UiPath Platform Reviews

My role is Solution Architect and Delivery Lead. We are exploring multiple use cases across different domains including banking, manufacturing, and insurance. Recently, we have been exploring manufacturing use cases, invoice dispute finding, three-way matching, and HR onboarding. We are also trying to automate the end-to-end underwriting flow in insurance.

When discussing the UiPath Platform components, we use Robot, Studio, and Orchestrator by default. We are extensively using Document Understanding for data extractions. For Agentic Automation, we use the Agent Builder and Maestro for Orchestration. We have implemented UiPath Insights at one of the largest banks in Malaysia, which is very useful for understanding transaction and bot status insights. This helps in making decisions based on operational and transaction data insights. The Agentic solution is our AI solution, where Document Understanding uses an AI ML model. For Agentic Automation, we integrate with Large Language Models to achieve end-to-end automation.

UiPath Platform is one of the top leaders. When developers are asked which tool is convenient for RPA development, they choose UiPath Platform. It provides extensive development options and is very convenient from a developer perspective. In terms of low-code, no-code capabilities, it competes with Power Platform and Automation Anywhere. The main area for improvement is pricing, as people are moving towards Power Platform due to license pricing considerations.

Regarding technical support, I would rate it 6 or 6.5. Previously, they provided excellent support, but now the support quality varies based on the client's license tier. Clients with fewer licenses receive support only through email. For critical errors, we may receive an initial email response within two to three hours requesting basic information, but resolution can take one to two days. This is a significant change from their earlier approach.

I have been using the solution for five to six years.

In terms of stability, I would rate it 7.5 out of 10.

The scalability rates at eight out of 10. We can expand whenever required. It is best suited for medium-scale to large-scale companies. Due to pricing considerations, especially in India, low-scale companies often prefer Power Automate.

By default, we implement both attended and unattended options. UiPath Platform is best described as a low-code, no-code platform. The Agentic Automation is completely no-code when creating agents. For robot development, it provides extensive options with low-code capabilities. For complex Excel automations or other automations, UiPath Platform offers numerous options compared to Power Automate. We can easily integrate VB code for string manipulations and complex Excel automations. The platform excels in debugging and selector fine-tuning for web automation or UI automation compared to Power Automate. We are a UiPath Platform partner. Overall rating: 7.5 out of 10.

I started with UiPath Platform for evaluation purposes and found it to be effective. We are now using it for processes and Intelligent Document Processing (IDP). These are the two main use cases that I have implemented using UiPath Platform. There are several different scenarios we can implement, and I have used it for both RPA and IDP.

I have used both attended and unattended automation options. The majority of my processes are unattended, but I have developed attended processes as well.

UiPath Platform is a low code solution. It offers a wide variety of activities and integrations with multiple applications, including CRM tools. At the same time, it provides us the flexibility to write our own custom code using features like Invoke Code or languages such as VBA and Python. This means we have the freedom to create our own code while also benefiting from a low code platform that allows us to build solutions based on existing activities.

One of the great things about UiPath Platform is its rapid evolution. This keeps people interested, especially when news breaks that new features are rolling out. Organizations become curious about potential use cases and how they can implement these updates. It’s impressive that they invest so much in improvement because it helps us enhance our offerings to business teams. With a single tool that encompasses a variety of functionalities, we can seamlessly integrate and address multiple problems simultaneously.

UiPath Platform is evolving and continuously adding new features. When I started, UiPath Platform was straightforward and easy to learn, even easy to implement because every function or predefined action, called an activity, was self-cleared and self-explanatory regarding its function, input, output format, and capabilities. They are currently implementing AI in every single product of theirs.

It is currently becoming somewhat complicated because AI is good, but too much of everything might spoil the dish. They are trying to evolve or include AI features everywhere, which could be challenging because I am not able to find proper use cases for each product having AI. Until we have specific use cases, we would not be able to use it effectively, and this also complicates the development and environment. This is one concern I have currently, though they might have other perspectives while developing this. My personal view is that involving AI in every product might be premature until we find actual use cases.

