UiPath Platform Reviews

I have used it mainly for document understanding and UI interactions. When invoices are being generated, my bot categorizes those invoices, extracts the information from them, updates it in the database, and stores them. 

Another use case was the validation of user identity in India. We have government identity numbers and cards in India, so my bot extracts information from those cards while onboarding people onto our HRMS platform. It extracts those details, puts them into the database, validates them, and reflects them back onto the front end.

Our team has been working primarily on AI integration and moving from RPA towards IPA. It has been helping us build a robust system where, instead of just basic logic, we started using AI implementations that can make decisions for our bots and proceed further. 

We have developed a process automation system for calculating churn risk. This system is part of our internal product. Whenever we receive support tickets from our clients, we track these tickets to analyze the sentiment behind them. Our goal is to understand what clients are trying to convey and the tone they use in their communications. We conduct sentiment analysis on these tickets to determine whether clients are having a positive or negative experience with us. Based on this analysis, we create a churn risk algorithm to assess whether a client is at risk of leaving us or if they are satisfied with our services. This entire process continuously accumulates sentiment analysis data from the client tickets. If the algorithm indicates potential churn risk, the information is passed on to our support team, allowing them to effectively communicate with and assist the client.

Orchestrator helped us streamline processes. It helps us set up different types of triggers and manage our processes much more easily while also providing source control. UiPath Platform is also super versatile. We can automate pretty much anything we want with it. There are very limited restrictions in UiPath, whereas Power Automate is primarily focused on the Microsoft environment, which restricts our ability to explore beyond that. UiPath allows us to work with various other applications quite easily and effectively.

UiPath Platform is super convenient to work with. Considering it with other automation tools, it is the easiest to work with and most versatile. You can perform all types of automation by using the UiPath Platform.

Reducing the price of the unattended licenses would be very helpful. Other than that, everything is already quite perfect. It would also be beneficial if the demos and new features they introduce were made more accessible to everyone, perhaps in an open-source format, rather than requiring registration and sign-up.

Recently, we worked with the checkout clipboard feature introduced by UiPath. This feature allows users to manually copy data from Excel and paste it onto another application, as it is directly mapped. However, I wish there were activities available in the actual UI part of Studio that we could use for integration. Currently, this feature is only available for manual usage. It would be great if they could develop additional features to enhance the process development experience.

I have been using the solution for about three years.

We have not had any issues with stability.

For scalability, it is quite capable. We developed a process where we framed it to be as scalable as possible. As we bring in new clients, it works quite easily for us to scale it. We started off with 10 but were able to add up to hundreds of different clients. It is quite scalable, and depending on the automation done by the developer, it should be very easy to accomplish.

I faced some issues when I was integrating Python with the UiPath Platform, and the support team was quite fast with their replies. I was able to solve that issue in less than a day. They came in handy when required.

Positive

It's quite straightforward. As long as we follow the basic instructions provided by UiPath, it's pretty easy to get it set up.

I had training for a couple of weeks, but even during that time, for installation, we did not have anyone explain the process. We were provided with the link and had to install the UiPath Platform tools. It was not hard for us to navigate through the site and get it set up.

Our company has automated many processes with the license we already have. We are able to get a return on our ROI. Since I am currently working at a startup, they cannot splurge money on licenses. Sometimes it is difficult for our developers to plan and coordinate flows to schedule in a way that would not interfere with other bots' execution. Other than that, it is totally fine and very convenient to work with.

One of the main advantages of the UiPath Platform is its versatility; you can perform virtually any type of automation without limitations. I find it particularly convenient for UI automation because the selectors we use for UI elements work very effectively. I haven’t encountered significant difficulties when working with UI automation in this tool.

In contrast, when I’ve tried using other tools like Power Automate or AutomationEdge, I faced challenges. These tools can make it harder to create dynamic UI interactions, especially since websites are frequently updated. As these sites change regularly, the selectors we configure may not function as consistently as before.

