UiPath Reviews

We use it for handling processes that involve human effort savings. We are currently focusing on processes and problems that our users are facing in their day-to-day activities. It is used for the automation of business problems that are repetitive and error-oriented with a huge number of users working on them. We list down a set of processes where users are spending a lot of time, then we verify whether the use case is valid for automation using RPA. Once that is complete, we start programming the bot based on the requirements given by the user. We try to mimic each and every action performed by a human being by using UiPath Studio. It replicates what a human being does.

In terms of setup, the development happens in Studio that's on-premise, but the deployment of the robots is done on the cloud. They have their own cloud service called Orchestrator. UiPath hosts that, and it is available at cloud.uipath.com. It is basically the UiPath Cloud. The interface is completely handled by UiPath.

The biggest benefit is that before implementing automation, the users were spending a lot of time doing mundane and manual activities. Implementing the robotic process automation for processes that they were involved in helped them to avoid doing these manual activities and focus on more value-added processes. On the whole, it has helped the users to spend their time more wisely and also get more benefits for the same time spent. It helps us to improve user satisfaction by improving their working methodology because they are only doing things that are value-adding.

We are automating all the manual activities that can be successfully handled by the robots. So, the users are really happy, and we are getting good feedback from the users in terms of time savings. We are also achieving 100% accuracy in the output, which was not the case when the users were performing these actions. When they were performing the actions, the users had to validate the outputs, and the outputs were not as per the requirement. There used to be an error rate of at least 10% to 15%, but with automation, the error rate has been reduced to zero. So, the removal of manual activity and the reduction of the error rate to zero are two of the main benefits.

We are using it in our finance operations for our accounts payable process to process invoices. For this process, we were receiving invoices at a rate of more than 50 per day, and having humans perform those actions was not sustainable in the long run. So, we developed a robot that would automatically process invoices that we received through email. It extracts and updates the data into our ERP, and then, it sends an email to the users telling them that the invoice has been received, verified, and uploaded into our ERP. Now, we have a process that saves approximately two hours for five or more users on a daily basis. At an annual rate, we can save approximately 10,000 hours. We develop the bot in UiPath Studio and then deploy it in cloud Orchestrator via an unattended bot, which is a bot that runs on a predefined schedule. We have a particular time when invoices arrive in our inboxes. We set the robot to run at that particular time, and then the robot is able to process those invoices and proceed to the next action.

We focus only on processes that can be automated end-to-end, completely eliminating human activity. UiPath is flexible, and it allows us to build robots that prevent human intervention right from the start and all the way to the end. Then, we are able to deploy it on the cloud by using the Orchestrator solution. From start to finish, we have completely eliminated human effort, supporting our mission of end-to-end automation. For process analysis, we use a UiPath tool called Task Capture to understand the business case and draw a flow diagram for the steps involved in a process. UiPath has all the solutions required to implement end-to-end automation, and we are successfully using them for all our business problems.

This end-to-end coverage is important. Basically, we select processes where we can avoid human intervention. End-to-end automation is one of the key KPIs that we check before we even start automating a process. It is the first thing that we look for because we prefer no human intervention at all, be it for any kind of input, validating the output, or checking the logs of a process. All of these are predetermined and handled by the robot.

It is cloud-based. So, we do not have any infrastructure costs for maintaining the servers, etc. That is a big advantage. Also, Studio updates for development are pushed automatically. We receive the updates and just click on them, and Studio is updated. Overall, it saves a lot of time for the IT team because there isn't any involvement from IT resources after we deploy or install Studio on our system. From there on, there is literally no involvement of the IT department. That is how beautifully they have designed the tool for the updates as well as overall maintenance.

We went for the cloud to avoid any on-premises server costs that we might need to take care of on a recurring basis. The cloud was a big advantage for us. We are able to save approximately 15 lakh Indian Rupees, which would be $10,000 to $15,000, by not going for the on-premises setup. We were able to save that sort of investment in server costs by going for a cloud-based tool.

We were able to synthesize the value of this solution right from the inception. As soon as we deployed the bots, we were getting actual analytics for the run rate of the process and the total time of bot execution. Indirectly, the time during which the bot executes is literally the time that is saved from human effort. We get proper metrics of the time being saved by using Orchestrator. The other important thing is logs. In case a process fails, from the logs, we are able to derive insights about when exactly a process is failing. We are then able to develop a solution to handle these failures and re-implement them. So, overall the cloud solution gives us insights. It adds value to even developers' time by giving us an overall metric of the time saved as well as utilizing the logs for insights about the process runtime, et cetera. Overall, the cloud functionality is a great value addition.

It affects our ability to scale up automation. When we develop and deploy a process, other users in different departments take a look at the processes, and they are getting confident about the fact that this can solve their problems. We have been receiving requirements, and in that way, we are able to scale up the automation. On top of that, we develop the robots in a way that is modular in nature so that when we implement a process, we have reusable components that can be plugged and played into the new process. This improves the speed at which we can automate processes.

It has indirectly brought innovation from the users' perspective and developers' perspective. The users are saving time, and they are getting innovative in their day-to-day activities. In terms of development, we are on a constant learning path. When the vendor releases new software updates, we are able to effectively utilize those and implement them into our processes on an immediate basis, which improves the speed of delivering a process and the quality of output.

We can scale automation without having to pay attention to the infrastructure for doing so. We don't have to be worried about the cost involved with the on-premises setup. It is a cloud-based solution. So, when a requirement comes up and a bot is developed, only then we need to apply for the license and procure a bot. It has been beneficial because we don't need to pay any upfront cost until the bot is developed and ready to be deployed, and because the bots are delivered completely through the software service, that also indirectly proved very beneficial for global deployments and scaling of processes.

Its AI functionality is helpful to learn from the existing use cases and then implement the learnings on the new and upcoming test cases. As a developer, we need not spend any time developing templates for the extraction, etc. The AI module in itself has the capability to understand new forms of data. It can then accordingly extract and plug in the data to our templates without much effort. So, AI functionality has saved a lot of our time in developing a solution as compared to doing it the manual way.

We had one process where we had to use AI functionality, and we were able to eliminate any manual efforts. Previously, we had somebody who was verifying the output of the bot and after that only processing went to the next step, but with AI, we got the confidence that the bot has the ability to complete the action without manual intervention. That is one great example where AI helped to eliminate manual effort and improve the quality of the output.

It has significantly reduced human errors. Bots have quite a high performance rate with minimal or zero errors. The errors only occur because we haven't updated the business case in the bot. Once the business cases are updated in the robot, we do not see any errors. The bots follow all the steps as programmed and do not deviate from the set of rules defined while developing them. This reduction in human error has had a positive impact on users. The users had been feeling more comfortable using the robot output rather than relying on their own output, which sometimes had errors. So, overall the confidence level has improved and the lead time in delivering the output has also improved. The time they were earlier spending on the validation of their output has reduced. 

