UiPath Platform Reviews

My primary use case is data scraping and entry for an insurance firm.

This solution has gives us shortened customer service time. It is easy to use and a lively community is always ready to help resolve an issue.

The most valuable features are PDF, Excel automation, and web scraping.

The Try-Catch feature is awesome.

The emailing and integration with self-service BI systems are areas that need improvement.

I have been using UiPath for eight months.

Our primary use is RPA in insurance.

This solution has given us the fast automation of processes.

The most valuable features of this solution are that it is powerful and easy to use.

The operations need to be improved.

I have been using this solution for two years.

I am a developer so I primarily use Studio. Once the bots are developed they go to Orchestrator.

We have a combination of different use cases. Sometimes it deals with Outlook, the Microsoft Office Suite, or certain integrated web applications. You build a solution to integrate all of the applications that are part of the same process.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment at the moment, but we are currently evaluating how we can do this.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a five. The majority of the simple tasks are done through recording, which saves on our development time. You just record the things that you want to achieve and then customize to get it going.

Since I was new to the product, I used the training. I took the developer training, as well as business analyst training. On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. It's truly very beneficial because you can just touch base with the actual tool and get it done.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately six weeks. This was a complex use case and it worked well, so it was a good proof of value.

Prior to using this solution, everything was running well, though users were facing challenges because they were spending a significant amount of their time correcting things that were misrepresented or not done correctly by some other part of the team. The consultant is supposed to correct or manage all of the changes, and it was not only taking a long time but not on their to-do list for the day. It is this extra time that this solution is being used to address.

In the pilot project, we have seen proof of value. However, it is not in production yet, so it is too early to see how much time this solution will save us. The people whose jobs will be affected are looking forward to this solution because we are expecting to cut their mundane tasks from eight hours a day to two or three hours a day.

In terms of eliminating human errors, I don't think that we have seen any difference.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the training that is available. You can just access the resources.

There is a Community Edition of this solution, which is a plus. Some other vendors do not offer this or have just started offering it. Accessibility is the biggest thing.

I would like to see more features included in the AI Fabric. This is the biggest thing that I am looking forward to.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. There are certain features that are incomplete and they are still working on, such as computer vision. 

We currently have about five people involved in the RPA team. It's the kickoff stage for us, and more like a COE.

We did not use another RPA solution before this one.

We decided to invest because necessity is the mother of innovation. We were seeing our consultants spending too much time in processing certain areas of the business, and we wanted to find ways to make their lives easier and improve the processing.

We had Roboyo assist us, and our experience with them has been pretty good so far. On a scale from one to five, I would rate them a five.

This is just a pilot project so ROI is not really in the grid. We hope to have a good ROI on the solutions that are deployed using UiPath.

I look forward to trying the better features that will be released in upcoming versions.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to not only automate the process but redesign the process. If you have steps one through ten then you don't simply automate them "as-is". First, improvise your process and then try to automate that. It will save time and money.

This is a good solution and I am looking forward to the new AI features.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I am a developer so I primarily use Studio most of the time, and when the bots go live, they move to Orchestrator.

We have a combination of different use cases. Sometimes it is dealing with Outlook or the Microsoft Office Suite. The idea is to build a solution that integrates all of the applications that are part of the same process.

We are not currently running our processes in a virtual environment but we are currently evaluating how we could make it work.

Everything was running well but the users had some challenges because they had to spend a lot of their day correcting the things that were misrepresented or not done correctly by another part of the team. The consultants had to manage the changes which were taking a lot of time but weren't on their to-do list for their day. UiPath is helping us save that time. 

It hasn't really helped to eliminate human errors. The processing time is dramatically reduced. It makes it easier for consultants to make things right. If they spent eight hours doing a task, it now takes them two. 

Compared to other solutions, training is very valuable. You can easily access the resources. There is a community edition which is a plus and something that other tools don't offer. Accessibility is the best feature. 

I would rate the solution's ease of use as a five out of five. The majority of tasks are done through the recording which saves development time. You just record the things you want to achieve, customize it, and get it going. This reduces development time. 

