UiPath Platform Reviews

We are using it to automate various tasks of mortgage onboarding.

We use UiPath Assistant and Studio. We are using the cloud version. 

We do a lot of mortgage onboarding. To make that opening process of a loan easier, we're automating various tasks or tests during the creation of loans, such as running driver for approval letters and things like that. So far, we're getting good feedback from the business. We have 60 bots now.

It has reduced human error. I don't know the exact impact, but currently, we have about a thousand transactions a day between all of our bots. A lot of those are critical where you don't want errors on it. So, knowing that those are error-free is really good for the business.

The Orchestrator is most valuable because we get work periodically throughout the day. It'll ebb and flow. We have a really tight SLA, so we're able to have bots on demand. As soon as work shows up, the bots are picking it up.

In terms of ease of building automation, it is pretty straightforward. Once you learn the tool, it is pretty easy to use. 

I have used UiPath's Academy courses. They have helped a lot in getting up to speed with the solution. I came from Blue Prism. Once you know a system, you try to map another one with the way you did things in the first one. I was able to figure it out pretty quickly by just going through the courses. The content is pretty good. They have everything you need to know to get started. 

It is a little confusing at first. I came from Blue Prism where you have one dashboard and very little jumping back and forth. In Orchestrator, you have menus, and there is a lot of jumping between tabs and subtabs to get to the specific information, but once you learn that, it is pretty intuitive. There is just that initial learning curve if you're coming from another system. Blue Prism does everything in the one pane, and even though UiPath is neatly laid out, you just got to learn how they laid it out.

They started using it before I joined. I joined the company in April, and I believe they started with the concepts back in January of this year.

We've had only one outage, and that might've been our internal issue. Otherwise, it has been rock solid.

In our use case, it is a little difficult to scale because we have to create accounts for each robot. We do want to explore the feature where you can scroll up bots on demand and shut them off on demand, but we don't have the resources. So, we can't use that yet based on our internal limitations. If you're able to use that, then that's great.

In terms of the number of users, we don't have any attended people. It is just our development team.

They've been fairly responsive to everything we've reached out for.

I don't think they used any other solution.

It was all set up before I came in, but I had to onboard new stuff. It is pretty straightforward and easy once you figure it out.

In terms of cost savings, I don't know the numbers exactly, but I've heard good things.

The automation cloud offerings help to decrease the solution's total cost of ownership by taking care of things such as infrastructure maintenance and updates. However, I'm not 100% in tune with that side.

The pricing for the robots is fair. One thing that annoys us a little bit is that we have to pay for each developer. With Blue Prism, you can have 20 developers and not incur any additional costs. We don't like having to piecemeal all these different licenses. It is providing value, but it is not in the sense of a robot. You're paying for the tools, whereas other people just give you the tools, and then you pay for the bots.

I'm sure they did because that's a part of their bidding processes.

It has not helped to reduce the workload of our IT department by enabling end-users to create apps because we're not utilizing or doing user-created stuff. We are also not using its AI functionality in our automation program.

It, as such, hasn't freed up employee time because we're still in the baby steps. We're still trying to figure out how RPA fits in with everything. We're piloting a bunch of things, and we'll automate one part, but we haven't been able to downsize or reallocate people yet.

I'd rate UiPath an eight out of 10.

Currently, we're doing the digital transformation in finance. I'm more of a functional person who understands the design and the processes but not the programming, coding, and details. 

I am using their automation cloud offering.

One of the best benefits is that instead of just doing their single task, it gets people to think beyond what they're doing and how other things impact them; for instance, for PO distribution, we had to think about where our suppliers' lists are and what do the people do out in the field? I've never been as exposed to that as much as now because we are trying to automate it. What you find is that the challenge isn't just in the robot. It is what you do before you get to the robot that is critical, and if it forces us to fix that, it has been a success. It helps you to realize some efficiencies in your current processes.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease the total cost of ownership of UiPath by taking care of things such as infrastructure. We have gone and moved many more things to the cloud. We have a Hyperion solution in the cloud that we use for consolidation. We have FCCS cloud from Hyperion.

I anticipate that there would be a reduction in human errors and also time savings within these five processes. Inherently, it has to improve the accuracy. That's because now you're focused on a particular thing, and you're testing it. If it is not a hundred percent accurate, it is not going to production. 

The ability to follow and orchestrate what the robots are doing has been very valuable. I've been working on the automation hub because that's the next step after our test case of five robotic implementations. So, it is orchestrated to see how they're doing.

UiPath Academy is helpful in terms of the ability to connect the software to the processes that you're trying to automate. It has been helpful in understanding the functions, and it is where you would go to get a better understanding. I do find that their online help is very beneficial with examples. In fact, sometimes that's better than the training itself.

I'm learning it for the training for the RPA associate, and I'm about 70% through there. UiPath's academy courses have been helpful in onboarding or being up to speed with UiPath. However, it has been tougher because the programming that I learned in school is very different from the programming done today. I am sure the younger people will pick it up much faster. There is so much out there, and there is so much to learn because it is not one software package. It provides the ability to use all software packages and interconnect with them. So, the opportunities are amazing but also intimidating.

I started with UiPath training in July 2021.

I am not worried about the stability. I may be naive, but if others are using it in the cloud with much more complicated processes than what we are automating, it is not really a concern.

It is being used by accounting and IT. Finance is learning that, and they're taking the same training that I'm taking. They're probably 10% to 15% on that journey.

Currently, we're doing the digital transformation in finance. We expect to expand that out to operations based on our test case of five robotic implementations. In fact, in our naming conventions, we're trying to make sure that we leave room for HR, Operations, IT, etc, but right now, we're just in finance. Payroll processes, HR processes, onboarding, operations, filling in maintenance on equipment, and doing the routine things out in the field that they do every day will take adoption and interest. Raising four kids, I realize you can't get the response that you want until the people in the field decide that they want to change and adopt it. So, that will be the challenge. The challenge is not whether you can automate something. It is more like will they let you automate something.