The AI integration is promising. We can utilize AI across various applications. We have autopilot functions, auto-healing capabilities, and now they’ve introduced IXP, which stands for Intelligent Access and Processing using AI. Additionally, we have communication mining for large language models (LLMs), which is a significant advancement. While it's good that we are leveraging AI to tackle problems, I do have concerns about relying too heavily on AI without fully understanding its actual usage. There’s a trend to incorporate AI into everything, even basic RPA tasks. That’s something to keep in mind.

My primary concern is related to the lack of clear use cases for AI technologies. I am a fan of AI and actively use it, but without proper use cases, its applications can seem unproductive. As we introduce these tools, their complexity tends to increase, and without defined scenarios for implementation, it becomes challenging to adapt to the technology effectively. Currently, new features are being rolled out, but we lack comprehensive insights into how to set them up and utilize them effectively. It would be helpful to understand the specific scenarios where we can apply these tools. If I had access to relevant use cases, I would be able to leverage AL tools more effectively. When new products are offered, it's essential that the providers also include use cases, training, and documentation to fill this information gap.

I have been using UiPath Platform for around seven to eight years.

The downtime for UiPath Platform is very minimal. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

For bugs, I would give a rating of around eight and a half. While they may not have many bugs, there could be better documentation. They offer a wide range of features, so having proper documentation and clear configurations is very important. 

Scalability is good for UiPath Platform. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

My organization works only on RPA solutions, so about 80% to 90% people are working with UiPath Platform. The client we are working with has a very small team of two to three developers.

Initially, their support was great, but now, since they are catering to a larger number of customers, I learned that they have different support plans. This means that support can be provided via email or phone, depending on the support plan you purchase from them. For resolving any issues, I believe it would be more effective to discuss matters over a call rather than through emails.

I am uncertain if they are fully aware of how this shift has affected their support quality. In the past, it seemed there were no different support plans, but now there are. I'm not sure about the cost differences either, but I would prefer comprehensive support for those who are paying for it.

There are instances where I encounter configuration issues that aren't well documented or where I face understanding gaps. Coming from a technical background, I often find that certain configurations need to be handled by the infrastructure team. In those situations, getting assistance from the support team would be much easier if we could arrange a call rather than relying on email exchanges.

Positive

With cloud infrastructure, they manage the entire application environment themselves. In contrast, on-premises setups are more complex, as we need to deploy multiple applications that require integration. This approach also comes with certain limitations, particularly regarding the use of large language models (LLMs) and AI technologies. Therefore, deploying solutions on the cloud is generally easier compared to managing them on-premises, which can be a bit more challenging.

I have been using their cloud solution for the last four to five years, but the Orchestrator is on-premises.

In terms of maintenance, an RPA solution requires ongoing maintenance, especially when applications are updated, formatting changes, or processes are modified. Various factors can necessitate upgrading or maintaining RPA systems. However, if there are no external impacts on the process, inputs, or outputs, the system can run smoothly for an extended period—possibly for a year or more—without issues or significant maintenance. Dependent applications, such as third-party applications, which are outside the control of RPA, can impact the process. Changes or updates to these external applications can indeed impact the overall process.

I'm not heavily involved in pricing, but I know that license prices are continuously increasing. The cost often depends on the organization and the number of licenses purchased, with larger purchases generally resulting in lower costs. This can lead to savings on extra expenses, especially since providers are now offering solutions as a service. For smaller organizations that may not have the infrastructure to support complex setups, using tools directly on UiPath Cloud can be a viable option. This strategic approach seems to be well thought out by the providers.

My experience with various tools leads me to believe that UiPath is significantly ahead of its competitors. They invest a lot of resources into continuously evolving and upgrading their products, especially with the incorporation of AI technology, which is a hot topic right now.

However, it's important to note that your choice of tools depends on your specific needs. For basic Robotic Process Automation (RPA), there are multiple vendors available that may offer more affordable options, including some open-source tools in the market.

When it comes to Intelligent Document Processing (IDP), there are also numerous vendors to consider. Ultimately, what matters most is your priorities and requirements. UiPath stands out in the market due to its comprehensive suite of solutions, which includes RPA, testing tools, IDP tools, Intelligent Process Automation (IPA), process mining tools, and communication mining tools. This wide range of offerings can greatly aid organizations in their digital transformation journeys. Therefore, UiPath is a leading choice for RPA products.

