UiPath Platform Reviews

We use UiPath for claims processing, enrollment, and interpreting what's on documents, and then we use the data that's in them for different purposes. I'm sure there are many other use cases. We're still brainstorming and giving our leaders some ideas. Frontline employees also have process improvement ideas.

UiPath has improved efficiency, turnaround time, and accuracy while eliminating repetitive tasks. 

With generative AI, we can take on even more complex tasks. We've seen a return in claims and enrollment, which has freed up time and resources. There are lots of other possibilities. Our frontline people have seen how it can supplement and focus on more important tasks, and business leaders like seeing the resources freed for various reasons. The growth potential is immense, and we're only in the early stages. 

UiPath is a low-code solution that allows us to build automations fairly quickly and see the results promptly.

Overall, UiPath is relatively straightforward, but there are opportunities to simplify activities. Sometimes, I've hit roadblocks while developing RPA jobs and found it difficult to find the answer. I can usually resolve a problem through a support ticket or an online search. 

We have used UiPath for about a year and a half.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath support is good, but sometimes they give generic users. Maybe I need to take the initiative and give a little more information and context

There has been a return on investment, though I'm unsure of the specific amount. We've already saved time and thousands of dollars.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

I use UiPath to automate repetitive tasks within our organization. It helps us deploy processes without human intervention for some tasks.

UiPath has helped my organization, especially in the banking industry, by automating processes, reducing manual work, and saving costs. These improvements enhance process efficiency, reduce stress, and improve end-to-end efficiency.

The Studio is a valuable feature because it allows us to automate processes independently. It enables us to configure and manage everything through a web application called Orchestrator, which is particularly helpful for large organizations.

The documentation related to new releases needs improvement. It should provide a clear understanding of what was present in the old release, what's new, and how it affects users.

I have been using UiPath for around three years.

UiPath's stability is satisfactory. No product offers one hundred percent accuracy, but UiPath performs well overall.

The solution is very scalable. I would rate it eight out of ten for scalability.

Technical support comes primarily from engaging in UiPath's forum, where people share insights. I find the community engagement to be more helpful than direct product support.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment doesn't take much time once the development and testing phases are completed.

The implementation of UiPath saves a significant amount of money and reduces manual errors, improving overall performance.

The pricing and licensing of UiPath are expensive. I rate it ten out of ten in terms of expense.

I recommend using this automation tool based on the specific needs of the industry or organization.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

My company delivers projects to clients based on their requirements. We use the tool for web and UI automation.

UiPath reduces human error. If you implement the correct logic and exception handling in your code, it's seldom wrong. The solution saves time compared to other tools, especially when you are trying to automate something that's complicated. It simplifies complex processes and makes my work easier. 

I like the Orchestrator and the AI Center. The AI Center has many pre-trained models you can adapt to your requirements. You can train your AI or upload your own model as well. You can use the AI to extract the information from structured or unstructured documents.

UiPath is easy to use and implement. The tool has so many capabilities that we can use without using any code. Everything is there, and it's a low-code solution. We only need to drag and drop the elements and apply the logic.

The UiPath community is helpful. Most of the questions have already been answered on the forum, and you can easily solve your issues there. I've done the UiPath Academy courses. I took the fundamental course and the advanced developer course. I also received an associate developer certification. You can develop a complete understanding of the tool and its capabilities using the Academy. 

UiPath's processing speed is a little slow. That's its only drawback compared to other tools. 

I have used UiPath for about two years.

UiPath is highly stable. 

I have used Microsoft Power Automate and OpenRPA. I believe UiPath is the best because of its capabilities, but I also think Power Automate is nice. Power Automate has robust integration with Microsoft platforms. That's one thing I like about it. 

I found the initial deployment to be difficult, but it became easier once I gained some experience. UiPath doesn't require any maintenance unless there are changes on the website that cause the bot to not work properly. You can find the issue in the error log. 

UiPath is a costly solution. Many of the clients choose another solution after hearing the price. 

I rate UiPath ten out of ten. UiPath is the best tool on the market, but the licensing cost is high and many clients don't have the budget. They prefer other tools like Power Automate, OpenRPA, and Automation Anywhere and all that. Otherwise, it's a great product with more capabilities than the other tools.

I am a consultant working on RPA solutions in general. UiPath is one of the solutions that I am using.

