UiPath Platform Reviews

We are an auditing firm who has a certain level of tasks that are open for automating. These are complete steps, which can be performed by anyone, standardized, and do not involve any human intelligence. These are just basic human tasks. It is a long process, where in-between there are certain validation and verification steps as well as certain steps that involve a lot of documentation to go through. The organization is targeting all these tasks, which are completely static and can be automated, so they can get rid of them. Then, employees can work on something more useful as well as more productivity-oriented tasks.

Currently, I am dealing with our internal COE, providing RPA solutions to internal and external clients. UiPath is a driving force in our COE.

It is on-prem. There are a couple of discussions going around upgrading UiPath because there has been so much advancement with the solution.

Document Understanding was a game-changer. One of our clients has manual billing that needs to be processed. With the help of Document Understanding and UiPath Action Center, we created an excellent workflow for our client. It also gives us better accuracy. Now, there are hardly any exceptions in the client's billing documents that are being processed.

In my previous role, I presented some clients the end-to-end installation design of UiPath, e.g., building a PDD using Task Capture, going to UiPath Studio to build the actual solution, and then later going to post-production Insights. 

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-prem footprint. Most organizations prefer on-prem because it reduces the risk of compliance issues.

Attended robots have been very beneficial for our users. UiPath saves one robot for every user. We have a couple of clients who are using attended automation for their day-to-day tasks.

From an organizational point of view, the most used feature is Orchestrator because that is how we manage more than 100 users. When there are more than 100 users, it is important, and probably better, to have some place to manage them. Orchestrator is doing that for us very well. 

The most exciting new feature is UiPath Apps. I have explored it in-depth to get a better understanding. I think this product will be a game-changer for my organization as well as for my clients. It will revolutionize the way that we are providing licensing and proper access to a user. It also revolutionizes the way people are using it. Everything will be on the cloud, which I think is the most interesting feature of UiPath Apps.

UiPath Apps will definitely help to reduce the workload of our IT department by enabling end users to create apps. If you are creating an app and sharing it over the cloud, that removes the dependency of having UiPath installed with the correct version as well as Internet connectivity. Or, you might have a global server in the background that is not functioning very well. There are multiple issues related to connectivity of the UiPath robot when deploying it on a user's machine. 

If you are giving access to a group of users and adding Azure container or any other container provided by UiPath, then this reduces 10 to 15 hours of work from the IT or support guys who are manually doing all these things by themselves. Not every user must have the new step of getting the UiPath license and software installed, it is really static. You are eliminating that task completely by having UiPath Apps on the cloud. This is definitely convenient for users to use.

We are not using UiPath Apps in my current organization. About two to three months ago, I created UiPath when I was at TCS. It was there that we demonstrated the power of UiPath Apps versus normal, conventional methods. It reduced our work through scalability. It helped us to easily scale and was more convenient, because giving new or temporary access can be a pain. 

It is very easy to share UiPath Apps. When you want to start or remove it, you can do it with a simple click within the cloud. It is not that complicated. Also, the usage is better in UiPath Apps compared to the conventional UiPath robot. In UiPath Assistant, you can access the portal and simply run it over there. Therefore, you will not have a problem with the background functioning of the UiPath robot or even connectivity issues. Scalability and ease of use are favorable for users when they are using UiPath Apps.

Recently, I have been exploring Automation Hub. Its idea to pipeline a feature will be very useful for our guys managing RPA products on a large scale. 

When it comes to debugging, there is some improvement needed for UiPath compared to other RPA tools. There are features to edit the workflow or content of the automation file while we are debugging. For example, we have 10,000 lines of code that we have integrated by 10 different users. So, there is one integrated code and you are debugging it. After some time, you might find a line which is not an error. You may have forgotten to remove it or change the value to your desired criteria. It is really a pain to stop the entire debug session and just edit it, then start again at zero. It will do the same steps again just to reach that level or step where you were actually stuck previously. Whereas, in different automation tools, whether you are on the findings step or in-between a debug session, you can actually edit that information. This is good because sometimes the developer also forgets to add or remove certain values in-between a long code. I think this should be improved in UiPath. This should already be in consideration because I have been in touch with UiPath a couple of times because of this.

