracting information from websites. UiPath is approachable, and it makes life much easier by automating repetitive tasks with the help of drag-and-drop flexibility, eliminating human interaction. The drag-and-drop APIs make it easy to get data from the API quickly.

I also like UiPath's security features because it gives us lots of tools to secure sensitive information. We can encrypt the customer data and store it in UiPath on-premises. We can also control access so that only authenticated users can obtain the data. 

Citrix and email automation could be improved. We can use the features, but the accuracy isn't 100 percent. 

I have used UiPath for the past five years. 

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. They provide us with assistance while we are developing bots. We can send the Orchestrator logs to UiPath to find out where a process is failing. For example, a web-based process might be using an old particular password. The support team will notify us that we need to update the password in the production environment. 

Positive

Before we implemented UiPath, we tried Automation Anywhere. I like UiPath the best because it has capabilities like Document Understanding, AI, fabric, etc. UiPath has more features than Automation Anywhere. When we did a POC of Automation Anywhere, we found that the data scraping wasn't as accurate when working with PDFs. 

The deployment may be straightforward or complex, depending on the project. Before each project, we have a testing phase of about seven to eight days. We have a 10-day monitoring period. In that 10-day period, the developer is also involved with the support. We have a different support team that takes care of most of these things, like deployment and monitoring the processes. If something goes wrong, they have to open a ticket and reach out to the developers. 

Our implementation process involves checking all the business requirements. We look at the software and machines our clients use and the steps involved. Once we know the business requirements, we start working on the modules. We determine how many modules we need and the amount of time it will take to develop them. 

After that, we have a daily scrum call. If we have issues, we reach out to the business, and they will come back with a solution. We need to undergo this initial development phase before starting anything. Once the development is completed, we have multiple process design documents detailing the processes and steps. We also work with third-party integrators. About seven or eight staff members are involved. 

This solution does not require much maintenance once it is deployed and we've granted the access required. Once we've ensured the process is running and done the initial updates, we don't need to maintain it.

I haven't calculated the ROI, but I've heard that other people have seen 60 to 70 percent return on what they invested.

The pricing depends on the project and how many hours we will charge. 

I rate UiPath nine out of 10. There are still a few areas that require improvement. Before implementing, I suggest doing a POC so you can evaluate other tools side by side to see which one is best. 

We are a partner of UiPath and a system integrator for our clients.

For most clients, we tend to begin by focusing on areas with the highest potential for automation. This typically includes finance, procurement, or HR functions, with the first two being the most common choices. These areas are chosen because their processes are generally stable and repetitive, making them ideal starting points for RPA implementation.

However, our experience doesn't end with just one client. We've had numerous engagements, including with large, multi-company groups. Once one division like the "glass division" successfully implemented RPA, it often sparked interest in other divisions like the pharmaceutical division. Demonstrating a solid proof of concept makes it easier to scale the technology to diverse use cases across the organization.

Ultimately, overcoming the initial hesitation and showcasing the tool's benefits is crucial. Once the value becomes apparent, a shift often occurs, transitioning from a client-driven demand to a proactive push from various departments eager to eliminate tedious manual tasks.

While we haven't encountered any major technical roadblocks, understanding the potential for automation has been the primary challenge for users. Initially, we also faced some learning curve hurdles during the first few projects. However, as our internal expertise matured, approximately 80 to 90 percent of use cases have been implemented smoothly with minimal or no support from UiPath. It's clear that effectively identifying tasks suitable for automation versus those requiring human intervention has been the key hurdle. From a purely technical standpoint, the capabilities have been readily achievable.

While UiPath facilitates end-to-end automation, its feasibility heavily relies on the specific use case and associated tuning costs. The decision to automate isn't solely driven by cost reduction, but also by the number of tedious tasks it can alleviate for employees. Clients are often eager to free their workforce from such repetitive drudgery, especially if the task is long-standing and well-defined. In these scenarios, full automation often presents a compelling value proposition.

The UiPath user community exists on two levels. First, there's the general UiPath user community, managed by UiPath itself. This broader community offers a valuable resource for learning, sharing experiences, and finding solutions. Second, once a UiPath instance is set up within a specific client's environment, a smaller user community emerges within that client's organization. While this internal community may seem less significant, its role in supporting individual users in tackling automation challenges is crucial. By sharing their experiences and overcoming difficulties, these internal user communities can act as "roll cages" for individual functions, providing guidance and support regardless of the specific challenges encountered.

