UiPath Platform Reviews

The primary UiPath use cases are document processing and using automation solutions to eliminate repetitive tasks in administrative data entry. 

Automation has helped our CoE understand the administrative structure and returns. It's a promising tool. We've already seen returns on the automation side, and we're beginning to explore GenAI. It helped us free up staff by taking them off repetitive tasks and transferring their focus to more important tasks. 

The automation and the significant return on investment it provides are valuable.

I want more flexibility in licensing and how we can use AI units. 

UiPath seems pretty solid.

UiPath has grown with us. We started on-premises and switched to the cloud, giving us greater flexibility. 

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath support is pretty good. It's adequate when needed. Fortunately, they have UiPath Academy and other information out there, so you don't need to use it often. 

We were using ABBYY, but I can't compare the two solutions because I joined when we were transitioning to UiPath, so I don't have much experience. 

UiPath provides a significant ROI in saving time and improving the employee experience.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. 

We adopted UiPath to leverage its generative AI capabilities for rule-based automation. This technology enhances the resilience of our automated processes, ensuring continued functionality even when underlying systems or data undergo changes that would typically disrupt traditional automation.

Our business challenges necessitated a combined approach of AI and automation. While automation initially streamlined processes, its rigidity proved limiting when faced with changing information. AI, with its learning and adaptive capabilities, addressed this by recognizing patterns and adjusting to variations. This synergy allows the AI to handle similar changes without requiring new automation, ultimately achieving the same outcome with increased flexibility and efficiency.

Our automations are now AI-centric, and this focus will expand significantly within the company as our organization refines its AI strategy.

Our company is developing a new AI automation strategy focused on employee engagement, partnering with Microsoft Copilot and utilizing ChatGPT for automation. While our AI policy is still being developed, we plan to carefully consider how to best leverage UiPath's AI capabilities, with a strong emphasis on security, once the policy is in place.

UiPath has helped save our staff time to focus on other tasks. 

UiPath's most valuable feature is Insights, which provides invaluable data on time savings and AI model performance.

UiPath should prioritize improving its updates and user-friendliness, particularly for new team members. Streamlining updates and simplifying the interface would enhance the onboarding experience and overall productivity.

I have been using UiPath for two and a half years.

In terms of what we use UiPath for, the stability has been great. 

We utilize both cloud-based and on-premises automation solutions. Our infrastructure began with two servers and has gradually expanded to four. UiPath has proven to be a scalable platform, provided we maintain the necessary licenses.

UiPath's support is generally good, augmented by the assistance of a Technical Account Manager who helps escalate requests when needed. However, resolving issues without a TAM would be significantly more challenging.

Positive

Prior to my joining the team, the organization utilized Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment was complex.

We collaborated with UiPath's service provider for the implementation, leveraging their expertise for the intake process and initial setup. Our experience thus far has been positive.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

I recommend UiPath due to its robust user community, which provides valuable feedback that contributes to the continuous improvement and development of the product with new features.

We have been using the RPA functionality in UiPath mostly for cash management. Our biggest use case is submitting wires and payments.

We aim to reduce routine tasks and allow people more time to do more important things. We were mainly looking at time savings for employees, and we may not have gotten all of the time savings that we wanted, but we definitely have found some. In addition to saving time, we also hope to mitigate risks for some of the tasks we've implemented and reduce human error in some of these processes, 

In bot development, we have had a lot of conversations about what we want bots to do, how to process exceptions, who exceptions go to, and who needs to be aware. Once the bot goes live, we have to keep the chats and lines of communication open to ensure everything's working.

The most valuable features are UI, web, and Excel automation, as well as the ability to package all of these in one software suite.

Setting up the infrastructure with different virtual desktops and making the connections stable in our environment present challenges. More direction on cleaning up these issues would be useful.

I have been using UiPath for about two years.

