UiPath Platform Reviews

My current use cases for the UiPath Platform include web development, web automation, desktop automations, and using document understanding, along with PDF automation using document understanding.

The most favorite feature in the UiPath Platform is the document understanding, and I appreciate the ability to automate the web part when applications do not have API access. The document understanding feature is based on ML technology, which extracts fields from a PDF document even when they are semi-structured or unstructured, based on the training models.

I use the UiPath Platform overall, including UiPath Studio and everything associated with it. Knowledge without scripting helps my colleagues who do not have any experience with scripting, as the UiPath Platform allows basic automation without requiring such knowledge. For some complex automations, we can integrate with VBScript and Python scripts if necessary, however, initial automation does not require in-depth programming knowledge.

There is scope for improvement in the UiPath Platform, particularly with the Web Studio feature that has been launched recently. They could enhance the object repository feature, which allows maintaining selectors externally, as there are challenges associated with changes in selectors that require updating the library and the version in the code. The Web Studio works when there are APIs involved, but it could be made more user-friendly and developer-friendly. It currently works only in cases where it is not dependent on a machine.

My total experience with the UiPath Platform is around 4.5 years.

Crashing from the tool end is very rare; only during upgrades might some issues arise. Overall, the occurrence is minimal. Proper exception handling in the code also ensures a low exception rate.

For technical support, I would rate it around eight or seven out of ten, mostly leaning towards seven plus. Most of the time, when we reach out, we have calls with the UiPath team, and we usually end up finding the solution or alternative methods.

Positive

I have used Power Automate as well. In Power Automate, it's easy to integrate with all Microsoft applications because it has direct integrations where all you need to do is change the URLs and authentication part, making it very simple to integrate with SharePoint or any Microsoft product. I also have basic insights into Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment using the UiPath Platform was actually easy. Everything is organized in UiPath, and there is a forum available for support where users can post questions and get replies. The courses are also well-structured, making it easy for beginners to understand.

I took around two weeks to learn the basics of UiPath automation since I come from a CSE background.

The number of people required for this type of deployment depends on the timelines and project length. A basic UiPath bot would typically require one person for development.

I don't have any insights into the licensing at the enterprise level.

When considering alternatives to the UiPath Platform, options we looked into include any scripting language or similar solutions.

I have used the AI integration features of the UiPath Platform, specifically the integration concept with the LLM model where we provide a prompt to get results that we extract and send over email. This is typically used to analyze resumes for our HR team, which receives numerous resumes. Using the AI integration concept in the UiPath Platform, we read resumes uploaded to the LLM model, extract relevant data, and filter out the necessary resumes. 

I rate the UiPath Platform a nine out of ten, based on my experience compared to Power Automate and basic knowledge of Automation Anywhere. I've found UiPath to be well-organized and well-structured for beginners.

Currently, our automation work with UiPath primarily revolves around financial processes, such as accounts receivable work and tax deduction management. We are exploring generative AI, but have not developed any AI use cases for UiPath yet. We prioritize our automation use cases based on RoI and process complexity.

With UiPath, we have saved time and cut costs. For example, one process previously took several people six or seven hours, but we've reduced it to a four-minute process. This allows us to shift our teams to more analytical, value-added work instead of repetitive transactional tasks. 

UiPath's learning modules have been a massive help in training our employees. The Orchestrator also helps us schedule, deploy, and monitor jobs.

We've engaged employees through meetings at the enterprise and department levels. Our manager has quarterly meetings with employees in different areas of the business to get them up to speed on what's happening in automation.

UiPath could have more robust, built-in auditing and logging. Currently, you need to build log messages into your automation to capture what's happening. 

I have been using UiPath for three years.

We haven't really had any trouble with stability. It has been very well.

I was able to scale up very easily, as we recently stood up eight more robots. Setting everything up and gaining access took about five days, and we received a lot of support from UiPath for licensing and key management.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. We have had a good experience. Our technical account manager is very responsive, and the ticketing system that UiPath uses is quite successful. We received answers to our questions promptly, and overall, it has been a positive experience.

Positive

We previously used a competitor, Automation Anywhere.

We weren't heavily involved with deploying UiPath, but it seemed straightforward.