It has freed a lot of time. We only automate processes where we find huge time savings. We count it as full-time (FT) employee benefits. We only pick processes that have three or four cumulated FT benefits. With automation, we are saving at least three or four hours on a daily basis. This time is being utilized by business users in completing any other backlog work, focusing on other important things, improving their own work skills, etc.

Excel automation is extremely reliable. Excel integration is one of the top features that I have been using. We also have a feature called Document Understanding for processing the PDF format of an invoice by a bot. It has the capability to scan an invoice and then pick out the required fields, such as the name of the vendor, the details of the products being sent, or the cost of the product. There is an AI functionality that allows a user to program the required fields to be extracted, and the bot automatically follows those rules and extracts the data. Therefore, the AI functionality of Document Understanding is another important attribute that I personally like about UiPath.

I also like the Computer Vision functionality, where UiPath provides image processing abilities for robotic process automation. This provides a big advantage because images can be automatically processed without involving any additional tools. With an API, we can automatically link the Computer Vision engine and start extracting and processing images at a quick rate.

UiPath is a low-code platform, or mostly no-code platform, where coding is minimal. We can drag and drop all the required steps and then develop a bot in very less time. I am good at programming, but even a user who doesn't know programming can easily pick up the tool. The ease at which anybody can learn it is quite high. Overall, it is a 10 out of 10 in terms of usability. It is really easy to use with the tutorials that they have in place. Everything about it is quite simple.

We use Orchestrator to keep a track of all the robots that are deployed, monitor the logs, and deploy the robots on the runner machines. We use Orchestrator to upload the bots from Studio to the cloud and then deploy them to runner machines across our virtual machines. Once a bot executes, we get the logs, and if needed, we can monitor them to check that the processes are coming in smoothly. In case of any failures, Orchestrator also has the functionality to re-execute the process. So, we are utilizing the cloud to a greater extent for managing our robots.

The UiPath community is wonderful. It is one of the best communities where we can get a solution for any question that we post in a matter of minutes or hours. Whenever we post a question about any doubt or a bug, someone from the UiPath support team or community replies. Their knowledge is useful for other users who might face the same problem in the future. They have an MVP promotion where if I answer more than 100 questions, they provide us freebies or maybe certification vouchers. That's a good thing that they're doing to grow the community. I'm really enjoying the community members' involvement as well as their support shown during any problems that we face. I have also used Power Automate, and the community support of Power Automate is not that great, but the community of UiPath is very responsive.

It is expensive. Its licensing structure should be improved. They can introduce a license structure where they charge you on a per-minute basis rather than a full upfront payment. 

In UiPath Academy, the certification that they provide at the end of every course can serve as a good motivating factor for somebody who's learning it. That is a good thing, but one of the negatives is that previously, the certification program was free of cost, which helped a lot of developers to become certified developers, but recently, they introduced a paid certification course. I wasn't expecting that move from them. I would like them to go back to their initial certification method which was free of cost.

Sometimes, we do find that the bots misbehave or there are bugs that prevent the bot from executing even when the business cases are completely listed out. It could be that the cloud Orchestrator doesn't send the trigger to the runner systems to start the process because of small internet fluctuation. Sometimes, we find that the processes are killing the execution themselves and going into a halt state without any errors in the program. So, we do see some reliability issues, but these happen once in 20 or 30 instances. They are not on a regular basis. However, when that happens, it does create panic, and we have to immediately rectify it. If they can focus on that, it would be good.

I have been using UiPath for three years.

It is great. We are able to scale at a rate faster than what we had thought of because of the way we are able to develop our processes. UiPath literally automates most of the processes that business users are doing. So far, we haven't had any use cases that cannot be handled with UiPath, which helps in scaling implementation at a faster pace.

We have about a four-member team with analysts as well as developers who work with it, but the developers basically handle all the IT-related tasks. 

We are a manufacturing company, and we have deployed our solutions in almost every department. We have finance, planning, control, human resources, sales, and supply chain. We have 15 to 20 in each of the departments, and they are saving close to three hours individually. Overall, our estimated time savings are upwards of 100,000 hours annually. 

Our current usage of it is 30% to 40%. We still have a lot more potential to tap. We are still on the journey to reach 100% of user involvement where everybody is aware of the process. We are yet to hold the discovery workshops with all the users so that they're aware of the process. Right now, it is limited to a few people within the departments, but its usage will increase with time as we continue to automate processes at this rate.

We use UiPath Academy for the certification or onboarding of new members. When we onboard new members, we tell them to go through the UiPath Academy to get an understanding of the tool. It is free of cost, and it covers all the required modules for becoming an RPA developer. We use it extensively during the initial days as a developer, and over time and with experience, we learn directly from the tool.

They have a very responsive community. Sometimes, within minutes, we get a response to our query. We are quickly able to understand the solution that they provided and implement it. If it is a complicated problem, sometimes, the UiPath moderator from the UiPath company responds to the query and resolves it. If it is not resolved, we can directly contact their customer support. We are enterprise users, and we get quick responses to the queries that we raise. I would rate their support a 9 out of 10.

Positive

In between, we used Power Automate just to see the functionality, but we did not find it as intuitive as UiPath. We gave up on Power Automate, and we are now full-time users of UiPath.

I was around when it was set up. I had personally taken care of the installation. I found it easy and not at all time-consuming. I was done with the process in a couple of hours. In about four or five hours, I was done with the installation and setup of Studio and Orchestrator, listing the licensed accounts, and deployment of the random bots. Everything was completed in a matter of no time. I am not directly related to the IT department. I am just a developer, but I was able to handle it with no external support.

We did it in-house. We only contacted UiPath. They delivered the license keys, and we just keyed in the license keys, and it started working. That's it. Nothing else.

It is lightweight in terms of maintenance. There's no maintenance at all. It automatically handles all the upgrades via the cloud. There are no issues. It requires zero effort from IT.

Overall, you don't have a lot of savings because of expensive licenses. The licenses are quite expensive, and they are not cheap. It saves money but not significantly. However, we are not focusing so much on the monetary benefits. We are focusing more on the quality of output and time savings.

It does reduce the cost of digital transformation, but that happens after a year or two from deployment. Immediate benefits are not evident, but within a period of one to three years, we are able to make a huge amount of savings in terms of time. 

This digital transformation doesn't require expensive or complex application upgrades or IT application support. We didn't have any issues, and we never needed IT to support the UiPath tool. We have been directly using it as it is without making any changes. The impact of this digital transformation on our infrastructure was zero. There were no costs involved. It was used as it is without any changes in the infrastructure.

