UiPath Platform Reviews

Our primary use case is to scrape our database to get data out, create audit files for our tax team, and then take that data and go to websites for each state and submit our taxes online.

Time-saving is the biggest area that has improved for us. We had users spending lots of time trying to get data from a system and then creating a file that was going to be used for our auditing purposes, which then gets submitted online. We definitely found some issues where an end-user was pulling data from different sources and then storing that data with lots of human touching that created issues.

UiPath created a better atmosphere of better data quality. Time management was also much better, and now the user actually has a better experience doing that process because now it's a click of a button. They can spend their time doing the actual work that they want to do.

Instead of having to go back out through those websites and make corrections when they paid for the wrong taxes. In some states, it's a lot harder to make those corrections, especially if it's one where you overpaid. Now, they're accurate and they don't have to go back and make those changes to try and get that resolved.

We have seen cost savings from the time it has saved us. We save around 40 to 50 hours a month. Over the course of a year, it's quite a bit, and it adds up.

Web trading services are the most valuable features. 

It is easy to build out automations. I have an IT degree, but I was not doing the dev work within our department. I came from a data quality background and transitioned over to this because the low code has been great and all the online resources that they've provided us have been very beneficial.

Other members of my team have used the Academy. It helps to get a jump start. Now, luckily, we have a couple of us that do it. It's much easier to train and show them what we have already built and then say, "if you have questions, you look here." It's just been great.

They have the robotic enterprise framework that I wouldn't have used if it wasn't for the Academy. When I first started automating, I wasn't utilizing that process at all. That actually made a huge difference in how I programmed and how I even looked at building my automations to start with. I feel like learning that course specifically for me, was great, was like the best benefit for me.

Since we've been with them, they've changed their licensing structure. It would be nice to have one set structure where they're not changing the structure on us because we were set with what we had, but now we are changing. I understand there's a lot of changes and reasons for it.

I have been using UiPath for a year and a half. 

I haven't had much issue with stability.

It doesn't seem to have a limit. Scalability has been great. Everything that we've run into that we've needed it to do, it's been able to do.

Even being a smaller consumer as we are, when we've submitted tickets, they've been very responsive even to the point of when we couldn't get our deployment deployed because we had an issue. They were responsive and within a couple of emails of them understanding our issue, we were on a phone call and had everything resolved over a phone call

The initial setup was straightforward. A different part of our IT department did the setup and they seemed to do okay with it. We had some hiccups with it. When I did some upgrades with that, I had a couple of hiccups, but I was able to actually work with UiPath and they were able to help us resolve our issues.

My first deployment took a couple of weeks.

When we did our original deployment, it took a couple of weeks just to research and understand exactly what we needed to do for the on-prem plus the other daily work that we had going on. It wasn't the highest priority because at the time I was using the community addition to get started.

Our very first project was the biggest return on investment.

For bigger businesses, pricing doesn't matter as much. It has the right packages. But for a smaller company, it's really tough. There could be better package options that suit smaller companies. 

A consultancy called Agility Partners came in to help us. We had the tax automation we wanted to do and they gave us some options of different things and then they pointed us in the direction of UiPath thinking it would be the best benefit for us.

As soon as you can, do it. You're not going to believe how well the automation will save you time, your company time, and even quality issues. This has been great.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

We've got mostly finance use cases including a lot of accounts receivable and stuff like that. Then, there is a lot of work where I do trading settlements, so a lot of settlements as well. The back office automation's there, too. We're still getting used to it and still getting started.

We've been able to expand up to citizen developers, and have been able to show them how to do various things. It's easy to pick up, so a lot of citizen developers are learning it now, and with little to no coding experience. It's been great.

The recorder has been great. Just being able to really start your automation there, and just modifying them a little bit and then getting them really in production has been helpful.

The solution has saved costs for the organization. For example, I used to do back-office stuff, and I was able to move to more of an IT role. That was definitely a savings there, and obviously, no one had to automate it after me or do it manually after me.

We have found that the solution has reduced human error as now it's a bot doing it. It's really reduced errors due to the fact that no one has to check each time to ensure the work is error-free, and, in general, there are a lot fewer errors. 

The solution has freed up employee time. For example, as I mentioned, I myself have moved off of back-office tasks and, in doing so, the company did not have to hire someone after me. We've likely saved 10,000 hours in a year. We're really happy with that result. The additional time has enabled employees to focus on higher-value work. People can now just quickly audit it and then move on to something more important.

The Academy is great to use. We've been able to learn a lot from there. That's what our citizen developers will look at as they get more familiar with the product, and as we show them how to develop items. It has positively affected the process of getting employees up to speed on the solution. A lot of them have little to no coding experience and the Academy has helped by showing them what they need to learn. The biggest value is if they have little to no coding experience, it'll really start from the basics and teach them from there. You don't have to teach them all the variables and stuff like that.

While I like the Academy a lot, it could maybe go deeper into some of the topics. The basic ones, such as Excel, which is already a decent course, could maybe go into more specifics. My issue is that, while the basics are good, getting into the weeds a little more could be very helpful. It's hard to specify exactly what is needed, however.

We've used the solution for about a year now. We're still getting used to it. 

Our stability is great. You rarely have any downtime, once you build it. There's obviously the support, however, I'd say it's pretty minimal.

We're trying to work on scalability at the moment. It's there, however, we have a lot of different departments that do a lot of different things and that's where we need to really work on scaling. It has nothing to do with UiPath. It's just about getting everybody trained up on everything on our side. That said, we can see how it is possible to scale in the future. We do plan to increase usage.

Currently, we have about ten users who are familiar with UiPath. It's not too many. They are either developers or just everyday users that support it.

In terms of technical support, from the perspective of tickets, et cetera, I would say they are pretty good. We've only done a few upgrades so far. We've only had it for a year, and so far, in that time, support seems great. They have been helping us out on everything.

