UiPath Platform Reviews

I use UiPath to automate tasks in our internal HR and finance departments, as well as to dispatch back office requests, close accounts, process insurance claims, and make international money transfers.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. It depends on our level of understanding of the process we want to automate. UiPath offers a wide range of possibilities for automating business processes. For example, we can use UiPath to get input data from files, extract data from databases, or make SQL requests. We can also use UiPath to manipulate applications, perform human actions on the user interface, and introduce back-office processes. Finally, we can use UiPath to distribute the execution of our automation across multiple devices.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation and orchestrate all processes using the orchestration tool. We can get the inputs for the process and execute the report at the end. We have all kinds of possibilities. For five or six years now, we have been able to automate all the processes that we faced, as long as the inputs are structured and well-structured, and we have a good flow and volume of inputs.

There are numerous advantages to using UiPath. Firstly, it can significantly increase productivity and reduce processing time. Secondly, UiPath enables scalability, allowing processes to be performed around the clock, seven days a week. Additionally, robots can execute processes with consistent quality, minimizing the risk of errors or incidents. Finally, UiPath can help optimize human resources by delegating tasks with low added value to robots, freeing up human resources to focus on tasks that require higher levels of expertise.

The time it takes to bring UiPath to market can range from a few days to several weeks. The return on investment can become apparent within a few weeks or months, depending on the complexity of the process involved.

When we refer to UiPath as a suite, it includes several tools and features that can greatly facilitate the automation process. For instance, we can group some commonly used features into a single library. Additionally, we can segregate the different layers of our development process. These abundant features can help us organize our work on UiPath, ultimately reducing our on-premises footprint.

UiPath Academy is a place where we can ramp up our skills very quickly and become operational as soon as possible.

UiPath's AI features provide a broad range of API applications, such as handling unstructured inputs. This includes non-digital inputs such as paper forms. Additionally, the system can process false inputs that are not well-organized through character recognition. UiPath also offers machine learning to further enhance its functionalities.

UiPath accelerates digital transformation and significantly lowers the associated costs. The impact is significant as it enables the deployment of production environments in just a few weeks. Additionally, RPA users can collaborate over the weekend to automate applications starting from the human interface. This allows us to automate more processes effectively. Other tools may require access to top-up bases or the use of Unix or scripts, but with RPA, we can automate a wide range of features based solely on the user interface component.

There were no expansive or complex application upgrades or IT application support required.

UiPath helped to decrease human error. By developing autonomous processes and thoroughly testing them, we ensure consistent and reliable execution, which guarantees high-quality results for our customers. Compared to human execution, global execution by robots is both more accurate and quicker.

UiPath saved us around 17 percent of our time.

UiPath helps to save costs in several ways, such as reducing the time required for execution. The main difference between manual and automatic processes is the ability to have UiPath execute tasks on our behalf, based on pre-defined reports. Unlike humans, who typically work from eight o'clock in the morning until six o'clock in the evening, UiPath can work all day, even on weekends. This can result in cost savings of up to 60 percent.

The queue feature is the most interesting to me because it allows us to work on a list of tasks in parallel on several robots.  Additionally, the ability to integrate the OCR components is valuable. We use this feature for one of our banks in Africa. These are the most valuable features that we cannot find with other tools.

The pricing has room for improvement.

I would appreciate UiPath's assistance in simplifying our process of easily and quickly capturing our customers' business requirements within our framework.

I have been using UiPath for almost seven years.

UiPath is stable.

UiPath is scalable.

UiPath's technical support is reactive.

Positive

The initial setup is complex, and obtaining a license for training poses a challenge. As a result, an experienced person is necessary to complete the deployment. Our deployment required two people.

The deployment can take one to two days for an experienced person, but for an inexperienced person, it may take up to three weeks.

The implementation was completed in-house.

The return on investment is based on the complexity of the process that is being automated.

The cost of UiPath is higher in Africa than in Europe and Asia due to differences in salary levels. As a result, the number of customers who are able to use UiPath is limited.

We pay for additional components to include features, in addition to the licensing fees.

We utilized Selenium Test Automation for tests and conducted an evaluation. However, it did not fully meet our business requirements, so we selected UiPath.

I give UiPath a seven out of ten.