My current company is currently looking at the end-to-end solution. However, Insights and Task Capture are major concerns. Task Capture will give you a skeleton of the PDD, then you have to edit it. The skeleton is only there for simple automation, and we have complex scenarios. It is so complicated that the PDD generation using Task Capture will not give you even 20% of the output. While Task Capture is something promising, people are looking at it with greater expectations than it provides. People are not using Task Capture or Insight because of their limitations. These features could use improvements and enhancements.

I have been using UiPath for three years. I recently switched companies. I worked with Capgemini and TCS prior to this company, where I was in their COEs and providing solutions to clients. This is the first time that I have been on a project for PwC. Since the start of 2018, I have worked mainly in COEs and have interacted with around 30 clients up until now.

PwC, as a firm, has been using this technology for four to five years.

I have been using UiPath on a different powerful system that has high-end RAM. Sometimes, it crashes due to the use of multiple components at once. For example, when I was using Druid with data service and another UiPath product. Developing was quite easy. However, when debugging, sometimes it would freeze. I don't know whether it was because of my system and its compatibility, my system's configuration, or the fact that we were using so many high-end tools and products at once. 

The robustness of the tool, when it comes to using high-end products, is something that I am currently exploring. This is something that is currently a bit of concern for other developers as well. I have been interacting with a lot of developers around the globe. As a part of that, I tend to share my experiences. They have shared that it will sometimes freeze, even with simple automation. Because we are using new features or products all at once, it freezes. I think this should not be the case. If you are using long, heavy code, and it gets frozen at one point, I can understand that. However, 10 simple lines of code, while using three or four products at once, is getting frozen. That should be taken care of or improved.

To troubleshoot the system crashing, we contacted UiPath. They were kind enough to reply and have a discussion. They are working on this and trying to make it more convenient so future releases will solve this problem.

As a part of a COE, we get clients who expect us to present the entire proof of concept as well as a PPT or presentation. For example, why they need to go with UiPath, what are the advantages/disadvantages, if any, and why we should not go with another tool or solution as a whole, not just RPA. The main point for us when presenting UiPath is the ease of usability and scalability. We don't need major infrastructure changes, just two or three URLs to be widely fitted. Then, they need to decide if they want unattended or attended robots. The scalability is the major driving force which excites our clients and us, because there isn't a need to have media-heavy software or heavy processes changes.

Clients don't want every user in their organization who joins to have a long process to get through the start up. Automation Cloud is something they were very much interested in exploring because of the scalability. They find it very easy to use and scale, because not all the clients have a certain set of users using robots. 

I have seen user usage explode from zero to a bigger audience of 22 users.

UiPath is used extensively in my current organization on a large scale. There is also a plan to scale it to more users.

PwC has their internal teams providing a "help center" sort of infrastructure to them. If there was a need for any help, or some basic doubt, it is solved internally. PwC's internal help center exists already. However, for major issues, we reach out to UiPath, as a customer, so that we can receive a response and clarity on issues.

The technical support is really great. I have been in touch with all sorts of UiPath support because I was in the COE and our clients were completely global until my latest assignment. I think UiPath India, France, Belgium, and Canada are timely. They provide a very precise support experience. They were kind enough to let us know the actual reason, because just saying that it is a bug is not something that we can comfortably accept or digest. Also, they have been kind enough to follow back up on updates and bugs that we have reported.

As a whole, I have reported more than 25 bugs across all their products. They were kind enough to reach out to the same forum where we raised the ticket. They were kind enough to reply that these are the updates that they will roll out in the next version. It is good to have this interaction as well as a heads-up regarding your bug reports. I think the technical support is on the mark and doing their job really well.

The learning tools and support are really great. They have the most engaging forum across the globe, compared to other RPA tools. The learning and engagement are really up to the mark. That also brings confidence to our clients and us. We are a part of their global community forum, which is a benefit for us. 

Their marketplace has grown tenfold in the last year. It is because of the developer's involvement as well as involvement from people in the community. UiPath is creating their own statements and usable components, which adds value to our presentation. The tool is growing, and developers and community members are growing with them. 