We did not previously use a different RPA solution.

I can't speak to the initial setup, as we had an outside party handle pretty much everything. I actually joined after they onboarded us and everything, and therefore wasn't a part of the process at all.

We have two to three people that handle maintenance tasks, on top of the AI.

We had an outside party do the deployment. It was a consultant. They did it for us.

I don't have any insights into the licensing process. 

While I joined after UiPath was implemented, my understanding is the company did look into a couple of other options, just to see their capabilities.

I would advise potential new users to go for it. The Academy offers a great starting point. It's a great tool. I would recommend UiPath.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

Our primary use cases are for invoice processing and some legal intake use cases.

The benefits we see from UiPath are always time savings. I've never seen another benefit. It's always that people don't have to do manual tasks anymore.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease UiPath's total cost of ownership, by taking care of things such as infrastructure, maintenance, and updates, if security isn't a big issue. 

With the cloud offering, you don't have as much control of where the data is and how it's protected versus the on-prem. If you're dealing with very sensitive information, you could introduce a compliance risk if you're using the cloud offering. But with the customers that we partner UiPath with, that's not an issue, so we use the cloud offering.

The screen automation features are the most valuable. There are some things, in an automation process that is complicated, that UiPath isn't very good at. And there are some things that are very repetitive and UiPath is good with it. For those repetitive aspects, it's obvious why it's valuable. It's replacing the amount of time that a human being would have to spend doing it.

We have seen that our clients have freed up time for their employees.

Our clients utilize AI functionality from UiPath. UiPath is really good at simple repetitive processes, but not as much at complex processes. The more complicated it gets, it breaks down because if it's less repetitive, it's less automatable.

AI functionality enabled our clients to automate more processes overall. It helped with end-to-end automation in the way that if you automate more processes, you save more time, and save more money for the company.

It is not very easy to build on automations. That's a problem with UiPath. I don't think it's very easy to build automation on top of it. 

Accessibility needs improvement. It would be easier to build on UiPath if they would have more employee-level users as opposed to consultants. Then that would increase the value of the product and the platform.

I have been using UiPath for two years. 

The stability is good. 

It's very scalable in our organization. The hardest thing is getting in and getting someone to build their first five automations and their first five robots in the first place. After that, it's very hard to rip out. Once you've already automated something and you've done all the in-depth work to set it up, it's pretty sticky.

There are around ten users and they're almost all solutions architects.

We've used Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, but I think UiPath is the market leader right now.

Even though UiPath is hard to use, it's easier to use than Blue Prism. And it has more features than Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup is never straightforward. There are always bugs. It doesn't matter if it's UiPath or any other company, it's always complex. It's never easy the first time.

The implementation takes around three months. 

Ideally you don't want to take someone's job, but if you free up the time that someone was spending doing something, you don't have to pay them to do that anymore, or you can reinvest their time somewhere else.

It's expensive, but it saves a lot of money too.

My advice to someone implementing UiPath would be to hire someone technical to do it. It's not as easy to use as they say it is.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. To get it to a perfect ten, it would need to be easier to use. 

There are lots of use cases. Mostly, there are many gaps in organizations that buy a lot of software and a lot of automation platforms like ERPs, however, they don't know how to actually create an end-to-end process and connect those systems. In those cases, they end up like small islands in a big organization. What I started doing was filling those gaps. After that, we use the RPA to fulfill that. For me, a lot of processing in Excel or some processes that needed multiple users to interact is what we use the solution for. We just capture those tasks and convert them to RPA bots. Basically, we've automated a lot of manual tasks.

We do not use UiPath in the contact center environment. In our case, contact centers here are really dependent on CRMs. Even using chatbots in contact centers is still very new in Iran. These foreign branches, these foreign companies that are in Iran, do not see any potential to use RPA in this scenario. 

Mostly, UiPath has improved my career. I am an RPA Developer, and without UiPath my job wouldn’t exist. UiPath changed my career. Due to UiPath (not Automation Anywhere or not Blue Prism), there’s a noticeable increase in the speed of development. I was a C# Developer and it's helped me a lot. Generally, UiPath is in the top 10 and has offered a lot of new technological shifts and people are talking about it more. When people are talking, there are great opportunities. There are now new voices that can be heard. 

UiPath is constantly listening. That's a good point for UiPath - it's always listening from its community to its top customers and interacting with comments. Due to the fact that it listens, it integrates new software, goes into end-to-end automation, and changes for the better. Someday they will have Autonomous RPA, a real Autonomous RPA that can actually decide like a true robot, not just a robot that works on a script. One day they will offer a true robot that can finally decide what to do in certain situations, not by just using something like document understanding that we call Machine Learning. UiPath is very, very good at giving true innovation to people. It’s a win-win for everyone.

RPA is actually something that can be executed, that can be used side by side with many programming technologies.

The speed of development in UiPath is very fast. For example, sometimes you want to do many frameworks and the budget is low, with the timeline being very crucial. With UiPath Studio and with the whole UiPath platform, it can be very fast to develop and deploy. That's the main advantage for me personally - that the speed of development is great.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis, then robot building, and finally monitoring. They are all there. The one exception I’ve noticed is that end-to-end automation is still lagging, I have reasons for that. However, the monitoring of the robots or even using insights is there. They are the prerequisites for an RPA platform. They are great suites. They are necessities.

I like parallel processing. I like that a robot can do some parallel stuff while the user continues to do their own thing. If it needs interaction, we can just pop up a clear window or apps, for example, or through email, in order to inform the user about the robot's request.