During the initial two years, we hadn't reached a breakeven point. When the development was going on, we had both costs. On one side, the manual effort was going on, and on the other, there was the licensing cost. So, we didn't have cost savings. After the bot was implemented or after about one and a half years, we were able to receive proper monetary benefits or what we call a breakeven point. So, when we started eliminating human activity, that got converted to cost savings. The accuracy of the process also indirectly improved our customer satisfaction. All in all, we were at a breakeven point, after a two-year period. That would be the general thumb rule for most organizations. So, at an immediate level, we did not receive monetary benefits, but after a period of about two years, we received monetary benefits or savings.

We rely on UiPath Academy for knowledge during the initial days, and it saves a lot of time. We don't have any monetary spending for setting up training because it is available for free. So, we have made some savings. It has saved us time and money, and it has been helpful in getting employees up to speed on the solution.

It is expensive. Every product or component is built separately. All the components have a separate fee. UiPath Studio has a license cost. The cloud has a license cost, and bots have a license cost. These costs are recurring on a yearly basis. So, every product or component has to be licensed for a year, and on expiry, you have to renew it.

Their licensing structure should be improved. The cost of a bot is a lot. It is more expensive as compared to some of the competitors. It is probably $8,000 for an unattended bot. When I did a search on the internet, I found that other vendors offer much better plans. I would like UiPath to introduce some flexibility in the licenses. Instead of a full license, they can maybe introduce a license structure where they charge you on a per-minute basis rather than a full $8,000 upfront payment. If I'm just spending eight hours on the bot, the bot should only be charged for that time. There could be a per-hour rate. A plan like that would be beneficial.

Initially, it will be expensive, and it also won't be as per the initial thoughts that it is going to be a quick solution that saves a lot of time. With time, you can achieve cost savings but not immediately.

We had our eyes on UiPath from the beginning. We did not focus on others.

My advice would be to not use RPA as the only solution. You also have to use other complementing features, such as optical character recognition, so that the overall solution is usable. Just RPA can't solve all the problems.

There should be proper change management to bring awareness about the impact of RPA. A lot of time, people misunderstand and take it in the wrong sense that they might lose their jobs. The fact is that RPA can't automate everything, and skilled people will still be required for doing activities. We can only automate a certain set of manual activities.

I would also advise taking one step at a time. Automate a few solutions, check the user feedback, and then start scaling up rather than immediately scaling up without getting the user feedback.

I would rate UiPath an 8 out of 10. Overall, I have no complaints. Studio, Orchestrator, and all the other tools are top-notch. They are being updated with new features on a daily basis. The product is extremely good, and I have no complaints regarding that, but the license is something they can focus on. They can introduce some innovative plans for procuring the license.

We are on-prem but we will be migrating to the cloud by the end of the month. 

My company has 100,000 people and uncountable departments. One of the biggest bots is in HR and finance. So far we have almost 57 bots in production, almost 45 in pre-production. We will have almost 100 bots by the end of this year. Our target is to reach 800 bots by the year after. 

No one can beat the automation. It's like you can sit back and play Tetris and let the bot do the work.

We see time savings, precision, and speed. Time is the most precious thing in the world. My company has saved around five million dollars this year. 

We use a standard approach when it comes to developing bots. By the end of this year, we are going to use Insights for reporting and we are going to use data mining the year after. We are doing a pilot right now, that captures the activities and try to figure out which is the high potential area. Based on the data, we will figure out and decide which route we should take.

Insights helps to determine which processes we will automate next. Based on that, we can get the data and write the defaults for leadership so they can make the right decision.

It's very easy to build automations. That's why we want to deploy 800 bots by next year. Our assessment is that it only takes 5% to 7% effort. The rest is trying to figure out the deployment process, the platform struggle, networking, etc. The development is very easy.

AI is a good feature. I am looking forward to that making life easier. It has enabled us to automate more processes. Based on the requirement, chat can hand over the process and we can kick off that bot to do the job. If someone has a problem with a ticket or with a schedule, they can connect to the schedule department or schedule bot. 

We have a citizen developer program in the company so we have taken the UiPath Academy courses. We bring the citizen developer on board and they have to go through the courses on our portal. We have tight integration of UiPath Academy with my company's internal learning process portal.

It's a wonderful integration and it's a very organically arranged process. We can start a raw developer and let them deploy a bot in a couple of months. It's a remarkable achievement. UiPath is very good at developing those courses. 

Creating the pipeline for the automation and then deploying it and keeping it there, is where the focus should be. I think UiPath realized that and is working on it. 

Support could use improvement. It's always a struggle to engage with them. We have a very tight relationship with support, but when things are in hot water, everyone wants to fix it right away which doesn't always happen. 

We have been using UiPath since 2018. 

The stability depends on the client's infrastructure. We're using a Citrix environment and internal infrastructure security has a lot of parameters. It totally depends. Every client has different challenges.

The scalability is a big value. If we have 100 bots today and we want to have 800 bots next year, on-premises is very challenging and expensive but with the cloud, it's very easy to replicate.

The quality of support depends on the support person that you get and on the situation. We started getting better support because we have a dedicated team.

Neutral

I have experience with Blue Prism and Microsoft cloud automation. The difference between them is like the difference between a Ferrari and a Toyota. UiPath is a Ferrari. It's a very mature and solid platform.

The initial setup is very easy because we created the right pipeline with the help of UiPath. However, at the end of this month, we are going to the cloud and we do not know the challenges that will bring. 

The deployment will take a few minutes. 

UiPath is revolutionary. My advice would be to try it out. In the beginning, it looks a little difficult, but once you get your hands on it and get used to it, it's the most wonderful thing.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. To make it a perfect ten, licensing and support should be improved. They should use the Microsoft model, where it's free. Once you develop it, the user will deploy it. You can make money on that. But let users have a taste, let them sit down in the driving seat and drive it.

Our core business is BPO, which is Business Process Outsourcing. We have massive operations that we have to perform for our customers and we have a digital section of the company that is assisting with that. The digital section is relatively new, being no more than two years old. We are building a number of solutions and tools that our digital section is using, and RPA is one of these tools. The goal is to help our customers innovate and assist them with their digital transformation, ultimately making them more efficient and more profitable. This is possible because some of the processes are very repetitive and performing them with humans is a very bad choice.

We have a hybrid environment, where some of our functionality is on-premises and some is on the cloud. For example, we have some cloud-based automation, and we use UiPath Apps, which is on the cloud.

We had a successful use case at the beginning of the year where we needed to process a large number of invoices that had contained errors when they were originally sent to the customers. There were approximately 200,000 invoices and we had a deadline of four days to complete the task.

It began with us developing the bot, which was completed in less than a day. After that, we sent the bot to our production environment to start processing the invoices. We were successful in the task, through the parallelism of 50 robots, we could process 5 invoices per second.

We have some metrics that describe how long it would take the process to be completed manually. It takes a human an average of between 60 and 90 seconds to process just one invoice. We estimated that it would have taken approximately 125 days to complete this task manually, with between 250 and 300 people working on it together.

