UiPath Platform Reviews

Primary use cases would be within the finance sector. We supply financial services for other government agencies. The main robots that we have in use right now are concerning floating of financial periods, uploading reports, commenting on these reports, and so on. We are starting to look at invoice processing, to a larger degree. Then, we have a few quality and control robots which do checks on data quality, customer information, customer carts, etc. 

We are using approximately 20 robots right now for different uses.

We've opted for professional, traditional developers and programmers to do batch robots. We don't use it in our business units. Possibly because we are a government agency, we don't necessarily get enough IT security around the users applying their own robots. 

It is not easy to use in this way because we do use traditional programming skills. We are considering moving some tasks out into the workforce for Attended Robots, etc. We think that this will be a problem for us in regards to getting it pushed out there and still maintaining good quality. However, we haven't tried it yet.

We are able to smooth out peak workloads. Because with a lot of the period closures, like monthly and yearly closures, we work in peaks. Everything has to be done within a few days. When we can prepare a lot of the data and reports through the night, the employees can start on those in the morning. Therefore, we are leveling out some of the workload features, which is one of the main benefits.

Automation technology for us is mainly a way to get around the long-term IT projects. This is the future for us, when using UiPath, to start moving into the AI part of it. In addition, the bundling of the offerings into UiPath is quite important, so we don't have to go to several different vendors. We can try it out on our own and see if this is something we want to do. Then, we might bring in another partner or vendor to do some specialized training, debug the networks, etc. We're never going to get that capability ourselves. We don't have a large IT department nor do we have data scientists. For us, it's important that one or more of these skills are getting baked into the system.

The ability to integrate between legacy systems is the most valuable feature. We use it mainly to replicate manual processes, where you just have to pull out data or pull down large volumes of customer information, in general. We work across many individual customers, who are individual entities or individual databases in our ERP system. We work across about 220 databases. Therefore, the task of logging onto different databases alone is quite cumbersome.

The main thing is to make data available to the employees when they start working mornings, instead of them starting drawing out reports to see if there is anything that they need to act upon. With these legacy systems, which work on a one-to-one basis, we tried to batch process them a lot more.

We have looked at it with Citrix, and there are problems with it. Some of the new features coming will address it.

We have been looking at Attended Robots, which result in the inability to lock your screen. That is simply a no-go for ever using them in most government agencies, as IT security will prohibit us from using them. If UiPath wants Attended Robots to be used inside a government agency, it needs to be applicable on a virtual desktop.

A lot of what is coming is what we are looking towards: Both on the skill set with computer vision, but especially also on the enhanced identity management and security. The ability to debug and lock at a less complex level for us to look at. 

One to three years.

UiPath's stability is quite good. We don't see any problems with the stability of the platform application. All our problems stem from the basic systems that we operate on, which are quite vulnerable to network problems, time outs in various systems, etc. However, these have nothing to do with UiPath. Perhaps some of the things which are on the road map will help with the debugging of some of these issues.

One of the things that we are lacking right now is not stability, but usability with debugging, e.g., when you can't see what went wrong. We have to look through 50,000 pages of logs or so. 

The scalability is quite good. 

The main problem around scalability is the licensing structure and the inability to dynamically assign licenses across robots. While I know this is coming, this is our main gripe with scalability: the licensing structure. Because we are part of a larger setup with our own IT supplier, who does a multitenancy setup with Orchestrator, to have more flexibility with the use of licenses would be very valuable.

We are using virtual desktops to deploy and run the machines with robots. It is necessary, as we cannot scale it on individual on-premise machines.

We have used the customer support. Our main issue with them is they need to understand the problem that we are writing about, and not reply too soon with a standard answer.

All our developers are using UiPath Academy and are RPA certified. While they like some thing, some of the frameworks which were used in the Academy examples, the developers didn't agree with. This is probably because they are IT professionals themselves and are used to doing things a different way. Whether it's because the use case wasn't good or they were just used to something else, this was the main gripe.

The product has a lot of backing from our director, who has been pushing the agenda. To be able to stay relevant, even as a government agency, we have to reduce our costs every year by two percent. To be able to produce that, we need to be more efficient at what we do. The target is: Not to reduce staff, but keep up with the increased demand for production and costs.

I wasn't part of the very first setup.

We mostly did the deployment ourselves or with our own IT partner, who is not a partner of UiPath. So, it has mainly been done by our own IT people.

