UiPath Platform Reviews

We work as a center of excellence and we develop automations centrally for other departments. All our deployments are unattended bots that are deployed and managed by us, centrally. They are all running on a virtual machine. Nothing is running on client computers or laptops. We do not have any attended use cases. The process owners are interacting with the bots.

We use the bots for a lot of reporting, including monthly and weekly reports. We are a construction company and we have a lot of reports for all kinds of things, such as construction projects, different construction sites, and various subsidiaries for regional departments. A region like Bavaria, for example, needs its reports. And there are plenty of controlling departments in all of the subsidiaries.

We also have some ticketing use cases. One of them is for IT services, meaning internal ticketing. That bot regularly checks our ticket software and automatically processes some of the tickets. For example, when an employee needs rights to a specific system, the bot checks whether they fulfill the requirements and approves or declines the ticket.

Another type of ticketing use case is more about processing customer tickets. As a construction company, we also do facility management, and that means there are a lot of external customers with their own systems in which they record tickets. The tickets are not visible in our local systems so someone has to go to the external systems, export the tickets, filter them, and then tell everyone what they're supposed to do to their buildings as a result. The tickets might be about small repair jobs, for example. We run this daily and, in the morning, everyone receives an email with all the tickets that have to be done within one day, three days, one week, et cetera.

Both of the ticketing use cases are connected with SLAs. If you miss a certain time frame before processing a ticket for external customers, you have to pay a penalty fee. For the internal tickets there are SLAs for internal tracking purposes. Because those tickets have to be processed within two hours, that bot runs every two hours and checks for new tickets.

Another IT services use case is for getting access rights to local drives.

We also have many recurring processes. For example, in HR they have to go to the system and confirm a process. It’s a necessary evil which is probably due to the legacy systems we have. Someone defined this process a long time ago and it still has to be done.

We also have use cases in finance and treasury. They are not tickets, but they process requests from employees. For example, they can request cash on a specific card and the bot will check the emails and then basically transfer data from an email, or from a PDF form attached to an email, and enter it into the finance system.

One last type of use case is where the bot works as an interface between systems. Data has to be exported from one system and imported to another system and there is no existing API. The bot exports and imports the data. We have one bot that exports PDF documents and sends them to an email interface. It defines a specific subject and then attaches the file. That file will automatically be uploaded to another system. Or the bot may log in to a system and upload the document. These use cases are due to the fact that there is no interface between two systems and they're either not big enough to develop an API or they may involve an external customer system and the customer has no interest in providing an API.

UiPath has freed up our employees' time and that's its main purpose. We don't have huge use cases, but for our bigger use cases it could be saving us 35 to 40 hours per month. With the smaller processes, people save about two hours a month. We have 23 use cases that are live at the moment and the total time saved by them is about seven or eight person-days a week. The big processes account for 50 to 60 percent of all the savings.

Employees have more time for more important things, but there are no direct cost savings from our automations. What we do have are a lot of efficiency gains and some time savings. Any cost savings are on the lower end of the scale.

The solution also definitely reduces human error. We have some processes that involve penalty fees if there is human error, so the reduction in errors has probably affected the business on a very small scale.

In terms of the cost of automations, before UiPath the whole automation process was much more complex. There might have been software providers involved in that process, charging us and providing APIs. And the whole process took way longer. Now that we have a UiPath license, the cost of implementing any automation is zero, other than our salaries, which would be paid anyway. The automation creation process is definitely a lot faster. It's also cheaper because there is no involvement of an external software developer, which is probably the most expensive part.

I like the REFramework. It's one of the unique selling points of UiPath because it gives you a framework within the software to structure your processes. It's perfect in terms of error handling and it provides a lot of functionalities for processing multiple transactions. It makes the whole solution more robust.

I tested the Process Mining at my previous company and I don't think it's suitable for RPA processes. It operates at a way higher level and, using it, you may find an area in which you can optimize a process, but it doesn't just give you a defined process for automation. It doesn't necessarily help you to identify the processes.

The Task Capture component offers the ability to record a process and it will give you process documentation. It tells you how many clicks are being made, and it will create screenshots. It tells you the basic activities that are being done in the process. When we tested it, the quality of these documents was very low. It took more time to take the output and make it useful than it would have taken to analyze and document the process ourselves. 

We are not using any of that. Together with the customer, we are manually defining and documenting processes. We are doing the actual automation, of course, with UiPath. In terms of monitoring it afterward, it's 50/50. Standard Orchestrator definitely offers you some ways to monitor your processes. It tells you how many processes failed and why they failed. You could also define a process that sends you an email when it fails.

UiPath also offers some BI components, but that requires a separate license and costs. We are not using them. The whole BI reporting functionality of standard UiPath is not that great. We use external dashboards in Power BI.

We also have a calendar application because, with standard Orchestrator, there's no overview about when you have bots running and when you have free slots. So it's also not great for planning license usage. The whole visualization piece, out-of-the-box, is not so nice. UiPath is mainly the automation tool for us, and it's definitely great for that. But in terms of analysis and monitoring, there's definitely still potential for the software.

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

Their tech support replies quite quickly. But when we had technical problems, most of the time, we had to have multiple calls. It's not that great. They definitely provided us with all the experts, but they just didn't immediately find solutions, most of the time.