We don't use the low-code functionality. Rather, we use the typical development features. When you're talking about developing inside the UiPath, you have something very user-friendly, so you don't even need to use the low-code options. It is very intuitive and you don't need to know technologies such as C# or .NET to develop automations.

The use of UiPath has helped to increase customer satisfaction by a lot. Our main goals are to improve the average handling time that the customer needs to complete transactions, as well as to improve quality. Customer satisfaction improves not only with the financial benefit resulting from a better average handling time but also, from improved quality in transactions. Our human resources department uses tools such as surveys to investigate the quality and they have their own metrics and KPIs for customer satisfaction.

Our first-contact resolution rates have increased because as we develop successful cases and implementations for different customers, future customers benefit from this through faster service, which leads to better customer satisfaction. I estimate that our first-contact resolution has increased by 15% to 20%.

The time it takes us to create automations depends on what we assess the complexity of the bot to be. We have a methodology and metrics that have been developed by our Center of Excellence, categorizing the bots into small, medium and complex. A small bot, which has simple logic, is something that we implement in between one and two weeks. A medium-complexity bot has a timeline of between two and four weeks, and a very complex bot takes four to six weeks to implement.

The most valuable feature that we are using is UiPath Apps because it makes it very easy to implement tasks. It is very easy to scale operations, which is important because we're not talking about just five or ten agents. We're talking about 1,000 to 2,000 agents. The Apps feature helps us to scale very quickly and very easily. We only need to develop one or two bots and then link them to UiPath Apps to process everything. All of the integration between the bots and the human, along with any scheduling that needs to be done, is taken care of by Apps. In our situation, the Apps feature is the best solution to handle this scale.

Utilizing our bots is very easy, and it is done using the licenses that we have with partner UiPath. We can access our licenses, then distribute them to the customers and we can use them dynamically. This is all done in a very easy manner. We just have to navigate to the web-based hub, where we have access to everything that we need.

UiPath is highly customizable and this is helpful for us because we can develop models and frameworks that can be reused for different tasks and different customers. For example, if we have a customer with a process that is very similar to one that we have previously developed for somebody else, we can reuse the models to scale the bots. This makes the new development very easy and very fast.

The Agent Console is able to provide customer insight in conjunction with the task and process mining features that we use. We install the tool into the machine that the customer uses every day, where it will capture the manual tasks and processes into a database. The insights that we receive are related to whether a process is a good candidate for RPA. For example, if it takes the human a lot of time to complete, or they are having trouble with it, then it might be suitable for RPA because putting a bot in place can optimize performance.

Another reason this is important is that human operators work very hard with day-to-day tasks, and they don't have much time to stop and look for processes that can be automated. Using task and process mining, it starts pulling out those insights. For example, it looks for the number of screens that the human is accessing and clicking on. It looks at each click, as well as every navigation and extraction. In the end, it generates a report for us.

The Agent Console has helped to decrease the average agent handling time, which is our main goal when it comes to these massive business operations. Average agent handling time is the metric that we primarily work with and as such, everything we do is related to reducing it. RPA in our use case is not used only to reduce the HC or FTEs; but it is used to boost this particular KPI too. In one of our use cases, we have had an average decrease of 30% in agent handling time, which is very considerable.

There are some enhancements that can be made within Orchestrator, such as the addition of new dashboards that provide us insights into processes that are already running, which would help us a lot.

We have been using the UiPath platform since last year, at the beginning of 2020.

The stability of UiPath is very high, and this is a very important point. In fact, stability was the problem that we had when we were assessing the competition with UiPath. We evaluated several RPA tools and moved on with the UiPath partnership because it was the most robust. It is important to remember that we have a high availability environment, and the entirety of it must be stable. Our team is tool agnostic and extremely skilled in the largest RPA tool providers, enabling us to develop automation on any platform.

UiPath is very easy to scale because, in every part of our solution, we use the Apps feature. This accounts for high availability and automatically provides us with scalability. For example, if we have a process that is handling 100 invoices at a time, but in three months we grow and need to instead process double that number, there is a feature that we can use to instruct the bots to run on additional machines. The scalability is very dynamic in this regard.

UiPath has a function within Orchestrator for dynamic allocation, where it can draw resources from a pool of machines in the infrastructure. For example, if there are 30 machines available then an option can be set to dynamically use the licenses. If there are 10 or 20 bots that need to perform tasks, the licenses will be automatically used to run the processes. You don't need to look at these machines to see what is running because all of the management will be taken care of automatically.

We currently have 25 staff involved in RPA. There are 20 developers and five architects, just to keep the projects and everything with the customers up and running. We expect this to improve and grow, doubling our numbers this year.

In fact, our expectation for growth is very high. Along with each implementation or development that we do, new opportunities arise. I would estimate that for each successful implementation that we have, four to five new opportunities are presented. Naturally, we will need to have more licenses and more contacts to increase the total number of bots in our environment.

From end to end we have about 50 robots already developed and running in a productive environment. We have human operators, back-office analysts, supervisors and coordinators involved in the whole process of execution and monitoring.

After our initial deployment, we have rarely needed to be in contact with support. Our in-house team can do most things autonomously.

We have a premium support package from UiPath and they are very useful and very helpful. They help us with whatever we want and without any doubt support is one of UiPath's strengths. This is not just in a technical sense, but in terms of business and strategy, as well.

As mentioned earlier, our RPA team is agnostic to the tool to be used. We can give our recommendation based on the customer's needs but if he has any premise that a specific platform should be used, we follow his needs.

The initial setup is very straightforward. We have a very good team of architects and we also had some assistance from UiPath. It was not simple, but it was not too hard, either. It was okay and we didn't have any problems with the implementation. In total, it took between three and four weeks to complete the deployment.

In terms of strategy, I think for the best implementation, you need to first have the infrastructure set up. The infrastructure and architecture should be very well defined with UiPath because you have a bunch of functionalities that may or may not be useful, depending on the type of business.

Deciding what functionality is required is the very first step. Then, the second step is to have a methodology and a center of excellence for RPA, including frameworks and best practices. This will help to ensure that everything is implemented correctly and that you don't have problems in the future. Finally, you need to have certified developers and certified architectures because this is the most relevant part. You want bots to go live with the best quality to ensure customer satisfaction.

We now have the ability to provide this type of environment to a customer very quickly. We can configure the environment in between two and four hours, to have it fully up and running, and it is very simple to do. This is because we have an RPA infrastructure already built, so you just need to acquire the hardware that includes the machines and servers. Once they are up and running, we activate this section and we can develop and build the bots.

UiPath was a big help during our initial setup. We have premium support, and they helped us with parts of the architecture, the infrastructure related to servers and the cloud, and getting it all set up properly in our high availability environment. It was like a four-handed job and it was all done well.

We have many different projects and customers and I would estimate that it has saved us and our customers something between $4M to 5M in total.