AI Automation overall has enabled us to automate more processes. However, when we go forward and move forward, we see that we can digitalize those documents before it needs to be processed by an image machine-like OCR or even Machine Learning. For example, there are still handwritten documents. We’ve convinced many organizations to drop those handwritten documents and use digital products for us. Those are immediate time savings for the process. We are not using document processing anymore, for example, in a specific organization. For processes that still need to have handwritten or printed out documents, document understanding could be fine. I really hope, however, that they shift to AI, which is what RPA lacks. RPA lacks Autonomous Automation, that's something that everyone is waiting for. We’d like to have a robot that's actually using the computer with its own mind, not just the workflow we give it.

For end-to-end scenarios, UiPath is still growing. I'm not saying that UiPath isn’t good. There is a lot of potential. They're using UiPath Actions or Apps, for example. Dashboards ensure that end users can interact in a new way with robots or with the whole end-to-end automation. RPA is a technology that hasn't maxed out yet.

Someday, there will be no legacy software or very intelligent processes that will use APIs. It’s my understanding that UiPath bought some company that specializes in API Automation. For end-to-end automation, UiPath needs to integrate all those components, rather than task automation to process automation, real process automation. With RPA, if you read the HFS report, you see that the process version is actually not a process. It's tasks. Perhaps in their next LTS release, UiPath will actually gain to that point.

There are minor bugs. Every major software has bugs. That said, all are solvable, all are resolvable, and it's not a very bad thing.

Mostly, licensing must be improved somehow. Licensing is very expensive. Even in many industrial countries such as the USA or UK, UiPath is still very expensive. For example, Microsoft now owns its own RPA, Power Automate, and the pricing is much more reasonable than UiPath. UiPath licensing is very vague and expensive. There are some ways that they can reduce the cost to make everyone benefit from an RPA.

UiPath needs a lot of maintenance. Every RPA vendor, every RPA on-premise software, needs a lot of maintenance. The cloud version has reduced that, as far as I know. It’s resolved the maintenance issue so that users can focus more on other things. Every new feature will be first on the cloud version and eventually, we can benefit from that.

We use document understanding. For English documents, it helps, however, for Persian documents, due to the fact that the models, the Machine Learning models, that are pre-built, are based on English or other common languages. If we want to actually use Persian, we need to use AI Fabric and build our own models. It's now out of our budget to do something like that here.

It's almost been three years since I first started using UiPath.

I don't like the stability very much as it has minor bugs.

You see that processes break without any reason. When you check the system, check every log, even view robot logs or logs in the network level and you see that it has, it's only then that you realize the issue was a bug from the UiPath platform. Once that happens, you must go to the community and explain the situation to each other. The good thing is, there is a community right there and you can learn from each other. 

Scalability is great. UiPath has many capabilities. Anyone, via a simple search, can go through UiPath and even try the enterprise version and just see for themselves that there are many, many, many capabilities. You can use .NET and there are many NuGet packages that you can use or you can even design your own custom package. There are many great platforms, such as Insights, Action Center, UiPath platforms, and so many different types of robots.

In terms of technical support, I do not have the opportunity to speak with them, as we are in Iran, and, due to sanctions, we do not have a direct opportunity to speak directly to UiPath's support. Therefore, I cannot have an opinion on their services.

I'm familiar with other RPA solutions such as Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism.  

I saw a lot of people that are going to RPA. I put myself in their shoes. However, from my perspective, UiPath has a great community. The UiPath forum is very good compared to Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. Every technology can be learned, sooner or later. That said, the first thing that any kind of technological software needs to have is a good community to facilitate that learning. Without community, you cannot spread the word, you cannot spread the knowledge. It's the first thing that UiPath has over both of these other solutions. 

And the second thing is, as a technological matter, UiPath is much better. The other two lack the connection, lack the integration. The user interfaces of both Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism are terrible. I do not like them. They're not very intuitive and they are not easy to learn. UiPath is using Workflow Hosting Foundation from Microsoft and great integrations with .NET, which is so much better than the other ways that other vendors are approaching things.

I'm typically involved in the setup. I'm involved in every phase of the process. 

The setup is straightforward. They're using .NET Core now and before that, they were using ASP.NET's Standard Framework. The company has relied on default application configuration as far as, for example, in web.config or .JSONs. Most configuration must be done in the UI itself. I don't really like to just manipulate files at the system level just to do something. I believe that's the way now, however, that can be improved. It could be just in the UI and the certainty would be much better.

The length of time it takes to set up a robot deployment depends on the project itself, however, for a small project, it can be in one month to 45 days.

The initial deployment of UiPath is not more than three days.

Setting up UiPath doesn't have any standard process. There's just documentation. We are always using its documentation.

We do not have any relationship with UiPath directly. We are just a contractor doing RPA for foreign companies that are based in Iran.

Iran has sanctions against it, and there are a few companies that are local branches of foreign companies, and those that have licenses from UiPath all use on-premise deployments. We're always using the latest versions of the solution. Right now, we are on version 19 and it's in the 2010 LTS.

I didn't have the opportunity to use UiPath Cloud. I'm in Iran and I don’t have access. There are some capabilities that are still in the cloud version, like Apps.

While it depends on the project requirements, much of our work is on attended automation. I see attended automation as a gateway to an RPA solution as users are very busy and we cannot just pop-up in some programs, random programs, and stuff so they end up having to wait. I do not believe that attended automation helps users as much as an unattended version can help. This is due to the fact that at some point, someone still has to be involved in the process.

RPA is a new technology and a new shift that there's no good book on how to manage. Maybe there are some, however, they can be obsolete rather quickly, as the technology is changing and with every new version. That's why hands-on experience is the best way to learn. Even for UiPath, without any practice, without any hands-on experience, and without any good community, you cannot do anything.

