UiPath Platform Reviews

The solutions or test cases where we have used UiPath are:

1. Formatting different types of files (.csv, .dat, and .xls) to .txt
2. Reconciling data between different applications
3. The direct-debit application process

We deployed the solution inside a virtual machine in Cloud.

The organizations where we have implemented the UiPath solution have seen reduction and savings in time and FTEs. Processors were able to focus on other tasks and have the robot work on mundane and repetitive tasks.

The most recent organization is happy with the output and is planning to have other processes automated.

The most valuable features of UiPath are the drag and drop activities.

Since UiPath offers eLearning it makes it useful for developers to learn the basic activities used in automating processes.

UiPath also offers documentation and forums that help developers during debugging.

The product should be made more friendly to non-programming users, as some functions require a background in VB.NET.

UiPath should also add activities for the Excel application like formatting Excel columns and rows.

We have been using UiPath for ten months.

The workflow was able to handle the exceptions gracefully. The solution followed the ReFrameWork template of UiPath.

The solution is scalable as we are able to reuse the workflow.

We have not reached out to customer service during the implementation.

From the start, we used UiPath in automating processes.

Installation of Studio is straightforward but the Orchestrator, we don't have visibility as the client's IT team performed the installation.

The implementation was performed by the in-house team.

We don't have visibility on the ROI, just feedback from the client to say they have seen reduction and savings in time and FTEs.

We did not evaluate other options prior to implementing UiPath. It was decided and chosen by the organization and recommended by the Business Analyst.

We have created a workflow that is dynamic and reusable.

Overall, UiPath Studio is easy to use and navigate.

We use UiPath for building business cases for customers and internally building RPA competency within my department. Our organization is just starting to implement RPA. As a business consultant, UiPath is our chosen solution for RPA implementation. 

UiPath has made it very easy to create business cases to showcase to executives the functionality and benefits of RPA. UiPath was instrumental in my initial business case, as they came in and executed the proof of concept. That was a huge help and my customer was very pleased.

I find the community most valuable as it allows you to find your solutions and people to help you.

I like being able to save components to reuse for other processes and not having to start from scratch each time.

I appreciate the simplicity of the interface as I am learning to be a developer.

I would say a better layout or interface between the Studio and Orchestrator tools would be nice.

I have been using UiPath for five months.

We did not use another solution prior to UiPath.

I'd advise others to consider sharing the costs after ensuring they understand their expectations for utilizing the capacity of the robots. Share the cost if you forecast not utilizing the entire capacity.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing UiPath.

There is already a new release and I am pleased so far. I think UiPath has done a great job making resources and tools available as well as providing opportunities for learning directly from their company and in the same quality as their employees.

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 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 are using Studio and Orchestrator.

We use this solution for financial analysis, accounting, invoice processing, and other menial tasks.

We run automations in a virtual environment.

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 ease of use comes from many things including the user interface and the coding.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a four. I feel that you can have people who are directly thrown into the training, but sometimes it is difficult for people to pick up on topics that are not related to the processes that they are dealing with.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately two weeks. The implementation was straightforward both on the setup and the development side.

This solution has a big impact on what we do. It gives us a bigger impact on a decreased employee base.

I can't say exactly how much time we have saved across the company, but I can speak to my own processes. We save about one hundred a twenty hours per week. This savings comes in part because it is making people's jobs easier.

In terms of eliminating human errors, our error rate has improved since automation. I would estimate we have twenty-five percent fewer errors.

The most valuable feature of Studio is the ease of use for developers who do not have a technical background.

The user interface is good.

I would like to see anything that can increase the reliability of the processes. It can be a really challenging task and there is certainly room for improvement.

I would like to see more selectors included in the next release of this solution.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. It's fairly stable and it's making good improvements. In some cases when you get an upgrade package, you can lose functionality that previously worked with some processes.

We have about six people involved in our automation program.

The technical support for this solution is good, but seeing the functionality break that worked in previous versions can be frustrating.

For my processes, everything was done in-house.

We have seen ROI with this solution. We began to see some in about a month, but a lot more after two months and greater.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is simply to do it. Dive right in. Gather as much information as you can about the processes, then use the community in place to help.

This is a good solution, but there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use Studio, Orchestrator, and robots.

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 two. It's been going for about six months now, and we are still having challenges here and there.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a three. The material is on the technical side, and not being a technical person, it makes it pretty challenging to get through. 

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately three months.

With respect to saving time, we have saved about fifteen hundred hours so far.

In terms of eliminating human errors, we have seen a reduction but I'm not sure by what percentage.

The most valuable feature is that you can save time when you have to run the same process over and over again with little variation. 

It is sometimes difficult to work with the exceptions, which can cause us a delay. We have a lot to learn.

I would like to see more options that we can quickly select to help improve the robots.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. Most of the time it is working pretty well, but there have been a couple of blips along the way.

We have approximately twenty people who use this solution in our organization.

