UiPath Reviews

The primary use case for document processing, automating data extraction from previously hard-to-access documents. This saves time, reduces manual work, and makes hidden data more accessible and usable.

It allows us to extract valuable information from various documents, categorize them based on their types, and make the data within these documents usable for our needs.

Assessing an AI center's role in orchestrating various elements of AI capabilities is quite constrained.

I have been working with UiPath for three years.

I find it to be highly stable.

Scaling on-premises can be cost-prohibitive due to the need to invest in hardware and infrastructure. This cost factor makes transitioning to the cloud a more attractive and well-designed option for scalability.

Our experience with their customer support has been excellent. We've encountered very few issues that required us to reach out, but when we did, we could contact our dedicated representative, and they efficiently escalated the matter, resulting in a prompt response from their support team. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

We have experience with Microsoft Power Automate, but it's important to note that UiPath and Microsoft Power Automate serve different purposes and have distinct target use cases. This uniqueness is a critical factor that sets them apart from each other.

The initial setup process was quite straightforward.

We initiated the POC to test the viability and implementation of automation before expanding the environment. The setup was designed with the understanding that we required distinct test and production environments. It was initially developed as an on-premises solution and is now transitioning to a cloud deployment. We've had a lot of success with Lydonia Technologies as a partner.

We now have access to critical data, and the accuracy has improved significantly. Additionally, the time it takes for processes or submissions to go through has been reduced from three or four days to just one day. While the cost savings in terms of dollar values may not be substantial, the real benefit lies in freeing up employees to concentrate on more meaningful tasks.

I find the pricing to be reasonable, especially when compared to other offerings in the same market.

My advice would be to begin with a small-scale approach and construct your automation incrementally. While it might be tempting to automate an entire process in one go, it's more practical to break it down into smaller components. This way, you can adapt and refine each piece as you go, reducing the risk of issues arising or changes occurring before the entire automation is completed. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate various processes across different functions within our organization including back-office operations, with a particular emphasis on finance, procurement, HR, and IT, as RPA technologies initially emerged from the finance sector.

Also, we extend our automation services to areas directly associated with production and supply chain operations.

Our primary goal is process automation, which lowers costs, enhances quality and improves operational flexibility. This is crucial due to our multi-time zone operations, requiring continuous processing. We're also dedicated to integrating various applications within the organization and addressing gaps. While engineering and IT departments have substantial automation, we're working on refining and addressing specific gaps in these areas.

The orchestration process itself offers a high level of impact, flexibility, and ease of development. While we have made significant improvements, particularly in terms of integrations and the seamless connection of integrators to applications, the process remains remarkably straightforward and efficient. It has significantly improved the accuracy of our operations, particularly in terms of quality, and has also reduced the time required.

There's room for enhancement, particularly in the support department and in the area of reporting, to provide a more robust product for gathering insights.

I have been working with UiPath for approximately five years.

The solution's stability is quite commendable and even when we encounter incidents, we consistently update to the latest versions. We typically lag about seven months behind the latest releases because it takes around three to four months for the new versions to stabilize after their initial release. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Scalability appears to be quite robust, especially when we have a solid model in place.

The improvement is needed for their support services. I would rate it seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was relatively straightforward. Back then, we were using a standalone automation suite. While we now have a cloud-based automation suite, the transition wasn't complex, and we found it quite easy to implement.

We've seen a positive ROI. Our organization, with the assistance of skilled consultants, successfully implemented the system and we established a robust business model and have maintained a centralized approach.

We evaluated several solutions available at the time, all of which were related to end automation. Ultimately, we opted for UiPath and that decision was influenced by the learning opportunities offered through UiPath Academy. At the time, it appeared to have the most compelling value proposition, with a strong ability to market and demonstrate the product effectively compared to other options.

The ease of use depends on whether you're a developer or someone who mainly uses automation. Nowadays, it is much more user-friendly compared to when I first started using it back in the day. The landscape has evolved significantly with a wider range of solutions available today and they've made substantial improvements, especially in terms of document standards.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We have a variety of use cases, primarily in finance and HR, which make up around seventy percent of our use cases.

Our focus has primarily been on document processing and it has significantly reduced the time spent on reading documents and manually inputting data.

The AI center's automation has proven to be highly valuable, although we haven't yet harnessed its full potential. It's exceptionally beneficial, particularly when it comes to handling invoices. 