The use cases depend on the clients. I have done automation of sending mail with invoices in it. We have used it for analyzing PDF documents, getting information out of these documents, preparing in three different languages depending on the client, and sending invoices by email.

We are also checking VAT numbers on the EU side to validate the client's VAT numbers and related data. We have automated the generation of reports out of SAP for two different managers and teams. We have also automated including specific signature images within PDF documents and sending them to the related service or email address.

We have mainly used UiPath to focus on processes related to the finance department. The targeted processes are the ones that are the most repeatable and require a lot of effort but there is no real focus and attention from the user. Because of its repeatable nature, the risk is that users do not pay attention to the process itself and make mistakes.

Generally, we do not implement end-to-end automation. The idea is not to automate an end-to-end process but to automate a part of the process that takes a lot of time and resources. That is the focus point, so it is not a matter of having an end-to-end process implemented. It may occur, but often, it is a part of the process where the focus needs to be reliability or time and resource consumption.

The benefit for our clients is time and reliability. They quite often see the benefits in terms of the reliability of executing the process, even reporting mistakes or errors that happen during the execution of the process. That is something quite valuable for them.

Usually, it takes our clients at least one month to realize the benefits. If the processes are executed on a daily basis, then it is quite fast, but there are processes that are triggered every month or every quarter. In that case, it will take at least a month or a quarter to see the benefits. Once it is executed, there is quite an immediate benefit. On the other hand, it takes time to analyze the process because often processes or procedures that are written are not in sync with what is executed by the user. We have to modify them. Often, by questioning the end user, you end up finding the shortcuts and implementing them, so the analysis takes more time, and the implementation takes less time.

UiPath reduces human error. That is one of the main reasons why automation is done for customers. Two main reasons for automation are reliability and resource availability. 

UiPath saves time for our customers, but it is hard to know how much time it has saved because it varies from process to process. For example, the process of validating the VAT numbers on the EU website used to take two or three resources every quarter, whereas now, it is reduced to less than half an hour. These time savings are valuable, but the added value is reliability.

UiPath has not had a lot of impact on the digital transformation because the processes that are requested to be automated are already digital. The reason for automation is to speed up the process or make it more reliable. There is no real impact on the digitization of processes.

In terms of the reduction in the on-premises footprint, I am not always aware of the eventual use of the processes that I am implementing for the clients with the bots. I see that some of the bots are not used anymore because they have their own application that includes a big part of what has been automated on their side. It depends on the way they use it and how often they use it because I have bots that are running every day, and I also have bots that are running once a quarter. The ones that are running every quarter are harder to evaluate because people are not always able to see the resources released from executing those processes. Because they are executed every quarter, they are usually not measured. Our clients generally go for automation for reliability.

Specifically in the recent versions, the ability to change the interface is valuable. One of my clients had to upgrade the SAP version and move to a web-based UI. This was handled by isolating the UI interaction within the library for the targeted SAP on the client side. I upgraded that library to handle the web-based, and the bots worked fine after that without modifying anything in them. The usage of libraries is very important for me because it helps a lot in this kind of upgrade, specifically because SAP is used across the company. It is impacting a lot of different businesses within the company.

It is quite intuitive and fully handled by a visual interface. It is no big deal for me. I have been a developer in the past, and I have used Visual Basic and C#. If I need to specify something exceptional, it can be done. It is not a big deal. For me, it is very easy. There is a competitor with an open-source solution called OpenRPA, but for me, UiPath is far better and more intuitive.

There should be the ability to customize the building blocks instead of having to specify everything in every step. We should be able to combine these building blocks to make specific processes faster.

There should also be some kind of templates, similar to Power Automate. Power Automate provides templates for a specific context.

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

I am absolutely satisfied with its stability.

I did not have to worry about it so much because usually, my clients want to take control of their bots. They want to execute it when they want, so I have had no experience with the scalability of UiPath. 

I have not contacted their support. When I am developing, I try to make a bot quite stable. I am aware of what is happening and what it is doing, and I can notify people with logs or names of different events that are occurring during the process execution. I know exactly what is happening and where. It is quite easy and fast to diagnose and fix if there is an issue, but it is not often that I have to intervene in production. If a process is designed correctly and safely, not much intervention is required. Clients look for this kind of stability because that will save the time that they will have to spend fixing things in the production environment.