I have not really had to use the support, but I will. I've gone back and forth, and I've lost some of my training. I'm a tenant who is just in the training phase. So, everyone has had issues with getting in, and it's more whether they're using Google or Explorer, and how they're accessing it. I am getting that standardized and having them do that. I am also a victim of the same thing that I'm teaching them, and what I'm trying to do is be the guinea pig.

Before UiPath, we didn't use any other RPA solution. We went for UiPath because it was really a move from our finance leader, the controller. We had automated many financial processes with planning, reporting, etc, but the accounting group was continually skipped over. We had a controller that came in, and they wanted to take many of our repeated processes. They took Rally and created an agile group to create the digital finance vector. There is a team of five members who went and looked at processes that we were doing and then told us about which ones we can change and do better with. By using his experience in other companies and having discussions with other people, along with the KPMG group, they did an analysis. They wanted to lead in the digital finance transformation. They're doing that by looking forward to five or 10 years and then coming back, which is really nice.

I will learn more about that. The workflow was nice, and the implementations that we have are relatively easy, but it is intimidating to see how much it takes to do some very small processes. It helps you understand more about the decision points and whether they're objective or subjective. With reporting, it will be helpful for us to understand which things are best to automate and which ones are the easiest. That's what I'm hoping to get from five implementations.

We are doing consulting with a collaborative effort with KPMG. So, they actually know more of the technical details, and they're supposed to be transferring data. 

KPMG did a sprint on the implementations. The sprints were such that it was really six week turnaround time, and that involved actually going backward and doing the assessments from those. By doing the cost benefits backward, we can set things upright and see what we do going forward. The key is not how quickly they were able to do it, but how quickly we can do it, and how quickly the people in the field can adopt that and have a robot actually be their assistant. I believe you call that the citizen developers.

Right now, it is way too big for me to even understand it. I feel like it's a universe. I'm just trying to get directions. The area that I'm looking at right now is analytics to make sure that we can properly report on how they're doing, and that's what is going to make management invest further into our idea. I come from a reporting background, and that's what I focus on in other financial packages that we have with PeopleSoft, Hyperion planning, and the FCCS cloud. In many of these automations, the need part of it is that you're not stuck within the software that you had; for example, a macro within Excel can only help you with what you're doing in Excel. It can't help you with an email. It can't help you with a PDF form, but you can bring these together, so the automation opportunities are endless.

So, at this time, it hasn't saved us money because we're just in the investment phase. That's why I want to do reporting so we can see. The decisions you make now affect the next 10 to 20 years. Everyone gets too short-term-focused. You should go to where you want to be five years from now and go backward. What you are doing today is going to make that five years strike. So, it is an investment.

It is pricey at the beginning, but we'll have to see going forward what we get for the tools. It is always expensive to buy a really nice car and not drive it very far and very much. So, it is about utilization.

I believe my company did evaluate other solutions, and they definitely liked UiPath best. The primary differentials were reputation, experience, and the level and quality of the tool.

I would advise others to give it a try. It can't hurt. Even if you didn't use it going forward, with the basic principles, you'll probably fix things and then come back to it. Some people just have bad processes, and it would be very frustrating to use them because they haven't fixed their processes. You have to get your processes aligned first and then take them to the point that they're standardized and understood by different people using them, and then you can automate across different software packages.

In terms of the ease of building automation within UiPath, that's something that I need to discover with the IT team, but what I do like is once you do something, you store it in a library, and then you have plug and play automation that you can add to others. So, you don't have to keep redoing the same work over and over again, and that's going to be a huge benefit.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. I'm learning it, but have to inject experience. I have to learn and understand, and then I have to utilize t. Like many solutions that I've dealt with, there are always three ways to do it, but there is the best way. I always wish you'd just teach the best way, but I understand that you want to make people agile and have an understanding of using it in different ways. However, learning all three ways is very cumbersome. You really want to learn the way you're going to use it.

Most of our use cases come in finance functions, however, we certainly have use cases spread across all sorts of other functions. For example, in HR. We've had a lot recently in IT operations and then also in broader operations. Obviously, that depends on the company we're working with. We're getting more and more customer-facing automation that is running all the way through the organization, from front office through middle office and back, across all different verticals within a company.

UiPath has improved our clients' companies and the way they function. For example, overall, automating the mundane and the repetitive allows people to do people things. Things like invoice processing and using Document Understanding to do that, enable your accounts payable team to look at the exceptions and do exception-based processing, which requires human judgment. Keying an invoice and working out who to send it to for approval should be rules-based. If it's not rules-based, it's probably an error or a miscommunication between the vendor who's sending it. Maybe it's a mismatch to the PO, and that requires human judgment. Therefore, just getting it out to a human to do that at the right time is critically important. If you're giving your people more time to do the exception-based management, you also give them the time and capacity to stop that from being an exception next time. Whether that's expanding the automation to be able to handle that use case, or whether it's educating your vendors when they're sending you invoices.

We work prominently with unattended solutions and larger end-to-end automation. What we're really loving about UiPath is the number of ways we can now inject human intervention at different parts of those larger workflows instead of looking at a big workflow and working out what parts of it we can automate, aiming to automate end-to-end and only working out the bits that we really need the human intervention in.

UiPath is constantly coming up with ways, whether it's through Teams or it's through apps, there are all sorts of different ways to get the human in the loop and get the automation throughput as high as we can.

Our clients use the UI apps feature. We use that for quite a few different functions. It helped to reduce the workload of IT departments by enabling end-users to create apps. That said, we generally work closer to the business than the IT side. We'd like to see it as taking the work away from the backlog that IT is looking to implement. You don't need an IT department that is quiet and doesn't have a big long queue of work. Allowing the business to be able to build their own solutions based on their business process is very powerful.

The UI apps feature has increased the number of automation. It’s certainly increasing the number of things you can automate and also the amount of a given process you can automate.