As developers, we strive to create dynamic selectors, but this can sometimes prevent us from delivering the most optimized and effective solutions. Overall, UiPath performs significantly better in this regard compared to tools like Power Automate and AutomationEdge.

People with basic technical knowledge and some experience watching a few YouTube videos can gain an understanding of how UiPath works and how to automate tasks easily. UiPath also has another studio called Studio X, which is a simplified version of UiPath Studio. This makes automation accessible to anyone, not just those with extensive technical skills. So, if some people aren't very technically inclined, they can use UiPath Studio X, which is more user-friendly and makes automation easier.

Since I have worked with it very consistently, it is a very easy tool to work with, and they have many options available. Recently, I heard that people are moving towards Automation Anywhere since the licensing costs are much lower than the UiPath Platform and other automation tools. The drawback I found with Automation Anywhere is that we do not have access to the premium version demo. The demo that we have access to is for the community version, and it is super restricted. Based on my knowledge, I would suggest the UiPath Platform as the best automation tool for any company to start with.

I would rate UiPath Platform a nine out of ten.

We adopted UiPath to leverage its generative AI capabilities for rule-based automation. This technology enhances the resilience of our automated processes, ensuring continued functionality even when underlying systems or data undergo changes that would typically disrupt traditional automation.

Our business challenges necessitated a combined approach of AI and automation. While automation initially streamlined processes, its rigidity proved limiting when faced with changing information. AI, with its learning and adaptive capabilities, addressed this by recognizing patterns and adjusting to variations. This synergy allows the AI to handle similar changes without requiring new automation, ultimately achieving the same outcome with increased flexibility and efficiency.

Our automations are now AI-centric, and this focus will expand significantly within the company as our organization refines its AI strategy.

Our company is developing a new AI automation strategy focused on employee engagement, partnering with Microsoft Copilot and utilizing ChatGPT for automation. While our AI policy is still being developed, we plan to carefully consider how to best leverage UiPath's AI capabilities, with a strong emphasis on security, once the policy is in place.

UiPath has helped save our staff time to focus on other tasks. 

UiPath's most valuable feature is Insights, which provides invaluable data on time savings and AI model performance.

UiPath should prioritize improving its updates and user-friendliness, particularly for new team members. Streamlining updates and simplifying the interface would enhance the onboarding experience and overall productivity.

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

In terms of what we use UiPath for, the stability has been great. 

We utilize both cloud-based and on-premises automation solutions. Our infrastructure began with two servers and has gradually expanded to four. UiPath has proven to be a scalable platform, provided we maintain the necessary licenses.

UiPath's support is generally good, augmented by the assistance of a Technical Account Manager who helps escalate requests when needed. However, resolving issues without a TAM would be significantly more challenging.

Positive

Prior to my joining the team, the organization utilized Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment was complex.

We collaborated with UiPath's service provider for the implementation, leveraging their expertise for the intake process and initial setup. Our experience thus far has been positive.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

I recommend UiPath due to its robust user community, which provides valuable feedback that contributes to the continuous improvement and development of the product with new features.

We are primarily looking to solve business challenges related to processing unstructured documents.

Currently, we have not realized the business outcomes as we have not implemented the solution yet. The goal is to increase efficiency, throughput, and accuracy. UiPath AI and automation have not yet helped free up staff to work on other projects or tasks. In terms of environmental, social, and governance solutions, it is not applicable.

The Studio and the Test Manager have been valuable as they made testing with QA easier. We've been able to rerun numerous test cases quickly. From the UiPath platform overall, I find these features valuable.

The product documentation needs improvement as it tends to be self-contradictory and sometimes hard to access since we are on an older version. 

There is also a need for more consistency in product support and customer service.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath has been pretty stable since we are mostly on-premises. However, the stability is to be determined when we move our full infrastructure to the cloud. Outages could occur with SaaS solutions.