They have a UiPath Community, but I have not used it often. If there is something blocking, I go over there, but generally, I find the solution to the issues through my colleagues.

It has always been on-premises. The setup is quite straightforward. If there is some kind of Orchestrator to be installed, it is more difficult, and it takes more time. Usually, they want to have someone internally to handle the Orchestrator. I am more focused on the bots and the triggers for these bots to be executed. I am not that often involved in the implementation of the infrastructure of UiPath for the operational side.

Bot development duration varies. It depends on the process, but it can take a few weeks to several months. I have bots that were developed in two or three weeks, and I also have bots that took at least six months because they were quite heavy and complex. Generally, it does not take longer than that because then it will not be as valuable to the clients. If it takes more than six months, it is better to have it developed in their own software.

Bot deployment is quite straightforward for most of my clients because, during development time, I take care of environment parameters. So, deployment is quite straightforward. It is a matter of deploying and pressing a button to have the package deployed. We then set parameters in config files, but it does not take a long time to have it deployed.

Bots usually do not require any maintenance, but if the source of data has been upgraded or modified or the UI has been modified, they might require some maintenance. Usually, once the process is running and every source is stable, there is no need for maintenance. When the data source changes or the infrastructure changes, such as the main server being moved or renamed, then there is a risk over there, but it is not a big deal to adapt.

Generally, two or three people might have to investigate the cause of the issue. If the issue is inside the bot, it is not a problem. One person is enough. If it is related to external data sources or infrastructure, it may take two or three people depending on the segmentation of the clients' people in their departments and services.

I do not know about the exact price because I am not selling anything. I propose several solutions to the clients, and the client does choose one of them. If UiPath is chosen, they contact the official reseller in the country. In one case, I had the prices in front of me, and it was not expensive for the service it was providing.

I would recommend it depending on the needs. UiPath can do a lot of things, and I have covered only 20% of UiPath functionality. Based on my experience and the needs that I had so far, UiPath has been quite valuable.

I would advise defining your use cases. That is the rule for everything. Once you have the use cases analyzed, you can specify what is needed, how you would do it, and what is the best solution to have it implemented. One thing that I am doing is that I am mixing solutions, where, for example, UiPath interacts with Python processes that I have developed. Python processes provide information in files. Web scraping is not difficult in UiPath, but it is quite heavy. In Python, it is faster to develop and use than with UiPath. It also depends on the number of iterations and resources available to execute it. It is a matter of the quality of a particular functionality in UiPath. UiPath relies on the .Net framework, and it has its own limitations. It has quite a heavy set of libraries and frameworks. It is a matter of balancing what you are expecting of it.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. It is a good product. It is well-designed and well-executed.

We have many use cases. We have used it in finance, HR, IT, business supply chain, insurance, etc.

It is easy to build automation using UiPath. UiPath definitely provides a lot of value to the organization. There is efficiency and effectiveness.

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-prem footprint. It is very important for us.

The AI functionality has given us a lot of flexibility to go to the management and tell them that we can enhance things. Some of the things that they initially thought could not be automated can now be automated.

The AI functionality has enabled us to automate more processes, but it is not an easy process to understand and implement automation. It is relatively new, and it requires a lot of change management.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation and reduces the cost of digital transformation. 

UiPath has reduced human error. There is an 80% reduction. UiPath has also freed up employee time by 80%. 

UiPath has saved costs for our organization by 30%.

The cloud feature is valuable. Automation Hub and AI fabric are also good features.

UiPath Community is good. They answer all the queries.

Their support should be improved. 

Any unnecessary features should be removed. Only the relevant features should be there. There are so many unnecessary features that are not used by the organization. They are offering too many things such as process mining, task mining, communication mining, intelligent documentation, etc. It should be a specialized solution. It should not do everything in this world because the value comes down.

I have been using UiPath for six years.

It is stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability.

It is scalable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for scalability. 

It is being used at multiple locations.

Their support is very poor. It is not timely. They sometimes take a lot of time to find resolution.

We do not use UiPath Academy. UiPath Academy courses are good, but nobody on the team is doing the courses through UiPath Academy.

Neutral

I have also worked with Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. All these tools are good. IQ Bot from Automation Anywhere is very good. It has better features than UiPath, but UiPath is marketed well.