My previous companies migrated from other RPA solutions, like Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and NICE Robotic Automation, to UiPath because of the value of its features and the quality of the overall solution. I migrated my clients from those companies so they could have a better ROI and reduce the cost of maintenance. We also migrated from scheduling tools, like AutoSys, to provide better accuracy and ease of use.

My current company was not previously using an RPA solution.

The initial setup and implementation are standard, simple, and user-friendly. UiPath just requires basic adjustment, then it is plug and play. It is very easy for everyone to understand, e.g., non-technical clients can understand what has been changed.

If the deployment is done properly, you will see better data accuracy with UiPath than manual entry. If the deployment is done by someone without much experience, it will affect the quality of the solution due to bad coding. You can't just leave it to the tool.

Using Automation Cloud makes it easier to deploy.

It takes almost two weeks for us to implement from scratch because we must understand the client's infrastructure, create a solution design, and then present it to them.

We present our clients with a PoC, including a document that justifies the work and costs. We also give them a standard robot that we created for demo purposes. This way, they can visualize how it will be implemented and mapped in their organization.

For deployment, one or two people are sufficient: one from an infrastructure background and another from a technical background. Sometimes, it is complex or hard to understand the client's needs when it comes to the deployment of Azure, Nvidia, or AWS servers on their VPN connection.

The amount of staff needed for maintenance depends on the size of the solution, e.g., the bigger solutions will need more people. However, the maintenance and support activities can also be automated and that reduces the need for support and maintenance. Three or four support team members are enough with the help of a robot.

The last ROI calculation that we did for a client showed that they saved 25% of their time by automating a manual task with an unattended robot for a single machine.

Overall, the cost remains the same to the client and us, when using Automation Cloud, because of the amount of money spent on the cloud migration and cloud usage.

At my previous company, in the best scenario, we removed almost 200 hours per month of client usage, making it automated with almost zero errors. So, about 32 employees were freed up from their work per month, and now there are only two. This has enabled employees to focus on higher-value work that involves human-base interaction. This saved the client money and provided a recruitment benefit.

UiPath has been useful for improving employee satisfaction. Employees are now spending time on more value-add work instead of something static, whether it is boring or hectic, that they have been working on for ages. This gives employees a sense of advancement.

I would rate the pricing as seven out of 10, where 10 is the most expensive. The pricing increased with the latest release. It used to be cheap. Now, it is expensive. However, it does come with supported features, which almost justify its cost.

Building automations is very easy. I have used multiple RPA tools. Developing automation with UiPath is very convenient compared to other tools. 

Development is very easy. I have been exploring certain markets based on the marketplace component and its native integrations with ServicesNow for the chatbot. I think development is where UiPath stands out as a winner compared to other tools because starting to automate is very easy.

Compared to other RPA tools, UiPath is leading with new feature additions every quarter. Obviously, all the new features will not be incorporated into the solution or be helpful for the client. We see the organization putting in efforts to grow at a rapid pace, including ML, scaling, and everything on the cloud, like data servers. UiPath gives us the confidence to present a tool that can be relied on because it is constantly growing. It constantly has certain new features added which can be beneficial.

With UiPath, not everyone needs to understand the code, which is great. This makes it superior over other tools because it is easy to understand. This contributes to profits because clients prefer UiPath over something else because they have more confidence using it.

Blue Prism has the ability to edit in the middle of a debug. As far as I have explored, Blue Prism is leading on the debugging front and stands out against UiPath. Debugging in Blue Prism gives users a lot of usability to edit the workflow. This makes it easier for developers to run things once and get things done. Otherwise, debugging multiple times can sometimes be a pain.

People migrate to NICE Robotic Automation because they were having difficulty maintaining their software with a limited number of staff. 

It is easier to become more proficient with UiPath than other RPA tools, especially Blue Prism. Training can be done at almost no cost.

I would suggest automating a policy that is not a requirement and follows a process. As an RPA user, it is your responsibility to get things done in an efficient way. If a user is doing A, B, C, D, it might not be required that the robot do the same thing. There might be a shorthand that can take you from A to D directly using the robot. For example, it can go directly to a page and not have to click 10 things like a human.

If you use it properly and consciously, it can increase accuracy and reduce error. If you don't, then it will be the other way around.