UiPath Insights is a valuable feature. Recently, they introduced UiPath Maestro, which I believe is focused on BPMN processes. For analytics, there are tools for communication mining and process mining. However, I haven't worked with any specific analytics tools yet. While UiPath does provide various insights, I wouldn't say there’s a dedicated analytics tool that I've used.

I would recommend it depending on the use case. If you are looking for an enterprise-level or full end-to-end solution for your automation journey, you should consider UiPath Platform. However, if you only need individual functionality like Robotic Process Automation (RPA), you can choose any other RPA vendor. If you have a significant pipeline of tasks to automate or a variety of processes that require automation, UiPath Platform is an excellent option. It provides robust integration capabilities and can handle multiple use cases. Conversely, if the focus is on a specific problem and there are budget constraints, opting for another vendor might be more suitable.

I would rate UiPath Platform an eight out of ten.

My current use cases for the UiPath Platform include web development, web automation, desktop automations, and using document understanding, along with PDF automation using document understanding.

The most favorite feature in the UiPath Platform is the document understanding, and I appreciate the ability to automate the web part when applications do not have API access. The document understanding feature is based on ML technology, which extracts fields from a PDF document even when they are semi-structured or unstructured, based on the training models.

I use the UiPath Platform overall, including UiPath Studio and everything associated with it. Knowledge without scripting helps my colleagues who do not have any experience with scripting, as the UiPath Platform allows basic automation without requiring such knowledge. For some complex automations, we can integrate with VBScript and Python scripts if necessary, however, initial automation does not require in-depth programming knowledge.

There is scope for improvement in the UiPath Platform, particularly with the Web Studio feature that has been launched recently. They could enhance the object repository feature, which allows maintaining selectors externally, as there are challenges associated with changes in selectors that require updating the library and the version in the code. The Web Studio works when there are APIs involved, but it could be made more user-friendly and developer-friendly. It currently works only in cases where it is not dependent on a machine.

My total experience with the UiPath Platform is around 4.5 years.

Crashing from the tool end is very rare; only during upgrades might some issues arise. Overall, the occurrence is minimal. Proper exception handling in the code also ensures a low exception rate.

For technical support, I would rate it around eight or seven out of ten, mostly leaning towards seven plus. Most of the time, when we reach out, we have calls with the UiPath team, and we usually end up finding the solution or alternative methods.

Positive

I have used Power Automate as well. In Power Automate, it's easy to integrate with all Microsoft applications because it has direct integrations where all you need to do is change the URLs and authentication part, making it very simple to integrate with SharePoint or any Microsoft product. I also have basic insights into Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment using the UiPath Platform was actually easy. Everything is organized in UiPath, and there is a forum available for support where users can post questions and get replies. The courses are also well-structured, making it easy for beginners to understand.

I took around two weeks to learn the basics of UiPath automation since I come from a CSE background.

The number of people required for this type of deployment depends on the timelines and project length. A basic UiPath bot would typically require one person for development.

I don't have any insights into the licensing at the enterprise level.

When considering alternatives to the UiPath Platform, options we looked into include any scripting language or similar solutions.

I have used the AI integration features of the UiPath Platform, specifically the integration concept with the LLM model where we provide a prompt to get results that we extract and send over email. This is typically used to analyze resumes for our HR team, which receives numerous resumes. Using the AI integration concept in the UiPath Platform, we read resumes uploaded to the LLM model, extract relevant data, and filter out the necessary resumes. 

I rate the UiPath Platform a nine out of ten, based on my experience compared to Power Automate and basic knowledge of Automation Anywhere. I've found UiPath to be well-organized and well-structured for beginners.

Currently, our automation work with UiPath primarily revolves around financial processes, such as accounts receivable work and tax deduction management. We are exploring generative AI, but have not developed any AI use cases for UiPath yet. We prioritize our automation use cases based on RoI and process complexity.

With UiPath, we have saved time and cut costs. For example, one process previously took several people six or seven hours, but we've reduced it to a four-minute process. This allows us to shift our teams to more analytical, value-added work instead of repetitive transactional tasks. 