If someone wants to learn UiPath, first they must sign up within the community and then go to UiPath Academy. Start there. Practice. Get in touch with people in the community, and then create a small use case and do some hands-on work. Practice is very crucial in RPA. Don't forget to review official documentation as well, as it will save you lots of time. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

My use case is to automate a bunch of office processes. It helps my team and finance organization save time and money.

There's a monthly upload process in my order management team. Every month, this team uploads a bunch of files to SAP. Now they don't need to do that because the bot does that for them at a given time period. The team members need to just upload a file to SharePoint and then the bot will pick it up.

It reduced human error. It saves us time redoing work and allows our humans to do other stuff.

It has freed up a couple of hours in a month. If you scale it, I'd say there are some processes that are daily. It has been at least 2,000 hours so far. This additional time enabled employees to focus on higher-value work. Bots can be tricky to debug. So, sometimes employees get frustrated there but overall they're happy it's there in the first place.

UiPath reduced the cost of our automation operations. Right now it's breaking even, but over time there'll be more. It has also reduced overall costs. 

The Studio and Orchestrator are pretty valuable. They seem to have a lot of connectivity and usability. It's pretty easy for people without a coding background to use it.

It's pretty easy to build automation using UiPath. It's a little hard for some activities because there's not enough support. There's not a lot of adoption with that activity, but the ones that are commonly used have pretty good support.

Its end-to-end coverage is important to us. If we have it all on one platform, we don't have to bounce around other software. But, we ended up doing a little bit of both.

Capturing ROI needs improvement. I would also like for it to have more logging mechanisms in Orchestrator.

I have been using UiPath for about two years now. 

It's stable now. 

We mainly use Unattended Automation but it has helped to scale RPA benefits by automating departments for the very few Attended Automations we have. It's important to me because my job pretty much depends on this software. Changing from this product to another RPA product is going to be extremely costly and time-consuming.

It is scalable. We have about 30 users on it now that are entry-level/senior associate-level people.

It requires four developers to maintain. 

We plan to increase usage in the long term. But right not we still have enough capacity in our existing Orchestrator.

I would rate their tech support a six out of ten. Most of them don't work in U.S. time and they're not always very responsive. Sometimes they give an answer that is pretty generic and can be found in the online article, even though I referenced the article already.

We also use Automation Anywhere. 

The initial setup was not too hard and not too easy. Some documentation wasn't very clear, and for basic features it handled it pretty well. But, if you wanted to go more granular and customize your deployment, it would be a little hard to find out the answer.

The deployment took about a month. We involved the UiPath support to help us implement it and upgrade our systems. Other than that, we got our PAM software lead that uses CyberArk to configure the Orchestrator with us.

We have seen ROI. I don't know the max number of hours but I'd say we've saved around 2,000 hours so far.

I think pricing could be better. I think it should be more visible.

The license system with Studio licenses seemed a bit redundant and not necessary.

We looked at other solutions but went with UiPath because of the cost. Another reason was that we have more developers that are specialized in UiPath, as well as management, who seemed to like UiPath more.

I still have to pay attention to the infrastructure a little bit because it's still On-premises. I'm using the On-premises products more so, but the support has been pretty decent. And then, there are community forums to look up how to debug some stuff.

The upfront cost is always going to be more than trying to keep it to the human process, but over time we'll realize more return.

My advice would be get UiPath support to do this for you and involve all your IT firewall security team.

You need to know more about security and cybersecurity in order to fully deploy your automations. Some of that is kind of missing in the Academy where they focus mainly on building automations, but not really securing it.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. 

I work for a banking company. We use UiPath for tracing and collecting customer's credit information.

We also use it to deploy a bot when clients have specific requests for changes to their information or accounts. We're able to change their service via these requests. We can also remove some processes of manual intervention.

We've deployed bots across various processes. We have been able to remove human intervention for multiple processes and have seen a general improvement in terms of cost-effectiveness.

We used to handle dashboards manually. Now we've turned customers into kind of specialists in that, whenever they want to change something, such as adding debit, or opening/closing accounts, changing addresses, et cetera, they can handle it. They no longer have to push that request through us and have us intervene. They can do it themselves using the bots. 

Previously, nobody could automate the process. The design and implementation allowed clients to handle their own data, for example, for transfers and items like that. We were able to digitize entirely from end to end. Now, the customer doesn't have to come to the bank and they don't need a pen and paper. They just have to log on and fill out the details of their request. Being able to share this new data is important. If there are manual aspects, we can now handle them for the customer. We don't have to have them worry about doing tasks manually.

We can use browsers like Internet Explorer for our automation. However, we've been able to use Excel as well with just a few hiccups in the beginning. UiPath really helped us with this change by disabling some elements at the managerial level. It was a big learning experience for us.

We are able to use codes to do a lot of checking to see that we are getting enough data and that we are able to filter it correctly.

The ease of building a process is pretty good and simplifies things. Normally it takes three to four hours to complete a process. That includes everything, including generating reports and sending the data. There are, of course, multiple steps involved in the process. We've gotten that down to about six minutes. We're able to better focus the work and, at the same time, we're able to use a lot of bots to get things done. 

We can scale the solution well. We've already deployed four more bots for various processes. We're actually able to have good control of each bot. We're able to put things into a proper standard format and then send the information where it needs to go without having to handle the process manually. It would go so much slower without the bots in place without having to go back to the customer. There's no longer a needs to do anything manually here. There was a concern that customers would not be able to manage the process that's automated by the bots, however, in the end, everything was clear and it was easily handled. 

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation, starting with process analysis, then robot building, and finally monitoring automation. We're involved from the very beginning to design the process from step one. We're able to test everything out before moving to production and that allows us to make sure everything works. End-to-end coverage is first and foremost. The visibility we have is really powerful. 

We were able to deploy in parts, as we didn't have global production. At first, we didn't know how to manage everything. Once we went live, however, we were able to monitor it all. We could send reports to show what was happening, and if there were any concerns, we could go and directly look at those areas.