I have been using RPA training since I was new to the product. I did the developer training. I would rate it a five out of five. It’s very beneficial. You can just touch base with the actual tool and get it done.

It hasn't really reduced human errors but it has reduced the processing time. It's easier to make things right.

I would like to see more of the AI Fabric domain feature. 

It interacts with so many products that the robot itself becomes unstable.

I would rate the stability as four-ish out of five. There are some features that they are still working on. There will be better features in the upcoming versions.

We have around five users. We're in the kick-off stage so not many people are involved. 

I have not needed to contact technical support. 

We knew we needed to invest in a new solution because necessity is the mother of invention. We saw our consultants spending too much time processing areas of the business, so we knew we needed to evaluate new processes to make their lives easier. 

We chose UiPath because of the accessibility. It's easily available and widely used. 

It took us around six weeks from when we purchased our first license to having our first Robot in production. It was not a complex process.

We used Roboyo for the implementation. We had a good experience with them. I would give them a five out of five. 

ROI is not on the grid right now. We hope to have a good ROI. It's a proof of value and it's not in production yet. 

With the existing features, I would rate UiPath an eight or nine out of ten. Once the new features come in, I would give it a ten. They keep improvising. 

I would recommend not only automating the process but redesigning the process. It's not just about automating steps one to ten, you need to improvise your process and then try to automate that. Automating the steps as is won't really help and you can end up spending the same amount of time and money. 

We use Studio and Orchestrator. I personally use unattended bots but we're releasing one of the largest attended implementations right now.  

For the most part, it's still in the back office, finance, and accounting, that's typically where we've been starting. That's where for me, as an inexperienced developer, is easier for me to get started.

We're able to handle some of our tax and HR processes, the volumes of the documents or new hires at a tremendous speed compared to how we used to do it manually in the past.

I like the layout and design of the Studio using the RPA framework. It makes sense to me. It's very easy to get started. I've been a fan of the current debugger. I know that UiPath is releasing an updating debugger but I think that's been very intuitive for me as well.

I would rate the ease of use of the platform for automating my company’s processes a four out of five because, for me, there's still a lot of clicks and keystrokes I need to do for development. I know that UiPath is releasing StudioX, which is something that is needed, for people like me who aren't super technical.

I would rate UiPath Academy RPA training a five out of five. It's one of the best. Compared to its competitors, it's intuitive and it's robust.

It's everything that UiPath is moving forward towards, intelligent, machine learning, and AI. I embrace the fact that the direction it's going especially for me personally.

I think in the Studio, as in building automations, it takes a lot of clicks and there's a lot of options and I think sometimes there's just too much. It should be more simplified on the user interface.

As far as our practice, we have over 150 consultants in the States and over 350 in India. We also have a team in Europe. Overall, we have over 3,000 RPA consultants. UiPath is probably close to about a third that would be UiPath competent.

I haven't had to contact their technical support. I go through my SMEs. 

We're always challenging ourselves to be more efficient and effective in the workforce. We also recognized that some of our businesses needed to do things better, faster and cheaper. RPA was a natural solution. For us, as a large organization, we want to learn about all of the top competitor solutions. UiPath is in the top-ranked quadrant regularly so it is an obvious choice.

Because of the market demands of Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism and UiPath, we had to invest in learning all three equally. I don't know the exact reason we went with UiPath, I can ask our clients. 

The implementation process was easier than the competitors.

We have seen a 100% ROI. We do automation to deliver a faster ROI than traditional software. As a firm, we saved over 2 million dollars a year now from using RPA.

Regarding both attended and unattended bots, I think there are places for both and it comes back to the purpose of what you're automating. I think attended is going to be great for the casual users of applications. It's a lot of the call centers and even some of the system developers. The unattended are places where you can really find those scaling volumes and processes. Typically back-office functions are unattended.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement. For me, it's very intuitive and logical. I grew up with a little bit more of a technical background so for me, it fits in well with my needs.

I would encourage someone considering this solution to use UiPath, especially if they're automated and especially with UiPath's new one-click cloud solution. It's so fast for them to get started. I would encourage them to be up and running in the same database to try it out.

We use Orchestrator, Studio, and of course the bots for indexing documents received from outside providers.