It often took two to three days to fix our issues. We would have to explain the issue one or two times and then they say, "Okay, we need to do a call." After the call we would try out the solution but it wouldn't work and there would be another call. Support is another potential area for improvement.

Also, we bought our licenses from a UiPath partner. We are actually supposed to talk to them for support, but they charge for their consulting services. They are the reason we didn't have constant communication with UiPath. From my experience at my previous job, where we worked with UiPath, we were in close communication with the UiPath success manager. There was way better communication and support because we always had a channel that we could talk to regularly. And they already knew what our issues had been. If you are working directly with UiPath, the tech support is good, although not great.

We did not have a previous solution.

I started in RPA with my previous company. My boss just told me to get into this topic. I started with the UiPath Academy before we were even using the software, but I could follow all the courses. It's all video training, so it's easy to follow. The Microsoft training often consists of long sets of text and it says "expected reading time is 23 minutes," but it's 23 minutes just to read the text. Now, UiPath even offers training exercises. 

And because they offer the Community version, you can download the full-featured software without actually having a license, for personal use and for training purposes. That way you can try out whatever you learn. That makes the learning very practical. And the Community version is not limited to 30 days like test versions of some other solutions. It's a version that you can use for testing forever and you can use all the functionalities. That definitely helped me when I did the training. That's how I got from knowing nothing about RPA to knowing a lot about RPA, before working with it.

If you have a basic understanding of the software, the most important thing is to develop with it, because that gives you practical experience.

They also have very specific, deep-dive courses, for working with Orchestrator, among other things. They're easy to find. You can invest two hours and learn the most important aspects of the UI and look for what you need.

With the Advanced RPA Developer certification, there is an exam. That is where I got the most practical experience. It's not just quizzes, it's also practical projects.

Overall, the Academy is great. It has training paths as well as very specific courses. 

UiPath is quite expensive and whatever additional components you want to use will have additional costs. We are not using the Document Understanding feature because of the cost. For Document Understanding, the cost may be per transaction.

Compared to Power Automate, UiPath is quite expensive to set up. What we are trying to do, and likely everybody tries to do this, is fully occupy one unattended-bot license before getting another one. So it's not just a matter of buying a few licenses, because they are quite expensive. That definitely also affects the return on investment, especially if you automate smaller processes.

Also, we are currently working with centralized automation development, but we are planning to decentralize it with citizen developers as well, for smaller processes. For that, we intend to use Power Automate Desktop because in that scenario the pricing disqualified UiPath. If you give a UiPath Studio license to many people—to fulfill the vision of a bot for every person—or even to one person per department, they would have to work quite hard to see a positive return on investment. 

For UiPath, you need Orchestrator, which is already quite expensive, although you can use just one to start with. But if you have multiple unattended-bot licenses and multiple Studio licenses, it gets expensive quite fast. 

Also, the whole pricing structure is very unclear. You can't find out anything about prices before talking with UiPath or with a partner. At that point, you're still not sure what kind of price you're getting. Of course, they offer savings when you order many licenses, but there's no fixed reference point if you haven't talked to UiPath before. There is no real information about what you actually need and how much you can expect it to cost. 

With the Microsoft platform, you can directly see the kinds of packages they have and whether they're charging per process or per transaction. You see the price. It's very transparent.

When I compare UiPath with other providers' solutions, UiPath offers a very structured development interface. It is more structured than the interface of Microsoft Power Automate, for example. It offers a very visually appealing way of structuring the processes in flow charts as well as in sequences. It makes it easy to see an overview of a process. I definitely like UiPath's development interface.

UiPath Orchestrator is definitely great, and better than what competitors offer because it enables you to use queues very easily, which again helps to create robust automations.

In addition, the UiPath community is the best among all the software communities that I've seen. There's a great forum. Whatever question you have will either be answered by other developers or even UiPath employees who participate in the forum. Also, there is already a huge stock of questions and answers about automation. Usually, you will get an answer to any question within hours or even minutes. Together with the training platform, the whole ecosystem around the community is much better than that of any other software I've ever seen.

In my previous company, we evaluated the big ones at that time: Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and UiPath. 

In my current company, we mainly evaluated two solutions. The first was UiPath, because it's probably the most powerful solution. The second was Microsoft Power Automate, which is now becoming more mature. Power Automate is probably also the easiest to implement because we are Office 365 users. We could just provide a Power Automate desktop license to any of our employees. It's definitely much easier to acquire Power Automate licenses and provide them to the users. It's directly integrated. There's no need for IT involvement.

In my opinion, UiPath is easy to use. Once you have been using it for a while, it's pretty easy. If you're using it as a citizen developer, meaning that you want to automate your own processes, it's probably a bit complex. It offers a lot of functionality and properties that can be edited per activity. You have to have a basic understanding of variables, arguments, et cetera, if you want to build a robust solution.

The macro recorder is not that nice. It's not like you can just record a process and then run it over and over again. It definitely requires some experience to create a robust process. All in all, I think it's easy to use. 

I also tried the StudioX version, just for testing purposes, and that may be a bit easier to use, but it's still not a tool that you can give to someone and they will be able to start developing on their own. In particular, they will not be able to run something unattended because that requires a lot of testing. It requires basic knowledge, which comes with experience, about the HTML selectors.