The solution helped to minimize our on-premises footprint. I always look for capabilities to deploy from the cloud. It changes as the customer needs to decide how to ultimately deploy. However, the cloud is able to handle anything an on-prem option would. We are able to handle the entire volume using one cloud. Our bots are able to be on the cloud and online. 

Attended automation has helped to scale RPA benefits in our organization by automating department roles and specific processes that require human/robot collaboration. Previously, we were concerned with data loss and not being able to attend to the browser. We were not able to do even the simpler stuff.

We were able to upgrade to an updated version, from 19.4 to 20.4 which had some more UI and automation. We were able to upscale our entire quota. We're able to do workarounds if we need to.

We can speed up our automation processes and automate faster with UiPath.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease the solution's total cost of ownership by taking care of items such as infrastructure maintenance and updates.

The solution speeds up the cost of digital transformation.

The solution has reduced human error. We've been able to reduce errors and have gotten more quality data instead of just more data. That way, if there is a mistake or something goes wrong, we can check the error against the quality data and resolve issues more effectively.

It has also freed up our employee's time. They can better deliver on big and innovative processes. We used to handle a lot of high volume tasks at the end of the month mostly and that's since tapered off. We'll have to see at the end of this month how much time savings we've accumulated. 

Our employees can now focus on more high-value work. Employee satisfaction is high as well. In a bank, we do have a high volume of transactions every month, and previously, each would have to be checked and verified and balanced by someone manually - even if most would be dismissed as canceled transactions, et cetera. With automation, our employees no longer have to look at everything themselves. They can be wiser about what interventions they have to make every month.

Overall, the solution has reduced the cost of our automation operations. As a developer, I cannot speak to exact amounts, however, as that's handled more by project managers. 

So far, the solution has saved the company costs. We're very customer-focused in our organization. Deploying these kinds of innovative solutions allows us to better serve while offering our customers better services as well. It's become like their personal service manager. We've done this without ballooning costs. 

While the solution speeds up the cost of digital transformation, doing so requires expensive or complex application upgrades or IT app support. You will need IT. That said, I haven't had a chance to explore mine in any detail.

There need to be more warnings for when there are issues within the automation especially when it comes to exceptions. We're not easily made aware of problems. The sooner we understand what the exception is, the sooner we can adjust things.

I've been using the solution going on 25 years now.

For the most part, the solution is stable. We did encounter one problem when we were testing. Apart from that, we did not encounter any issues. 

The solution has helped us to scale. For example, if we have no idea from where to start, but we know the process test and know the application is involved, we're able to start building. We can go and test and try out options without having to put anything into production right away, so we can refine and validate the data.

The solution itself is highly scalable. We have three worker bots running at the same time. Users, however, can scale it up however they want to.

I'm not sure if the company has any plans to increase usage or put more bots into production.

We have a team that lets us know if there are any changes coming up in relation to the infrastructure. If there are any changes that will affect the bots, it will not be done suddenly. We'll be able to ensure nothing is overly affected. 

In terms of technical support, if something is not working as it should, they do need to review it. They do help us with technical validation.

We did not use a different solution before we adopted UiPath.

The initial setup was complex to a certain degree. The documentation was unclear. In the beginning, we weren't really comfortable with the approach or the process. 

There were two types of processes happening at once during the deployment. We did each process twice, and each took two or three hours, so it was about one day to get everything going for each deployment, and then we did a final run-though. Likely, in total, it took us about 12 days or so. 

We tend to have a specific process that we go through for every implementation we do. We'll go through how many bots are needed and what to do. We also do testing for all types of situations. We have a process designer who is involved and assists with the setup.

In terms of maintenance, we don't need anyone to run the operation. We have three to five people that after a month of production, have a good enough understanding to handle any outstanding tasks, whatever they may be. If there are issues, such as, for example, if Internet Explorer is not working, they are able to troubleshoot and manage the solution.

We did not use an integrator or installer to assist in the deployment process.

We have seen an ROI.

I always work to design my solution in such a way that is the most cost-effective.

You do need to pay the full license cost in order to use UiPath, so you need to be strategic to get the most out of it.

Our company handles costs internally as we do not directly deal with a vendor.

We did evaluate other options for data capture before we chose UiPath.

We are customers and end-users.

At this time, we do not use the AI functionality within UiPath. Our solution is not impacted by anything generating artificial intelligence.

The automation speeds up the time to value and we see very quickly how much the solution is able to positively affect the business aspects. It's been really helpful for us overall. The processes have been profitable. 

I'd advise users to really focus on their input and output size. You'll be able to validate your data. It will help you transform your processes. You just need to figure out where you want to simplify and where you want to maximize value.

We've learned how to standardize processes. We've realized how important it is to always try to be very clear when creating automation.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Currently, I'm dedicated to working within a finance organization. It develops processes in the scope of five months. I do not use the solution in a contact center environment. I work on projects for shared services.

It's FTE-saving. Since the beginning of this year, I have covered more than four FTEs. That means that for half a year, I saved three FTEs. That's a huge benefit.

The easy development process is very useful for us. I know how to use it, and I'm able to prepare and add to a solution in one or one and half weeks. It depends, of course, on the process, however, largely, if it's a simple process, it could be developed from the beginning very quickly.

It's very important that I can create end-to-end automation using UiPath. Thanks to that, the business is free to do more advanced processes and is not overloaded by less important, repetitive tasks.

I've noticed that UiPath has reduced human error. The first benefit is FTE saving, however, the second is quality of work. Human work, if it's repetitive, it's very often related to human errors. That said, if something is programmed really well and automated it works without the need for human intervention.