As features are concerned, it is reasonably priced compared to any other heavyweight tools in the market.

It is beneficial that there is a SaaS option because this offers a diversified cloud environment. If we expand and explore more cloud options, then having a SaaS solution for UiPath will be beneficial for us. Right now, SaaS comes with a certain amount of compliance issues for my company. 

UiPath AI Center is very useful. I think it is a game-changer when it comes to better usage. However, I haven't had much of a chance to explore it on an enterprise level. Not many clients are using it because of the exposure risk. Once a lot of developers start exploring and developing on it, then more companies will have the confidence to say, "Yes, we can push to that," which will increase the usage of UiPath AI Center.

Everything on the UIPath Cloud is a template. It is just a starting point. You have to dig into it and do more exploration to make it better.

Using Automation Cloud would be very beneficial for us, as a COE, because we are getting rid of the mundane tasks of infrastructure, maintenance, and upgrades, which we do not think are our primary job.

Biggest lesson learnt: UiPath has the fastest growing community with the quickest learning tools. It is easy to automate. It requires basic understanding and effort to get started. 

I would rate UiPath as 9.5 out of 10. I have concerns about the debugging capability, where if I need to edit something while debugging, I can't do it right away without stopping the process.

Our core business is BPO, which is Business Process Outsourcing. We have massive operations that we have to perform for our customers and we have a digital section of the company that is assisting with that. The digital section is relatively new, being no more than two years old. We are building a number of solutions and tools that our digital section is using, and RPA is one of these tools. The goal is to help our customers innovate and assist them with their digital transformation, ultimately making them more efficient and more profitable. This is possible because some of the processes are very repetitive and performing them with humans is a very bad choice.

We have a hybrid environment, where some of our functionality is on-premises and some is on the cloud. For example, we have some cloud-based automation, and we use UiPath Apps, which is on the cloud.

We had a successful use case at the beginning of the year where we needed to process a large number of invoices that had contained errors when they were originally sent to the customers. There were approximately 200,000 invoices and we had a deadline of four days to complete the task.

It began with us developing the bot, which was completed in less than a day. After that, we sent the bot to our production environment to start processing the invoices. We were successful in the task, through the parallelism of 50 robots, we could process 5 invoices per second.

We have some metrics that describe how long it would take the process to be completed manually. It takes a human an average of between 60 and 90 seconds to process just one invoice. We estimated that it would have taken approximately 125 days to complete this task manually, with between 250 and 300 people working on it together.

We don't use the low-code functionality. Rather, we use the typical development features. When you're talking about developing inside the UiPath, you have something very user-friendly, so you don't even need to use the low-code options. It is very intuitive and you don't need to know technologies such as C# or .NET to develop automations.

The use of UiPath has helped to increase customer satisfaction by a lot. Our main goals are to improve the average handling time that the customer needs to complete transactions, as well as to improve quality. Customer satisfaction improves not only with the financial benefit resulting from a better average handling time but also, from improved quality in transactions. Our human resources department uses tools such as surveys to investigate the quality and they have their own metrics and KPIs for customer satisfaction.

Our first-contact resolution rates have increased because as we develop successful cases and implementations for different customers, future customers benefit from this through faster service, which leads to better customer satisfaction. I estimate that our first-contact resolution has increased by 15% to 20%.

The time it takes us to create automations depends on what we assess the complexity of the bot to be. We have a methodology and metrics that have been developed by our Center of Excellence, categorizing the bots into small, medium and complex. A small bot, which has simple logic, is something that we implement in between one and two weeks. A medium-complexity bot has a timeline of between two and four weeks, and a very complex bot takes four to six weeks to implement.

The most valuable feature that we are using is UiPath Apps because it makes it very easy to implement tasks. It is very easy to scale operations, which is important because we're not talking about just five or ten agents. We're talking about 1,000 to 2,000 agents. The Apps feature helps us to scale very quickly and very easily. We only need to develop one or two bots and then link them to UiPath Apps to process everything. All of the integration between the bots and the human, along with any scheduling that needs to be done, is taken care of by Apps. In our situation, the Apps feature is the best solution to handle this scale.