Initially, our focus was solely on on-premise solutions. In fact, up until last year, I hadn't encountered a single client who had implemented their RPA solution on the cloud. This was primarily because we catered to a mainly small business clientele. However, the landscape has shifted significantly, with more and more cloud-native solutions emerging. This shift has been driven, in part, by the cost-effectiveness of cloud-based options. One of the major roadblocks to cloud adoption in the past was the pricing of the orchestrator. While it might be suitable for supporting large client bases with thousands of users, it wasn't cost-effective for smaller businesses with only 100-200 users. Fortunately, UiPath has introduced a new approach, allowing us to purchase orchestrator instances tailored to specific user base needs. This, combined with the inherent benefits of a cloud-based platform, has made the cloud a much more attractive option compared to 2019. In conclusion, cloud computing is now a critical factor in the RPA landscape, and the adoption of cloud-based solutions has become significantly easier. This shift has opened up new opportunities for businesses of all sizes to leverage the benefits of RPA technology.

We started with five or six people trained online by UiPath and the different certification programs available in the UiPath Academy courses were helpful.

UiPath has helped to drastically reduce human error to almost zero by automating all the structured data that used to be done manually by people. This has improved the quality of work for our clients.

UiPath has helped free up employee time. Previously, we analyzed each potential use case to determine its priority. Before committing to a specific case, we built a business case to assess its potential benefits. This involved analyzing how much time automation could save, the associated cost savings, and the number of transactions it could automate. We performed this analysis during the design and assessment phases of our workflow. Following this process, we would gather the data and present it to management for approval before moving forward with automation. The amount of time saved depends on the individual use cases but they are significant. What used to take hours now takes seconds.

UiPath has delivered cost savings for our clients' organizations, not through mere implementation, but through thorough assessment. We start by demonstrating the technology's value through small-scale projects, then scale up. At this point, we gather a list of potential use cases, identify the number of users who could benefit, and pinpoint the manual tasks ripe for automation. Only then, with a business case in hand, do we proceed with full implementation. This careful approach ensures that when use cases are deployed, they translate into meaningful time savings and reduced manual workload. As a result, our clients typically see cost savings in staff reductions of at least 30 percent.

UiPath is an efficient and user-friendly tool. It allows us to record and capture actions, which it then translates into underlying code. This makes development incredibly fast. The centralized orchestration feature is also a major advantage.

Clients are often convinced by its features and marketing. In some cases, when competing with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, UiPath has won out due to its faster time to market. This was especially true during the early days of RPA when clients were still experimenting and wanted to try multiple vendors. UiPath's flexibility and strong support, both during evaluation and implementation, were also key factors in its success.

We sometimes use the AI functionality mainly for document scanning but at the time it was poor and had room for improvement.

The operation costs have room for improvement. 

I have been using UiPath for over four years.

UiPath is a stable solution.

We haven't encountered any scaling issues, and UiPath is theoretically scalable for up to 10,000 bots. We've successfully implemented over 100 use cases for a large client with multiple subsidiaries, receiving no complaints.

The technical support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward and UiPath worked with us for every deployment.

We implemented UiPath for our clients in-house.

We evaluated Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere are not as user-friendly as UiPath and they don't have the same user community.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

Previously, we distinguished between Automation Anywhere and UiPath based on their bundled offerings. Automation Anywhere included category two AI capabilities with their RPA solution, while UiPath focused solely on RPA and didn't have much presence in the AI space at the time. Although UiPath could integrate with other AI vendors, this wasn't a significant interest for our clients.

Most deployments we completed for our clients were central.

We are a consulting firm. We started last year, and we are growing pretty rapidly.

We have quite a few document-understanding processes that we are working on. We are a partner of UiPath, so we have various clients in different industries. Currently, we are processing vendor statements to create payments in NetSuite. We also have a three-way match cache application process, and then we have a basic user interface for scraping vendors' websites for payment data and that kind of thing.

We are trying to figure out how to incorporate LOMs with everyday processes and get reliable information back. We are also training a lot of machine learning models to extract data from PDFs along with processing contracts. I hope that those get easier to train and that there are more reliable answers or outputs from the models that we train.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has fundamentally changed what our organization is able to achieve. Document processing has come a long way and become a lot more user-friendly with validations and Action Center. The straight-through processing has increased.

They are constantly making improvements to Action Center where you have more feasibility in assigning tasks. There is a lot more flexibility and data around it. We have been incorporating insights into our automations, which helps us create a business case for future automations based on what we have done in the past.