I had a problem with one thing and that was exporting activities packages between the test server and the production server. I'm not sure that it's my own issue, or a general problem from the global perspective of UiPath, however, I have a lot of problems with packages, using the test server and production server.

I've used the solution for quite a long time. I started using UiPath at the beginning of 2017. It has been more than four years.

The stability is good. Everything works well and I don't have any production bugs. I only have positive feedback, It works and there are no unexpected errors.

The scalability  depends on the developer. If we have an advanced developer, it is really easy to scale. If someone's preparing, for example, components, it is quite easy. From UiPath's perspective, it is easy to scale, however, that said, everything depends on the person who uses it and how familiar they are with the product.

I had a chance to contact UiPath when UiPath licenses needed updating. I had close contact. I wrote a ticket and I had contact with them in less than an hour. I was quite pleased with their response time. 

I made the right decision to go with a solution that can scale automation without having to pay attention to the infrastructure and to develop my skills in terms of RPA.

I had to do tests with Blue Prism and UiPath. Currently, I use UiPath, as I find it's much easier to use than other RPA tools. For example, I really like Orchestrator, from a user perspective. The control of both is really easy as it's centralized in NonProduction Orchestrator, and it's really easy to operate it. There's general ease of development. In Blue Prism, for example, if you want to develop something, first you need to prepare the object layer, and after that, you can go to the business layer and connect it in one solution. In UiPath, we create just a component and connect components together which is more logical.

I was not exactly involved in the initial setup as when I joined the company, UiPath had already been set up. Therefore, everything was prepared to start development. That said, for a few months, I worked in UI as a consultant for external clients. During that time I had the chance to install UiPath for external clients. In that sense, I've been involved in the installation of UiPath previously.

The initial setup's level of difficulty depends on a client's needs. At first, we need to think about the strategy of the client. In general, UiPath provides different types of architecture and it's generally straightforward.

The setup could take weeks if you need, for example, to order servers. However, if servers are already on-site, we can begin the installation. As I recall, I set up Orchestrator in a few hours.

We have calculations for that and we are on the right path. There is an ROI when using UiPath, however, I thought it would be higher. That said, we can calculate costs related to the UiPath environment and compare it to the automated processes created and we can see we are on a good path. It's hard, however, to provide exact numbers at this time. 

I'm not sure if UiPath has sped up or reduced the cost of digital transformation. It's a tough question, as the license for the solution is too expensive right now. In Western Europe, it may be okay to pay such money for a license, however, where I work now, in Poland, the license cost is too high for the local market.

We have a connection to ServiceNow. In ServiceNow, there is an approval process to publish UiPath processes on the Production Orchestrator, and that's easy. I'm able to set schedules or run a process model from our Production Orchestrator.

We have different servers for development, including a different server for Orchestrator and a different server for production. However, everything is in my company environment.

At this point, I only use unattended automation. Currently, there are no projects for attended automation as it's more for the business side. I am just a developer from the IT side. I am not involved in any business department.

I'd advise those considering the solution to find a really good developer and maybe a solution architect. Some time ago, UiPath had marketing such as, "everyone could be a developer," and so on. That said, it does not work like that. UiPath developers should have a large IT background. During my career, I've seen a lot of projects fail due to developers' lack of skills.

My biggest takeaway from the solution is that automation is a process that doesn't have a start and end point. It's an ongoing process.

Overall, I'd rate the product at an eight out of ten. If the licensing price matched the local market's capabilities, I'd give it higher marks. I would like to start deploying the UiPath solution in Polish companies, and there is huge scope to do it, however, for now, it's too expensive.

We primarily use UiPath for outsourcing. Customers call us when they need extra people to fill positions, on a temporary or permanent basis, similar to a temp agency.

The biggest use case that is running right now is that we get job openings or requests from a lot of different third-party brokerages, customers, clients, vendors, et cetera. They all arrive through different platforms. We get an email saying there's a request, please check it out and let us know if you have someone to fulfill the position, and the request is implemented through UiPath. It's automated. We've created all of the mailbox folders based on the sender and the subject, so we know which customer or which broker it is. Then, we make the email follow a link to the information for the job opening or the inquiry and we put it into our Salesforce system.

There are a couple of smaller use cases as well, where we have task operations that have to be done weekly or daily. Mostly it's reading emails or reading schedules and making changes in files.

The automation of job inquiries has a lot of sufficiency on how we operate as we used to have multiple people need to be available throughout the day to manually check if an email with an inquiry came in, and that would require them to drop work and open the email, check it out and maybe take action immediately. Now that the robot is running and taking care of the need for filtering through all the results for them, employees can stay focused on the other tasks that they have. They don't have to keep an eye on a second monitor every time and drop everything they're doing to read an email only to decide what is relevant or not.

I understand work has to be tested. It hasn't impacted the entire company yet as I've been here a little short of a year now and we haven't made that big of an impact just yet. 

The most valuable aspect of UiPath is the community in terms of the way they open up their platform to the community and make it freely available for people to try and to practice. The amount of feedback from that community makes it very easy for us to get into UiPath and if you're trying something that you've never done before, you at least have some insights. There's almost always someone who has done it before or who has asked the question. I would say the community is one of the biggest extra treats for UiPath. 

From a technical perspective, I like the learning curve in the Studio and in the orchestrator - or the Cloud Platform as they call it now - due to the fact that it's easy to get into. It's easy to grasp the basics and to get started. You can scale up as fast and as far as you'd like or need to for your customer. It can do everything. You don't have to learn everything in advance to be able to work with it. It makes it really approachable.