We've had some stability issues, but we're unsure whether UiPath caused them or if it was our company's older internal infrastructure. We haven't had any downtime caused by UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale as our environment grows and keeps up with demand.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. We receive good support from UiPath when we need it.

Positive

Personally, I did not use a different solution before UiPath, but some departments at the corporation have used other RPA tools, and some still do. We chose UiPath because we worked with some consulting firms that were familiar with the development capabilities of the solution. They could help with the initial development of the bots. We like the direction of the tool.

We worked with consulting firms familiar with the development capabilities of UiPath to assist with the development of bots.

We have seen a return on investment due to time savings with high-value employees. However, as we continue to make new things, it's hard to determine the exact return at this point.

I am not involved in the purchasing, but people have been generally happy with the pricing so far. Some pieces we use now may not provide expected value, and we might remove those in the future.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

We're a financial institution, and we started using UiPath for small, simple processes and day-to-day tasks, such as adding and removing users and updating information, but we're also exploring opportunities to automate lending processes.

We typically evaluate a process first to see if it's appropriate for automation. Sometimes, we've identified bad processes and needed to update documentation before we can implement them.

UiPath has allowed our employees to focus more on servicing our members rather than being bogged down by mundane tasks. In the last year, we have saved about 6,500 hours for our users, equating to the time of two full-time employees.

With UiPath, we've saved costs, increased productivity, and reduced stress on our employees. It has saved our employees time. They're thinking more about their processes instead of just doing what they're told. It places more onus on employee creativity.

I primarily work with task capture, which has been valuable. We have created a template for ourselves and reused it for all these processes. Other departments also use it for their procedures, even if the process is not automated.

We struggle to demo our processes. For whatever reason, we can't get the bot to run so that someone can watch it simultaneously. We press the button, and it shows that it's done rather than showing how the bot works. 

We started using UiPath with a partner two years ago and transitioned to handling everything in-house last year.

The stability of UiPath is good. We do not encounter issues with logging in or frequent service failures.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. Their customer service is good. They are always willing to help us and address our concerns. 

Positive

We initially used a UiPath partner but have since moved operations in-house. Our in-house experience has been better.

We have seen a return on investment. The 6,500 hundred hours we saved using UiPath translates to a savings of about $56,000 per year.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

I piloted the introduction of UiPath to my team with two projects. The first, domain monitoring, automated our ten-plus Pega applications' quarterly security and health checks. We designed an architecture that could be mapped across all domains, streamlining the process to run weekly instead of quarterly. This provided timely reports on application health via Webex. The second project was a more straightforward test suite automation for another UI-based application. These two successful pilot projects showcased the capabilities of UiPath, with the domain monitoring still in use today.

Building automation with UiPath is straightforward, but it's essential to be familiar with the target application and have a basic understanding of coding and if-else statements. This knowledge will help troubleshoot any unexpected errors. Overall, I'd rate the ease of building automation with UiPath an eight out of ten.

While working on the projects, we used two versions of UiPath: the enterprise and cloud versions. The orchestrator that comes with the enterprise version is different from the cloud version. The cloud version had better end-to-end automation, and the ease of use and accessibility were superior to those of the enterprise orchestrator, which is the on-premise version of UiPath. Although the enterprise version lacks a few features, the cloud version provides a complete solution.

I was impressed by UiPath's user community. We used an open-source library that someone else had built and generously shared with the UiPath community. It ideally suited our needs. The user community is also very responsive, and we readily receive answers to our questions.

We didn't see immediate benefits from UiPath because it was a new tool I was piloting. We had to prove to upper management that it saved significant time, and we eventually eliminated manual testing. It took until the project's end to demonstrate this, as management focuses on results, not processes. However, other teams adopted UiPath after completion, so benefits appeared after two or three months. It took time to get people on board, but they eventually embraced the idea.

UiPath has significantly improved our efficiency by automating domain and application monitoring, saving valuable time and working hours. These tasks were previously quite intensive and repetitive, demanding considerable focus and effort from our employees. With UiPath handling these processes, we've freed up our workforce to take on more engaging and strategic responsibilities.