We hired a consultant to help us with the implementation. I would rate our experience with them at three out of five. It was successful, but we had to redo some of the stuff that was originally done.

We have seen ROI but it is pretty far off right now. After about three months, we began to see ROI. I'd say that it is probably going to be about two years before we break even.

We are excited about the new features that were recently announced.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to hire a consultant who is familiar with the process. It is such a new technology that getting assistance would be helpful.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We're starting within our finance group, so a lot of different processes in our finance group are being automated. Our main project was for our tax department, extracting data from PDFs and putting them into Excel.

We have two people involved with RPA in our company.

We just purchased this solution last week so we're still installing everything. We did automate four processes with the community edition. The length of time in development varied by the process. The longer ones required help from UiPath. They came on-site for the PoC, so that helped us out. Some other easy ones we just did ourselves within a couple of days.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would say that it is a four. But with Studio X, I think it will probably be a five. I say four because as you get more complicated with your processes, you need to learn how to code and there's a brunt learning curve. A lot of people will get turned off by that. So, I made some good sessions with Studio X, it's all drag and drop, mostly, so that's perfect for the business users.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. We are actually in the process of taking it right now. It's good that they have something like that available. There are not that many who have aced it.

So far we haven't gone too far, but I expect that people will be a lot happier because they won't be doing the jobs that they don't like doing. They'll have more time to learn and up-skill technologies like this, which can help further their careers rather than just learning, or not learning by copying and pasting.

The most valuable feature is automating processes and tasks, giving users time for more value-added activities. This results in cost savings.

The free community edition allowed us to test out the technology before investing in it.

I would like a better ability to connect and integrate with other software systems. An example would be integration with data and business intelligence tools. I don't think they have a native connector yet. So, just something that a user can connect, and have RPA in the middle, would be helpful.

I would also like to see an easier UI for the user. It may have already been taken care of with Studio X, but I think if they keep improving that, it's going to get a lot of people interested because users are attracted to it.

We were just using community edition for about six months.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a five. I mean we haven't used it too much so we haven't really pushed the boundaries, but for the stuff we've, done I would say it is stable.

Their sales and pre-sales support is very good. They've been very willing to come onsite and help us out and help with our pilot as well.

We got introduced by RPA from PWC. They came and talked at one of our finance summits.

The paid version, I'm still learning how to use, how to connect everything together. There is still a little learning period for that as well. Learning how Orchestrator works, how the licensing works and things like that, were necessary after using the community edition.

UiPath helped us with our PoC and they were great. I mean they came for free and through just a pilot or a proof of concept. We could actually see if the technology works for a use case.

Before we start anything we evaluate the process and we take down how many hours it saves, the costs, and ROI. In our main project, it took someone approximately three hundred hours a year to do all that data extraction, data input, and that also came along with errors because someone could fat-finger the value.

Then, through the PoC, they're able to turn around within two days. A bot can basically do that entire process and do it error-free as well.

It is a savings of three-hundred hours, and the cost savings is a multiplier of hourly pay.

We also use it as an ETL tool sometimes, so instead of paying for an API connection, we can use RPA. Simply just to run a simple report of the system.

I don't have any other software vendors to compare it to, but I would say if you're fully utilizing it then there's definitely an ROI in it. Obviously, if you have only one process running five minutes a day with the bot, it's not worth it. For us, what we did was we built enough use cases before we bought that enterprise license to make the ROI on it. We've got eight or ten and then we realized that we can cover that license cost easily with ROI before we purchased it.

Ultimately, we realized ROI within six months.

We got purchased the basic minimum package and it was around $35,000 USD, annually.

We tested out Kryon RPA, and we looked but did not test Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. Those two were out of our price range, and at that time, neither of them had a free community edition, so we couldn't test out the technology.

UiPath sort of fit our company well because it was priced reasonably, and they also had a free version so we could test out the technology. Ultimately, we chose UiPath because of the price. It was not as expensive as Blue Prism or Automation Anywhere. It has a free community version where you can test new technology, which was huge. They also have a local office next to us so we can get their help pretty easily.

They have announced features in the next release, and I think that they are all the things that users would want. There are easier ways to document processes and a better and more user-friendly UI. A lot of people just got turned off by having to learn code. So that was a lot easier, and then being able to track all your RPA projects and the ROI on them saves time. Doing them manually is time-consuming. Fortunately, we're a small company because I couldn't imagine if you're trying to implement this for a bigger company.

My advice for anybody who is researching this solution is to, first of all, do their own research on the ratings and independent research. Secondly, I would just say a lot of them now have free community editions, so there's nothing holding you back from testing out the technology and seeing if it works. I think Blue Prism is the only one that doesn't have it now. That's a really high cost and a barrier to seeing if the technology works. Just going and validating the software and doing a simple automation task is important. All of those vendors have free training so you can just go step-by-step and learn something. I think that's the biggest thing someone can do, and then obviously finding enough processes within your company as well.

This is a good solution but there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.