On the individual robots, we do have good return on investment. However, once you add in the governance, including when we are scaling up the solution and the maintenance of robots, then I don't think we are at a break-even point. This upcoming year, we are expecting positive ROI. For us, the return on investment is high quality data. 

It has helped us to eliminate human errors. We have a robot that is specifically requested to avoid, for example, uploading reports on the wrong customers because of GDPR cases, where data protection officers will have to get involved, even though, it's not sensitive data. We have seen problematic use cases drop from a couple of incidents from maybe 100 transactions to zero. We are looking to completely eliminate errors in some cases, not just reduce.

It has saved our organization time. We use the robots to try to address some of the peak workloads that we have. They are not there so much to address a certain number of hours that we want to save. We want to be able to use the robots to help address our customers' needs during designated time frames to reduce extra stress on our employees.

We would like to see improvement around the licensing and multitenancy. 

We also evaluated Blue Prism and Kofax Kapow. The reason that we went with UiPath has a lot to do with scalability, as our IT supplier has committed to a multitenancy set up, which was not possible with Blue Prism. 

We are quite happy with UiPath. We are not looking at other vendors at the moment. They are all offering similar solutions, but with a slightly different focus. We could use any other solution, but the development is so fast that even changing now would be no guarantee that we end up with what we want, because everybody is moving at a pace where we can barely keep up with the development of the products.

Try out different vendors and their labs. See how it fits to the processes that you are trying to automate right now. Some applications are better at old mainframe systems, and if that's what you will be focusing your efforts on, then maybe UiPath isn't the best vendor for you. There are others who focus more on that sort of environment. So, be realistic about what you want to automate, and choose your use case initially from that. 

We see the biggest benefit right now from Unattended Robots, but that's all we use. In the very long-term, Unattended versus Attended Robots will be able to generate a greater benefit. However, with the current licensing costs, they will need to change for it to be a positive business model. We have to be able to move licenses from one person to another. If we have to apply a fresh license to each person in the workforce, with our budget, it will not be possible.

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 primarily use UiPath's AI features to pull information from chatbot conversations with insurance providers and identify decisions made. 

Implementing AI and automation has allowed us to collect information quickly. We have deadlines that we must meet for our clients, and AI has enabled us to get that information without manual intervention. There are delays while we wait for insurance to pay for claims, and taking humans out of the equation enables us to be as productive as we want. 

We've been testing this emerging technology, and we're excited to see it continue to grow. So far, we've been successful in connecting, having interactions, training a language model, getting responses, and using that information to make decisions in the workflow.

The most helpful features are human-assisted and unattended bots. These features help us drive the workflow in the direction we want it to go. It allows staff to utilize their talents and the information they need. We can remove this small conversation and let them focus on the more important work.

Data integration is the biggest opportunity for improvement. We need quick connections to our complex in-house databases to set up automations more efficiently. It's time-consuming to connect those large databases. 

I have been using UiPath for about a year, while our organization has been using it for about four years.

UiPath's stability is excellent, and its ability to forecast stability is improving. We have a lot of stable automations running.

Scalability is a challenge as we're a large enterprise, but task mining helps identify issues and pushes automation into the enterprise effectively.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10.  We have strong contacts with UiPath, and an in-house team managing implementations has built a really good relationship with them.

Positive

I am not aware of any solutions we used prior to UiPath. We developed our own home grown tools and UI automation.

We've seen a significant ROI by reducing the number of full-time employees. We haven't calculated a precise figure, but it has been pretty successful, and we believe it is promising. 

We are using UiPath for traditional RPA automations at the moment. 

We are automating rule-based, repetitive business processes, but we're interested in the automation opportunities AI capabilities present. Of course, transactional automation has limitations, but in areas where it is applicable, we have been able to use it effectively.

The overall UiPath platform, including the Orchestrator, Studio, and the robots, is valuable. UiPath's competitors don't do orchestration as well.

The licensing policies and concepts change almost yearly, leading to difficult negotiations. All components are licensed differently, and it would be more straightforward to adopt new features if they were included in the same bundle.

I have used UiPath for six or seven years.

The solution is very stable for us.

It is scalable according to our needs.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath is customer-oriented and attends to the customers well. They're helpful when we have challenges and are open to our ideas. We've had challenges with technical support solving some tickets, but it's been excellent overall. 