It has also reduced the time of creation. Certainly with the app creation, having a single platform reduces the time. You no longer need to integrate it with other different web forms or things you create on the front end, which we did a number of years ago. Now, it's one solution. UiPath can do it all.

For clients that use automation cloud offering, it has helped to decrease UiPath's total cost of ownership. It goes a little bit back to the IT side. You don't need to involve them nearly as much. Having a platform that is always on the latest version really, really helps. It also closes down the handoff between business and IT within the COE.

UiPath has saved costs for our client's organizations. The IT costs are different for each organization. We have clients who have an outsourced IT set up where they pay quite large costs to spin up machines and to maintain and upgrade those machines and services. Having the one solution as UiPath and offering the cloud is critically important for that.

In terms of on-prem instances, clients have saved costs there as well. We're very, very excited about the automation speed and the one-button deployment to the whole environment. That's certainly a step in that direction with on-prem. That will certainly save our client and us a lot of time. That way, everyone can spend more time building automation rather than building a platform to put them into.

The product has reduced human errors. On the same note, it also allows humans to spend a little bit more time on those exceptional cases. When the pressure may be on to get an invoice keyed it allows them to spend the right amount of time getting that exception handled. Then, of course, everything that's going through the bot is pretty much zero-error. The way the bots work, if there is an error it's going to let someone know. It's not going to guess and it's not going to fat finger.

We increasingly use UiPath's AI functionality. We certainly do on custom models with Document Understanding. We're just starting a project now to look at pulling entities out of emails. This is an exciting use case and I’m excited to learn about the capabilities that are being expanded.

The ability to automate processes is twofold. One of them is, it allows us to start to create human decisions. The human decision is the bit that you really need to automate around and starting to build that human decision-making into an AI model is critically important. The other side of that is that, when you're running automation, you have the ability to create a huge dataset. Everything that's being done is rules-based and it's data-driven so you can map everything every bot does, every button press if you want. That's a huge amount of data and a huge amount of input to AI models. Having it all in the UiPath platform is critically important for our customers. It's great that UiPath has lots of partners and we use partners, technology partners, to do that when required. However, the more that comes into the UiPath platform, the better.

We’ve utilized Academy courses from UiPath. UiPath's academy is amazing. It's unparalleled in the industry. We traditionally have done a lot of training for our clients over the years. However, we find with UiPath, we just point them in the direction of the Academy. We're always there to support, of course, and supplement any training that's specific to maybe a client environment or a client business system. That said, it's a fantastic resource for partners and for clients of UiPath.

The quality of the training Academy is great. It's also a tool to evangelize UiPath in our customer base. If someone hears about UiPath or they come to one of our demos through our delivery life cycle, and they really want to know something about UiPath, or want to get involved, or want to become a part of the COE or become a developer, it’s very, very easy to send them in the right direction. They can do the training they want to do, and they can get as deep as they want. It’s great and offers a low-effort way to evangelize UiPath.

The time to competency has been lowered with those that go through the Academy. It's not only learning. Learning things off slides. It's getting in there, it's whether it's a community edition or a training install, it's building things. Through the certifications, users can submit those things to get reviewed. This makes sure that people who are certified through the academy really do know their stuff. They've got hands-on experience. There's nothing quite like doing it in a real process. With the UiPath Academy, new users get as close as they can to that.

There should be extra ways for humans to interact with automation.

From what I've seen, and it's very early, however, there's certainly the direction they are headed, which is really, really great to see. It's my belief that Document Understanding will continue to improve. I'd like to see more predictive-type stuff, which again, we are beginning to see.  We'd love to get Document Understanding continually improving and having it more improved by the SMEEs who are performing the processes rather than the data analysts.

We've been implementing UiPath for just over four years.

The stability is amazing. Years have gone by and obviously, the product has changed a lot, however, of late, the last couple of years have been great stability-wise.

The object repository and modern folders have been great for the scalability of the solution. From the platform side, it's certainly easy to scale. We're very, very impressed on the automation suite side. You can deploy everything very quickly and you can scale everything up. 

The focus on reuse from a developer level is great to see. That's really improved in the last little while. On the other side of it, the actual scale through the organization, in terms of evangelizing automation, and making our customers an enterprise that automates first, there are numerous tools that do that really well. Whether it's the workshops that UiPath will come and do, or that we facilitate or it's through the pipeline itself, the scalability has obviously been a focus for the last little while. It's really, truly great.

We very rarely need to reach out to UiPath support. If we do, we know we're going to get a prompt response, and we're going to get a good answer. That said, we rarely need it. It's very, very good in general when we do use it.

We've got a few clients that run multiple solutions. They've been legacy users of another solution for a very long time. Citizen Development through StudioX is unparalleled in UiPath. Attended automation is obviously a strong point and has been for years. There are also things like Document Understanding. Document Understanding is much stronger than any of the solutions on other providers. There are those value adds that come in for that full lifecycle.

The solution is relatively straightforward. We have a dedicated platform team whose role is to implement UiPath for our customers, whether it's integrating them into the cloud or getting their business applications on the cloud. Or, whether it's an on-prem solution where we'll interact with their systems and integrate with their CyberArk or AD groups or whatever they need.

Each deployment is very dependent on the customer. We've had them deployed in a few days and we've had some that have gone on a few months, unfortunately. We find that talking to the risk group, the security group, and the infrastructure group all at the same time on day one of the project will make sure everyone's aligned - and that is the best way to mitigate the risks. 

The last thing you want is someone from the security organization putting their hand up in week four and saying, "Hold on, hold on, start again. This doesn't comply with one of the controls in our organization." It's about educating and keeping everyone, all stakeholders from the IT side involved at all stages.

