Appian RPA Reviews

Clients use the Appian RPA solution whenever they have manual tasks and want to automate them using robots. It is usually used for highly repetitive tasks which are manual in nature and where there are no third-party integrations or APIs available to connect to their systems. This is why clients use Appian RPA.

The best feature of Appian RPA is that it is highly integrated into the Appian platform itself. It is very easy to configure that in the end-to-end Appian automation solution.

The second notable feature is that Appian RPA gives you a lot of flexibility in terms of how you want to design the robotic tasks. It has a very detailed orchestration console which provides details about the entire runtime and the logs of Appian RPA where you can find in detail what the robot did on the virtual machine.

Appian provides dashboards where users or admins can log in and see how the robots are performing various robotic tasks. It is very detailed and gives substantial insight into how Appian RPA is functioning or is operational. It also lets you drill down into specific details at each task level.

There are many competitive products in the market right now, for example, UiPath and Automation Anywhere. These competitive products are now coming up with features which Appian RPA currently does not have. For example, agentic AI automation is a new feature which UiPath recently released, and while Appian is planning to release something similar soon, it is not at the same level as UiPath yet. Appian could work more on the agentic AI automation side of things for RPA.

I have worked with Appian RPA for about three years.

RPA in general struggles with stability because once you implement the RPA solution, if you are doing web automation or browser automation and the website changes, you will have to develop the RPA solution all over again. This is because it detects the browser or web elements, and based on that, you have designed the RPA solution. If those elements change, there is a significant need for maintenance and ongoing support to continue maintaining your RPA software. It is stable unless a website or the browser that you have built on changes. It does require maintenance for the long term.

The solution is scalable and can be scaled for multiple tasks and multiple processes, and it is easy to scale.

I have seen ROI with the tool. There are multiple use cases that I have implemented across healthcare, education, and financial services on the Appian RPA platform. The main ROI is that there is a lot of manual work which company employees are doing that takes significant time to complete manually. It saves a lot of time for the employees and reduces complexity where these manual tasks are handled by RPA, allowing employees to focus on other more important things. The main ROI comes from saving hours and time.

I am a partner of Appian, so we sell Appian and also implement it.

Appian does not sell Appian RPA licenses separately. It comes along with the entire Appian platform. It is one of the offerings of the entire platform, unlike UiPath or Automation Anywhere which are sold separately as RPA licenses. Appian's pricing strategy is different as they sell the entire platform and RPA comes along with it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Appian RPA a rating of eight.

We have been working with Appian RPA along with the entire workflow case management suite. Recently, Appian released their AI, which achieved general availability in August 2025. This is a document management OCR technology that we have not yet signed up for, but we are evaluating it for our use cases.

I have been working with Appian RPA for approximately eight months to a year. The majority of my work has involved onboarding all our operations onto the case management and workflow solution, though the RPA implementation started later. We remain heavily reliant on Pega RPA and Blue Prism, and we use Appian RPA primarily if a workflow is already situated on Appian, which is why we recently began exploring it as a capability.

Appian RPA's rule-based automation helped reduce error rates in our organization. One of our operations teams that uses external data switched from manual external data gathering to downloading data through Appian RPA from a public website because the external vendor does not provide an API or web interface. Previously, a user performed this task manually.

I assess the integration of Appian RPA with Appian's low-code suite in our workflow as good. We typically rely on Blue Prism bots for 80 to 90 percent of our work, and Appian has a connector to Blue Prism, which allows us to work it out that way.

The impact of Appian RPA's user interface on task efficiency is acceptable in terms of being developer-friendly. We have not yet adopted it extensively, so we do not have many people either complaining or expressing satisfaction. A handful of users are utilizing it for a small use case, and as of now, nobody has complained, so things are progressing well.

Approximately 20 to 30 people are currently using Appian RPA in my company.

In my opinion, Appian RPA can be improved. We are planning to conduct a proof of concept on volume because we are still not entirely certain about how well the record type feature performs on Appian with high volumes of data. After conducting client calls with HSBC, Santander, and a few of the Big Four, we learned about use cases where Appian has been used for high volumes of data. We are planning to conduct a proof of concept to test that hypothesis.

Additional features that could enhance Appian RPA in the future would include AI on Azure. Currently, their AI is only AWS-based, and we are in discussions with the company about this because we are an Azure shop. I believe this would be a good area for them to concentrate on.

I have been working with Appian RPA for approximately eight months to a year.

We still work with Pega, and while we have UiPath, that presence is very small. We remain heavy on Pega and do not plan to move completely away from it into Appian. However, we are exploring what can be done in use cases where things are already on Appian.

Pega does not have any advantages over Appian RPA. The primary reason we continue using Pega is that the person who owns the relationship and delivery of services for us in the bank has a longer and older relationship with Pega. In 2021, we conducted an enterprise-wide workflow and case management RFP, and we selected Appian.

I have not used Appian RPA orchestration features.

I do not utilize Appian RPA's analytics.

I would rate Appian RPA a solid seven or eight overall because we have not invested heavily in its adoption. I have heard it can do much more, and after speaking with clients who have implemented it more extensively, I would rate it a seven to eight based on what we have implemented.

I find the pricing of Appian RPA reasonable because it is user-based, and we can experiment with it. We started with department adoption, but then moved to enterprise adoption, so overall, it has been good. My overall rating for Appian RPA is seven.

We were automating customer experience workflows for the contact center, including systems like CRM, service desk solutions, CCaaS solutions, and pulling data from ERPs.

It allowed us to reduce the level of effort to complete contact processes from one hundred fifty seconds to ninety seconds, providing a significant ROI by reducing unnecessary steps in the workflow.

Appian RPA is super easy to use, offering low code, no code capabilities. Any individual can be trained to use it effectively.

There are not any areas that need improvement off the top of my head. It has been 18 months since I worked with the environment, and they've made UI enhancements and implemented AI, including features like Copilot.

We used the solution for three or four years.

There were no issues with stability, and I can't recall any downtime with the deployments.

Appian scales effectively. It’s built on top of Elastic cloud platforms. There are no limits in terms of how much you use it.

The customer service was easy to work with and they were pretty prompt. Most clients had top tier service agreements, which allowed for fast responses.

Positive

We also used Pega and UiPath. Most solutions are about 85% to 90% the same.

I wouldn’t say the setup was very complex. On a scale of one to ten, with ten being the easiest, I would rate the setup at six and a half.

These were deployed within client environments, involving their enterprise IT teams. Typically, five to six people were involved, including technical PMs and infrastructure engineers.

Reducing the level of effort in contact workflows provided a significant return on investment. Clients could decrease process time, saving considerable amounts of money.

I didn't handle payments or costs. We recommended infrastructure stacks to our clients, who implemented them, and we provided ongoing consulting services.

We also used Pega and UiPath.

I recommend looking at Appian as well as UiPath. Consider all top players and choose the one you feel most comfortable with. Factors like training requirements and platform learning classes should also be considered.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.