My favorite aspect of UiPath is its user-friendly interface, as it's a no-code, low-code platform that eliminates the need for extensive coding. Its drag-and-drop functionality, coupled with UiPath's comprehensive library suite, simplifies automation tasks. For instance, the Microsoft Outlook and SharePoint libraries allow seamless integration with those platforms, streamlining processes like connecting to SharePoint in Microsoft 365. In essence, the combination of UiPath's robust infrastructure and versatile tools significantly enhances its usability and effectiveness.

I found the UiPath Academy courses to be a bit rigid in their curriculum. It was more beneficial for me to learn from the forums and YouTube videos. Their courses were tailored to particular roles, with a course on UiPath in data science being heavily focused on Excel. While it was a well-structured course, it didn't align with my job's limited use of Excel. Overall, their courses are well-built, but I found YouTube a more suitable learning platform for my needs.

UiPath Studio provides comprehensive tools and libraries for building automation, but it lacks a built-in feature to generate consolidated reports after automation runs, detailing successes, failures, and operational features. This absence of detailed logging information makes it difficult to troubleshoot issues and identify whether the problem lies within the application or the automation itself. While UiPath's orchestrator website provides some information, it's insufficient for demonstrating automation runs and accomplished features to stakeholders. Although a future release may address this, the lack of robust reporting capabilities remains a significant area for improvement. Additionally, UiPath's diverse suite of licenses can confuse end-users, making it challenging to determine the most suitable option. While the company has improved features, the increased number of licenses creates a knowledge gap between what's available and user understanding. Clearer explanations of each license would simplify decision-making for potential users and streamline adoption.

I have been using UiPath for one year.

Once we have the licensed version of UiPath, we don't anticipate issues with caching. We were using the 2021 Studio version because it was stable. Although the UiPath team suggested upgrading, I'm not certain about the reasons. I can't comment on the latest models, but the 2021 version was reliable.

The scalability of UiPath depends on the number of licenses. To deploy our automation, we need to utilize robots responsible for executing the automation we've built in a user-less environment. Scalability is directly proportional to the number of robots we have, which is, in turn, determined by the number of licenses. Therefore, more licenses translate to greater scalability.

The initial onboarding of UiPath was straightforward, but the only challenge we encountered was connecting UiPath Studio to the Orchestrator. UiPath Studio is where automations are built, while the Orchestrator is where they are deployed and run. This required some back-and-forth with the product team and my technical lead. However, this issue only arises during the initial setup. Once someone familiar with the process sets it up, it becomes easier. There were some challenges connecting and deploying the first automation, specifically between the Orchestrator and Studio.

Three people were involved in the deployment: my technical lead, who liaised with the product team to discuss progress and challenges; myself, responsible for building and deploying the automation; and one of my junior colleagues, who assisted me. In short, we had a three-person team.

We used UiPath and built and deployed that project, which ran successfully for approximately two quarters while I was away. However, the cost and licensing associated with UiPath became an issue. The license we were using offered excellent features specific to our needs, but it didn't provide much beyond that. It didn't make sense to continue spending much money on UiPath, even though it saved us time and money. The savings were essentially being reinvested back into purchasing the UiPath license. While UiPath licenses offer valuable features, they are expensive. For our single-use case, investing that much wasn't justifiable. We switched to Selenium, an open-source automation tool. Although it took additional time to deploy the same solution with Selenium, and it might not be a 100 percent match in functionality, it allowed us to save on costs.

The cost of UiPath is justified for organizations with many use cases but not for one or two use cases.

I give UiPath a seven out of ten.