Utilizing our bots is very easy, and it is done using the licenses that we have with partner UiPath. We can access our licenses, then distribute them to the customers and we can use them dynamically. This is all done in a very easy manner. We just have to navigate to the web-based hub, where we have access to everything that we need.

UiPath is highly customizable and this is helpful for us because we can develop models and frameworks that can be reused for different tasks and different customers. For example, if we have a customer with a process that is very similar to one that we have previously developed for somebody else, we can reuse the models to scale the bots. This makes the new development very easy and very fast.

The Agent Console is able to provide customer insight in conjunction with the task and process mining features that we use. We install the tool into the machine that the customer uses every day, where it will capture the manual tasks and processes into a database. The insights that we receive are related to whether a process is a good candidate for RPA. For example, if it takes the human a lot of time to complete, or they are having trouble with it, then it might be suitable for RPA because putting a bot in place can optimize performance.

Another reason this is important is that human operators work very hard with day-to-day tasks, and they don't have much time to stop and look for processes that can be automated. Using task and process mining, it starts pulling out those insights. For example, it looks for the number of screens that the human is accessing and clicking on. It looks at each click, as well as every navigation and extraction. In the end, it generates a report for us.

The Agent Console has helped to decrease the average agent handling time, which is our main goal when it comes to these massive business operations. Average agent handling time is the metric that we primarily work with and as such, everything we do is related to reducing it. RPA in our use case is not used only to reduce the HC or FTEs; but it is used to boost this particular KPI too. In one of our use cases, we have had an average decrease of 30% in agent handling time, which is very considerable.

There are some enhancements that can be made within Orchestrator, such as the addition of new dashboards that provide us insights into processes that are already running, which would help us a lot.

We have been using the UiPath platform since last year, at the beginning of 2020.

The stability of UiPath is very high, and this is a very important point. In fact, stability was the problem that we had when we were assessing the competition with UiPath. We evaluated several RPA tools and moved on with the UiPath partnership because it was the most robust. It is important to remember that we have a high availability environment, and the entirety of it must be stable. Our team is tool agnostic and extremely skilled in the largest RPA tool providers, enabling us to develop automation on any platform.

UiPath is very easy to scale because, in every part of our solution, we use the Apps feature. This accounts for high availability and automatically provides us with scalability. For example, if we have a process that is handling 100 invoices at a time, but in three months we grow and need to instead process double that number, there is a feature that we can use to instruct the bots to run on additional machines. The scalability is very dynamic in this regard.

UiPath has a function within Orchestrator for dynamic allocation, where it can draw resources from a pool of machines in the infrastructure. For example, if there are 30 machines available then an option can be set to dynamically use the licenses. If there are 10 or 20 bots that need to perform tasks, the licenses will be automatically used to run the processes. You don't need to look at these machines to see what is running because all of the management will be taken care of automatically.

We currently have 25 staff involved in RPA. There are 20 developers and five architects, just to keep the projects and everything with the customers up and running. We expect this to improve and grow, doubling our numbers this year.

In fact, our expectation for growth is very high. Along with each implementation or development that we do, new opportunities arise. I would estimate that for each successful implementation that we have, four to five new opportunities are presented. Naturally, we will need to have more licenses and more contacts to increase the total number of bots in our environment.

From end to end we have about 50 robots already developed and running in a productive environment. We have human operators, back-office analysts, supervisors and coordinators involved in the whole process of execution and monitoring.

After our initial deployment, we have rarely needed to be in contact with support. Our in-house team can do most things autonomously.

We have a premium support package from UiPath and they are very useful and very helpful. They help us with whatever we want and without any doubt support is one of UiPath's strengths. This is not just in a technical sense, but in terms of business and strategy, as well.

As mentioned earlier, our RPA team is agnostic to the tool to be used. We can give our recommendation based on the customer's needs but if he has any premise that a specific platform should be used, we follow his needs.

The initial setup is very straightforward. We have a very good team of architects and we also had some assistance from UiPath. It was not simple, but it was not too hard, either. It was okay and we didn't have any problems with the implementation. In total, it took between three and four weeks to complete the deployment.

In terms of strategy, I think for the best implementation, you need to first have the infrastructure set up. The infrastructure and architecture should be very well defined with UiPath because you have a bunch of functionalities that may or may not be useful, depending on the type of business.