In general, UiPath is the most powerful solution there is on the market right now for RPA, mainly because of the easy structure provided by UiPath Orchestrator for larger transactional business processes.

We are working with automation, and it is very useful for my enterprise and our clients. We are using UiPath for building applications for automation purposes. Some of our clients are in the banking industry. They ask us to create applications to automate their processes, and we use UiPath for that.

Our overall productivity has increased because the bandwidth of our people has increased. Previously, when we were manually doing a particular task, it used to take us two hours, and after building the application with UiPath, the same task is taking around 10 seconds. From two hours, the time has come down to 10 seconds, which increases our bandwidth and productivity.

We are moving into robotics, and in robotics, advanced NLP and AI are being used. As tasks move from being manual to being automated, it definitely reduces the effort and improves productivity. The saved time can be utilized in a better way.

Its ease of use is valuable. For building an application, if I give this product to a newbie, he or she would be able to easily use it and build an application with minimum knowledge. No extra training is required. Its features are self-explanatory, and anyone can understand them, which is the main feature of this product.

I extensively work on the automation part, and I like the drag-and-drop functionality for workflows. Its graphical workspace or visualizations make it a unique product. It provides good visualizations, which are helpful in understanding the workflow. I am very impressed by its drag and drop functionality, and I would recommend it to everyone.

It can be improved in terms of platform integration. It is platform-independent, but it should be easy to integrate with different platforms, such as Windows, Linux, Cloud, etc. If I am using AWS for my server response, I should be able to integrate that into UiPath. 

If I can get some manuals along with the product, it will be good to see all the features that are available in it.

I have been using this solution for the last eight years. I have been in the software industry for about eight and a half years, and I have been using UiPath very regularly for my day-to-day work. 

Its stability is good. In the last couple of years, I didn't have any problems. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

We have a team of 30 to 40 people who use this solution. At this time, we don't have plans to increase its usage. If the usage of this tool grows, it would definitely be better. It will increase productivity and more efficient use of our company.

I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have used Visual Studio previously to build applications. I switched to UiPath because I like its interface and the drag-and-drop functionality. When I am building an application using this, it's very easy to edit the flow. I am very impressed with UiPath.

I'm involved in the development and deployment of applications. I have the knowledge, so for me, it is straightforward. Most of the features are self-explanatory, but there are certain features for which a newbie might have to refer to the manual.

The duration varies from application to application. It can be anything from 30 minutes to six hours. For the development of applications, we use the SDLC model. When our testing is complete, we deploy the application. We have a team of six to eight people for implementation. They are from the product team and the support team. They are software developers at different levels.

In terms of maintenance, it requires upgrades. It is a timely activity, and it happens once or twice a year. We do not have a separate team for maintenance. The same team involved in its deployment takes care of its maintenance.

We are able to build applications for our clients, and they are also buying them. So, we have definitely seen an ROI.

We are an enterprise. So, its price is bearable for us,  but I am not sure about the small industry. It might be expensive for them.

It is a promising tool. It is very helpful for my day-to-day work. For automation applications, this is the best solution. Its drag-and-drop functionality and visualizations make the work easy. It is a very good tool for me.

I would rate it a nine out of ten because I'm very impressed with this tool.

My previous company was in the banking sector, and we had done automation with websites, UI, SAP, Excel files, and PDF. In my current company, it is being used for finance and HR. We have ERP, CRM, chatbots, etc. We are using this solution to integrate different systems.

I use UiPath Studio to develop the code, and I use UiPath Orchestrator to publish my work. We have our own UAT systems to test the code. We can install the UiPath in the test environment and find all the compilation errors in the debug mode and fix them. We also have version control. If we upload a version and it doesn't work, we can downgrade the version. Everything is tracked in UiPath Orchestrator.

We are using it on-premise. In my previous company, it was on the cloud, and we accessed it through the cloud. 

UiPath Academy courses have been helpful for me. There were lots of activities that I didn't know about, and UiPath Academy was helpful for that. There are multiple ways to do an activity, and UiPath Academy helps you to find out those activities. When you start using it, you can find out which activity will work the best for you. The courses are interactive and not boring with just videos or PDFs. They have a mix of PDFs, videos, and interactions. It is fun and interesting if you have a passion for it.

I found the UiPath community very helpful. At the beginning of my career, I had lots of doubts, and I posted them in the community. We had got an unknown error, and we posted our query there thinking that there must be at least one person who has had the same issue. They solved the issue quickly. It was a quick response. If you post a question, sometimes, you can also get a response within five minutes.

I use attended automation, and it has helped to scale RPA benefits in our organization for processes that require human-robot collaboration. We have a process for reconciling bank statements. When the finance department is done with their files, they send them over to me by email, and I have to start the process manually from UiPath Orchestrator. It needs human interaction. It is a monthly process, and we don't want to automatically trigger based on something.

We use its AI functionality a little bit. We have automation for processing invoices that are in different formats. We are using an ML model to train and replicate the output based on the incoming PDFs. We don't have to manually identify the PDF format and process it. Its AI is very helpful in the case of dynamic files where when a PDF is in one format, we want to process it in a certain way, and when it is in another format, we want to process it in a different way. We have automation to automatically identify the fields and then process the documents accordingly. It is helpful in the case of dynamic files. 