The advice I'd like to give new UiPath users is to first understand their specific use case for UiPath. I've noticed some teams try to adopt UiPath by first figuring out a solution and then trying to retrofit it to their existing problems. Instead, I suggest thoroughly understanding the problem before creating a solution. Many teams see others using UiPath and assume it's a cool new tool they can simply apply to their existing issues. This approach rarely leads to optimal results. You might be able to build a solution, but it won't be the most efficient. For first-time users, I recommend understanding your problem, then exploring UiPath's capabilities to determine the best solution. There are plenty of resources available, like forums and YouTube, to help with the building process. Remember, understand the problem first, then build the solution.

We mainly use UiPath for automation testing processes. I am from delivery and project management, and I have a team member under me who is developing automation processes for me.

We had five members on our team when we started in 2019, and now we have 70 people in-house. We have achieved a very good scale in the last five years. We started with UiPath, and we have started adding other tools over the last one and a half years. Till mid-2023, we were just on the UiPath platform, but now we've expanded to other tools. We are the only organization across the globe that has achieved certifications in Document Understanding.

The most valuable features of UiPath are test automation, test suite, test manager, and document understanding.

Communication mining and process mining can be enhanced in UiPath. UiPath should improve its licensing because its competitors offer a cheaper and more sustainable model for even small-scale industries. Any company that wants to adopt UiPath has to pay straight away and then use it.

I have been using UiPath since 2015.

We haven't faced any issues with the stability of the solution because it is continuously evolving and upgrading. In some instances, we found that some solutions we had built in the past were failing, but that could be quickly fixed with their suggestions.

I don't feel any other tool has that much accuracy and stability of the applications. UiPath is a very scalable solution, and we can integrate it with any other application.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight to nine out of ten.

UiPath's support team has to improve a little because their responses regarding production incidents are not too quick. Initially, they try to resolve issues by email and connect on a call if that doesn't work. I think they have to improve a lot in this area. I rate the solution’s technical support a six or seven out of ten.

Neutral

In my previous organizations, I used Robot Framework and Power Automate.

The initial deployment of UiPath is easy.

We have several in-house experts who can deploy the solution. If we struggle with something, we seek the help of all the resources in our team. Mostly, we don't take any external help for deployment. If required, we reach out to UiPath for something that is missing or not working. However, that is just 2% to 3% of the complete processes. We manage the rest, 98% of the process, among ourselves.

Compared to other RPA tools, UiPath is a much more expensive solution.

UiPath's implementation depends on the process and budgeting. If clients have a good budget, we proceed with UiPath. Otherwise, we suggest some other solutions. Sometimes, we need to minimize the time frame to do the repetitive task. Manually, people take a longer time to process any files. We are automating the processes to streamline them and minimize the team members' costs and efforts.

If we have multiple tools involved, we have to put a lot of effort into analyzing them. If we directly go to development without thinking or analyzing, we lose time and effort. That's why it is very important to analyze the tools in depth. If the processes are straightforward, we suggest some improvements, which would be much easier. If multiple applications are involved, it takes a longer time. The complex process also requires some improvement, and based on that, we suggest whether to go ahead with UiPath or not.

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation for 90% of the processes. End-to-end automation is always important for us because it creates business for us. When we implement UiPath for the client, each client will be satisfied and happy with us, and we can get more business.

UiPath's user community is very helpful. We learn about different technologies and aspects when we get involved with the user community. Sometimes, we interact with problems that we have never worked on. We learn about such challenges and their solutions because of the solution's user community.

If you are struggling somewhere, you can post the issue on the user community forums and get an immediate response. With UiPath support, we have to wait for 24 hours to get a resolution. We get quick responses in community forums because experts respond to us. Compared to other solutions, UiPath's community forum is much stronger.

Most of our resources are first going ahead with UiPath Academy courses. After that, we give training because that is a basic point to start with. We are even onboarding the freshers. We ask them to go through their Academy courses, and after that, we allocate an in-house mentor. It will be much easier for us after they have an outline in their mind regarding the processes they have to go through. Once they finish it, we have an internal assessment and a training team that will assist in complex use cases.