With numerous hospitals generating thousands of invoices, this automation has made a significant impact. Implementing AI in our automation has significantly enhanced the accuracy of our operations. 

These improvements have resulted in increased efficiency and a significant reduction in the time needed for these processes. The last time we estimated, it amounted to around 60,000 hours saved.

Integrating with tools such as Asana or other service and project management platforms would be a valuable enhancement.

I've been using UiPth personally for approximately a year and a half, while my company has utilized it for around five years.

The stability has been excellent, and we haven't encountered any problems.

Scalability is a bit challenging for on-premises solutions. We anticipate that the transition to a hybrid environment and cloud will provide more flexibility.

When we initially engaged with UiPath Professional Services, the experience was excellent, they replayed and assisted swiftly and seamlessly. However, recently that changed. I would open a support ticket, and it would sit untouched for a week with no response. Even after I inquired or raised questions, there was no follow-up. Sometimes, I had to call multiple times a day to get any action. It seemed that some managers had to step in to take control of the situation, and even then, there were delays in responses. I rate it four out of ten.

Neutral

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate the extraction of information from PDF files and populate websites with this data. 

Our primary goal is to save time for our business users, allowing them to focus on more engaging tasks instead of manually clicking and inputting information on various websites.

The incorporation of AI in our automation liberates resources for other tasks. I believe we save approximately thirty minutes per employee each day.

The most valuable aspect is the ease of accomplishing tasks. It's incredibly user-friendly, making it accessible even to non-developers. Whether it's clicking in specific locations or entering data on a website, it simplifies the process significantly.

Updating the tool across multiple virtual machines can be time-consuming and somewhat cumbersome. It would be more convenient if this process could be automated.

I have been using UiPath for three years.

It offers good stability capabilities.

It is a highly scalable solution.

Their customer support has proved to be excellent. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Positive

I previously used Microsoft's Power Automate tool, but I switched to UiPath because it offers a wider range of features. Microsoft's focus seemed to be primarily on Microsoft-related costs, often neglecting comprehensive support.

The initial setup is straightforward, but the main challenge I encounter is related to updates.

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

In my last company, we focused on Document Understanding. We received medical claim forms through Outlook and extracted the data from them. That is one use case. At my current company, I'm doing SAP automation.

My organization has automated around 200 daily processes that were previously manual. Some things that may have taken weeks in the past can be completed in a few hours. UiPath has reduced the costs of digital transformation and improved our productivity because the processes can continue running over the weekend when no one is in the office. 

I like UiPath's Document Understanding and OCR functions. That's UiPath's advantage. It has a native OCR tool, whereas other tools do not, so it provides an end-to-end solution that covers everything. We do not need to integrate other applications. 

It's effortless to build automations in UiPath. Anyone can learn it because it has a drag-and-drop interface. We only use about 10 percent coding. It's easy to understand. The UiPath Academy is also available for anyone who wants to learn the solution. The academy courses are free, and you can get a certification. Anyone can take advantage of it.  

I would like UiPath to add built-in ticketing to Orchestrator so you can raise a ticket directly to the vendor inside the solution and send the error information. We have to build our own error-handling process, which is an enormous task.

I have used UiPath for a little more than a year. 

UiPath is mostly stable, but we have encountered an issue after an update where a process created under a previous version may fail, so we need to update the bot. 

UiPath's scalability is excellent because we are automating processes in India and other countries. We have already automated more than 200. 

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. 

Positive

I have used Automation Anywhere and Power Automate. UiPath has an advantage over other tools because it can perform end-to-end automation and cover more activities.

Deploying UiPath is straightforward. One person is enough to deploy the solution, but I may need to contact the solution architect if I need access to something. We deploy to multiple locations because we are a multinational company, but we are not providing services to any other company. We have our internal clients, including stakeholders in Denmark, Norway, and some other countries. 

I rate UiPath nine out of 10. UiPath is better than other competing technologies. 

I use UiPath to automate getting the relevant data from Excel and PDF files and for normalizing the data.

It helps reduce human error in data retrieval from PDFs and Excel documents. We get accurate output that is easy for us to make decisions on, helping us move forward to next steps. It makes us more productive.

End-to-end processes are useful for us because they give us positive output and increase our business productivity as well as staff availability. It saves a lot of time and human resources.

The amount of time an automation saves depends on the complexity of the task. Some save a lot, some save less, but it works well for us.

Automating tasks makes them more scalable and makes our client relationships better. We are able to provide solutions in less time than we expected.