It has reduced human errors. We have a process to send emails to the end-users based on the training they complete in our LMS. I did the automation, and the SME was very happy with that automation. She used to have lots of manual errors where she might miss one email id or put an incorrect email id. With the bot, we automated it and added exceptions, etc. It is more stable now, and there are fewer human errors. It is also very helpful for data entry work where there are lots of chances of human errors. All this can be avoided with a bot.

It has freed up employee time. The time saved depends on the complexity and the length of the process. For our LMS use case, the SME used to take around one hour every morning, and now, she doesn't have to do that. Even if she is on leave, our bot is available 24/7/365. 

The UI Explorer in the UiPath Studio is valuable. We can get a unique and dynamic selector for every element in the UI, which is helpful for me in finding out a particular UI element. Most of my automations have had UI interactions. So, I found it the most helpful feature.

It is pretty easy to build automations. I am from an engineering background, but even if you don't have much coding or programming knowledge, you can easily learn and use this tool. I used UiPath Academy to learn about this tool, and they have got a detailed explanation about everything. So, even if you don't have prior experience, you can easily use this tool.

They give updates every year. Before the new features go live, they put them out in the Community edition. When the features are stable, they release them. They have got a helpful community forum. If you have any roadblocks, you can post your question there and you will get a response, sometimes even within five minutes, depending on the complexity of the question.

When I started working with UiPath, there were no activities for SAP, but in the version that I'm using right now, there are SAP activities or SAP modules. Previously, I had to code everything from user login to user logout, but now, all the activities are available. I just have to drag and drop and give the username and password. I don't have to do it from scratch. It would be great if they can include activities for all of the most common CRMs and ERPs. They can integrate it with different activities for the most common systems.

I have been using this solution for around five years.

It is mostly stable. We recently upgraded our UiPath Orchestrator, and we stopped receiving the emails that we used to receive in the morning about the status of our bots and jobs. I created a ticket, and they said that the particular version or update that I had wasn't stable. They provided me with a different version that was stable.

It is great. In my previous company, one single bot was doing all the processes. In this company, we have six bots, and every day, around 50 processes are running. So, it is scalable.

For the email issue that we had, we created a ticket, and they responded the next day. The response time was less, and they also provided me with the correct solution.

Positive

When I started my career, I started working in Python and website development with Django. When I heard about UiPath and RPA, I felt that it is going to be the future. So, I switched to RPA. UiPath is the first tool I used, and I'm still using it.

I have used Power Automate from Microsoft, but I found UiPath much better because it has a single package with UiPath Orchestrator, Studio, etc. It has everything in a complete package.

I have also used Blue Prism. Blue Prism is more expensive. I used its Community Edition recently because I wanted to explore other tools, and I felt that its UI is not as good as UiPath Studio. They both have drag-and-drop functionality, but Blue Prism is not as user-friendly as UiPath. I have never used Automation Anywhere, but I have heard from my peers who are from the same background that it needs programming knowledge.

It was a bit complex because we have two virtual machines, and each one had three robots in it. We had to do remote desktop on the virtual machine to run the automation. We have recently improved all the processes in our company. They are now dynamic, and they can run in the background. Even if the virtual machine is closed, they will run.

It was implemented in-house.

We have definitely seen an ROI. It replaces the manual work and allows us to do other productive tasks rather than doing repetitive and manual tasks every day. If someone costs $50 per hour, and we are able to save one hour of manual work every day for that person, it is a substantial saving.

It is a bit expensive, but it is cheaper than Blue Prism. We have six robots in total. There are no other costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

I love this tool. They have been improving it every year based on the user experience, or they have been releasing a stable version for any bugs.

I would rate it a ten out of ten.

We are an auditing firm who has a certain level of tasks that are open for automating. These are complete steps, which can be performed by anyone, standardized, and do not involve any human intelligence. These are just basic human tasks. It is a long process, where in-between there are certain validation and verification steps as well as certain steps that involve a lot of documentation to go through. The organization is targeting all these tasks, which are completely static and can be automated, so they can get rid of them. Then, employees can work on something more useful as well as more productivity-oriented tasks.

Currently, I am dealing with our internal COE, providing RPA solutions to internal and external clients. UiPath is a driving force in our COE.

It is on-prem. There are a couple of discussions going around upgrading UiPath because there has been so much advancement with the solution.

Document Understanding was a game-changer. One of our clients has manual billing that needs to be processed. With the help of Document Understanding and UiPath Action Center, we created an excellent workflow for our client. It also gives us better accuracy. Now, there are hardly any exceptions in the client's billing documents that are being processed.

In my previous role, I presented some clients the end-to-end installation design of UiPath, e.g., building a PDD using Task Capture, going to UiPath Studio to build the actual solution, and then later going to post-production Insights. 

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-prem footprint. Most organizations prefer on-prem because it reduces the risk of compliance issues.

Attended robots have been very beneficial for our users. UiPath saves one robot for every user. We have a couple of clients who are using attended automation for their day-to-day tasks.

From an organizational point of view, the most used feature is Orchestrator because that is how we manage more than 100 users. When there are more than 100 users, it is important, and probably better, to have some place to manage them. Orchestrator is doing that for us very well. 