The biggest benefit of UiPath Academy is its proper outline and structure in terms of education. Anyone who can follow will at least get 40% to 50% of the learning from there. After that, they will learn a lot based on their practices. They can practice some examples from there if the basic concept is clear. The courses are structured in such a way that even kids can also start with them. The courses in UiPath Academy are well structured and planned.

We cannot add the solution's AI functionality for every project. Around 50% of the projects we have done so far are related to AI. AI is helping a lot in terms of AI Center. The AI functionality helps connect with each application and for documenting. The solution’s AI functionality has enabled us to automate more processes overall.

Other than licensing costs, the solution reduces the cost of digital transformation. Our complete business depends on UiPath. As a solution-based company, we are automating the processes. We don't have manual resources except the project manager and business analyst to analyze the processes. Our complete business depends on the solution's automation or the AI model.

UiPath has freed up employee time for us. We have delivered two projects to a European-based client. UiPath has freed 90% of employee time in one of the processes and 85% in the other. It was a very big logistic company where we implemented UiPath using a Document Understanding to extract all invoices and feed them into the application. Earlier, they used to allocate these tasks to nine resources. Now, one resource can handle everything.

We have been expanding into other tools for the last year, but UiPath has been beneficial and has saved us overall costs. We don't have any licenses with us. We just provide the solution. We deploy UiPath on-premises or on the cloud, depending on the end user's requirement.

UiPath is usually deployed across multiple locations and departments. Maintenance will be required for UiPath in terms of new functionality during upgrades. I would recommend the solution to other users.

We always suggest to every client and whoever reaches out to us not to proceed with UiPath without having proper knowledge. We say this because of the licensing cost and several factors involved. If the processes are just one time, it's not recommended to use them. Overall, the learning is good. If anyone wants to try UiPath, they should first explore smaller processes and then proceed to the bigger ones.

Whenever new upgrades are available, sometimes they break the functionality, which we have faced a few times. If you are using version 12, stick with that and disable the updates directly from UiPath. First, try on the smaller instances, then proceed with the bigger ones. Otherwise, some production activity might fail.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use UiPath to automate various processes in the energy industry, including invoice processing and contract registration.

Building automation using UiPath is easy.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. This is important for the impact of the work and the satisfaction of the client.

The UiPath User Community offers great value because it allows us to find support, ask questions, and collaborate and share with other members.

UiPath has improved our organization by enabling us to automate repetitive tasks.

UiPath has helped minimize our on-premises footprint.

We utilize the Academy courses to prepare for certification. The Academy, a structured learning environment, provides me with the opportunity to acquire knowledge systematically. While it offers a wealth of valuable information, it primarily serves as a foundation for earning the certification. To gain practical experience and proficiency with the tool, additional hands-on work is necessary. Nonetheless, the Academy courses serve as a valuable starting point.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation. The digital transformation does not require expensive or complex application upgrades.

UiPath has helped reduce human error.

UiPath helps save around 80 percent of our client's time.

UiPath has saved us thousands of dollars over the years.

While I haven't explored all of UiPath's features yet, I'm interested in using some of them to discover potential use cases, scenarios, and projects relevant to my work. For instance, the collection center functionality seems promising. It allows clients to create tasks, fill in fields, trigger activities, and log execution process details. Additionally, verifying and managing jobs while switching between different items.

In UiPath, when debugging an issue, we cannot revert to previous steps while retaining variable values. Compared to Blue Prism, UiPath presents greater difficulty in troubleshooting bugs. 

The orchestrator may occasionally disconnect and lose communication with the machine, failing to provide real-time warnings. Additionally, error messages displayed throughout the solution lack clarity and conciseness. Furthermore, workflow names cannot contain spaces or symbols, leading to complications during package download within the project. However, no warning is issued for such naming inconsistencies.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath is not 100 percent stable but it is within acceptable range.

UiPath is scalable and it allows us to build scalable solutions.