Deciding what functionality is required is the very first step. Then, the second step is to have a methodology and a center of excellence for RPA, including frameworks and best practices. This will help to ensure that everything is implemented correctly and that you don't have problems in the future. Finally, you need to have certified developers and certified architectures because this is the most relevant part. You want bots to go live with the best quality to ensure customer satisfaction.

We now have the ability to provide this type of environment to a customer very quickly. We can configure the environment in between two and four hours, to have it fully up and running, and it is very simple to do. This is because we have an RPA infrastructure already built, so you just need to acquire the hardware that includes the machines and servers. Once they are up and running, we activate this section and we can develop and build the bots.

UiPath was a big help during our initial setup. We have premium support, and they helped us with parts of the architecture, the infrastructure related to servers and the cloud, and getting it all set up properly in our high availability environment. It was like a four-handed job and it was all done well.

We have many different projects and customers and I would estimate that it has saved us and our customers something between $4M to 5M in total.

Just looking for our success case of the invoices processing, we avoid a cost of $10M.

The price of UiPath is higher than competitors, although the cost depends on what functionality and tools you require. For us, we don't need anything extra in terms of functionality but our contract includes an extra charge for premium support.

We evaluated UiPath, Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, all the best RPA tools providers in the international Market. As we are agnostic with the platform, we can develop using any of those three tools.

One of the cons of UiPath is the price. It's a bit higher than the other RPA tools. In terms of the pros for UiPath, it is more stable, it works in our high availability environment, the support is good, it is very agile and we can develop automations very quickly. Also, implementation was very fast and scalability is important.

We have conducted a proof of concept using UiPath's unattended robot capability to enable a self-service chatbot. Specifically, we used the unattended bot to speak with our S3ND (messaging) solution, which is a chatbot. The scheduling was done via APIs and the communication was done through the chatbot. This is something that we have tested, but not yet deployed. We do think that this is an important next step for us to look at.

We do not use the Document Understanding and AI Fabric features at this time but we are already testing it in some of our customers to implement them as soon as possible.

Another feature that we do not yet use, but we are looking into, is using the AI Center to drag-and-drop machine learning models into RPA workflows. We recently had some discussions with the technical specialists at UiPath about the newer features that are available, and we are looking into arranging for training and webinars that will teach us how to use these new features correctly. Once we have a better understanding of how to implement them, we will begin looking for specific use cases.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from UiPath has to do with our customers and their operations. The most difficult and important challenge that we have is changing the mindset of our customers such that it is in line with digital transformation, and this is something that UiPath helps us with. They provide us with everything we need in terms of security, implementation, and high availability. Really trusting that these bots are doing the right thing is the biggest advantage that UiPath provides for us.

There are three main points that I would make for anybody who is considering UiPath. The first is the cost, in terms of money. The price of investment is high but the benefits are uncountable. Next, it requires that you look into what you really need, and whether it is all of the features that UiPath offers or just some of them. It is also very important that you look at your infrastructure because it has to be able to handle all of the bots. For example, we know that our processes need a lot of computing power and a lot of memory, so the hardware is important. This has to be built in advance of purchasing the software. The final part is the team, including the developers and architects. It is very important that they all be certified by UiPath. There is training and courses available, they make everything clear, and it includes learning the best practices, frameworks, and models to assure that you're doing everything right. If the company is audited and you are doing it properly then you won't have any headaches.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Currently, we use UiPath in multiple types of use cases and build innovations for our clients to improve their system operations. We don't plan to implement AI in our automations in the near future. We're interested in that market, but it's a long journey, and it's a little advanced for us right now.

UiPath is helping our organization with its environmental, social, and governance automation space. Though it's currently at a beginner stage, it is progressing, and we expect to see improvements. UiPath has helped us free up staff for other projects. We have engaged our employees in working with UiPath through presentations. 

UiPath's integration features are highly valuable to us. We are able to achieve a lot with them.

For the moment, I don't see any explicit areas for improvement. However, having UiPath come up with unique features or advancements would be beneficial.

I have used UiPath for five years.

I don't see any drawbacks because our content is not down over time. We keep it updated consistently.