The most exciting new feature is UiPath Apps. I have explored it in-depth to get a better understanding. I think this product will be a game-changer for my organization as well as for my clients. It will revolutionize the way that we are providing licensing and proper access to a user. It also revolutionizes the way people are using it. Everything will be on the cloud, which I think is the most interesting feature of UiPath Apps.

UiPath Apps will definitely help to reduce the workload of our IT department by enabling end users to create apps. If you are creating an app and sharing it over the cloud, that removes the dependency of having UiPath installed with the correct version as well as Internet connectivity. Or, you might have a global server in the background that is not functioning very well. There are multiple issues related to connectivity of the UiPath robot when deploying it on a user's machine. 

If you are giving access to a group of users and adding Azure container or any other container provided by UiPath, then this reduces 10 to 15 hours of work from the IT or support guys who are manually doing all these things by themselves. Not every user must have the new step of getting the UiPath license and software installed, it is really static. You are eliminating that task completely by having UiPath Apps on the cloud. This is definitely convenient for users to use.

We are not using UiPath Apps in my current organization. About two to three months ago, I created UiPath when I was at TCS. It was there that we demonstrated the power of UiPath Apps versus normal, conventional methods. It reduced our work through scalability. It helped us to easily scale and was more convenient, because giving new or temporary access can be a pain. 

It is very easy to share UiPath Apps. When you want to start or remove it, you can do it with a simple click within the cloud. It is not that complicated. Also, the usage is better in UiPath Apps compared to the conventional UiPath robot. In UiPath Assistant, you can access the portal and simply run it over there. Therefore, you will not have a problem with the background functioning of the UiPath robot or even connectivity issues. Scalability and ease of use are favorable for users when they are using UiPath Apps.

Recently, I have been exploring Automation Hub. Its idea to pipeline a feature will be very useful for our guys managing RPA products on a large scale. 

When it comes to debugging, there is some improvement needed for UiPath compared to other RPA tools. There are features to edit the workflow or content of the automation file while we are debugging. For example, we have 10,000 lines of code that we have integrated by 10 different users. So, there is one integrated code and you are debugging it. After some time, you might find a line which is not an error. You may have forgotten to remove it or change the value to your desired criteria. It is really a pain to stop the entire debug session and just edit it, then start again at zero. It will do the same steps again just to reach that level or step where you were actually stuck previously. Whereas, in different automation tools, whether you are on the findings step or in-between a debug session, you can actually edit that information. This is good because sometimes the developer also forgets to add or remove certain values in-between a long code. I think this should be improved in UiPath. This should already be in consideration because I have been in touch with UiPath a couple of times because of this.

My current company is currently looking at the end-to-end solution. However, Insights and Task Capture are major concerns. Task Capture will give you a skeleton of the PDD, then you have to edit it. The skeleton is only there for simple automation, and we have complex scenarios. It is so complicated that the PDD generation using Task Capture will not give you even 20% of the output. While Task Capture is something promising, people are looking at it with greater expectations than it provides. People are not using Task Capture or Insight because of their limitations. These features could use improvements and enhancements.

I have been using UiPath for three years. I recently switched companies. I worked with Capgemini and TCS prior to this company, where I was in their COEs and providing solutions to clients. This is the first time that I have been on a project for PwC. Since the start of 2018, I have worked mainly in COEs and have interacted with around 30 clients up until now.

PwC, as a firm, has been using this technology for four to five years.

I have been using UiPath on a different powerful system that has high-end RAM. Sometimes, it crashes due to the use of multiple components at once. For example, when I was using Druid with data service and another UiPath product. Developing was quite easy. However, when debugging, sometimes it would freeze. I don't know whether it was because of my system and its compatibility, my system's configuration, or the fact that we were using so many high-end tools and products at once. 

The robustness of the tool, when it comes to using high-end products, is something that I am currently exploring. This is something that is currently a bit of concern for other developers as well. I have been interacting with a lot of developers around the globe. As a part of that, I tend to share my experiences. They have shared that it will sometimes freeze, even with simple automation. Because we are using new features or products all at once, it freezes. I think this should not be the case. If you are using long, heavy code, and it gets frozen at one point, I can understand that. However, 10 simple lines of code, while using three or four products at once, is getting frozen. That should be taken care of or improved.

To troubleshoot the system crashing, we contacted UiPath. They were kind enough to reply and have a discussion. They are working on this and trying to make it more convenient so future releases will solve this problem.

As a part of a COE, we get clients who expect us to present the entire proof of concept as well as a PPT or presentation. For example, why they need to go with UiPath, what are the advantages/disadvantages, if any, and why we should not go with another tool or solution as a whole, not just RPA. The main point for us when presenting UiPath is the ease of usability and scalability. We don't need major infrastructure changes, just two or three URLs to be widely fitted. Then, they need to decide if they want unattended or attended robots. The scalability is the major driving force which excites our clients and us, because there isn't a need to have media-heavy software or heavy processes changes.

Clients don't want every user in their organization who joins to have a long process to get through the start up. Automation Cloud is something they were very much interested in exploring because of the scalability. They find it very easy to use and scale, because not all the clients have a certain set of users using robots. 

I have seen user usage explode from zero to a bigger audience of 22 users.

UiPath is used extensively in my current organization on a large scale. There is also a plan to scale it to more users.