UiPath's learning modules have been a massive help in training our employees. The Orchestrator also helps us schedule, deploy, and monitor jobs.

We've engaged employees through meetings at the enterprise and department levels. Our manager has quarterly meetings with employees in different areas of the business to get them up to speed on what's happening in automation.

UiPath could have more robust, built-in auditing and logging. Currently, you need to build log messages into your automation to capture what's happening. 

I have been using UiPath for three years.

We haven't really had any trouble with stability. It has been very well.

I was able to scale up very easily, as we recently stood up eight more robots. Setting everything up and gaining access took about five days, and we received a lot of support from UiPath for licensing and key management.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. We have had a good experience. Our technical account manager is very responsive, and the ticketing system that UiPath uses is quite successful. We received answers to our questions promptly, and overall, it has been a positive experience.

Positive

We previously used a competitor, Automation Anywhere.

We weren't heavily involved with deploying UiPath, but it seemed straightforward.

UiPath professional services managed the deployment and helped us convert about 40 automations. 

We've saved thousands of hours using UiPath and freed employees to focus on more value-added work.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We're a food ingredient distribution company that receives documents on ingredients' nutrition, allergens, microbial testing, etc.  We primarily use UiPath to process these documents. It was our proof of concept for using the system initially, and we'll expand it to process invoices and other related use cases.

We operate using an enterprise operating system. It's not a technological thing. It's how you determine project priorities. Soon, we'll set up process mining. Then, the IT team and technology group will decide what we do. Right now, the business units effectively vote on the next quarter's priorities. 

We're a high-tenure organization. The average tenure is 15 years, so we want to avoid growing our headcount. We're continuously growing by 10 to 15 percent annually, so we've had to add enough staff to process the documents. Our primary concern was to stop the increase in staff. Even after we added staff, we were falling behind because they were much slower at processing those documents. 

We get documents from our suppliers and, as a distributor, send them to our customers. If the supplier hasn't sent them, we need to hound them. We were falling behind on our backlog of 250,000 documents. UiPath enabled us to avoid adding more employees. Automation was the way to go. We haven't added any more headcount, and the backlog is going down, but it isn't as much as we had hoped.

The automation has allowed us to provide customers with better-quality documents faster. It has also given employees more time to locate the documents we don't have, freeing them from mundane tasks. It's freed them from the work of typing data on a form into an ERP system. 

We are talking about using it for our environmental and social governance initiatives. We're considering bringing together some of those pieces through automation to track our energy usage or what we've spent on some of the other bits and pieces and have a better ESG profile.

I find the intelligent document processing features extremely interesting. They're fun and represent an actual practical use of AI. There are so many impractical ways to use AI, but this offers a tangible ROI, and you can see its benefits directly. 

There are small issues, such as the Action Center not auto-refreshing. The user has to keep clicking "refresh." It's minor, but if you're waiting for something in your queue, you don't want to sit there and keep clicking. Logging could be improved, and there are a few connectors where I would like to see enhancements, but nothing major.

We started using UiPath in January of this year, so we've used it for less than a year.

The solution is solid, and I've had no issues with stability. The one issue encountered was due to a version change, where the changes in that version were unexpected.

The solution is great for scalability, and we can always add more bots as needed. We haven’t found it limiting at all.

Our experience with UiPath support has been mixed. The responses take a little long, which isn't bad when we only need a question answered. However, our system went down twice, and it took four to eight hours to get our first response from support. If I submit a ticket at 2 pm, I might not get a response until 10 pm. That's still relatively soon, but I might not be paying attention that late at night or be available to respond. 

Positive

We did not use a different solution for document processing before this.

The initial setup was pretty easy and straightforward. It didn’t take much time to get UiPath running.

We implemented the solution in-house ourselves. We do have a partner, Empower dot AI, which we plan to work with on future projects.

We are probably just starting to see a positive dollar ROI versus what we spent implementing UiPath. We only started this in January, and it was fully implemented by late June or early July. Hence, we are still in the infancy phase of experiencing ROI.

UiPath's pricing is reasonable. The model of charging per AI unit makes sense, and the licensing for Action Center and other parts is good. The cost does not seem excessive.