Due to the quantity of customer input, the success of automating tasks is not solely dependent on the capabilities of UiPath tools. The quality of the paper scan, document quality, and resolution are also crucial factors that can positively or negatively impact the possibility of a wide range of automation. Therefore, the success of automation is highly reliant on the quality of the source inputs, in addition to UiPath's capabilities.

Our implementation strategy involves beginning with the proof of concept and then separating processes before moving on to scaling the API.

I would recommend UiPath for large enterprise companies, as the cost of the solution may be prohibitive for smaller organizations.

I recommend that anyone assessing UiPath should first create a clear automation roadmap. This will enable them to address questions related to optimization, implementation, and development.

We use it mostly for our sales and for our clients, with relatively simple, stand-alone robotic solutions. Some are attended and some are unattended. We use it for reporting in our finance and HR departments. 

We have automated processes for our clients that, before, took somebody three days to do, and now they're done in minutes. That says everything. It's extremely useful for saving time and avoiding mistakes. Those are the two main efficiency factors that we have seen with our clients. Repetitive projects, where someone has to copy a lot of data from one place to another and then work with the data, are very prone to mistakes. We can completely eliminate mistakes and save people a lot of time so that they can do more interesting tasks. We have developed programs that reduce human error by 100 percent. There are no errors, once they are automated.

And it absolutely accelerates the process of digital transformation. There is no doubt that it is getting faster and faster. We are thinking about combining RPA solutions from UiPath with ChatGPT or whatever else comes along, to see if we can make them work together. This will be the future.

It enables us to implement end-to-end automation. We have projects where it automates the entire process from one end to the other. Very often we have "human-in-the-loop" within them, because some decisions have to be made, but they are almost end-to-end solutions.

End-to-end automation is extremely important. Usually, when we start with a new client, we start with a smaller process as a type of proof of concept, so that they can see what is possible. Then, we extend it up and down until we have an end-to-end solution. We have seen that it's better to develop a process step-by-step, and not try to do everything at once. But in the end, we have an end-to-end solution.

The UiPath community is used by our developers. They ask questions and receive responses. They are definitely active there.

We have had issues with Ingram Micro. It happened that we ordered licenses and we received something else. It takes a relatively long time, two and sometimes even three weeks, after the order until we receive licenses, and clients are sometimes a little bit impatient. This is something that should be accelerated.

I have been using UiPath for almost four years.

UiPath is a stable solution. One of the reasons we left the Foxtrot solution was that it was unstable. If we had the same process running 10 times, we could get three different results. But with UiPath, we have never had any issues regarding stability.

It's scalable.

We have discussions sometimes with people from UiPath about solutions and things that we have done already. That is working quite well. The support is very good.

We participate quite frequently in UiPath webinars, especially when they are presenting new versions or components or pricing models for the software, so that we keep everybody up to date on the latest developments. They develop things very quickly. It's difficult to keep up with the speed at which they are developing new solutions.

Positive

It is very straightforward to implement. The setting up of a license is something that is done within an hour. It's the development that takes more time. Most of our clients are large, multinational companies.

UiPath itself does not require any maintenance, but solution maintenance is required if something changes for one of our clients.

Everybody is afraid of the licensing fees in the beginning, and because we are in Romania where salaries are still significantly lower than in Western Europe, that means that licensing fees have a bigger impact on costs for the company. But we are also working more and more for companies outside of Romania, where that is less of an issue.

When we come up with an offer in which the licensing fees are getting a little bigger, clients are more reluctant. That is another reason that we prefer to start with something a bit smaller until they get acquainted with the solution and see the advantages.

We looked at other solutions. We started with something called Foxtrot RPA, which didn't work well at all. We also compared UiPath with Automation Anywhere. But UiPath offers a better variety of possibilities, it's more flexible, and it's very easy to program if you are a developer and know other programming languages. UiPath offers StudioX for people who do not have any experience with development, but it's still a little too complicated.

We are not using a lot of the abilities that UiPath offers. We have made some attempts to use Document Understanding and we would very much like to do project mining, but we haven't had a client that is interested in that yet.

I would recommend that you start by implementing a small, standalone process, something that is not part of a big process. Automate that small process first to get used to how it works and see what can be done with RPA in general. And only then start with more complex processes. The latter take more time to develop, and clients don't like to wait.