Positive

We installed the on-premise version in our environment seven years ago. It was very straightforward at that time.

I was involved in the deployment process by overseeing it.

We have seen a significant return on investment. The easiest to measure is the hours saved from manual work. We've saved the equivalent of 200 FTEs worth of hours each year. There are also less measurable benefits, such as improved quality and faster throughput.

We are primarily looking to solve business challenges related to processing unstructured documents.

Currently, we have not realized the business outcomes as we have not implemented the solution yet. The goal is to increase efficiency, throughput, and accuracy. UiPath AI and automation have not yet helped free up staff to work on other projects or tasks. In terms of environmental, social, and governance solutions, it is not applicable.

The Studio and the Test Manager have been valuable as they made testing with QA easier. We've been able to rerun numerous test cases quickly. From the UiPath platform overall, I find these features valuable.

The product documentation needs improvement as it tends to be self-contradictory and sometimes hard to access since we are on an older version. 

There is also a need for more consistency in product support and customer service.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath has been pretty stable since we are mostly on-premises. However, the stability is to be determined when we move our full infrastructure to the cloud. Outages could occur with SaaS solutions.

It has scaled with us efficiently despite the initial complexity in understanding licenses, runtimes, and utilization. No significant issues have been encountered yet.

There have been ebbs and flows with customer service. We are at Premium Plus, now called Enterprise Success. Initially, there wasn't much value, but there has been some improvement. Dedicated support provides more assistance and better outcomes.

Neutral

I'm familiar with Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, each of which offer different pros and cons. UiPath, being the market leader, differentiates itself with its capabilities and portfolio. It is easy to use from day one, flexible, and their vision is helpful.

I can't provide specifics as to ROI. That said, in general, we achieve financial benefits and a positive ROI on our implementations most years.

Pricing and licensing are challenging as they can be difficult to understand. They make it hard to determine utilization and necessary licenses for runtimes. Comprehensive components need to come together for a clear picture, making renewals and contract negotiations complex.

We have considered Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism as alternate solutions.

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten.

I am working for a client. I am using on-premises UiPath Orchestrator. I have installed UiPath Studio and deployed some processes for automation. 

I have used it for SAP automation, Excel automation, and web automation. I have not yet used the AI functionality. I might use it in the future.

Manual tasks are reduced, and in less time, I can complete a task. 

UiPath has sped up our digital transformation by 20%.

UiPath has reduced human error. With automation, correct values get entered, and there is a reduction in human error. There is a 10% reduction.

UiPath has saved us money because there is a reduction in manpower. It has saved about 20% on costs.

In terms of time savings, for Excel automation, the backend activities are much faster, whereas web automation takes time because it requires loading the screen and capturing the elements. For Excel automation, the backend activities take 30% to 40% less time.

UiPath Orchestrator is very user-friendly and easy to understand.

The interface is very good. In the latest one, they have added many more activities, which has made it even easier to do automation.

While doing web automation, I am facing a selector issue. In the web portal, we need to capture a screen element. For capturing the screen element, when I run the job the next time, it fails because the limit is not recognized. It is very difficult to make the selector stable. It is not easy.

I have been using UiPath for more than two years.

At times, when I restart the system, the deployed robots take time to connect to the UiPath Orchestrator. Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

It is scalable. We can use it in different companies or industries, such as hospitality or finance. I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

It is deployed at one location, and we have four to five users of UiPath.

I am satisfied with their support. Whenever I raise a ticket, they provide the required support. 

UiPath has a user community, but I did not use it much. I used the UiPath documentation.

I have also used UiPath Academy and completed three courses. I have done the foundation course, the advanced course, and the continuous learning course. I am satisfied with the UiPath Academy courses.

Positive

I have also used Automation Anywhere. Compared to Automation Anywhere, UiPath is more user-friendly. In Automation Anywhere, we have to do lots of things, whereas in UiPath, we have to do fewer things, which makes it easier to do automation. Also, capturing the screen is much harder in Automation Anywhere. It is easier in UiPath.

The deployment of UiPath Orchestrator only takes one day. 

In terms of maintenance, it only requires yearly license renewal and making sure it is up to date.

We have two people who are involved in the UiPath deployment. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We are an insurance company. We mainly deal with all types of insurance from casualty and specialty to even aviation and medical stop loss.