We use UiPath across departments, including HR, IT, procurement, and the supply chain. One use case is hiring and other simple HR-related tasks. We also automate complex processes, like using Document Understanding and machine learning to extract vendor contract information and input it into our procurement system. 

Many applications don't have built-in APIs, and some repetitive processes require a lot of staff to perform. We try to identify those processes and automate them. At the end of the day, it's about how quickly a particular process can be implemented, what kind of ROI we can realize, and the speed of completing the process. 

These processes take forever if you're doing it manually. For example, let's take something as simple as hiring. Evaluating a candidate probably takes 30 to 45 minutes to complete all the steps, and large organizations are constantly hiring. Another challenge is the number of staff you have. By automating using robots, you can reduce the number of people you need to hire and complete the work much faster. It also helps resolve turnover. You can run the automation 24/7, and robots don't take vacations, so things happen faster. 

Another benefit is SLA compliance. We have SLAs to meet for data, and we need to complete some tasks within 48 or 72 hours. Automation helps us meet those targets by completing jobs faster. UiPath frees staff to work on other tasks. Just one process that we use for hiring has easily freed two or three people. Now, they're doing tasks that require human intelligence and knowledge. 

Any solution, such as Power Automate, can do traditional RPA functions, but UiPath's Document Understanding sets it apart. The document understanding feature can handle a significant amount of handwritten notes and efficiently extract information. While there is a human-in-the-loop component for validation, it is still faster than manually extracting information.

My biggest problem is that UiPath is growing so fast and adding integration with so many different products that it's hard to keep up. The COEs at various companies and our developers aren't able to keep pace with what's happening. It's a good problem to have. I'm not complaining, but there are so many features and little time for developers to learn and implement them. 

If you need something new like a CICD pipeline or somebody for a test suite or to work with Document Understanding, you can't use our existing staff because they don't have the skills. Now, I need to go out and hire more people. I need to reduce the company's size to save money but also spend more to hire. 

I have used UiPath for about seven years.

We have not encountered any stability issues with UiPath. The cloud-based deployment has been stable, and we have not experienced any unexpected robot shutdowns. Issues tend to arise from other SaaS applications rather than UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale effectively as our organization grows. Scaling with UiPath has been easy and efficient.

The customer service has always been good. However, it takes longer to reach support now than it did four to five years ago, this can be attributed to their increased customer base.

Positive

At my current organization, we didn't use a different solution before UiPath. However, I have previous experience with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup was straightforward. Despite using a partner, we managed most of the work in-house due to my previous experience with UiPath.

We worked with a partner for the implementation. Although the partner helped, we managed most of the work ourselves to tailor the solution to our needs.

When you start a program, it takes a while to reach the point where you achieve an ROI. Still, if you're not seeing an ROI with UiPath by the second year, you're doing it wrong. We are doing that right now. 

We've found a lot of processes working across different teams and departments. We spoke to the leads of various COEs and found processes that would realize the highest ROI or SLA compliance. A department might have only one or two procurement processes, but they are sizeable. Automating those will help you achieve an ROI faster.

UiPath isn't cheap, but it's priced competitively with other automation solutions, and it offers more resources.

I was not part of the organization during the evaluation phase, but I know they chose UiPath because it was easier to set up with comparable costs to other solutions, more resources available, and robust training material for basic RPA functions. It's easier to train people to perform basic RPA functions.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

We are considering implementing AI as we are a healthcare staffing company in the education sector. Our use case focuses on processing a large number of emails and resumes. We aim to mine resumes to determine which are best for rapid and successful placements. On the communication side, we wish to perform sentiment analysis to assess how well our salespeople respond to clients.

We want to mine, structure, and analyze data using data science methods. We also hope to use generative AI and large language models to perform some of the data analysis, saving us lots of time. My company tripled in size in the last three years, so we have a lot more people, but the backend operations haven't grown at the same pace as the number of salespeople. 

Automation helps us with operational and analytical work because we lack enough talent for that. By using AI, we can do the same amount of work without hiring more people, so we save money and improve productivity. Generative AI is part of our discussion. We had to decide whether to develop our own model or use existing software like UiPath to get things done faster and easier.