We use UiPath for replicating manual tasks and PDF automation. 

UiPath saves us a significant amount of time and is recognized as the leader in Robotic Process Automation. It helps us a lot. It makes us much more efficient at dealing with repetitive tasks, reduces costs, and makes automating processes easier compared to other automation solutions.

The solution reduces human error; automating manual cases lowers the risk of error by over 90%, including recurrent mistakes. This keeps our clients happy.  

The product frees up a significant amount of employee time by automating manual tasks and being so user-friendly and time-efficient, meaning we don't have to spend much time using the app. 

I like how easy it is to automate tasks and how time-efficient the product is.

UiPath is very user-friendly, so even employees with no coding experience can use it, which adds value to staff with less experience in coding.

Building automation using UiPath is easy; creating scripts for automated test apps and PDFs isn't difficult.  

The solution enables us to build end-to-end automation, which is important to us, and it's one of the only automation apps that can provide this.   

We use the platform's AI functionality in our automation program, which has significantly contributed to our end-to-end automation. It's cost and time-efficient, and that's what we want from an automation app.   

UiPath speeds up and reduces the cost of digital transformation without requiring expensive or complex application upgrades or IT support. It provides features in a cost-efficient way.  

The interactive selection could be more accurate.

The customer support could be faster. 

We've been using the solution for between three and six months. 

UiPath is a stable app; I give it nine out of ten for stability.

The solution is scalable; I can't see any ways in which there would be a problem or limitation with scalability.

We contacted technical support, and they have solved most of our issues lately. Sometimes we don't get the solution we want and are dissatisfied, but overall, I rate them very highly.

Positive

UiPath is the only automation solution I have used. 

I wasn't involved in the solution's deployment, and apart from keeping the version up to date, it doesn't require any maintenance. 

The solution saves costs for our organization, though I'm not aware of precisely how much.

We didn't evaluate any other options, the company provided UiPath, and we didn't have a choice in the matter. It's an excellent product, and we don't have any problems with it. No solution is perfect, but that's to be expected.

I rate the solution 10 out of 10.

We use UiPath to automate processes that deal with a ''good cause'' we are involved in; specifically, we use it for employee diversity.  

The product's automation helps a lot in achieving the results regarding our ''good cause''; we encounter fewer errors compared to other automation apps.

Being a part of the UiPath user community is valuable.  

I recommend the solution and have recommended it to many of my friends who work in the same domain. 

We have yet to use any UiPath Academy courses, but we plan to in the future.

I use UiPath for PDF automation. About 10 to 15 employees use this tool in our organization.

UiPath saves us time and increases productivity for our organization. The solution is highly accurate and reduces human error. It freed our employees to spend time on other tasks, saving us time and money. UiPath reduced the time employees spend on these tasks by about 40-50 percent. It cut the cost by approximately 30-40 percent.

UiPath is highly user-friendly. Anyone can build automations without any prior knowledge.

Sometimes, UiPath becomes a little laggy when we move from one page to another. 

I have been using UiPath for the last six months.

There is some lag. Otherwise, UiPath works well for us. 

UiPath is highly scalable. 

I rate UiPath support a nine. They respond quickly.

Positive

We've seen a 60-70 percent ROI from UiPath.

The price of UiPath is reasonable.

I rate UiPath a nine out of ten. It automates manual tasks with accurate results. UiPath has been great for us.

We use it to automate output from PDFs.

It reduces human time and human error compared to manual processes. It helps a lot in improving business productivity, project productivity, and scalability. It also saves us money.

UiPath is easy to use without any training. Anyone can use it. There is also great customer support. And if you want to learn new things or enhance your skills, you can choose the UiPath Academy training courses.

It is very secure and cheaper and faster.

It needs improvement in terms of optimization. Sometimes the tools slow down when you are working on a huge data set or if the internet connectivity is slow in your area. Otherwise, it works as well as the other tools that are available in the market.

I have been using UiPath for the last three years.

I give the stability a 10 out of 10. It is very stable compared to other solutions.

The scalability is also good, a 10 out of 10.

I have deployed it across different departments and different locations, per the requirements of the various projects I have worked on.