As our environment has grown, I haven’t encountered any specific issues or limitations.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. It's great, but sometimes we see delays. We ask a question, and they have to get back to us later with an answer. Otherwise, I don't see any drawbacks.

Positive

We previously tried out another automation app, but it didn't meet our expectations for handling exceptions and managing complex workflows.

Deploying UiPath was straightforward.

UiPath is the best tool, but the price is challenging from a management perspective. The cost-benefit equation might not work out favorably for some smaller organizations.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

We use UiPath for backend office automation and website integration. 

UiPath increases the dependability of our operations team and simplifies the coding process for novice developers.  It has freed up your staff time to work on other projects.

It's easy to automate rote tasks with UiPath. 

UiPath Studio could offer alternative coding methods. You could invoke the code with VB or C#, but I'm unfamiliar with either of those languages, and I don't have time to explore them. 

I have used UiPath for a little over a year.

My impression of the stability of UiPath is decent.

The scalability performance is yet to be fully assessed as the environment grows.

The documentation is not impressive, warranting a rating of five out of 10. It is neither bad nor great.

Neutral

I did not use a different solution before UiPath. The acquisition happened before my time.

I do not know of any alternate solutions evaluated as the acquisition was before my time.

I rate UiPath five out of 10. 

We use UiPath for our accounts receivable and accounts payable. We are a wood company that uses it primarily for customer care and finance.

UiPath helps us to reduce human error and eliminate some repetitive tasks involved in processing invoices, so our employees can focus on critical work. We have been able to assign users to different tasks. These tasks are done faster with fewer errors, and our customers our happier. 

The task recording is awesome. I love being able to see the processes and find out the issues a lot better.

I can't really say about the pricing and licensing.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

Our use cases for UiPath AI and automation are diverse and cover a number of functional areas within our business. We are doing everything from building simple to medium to complex RPAs. 

We have started utilizing communication mining and have a unique use case leveraging document understanding. Essentially, we are getting our feet wet across the board.

UiPath has allowed us to free up time for our employees so that they can engage in more value-added activities. Although cost has not been a significant driver, we focus on being more efficient and consistent throughout the organization. 

It has enhanced the overall experience for our stakeholders, including employees and customers, by streamlining processes and improving engagement.

Document understanding has been immensely valuable due to the breadth and depth of its application. Additionally, the potential of Generative AI is expected to drive significant value.

Since we are still in the early stages of using UiPath, identifying areas for improvement is challenging. We anticipate that some aspects may emerge as time progresses.

We have been using UiPath for close to a year, approximately ten months.

The solution has been stable so far.

UiPath has proven to be scalable.

We have received excellent customer service and support from UiPath. We have a good Technical Account Manager (TAM) and a strong relationship with the team managing our account.

Positive

We previously used Power Automate and other solutions. Most automation has transitioned to UiPath. We switched due to the fact that UiPath offers a broader range of functionalities and addresses our speed-to-delivery challenges.

The initial setup of UiPath was straightforward, thanks to a good partner.

We have been using an implementation partner, and they have been great so far.

While we have not yet achieved the ROI we expect, we are on target to do so. There have been some instances of ROI, although we are still in the infancy stages.

Typically, pricing is reflective of the value provided. While more value for less cost would be preferred, we do not focus extensively on costs.

We evaluated other options before choosing UiPath. It seemed best in class and fit our needs after due diligence.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use the tool for robotic process automation to automate mundane business processes prone to human error.

Some of UiPath's best features are its ability to interact well with applications and its less proneness to errors. It allows us to implement end-to-end automation, which is very important for our organization since we have many time-consuming job runs.

The tool has improved our organization by reducing operational costs through process automation and cutting FTEs. We can do more regression testing for test automation, leading to better products. It's helped minimize our on-premises footprint to some extent and aided organizational restructuring.

We've used the academy courses, which are good for beginners and advanced users. UiPath has sped up digital transformation, allowing quick fixes without building entire new solutions. It reduces human errors by 60-70 percent and saves us around 2500 hours.

UiPath is pretty easy to use for small—and medium-scale automation. However, maintaining the code becomes a bit more difficult when building large-scale, enterprise-level automation. Areas for improvement include versioning for collaborative projects and reporting features currently lacking.