PwC has their internal teams providing a "help center" sort of infrastructure to them. If there was a need for any help, or some basic doubt, it is solved internally. PwC's internal help center exists already. However, for major issues, we reach out to UiPath, as a customer, so that we can receive a response and clarity on issues.

The technical support is really great. I have been in touch with all sorts of UiPath support because I was in the COE and our clients were completely global until my latest assignment. I think UiPath India, France, Belgium, and Canada are timely. They provide a very precise support experience. They were kind enough to let us know the actual reason, because just saying that it is a bug is not something that we can comfortably accept or digest. Also, they have been kind enough to follow back up on updates and bugs that we have reported.

As a whole, I have reported more than 25 bugs across all their products. They were kind enough to reach out to the same forum where we raised the ticket. They were kind enough to reply that these are the updates that they will roll out in the next version. It is good to have this interaction as well as a heads-up regarding your bug reports. I think the technical support is on the mark and doing their job really well.

The learning tools and support are really great. They have the most engaging forum across the globe, compared to other RPA tools. The learning and engagement are really up to the mark. That also brings confidence to our clients and us. We are a part of their global community forum, which is a benefit for us. 

Their marketplace has grown tenfold in the last year. It is because of the developer's involvement as well as involvement from people in the community. UiPath is creating their own statements and usable components, which adds value to our presentation. The tool is growing, and developers and community members are growing with them. 

My previous companies migrated from other RPA solutions, like Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and NICE Robotic Automation, to UiPath because of the value of its features and the quality of the overall solution. I migrated my clients from those companies so they could have a better ROI and reduce the cost of maintenance. We also migrated from scheduling tools, like AutoSys, to provide better accuracy and ease of use.

My current company was not previously using an RPA solution.

The initial setup and implementation are standard, simple, and user-friendly. UiPath just requires basic adjustment, then it is plug and play. It is very easy for everyone to understand, e.g., non-technical clients can understand what has been changed.

If the deployment is done properly, you will see better data accuracy with UiPath than manual entry. If the deployment is done by someone without much experience, it will affect the quality of the solution due to bad coding. You can't just leave it to the tool.

Using Automation Cloud makes it easier to deploy.

It takes almost two weeks for us to implement from scratch because we must understand the client's infrastructure, create a solution design, and then present it to them.

We present our clients with a PoC, including a document that justifies the work and costs. We also give them a standard robot that we created for demo purposes. This way, they can visualize how it will be implemented and mapped in their organization.

For deployment, one or two people are sufficient: one from an infrastructure background and another from a technical background. Sometimes, it is complex or hard to understand the client's needs when it comes to the deployment of Azure, Nvidia, or AWS servers on their VPN connection.

The amount of staff needed for maintenance depends on the size of the solution, e.g., the bigger solutions will need more people. However, the maintenance and support activities can also be automated and that reduces the need for support and maintenance. Three or four support team members are enough with the help of a robot.

The last ROI calculation that we did for a client showed that they saved 25% of their time by automating a manual task with an unattended robot for a single machine.

Overall, the cost remains the same to the client and us, when using Automation Cloud, because of the amount of money spent on the cloud migration and cloud usage.

At my previous company, in the best scenario, we removed almost 200 hours per month of client usage, making it automated with almost zero errors. So, about 32 employees were freed up from their work per month, and now there are only two. This has enabled employees to focus on higher-value work that involves human-base interaction. This saved the client money and provided a recruitment benefit.

UiPath has been useful for improving employee satisfaction. Employees are now spending time on more value-add work instead of something static, whether it is boring or hectic, that they have been working on for ages. This gives employees a sense of advancement.

I would rate the pricing as seven out of 10, where 10 is the most expensive. The pricing increased with the latest release. It used to be cheap. Now, it is expensive. However, it does come with supported features, which almost justify its cost.

Building automations is very easy. I have used multiple RPA tools. Developing automation with UiPath is very convenient compared to other tools. 

Development is very easy. I have been exploring certain markets based on the marketplace component and its native integrations with ServicesNow for the chatbot. I think development is where UiPath stands out as a winner compared to other tools because starting to automate is very easy.

Compared to other RPA tools, UiPath is leading with new feature additions every quarter. Obviously, all the new features will not be incorporated into the solution or be helpful for the client. We see the organization putting in efforts to grow at a rapid pace, including ML, scaling, and everything on the cloud, like data servers. UiPath gives us the confidence to present a tool that can be relied on because it is constantly growing. It constantly has certain new features added which can be beneficial.

With UiPath, not everyone needs to understand the code, which is great. This makes it superior over other tools because it is easy to understand. This contributes to profits because clients prefer UiPath over something else because they have more confidence using it.

Blue Prism has the ability to edit in the middle of a debug. As far as I have explored, Blue Prism is leading on the debugging front and stands out against UiPath. Debugging in Blue Prism gives users a lot of usability to edit the workflow. This makes it easier for developers to run things once and get things done. Otherwise, debugging multiple times can sometimes be a pain.

People migrate to NICE Robotic Automation because they were having difficulty maintaining their software with a limited number of staff. 

It is easier to become more proficient with UiPath than other RPA tools, especially Blue Prism. Training can be done at almost no cost.