The best example of the way this product has improved how our organization functions is by the increase in efficiency it has helped us achieve.

The most valuable features are the ability to schedule tasks and using Orchestrator to centrally manage our bots.

Areas of this solution that have room for improvement are a couple of activities that have issues. We would like to incorporate machine learning so that we can do some of the quality checks that we do automatically instead of relying 100% on manual quality review by humans.

Additional features that we would like to see included in the next release are those they seem to already have planned. I am very intrigued by the AI capabilities that we saw in demonstrations. Having that capability would be absolutely fantastic.

On a scale from one to five where one is not stable and five is very stable, I would rate the stability of UiPath platform as about a four. There are two activities that we use that fail about 5% of the time. UiPath is fixing that — as far as we understand — and so we should get a solution very soon.

We currently have just two people in our organization involved in the automation program. That could potentially expand under the right circumstances.

Our team has had the opportunity to use the UiPath Academy RPA training. On a scale from one to five where one is the least beneficial and five is very beneficial, I would rate the UiPath Academy in training our team as a five-out-of-five. We literally started at ground zero with UiPath software, and, without the training, I don't think we would know exactly what it can do.

I also think the source support and technical support for this solution are both very good.

From the time we purchased our UK UiPath license until we had your first robot in production was really before purchase. We had a proof of concept opportunity prior to purchasing the product, so we could make sure it worked for our purposes.

The initial setup process was straightforward. We started with just Studio, and not Orchestrator. Our deployment was just a simple matter of installing Studio. It was very simple to install.

We have not seen a return on investment in a way that we can account for exactly because we have not done that evaluation. At this point, we have projected some ROI numbers but we don't have the final ROI. I think it did not take long to see the ROI as it didn't take months. It probably just took a few days to see a difference.

The performance benefits we have seen at this stage of our deployment is in the form of increased productivity. So, in our development processes, we have at least doubled the performance of the process we have automated.

The solution also helped to eliminate human errors. I really don't know the percentages we have not done that evaluation, but I know it does eliminate them as it is evident in the results.

On top of that, the solution saves our organization time which is also evident in the fact that the staff members who are using the bots can double their performance.

On a scale from one to five with one being the most difficult and five being very easy, I would rate the interface of the UiPath platform as a four-out-of-five. I chose that rating only because our legacy software is a bit difficult to automate. The selectors end up not always being accurate.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the product overall as a nine. I don't think I have enough understanding to give it a ten. However, it seems from our investigation of other platforms, that UiPath is one of the easiest RPA systems to learn and use.

My advice to anyone considering RPA as a solution is to do your homework upfront. Learn what the platforms can do before you just pick one and start trying to automate.

We use this solution for our business purposes. We use it from the back end all the way to the front end. That's where we are looking to use this, although we haven't fully implemented it yet. We are exploring more processes to use it for.

Mainly, this solution has reduced the need for manual intervention. That's the main thing. It has saved us time. We can now increase our ROI.

We run a few automations in a virtual environment, but not all of them. I've been using some other automation tools, like QTP/UFT.

I would rate the ease of use of the platform for automating our company's processes as four out of five.

Its intuitiveness is great. This solution is very user-friendly. There is almost no need to have programming knowledge.

The solution has helped us eliminate human errors, by about 40%. It also saves us time.

The solution is fairly stable. I would rate it as four of five for stability.

So far, we have almost 50 people in our organization involved in our automation program.

The initial setup was in between simple and complex. As even my colleague was fairly new at that time, he came across a few challenges. However, he could overcome them and now I'm in three of the processes that are in products.

It took about three months from the time we purchased a UiPath license until our first robot was in production.

We used a consultant. I would rate them as four out of five.

We have definitely seen a performance benefit. Now that it is in the production processes, we are able to see ROI, in terms of saving time on repetitive tasks and the manual effort saved. That's our return on investment.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten because it has saved us a lot of manual intervention, as well as time and money. We may have not yet explored the full horizon of what this solution can do for us.

I use Studio, Orchestrator, attended and unattended robots.

My primary use for this solution is back-office automation in a banking environment.