UiPath professional services managed the deployment and helped us convert about 40 automations. 

We've saved thousands of hours using UiPath and freed employees to focus on more value-added work.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We're a food ingredient distribution company that receives documents on ingredients' nutrition, allergens, microbial testing, etc.  We primarily use UiPath to process these documents. It was our proof of concept for using the system initially, and we'll expand it to process invoices and other related use cases.

We operate using an enterprise operating system. It's not a technological thing. It's how you determine project priorities. Soon, we'll set up process mining. Then, the IT team and technology group will decide what we do. Right now, the business units effectively vote on the next quarter's priorities. 

We're a high-tenure organization. The average tenure is 15 years, so we want to avoid growing our headcount. We're continuously growing by 10 to 15 percent annually, so we've had to add enough staff to process the documents. Our primary concern was to stop the increase in staff. Even after we added staff, we were falling behind because they were much slower at processing those documents. 

We get documents from our suppliers and, as a distributor, send them to our customers. If the supplier hasn't sent them, we need to hound them. We were falling behind on our backlog of 250,000 documents. UiPath enabled us to avoid adding more employees. Automation was the way to go. We haven't added any more headcount, and the backlog is going down, but it isn't as much as we had hoped.

The automation has allowed us to provide customers with better-quality documents faster. It has also given employees more time to locate the documents we don't have, freeing them from mundane tasks. It's freed them from the work of typing data on a form into an ERP system. 

We are talking about using it for our environmental and social governance initiatives. We're considering bringing together some of those pieces through automation to track our energy usage or what we've spent on some of the other bits and pieces and have a better ESG profile.

I find the intelligent document processing features extremely interesting. They're fun and represent an actual practical use of AI. There are so many impractical ways to use AI, but this offers a tangible ROI, and you can see its benefits directly. 

There are small issues, such as the Action Center not auto-refreshing. The user has to keep clicking "refresh." It's minor, but if you're waiting for something in your queue, you don't want to sit there and keep clicking. Logging could be improved, and there are a few connectors where I would like to see enhancements, but nothing major.

We started using UiPath in January of this year, so we've used it for less than a year.

The solution is solid, and I've had no issues with stability. The one issue encountered was due to a version change, where the changes in that version were unexpected.

The solution is great for scalability, and we can always add more bots as needed. We haven’t found it limiting at all.

Our experience with UiPath support has been mixed. The responses take a little long, which isn't bad when we only need a question answered. However, our system went down twice, and it took four to eight hours to get our first response from support. If I submit a ticket at 2 pm, I might not get a response until 10 pm. That's still relatively soon, but I might not be paying attention that late at night or be available to respond. 

Positive

We did not use a different solution for document processing before this.

The initial setup was pretty easy and straightforward. It didn’t take much time to get UiPath running.

We implemented the solution in-house ourselves. We do have a partner, Empower dot AI, which we plan to work with on future projects.

We are probably just starting to see a positive dollar ROI versus what we spent implementing UiPath. We only started this in January, and it was fully implemented by late June or early July. Hence, we are still in the infancy phase of experiencing ROI.

UiPath's pricing is reasonable. The model of charging per AI unit makes sense, and the licensing for Action Center and other parts is good. The cost does not seem excessive.

We use UiPath across departments, including HR, IT, procurement, and the supply chain. One use case is hiring and other simple HR-related tasks. We also automate complex processes, like using Document Understanding and machine learning to extract vendor contract information and input it into our procurement system. 

Many applications don't have built-in APIs, and some repetitive processes require a lot of staff to perform. We try to identify those processes and automate them. At the end of the day, it's about how quickly a particular process can be implemented, what kind of ROI we can realize, and the speed of completing the process. 

These processes take forever if you're doing it manually. For example, let's take something as simple as hiring. Evaluating a candidate probably takes 30 to 45 minutes to complete all the steps, and large organizations are constantly hiring. Another challenge is the number of staff you have. By automating using robots, you can reduce the number of people you need to hire and complete the work much faster. It also helps resolve turnover. You can run the automation 24/7, and robots don't take vacations, so things happen faster. 