It has scaled with us efficiently despite the initial complexity in understanding licenses, runtimes, and utilization. No significant issues have been encountered yet.

There have been ebbs and flows with customer service. We are at Premium Plus, now called Enterprise Success. Initially, there wasn't much value, but there has been some improvement. Dedicated support provides more assistance and better outcomes.

Neutral

I'm familiar with Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, each of which offer different pros and cons. UiPath, being the market leader, differentiates itself with its capabilities and portfolio. It is easy to use from day one, flexible, and their vision is helpful.

I can't provide specifics as to ROI. That said, in general, we achieve financial benefits and a positive ROI on our implementations most years.

Pricing and licensing are challenging as they can be difficult to understand. They make it hard to determine utilization and necessary licenses for runtimes. Comprehensive components need to come together for a clear picture, making renewals and contract negotiations complex.

We have considered Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism as alternate solutions.

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten.

We use UiPath for social media marketing.

UiPath increases efficiency, speeds delivery, and automates repetitive tasks to save time. We can streamline tasks and make daily work more meaningful. Instead of doing the same things over and over, employees can focus on more important work.  

It also allowed us to automate many internal processes, saving significant time and increasing the accuracy of reports and monitoring. It also helped improve customer satisfaction and made significant time and cost savings.

The most valuable feature is the autopilot or copilot AI feature. While we have not used it yet, I'm told the Document Understanding feature is also highly powerful. SaaS is also valuable.

The UiPath Studio development suite response can be a little sluggish, depending on the workflows you use. I use a lot of legacy workflows, and the application response is slow. 

I have used UiPath for three years.

The UiPath Orchestrator has been pretty stable overall. There have been a few outages. 

We started with three licenses and still have that. We also have one test bot test license, and it's scalable.

When we opened a specific ticket, UiPath lacked the resources to help us. Getting someone to help you was hard because you needed to go through different channels. 

Positive

We needed to connect three unattended bots to the Automation Cloud and Orchestrator. Setting up on-premises for different applications that don't have their own infrastructure may be a little more difficult. 

We did not use a partner for implementation.

We've saved about 350 hours using UiPath, which equals about $500,000. When we automate jobs that take longer manually, the time savings are pretty straightforward.

UiPath's pricing and licensing are in line with the market. We haven't used AI units yet, so I'm unsure about their pricing.

We're a financial institution, and we started using UiPath for small, simple processes and day-to-day tasks, such as adding and removing users and updating information, but we're also exploring opportunities to automate lending processes.

We typically evaluate a process first to see if it's appropriate for automation. Sometimes, we've identified bad processes and needed to update documentation before we can implement them.

UiPath has allowed our employees to focus more on servicing our members rather than being bogged down by mundane tasks. In the last year, we have saved about 6,500 hours for our users, equating to the time of two full-time employees.

With UiPath, we've saved costs, increased productivity, and reduced stress on our employees. It has saved our employees time. They're thinking more about their processes instead of just doing what they're told. It places more onus on employee creativity.

I primarily work with task capture, which has been valuable. We have created a template for ourselves and reused it for all these processes. Other departments also use it for their procedures, even if the process is not automated.

We struggle to demo our processes. For whatever reason, we can't get the bot to run so that someone can watch it simultaneously. We press the button, and it shows that it's done rather than showing how the bot works. 

We started using UiPath with a partner two years ago and transitioned to handling everything in-house last year.

The stability of UiPath is good. We do not encounter issues with logging in or frequent service failures.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. Their customer service is good. They are always willing to help us and address our concerns. 

Positive

We initially used a UiPath partner but have since moved operations in-house. Our in-house experience has been better.

We have seen a return on investment. The 6,500 hundred hours we saved using UiPath translates to a savings of about $56,000 per year.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

We use UiPath to build attended and unattended automated processes for public and private sector clients. I try to make the processes as slim as possible so that they aren't as dependent on external applications. We have an abundance of documentation, and the goal is to have very little overhead. 