Building automation can be really easy. The biggest challenge is to find the easy use cases as the use cases in the company can get quite complicated quite fast. That said, using the recorder in the Studio and then converting that to work in a mobile office is quite easy. I started in 2016 or 2017, and between then and now there's been a lot of changes. It's always been easy for developer-minded people to get started. However, now with the introduction of StudioX, it is even more focused on the different users and they have a different entry point for them. What I like about UiPath is that the training is really comprehensive. You can almost just record what you do by hand and then StudioX will translate that into a robot and then you can fine-tune it to make it more robust. Smaller costs can be easier steps. Just press record, do what you do, and then you're able to work with teams. 

Scaling automation without having to pay attention to infrastructure does make my job a lot easier for now. What I do see in companies is when they've taken the first steps and they start to scale up, a lot of them have policies or ways of working in place where they want to stick to the ways that they know. A lot of time I see customers will, in the end, do it by themselves anyway, so they use all of the upscaling functions that are available as they want to do it the way that they always did. 

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis, then robot building, and finally monitoring of automation. However, while it does facilitate end-to-end automation, it does take a lot of the development and running and monitoring of the robots on itself. That is something that is facilitated really well by UiPath. The process discovery and the analysis is rather newish within UiPath. Maybe it's not as well integrated into the community platform.

At this time, UiPath has helped to minimize our on-premises footprint as it is a cloud-based solution. It's important that the on-premise footprint has been minimized as it makes it easier for us being a small company. We have 160 people working for us in the Netherlands and then a couple in the Caribbean. Bringing new technology in like robotic process automation and then asking from the IT department to get me free service and results of my configuring and have all the discussions about what goes where, how the security works, how to find the work, who gets access, et cetera is easy. This is due to the fact that UiPath is offered on a cloud basis and I don't have to do all that on-site work, which allows me to get to building and talking about RPA quicker. 

The fact that the vendor handles infrastructure, maintenance, and updates saves time for our IT department. It helps us to implement a lot faster. The client companies can have a reliable cloud solution to help them do at least the first steps to get them acquainted with the product. It makes it a lot easier. It helps me a lot, and it helps our customers in starting out as well.

UiPath has decreased the time to value in that since it's cloud-based, I can deliver faster than I would be able to do on-prem. If we have an idea, or if we want to scale up, we can do so faster in the cloud solution than I could on-prem.

The product lowers the overall total cost of ownership by taking care of things such as infrastructure, maintenance, and updates, however, I'm not sure what would happen if we scale up.

The automation Cloud Platform has definitely helped reduce the time it takes to create automation. It brings a lot of things together. It's easy to use for clients and customers. It makes it easy to bring different disciplines together, so I don't need to think about how to reuse my code, or how to explain to the customer, and I don't need to share the processes to be able to release, run, and monitor and to get reports on the results. 

UiPath has reduced human error. There are fewer errors and the processes are less error-prone and once the technology has proven itself within the company, within the customers, people start to trust the robots to do what they do. Employees don't need to check the work that had been done as they know that if the robot reported that it was done correctly, then it was done correctly. In that way, it has saved a lot of time by not having to check anything. 

It has also freed up employee time. It's a three-person team and it saved them a couple of hours a week doing the work that they used to do. It saved them a lot more focus as they didn't have to monitor the email inbox all the time. They were able to apply more focus to the other things that they were doing. That said, it's hard to quantify the gains. However, overall, it has made them happy. That's one guarantee. They absolutely love that they gave the mundane work away to the robot because it was bothering them to be monitoring an email inbox all the time. It's given them the time to focus on cases that match the right people to the right inquiries or openings. I don't have any metrics on it, however, anecdotally, they tell me that it helped them to do the rest of their work better as they could apply more focus to more important tasks and placements are better attended to. There's much more focus and attention and better matches being made.

The solution has saved costs for our organization.

I'm trying not to sound negative about it as I like them a lot, however, the process mining and the process mining features stem further away from the development of the robots and the monitoring. The development, run, and monitoring are really closely knit, or really close together, and then process discovery is starting to get there. It's on its way, however, I don't see that it's as closely connected as the other three parts.

The automation operations have not brought down any company costs. Automation operations have gotten more expensive due to the fact that we added UiPath to them. That said, you do get gains at a different branch of the company. We didn't replace anything with UiPath. We weren't able to skip a step or program or tool, which makes it an added cost.

More documentation would be helpful, as they change rather quickly. There are two yearly stable releases and then a couple of community releases and data releases in between. Sometimes not all documentation is changed as quickly as the features are. Sometimes you can find something in the documentation that is not the answer, or not available in the product anymore. That's simply a side effect of how fast they develop the product. 

Sometimes it's not entirely clear what features are, for example, available in their community edition, or in the on-prem, or in the cloud. The difference between the on-prem and the cloud has become clearer in the past few weeks, however.

I've been using the solution for three years now. 

I started out at my previous company with systems integration. We started out with discovering robotic operations, discovering the tools, and suppliers. We chose UiPath and one of the competitors, as we found them to have the best suit with our customers. That was the end of 2016. That's when I started doing training in UiPath and started doing some custom integrations.

Now, I switched to a new job at a different company where they want to start an RPA practice as well and they chose UiPath solely for RPA.

From the operations standpoint, the stability of the cloud it's very good. I haven't had any issues with stability. The Studio will crash at random times. I've identified two scenarios where I'm able to make the Studio crash every time by just doing the same actions.

However, other than that, the automation was really stable, and I haven't had any issues or incidents. In Studio, I'd say it is good enough, however, there is some room for growth there.

Scaling automation without having to pay attention to infrastructure is a bit pro for UiPath as I'm starting an RPA practice. We don't have a lot of infrastructure engineers to build the project yet. Therefore, a lot of the time, with new customers as well, it will be a bit of a one-man show. Yet, what we can do is communicate to the platform and then make sure the infrastructure is there and then implement the platform and build a business analysis basically in an un-built realm. I have to do a lot of things by myself, so the fact that UiPath brings in the Cloud Platform and the Studio and it's all integrated and you can scale up without having to have too much. You need to know something about infrastructure to understand what it does for you, however, you don't have to do it all by hand. I don't need like three or four DP-trained individuals to be able to scale up or scale out. It's helped me get further faster.