Another benefit is SLA compliance. We have SLAs to meet for data, and we need to complete some tasks within 48 or 72 hours. Automation helps us meet those targets by completing jobs faster. UiPath frees staff to work on other tasks. Just one process that we use for hiring has easily freed two or three people. Now, they're doing tasks that require human intelligence and knowledge. 

Any solution, such as Power Automate, can do traditional RPA functions, but UiPath's Document Understanding sets it apart. The document understanding feature can handle a significant amount of handwritten notes and efficiently extract information. While there is a human-in-the-loop component for validation, it is still faster than manually extracting information.

My biggest problem is that UiPath is growing so fast and adding integration with so many different products that it's hard to keep up. The COEs at various companies and our developers aren't able to keep pace with what's happening. It's a good problem to have. I'm not complaining, but there are so many features and little time for developers to learn and implement them. 

If you need something new like a CICD pipeline or somebody for a test suite or to work with Document Understanding, you can't use our existing staff because they don't have the skills. Now, I need to go out and hire more people. I need to reduce the company's size to save money but also spend more to hire. 

I have used UiPath for about seven years.

We have not encountered any stability issues with UiPath. The cloud-based deployment has been stable, and we have not experienced any unexpected robot shutdowns. Issues tend to arise from other SaaS applications rather than UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale effectively as our organization grows. Scaling with UiPath has been easy and efficient.

The customer service has always been good. However, it takes longer to reach support now than it did four to five years ago, this can be attributed to their increased customer base.

Positive

At my current organization, we didn't use a different solution before UiPath. However, I have previous experience with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup was straightforward. Despite using a partner, we managed most of the work in-house due to my previous experience with UiPath.

We worked with a partner for the implementation. Although the partner helped, we managed most of the work ourselves to tailor the solution to our needs.

When you start a program, it takes a while to reach the point where you achieve an ROI. Still, if you're not seeing an ROI with UiPath by the second year, you're doing it wrong. We are doing that right now. 

We've found a lot of processes working across different teams and departments. We spoke to the leads of various COEs and found processes that would realize the highest ROI or SLA compliance. A department might have only one or two procurement processes, but they are sizeable. Automating those will help you achieve an ROI faster.

UiPath isn't cheap, but it's priced competitively with other automation solutions, and it offers more resources.

I was not part of the organization during the evaluation phase, but I know they chose UiPath because it was easier to set up with comparable costs to other solutions, more resources available, and robust training material for basic RPA functions. It's easier to train people to perform basic RPA functions.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

We are considering implementing AI as we are a healthcare staffing company in the education sector. Our use case focuses on processing a large number of emails and resumes. We aim to mine resumes to determine which are best for rapid and successful placements. On the communication side, we wish to perform sentiment analysis to assess how well our salespeople respond to clients.

We want to mine, structure, and analyze data using data science methods. We also hope to use generative AI and large language models to perform some of the data analysis, saving us lots of time. My company tripled in size in the last three years, so we have a lot more people, but the backend operations haven't grown at the same pace as the number of salespeople. 

Automation helps us with operational and analytical work because we lack enough talent for that. By using AI, we can do the same amount of work without hiring more people, so we save money and improve productivity. Generative AI is part of our discussion. We had to decide whether to develop our own model or use existing software like UiPath to get things done faster and easier.

We have about 15,000 consultants working for us during the school year, and to fill those positions, we may need to interview five times that many. A lot of them might drop out by the time school starts. Using UiPath and AI, we can speed up processing and onboarding because that might be why people quit. They might leave for another job if we don't onboard them fast enough. We can save more candidates and prevent revenue loss from a potential placement by making the processing time faster.

After implementing UiPath, we automated many manual tasks. We save a lot of time, and those people who used to do manual work are doing more knowledge work. A lot of them now see what bots can do, so they're more open to the idea of developing bots. That set the stage for them to trust AI-powered bots in the future. 

The most valuable featire is the whole automation suite that helps develop automation processes. In the future, we might further explore Communications Mining and Process Mining. 

There's a push for cloud-based operations, but I prefer to develop things on the desktop. I'd appreciate the ability to develop things on the desktop and roll them out concurrently on the cloud. 