All the businesses where we've deployed UiPath were pleased with the solution. They saw immediate benefits to the bottom line, and employees were no longer stuck doing repetitive stuff. Organizations typically start realizing the benefits in the first month.

UiPath has reduced human error. It also offers visibility that helps build rapport between contractors like me and my clients in the federal government or other process owners we're working with. The solution cuts the costs associated with digital transformation. The more you want to digitally transform your business, the more expensive it will be. With UiPath, that means the solution needs to use more of the product offerings, like IDP, the AI panel, and other stuff like that. But even with the minimal architecture, it will still cost at least a little bit.

UiPath significantly frees up employee time. On average, I estimate it saves between 50 to 100 hours per automation annually. The amount of money saved offsets the cost of licensing because you're saving time and reducing headaches. 

I like UiPath's Orchestrator. It's the core piece.  Automations are relatively easy to build. There is a learning curve initially, but I would rate it seven out of 10 for ease of building automation. The end-to-end automation is critical. It helps us develop a strategy where everyone has their things automated, saving time throughout the organization. The UiPath community forums are a helpful resource where you can contribute and get answers. 

I think UiPath's documentation for new features is a bit incomplete at times. 

I have used UiPath for around four years.

The stability depends on the VM you're running UiPath on, so that's not even really UiPath at that point.

UiPath prides itself on being very scalable. The unattended RPAs make it easy to scale. If you need to add more bots to run more processes, you can just have your IT department provision a new VM and buy more unattended licenses. 

I rate UiPath support five out of 10. Sometimes, UiPath support is like a lottery. They have many intelligent people who can get you what you need, but it depends on whether the person you're assigned knows the solution. It might be that they have so many customers and not enough staff. The ticket response times can be pretty slow.

Neutral

Previously, I used Power Automate mainly for its API integration and cloud workflows. I wasn't using it as an RPA solution. 

Due to the ridiculous nature of the government and the premium associated with adopting newer things, we can only do attended bot deployment right now. That means we publish new packages, send them via email, and deploy them on their type of system. In any other RPA shop, we would publish to Orchestrator and manage the process from there. The deployment is straightforward once you know what you're doing, but we need to maintain some oversight on the beginners to ensure they publish the processes correctly.  

I would like to see a GitLab model. In a CI/CD pipeline, it runs a series of tests after every commit to ensure that everything's functioning. It doesn't require maintenance so long as the engine keeps running, but we review the processes annually to see if there are any pain points or if anything needs optimization. 

There's an ROI despite the high cost. We save time, and many of the processes are much more robust than they could be if they were performed manually. UiPath can process an Excel file with thousands of rows. Human employees can do that by themselves, but bots can do the job so much faster. 

I think UiPath costs too much. They know they're top dogs, and that's fine, but I would never recommend them for anything other than a large enterprise or the federal government. There are development costs and unattended bot licenses are more expensive. UiPath has additional apps you can purchase that all have separate costs. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

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. 

The primary UiPath use cases are document processing and using automation solutions to eliminate repetitive tasks in administrative data entry. 

Automation has helped our CoE understand the administrative structure and returns. It's a promising tool. We've already seen returns on the automation side, and we're beginning to explore GenAI. It helped us free up staff by taking them off repetitive tasks and transferring their focus to more important tasks. 

The automation and the significant return on investment it provides are valuable.

I want more flexibility in licensing and how we can use AI units. 

UiPath seems pretty solid.

UiPath has grown with us. We started on-premises and switched to the cloud, giving us greater flexibility. 

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath support is pretty good. It's adequate when needed. Fortunately, they have UiPath Academy and other information out there, so you don't need to use it often. 

Positive

We were using ABBYY, but I can't compare the two solutions because I joined when we were transitioning to UiPath, so I don't have much experience. 

UiPath provides a significant ROI in saving time and improving the employee experience.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.