The ROI that our clients have seen is very process-dependent. We've seen some huge 300 to 600% on particular use cases. Some of them are very easy to calculate due to the fact that we're taking work away from manual users. We've also seen some really good ones recently that are actually increasing revenue. Whether that's giving the capacity to sales-type items or whether it's tasks such as processing refunds and all those sorts of things that shouldn't be taking time away from salespeople, it’s been helpful.

The licensing can get a little confusing. There's been a move recently to create personas around licensing. My feedback from customers is that it hasn't necessarily helped. Some of the new enterprise-type agreements, the per-seat arrangements, are interesting. That's likely the way it'll go. Even then, it's still a little on the confusing side at times. We do a lot of work with clients to get them to understand the licensing model.

We've been aware of other solutions, and in comparison, with UiPath, it's the breadth of the lifecycle that sets it apart. UiPath as a platform, from the moment the first person at an organization thinks about automating, to reaping the benefits of that and improving the day-to-day work of the business, there's a solution for all of that. Whether it's process mining and finding automation candidates, it's the way UiPath brings different users into the automation. Apps and insights make sure we're pulling the right data out to keep generating the business case to grow the UiPath account itself. Also, along with that, is the ability to provide the extra benefit and knowing what benefit we're providing.

We have clients across both on-prem and cloud deployments. We have about 25% cloud, 75% on-prem solutions. We use various versions of the on-premises model. We probably average about 12-month-old versions, however, we do have clients on the most recent as well. We also have a couple of clients who are lagging a little bit.

I'd advise potential new users to get in there and get started. You don't know until you've tried. You don't have to look very hard to get started, however, it's important once you get going to start to think about how you scale and how you build an operating model around it. Maybe start small, and think big, and make sure you plan accordingly.

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

We primarily use the solution for the typical banking and transactional use cases. An example could be something such as homeowner's association transactions. That incorporates multiple departments in a bank, including treasury management accounts and opening an ACH. All of those areas are very transactional in terms of the rules-based processes that they follow.

We also use the solution for wire transfers. We have a lot of those. Then, from a business perspective, we look at lines of business as well. It can be used for residential and commercial lending. It's very process-driven and very transactional. We're able to incorporate automation in those areas very easily.

The solution allows us to do more with less. If we have a relationship with a third-party bank to onboard with a thousand accounts with a 15-day turnaround time, depending on what the relationship is, without automation, without RPA, you'd have to hire at least 10 or 15 contractors to get that done. That’s from a contractual perspective, to make sure that you meet the deadlines. However, automation just allows you to scale. You can save the same scenario in multiple areas. The scalability and the time to scalability on offer are key. And that's where we see the value as an organization.

The time to value is excellent on this solution. It is incredible. Unlike any other technology, which is really generally workflow-related, this RPA will give you quick wins, as demonstrated by the return on investment.

The solution has saved costs for our organization. We look at it from different lenses. We look at it from an actual savings perspective. We forecast it and then we annualize it to understand where the product will be or what it will bring us in the long and not just short term. For us, it’s very ROI-driven.

I’ve been with the bank for nine months now, and we went from having two processes automated to now having actual savings of about a little over $300K. It's not bad. There are about 30 processes in production. If we annualize that and forecast out we can see how we can continue to grow.

We have been able to reduce human error. I would call that the cherry on top. You don't really track that until you have it automated. However, if the alternative is having end-users upset that mistakes happen, having the level reduction we’re getting is great.

The solution has freed up employee time by a lot. We see it wherever it's very transactional heavy, where we had multiple team members. Now the teams are built by bots and people. Where you had three people before, now you have a person and a bot executing. So far, we have likely saved, in these nine months, a little over 11,000 man-hours. That's quite a win.

This additional time enabled employees to focus on higher-value work. That’s the whole purpose. We tend to look at ROI, not just money. It's also what else are the employees doing. We’re saving money from a man hours perspective, and, from a cost avoidance perspective, we’re not having to hire. The folks that work for us actually can do valuable work. They can focus on better decision making, more time with the customer, better relationship making, et cetera.

My team has started to utilize the UiPath Academy. My team is composed of multiple different skill sets from PMs to BAs to engineers, and so forth. Even at the level of IT, with the teams that manage infrastructure, sometimes I have them taking some of the infrastructure courses in the Academy. The Academy works well due to the fact that they prep you to grow quickly. If you don't understand how the technology operates, it could be a little bit difficult. You do have to train a little bit to understand it a little bit, however, it's not very difficult, especially when you have access to the Academy.

Having the Academy has affected the process of getting employees up to speed big time. Their appetite to get better and better is just enormous - not just due to the fact that the product is good and it's providing that information to do that, but also due to the fact that they're seeing results. That's helping them want to do it better and faster. It’s a win-win situation there.

The Academy has a really good curriculum for very particular skill sets. It's hard to be an engineer and have to learn a bunch of different stuff that won't necessarily concern you. UiPath has been able to really compartmentalize that learning capability so that it makes sense to different groups and speaks to their level of expertise. That’s probably the most valuable aspect of it.

In the world of NextGen technology, it would be ideal if they could speed up their beta products. My team handles all next-generation technologies that we implement in the bank. For example, we're looking at task mining right now. It's theoretical, however, that product is going to be tremendous. That said, it's still a bit in beta. For us, if they were trying to get new items a little bit quicker out there, that would be ideal. They're running with it, therefore, I'm not overly worried. They also want to provide a good platform for its users, and so I understand why they want to make sure it's good. The competition, in reality, even though it's growing, is not as strong. The feedback is just me being picky at this point.

We've been using the solution since 2015.

So far, we have had very few issues and the issues really have been around very complex knowledge. We have reached out to UiPath to get advice, and they responded, and it hasn't been bad at all.

Scalability has not been an issue. It's not even a topic of concern. The concern is more on the business side and can you manage the growth from a business perspective. The technology's there and I want to automate more. However, with automation, the question is if you can manage it.

We do have plans to increase usage. 

We have about 30 automations in place. That means about 60 to 70 people are using it. They work in shifts and they'll come in and they'll use their bots to process stuff while they do other stuff. 