I would give a 10 out of 10 to customer support. If you have any queries you can post them to the community. Last year I was facing some issues related to some processes and I posted queries on the community. I got a response after some time. That was very good for me.

Before UiPath, I tried a related Microsoft tool. 

I did one deployment with the team, but I'm not privy to how deployment works from scratch. But the deployment is of medium difficulty, not very straightforward and not very easy.

I have used UiPath in different types of deployments, depending on the project. Sometimes it's on a private cloud. For example, if it is a project related to deployment on the client side or server, we use the cloud services. If we want to test something on a website or another cloud, then we use the SaaS.

The solution does require some maintenance. The number of people needed depends on the project's size and complexity.

It gives a great ROI. It gives around 25 to 30 percent return. It works well.

The pricing is moderate. It's not that cheap and not very expensive. Every organization can buy or renew a license.

I have used Microsoft Power Automate. I chose UiPath because it is cheaper and has great customer support. There is a huge community of developers, more than for Microsoft Power Automate.

If we're working on a project related to website automation, it requires a minimum of five to 10 people. And if we're working on a small project, there might be a single person or maybe two who work on it. The responsibilities relate to developing, testing, and hosting.

If an engineer wants to learn more about RPA, they should consider this tool first. I always recommend UiPath if you are working as an individual. If you invest X, it will give you 100X.

We have two primary use cases. We use UiPath to scrape data from multiple websites and platforms, mainly for competitive intelligence and internal use. The other use case is basic automation, that is, moving files from one system to another when there is no direct integration. Through UiPath and leveraging RPAs, we pull data from one system, for example, an S3 bucket or Google Drive, and put it into our database.

The use of UiPath has resulted in time savings for our organization. It has probably saved us 40 development hours a month.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. If you compare it to building these scripts using Python or any other programming languages directly, then it is incomparable. If you write a .NET or a Python code, it will take a lot of time development-wise. The ease of building automations is very high compared to that with programming languages.

End-to-end automation is important to us in terms of deployment and development. Development is definitely easy, but the orchestration of those flows and deployment can be a hassle to maintain and manage. With UiPath, we are able to monitor the workloads and orchestrate the different workloads within the app ecosystem itself.

The UiPath community has grown and is active. It is definitely helpful to be a part of it because others can assist us.

UiPath Academy courses helped reduce the learning curve.

You can speed up digital transformation and reduce the cost of digital transformation using UiPath. It provides a good orchestrator, and the fully managed option can help reduce the burden on IT staff.

We have been able to reduce human error by using UiPath. Suppose we need to move files from one place to another. If we move it through a system and predefined rules, the system will not make a mistake. It will always pick up the particular file and concatenate it where it is supposed to. However, a human can, by mistake, concatenate one file to another.

For small use cases, it would be great to have independent runner licenses with costs that are comparable to those of Power Automate. Then, UiPath would be a better alternative.

The AI functionality was not that effective in complex scenarios when I used it some time ago.

I would like to see a universal recorder feature added so that we can record Excel macros. You could then click a button to record the screen, and then all the actions across applications would be recorded. This functionality is available already in Automation Anywhere, but the last time I checked, it was not available in UiPath.

I've used it for over a year.

UiPath is a stable solution.

It is a scalable tool.

I found the initial setup to be straightforward, and it took less than a week. You don't need dedicated staff to maintain the solution.

We implemented it ourselves. We had a team of three who worked on the deployment.

We haven't seen much ROI; it has been average. As a result, we are moving to Power Automate.

The pricing is competitive, and for large-scale use cases, UiPath may make better sense cost-wise. However, it is not very viable for small-scale use cases. Power Automate is much cheaper and has similar functionalities.

UiPath offers two options. If you choose the on-premises option, then you would have to manage it yourself, but if you go for the fully managed one, then there won't be any overhead cost.

We are gradually moving to Power Automate and Power Apps because we are already on the Microsoft stack, and it helps us reduce the footprint. If the cost of UiPath were comparable to that of Power Automate, then UiPath would have been the better alternative.

In my previous company, we used Power Automate, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. The only good aspect of Power Automate is that it has very minimal cost implications. IQ Bot from Automation Anywhere is slightly better than UiPath's AI capability. Also, the ease of building automations with UiPath is comparable to that of Automation Anywhere and Power Automate.