I would suggest automating a policy that is not a requirement and follows a process. As an RPA user, it is your responsibility to get things done in an efficient way. If a user is doing A, B, C, D, it might not be required that the robot do the same thing. There might be a shorthand that can take you from A to D directly using the robot. For example, it can go directly to a page and not have to click 10 things like a human.

If you use it properly and consciously, it can increase accuracy and reduce error. If you don't, then it will be the other way around.

As features are concerned, it is reasonably priced compared to any other heavyweight tools in the market.

It is beneficial that there is a SaaS option because this offers a diversified cloud environment. If we expand and explore more cloud options, then having a SaaS solution for UiPath will be beneficial for us. Right now, SaaS comes with a certain amount of compliance issues for my company. 

UiPath AI Center is very useful. I think it is a game-changer when it comes to better usage. However, I haven't had much of a chance to explore it on an enterprise level. Not many clients are using it because of the exposure risk. Once a lot of developers start exploring and developing on it, then more companies will have the confidence to say, "Yes, we can push to that," which will increase the usage of UiPath AI Center.

Everything on the UIPath Cloud is a template. It is just a starting point. You have to dig into it and do more exploration to make it better.

Using Automation Cloud would be very beneficial for us, as a COE, because we are getting rid of the mundane tasks of infrastructure, maintenance, and upgrades, which we do not think are our primary job.

Biggest lesson learnt: UiPath has the fastest growing community with the quickest learning tools. It is easy to automate. It requires basic understanding and effort to get started. 

I would rate UiPath as 9.5 out of 10. I have concerns about the debugging capability, where if I need to edit something while debugging, I can't do it right away without stopping the process.

I work at a large retailer and we use UiPath to support the HR and e-commerce departments. For example, we can automate the management of HR tasks, such as scheduling training courses for associates. We have around 500 bots running in production.

UiPath helped us realize some cost savings by eliminating several FTEs. 
UiPath freed up our employees to work on other things. Instead of doing repetitive tasks, they can learn new skills or work on more exciting jobs. When we automate, we don't lay off employees. They're shifted to other projects once a robot takes over their process.

I set up the entire automation team in 2017. The UiPath Academy courses have been useful for training our staff. I have completed almost all of the certifications.

It's challenging if you don't have knowledge bases or community forums. When UiPath first launched, we had to Google everything, and it was hard to find accurate information. UiPath Academy has enabled me to grow professionally. I started as a developer and later became a technical lead. Now I'm in an architect role. 

A robust user community is essential for any solution. The community updates us about new features in the latest release notes. We can ask the community about how to deal with common problems and always get a quick response. Users can create custom solutions and upload them to the marketplace. 

I like the UiPath Orchestrator. The Marketplace is also helpful because there are pre-built automations we can use. One of our processes is used to manage annual charitable donations.

We use UiPath for end-to-end automation but only for about half of our processes. We've also integrated the solution with other tools. 

I have used UiPath for eight years. 

I rate UiPath support six out of 10. It's primarily an email-based model. Sometimes we have questions, and it takes days for them to respond and sort our issue out. 

Neutral

My firm uses two or three tools, but most of our bots in production use UiPath. 

I was present for the initial deployment, and I have been involved with the upgrades. Everything went smoothly. 

We relied on the UiPath team during the initial phases, but we've developed in-house expertise since then. I did the last upgrade for the UiPath Studio, Orchestrator, etc.

The licensing model could be improved. UiPath charges more if you increase the number of components. It should be included within the premium licensing. We have 100 percent end-to-end automation for some of our processes. However, we're limited by the licensing from fully automating all of them. We can't use all the features. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

Currently, we use UiPath in multiple types of use cases and build innovations for our clients to improve their system operations. We don't plan to implement AI in our automations in the near future. We're interested in that market, but it's a long journey, and it's a little advanced for us right now.

UiPath is helping our organization with its environmental, social, and governance automation space. Though it's currently at a beginner stage, it is progressing, and we expect to see improvements. UiPath has helped us free up staff for other projects. We have engaged our employees in working with UiPath through presentations. 

UiPath's integration features are highly valuable to us. We are able to achieve a lot with them.

For the moment, I don't see any explicit areas for improvement. However, having UiPath come up with unique features or advancements would be beneficial.

I have used UiPath for five years.

I don't see any drawbacks because our content is not down over time. We keep it updated consistently.

As our environment has grown, I haven’t encountered any specific issues or limitations.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. It's great, but sometimes we see delays. We ask a question, and they have to get back to us later with an answer. Otherwise, I don't see any drawbacks.

Positive

We previously tried out another automation app, but it didn't meet our expectations for handling exceptions and managing complex workflows.

Deploying UiPath was straightforward.

UiPath is the best tool, but the price is challenging from a management perspective. The cost-benefit equation might not work out favorably for some smaller organizations.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

We use UiPath for backend office automation and website integration. 

UiPath increases the dependability of our operations team and simplifies the coding process for novice developers.  It has freed up your staff time to work on other projects.

It's easy to automate rote tasks with UiPath. 

UiPath Studio could offer alternative coding methods. You could invoke the code with VB or C#, but I'm unfamiliar with either of those languages, and I don't have time to explore them. 

I have used UiPath for a little over a year.

My impression of the stability of UiPath is decent.

The scalability performance is yet to be fully assessed as the environment grows.