We use both UiPath and Blue Prism, depending on our client's specific needs. However, in most cases, we recommend and utilize UiPath as our preferred solution.

The initial deployment was straightforward, but it does require some fine-tuning. I use the framework for deployments and customize it according to our client's needs.

One person is enough for the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

UiPath provides a good return on investment. It saves on employee costs through automation.

UiPath pricing is average.

I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

The environments and number of endpoints we deploy UiPath in vary by client.

One to three people are usually required for UiPath maintenance.

We managed over 500 global tasks worldwide, leveraging UiPath to automate procurement, financial accounting, customer service processes, and customer relations.

We evaluate resumes through the RPA and ChatGPT four. We also arrange service for customers who need repairs to their devices through automation we developed using UiPath.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation. The end-to-end automation is important because it allows us to reduce our testing and reporting time from 28 hours down to 15.

UiPath has helped us shorten the time for our supply chain and revenue report generation. By using UiPath Document Understanding the OCR can read the PDF documents and automatically drop the file into the ERP system significantly reducing our time.

UiPath has streamlined our operations by digitizing our documentation and converting it to easily accessible PDF files. This has significantly reduced our physical footprint, eliminating the need for paper storage and manual document handling.

As a partner of UiPath in our region we are required to take all the Academy courses so we can better service our clients and share our use cases.

We have 1,000 clients around the world, each with unique invoice formatting preferences. Our AI system efficiently sorts these invoices based on their specific formats. By automating more processes through AI, we've significantly improved efficiency. For example, while standard OCR takes a minute to process a PDF invoice, our AI system does it in just two seconds.

UiPath has helped speed up our digital transformation. We have created a large data lake to help with analytics.

We require human verification for the final invoice numbers. Using UiPath the number of human errors has been reduced to one percent.

UiPath has saved ten percent of our employees' time by automating the invoicing process, translating the invoice language, and emailing it to the original user.

UiPath helps save costs. We can keep the license costs down by using one API license to convert all our PDF files into Word.

UiPath is well-suited for automating tasks within Oracle applications and can be deployed on-premises or in the cloud. This flexibility is particularly advantageous when dealing with sensitive data that cannot be migrated to the cloud for security reasons.

UiPath needs to improve its integration with Microsoft products such as Office, SharePoint, and PowerPoint.

I have been using UiPath for two years.

UiPath is stable.

UiPath can scale to our needs.

The technical support is good. We rarely have to use them.

Positive

For general automation needs, we choose Microsoft Power Automate due to its cost-effectiveness compared to UiPath. However, for Oracle-centric automation, where stability is paramount, we rely on UiPath.

The initial deployment was complex. Many settings within the orchestrator need to be set before running a job. Once we implemented UiPath we had our user team keep an eye on it for one month to ensure it was stable, scheduling only attendee jobs before moving onto more complex automation.

In our region, we have a team of 15 to 25 people for the deployments and a smaller team of five in North America.

We implement UiPath in-house.

UiPath is expensive compared to the competition. We pay a license fee that is over 20,000 USD.

We evaluated Automation Anywhere, Power Automate, and UiPath. Automation Anywhere and UiPath are more expensive than Power Automate.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We do require the assistance of IT to help increase our digital transformation.

Maintenance is required when updates are made to a process or component. Our team of 25 is responsible for the maintenance as well.

We use UiPath to build attended and unattended automated processes for public and private sector clients. I try to make the processes as slim as possible so that they aren't as dependent on external applications. We have an abundance of documentation, and the goal is to have very little overhead. 

All the businesses where we've deployed UiPath were pleased with the solution. They saw immediate benefits to the bottom line, and employees were no longer stuck doing repetitive stuff. Organizations typically start realizing the benefits in the first month.

UiPath has reduced human error. It also offers visibility that helps build rapport between contractors like me and my clients in the federal government or other process owners we're working with. The solution cuts the costs associated with digital transformation.