The most valuable feature is the ability to retrieve data from Excel files, including filtering the data. It is also straightforward and easy to navigate when building automations and makes our tasks easy to perform. It is very easy to use without any prior coding knowledge.

Another important aspect is the UiPath community. It's critical when you face an issue. You can post it to the community and there are always people there who are ready to solve your issues. It works well in every scenario, and I would give a 10 out of 10 to the user community.

The UiPath Academy also helps a lot. I did a course last year because I wanted to know more about the new features. For anyone who wants to improve their skills related to UiPath, they should do courses from the UiPath Academy. It's very helpful.

The user interface needs a little bit of improvement because it looks a little cheap due to being a very old tool. Otherwise, it works well.

I would also like to see the ability for applications to work offline. Currently, they only work when online. If that is possible, that should be included in a future release.

I have been using UiPath for the last two and a half years.

The stability is good, a 10 out of 10.

The scalability is also good. I give it a 10 out of 10 for scalability.

Last year I faced an issue related to UiPath and I posted a question on the developer community forum. After approximately two to three hours I got a response and that was all I required to resolve the issue.

Positive

I used Microsoft Power Automate. I switched because UiPath is cheaper and it has a large developer community.

It gives a great ROI. If you invest $1,000 in a project, it returns approximately two to three times, or $2,000 to $3,000. 

The time it takes to set up an automation depends on the project size or complexity. It can take 15 or 20 minutes, and sometimes, it takes hours or a whole day.

Sometimes maintenance is required because it slows down due to new features or an upgrade going on. 

We have about 10 to 15 people maintaining things, doing testing or helping when anyone faces an issue. We have 200 to 300 end-users in our organization.

We did AP automation. We started with AP invoice automation first. Then we did a proof of shipment delivery. That was the second concept. After, we expanded to the inputting of contractor timesheets. We moved to publish the metrics on a dashboard and log in to different databases. Slowly, the demand picked up in the last year.

This solution has reduced manual effort on our part. It's removed repetitive tasks which do not bring any value to the company. They have now been eliminated. It's saved maybe 1,000 man-hours every year on the AP side, and maybe on the metric side for a dashboard that we created, we saved 90 hours a month.

The capacity to read the emails and then understand what is out there has been very useful for us. This is extremely useful with the huge volume of transactions that we are taking. We get close to over a thousand invoices in a day. 

I would like it to be more user-friendly.

The one thing that we would really like to see is the licensing. UiPath is selling on a per-bot model. What I find with other companies is they give it as a SaaS solution and that you subscribe to it. UiPath manages how many bots you need, whatever intelligence you're using, and then you give us a total solution. Changing licensing would probably interest us in the long run.

I've been using the solution for five years. 

It is pretty stable. We have not had major issues.

We can scale it up. However, the cost again is a factor. The cost of scaling up is high.

I have not been involved with technical support. Our team would talk to UiPath if there were a problem. I haven't had personal experience.

We did not previously use a different solution.

I was involved in the deployment and initial setup. It was straightforward. 

It was straightforward in the sense that we used it in a very limited way first as a proof of concept. Therefore, it was simple to just deploy it on a desktop at first, where we didn't even use the server. We deployed it on the desktop to see if it was able to scan and to see if it was able to read the mail. In that sense, it was simplistic. 

We ran into issues as we were scanning it, sometimes it was classifying it right, and sometimes not. So we had to bring machine learning in for it to be accurate. Therefore, while we did run into some complexity, deployment-wise, it was simple.

Our strategy was simple: informing the infrastructure team that spun up a VM for us. 

We did not use any integrator, reseller, or advisor.

We have definitely seen an ROI. We compare it to the number of hours saved. For each process we do, we measure it by the number of hours we save across the globe. That's how we are measuring ROI now. We don't have hard dollar amounts.

The solution is expensive. 

Initially, it maybe was $8,000 or $10,000. However, as the number of bots increases, the pricing has to come down. That said, with volume, we don't see that. 

Price will definitely be a factor if we decide to use UiPath down the road. Even looking into this Studio Web, I was thinking, "Okay, I can upgrade immediately to the newer version." Then, if we need two or three more Studio Webs due to the development that we need to do, or even the Citizen Developer, the bot, it's going to become very expensive if we need to take off. Therefore, the volume should provide some sort of discount. 

We did evaluate Automation Anywhere. 