We run automations in a virtual environment, both for development and production. The robots are implemented in a development environment first, which is connected to Citrix. Once the process automation is finalized, including deployment and UAT has passed, we move the same file from the development Orchestrator to the production Orchestrator in the production environment. Production is also in Citrix.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a three. We have legacy Oracle applications and I'm finding it difficult to find selectors for the older, legacy systems.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a four. Some of the lessons are really easy, whereas others are more difficult, but you need to finish everything, otherwise you cannot go further. This is what I didn't like about it.

It took approximately one month to implement our first robot. Prior to purchasing the license, we implemented our PoC using the Community Edition. That took three weeks. After that, my company bought the license and it took about a week to put into production.

With respect to saving time, we save a lot of manual hours by using automation. I would estimate that we save eighty hours per month, on average.

In some of our processes, it took an hour to run them and the resource used to have to watch them manually. They are now automated and running in unattended mode, and the resource is finding other activities to do. There are more than one hundred of these types of processes.

In terms of eliminating human errors, I would say that we have a ninety-five percent reduction in our rate of errors.

The most valuable features are the scheduler, queues, and activities. The activities are there for applications like Excel, Word, and Outlook.

More Excel activities should be included. We do have basic Excel activities, but we don't have ones to do things like add colors or formulas. For these types of operations, we always use custom objects and have to write custom code or pay for them.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four.

My automation is one hundred percent working in my dev environment; however, the same package is not working with one hundred percent success in the production environment. It's a ninety-eight percent success rate, because sometimes there is a network issue, like slowness, and it's breaking my automation.

We have eleven people working in our automation group including process architects, developers, and testers.

I would rate our experience with technical support a five out of five. Whenever I needed help on the infrastructure, or with development, they immediately responded and tried to solve the problem. In cases where it was not solvable, they would jump on a call and look at through our code to help us out.

Prior to using this solution, we used both Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

When it comes to deciding the suitability for automation and the choice of vendor, we consider the results of the process mining. We evaluate how many hours and how much money will be saved. We also consider how frequently the automation will be run, such as quarterly, monthly, or even daily.

One of our clients did not like the support from Blue Prism, which is why we jumped onto UiPath and implemented it.

The initial setup of this solution is complex. We began immediately with a setup for high availability, but somehow we messed it up. We did not have the proper documentation and ended up getting help from UiPath.

They helped us, but overall, I would say that it is not straightforward.

We implemented this solution in-house with support from UiPath.

We have not yet seen ROI from this solution.

The licensing fees for this solution are $8,000 USD annually.

Everybody says that this solution is easy to implement, but I do not find it that easy. It may be true for very simple processes, but not for more complex ones. For that, we need to have some kind of development and analytical skills. 

That said, from a code developer's point of view, I haven't found any difficulties with this solution. My advice for anybody who is considering this type of solution is to try UiPath.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We currently use an on-premise Orchestrator instance along with VDIs for Studio development, testing, and production Robots. We use UiPath in a few different ways: for repetitive high volume and or high complexity time-intensive tasks, for tasks with high error rates and or low error tolerance, and as a component in larger digital workstreams requiring the interaction of multiple systems and workers.

We are able to roll out customized sales reports for every appointment for all 400 of our sales agents, which is something that was not even feasible before. It could not possibly be done by humans alone without hiring an army.

We have been patching together a number of different solutions to try and create a more holistic automation solution. The newly announced features such as Long Processes, AI Fabric, and improved attended dashboard will go a long way in solving those needs.

On a scale from one to five where one is not stable and five is very stable, I would rate the stability of UiPath platform as a three. We had a lot of trouble initially, most of which was our own fault. Migrating all development, testing, and production, to identical virtual machines to ensure parity helped tremendously with stability and reliability. We still have to be very careful with selectors though and have learned to not trust the default capture particularly with Java-based applications.

I'd say the customer support is nothing short of excellent. We've had access to both technical and business experts as needed, and have regular conversations regarding challenges, successes, and the path to full-enterprise deployment.

On a scale from one to five where one is the least beneficial and five is the most beneficial, I would rate the UiPath Academy RPA training for our team as a four. It's no substitute for programming experience and computer science knowledge, but one of our Accounting Analysts and a Process Engineer each completed the first course and within a couple of weeks were producing basic automations. It's a fantastic entry point both for non-technical and technical users to learn about RPA and get up and building fast.