UiPath significantly frees up employee time. On average, I estimate it saves between 50 to 100 hours per automation annually. The amount of money saved offsets the cost of licensing because you're saving time and reducing headaches. 

I like UiPath's Orchestrator. It's the core piece.  Automations are relatively easy to build. There is a learning curve initially, but I would rate it seven out of 10 for ease of building automation. The end-to-end automation is critical. It helps us develop a strategy where everyone has their things automated, saving time throughout the organization. The UiPath community forums are a helpful resource where you can contribute and get answers. 

I think UiPath's documentation for new features is a bit incomplete at times. 

I have used UiPath for around four years.

The stability depends on the VM you're running UiPath on, so that's not even really UiPath at that point.

UiPath prides itself on being very scalable. The unattended RPAs make it easy to scale. If you need to add more bots to run more processes, you can just have your IT department provision a new VM and buy more unattended licenses. 

I rate UiPath support five out of 10. Sometimes, UiPath support is like a lottery. They have many intelligent people who can get you what you need, but it depends on whether the person you're assigned knows the solution. It might be that they have so many customers and not enough staff. The ticket response times can be pretty slow.

Neutral

Previously, I used Power Automate mainly for its API integration and cloud workflows. I wasn't using it as an RPA solution. 

Due to the ridiculous nature of the government and the premium associated with adopting newer things, we can only do attended bot deployment right now. That means we publish new packages, send them via email, and deploy them on their type of system. In any other RPA shop, we would publish to Orchestrator and manage the process from there. The deployment is straightforward once you know what you're doing, but we need to maintain some oversight on the beginners to ensure they publish the processes correctly.  

I would like to see a GitLab model. In a CI/CD pipeline, it runs a series of tests after every commit to ensure that everything's functioning. It doesn't require maintenance so long as the engine keeps running, but we review the processes annually to see if there are any pain points or if anything needs optimization. 

There's an ROI despite the high cost. We save time, and many of the processes are much more robust than they could be if they were performed manually. UiPath can process an Excel file with thousands of rows. Human employees can do that by themselves, but bots can do the job so much faster. 

I think UiPath costs too much. They know they're top dogs, and that's fine, but I would never recommend them for anything other than a large enterprise or the federal government. There are development costs and unattended bot licenses are more expensive. UiPath has additional apps you can purchase that all have separate costs. 

The more you want to digitally transform your business, the more expensive it will be. With UiPath, that means the solution needs to use more of the product offerings, like IDP, the AI panel, and other stuff like that. But even with the minimal architecture, it will still cost at least a little bit.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

At Aeyon, we use UiPath to develop custom solutions for our clients that drive innovation and digital transformation within the public sector. We work closely with the US Marine Corps, Army, Navy, Coast Guard, NASA and several other Federal agencies. We have built 50+ automations for a wide range of use cases, but the ones we see most often include financial reconciliation, data extraction using AI/ML Models, data entry, data manipulation/consolidation, downloading/moving files in bulk, data validation, and interacting with various web applications.

The business objective that our organization is trying to achieve with its AI-powered automation initiative is to greatly reduce the time spent on repetitive/clerical tasks and allow the employees more time to focus on the important tasks that grow their business such as collaboration and innovation. Aeyon successfully helps our client achieve this objective by using UiPath to develop solutions that increase efficiency, reduce operating costs, and drive ROI.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has fundamentally changed what our organization is able to achieve. It has made a huge impact on the way we process documents for not only ourselves but our clients as well. It saved a lot of time and money.

We use AI Center for data extraction on structured and unstructured document types. The pre-built models are very versatile and efficient, and the ability to train custom models makes it a great solution for almost any use case. I feel that AI Center and UiPath Document Understanding were pretty easy to learn. It only took me about a week to learn. There are tons of helpful tutorials and other resources online. I like how it has the prebuilt models as well as the option to be able to go and train your own data, so I would give it a ten out of ten.