Once you build the infrastructure and you know what you're doing and you know where you want to go with your platform and scaling, it's rather easy.

The only people really using it at this time are me and six trainees. There are a couple of ops people as well that are able to log in. We might have a total of ten people on the solution.

It's not being used too extensively now, however, that's for a large part due to the fact that most of my colleagues are working with our customers, so there are not too many internal processes or tasks. However, we do have plans to increase its priority as the tasks that we do have are at some points largely repetitive. We do a lot of operations and maintenance for our customers as well in different fields, so we are mainly looking at that for further automation opportunities.

Technical support has been pretty good. 

I get a quick response and it's usually constructive. I manage to fix my own problems a lot of the time using the community forums and information from there. I haven't had too much interaction with UiPath tech support.

We did not previously use a different solution. 

I personally implemented the solution at my company. 

We currently have it running, so some internal processes. And, we're looking to expand that into the customer landscape.

The setup is simple. They deliver it in a cloud environment, I didn't need to do any installs or make any arrangements.

You need to make an account and get started and watch a couple of training videos that will help you through it. The adding of the robots is very well documented in the forum, in the community, and in the training sessions. They have made it really easy to get started and to get the information you need to take the first step.

The deployment question is a tough one as I started out at this company while already having a communicators subscription on my own account. Therefore, I started out using that one and then gradually shifted toward using more automated resources. I don't have a clear overview of how much time it took to deploy. It might have been a couple of weeks overall, however, I was doing different things at the same time, and I never took a metric of how much time it took. I'd say starting out if the prerequisites are in place at the company, it could be a matter of days.

Tasks such as setting up an account, getting some service, et cetera, if you know what you're doing and you know what to ask a few questions before starting, it's a couple of minutes or hours. That said, in reality, there are always things you forget or things that they didn't do, so it always takes a little extra time.  

My implementation strategy was basically to figure it out as I went, which is not the best strategy, however, it was the best we could do due to the fact that the company didn't really know what they wanted to do with RPA. I was figuring out my own place in the company and then their wishes with robotics with RPA. There were a lot of things at the same time, so there was not a closed strategy other than to start up quickly, as soon as possible, get feedback, and then try again.

For now, I alone handle deployment and maintenance tasks. That will be the case until our trainees finish training.

We did not use a third-party service such as an integrator or a consultant.

We have not yet seen an ROI and have no concrete plans for any in the near future.

While I have one or two sheets from old presentations that have pricing information, they are over a half year old. I have no current insights. I wasn't included in discussions between the company and UiPath in relation to licensing. 

The company might have looked at other options. However, they did this before I was hired. Ultimately, they did want to choose UiPath, and I was hired based on my experience with the product. They chose UiPath at that time as they were working together with Oracle and that company has always been very Oracle-minded.

I use the community Studio and the Cloud Platform. I take the cloud from UiPath. I'm not sure where they host their solutions. I use the automation cloud from UiPath.

End-to-end coverage is not too important to my work at this time. Maybe if they were more closely integrated, I would be able to offer it more easily to my customers. However, now, due to the fact that I often go in at the first interaction with a customer or at a company, I have to introduce the concept of RPA, I have to introduce the product of UiPath, and I have to introduce or orchestrate the Cloud Platform and Studio. What I've seen is that that's enough for the first steps, usually, the company will have a pretty clear vision of what they want to start out with in terms of automation. However, introducing the process mining capabilities would add an extra step to the start-up that we have to do and what they want to see is faster results in the early phase. It's short the time from when I come in to initiate the first value, so they can appreciate the value and start the business cases and go from there. Maybe, once they are a couple of steps further on and they have a couple of automations, then they go look at the process of task mining as they have the infrastructure, they understand what the process automation is about, and then they start to see the value process or task mining. Therefore, the end-to-end factor, for my job, for now, is not too important as I don't truly use the end-to-end approach. I do the start by myself with the customer and then we go from there. Then, in the next phase, I will build them practices and they will start to automate the beginning of the process discovery as well. There is not something that I have initially do. Once companies start beyond that first phase and the first steps, then process discovery and process mining can be really important in automation. In a later stage, it becomes more important. However, in my case, I work a lot in the early phases and haven't seen too much of the process discovery products in that phase.

Attended automation hasn't really helped us scale RPA benefits as we are a rather small company and there's only a small group that works with the product, and therefore, we haven't been able to use the assistance in the same way a larger organization such as a bank or insurance company might use it.

We don't use the staff solution yet and we have not taken advantage of the AI functionality. While I have played with AI, I haven't had any use cases to implement the AI sensor.

Overall, I am quite satisfied with the product.

I'd advise new users to start by doing instead of only reading. Start small, like finding small processes or if you're an individual, look at your own work. Find something you could do and automate that as it gives you the best appreciation of the value. Try it out in your own environment and just explore how it goes as that gives you the best insights. For me, when I started, it was a great feeling to watch your screen and watch your cursor follow the screen without doing anything. 

Keep asking questions when talking to users. When translating the biggest use case into other processes, spend more and more time talking to the users and going through the processes, and defining and understanding what happens. Otherwise, it's going to cost you a lot of extra time figuring out why you've got all these weird exceptions that you didn't expect. Everyone always talks about how easy robotic process automation is. However, only once you understand your processes from a user's perspective, you'll run into a wall. It's never standardized. It's never the same. I need to warn my customers more frequently about this pitfall, due to the fact that, yes ultimately, it's very fast, but it only is once you know exactly what you want to automate and that's why most of the time it's time-consuming.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.