Previously I've used Automation Anywhere and switched when changing companies.

Our infrastructure team handled implementation with considerable help from UiPath. On a scale from one to five where one is very bad and five is excellent, I would rate our experience with UiPath as a five. The service was excellent.

It took us about four months to see a return on our investment. In the last six months, we have saved about a hundred thousand dollars and we have freed up about five FTE (Full-Time Employees) of capacity.

Plan to scale from the start! We initially deployed with a single-node on-premise configuration to test everything out and validate the business case. Six-months later and we now have to stand-up a new environment that is critical-process-capable (multi-site/cloud, load balancing, log monitoring, failover, etc) and has the capacity to handle the number of robots and users needed as we roll out enterprise-wide. It would have been more cost-effective and much easier on the infrastructure team to plan it all out ahead of time.

We evaluated BluePrisim, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. Our Process Engineers and citizen developers really liked the flowchart-esque UI and the business leaders were impressed by UiPath's ability to build a PoC for one of our worst processes in just two days.

On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is very easy, I would rate the ease of use as a three. The flow is ideal for process-minded people and analysts, so they are able to navigate the UI and start building quickly. Our more advanced developers occasionally opine about the lack of an editor like interface and the need to click through a lot of UI elements to access more technical elements. Overall though, we feel it strikes a good middle ground, particularly when compared to other major competitors.

Currently, we're using Studio and soon to be using Orchestrator. We have not actually deployed any bots yet, but we have looked into both Orchestrator and bots. We have just looked at the solution set of that on why do we need to deploy in the future.

Our primary use will vary from department to department. We have what we call 11 global practices. These range across different platforms, but the underlying theme of that is we want to automate different items which might be finance or accounting or HR or whatever. But where I think it will be most useful is in our core business where I'm looking to apply it to engineering project management.

The most valuable feature for us has been the ability to take data out of where we have it — Excel sheets or wherever it may be — and translate it into customer-owned Citrix environments. Our primary core is engineering. A lot of our business requires us to take data what we have developed as part of the design process and relay that into work orders or other process triggers, ordering triggers, or material ordering, or different things for our clients. Allowing us to interface local data with Citrix environments is going to be a big deal.

I'm not exactly sure what I want to see enhanced yet. I know that we do a lot of small processes. Depending on how good Studio X is and how easy that is to build and manage we could potentially do a lot of small little things inside of various design tools like Excel, Word, and Outlook and to be able to kick out the workflows from that.

We like to do a lot of the design side locally for Excel, whether that be in a BBA or an add-in type environment. Being able to manage and deploy or build those will be helpful. Maybe we won't call them bots, maybe we call them processes that are centrally managed. In addition to the Microsoft stack, we use many other vendors like AutoCAD, Bentley MicroStation, Revit Inventor, BIM 360 and Autodesk Forge. To us, the CAD world is where we can see a lot of time savings and benefit ROI on a solution. That would be our next horizon.

I think this solution has room for improvement in the area of ease-of-use. It does require a little bit of coding background to be able to get in and really build out the solution. After I get in and look at Studio X a little more, I may change my opinion on that.

We have six people working in the organization involved in our automation program. We are pretty confident that can scale easily.

Since we have not deployed to production yet, we are not sure which direction we'll be going in. We were looking on-premises but the software as a service cloud deployment will likely be a hit with our IT department. We plan to run our automation in virtual environments through a Citrix interface but not in Citrix.

On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is very easy, I would rate the ease of the use of the platform as a three or four for now. I saw some things today I'd like to dig into a little farther, and I think that that Studio X would make it a whole lot easier for citizen developers to get in and do small tasks. Rebuilding tasks for accounting and finance where there are fairly rigid rules will be great. In the engineering world, our interfacing with the clients sometimes changes on a weekly basis. So having something that is very flexible like Studio X will make it possible to flex and change with those environments very quickly, very easily, very nimbly, and to deploy and redeploy. So if Studio X is what I hope it is, that rating may be closer to a five than not.