Just looking for our success case of the invoices processing, we avoid a cost of $10M.

The price of UiPath is higher than competitors, although the cost depends on what functionality and tools you require. For us, we don't need anything extra in terms of functionality but our contract includes an extra charge for premium support.

We evaluated UiPath, Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, all the best RPA tools providers in the international Market. As we are agnostic with the platform, we can develop using any of those three tools.

One of the cons of UiPath is the price. It's a bit higher than the other RPA tools. In terms of the pros for UiPath, it is more stable, it works in our high availability environment, the support is good, it is very agile and we can develop automations very quickly. Also, implementation was very fast and scalability is important.

We have conducted a proof of concept using UiPath's unattended robot capability to enable a self-service chatbot. Specifically, we used the unattended bot to speak with our S3ND (messaging) solution, which is a chatbot. The scheduling was done via APIs and the communication was done through the chatbot. This is something that we have tested, but not yet deployed. We do think that this is an important next step for us to look at.

We do not use the Document Understanding and AI Fabric features at this time but we are already testing it in some of our customers to implement them as soon as possible.

Another feature that we do not yet use, but we are looking into, is using the AI Center to drag-and-drop machine learning models into RPA workflows. We recently had some discussions with the technical specialists at UiPath about the newer features that are available, and we are looking into arranging for training and webinars that will teach us how to use these new features correctly. Once we have a better understanding of how to implement them, we will begin looking for specific use cases.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from UiPath has to do with our customers and their operations. The most difficult and important challenge that we have is changing the mindset of our customers such that it is in line with digital transformation, and this is something that UiPath helps us with. They provide us with everything we need in terms of security, implementation, and high availability. Really trusting that these bots are doing the right thing is the biggest advantage that UiPath provides for us.

There are three main points that I would make for anybody who is considering UiPath. The first is the cost, in terms of money. The price of investment is high but the benefits are uncountable. Next, it requires that you look into what you really need, and whether it is all of the features that UiPath offers or just some of them. It is also very important that you look at your infrastructure because it has to be able to handle all of the bots. For example, we know that our processes need a lot of computing power and a lot of memory, so the hardware is important. This has to be built in advance of purchasing the software. The final part is the team, including the developers and architects. It is very important that they all be certified by UiPath. There is training and courses available, they make everything clear, and it includes learning the best practices, frameworks, and models to assure that you're doing everything right. If the company is audited and you are doing it properly then you won't have any headaches.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I use UiPath to automate various processes in the energy industry, including invoice processing and contract registration.

Building automation using UiPath is easy.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. This is important for the impact of the work and the satisfaction of the client.

The UiPath User Community offers great value because it allows us to find support, ask questions, and collaborate and share with other members.

UiPath has improved our organization by enabling us to automate repetitive tasks.

UiPath has helped minimize our on-premises footprint.

We utilize the Academy courses to prepare for certification. The Academy, a structured learning environment, provides me with the opportunity to acquire knowledge systematically. While it offers a wealth of valuable information, it primarily serves as a foundation for earning the certification. To gain practical experience and proficiency with the tool, additional hands-on work is necessary. Nonetheless, the Academy courses serve as a valuable starting point.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation. The digital transformation does not require expensive or complex application upgrades.

UiPath has helped reduce human error.

UiPath helps save around 80 percent of our client's time.

UiPath has saved us thousands of dollars over the years.

While I haven't explored all of UiPath's features yet, I'm interested in using some of them to discover potential use cases, scenarios, and projects relevant to my work. For instance, the collection center functionality seems promising. It allows clients to create tasks, fill in fields, trigger activities, and log execution process details. Additionally, verifying and managing jobs while switching between different items.

In UiPath, when debugging an issue, we cannot revert to previous steps while retaining variable values. Compared to Blue Prism, UiPath presents greater difficulty in troubleshooting bugs. 

The orchestrator may occasionally disconnect and lose communication with the machine, failing to provide real-time warnings. Additionally, error messages displayed throughout the solution lack clarity and conciseness. Furthermore, workflow names cannot contain spaces or symbols, leading to complications during package download within the project. However, no warning is issued for such naming inconsistencies.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath is not 100 percent stable but it is within acceptable range.

UiPath is scalable and it allows us to build scalable solutions.

We use both UiPath and Blue Prism, depending on our client's specific needs. However, in most cases, we recommend and utilize UiPath as our preferred solution.

The initial deployment was straightforward, but it does require some fine-tuning. I use the framework for deployments and customize it according to our client's needs.

One person is enough for the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

UiPath provides a good return on investment. It saves on employee costs through automation.

UiPath pricing is average.

I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

The environments and number of endpoints we deploy UiPath in vary by client.

One to three people are usually required for UiPath maintenance.

At Aeyon, we use UiPath to develop custom solutions for our clients that drive innovation and digital transformation within the public sector. We work closely with the US Marine Corps, Army, Navy, Coast Guard, NASA and several other Federal agencies. We have built 50+ automations for a wide range of use cases, but the ones we see most often include financial reconciliation, data extraction using AI/ML Models, data entry, data manipulation/consolidation, downloading/moving files in bulk, data validation, and interacting with various web applications.

The business objective that our organization is trying to achieve with its AI-powered automation initiative is to greatly reduce the time spent on repetitive/clerical tasks and allow the employees more time to focus on the important tasks that grow their business such as collaboration and innovation. Aeyon successfully helps our client achieve this objective by using UiPath to develop solutions that increase efficiency, reduce operating costs, and drive ROI.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has fundamentally changed what our organization is able to achieve. It has made a huge impact on the way we process documents for not only ourselves but our clients as well. It saved a lot of time and money.

We use AI Center for data extraction on structured and unstructured document types. The pre-built models are very versatile and efficient, and the ability to train custom models makes it a great solution for almost any use case. I feel that AI Center and UiPath Document Understanding were pretty easy to learn. It only took me about a week to learn. There are tons of helpful tutorials and other resources online. I like how it has the prebuilt models as well as the option to be able to go and train your own data, so I would give it a ten out of ten.

It has definitely increased the accuracy of our operations. It has reduced the risk of clerical errors. Document processing has allowed us to be able to compare data for that extra layer of making sure that everything is extracted correctly.

It has freed up a lot of time because instead of having to manually go through and find ways to track data or manually look at it, we are able to use different AI technologies to fit pretty much any use case. For most of our clients, it saves them an average of about 100 hours annually on the smaller processes, and then we have some larger ones where they are even saving about 15,000 hours annually, which is a lot of extra free time for them to focus on collaboration and those kinds of things.

A lot of the prebuilt models that are on an AI Center are valuable. Being able to go in there and train your data, give sample data, label the fields, and different OCR methods are also valuable.

The improvement is not necessarily in the product itself. The main difficulty we have usually has to do with pricing and identifying the best solution for each specific use case on a long-term scale. If there was an easier way to track the AI unit usage and determine which pricing plan would best fit the need for each use case, then that would be extremely valuable.