The use of AI in our automations has definitely increased the accuracy of our operations. It has also increased the ability to process certain use cases that were not available before. It gives us more opportunities to automate processes, and therefore, drive revenue.

The use of AI in automations has freed up time or resources for other tasks for our customers. The time saved depends on the use case, but they are probably saving about a thousand hours a month on the vendor statement processing. They are getting 2,000 to 5,000 statements a month. Each one takes roughly 45 minutes.

Their core platform of Studio is valuable. The ease of use and the ability to build these automations quickly is definitely a highlight for us. Our average process from start to finish takes three to four weeks. We can knock out automations as quickly as we can identify them. That is probably the best feature I see.

In Action Center, saving progress in data validation, specifically for table content, is currently not available. There should be more clarity around the feedback loop along with the auto-update feature when you deploy machine learning packages. They should give some rule-based options so that if the confidence is returned higher than the previous model trained, then it would auto-deploy. If it is less, then it should send you an email rather than auto-deploy.

With task assignment, if there was a round-robin feature within the bucket to automatically assign it to a certain group of people, that would be helpful. 

There should be the ability to add custom fields to validation tasks because there is a lot of potential for it. It would be helpful when somebody needs to identify a scenario. For example, we have a customer who is processing rate sheets for trucking, and sometimes, depending on their customer, they have an all-in rate versus an adding fuel mileage rate. If they are able to specify that, even if it does not say it on the rate sheet, it would allow them to process more documents successfully.

We use UiPath's AI Center, but some clarity is missing around when to use AI Center versus when to use the Document Understanding module within Orchestrator. We are trying to figure out the benefit of one versus the other. We have also seen that the out-of-the-box models that we train versus a custom model that we train with the same data end up with the same output result at the end. We are trying to see where these out-of-the-box models are providing value if we are going to take the time to train them.

I have been using UiPath since 2019.

We have run into issues with integration services where we developed something, implemented it, put it into production, and all of a sudden, it does not run unattended. It is a very frustrating situation to be in. 

There were some issues with sharing connections between different accounts, and we have learned from that experience to do more upfront testing of new features before we build automation on it. 

Event-based triggers not working is probably the biggest stability issue that we have run into, and integration services not working is probably the biggest gray area. Other than that, it is a stable platform.

It is definitely a scalable platform.

Their support is good. I have had good success with submitting support tickets and getting answers quickly. If it is a bug that is identified with the process or with the platform, they resolve it within a matter of a week. There was a production issue. It was a throughput issue for the AI model. We were not able to access a 100-page document because of this exception. They implemented it and fixed it within a week, which I thought was awesome. I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I did not use any other RPA solution previously. I have only used Power Apps a bit, but it was a very small part that we have looked into. Overall, we are strictly focused on UiPath.

I have probably set up 100 Orchestrators at this point, so it is straightforward. However, the initial setup is confusing for new people who have not done it where they are matching machines to the tenant and plugging it in their machine key, but I am not sure if there is any way to get around that. When you have done it once, it is easy. 

The other thing is the licensing aspect of it. You need to assign a license to the machine template and then the machine template to the folder, and then you have to make sure that the machine is connected. There seems to be some confusion amongst our developers on how to make sure it is all set up correctly, and then you have the robot account. You have to make sure that it is also set up correctly to run unattended automations. It is a challenge, but if you do it two or three times, you get the hang of it.

In terms of the implementation strategy, overall, we look for quick wins upfront so that we can build the program and get support behind it, and then tackle the more advanced use cases after we get three or four in production.

We have cloud deployments. We have had different cloud providers, such as Azure, AWS, and GCP.

We are a consultant. 

We have definitely seen an ROI in terms of hours saved and quality of work. Once you get off the ground, there are a lot of other departments that end up getting excited and looking forward to future automation. I feel that is a win for morale.

Overall, the model is fine except for AI units. It is usage-based, which makes sense if you are processing documents, and you have one unit per page. It is the hosting cost of the models where there are issues, so we are running into potentially designing poor solutions because we are having to say, "If the documents are very similar but different enough, even though you would prefer to use two models, maybe consider not using two because of the hosting costs."

Power Automate is something we might look at. UiPath has orchestration while Power Automate does not. Orchestration is vital for us.

If you are trying to do in-house development, the user experience is much better than any other platform that we have evaluated. It is easy to pick up. The UiPath academy, training, and forums are great. The biggest selling point for me is that you can pick it up as a business user and learn the platform in a matter of days or weeks as opposed to months or years.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.