I have had use cases where we have been taking information from emails and phone calls to put them into a mainframe. We have done claims intake for insurance, and then we have notifications. For the policy system, we have done a lot of back-office accounting work.

By implementing UiPath, we were trying to seek a way to free hours up at critical times. It is not just about hours saved. It is also the quality of the hours that we save and freeing people up for more value-added work.

UiPath has definitely helped with scalability. The number one reason to use something like UiPath is to increase scalability so that we are less susceptible to changes in the market. We can grow our business without growing our staff hours.

UiPath has changed the way we perceive our processes because even outside of processes that we automate, we look at our processes in a new way in terms of process improvement. Not everything needs to be automated. Some things just need to have the process changed. It has helped us to be very critical of our processes and be more forward-thinking and not just sticking in the same ruts.

UiPath has helped with the accuracy. There is less fat fingering of things. When the robot is entering things into a system, it will put in exactly what was input into it. There is also a chance for transposing things, so there is a lot more accuracy in that respect.

UiPath has freed up time and resources for other tasks. That has been our main focus in terms of the ROI we look for. With the accounting back office practices, our close cycles are shorter, but people are not working more. With automation, we now have things that are on more of a 24-hour cycle. We are able to do a higher volume in less time.

We have saved thousands of hours not just in the back office accounting side for close cycles but also in insurance. We have busy seasons. We sometimes had to hire temporary workers. With the automation of our claims intake and other processes in that area, we are no longer hiring those temporary workers. We do not need them anymore.

The ability to connect various systems that do not have any kind of API between and the areas where we need to mimic what a human does to a system in terms of input and output is valuable. We primarily use UI automation where we simulate what a human does within an application. By using the right selectors, we try to find where on the screen we need to click. We take in information from input files. We use all the logic flowcharts and logic trees to determine where the information needs to go in a system.

Some of the areas around the administration aspect of UiPath, which is what I have been mostly working with over the past few years, can be better. From an organizational standpoint, some of the guidance there could use some work in terms of helping COEs know how to grow and how to take control of their organizations as they spread.

I have been using UiPath for about five years. 

There are still some stability issues. There are sometimes issues related to bots acting up. It can be hard to tell whether that is something related to how we developed it or whether the bots are having an issue. We are not sure why, but there are some stability issues.

Its scalability is fine. It has definitely gotten better over the past few years with all the improvements there. I know there have also been new offerings for serverless robots, which we have looked into, but they do not fit our needs. The UiPath Orchestrator makes it easy to maintain its governability as we scale, which is one of the main differentiators of this solution.

They can sometimes be hard to get a hold of. There have been a few times we have had to go to the UiPath Pro support. While we have eventually gotten to the solution, it has sometimes taken us a while to get in contact with someone who has the right knowledge to help us with our problem. I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

This is the first one we have been using. We have a group in the company that started using Power Automate. They ran into a problem and turned that back over to us. We are the UiPath team. They tried to automate something with Power Automate, and we ended up taking over that project.

Orchestration is the main differentiator between Power Automate and UiPath. UiPath has orchestration whereas Power Automate does not. Without that orchestration, you lose a lot of the value for these robots, especially at the organizational control level.

I was brought on specifically to do the deployment at my current company. It was fairly easy. I did an on-prem deployment about five years ago, and now, I am doing the cloud deployment. We are using the automation cloud. Having the automation cloud made it much easier to do the deployment this time than trying to set up the on-prem Orchestrator the first time.

In terms of the implementation strategy, we essentially looked at how many processes we had as candidates and what we thought the bot load would be. We stood up that many VMs. We deployed unattended robots to those. In terms of Orchestrator, we just did some basic tenant separation, and as we have grown, we have seen where to increase the bots.

We used one called Accelerate to start with. Our experience was fine. Our goal was always to transition to our own, so after the proof of concept was done, we hired our own developers. We hired our own team and went from there.

We have definitely seen ROI coming from it. For any project we take on, we look at both quantitative and qualitative aspects. Quantitative is usually just the hours saved. If a process is automated, how many hours are saved as compared to the last one? Qualitative would be things like whether we have increased accuracy, whether we have increased any time to the next process in the chain, or whether we have gained redundancy and reduced the fragility of our processes.

If it can be lower, we will always take lower.

Blue Prism was what we looked at pretty heavily. We looked at Pega. We also looked at Power Automate, and some groups within the company decided to try and use that. 