We have about 15,000 consultants working for us during the school year, and to fill those positions, we may need to interview five times that many. A lot of them might drop out by the time school starts. Using UiPath and AI, we can speed up processing and onboarding because that might be why people quit. They might leave for another job if we don't onboard them fast enough. We can save more candidates and prevent revenue loss from a potential placement by making the processing time faster.

After implementing UiPath, we automated many manual tasks. We save a lot of time, and those people who used to do manual work are doing more knowledge work. A lot of them now see what bots can do, so they're more open to the idea of developing bots. That set the stage for them to trust AI-powered bots in the future. 

The most valuable featire is the whole automation suite that helps develop automation processes. In the future, we might further explore Communications Mining and Process Mining. 

There's a push for cloud-based operations, but I prefer to develop things on the desktop. I'd appreciate the ability to develop things on the desktop and roll them out concurrently on the cloud. 

My company has used UiPath for about two years, but I've used it for about a year.

UiPath is very stable.

UiPath has kept up with our growth. However, there's a limitation with licensing.

I previously used Blue Prism in a different company. However, for the current company, they had no prior automation solution.

Our IT support company, Coretelligence's parent company, helped with the initial implementation. There were renewal delays prompting a desire to work directly with UiPath.

From a cost-saving perspective, we are seeing a lot of returns, including internal staffing cost savings and HR bot efficiencies.

UiPath's licensing could be cheaper and more dynamic. The licensing can sometimes feel high, especially for smaller companies, but generally, the pricing is reasonable when considering the time saved and corresponding costs.

I wasn't the decision maker, but my CFO considered industry leaders and attended the Forward Conference. He was impressed and chose UiPath. One thing that he liked was that it was easy to learn and use. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. I enjoy working with it, and it seems to have everything we need. They're adding new features at a reasonable rate while not deprecating old stuff too fast. It's a smooth transition from classic to modern activities.

Our use case involves using the UiPath Platform to automate processes for customers, as I work with different customers. We use it to automate repetitive tasks, such as daily business team tasks that typically take one to two hours.

We have not utilized the AI integration features yet but plan to implement them with the latest version next year. 

We use both attended and unattended automation options in the UiPath Platform. These options have helped in meeting our diverse business needs because before, the business was using manual processes to do tasks, and with attended and unattended automation, they save significant time. We primarily use unattended automation, with customers using it 90% of the time.

The UiPath Platform has improved organizations by saving significant time and money, with approximately 50% return on investment, though this varies by customer.

The analytics in the UiPath Platform help in making decisions, as I am an architect who builds the platform for customers and helps the business team choose which processes will be automated. 

They have free training and it is very easy to use. They provide training through their platform or through partner-led training sessions. Training with a partner in the UiPath Platform takes three days to introduce the platform, while self-paced training takes approximately one to one and a half months. 

In the UiPath Platform, reporting is an area that has room for improvement. I would like to improve reporting by having more detailed information, including logs and robot logs.

I have been using the UiPath Platform for nine years.

The stability of the UiPath Platform is excellent, rating a ten out of ten.

The scalability of the UiPath Platform rates a ten out of ten.

The number of users varies by customer, with one customer having 100 users and another having 200 users. In my organization, I work alone with the UiPath Platform as the architect and process builder, though we have a developer.

The technical support of the UiPath Platform is very active and excellent, deserving a rating of ten out of ten.

Positive

The deployment can be either on-premise or cloud-based, depending on customer preferences. I have deployed it on-premises for nine years. For me, it's easy, but it takes time to deploy it.

A complex architecture can take two to three weeks. A simple architecture can take a few days.

The solution requires minimal maintenance, with major updates annually and minor updates every two months.

The UiPath Platform has saved approximately 50%, though this depends on the customers, with an average 50% return on investment.

It's expensive.

Comparing the UiPath Platform with other automation tools such as Blue Prism, UiPath is significantly better. Power Automate works only with Windows Microsoft products, which is limiting, but the UiPath Platform is the best for automation. Though it is expensive, it remains the superior choice.

I would recommend the UiPath Platform to other users because it is very robust, easy to use, and offers abundant information on the internet along with free training. 

I would rate the UiPath Platform a ten out of ten.