I was involved in its deployment. It is a straightforward process. It took us three months.

It does require maintenance. We have five people for deployment and maintenance.

We have consultants.

We have seen an ROI. It took us five years to see an ROI.

UiPath is expensive.

It is a great tool, and I can help people to implement it.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We are using this product to develop automation in the billing section of our website. We are integrating bots so that they can do the basic listing and then our salesperson can take it from there.

The biggest improvement has been in cost. We have been operating it for about eight months for about $8,000. Earlier, it was taking us somewhere around $30,000 to $40,000, so that is a big improvement.

The other part has been accuracy. Before, when we had employees for the same process, there were some minor errors, as well as some time issues. But with this system, I believe the accuracy has been at par, although there are several times when we have had to reframe or do some minor modifications in the AI to make the model work for a new set or variety of clients.

The reduction in human error means we get more leads into the hands of the right salespeople who can work on them. Fewer errors means time savings.

With time, the AI automation has improved. Specifically talking about the kind of business that we do, which is putting things into the right sections so that the right people are taking the right leads, even in some complex cases, we have seen accurate results from automation. AI is doing its job.

AI has also enabled us to automate more processes. Earlier, we had different sets of protocols for differentiating among the different kinds of inbound information we were receiving. Since deploying this automation, we have automated a large chunk of the reception. The accuracy has been maintained and the time has been reduced significantly. We are able to convert the leads in a way that gives us more to work with from the leads we get.

The automation-creation process is quite easy and the accuracy is quite good. That last aspect is critically important because we have used RPA to replace one of our employees and we are taking on a lot of responsibility. The most important thing that we require is accuracy and we have been getting that so far.

The end-to-end coverage is important because each and every part of the input we are receiving from our customers—and they're highly valued customers—is information that goes into our software via automation, and we do not want to miss out on any types of leads.

The UiPath Academy courses have been great at giving an overview of the solution and allowing employees to learn things at their own pace. Other users out there also helped our technical staff, so they have added value. The biggest benefit was that at the time our technical staff was getting used to the product, they felt that there was a scarcity of people who knew about how to execute things. Having this UiPath course was a little helpful because it gave them the initial confidence they needed to start doing things, whether it was right or wrong, and they kept getting feedback and improving.

The only concern is it's a bit tough to understand the first time, and you have to invest in the technical improvement of your team in general.

About 6 Months.

There's no need to worry about the stability.

The only concern is as we move towards scaling it. What happens if the system goes off? Although it's not a big concern, we have been getting reassurance from UiPath that they have a solid backup of everything.

With RPA, scaling is not an issue at all. Once a bot has been trained to do a specific thing using ML, multiple bots can be added for the same automation process, as many times as we want. Scaling is not a concern.

We have not used technical support.

Positive

In terms of our decision to go ahead with this product, although we had received a recommendation that we should be moving forward with it, we were severely concerned about whether doing things over and over would take us the same amount of time, in terms of the technical ability and the workforce, or whether it would be easier. After having a technical call with UiPath, we quickly knew that it would be easier. That was a crucial part of our decision.

The initial setup was easy, but making the AI understand, and using the machine learning algorithms in it, took a long time. It took more than we expected it would take. The UiPath team had us understand that it would be functional after one or two months, but it eventually ended up taking about four months. That was more time than we expected, but the initial setup was easy and straightforward.

We used a consulting firm. There were three meetings over the duration of the two-month contract. The advices we received we about our model selection with regards to pricing and data storage capability.

We have been using it for eight months. For the first four months, I do not believe we were saving time because we had to intervene a lot of times with help from the vendor as well. But from that moment onwards, once the integration was operating smoothly, we started saving time.

We do a regular analysis each month and we have been seeing constant growth. A month is a good amount of time to see the progress of a newly implemented solution.

Previously, we were not using automation operations. I believe we have now reduced costs significantly, which justifies the cost we are paying for the service.

Pricing is good if your venture is looking for growth in 1-10 million size of customer domain.

yeah we got in touch with the IBM team for their automation tool.

Building automation takes some time. The first time, it took us a month, but after that, it was easier. The next time we build an automation, it's a kind of reciprocal of what we did the previous time. The first time involved some help from other resources, but from that time and onwards it has been going well.