I have been using the product for six years. 

As for stability, I'd rate it as six out of ten. Once a project is built, we face many issues, and we often have to go back to UiPath. So, in my opinion, stability could be improved.

My company has 10-15 users. Based on my experience, I would say UiPath is a scalable solution. I'd rate its scalability around seven or eight out of ten.

The user community for UiPath is great. We can ask about any issues we have on the community forum and usually get them resolved. Regarding technical support, it's amazing that they respond quickly. However, their level one engineer could be better educated on the tool before moving to level two support.

Neutral

We previously used an open-source Java Selenium solution but switched to UiPath for better security and platform capabilities.

We have the tool deployed in the cloud version. The deployment process was straightforward—it was pretty easy, mostly just drag and drop. Because of the number of projects we have, the initial deployment took days to months.

We use UiPath in multiple locations globally, including the US and India. The solution requires maintenance, particularly from a coding perspective.

I'd estimate UiPath has helped us save around 10-15 percent in costs.

UiPath is a pretty expensive tool compared to what the market offers, including open-source alternatives that can do similar things.

Overall, I would recommend UiPath to other users. The main reasons I like it and would recommend it are that it's very user-interactive and its capabilities are really good.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it overall around eight.

My client is a bank, and we create bots for them. They had processes that their employees used to do manually. They gave them to us to mimic the actions that they did. We automated those processes.

UiPath has increased the net worth of our organization. From UiPath, our organization has gained much more than expected.

UiPath improves the workflow. When we automate the processes, they go into the bank environment where they are used by all the employees from all the regions or states.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It is very easy to build automation using UiPath.

UiPath improves efficiency. The last project I worked on had 1,200 people working on the process. We automated that process, and with automation, 1,200 people have been eliminated directly.

I have not used UiPath's AI functionality but my team has. It makes it easy to automate processes that are more complex or involved.

UiPath has not saved us costs. When we use AI Fabric, we have to implement it additionally to the production environment, and it costs more.

UiPath has reduced human error by about 70%.

UiPath has freed up employees' time. The time saved depends on the process. If a person is doing the same process the whole day and we automate that, he has the whole time for other activities.

The Excel activities are valuable. We can do browser automation through other sites or tools, but for Excel, using tools or options like Selenium or JavaScript is quite complicated because we have to import the file from the JSQL or other things, whereas, in UiPath, we get direct activities. We can directly perform the operations by using the activities. We can directly apply logic to it, and that is how UiPath makes Excel automation easy. This is why I like it.

We have been getting positive outcomes from the UiPath Community. Whenever I have any questions, I go directly to the UiPath Community. Most times, we get the answer from there.

Currently, we have to additionally implement UiPath Fabric. It would be easier if it is already integrated with UiPath rather than having to add it. We have to take the dependencies by searching them. We should be able to go for the default ones.

Its stability also needs improvement.

It has been approximately one and a half years.

The stability needs to be improved. The UiPath selector is consistently failing.

It is a scalable product. We have about 150 users using the solution. It is being used in multiple departments.

Technical support is much needed. It has to be there. 

Our team has used UiPath Academy and UiPath Community. Whenever we get stuck while building the solutions, we most often get a solution from there. It is quite efficient.

Positive

I have used Selenium. In Selenium, we write scripts. We use the Java language for automation. We have to write the code, which makes it more complex, whereas, with UiPath, we can use direct activities, which makes it easier to understand and write the code.

We work in the cloud. Its deployment is easier. For the older versions, it was quite difficult, but with the upgraded version, it is quite easy.

It takes five to ten minutes, depending on how many bots you want to implement. If you want to implement one, you can directly do it in ten minutes.

One person is enough for the deployment. For maintaining the bots, we have a team because the developers and users do not have access to the production environment.

We have seen a 100% ROI.

The price of UiPath is comparatively higher than Selenium. Selenium is a free tool, and UiPath is quite expensive. 

Some organizations make automation costlier than it has to be. They use UiPath, and while selling the products, they make it more costly. It depends on the organization.

Freshers can learn UiPath. They will get knowledge about logic building. 

I would recommend UiPath to others. I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.