My company has used UiPath for about two years, but I've used it for about a year.

UiPath is very stable.

UiPath has kept up with our growth. However, there's a limitation with licensing.

I previously used Blue Prism in a different company. However, for the current company, they had no prior automation solution.

Our IT support company, Coretelligence's parent company, helped with the initial implementation. There were renewal delays prompting a desire to work directly with UiPath.

From a cost-saving perspective, we are seeing a lot of returns, including internal staffing cost savings and HR bot efficiencies.

UiPath's licensing could be cheaper and more dynamic. The licensing can sometimes feel high, especially for smaller companies, but generally, the pricing is reasonable when considering the time saved and corresponding costs.

I wasn't the decision maker, but my CFO considered industry leaders and attended the Forward Conference. He was impressed and chose UiPath. One thing that he liked was that it was easy to learn and use. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. I enjoy working with it, and it seems to have everything we need. They're adding new features at a reasonable rate while not deprecating old stuff too fast. It's a smooth transition from classic to modern activities.

We use AI mainly around sales processing and document understanding. Our current use cases involve traditional automation, processing different orders, order formats, languages, and language translation, and creating actual orders in any ERP solution.

We've done a Communications Mining POC, and we think that's promising, but we haven't used UiPath's process mining because we have another solution for that. 

We were already using a competing automation platform when we implemented UiPath. UiPath is a more cloud-based solution. We're biotech regulators, so we're trying to adopt new innovations as quickly as they are released. Regarding challenges, we're trying to simplify and automate processes to achieve a higher value and make problem-solving more seamless.

We engage our employees in automation in two ways. At the enterprise level, it's more about making it easy for there to be a centralized intake of opportunities and focus on the value of what comes through. Citizen automation is about empowering and training them on how to use it so they can build more. 

Our organization has experienced productivity increases, financial savings, error reductions, and streamlining of many processes in finance and accounting with UiPath automation. It has helped free up staff time so that they can focus on more value-added work, and when automations don't function as expected, employees can be upset because they don't want to return to previous manual methods.

I don't know about shareholders, but employees who learn to build automation can do more value-added work. It makes them happy. Customers within the company can have people in their teams spend their time on more value-added work, and they have better transparency.

RPA is always good, and UiPath's Document Understanding is interesting. We used the old model, but the new modern Document Understanding is much easier.

UiPath could offer better support for operations. It has all these cool features, but when you still need to build and run these bots. You need to have more features that make it easier to run bots, and they require fewer people to maintain. 

We have used UiPath since 2020, so it has been nearly four years.

The solution is stable, with, for example, only a thirty-minute outage in three years.

It is scalable, but successful scalability depends on how you build automations.

We have premium support, which provides excellent customer service. Our technical account manager is amazing, and that's one reason we keep paying for premium support. 

Positive

We previously used Automation Anywhere and switched to UiPath because it was easier for developers to use and could integrate with more products.

It was complex because UiPath didn't have a biotech-specific offering. We were the first biotech company to use this, so we had to develop a product that would work for companies under regulation. We needed something called delayering. We had to educate UiPath on what it means to do this for health care and biotech.

UiPath helped us save around 500,000 thousand hours. Over our entire automation journey, that amounts to an estimated $25 million worth of productivity hours.

The pricing is very expensive, making it challenging to continue using UiPath when competitors like Microsoft offer cheaper alternatives like Power Automate. Why continue to use UiPath when you're paying three to five times more? 

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We're a bank, so we primarily use UiPath to automate tasks such as filling out Excel sheets, organizing PDF files into folders, and reconciling rejected checks and chargebacks.

We prioritize use cases by meeting with each business unit to operational challenges that they would like to solve through automation. They walk us through the process they want to be automated, and we prioritize the requests based on potential hours saved and the automation difficulty.

The business units don't interact with the bots much. We get requests via email, and our Center of Excellence develops and maintains all the bots.  

UiPath helps us improve operational efficiency. We want to grow our bank by increasing the number of accounts without adding more employees. Our headcount hasn't increased in the last four years while our assets have grown tremendously. By automating data entry and other monotonous tasks, UiPath has improved employees' sense of job fulfillment. It frees them up to work on more challenging tasks and work on new skills.