Automation Anywhere was offering a SaaS model, which we like. However, the cost was expensive, and also the scalability wasn't what we needed. We are just at the beginning of the automation journey. When we were evaluating it, we didn't have that many bots that could justify that cost. Right now, we are at the point where we are maybe at eight to ten bots. It is taking off pretty fast at this point. Managing it may become an issue for us at some point, and maybe with the scalability, that model may offer more value to us. I don't think UiPath offers that as a cloud.

We are still surfacing demand for automating processes based on sustainable or environmental causes. We aren't using any automation to promote any good causes just yet.

I have yet to be a part of UiPath's user community and have yet to understand what they offer.

We haven't gotten into the UiPath Academy. We partnered with a couple of vendors, and I'm not sure if they're Academy-certified people.

At this time, while we do use AI, I'm not sure if it's UiPath's AI. We are still surfacing the process. We've done a proof of concept, and we have to measure the metrics to see if it makes sense for us to move ahead. 

For us, at least, the cost is the biggest factor for us to scale up. For others evaluating the solution, they need to look at ten years down the road or what is their vision for automation. Only then can they effectively evaluate the products. 

This solution was simple, and it was easier to use, so we took this first, and now we're pretty much married at this point. There isn't anything to complain about, however, if we had the vision to see where we would be, we might have looked at other products more. I don't have any complaints as of this point. As of now, the cost is the biggest sticking factor for us.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

You have the studio licensing, and the orchestrator. The architecture is complex, at least from a business point of view. There are a lot of moving parts that I have to work with. As with any product, I would just want it to be up and running immediately without the hassle of maintenance. I feel the maintenance factor in this product is high.

We have about 180 bots we're doing now. I think the most interesting one we have is an underwriter bot. It collects information about a person who has just applied for a product, and it does research for the underwriter. It does financial research and medical record research, and it compiles all that into notes for the underwriter. It actually gives them a recommendation on how to proceed with the application. We do all sorts of use cases, including financial and claims, and have a hand in everything that MassMutual does.

In terms of the ease of building automations, we have processed millions of cases through UiPath. It has saved hundreds of thousands of hours for our employees and freed them up to do other tasks. At MassMutual, we have people lining up to have us make a bot for them. So, it's been well accepted.

I like the tie-ins to other languages. Being able to use Python, C#, and VB has been very valuable because I can get a more diverse developer skill set on my team. If somebody's interested in a particular language, I can push them in that direction. If they want to get more into C#, for example, we can do that.

We put all new developers through the UiPath Academy courses. We're trying to get more into attended automations as we're almost exclusively unattended right now. I'm trying to get all my developers to go through the attended automation course. It's only 16 hours, so I can upscale them all on how to build attended automations better. I'm also sending some citizen developers to that course. It's pretty easy for the developers to pick up, and the citizen developers can try it.

We struggle with handwriting recognition. If we had something, maybe in Document Understanding, that would work well with handwriting recognition, it would help us out a lot. Right now, we use an outside vendor for that.

I've been using UiPath for four and a half years.

We've been using UiPath for almost four and a half years, and we've had one outage so far. The stability has been great.

We've grown a great deal in the last four years, and scalability hasn't been a problem.

We have a really talented development team, so we haven't used technical support much. However, they've been useful when we've run into problems. I'd give them a rating of ten out of ten.

Positive

I was not involved with the initial setup, but all other deployments and upgrades have been seamless.

We measure the ROI by how many full-time employees we would need to do the work the bots are doing. I think we're at 90 to 100 covered. It's working well.

The cost of UiPath is much less than that of Blue Prism. They've been very flexible and willing to work with us with our new contractors we just signed on. It's worked out well.

We looked at Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. We chose UiPath because of the technology that we can use to build things. I like that our developers have marketable skill sets when using UiPath. They can use their SQL skills and their C# skills, for example. With some of the other products, the developers aren't really stretching themselves or making complicated solutions, which is just what they really want to do. It just seems like the other programs are more drag-and-drop only, and I don't think that's great for my team.

My advice would be to start slow and small. Big bots sound like they give you a great ROI, but the complexity and the amount of time you have to spend on them burn through your ROI quickly. We've learned that building small 10-week projects for bots is better.

On a scale from one to ten, I give UiPath a ten. It is very simple to use and easy to pick up, like I'm learning with my new citizen developers. It can get really complex with my advanced developers being able to build some pretty unique things. I like that flexibility.