Technical support is great. In the times we've used it, they've come back relatively quickly.

I started with UiPath a long time ago and I actually worked for Automation Anywhere. I was head of their cognitive product. Therefore, I used them for a while. They're not a bad product at all. They're really good, however, their scalability is a little bit of concern. For us, coming back to UiPath was probably a good decision.

The initial setup is complex. However, that's okay. It's also not supposed to be easy. You have to learn a little bit about what you're doing. Any technology would be a little bit complex. Once it's in, you can get that learning curve moving. With the actual users, that's where the trick of the implementation piece comes in. Once you're through it, however, that's where UiPath becomes really tremendous.

The deployment was maybe 60 days, however, it wasn't necessarily just because of UiPath. In banking, there's red tape. It takes time to get certain aspects approved. It takes time to get the right infrastructure in place. The enterprise has to be willing to put the time in just as UiPath has to put a certain time. It's a blend. As we were implementing, we were still putting things together and setting up governance. It was not just the technology. You still have to prep on the business side.

In terms of maintenance, on my team, I have about seven people, three engineers, a couple of business analysts, and a couple of PMs.

The pricing could be a little bit better for document understanding. I ran the pricing scheme for intelligent documents. With understanding at Automation Anywhere, there's room to maneuver. They can do a little bit better in making it easier for customers to dive in. I know it's available, however, it is what it is.

The organization evaluated Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. 

We went with UiPath due to the fact that they gave us a good deal and we wanted to try it out. We started little. At the hedge fund, we're actually now at over three bots in production. Automation Anywhere's a little bit pricey at the moment. We just kind of pulled the trigger on UiPath and it was a blessing. 

We're just customers and end-users.

While we are on-premises, we're starting to use the cloud including some of the modules from the cloud, document understanding, task minding, et cetera. We're using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd advise those considering the solution that there's a secret sauce to it. It's not just the technology. People need process systems and a really good partner. That's how you get it done.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We're a revenue cycle management company for medical billing. What we've done is we've replaced or reallocated our charge entry employees. We're using bots now to do the charge entry on medical claims and then also payment posting along with eligibility and AR. So we've been able to reallocate just within this last year, probably about eight employees. They've been reassigned to more valuable work, for example, things that the bot can't do and actually requires a human to do. We've been understaffed, therefore, it's actually worked out great.

The ease of building automation using UiPath isn't a problem; it seems to be very easy to do to a point. Our challenge is we work in a live environment. Therefore, we’re not able to use a test environment when we build things out. That’s why we have to go very slowly.

I'm not that familiar with the product, with the solution, however, the UiPath apps feature is great, although we're not using any of the apps currently.

The biggest benefit we've seen would be the accuracy. Even just with employees calling in sick, not having enough staff, we’ve been able to fill those roles.

The robotics piece has been a huge thing. We're doing medical claims. We're always worried about claims not getting paid. This solution has allowed us to been able to capture those claims so that we get paid the first time.

We also now can track how many times we touch a claim. For example, how many clicks. We couldn't do that before. That's been very valuable to us.

We’ve improved our efficiency. Even just our cost analysis has been great. As we do new contracts, we know what it's going to cost exactly.

UiPath has saved costs for our organization. We’ve re-allocated six employees and, for what they do, they're somewhere around $40,000 a year. We've implemented six bots to do those same functions and they're about $8,000 a year. We've almost tripled our ROI.

I don't know if it's UiPath as much as just what we do which is really complicated. Even the consultants that we've used with UiPath had said, "wow, this is very difficult what you guys do." There are a lot of moving parts. It's not as much of a UiPath issue. It's just our own processes.

I cannot recall the solution missing any features. 

We've been using UiPath for about maybe a year and a half tops.

I don't have any problems or concerns about the stability right now. The biggest concern I did have at the time was the fact that we've already invested six people in this in terms of the robotic piece and we're going to have a lot more. Since we've re-allocated these resources, and I have potentially 100 people where I could also reallocate resources, I worry about if something does happen or it doesn't work or there's no backup. If something goes wrong, I don't have employees to backfill as they won't exist. That's my concern. That hasn't happened yet, and I hope it doesn't.

The scalability has been great. It hasn't been a problem at all. We will just continue to add bots every time we need them. So far, it's been easy. We started with two. Three months later, we added another two. Another three months went by and we added another two. From our standpoint, it's great. My UiPath rep was shocked that I keep adding more.

I have not used technical support. 

We have a partner and they take care of it if something comes up. 

We had one issue with UiPath where something didn't work. We talked to them and it was taken care of within a couple of days.

We're working on something that may be called UiPath Insights. It's still not functional and there are some sources that we need. My vendor's working on that. I'm not quite sure what he means by it, however, he's working on it.

We did not use a different solution previous to UiPath.

The initial setup was pretty easy. Yeah. We didn't face any challenges with it.

I contacted one of the vendors and they ran with it. As far as I'm concerned, we didn't have issues at all.

The deployment took us about 30 days. After that, in terms of implementing the bots, the first bot took us about three months. As soon as we did the first one, it just went really quick after that. That's due to the fact that it was a lot of reuse. It was just us internally understanding what information was needed and how it works. In terms of requirements, it was all new to us. Even with the acronyms they use, I'm still learning as we're not IT-based at all.

We had a vendor that helped us implement it. We didn't have any challenges as far as that goes.

It was good. They didn't realize how challenging it was going to be or the person who integrated the solution for us, at last, didn't. At the same time, they know almost everything about my business now, however, I'm a little concerned about having to bring on more people as they're not in this industry. We're going to have to start them over from the kind of the ground up, which takes time.

We had a problem before with the pricing, however, for the most part, it's fine where it is now. My ROI is fine and it works great. I have no complaints.

The issue is you have to do a package at a time. That's my only challenge. Sometimes I don't need that much. I don't need that many licenses. The first time you sign up, it's a package of five every year. I don't necessarily need that.