Overall, I would rate UiPath at eight out of ten.

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

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

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

I would like it to be more user-friendly.

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

I've been using the solution for five years. 

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

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

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

We did not previously use a different solution.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The solution is expensive. 

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

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

We did evaluate Automation Anywhere. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

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

We automate the entire revenue and order to cash and then process it to payables. It is used for processes, from generating customer invoices to ensuring that all our vendors are getting paid timely. We also use it for data reporting, audit requirements, or whatever information gathering that the company may need.

We've automated about 30-ish processes, and that's just the tip of the iceberg of where it's going.

All of the processes are attended to right now. We're still getting the backend set up to move some of them to unattended.

The solution has improved the organization by providing time savings. That's one of the most fundamental things. We recently had a project that would take a human who's actually navigating through the screens and clicking all the buttons roughly a month's worth of work, if that was their primary focus all day long. We were able to get that completed within two days using UiPath. Therefore, the time savings are phenomenal. 

Also, when you're dealing with all that data, there's a lot less likelihood of human error and missteps. With the bot, we know for sure that the line is the line, and that's it. It's error-free for the most part.

The low to no-code is by far the most valuable feature. Developing a bot in under a minute that saves you an hour a day is phenomenal.

The user community is great. Looking at the forums, when a question is posted, the responses are fairly quick, either from UiPath or the community itself. In my past role, I posted to the community before, and I had been able to answer some questions as well. Then, it's nice to know people are having the same problems you're having and finding solutions.

I've taken UiPath Academy courses. I've taken mostly the developer ones, and then I'm looking into more of the admin side, with the Orchestrator and project management side of it. The biggest value is that it walks you through step by step and you're doing it alongside the course. It's hands-on learning. It's one thing to watch a video. It's a different thing actually to play with it and have something start working.

Overall the training and documentation could be better. There's just so much of it, so a streamlined way to get to the information I need would be ideal.

I've used the solution for about two years. 

It's very stable. Performance-wise and stability-wise, it's great. We're able to access it from anywhere. I have the Orchestrator app on my phone, so I can always keep track of the bots that we've developed and see how they're doing and everything.

Scalability is something we're still looking into. We just started, so we're still in the groundwork. However, in terms of being able to scale, the potential's there. We just need more time to play with it.

I've had one instance with them, and it was great. They knew their stuff, they walked me through everything.

Positive

Before UiPath, we used Nintex RPA, and then an SAP RPA tool as well. We used to UiPath to get more usability and scalability. The user-friendliness of the product and just the engine and the innovations that they're making behind it really placed them as a leader in the sector.

I was involved in the implementation since proposing the idea to start developing and starting a road show to be able to expand.

The process was straightforward. I had no qualms about it.

We started small. We essentially had two developer licenses, a couple unattended, and then a couple attended. We had already identified who would the attended bots go to, and did all that legwork in the forefront. Once we got the license enabled, we could activate it, work in the Orchestrator to assign the specific roles, and then have them start running. Within a week, we were able to get bots out the door and have people actually using them.

Everything has been done in-house. We've been building everything ourselves. 

We've definitely seen an ROI. For example, in one project, we were able to take a month's worth of human effort and completed it in two days with UiPath. We've had several others of a similar nature.

The pricing is a bit high compared to other products. That said, it does offer more. From working with other ones, it is definitely a more powerful tool and well worth the pricing.

We did evaluate other options. We had the ones we used before. We also looked at Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, and a couple of others. 

The difference was a sense of familiarity. I had previous experience with UiPath. Mainly the innovations and the fact that since 2019 on the Magic Quadrant, they've been the leader consistently, and they will continue to be, were the reason we chose UiPath.

We do not use the AI functionality in our automation as of right now. It is something I'm interested in, however.

Our company will be involved in an environmental initiative using UiPath. We have an environmental group. As of right now, we haven't thought about taking it that far. We've only had it for about a month or two. It's something we're considering for the future. 

The most important part is going to be the user interface. The people who are developing it, the people who are using it, they're the ones who are going to have the most to say about it. Your business end-user has the most to say about it; if they don't like it, that's all you'll hear. By focusing on that user interface, which UiPath has done, you really get a solid project that people get excited about rather than leaving a bad taste in their mouths.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. I love the product.