UiPath is very stable. I have not had any issues in terms of that. The only issue we used to have was if a website were to change or an application were to change, but we have found ways to work around that and deal with those types of situations.

I have been using UiPath for about four years.

Overall, it is very stable. There is low technical debt and monitoring. After a process has been deployed, for the most part, it is stable after testing and everything.

It is very scalable. I have had no issues in that department, and I know that they continue to make it more and more scalable, which is awesome to see with each new release.

Their support is great. There are so many resources available online. There is UiPath Academy, and there is the ability to chat with them 24/7. I have never had an issue getting in touch with their representative quickly when I needed help with something. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

I started off using UiPath, and then I got a job a few years back where I used a software called Kofax. I was able to see a lot of similarities, but I still felt that it was very limited in its ability to integrate with third-party software. I remember several use cases where I thought that if this was UiPath, I would know how to do it. I noticed a lot of limitations with Kofax. It was a bit of a learning curve going from UiPath to Kofax, and then I realized that there were a lot of things that Kofax was not able to integrate with in terms of third-party software. Based on my experience with Kofax, I definitely feel that UiPath is superior.

I have used Microsoft Power Automate for a few processes. We use that for some of our smaller projects. We just started looking into that as an option as well for certain use cases. It is important to us that UiPath has orchestration whereas Microsoft Power Automate does not because orchestration gives you a way to run processes in the background rather than on your local machine. You can also do event triggering and time schedules. UiPath definitely gives a lot more options and freedom to be able to do things without having to manually run the process.

I was involved in its initial setup. I pretty much came in when it was coming from the ground up. I have helped install it. I have helped customers set their licensing plans and install everything on their local machines so that they can run the automation and get set up with orchestration and all that.

Its initial setup was pretty straightforward. You need to have UiPath Studio installed. They now offer automation. They have UiPath Cloud. You just sign into that, and you have access to Orchestrator and all of those services just right off the web. It is pretty easy to set up.

Our implementation strategy includes getting on a Teams call with the client so that we are able to look at their screen and walk them step by step through various aspects, such as:

• Where to save specific folders?
• How to get signed in to the appropriate account?
• How to access Orchestrator and the logs in there to see if there are any issues with the process?
• How to monitor it?

We look at their screen and walk them through various things. We keep that communication line open if they ever have issues or questions in the future.

We did not take any external help. Our company did it through our own team members.

We try to calculate ROI for all of our clients for projects that we deploy. We usually calculate it in terms of total cost savings annually and also in terms of how many hours of labor are being saved annually. It is cool to see those numbers continuing to grow.

The licensing is very affordable, especially when you compare its benefits. However, I know that AI units are purchased separately and can be costly depending on the specific use case. We are still trying to figure out how to track our usage and which tier or plan to go with, but overall, it is affordable in comparison to other options.

I evaluated Automation Anywhere as well as Blue Prism. At my last company, we were trying to figure out between those two and UiPath. After comparing everything on a wider scale, we realized that UiPath was going to be the better solution for us.

I would rate UiPath a ten out of ten.

We're focusing heavily on document understanding processes. We use it to extract invoices, data tables from PDFs, budget, and PITBULL automation that's heavily focused on UI navigation and PDF manipulation. That's our main focus at the moment.

We've had a few calls with UiPath where they've shown demos on how they use the AI Center, but we've yet to find something that we can look in and see because we are a financial institution. We want to trust AI. We need to build our confidence in that before we actually implement it. It's at an experimental stage for us.

It started off as optimizing redundant processes to make sure that we enhance department abilities. We moved into the research sphere last year, where we focused on taking large datasets and throwing them up into data tables, and getting that data from PDFs or web pages. We started using data extraction and table extraction, and that's what drove our projects from that point. 

Document Understanding is a key feature for us. We find that really useful because the OCR technology, the RedJack extraction that it uses, is easy to implement with a very level structure involved, even for unstructured PDFs and structured PDFs. 

We mainly use Studio and Action Center. 

In some cases, we use Task Capture to build outflows.

We started off as pure RPA, focusing on building out a citizen developer program with low code person-by-person automation that users can trigger by themselves. That then evolved into unattended automation. We started looking into document understanding processes and trying to get involved with the AI Center as well. 

From the start of the citizen developer program, it went really successfully. We moved into the unattended sphere, and we're looking into big data.

The document understanding has room for improvement. The handwritten documents need to be optimized further on the OCR extraction, making sure that we extract accuracy above 80% because we do see a lot of failure rates when it comes to handwritten documents. There's a lot of room for improvement there.

UiPath has referred to the fact that they are still building upon OCR and document understanding. But with the use of Generative AI, we're hoping to see improvements. We're hoping that might be something that we start later on. 

I have been using UiPath for four years. 

The stability of UiPath really depends on who builds the automation. 

However, the latest version releases, such as 2023.4.4, have been known to contain bugs. For example, we recently upgraded to 2023.4.4 and faced a lot of studio bugs, which forced us to downgrade to 2023.4.2. 

The upgrades on other orchestrators were fine, but there was a bit of a change to the UI that took some time to get used to.

Upon their version releases, there should be a bit more due diligence before they are pushed to customers because almost every time we're given the opportunity to upgrade, there are issues where we have to scale back, wait a while, and then upgrade again.

Scalability depends on the team. It depends on your vision, but UiPath definitely opened the doors for making sure that the framework is in place and that they are aligned with our vision so that they can help us in terms of scaling the automation to the degree that we want. 

When we are looking to scale up the automation that we have, the customer support guys are very much on hand to give us the technical support that we require. UiPath's scalability is pretty enhanced. 

When you buy the enterprise licenses at the tier that we're on, you're provided a technical or client manager, and we find that we can easily contact them. 

We have a weekly call with our team, and any support question is rerouted through them because their portal can be a bit slow at times. 

UiPath's endorsement of the community has helped drive the success of UiPath because no other RPA vendor really has the community of support that UiPath has. That's a big one for us.

UiPath does have a good community, but the support portal is probably something that they need to work on. 

Neutral

We use Power Automate as well. It is something that we try to marry with UiPath, especially when it comes to office app integration and things like that. Power Automate is simpler to use. 

We previously had some free Prism automation, and then we decided to switch over to UiPath simply due to the fact that the cost savings were a lot better.

Orchestrator was a selling point for us because our control room is something that we would be very interested in in terms of monitoring insights and transactional items. That's why we switched over to UiPath.

We've tried to take both tools and get the best out of both worlds. Anything that any of our automated processes involve Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, Outlook, or anything like that, we tend to use Power Automate simply because of the ease of use. 

We're using the local installation. Everything is localized to our premises. We have a lot of strict protocols, being a financial institution, so, we don't really want to open ourselves up to any sort of cloud orchestration.  