We chose UiPath based on a referral. Somebody we heard speaking at a neurological healthcare conference about four years ago, who was not from  UiPath suggested that we needed to talk with UiPath.

I actually didn't know of any other company until after we were on UiPath.

This person was in our same space and he said it's fantastic. He had actually used two other solutions, however, he told us to go with UiPath and I trusted him. I've talked to other people since and they have said the same thing. We've made the right choice.

We started using the on-premise deployment for the first six months and then we actually moved to the cloud.

We're mostly using unattended bots. 

We haven't really reduced human error for sure. We haven't calculated that. We're just moving on to our Insights app. We're just getting ready to launch that. Therefore, we’re not there yet. We don't know what that turnaround is going to look like.

We do not yet use UiPath's AI functionality in our automation program.

We have not yet used any UiPath Academy courses.

When we first got involved, we just wanted to know if it would work. We just decided on a certain budget and decided to try it. Once it worked, we realized we actually had to step back. We started really looking at where we could implement it. We should have done that earlier. That's what I would tell people. It's an automation hub. You need to go through and find your best scenarios, your best ROI. I would definitely tell people to look at that first.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We're in the financial services industry, so we target the operations. We use it in finance but we're also going after our wealth management group, capital markets group, and fixed income capital markets group.

In one year we've done 17 automations in about 3,500 hours. We're just getting started. 

We use mostly unattended automation, but we do have both.

It's still early for us so we're selecting specific areas and items to automate based on areas that we believe will provide strategic importance for us.

We're now going to start expanding that and going after some of the larger jobs that we want to try to tackle, now that we've got some experience under our belt.

We have saved costs in terms of employee hours saved. There are definitely going to be costs associated with that. Some of those are pretty high net worth individuals that UiPath is doing tasks that they just didn't need to do.

It's definitely saving time for employees. One of our most successful automations frees them up from doing an entire task. Their quality of life has had a big improvement. It also happens to save a lot of hours. It saves a little over 2,000 hours annually.

We are still learning how to build automations but I'm a fan of the RA framework. We use StudioX to help with citizen developers to help fill our pipeline. The tools are pretty good and evolving.

The ability to bridge various applications that users are using is the most valuable feature. If we have a process that's entered in multiple locations, we can send a robot to do one of those processes on behalf of the person. We've had good success there.

Everybody on the team goes through Academy courses and continues to go back there for continuing education. Citizen developers are directed in that location as well. So we try to get them to complete StudioX. We like its ability to extend the life and the usability of some applications that by themselves can be a little cumbersome to use. I would like to make those apps and those experiences better for the user. And actually do more with them by extending parts through APIs that are passed to other applications.

We're looking to start to modify the meat of the process and then tag on pieces to the beginning and ends. 

Insights is a little clumsy. StudioX is a great start but needs more functionality. They should bring the document understanding into StudioX and make it go a little bit further. There's a pretty clear point at which you really need to switch over to Studio, but in the case of some of our citizen developers, they'd like to stay in StudioX. They just need more features. 

We have been using UiPath for a year. 

It's been very stable. The only problem we had were some digital certificates and those aren't UiPath's fault. It's partly our fault and how we manage them. One of those got in the way and shut some stuff down. It's not really the UiPath platform. That really hasn't gone down on us at all. It was the certificates. 

We're only at 17 automations now. We have a lot of headroom in the bots that we currently own and the licensing that we have. We're getting ready to put the necessary pieces in place so that we can scale it up.

The technical advisor is very good. 

Positive

 We have plenty of solutions that fall in the surrounding area, like various CTL things, automated software, and the types of things that are primarily used by IT.

We had a strategic partner help us with the setup because we knew nothing about it. They helped set up our COE and the basic frameworks that we were going to be using within IT. I came in about four or five months into the project as an analyst so I wasn't there when they did it. 

The strategic partner we used was very good.  They got us up and running and got our initial test trial into play.

The setup process was not straightforward. They purposely gave them some things that were a bit of a challenge. 

We are happy with what we got as a result.

The first deployment took quite a while. If you're considering standing up a whole COE in all those environments, they did that fairly quickly. I believe it was in about three months. It has then continued to evolve from there. That was the learning experience. If you look at our development, that first automation, there's a long flat line. Then it started to ramp up pretty significantly in the back half of the year.

Pricing is working for what we have right now. We set up two Orchestrator environments and we're unable to use our single license of the analytics on both. That's a bit of a problem. We'd like to see a dev environment for us that is free of licensing. It's development versus production. Charge us for production, don't charge us for dev. That's about the only complaint I would have.

Don't be afraid to jump in. Get the IT department involved early, get the security department at the table. As long as you have top-down management that's there to mandate and make sure everybody does what they should be doing, the proper sponsorship, and the proper buy-in from the people that have to execute.

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

UiPath helps us to develop and build a center of excellence for our clients. I do development and technical implementation of the bots, best practices, and teach others how to do the development.

The client that I'm working with now is in the financial services sector. They do banking and life insurance. They do a lot of contracts and billing, backend, data entry-type work. We process all of the return mail that comes in, scan it using Doc Understanding, publish new bills, generate form letters, and all of those tasks that go along with managing the client for life insurance, annuities, 401K, etc.

A lot of the benefits we've seen are from FTE hours saved. We are looking at almost all of our processes, and it saves us at least a thousand or more hours per year before we go into implementation. We have around 20 in production. We're saving between 15,000 and 20,000 hours of process time.

From the user's perspective, people are happy that they don't have to do certain tasks that they didn't like to do. I only have one of those bots where I have a group of people that prefer the way they've always been doing tasks, but that's more of an organizational thing. I'm seeing across the enterprise with other folks that they're very happy to have this. They are putting more use cases in, and the frontline workers are bringing in use cases. Of course, we need to vet a lot of those so that we get enough bang for the buck, but we're finding a lot of adoption across, up, and down the whole scale so far.