When comparing UiPath and Blue Prism, there is clearly a difference in power and capabilities between the two. We also had a solution partner who could work with us better with UiPath at the time.

We are currently setting up the AI Center. We have not used UiPath Process Mining and Task Mining. We tried to use the task binder where you record something and create a workflow from it, but it was not very useful for us. The output was not very useful for us. The documentation from it was also not useful for us.

If you are evaluating UiPath and other products, I would advise looking at what kind of model you are looking for. Are you looking for a more federated model or a centralized model?  You should look at what kind of governance you need in place for the solution you are looking for. One type of solution is that you put it in someone's hands and leave it and forget it. If you want to empower people and maintain central control, UiPath would be for you.

In terms of deployment, I would go for the automation cloud every time. There is the ease of use of not having to worry about standing up your own servers to monitor that. The US cloud especially has been very stable.

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We're a consulting firm and we use the solution to automate various systems, mostly in data processing, including in the customer service department. We're also using it to take advantage of artificial intelligence.

We've noticed a lot of benefits. For example, I've noted a reduction in errors in data processing and analysis. We've also been able to increase our working hours. We don't necessarily need to have a human workforce going around the clock. There are some hours or some shifts where we rely on the robot to take care of the workflow. We've also been able to apply artificial intelligence to our work to amplify the customer service experience and help us be efficient and fast.

The pricing is pretty fair. It fits various types of organizations.

The support has been very good. We appreciate it. Support is in various languages.

Building automation is very easy. You can deploy anywhere and you can even access the platform using a mobile device, web browser, or iPad. This flexibility makes it easy to use. 

It allows us to handle end-to-end automation, mostly for data analytics and data processing. With this option, we are able to work through processes 24/7. This reduces the amount of downtime.

The community has been very helpful. You can go there if you have minimal problems instead of going to support or having to shut down your whole system. You can contact someone in your community, and they can help share insights. It's helpful for teaching staff how to use the platform.

We've been able to reduce our on-premises footprint. At the same time, we've been able to grow our digital footprint.

We have dashboards where we can monitor staff, and even if they are far away or working from home, we are able to monitor everything, and people no longer need to necessarily be on-premises to work.

The solution has a useful Academy that I started using in the past year. When we have new employees who are onboarding to the department, we conduct an initial training. However, after that, they can go to the UiPath Academy and acquire even more skills. The biggest benefit is that it allows any employee to learn on their own time. It gives everyone the potential to grow and learn at their own pace.

We have used the AI functionality from UiPath, mostly in Europe. As an accounting company, we handle tons of Excel worksheets and formulas. The AI makes it all very efficient and helps with analytics and processing. 

It's sped up our digital transformation. Initially, we did not have automation. We only had automation available through other companies. When we adopted UiPath, we developed an automated process that allowed us to bypass having a human behind the computer.

UiPath helps reduce human error. It's reduced it by a huge amount and was a big reason for us acquiring the product.

The solution has helped free up employee time. Employees now have to do less manual work. You don't have to manually look at every receipt or every piece of data. We assign a UiPath automation to the task. Something that would take a human an hour is done in 15 to 20 minutes.

It does save us money. We used to have two shifts before acquiring UiPath. Now, we've reduced the human workforce for the night shift. 60% of the work we can assign to RPA. Less of a human workforce means less money spent on manual productivity. It's helped us reduce our overall operating costs.

The billing plans should be improved. Instead of billing per month, they can offer plans for a year or two.

I've used the solution for a year and eight months. 

The solution is stable, depending on your infrastructure.

The solution is scalable. 

We contacted support in the initial six to eight months of usage. We used to contact them monthly since not all staff were knowledgeable. 

Support was fast enough. Of course, there were sometimes technical errors and it would take two to three hours to get a response.

Positive

We did not previously use any automation solution. 

While we started on the cloud of the free trial, we moved to the on-premises deployment model.

The deployment was easy. We started with the free trial, and after we saw the results, that informed our decision to continue.

We had 20 to 40 people involved in the deployment. 

There is some maintenance required. New employees need to be onboarded and sometimes they mess up and the IT team will have to return the platform to normal.

We didn't go through any other channel during deployment. We had an efficient vendor from UiPath.

We have seen an ROI in that we were able to reduce the need for so many workers on night shifts. That aspect has brought down our operating expenses while driving productivity up.

I'm a customer and end user. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.