The documentation is not impressive, warranting a rating of five out of 10. It is neither bad nor great.

Neutral

I did not use a different solution before UiPath. The acquisition happened before my time.

I do not know of any alternate solutions evaluated as the acquisition was before my time.

I rate UiPath five out of 10. 

We use UiPath for our accounts receivable and accounts payable. We are a wood company that uses it primarily for customer care and finance.

UiPath helps us to reduce human error and eliminate some repetitive tasks involved in processing invoices, so our employees can focus on critical work. We have been able to assign users to different tasks. These tasks are done faster with fewer errors, and our customers our happier. 

The task recording is awesome. I love being able to see the processes and find out the issues a lot better.

I can't really say about the pricing and licensing.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

Our use cases for UiPath AI and automation are diverse and cover a number of functional areas within our business. We are doing everything from building simple to medium to complex RPAs. 

We have started utilizing communication mining and have a unique use case leveraging document understanding. Essentially, we are getting our feet wet across the board.

UiPath has allowed us to free up time for our employees so that they can engage in more value-added activities. Although cost has not been a significant driver, we focus on being more efficient and consistent throughout the organization. 

It has enhanced the overall experience for our stakeholders, including employees and customers, by streamlining processes and improving engagement.

Document understanding has been immensely valuable due to the breadth and depth of its application. Additionally, the potential of Generative AI is expected to drive significant value.

Since we are still in the early stages of using UiPath, identifying areas for improvement is challenging. We anticipate that some aspects may emerge as time progresses.

We have been using UiPath for close to a year, approximately ten months.

The solution has been stable so far.

UiPath has proven to be scalable.

We have received excellent customer service and support from UiPath. We have a good Technical Account Manager (TAM) and a strong relationship with the team managing our account.

Positive

We previously used Power Automate and other solutions. Most automation has transitioned to UiPath. We switched due to the fact that UiPath offers a broader range of functionalities and addresses our speed-to-delivery challenges.

The initial setup of UiPath was straightforward, thanks to a good partner.

We have been using an implementation partner, and they have been great so far.

While we have not yet achieved the ROI we expect, we are on target to do so. There have been some instances of ROI, although we are still in the infancy stages.

Typically, pricing is reflective of the value provided. While more value for less cost would be preferred, we do not focus extensively on costs.

We evaluated other options before choosing UiPath. It seemed best in class and fit our needs after due diligence.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

My client is a bank, and we create bots for them. They had processes that their employees used to do manually. They gave them to us to mimic the actions that they did. We automated those processes.

UiPath has increased the net worth of our organization. From UiPath, our organization has gained much more than expected.

UiPath improves the workflow. When we automate the processes, they go into the bank environment where they are used by all the employees from all the regions or states.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It is very easy to build automation using UiPath.

UiPath improves efficiency. The last project I worked on had 1,200 people working on the process. We automated that process, and with automation, 1,200 people have been eliminated directly.

I have not used UiPath's AI functionality but my team has. It makes it easy to automate processes that are more complex or involved.

UiPath has not saved us costs. When we use AI Fabric, we have to implement it additionally to the production environment, and it costs more.

UiPath has reduced human error by about 70%.

UiPath has freed up employees' time. The time saved depends on the process. If a person is doing the same process the whole day and we automate that, he has the whole time for other activities.

The Excel activities are valuable. We can do browser automation through other sites or tools, but for Excel, using tools or options like Selenium or JavaScript is quite complicated because we have to import the file from the JSQL or other things, whereas, in UiPath, we get direct activities. We can directly perform the operations by using the activities. We can directly apply logic to it, and that is how UiPath makes Excel automation easy. This is why I like it.

We have been getting positive outcomes from the UiPath Community. Whenever I have any questions, I go directly to the UiPath Community. Most times, we get the answer from there.

Currently, we have to additionally implement UiPath Fabric. It would be easier if it is already integrated with UiPath rather than having to add it. We have to take the dependencies by searching them. We should be able to go for the default ones.

Its stability also needs improvement.

It has been approximately one and a half years.

The stability needs to be improved. The UiPath selector is consistently failing.

It is a scalable product. We have about 150 users using the solution. It is being used in multiple departments.

Technical support is much needed. It has to be there. 

Our team has used UiPath Academy and UiPath Community. Whenever we get stuck while building the solutions, we most often get a solution from there. It is quite efficient.

Positive

I have used Selenium. In Selenium, we write scripts. We use the Java language for automation. We have to write the code, which makes it more complex, whereas, with UiPath, we can use direct activities, which makes it easier to understand and write the code.

We work in the cloud. Its deployment is easier. For the older versions, it was quite difficult, but with the upgraded version, it is quite easy.

It takes five to ten minutes, depending on how many bots you want to implement. If you want to implement one, you can directly do it in ten minutes.

One person is enough for the deployment. For maintaining the bots, we have a team because the developers and users do not have access to the production environment.

We have seen a 100% ROI.

The price of UiPath is comparatively higher than Selenium. Selenium is a free tool, and UiPath is quite expensive. 

Some organizations make automation costlier than it has to be. They use UiPath, and while selling the products, they make it more costly. It depends on the organization.

Freshers can learn UiPath. They will get knowledge about logic building. 

I would recommend UiPath to others. I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.