We tried to utilize Automation Hub to predict our ROI. The reason that we're using automation is to assist teams rather than just kick the task away from them. It's just very robust. 

We haven't seen any major cost savings, but we're an early team at Cowen. Maybe later on down the line, we'll get some solid figures.  

The pricing is a bit convoluted. We have an overallocation of licenses at the moment. Citizen developer licenses are something that we probably need to refine. 

They probably oversell it a bit to the point where we would propose that we may use x amount of licenses but in reality, we're probably only using a fraction of that.

There's room for improvement in how they sell their product.

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. Out of all the RPA vendors that I've had access to, UiPath is the easiest to use. It's the most in-depth when it comes to being able to have automation and it works in the way that you want it to work. Other vendors like Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, or Power Automate have rigid models. Some of them are web-based, which we don't really like because we're a financial institution, so we like local installations. UiPath tops them all.  

For anyone looking to enter the world of automation, UiPath should be the first point to call. They have a much better idea of how to generate a productive automation team for companies. 

I have worked with most of the UiPath use cases. From 2017 to now, I have delivered more than 400 bots. I have worked in healthcare, energy, shipping, and other industries.

When it comes to manual processes, especially IDP and the combination of IDP and automation, the journey has been a bit difficult and challenging, but it has been worth it. Most other automation is straightforward. We take input from multiple platforms, put it into another platform, and so on. But with IDP, we have to read the document, validate the data, and then integrate it with the automation tool in UiPath.

I started integrating IDP and automation before UiPath Document Understanding and the Action Center were available. What I used to do was automate the process and then create a layout in ABBYY. I would then integrate the ABBYY layout into UiPath, evaluate the data, and then automate the rest. I did this in 2018 and 2019.

Now that we have our own Document Understanding and Action Center platform, I don't have to rely on any third-party tools for IDP. The combination of automation and IDP within a single platform has made a big impact on many businesses. It has helped them to reduce their annual efforts in data entry, reading documents, and correcting small errors in data extraction and copy-pasting.

I have seen the best results when IDP is combined with automation. It has reduced manual efforts by at least 80 percent. Automation is always helpful, but the combination of IDP and automation is even more effective.

In one example, we were able to deploy more than 700 bots for a single organization in the manufacturing industry. They had around 25 servers just to run the bots, but now they are running multiple bots on a single server. They are saving millions of dollars per month by using UiPath.

Overall, I think the combination of IDP and automation is a huge game-changer for businesses. It is helping them to save time, money, and resources.

Most of the elements we have right now as activities with this do not require us to work with the norm of 100 lines of code or anything like that. It is just drag and drop, so anyone can use UiPath from scratch and be approved within a couple of months. The platform itself is very easy to learn and use. I don't think there were any challenges at any point with respect to this.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. We have many back-end processes that run without any manual intervention. We simply schedule the bots, and they run flawlessly. We also have a bot that generates reports for us. As a result, we have had end-to-end automation in place for almost a year now. We are very pleased with how it is working, and we believe it is a valuable feature.

The UiPath User Community is great. I am proud to be a part of the community, where I have earned the Community Moderator badge, the Bylaw badge, and the MM VPA badge. I have witnessed the incredible journey of the community, from a group of people who didn't know each other to a community that meets in person at least once a month. The quality of the answers in the forum is amazing. I have seen a few companies create internal competitions to see who can answer the most questions in the forums and receive prizes. These small gestures from the community make a big impact. I would say that the community has played a major role in the growth and deployment of UiPath. UiPath has never failed to surprise and value the community members. The company has never disappointed us, and it continues to support our efforts.

When we join the UiPath Community and become an MVP, we gain direct access to the company's product engineers. We can provide our feedback and reviews for every product and release, and we also have beta access to all products when we are eligible as an MVP. Every review, opinion, and idea that we provide to the product managers is taken seriously and reviewed. If it is valid, the product managers implement it. I think this is the best thing about being a part of the UiPath team, both as a team member and as an individual. I really like the core UiPath team very much.

We have UiPath both on-premises and in the cloud. I think we were able to make significant savings when we upgraded to the cloud, especially in terms of infrastructure costs, deployment, and upgrades. The dynamic nature of cloud computing has helped us to reduce costs and save time.

We often use the UiPath Academy courses. I believe that 80 to 90 percent of my team uses the Academy, and it is the main platform where we have learned to use UiPath. I recommend that everyone take the Academy courses. For anyone who wants to learn UiPath, the Academy is the best place because it has everything we need to know.

UiPath accelerates our digital transformation and reduces costs. We did not need to upgrade to expensive or complex applications to accelerate our digital transformation.

UiPath has reduced up to 70 percent of the human errors.

UiPath has helped free up staff time. We have citizen developers from UiPath who are using UiPath Studio X to save almost 70 percent of their daily time on email automation. Especially when it comes to process mining, they don't have to do the same update task; the processing is ready, and everything is ready to be given to the developers. Even the developers are saving time when using the RA framework for SAP or ERP applications, such as by creating and using libraries of common screens, selectors, and steps. This saves them at least 50 percent of their time, so they can focus more on research and development and new features.

Document Understanding and Action Center have added significant value to UiPath, especially for the IDP process.

There are a few businesses that are failing to generate their ROI. I think that's where UiPath needs to educate businesses so that they can choose the right product for them, whether that's the entire automation solution suite or just the individual products that they need. I think that educating businesses about this will help them a lot and make it easier for them to succeed.

When integrating with third-party tools, UiPath gives us the freedom to write our own code and integrate it. However, if we could get a repository of at least a few of the layouts for the GUI or AI Center, where we would only need to make minor changes, that would be helpful. For example, the files have a template that extracts all the information. I would just like to change a few things, but I don't want all of that. I know we can just hide it, but that won't help because processing the whole document extraction will still take the same amount of time. If we could get those codes in any of the repositories where we could make small changes to the existing code and then import them into our processes, that would be helpful. We do have all the code. We do have all the activities, but none of them are accessible or modifiable. We have to use them as is, or we have to create our own. Those are the only two options we have. If we could get the codes in the report that we want, and then we could make the changes and use them in our own code, I think that would help us more.

I have been using UiPath for seven years. I started my journey in December 2016 and we started delivering projects to clients in 2017. I have been impressed with the evaluation of the UiPath products from 2017 to 2023. The features that we have been receiving in recent years are very good.

When I started as an automation engineer in 2017, people at companies like Sony and other networks and large companies were scared to share their processes and credentials due to security concerns. I have seen this challenge firsthand. However, now, companies of all sizes, including national banks, are looking at automation.

I have seen an incredible journey from 2017 to 2023. I am happy to have been a part of it.

UiPath is stable.

UiPath is scalable. We are able to upgrade anything.

Whenever we have a challenge or similar issue, in rare cases, such as when there are multiple questions assigned to a support ticket, there may be a slight delay in technical support responding.