We like UiPath's integration with the ARIA framework and Orchestrator we use to manage our automations. The Copilot also helps us streamline the development process.

There could be better documentation for Copilot, and UiPath could provide solution design documents as part of the training.

We have used UiPath since 2021.

We haven't had any issues.

UiPath scales well with our environment. 

I rate UiPath customer service eight out of 10. I had one issue where they pointed me in the right direction but didn't fully resolve it.

Positive

We've done some simple tasks with homegrown automation that UiPath could handle, but we opted to build the processes with tools we already had.

The initial setup involved using a UiPath partner, which significantly facilitated our production and deployment environments.

We've saved about 2,500 hours annually with UiPath.

I'm not responsible for the budget, but I know that UiPath is more expensive than its competitors. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We have an online report, and our management tasked me with recreating it, but they don't allow bots to create things on the website. I'm responsible for the automation and engineering work, and they wanted me to evaluate the performance of our systems and solar panels. I need to go to the manufacturer's website and download the monthly report corresponding to our factory site. 

Each month, I need to go to the site, get their readings, and create a report. It's a repetitive task that takes about four or five hours. UiPath enables me to automate the finance side of the report.

Generating all these market analyses and data reports from various websites can be time-consuming. It might require a whole team with its own manager to check and update the docs. However, when UiPath came into play, we could automate a lot of that work from different platforms. That was the start of a digital transformation at our company. It saves about eight hours per report. 

UiPath decreases human error. A lot of the reporting on product quality was done through manual data entry into the database system. There is potential for human error. Now, we can a lot of that information automatically and perform the data analysis with UiPath. Since we no longer need a designated person to do the data analysis, we can save around $200 to $300 monthly.

UiPath is easy to use and learn. With some experience in automation, I could learn the solution in three or four hours. It's easier to build automations in UiPath compared to other tools. UiPath has a feature that allows you to build automations quickly. You can build your workflow in under 10 minutes. In UiPath Studio, you can do browser automation by recording it. You can set up flows where you click through the buttons on a website. For example, there's a button where you have to click to verify that you're human. That's something you can add to the flow. 

Having a workflow is beneficial. At our monthly meetings, we rectified the revenue generation, etc. We analyzed all these systems' performance and costs to create a plan and saved a lot of money doing that.

We're developing a use case for automated communications mining using Salesforce for one of our teams. It will be helpful, but we haven't implemented it yet. We have several reports and a script to perform this automatically. We will rate the responses from our team members and the outside groups we are using. 

The UiPath community is very helpful. When I started using UiPath, I had no clue about it, so I watched a few videos and learned how to do most of the integrations. I also reached out to some colleagues on LinkedIn who directed me to the Sri Lankan user community. They were amazing.

I would love to see UiPath create a reporting application that you could deploy on the side and feed data directly into it. That would be an amazing tool to have. Microsoft has this data migration interface, so if you create an automation, it checks everything going into it. 

I tried UiPath a couple of years back for another project and worked with it for about a year and a half. I also worked with it more recently, and the experience is different.

We had some performance issues in the first few weeks. Apart from that, UiPath has been running okay.

The cloud component of UiPath makes it scalable.

I rate UiPath support seven out of 10. You can contact enterprise support. They're always ready to receive our calls and provide recommendations. 

Neutral

We previously used Microsoft Power Automate. Since we are using Microsoft ERP and CRM systems, all of our automation systems need to be compatible with Microsoft. We could use Power Automate for free, so it made sense to stick with one vendor. 

UiPath is easier to understand and use because we can record actions, and it has an amazing support community. It is also competitive in terms of cost. If you are sending information to databases with Power Automate, you need some subscriptions to PowerApps and Power BI. It costs you about a hundred dollars to get started. You can download and use UiPath Studio for free. 

Compared to our older platforms, UiPath is easy to install and integrate. On day one, you can deploy it to your system in a few minutes. Our previous solution required more infrastructure to do the automation. UiPath has UiPath Studio, so you can play the flow and record all your inputs. The main advantage is that you can build a solution in minutes. It's effortless to get started. 

UiPath is reasonably priced. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.