There's also been a reduction in human error. There are so many use cases that have been more on the production side of things, like productivity as opposed to risk avoidance. We enter data and we do bank transfers, so it's important to key the data correctly. We use the attended bot to do that. We took a paper form. We push it in, it comes in as an unattended bot in the backend to read an email from a person and put a transfer in place. It gets approved and put in the queue.

When they run the attended bot, it allows them to do an RSA key into their external site, take the data, watch it go in, they see it, we audit it on the backend with a second user, it gets pushed in, saved, and submitted. From that perspective, if you're dealing with 10, 50, or 100 transfers a day, where you could key in the wrong number, it's important.

That's been helping. Employees are happy that they don't have to type it all in, and that they don't have to worry about the errors as well. It offers peace of mind for those folks.

Getting the bots going and working is the most valuable aspect. We have about 20 or so in production. We're building out from there. We've been very focused on Studio and Orchestrator, as opposed to some of the other product lines. Because a lot of what we're dealing with pertains to advanced technical people like myself that are helping them along that journey.  

It's easy for me to build automations but I am a computer scientist. I have a deep technical background. A lot of what I've been doing is trying to teach people how to build resilient bots, and how to build processes that will run. To me, one of the big things to meet your ROI is that you need to build things upfront that work. You need to verify them, test them, componentize them, and put them together. Otherwise, you're going to spend too much money on the backend with maintenance.

If you can get people to think about what do to in the event of a failure, even from the developer side of it, then they can create things that we can run, and we don't have to do so many new maintenance and operations tasks on it. That's vitally important.

I have used the UiPath Academy courses. I'm a certified developer. I didn't know UiPath at all. I went through the Academy and trained myself. When I brought in new developers, I had them do modules and I sometimes go visit them. 

The Academy is pretty good. It's very helpful to have something like that. Personally, my favorite side of things that UiPath is bringing to the table, is a community edition in the cloud. I can go out and play with the latest and greatest. I have my client's laptop, but I also have my own personal laptop and I go out to the cloud and do tasks out there.

I want to bring what's new, help bring to the forefront what we might want to do in the future, and get a hands-on perspective, without having to go to the client and bug them about bringing in a license for something. That's great and I hope they continue with that.

The fact that they're not charging for training is great. It brings on more developers. The barriers to entry for people are low. And the more developers you have, the more adoption you're going to get.

There's a lot of technological growth that should be done. They need to learn from customers. I talk to people about Doc Understanding which is relatively new. There's a lot of people in the document world that have more experience. They should learn a little bit more about what Kofax has done over the years with their validation actions and those types of things.

There should be more growth, but the platform is there. As they grow those things they should take each piece and make it better. If you start with a good platform and you build it up, it's going to get better. What we have today is very usable, and is only going to get better. I look forward to it.

They should talk to their customers and understand their use cases. Give customers what they need. 

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

Stability has been quite good. I see technical glitches once in a while in the Studio, but when you're running on Windows, it happens. The glitches don't happen very often.

It seems very scalable, in terms of rolling out new processes. We're more limited by machines and getting things set up than we are by what Orchestrator can handle. We have one attended bot and we're 95% unattended.

We have plans to increase usage. Our clients are growing from two developers, a QA and a VA, to a VA, and a team of two pods of six or seven developer QA types, to implement use cases over the next couple of years. They're on a very high trajectory of growth.

I go out to the community a bit. I Google looking for what everybody else has said and figure it out. We only have a couple of different use cases where we've gone back to UiPath, and the ones that we had the most difficulty with, we went right through the local sales rep to get things going. I found their support to be good.

The initial setup was straightforward and easy.

I set up Orchestrator servers, I put bots out into the systems, and I installed Studio in the client's environment. The only problem I have is with the way the client environment exists. Security gets to be a hassle. 

One of the things the company focuses on a lot is employee satisfaction. From a cost perspective, we haven't necessarily gotten to that level. I've been there for two years. I'm a consultant. We have other consultants. We're saving $15,000 a year, while we're displacing certain cost dollars from the people that did those jobs, we get paid more.

Cost-wise we're fairly evening out, and probably bringing an MROI. This is a longer scale process for them, to take them along this journey. It's important for businesses that go under that, to not necessarily focus on year one, year two. We look at this as a longer-term endeavor for them. The key benefit that they see out of it right now is the future. The workers are satisfied not having to do the "bad" work.

I found UiPath to be pretty cost-effective. 

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten. I see it as a maturing product. It's done very well, because it is stable, and it does build real use cases. But I look forward to the future. There's a lot of good going on here.

We're a revenue cycle management company for medical billing. We've reallocated our charge entry employees. We're using bots now to do the charge entry on medical claims and then also payment posting along with eligibility and AR. We've been able to reallocate about, just within this last year, probably eight employees. They've been reassigned to more valuable work - things that the bot can't do and actually requires a human to do. We've been understaffed, so it's actually worked out great for our company.

The ease of building automation isn't a problem. It seems to be very easy to do to a point. Our challenge is we work in a live environment. We're not able to use a test environment when we build things out. We have to go very slowly.

I'm not that familiar with the product, with the solution, however, the UiPath apps feature and OCR are great. That said, we're not using any of the apps currently.

The biggest benefit we've seen is the accuracy. Even just with employees calling in sick or not having enough staff. We’ve been able to fill those roles.

The robotics piece has been a huge thing. We're doing medical claims. We're always worried about claims not getting paid. This has been able to capture those claims so that people get paid the first time. One of the other things we track is how many times we touch a claim. For example, how many clicks. We couldn't do that before. That's been very valuable to us.

We’ve improved our efficiency in a way for sure. Even just our cost analysis has improved. When we do new contracts, we know what it's going to cost exactly.

I don't know if it's UiPath as much as just what we do is really complicated. Even the consultants that we've used with UiPath, even they've said, wow, this is very difficult what you guys do. There are a lot of moving parts, so it's not as much of a UiPath problem in terms of limitations. It's just our own processes.