It has definitely increased the accuracy of our operations. It has reduced the risk of clerical errors. Document processing has allowed us to be able to compare data for that extra layer of making sure that everything is extracted correctly.

It has freed up a lot of time because instead of having to manually go through and find ways to track data or manually look at it, we are able to use different AI technologies to fit pretty much any use case. For most of our clients, it saves them an average of about 100 hours annually on the smaller processes, and then we have some larger ones where they are even saving about 15,000 hours annually, which is a lot of extra free time for them to focus on collaboration and those kinds of things.

A lot of the prebuilt models that are on an AI Center are valuable. Being able to go in there and train your data, give sample data, label the fields, and different OCR methods are also valuable.

The improvement is not necessarily in the product itself. The main difficulty we have usually has to do with pricing and identifying the best solution for each specific use case on a long-term scale. If there was an easier way to track the AI unit usage and determine which pricing plan would best fit the need for each use case, then that would be extremely valuable.

UiPath is very stable. I have not had any issues in terms of that. The only issue we used to have was if a website were to change or an application were to change, but we have found ways to work around that and deal with those types of situations.

I have been using UiPath for about four years.

Overall, it is very stable. There is low technical debt and monitoring. After a process has been deployed, for the most part, it is stable after testing and everything.

It is very scalable. I have had no issues in that department, and I know that they continue to make it more and more scalable, which is awesome to see with each new release.

Their support is great. There are so many resources available online. There is UiPath Academy, and there is the ability to chat with them 24/7. I have never had an issue getting in touch with their representative quickly when I needed help with something. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

I started off using UiPath, and then I got a job a few years back where I used a software called Kofax. I was able to see a lot of similarities, but I still felt that it was very limited in its ability to integrate with third-party software. I remember several use cases where I thought that if this was UiPath, I would know how to do it. I noticed a lot of limitations with Kofax. It was a bit of a learning curve going from UiPath to Kofax, and then I realized that there were a lot of things that Kofax was not able to integrate with in terms of third-party software. Based on my experience with Kofax, I definitely feel that UiPath is superior.

I have used Microsoft Power Automate for a few processes. We use that for some of our smaller projects. We just started looking into that as an option as well for certain use cases. It is important to us that UiPath has orchestration whereas Microsoft Power Automate does not because orchestration gives you a way to run processes in the background rather than on your local machine. You can also do event triggering and time schedules. UiPath definitely gives a lot more options and freedom to be able to do things without having to manually run the process.

I was involved in its initial setup. I pretty much came in when it was coming from the ground up. I have helped install it. I have helped customers set their licensing plans and install everything on their local machines so that they can run the automation and get set up with orchestration and all that.

Its initial setup was pretty straightforward. You need to have UiPath Studio installed. They now offer automation. They have UiPath Cloud. You just sign into that, and you have access to Orchestrator and all of those services just right off the web. It is pretty easy to set up.

Our implementation strategy includes getting on a Teams call with the client so that we are able to look at their screen and walk them step by step through various aspects, such as:

• Where to save specific folders?
• How to get signed in to the appropriate account?
• How to access Orchestrator and the logs in there to see if there are any issues with the process?
• How to monitor it?

We look at their screen and walk them through various things. We keep that communication line open if they ever have issues or questions in the future.

We did not take any external help. Our company did it through our own team members.

We try to calculate ROI for all of our clients for projects that we deploy. We usually calculate it in terms of total cost savings annually and also in terms of how many hours of labor are being saved annually. It is cool to see those numbers continuing to grow.

The licensing is very affordable, especially when you compare its benefits. However, I know that AI units are purchased separately and can be costly depending on the specific use case. We are still trying to figure out how to track our usage and which tier or plan to go with, but overall, it is affordable in comparison to other options.

I evaluated Automation Anywhere as well as Blue Prism. At my last company, we were trying to figure out between those two and UiPath. After comparing everything on a wider scale, we realized that UiPath was going to be the better solution for us.

I would rate UiPath a ten out of ten.