The innovation did not happen as fast as we thought it would for the first half. We had to recruit some IT guys to our technical team so that our entire team could become familiar with the process. The innovation potential is there. It helps to get very familiarized with the solution. But for the first few months, the innovation part was delayed. The technical level required to handle it smoothly was not there on our team.

I am working for a client. I am using on-premises UiPath Orchestrator. I have installed UiPath Studio and deployed some processes for automation. 

I have used it for SAP automation, Excel automation, and web automation. I have not yet used the AI functionality. I might use it in the future.

Manual tasks are reduced, and in less time, I can complete a task. 

UiPath has sped up our digital transformation by 20%.

UiPath has reduced human error. With automation, correct values get entered, and there is a reduction in human error. There is a 10% reduction.

UiPath has saved us money because there is a reduction in manpower. It has saved about 20% on costs.

In terms of time savings, for Excel automation, the backend activities are much faster, whereas web automation takes time because it requires loading the screen and capturing the elements. For Excel automation, the backend activities take 30% to 40% less time.

UiPath Orchestrator is very user-friendly and easy to understand.

The interface is very good. In the latest one, they have added many more activities, which has made it even easier to do automation.

While doing web automation, I am facing a selector issue. In the web portal, we need to capture a screen element. For capturing the screen element, when I run the job the next time, it fails because the limit is not recognized. It is very difficult to make the selector stable. It is not easy.

I have been using UiPath for more than two years.

At times, when I restart the system, the deployed robots take time to connect to the UiPath Orchestrator. Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

It is scalable. We can use it in different companies or industries, such as hospitality or finance. I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

It is deployed at one location, and we have four to five users of UiPath.

I am satisfied with their support. Whenever I raise a ticket, they provide the required support. 

UiPath has a user community, but I did not use it much. I used the UiPath documentation.

I have also used UiPath Academy and completed three courses. I have done the foundation course, the advanced course, and the continuous learning course. I am satisfied with the UiPath Academy courses.

Positive

I have also used Automation Anywhere. Compared to Automation Anywhere, UiPath is more user-friendly. In Automation Anywhere, we have to do lots of things, whereas in UiPath, we have to do fewer things, which makes it easier to do automation. Also, capturing the screen is much harder in Automation Anywhere. It is easier in UiPath.

The deployment of UiPath Orchestrator only takes one day. 

In terms of maintenance, it only requires yearly license renewal and making sure it is up to date.

We have two people who are involved in the UiPath deployment. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

UiPath provides a platform for building, managing, scheduling, and monitoring automated processes. We use it for various processes, such as cost analysis, repairing permissions, and manipulating Excel data. 

UiPath enables us to build end-to-end automations, improving efficiency, enhancing customer service, and creating a human focus. The solution helps us reduce human error. UiPath saves us time because it's flexible and makes deploying processes easy. 

It's easy to build automations in UiPath. It has a simple drag-and-drop interface.

UiPath has an active user community covering a variety of applications and use cases. The forum acts as a central hub for community members to ask questions, share knowledge, and seek help with different issues.  

UiPath has added more artificial intelligence to the full version of the product. There are many options for developers to integrate AI capabilities like natural language processing and optical character recognition.

UiPath should expand its coding options and reduce its dependency on third-party resources. There should also be more flexible licenses for smaller businesses. It's hard for small companies to estimate the cost of adding users in their final budgets. UiPath could also improve error handling and capture a little more information about the execution of your processes. 

I have used UiPath for the last four or five years. 

UiPath is robust and always available. 

I have used Automation Anywhere. The solutions are similar. UiPath has advantages in scheduling and analytics, but Automation Anywhere supports all the LoadRunner requirements. 

Deploying UiPath is straightforward. The installation can take from a few hours to a day, depending on the project. You need to implement the architecture, create a data server, and integrate it with the solution.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10. It helps to learn a little coding in languages like SQL and Python. You should also take time to learn the platform with hands-on experience, instructor-led training, and online resources.  You can start with a foundational UiPath course if you're new to the platform and learn about the fundamentals of RPA processes. Then, you can create a simple automation project to reinforce what you've learned. I also recommend joining the UiPath community and asking questions on the forum. Once you have the basics down, you can try some of the more advanced programs on UiPath Academy.