Positive

The initial deployment is straightforward.

The deployment time depends on the complexity of the project, ranging from six weeks to four months. For a very simple UiPath automation project with multiple applications, we can complete the development, UAT, and deployment within six weeks. However, if the project involves IDP, validation, and other complex features, it may take three to four months to complete.

The number of people required for deployment depends on the complexity. I always suggest having proper planning. I would not let any of the junior developers deploy to production at any time. I would always have two different teams. This is my preference. Instead of having junior developers deploy to production with only one person, even if they are capable of doing it, I would suggest not giving access to everyone to deploy to production. Instead, they should reach out to the production support team, and the production support team should do a code review before the deployment. Once the code is reviewed, the production support team can publish the package to production.

I have seen organizations that have been able to generate an ROI of almost 100 percent, as well as organizations that have struggled to generate even a 10 percent ROI. Some companies are very good at knowing what licenses they have bought and how to use them, but I have also seen companies that have a whole suite of automation tools that they are not using, including process mining and test suites. They are still paying for all of these tools, but they are struggling to generate an ROI.

The main complaint I receive about UiPath is the pricing. Many people purchase the entire suite, which can be expensive, even though they don't need all of the features. The pricing is also somewhat opaque for businesses of all sizes. Unless a company is a UiPath partner, it is difficult to customize the solution to pay only for the features that are needed.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten. We have experienced some automation processes that did not turn out as expected, especially with legacy applications, which can be challenging.

I have not seen any challenges with UiPath upgrades, but there are a few things to keep in mind. Consider a client with an on-premise deployment. The developers have returned their code, which is very old. After two or three years, the client is finally upgrading. During this time, a few activities may have changed drastically or been removed from UiPath because they have been merged into other activities. In these cases, we need to do some maintenance to ensure that the upgrade is successful. We need to check that everything is ready and that the upgrade looks good. This may take some time, but it is the only maintenance that is required.

Most of my use cases are spread across all the business units. It's used in accounts payable or for receiving reconciliations. It is also used in directory management and the banking finance sector. 

UiPath has a lot of features and they have added a lot of things. The apps and document understanding are good. We use document understanding a lot, even though they may not be common for day-to-day processes.

The Orchestrator is amazing. It provides a huge benefit including data security and data storage.

We can add a huge number of activities and can input code right into the platform.

While there might be companies that use the product to do automation for good cause, however, so far, in my experience, I have yet to do much of those use cases. I’m more on the business process side.

The product enables us to implement end-to-end automation. When they first launched, people used to have some sort of hiccups, however, now you don’t need different tools to manage your entire automation journey. With UiPath, from the discovery phase on, you have everything you need. We can understand the ROI clearly and can see what we’ve invested and what we’ve received.

The user community is valuable. It has the biggest community. Everyone knows it. One of the reasons UiPath is so successful is the UiPath community. We have tremendous people in the community supporting each other in terms of development or community events. People from different organizations can explain different pain point areas or explain good use cases and share learning and feedback.

We use both cloud and on-prem services. Most companies prefer on-prem over the cloud. From our perspective, we’re working to convert users to the cloud to reduce the footprint. Still, many want to maintain that on-prem segment.

We use the UiPath Academy courses. Since the beginning of my career, I’ve used it. Whenever there are new products that are launched, they will release certain courses for training purposes. I've gone through training at the Academy. I found a certified trainer also to provide training. Overall, having the training available really helps new people who want to kick-start their careers using the app.

They've also implemented community collaboration. If someone from the community has developed something, they will add training based on the community. The user has larger visual data now, compared to what happened previously.

The solution has allowed us to manage digital transformation and reduce the cost around it. Automation really helps boost digital transformation. We've seen cost reduction around resource use and the cost of operations as well. 

We've been able to reduce human error using UiPath. Of course, it depends on the people developing it. However, as long as the people have good implementation experience, we can really minimize errors.

It's helped free up employee time. However, it is not a major amount across every project. Comparatively, it can save a number of hours versus manual labor. 

We have saved money and that's calculated on the number of hours saved in terms of man hours. We haven't cut staff; they are now working on different tasks instead.  

We've used AI functionality. On a real-time basis, we haven't seen many benefits from the AI center. It's not cost-effective to run models on it as of now. We haven't been able to automate more processes. Some projects don't require AI at all. If it gets more cost-effective and has more use cases, that might change. 

The tool continuously redefines itself. They release three major versions every year and target one major feature once a year, like AI, et cetera. However, there are a few features at an early stage and not quite mature yet.

The initial tools are good enough compared to other vendors, however, they are still refining and need to change a lot of things, especially in the AI center, which is not that flexible when it comes to deployment. This is the same for UiPath apps. In most cases, nobody wants to invest a lot of money in attended bots. They need to work on that.

We'd like to see them work towards more stable outcomes to minimize hiccups. 

I've been using the solution for more than six years. I started in 2017.

Previously, we haven't noticed stability issues. In the past year, we have noted issues with stability. There have been some hiccups. 

The scalability depends on the way a company implements it. From a cloud perspective, the scalability is good. That said, the flexibility is there to scale.

We've had issues in the past where products were not working as expected and we've reached out to support. The experience has been mixed. Sometimes it is good. Sometimes solutions are delayed. 

Neutral

I did not use a different solution previously. However, I have used Automation Anywhere, Power Automate, recently, and also Intellibot and Blue Prism.

Power Automate is still quite young. There are still items missing as it's new. 

UiPath excels in the Orchestrator. The flexibility is great as well.

We've worked with both cloud and on-prem deployments. However, people seem to prefer on-prem. Almost all of our clients are maintaining their own cloud and then running UiPath into the cloud from on-prem.

I was involved with the deployment. The setup is straightforward. For the governance and audit security principles, we do need to add in a bit more. We might add, for example, a CI/CD pipeline. 

We tend to have three to five people, part of the support team, to help with the deployment.

There is some maintenance required. We need to monitor our VMs and understand if the robot is failing and if so what is the root cause. We have an interior support team for maintenance services.  

We did not use an outside vendor for the setup. Only people in the department are allowed to handle the deployments due to compliance. 

We cannot calculate an overall ROI. However, if something isn't getting 150% or more, people tend to not want to implement it. So far, we've seen a very good ROI. 

The costs have gone up recently. The pricing seems to be a bit higher for the end user. 

We are UiPath partners. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. The most recent tools are not as impressive compared to what is happening in the market. 

As long as others don't need additional tools like Apps or document understanding, I'd recommend it. There are a lot of features and functionality to try. However, if you need document understanding and apps, I'd advise users to look at their use case, do a POC, and figure out if it's a perfect fit. 

From the perspective of pure automation, UiPath is excellent. However, if a company is looking for AI functionality, they really need to see what else is out there and what is best for them.