Right now, I don't think I've been on there long enough to know if there are missing features or functionalities I’d like to be added.

I’m talking to people right now, to see how it can do things better or how we could use it more effectively. We’d like to discover what worked for other people.

We've been using UiPath for about maybe a year and a half tops.

I haven't had any problems or concerns right now concerning stability. The biggest concern I do have is that we've already invested six people in this. We're going to have a lot more that will, more or less, not have the robotic piece as part of their job. That work will be reallocated. I have about a hundred employees that UiPath could technically reallocate.

When I look at that, I worry about if something does happen or it doesn't work or there's no backup. Then, suddenly, I don't have employees. Right now, we can jump in and some humans can do the work if necessary. My concern is that in the future they won't exist. This hasn't happened yet. I hope it doesn't.

Scalability hasn't been a problem at all. We can just continue to add bots every time we need them. It's been easy.

We started with two. Three months later, we added another two. After another three months, we add another two. From our standpoint, it's great. My UiPath rep was shocked that I keep adding more, so that's good.

I have not used technical support.

That said, we had one issue with UiPath where something didn't work. We talked to them and it was taken care of within a couple of days.

My vendor is working with them. They mentioned there was an issue with insights that they are working through. Insights are still not quite functional, or there are some resources we need. However, the vendor is dealing with it directly. It's a work in progress. 

We did not previously use a different RPA solution. 

The initial setup was pretty easy. We didn't have any challenges with that. I contacted one of our vendors and they ran with it. We didn't have issues at all.

With the vendor, it took us about 30 days to deploy UiPath. After that, in terms of implementing bots, the first bot took us about three months. Once we did the first one, it just went really quick after that. We could reuse some processes which made it faster. There was a lot of reusing of the same. We were also internally understanding what information they need and how it works.

It was all new to us. I'm still learning the acronyms they use. We need to learn what they are talking about. We’re not IT-based at all. It's definitely different.

We had the solution implemented by a vendor. They implemented it all. We didn't have any challenges as far as that goes.

Our experience with the integrator was good. I would say that they didn't realize how challenging it was going to be or, at least, the person who integrated didn’t. At the same time, they know almost everything about my business now.

UiPath has saved costs for our organization. For example, we’ve allocated six employees that are paid around $40,000 a year and we've implemented six bots to do those same functions and they're around $8,000 a year. In a way, we’ve doubled our staff, and almost tripled our ROI.

We had a problem before with the pricing, however, for the most part, it's fine where it is now. My ROI is fine. It works great. I have zero complaints.

You have to do a package at a time. That's my only challenge, where sometimes I don't need that many licenses. 

When you first sign up, it's a package that can renew every five years. I don't necessarily need everything. I'd prefer just to pay for certain pieces. 

We did not evaluate any other options. We started using UiPath due to a referral at a neurological healthcare conference about four years ago. The speaker suggested UiPath. I actually didn't know of any other company until after we were on UiPath. We've since talked to others who have used other solutions and they mentioned that we made the right choice when we chose UiPath.

We started on-premise for the first six months and then we actually moved to the cloud.

We do not use their UiPath apps feature as of right now.

We are mostly using unattended automation.

We haven't really calculated the reduction in human error. We're just moving on to our Insights app. We're just getting ready to launch that, so we're not there yet. We don't know what that turnaround will be.

We do not use UiPath's AI functionality in our automation program right now.

Our teams have not yet used the UiPath Academy courses.

I'm a little concerned about having to bring on more people that are not in this industry. We're going to have to start them over from the ground up, which takes time.

When we first started, we wanted to know if it really worked. We got a certain budget and just started using it, and now I can say that yes, it does work. We can see that now that we've stepped back. We should have done it earlier. That's what I would tell people. I would definitely tell people to look at it first, before anything else. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We are using the solution to create application reports. What we've done is take all of that information, where somebody was initially doing everything as it happened, and create templates that work in another application. Due to our business model, we have multiple applications that are similar but very different. Rather than have somebody go into this application and update it and then go to another application and put in the same information, we've developed bots. We'd go to the template, input the information one time, and let the bots go in and open up the other applications.

The solution has improved the organization just by freeing up the resources to do that MBA work so that the bots can actually do things for you.

We use the solution's UiPath app feature. It has helped to reduce the workload of our IT department by enabling end-users to create apps. That said, I myself am in IT and not a developer.

The UiPath’s apps feature has increased the number of automation created while reducing the time it takes to create them. We're just now starting with that. We’ve only got 10 bots in production. We've got another eight in development right now.

Likely, the automation we’ve created has saved us probably in the neighborhood of one full-time person.

The solution’s ease of use and the UI is great, specifically for the users. Not necessarily the developers. The people actually using it find it very easy to use.

In terms of the ease of building automation, from what I've seen, I'm very impressed. We're using a partner. We built the COE and everything that they're developing right now. Obviously, we're just starting down this path. This means we're going to go work with a partner while we're developing our own guys. We can get to market quicker.

We've got our own VA. The next step will be looking into building our own developers.

The solution has reduced human error. There are still errors in the templates. People still have errors with bigger things, however, we're able to catch it before it gets into any of the applications. Reading the information across the other applications, you can stop it before it gets synchronized into the applications due to the fact that it is the same source. It doesn't go into "A" if it's not going into “B”, for example.

This has had a big impact on our business. In our model, it's a little complex as our customers are our clients. For example, in the ATM business, they charge us a fee, so we partner with a large retailer like Walgreens or CVS and we share the revenue. We actually pay our customers as they use our services. With the help of UiPath, we’re able to keep everything synchronized. We’re not sending stuff to the wrong site, or to the wrong corporate headquarters.

The solution has freed up employee time due to the amount of work that it's doing. We’ve got just one bot and it can do triple the work, covering three full-time employees in a week. Likely, existing employees now can focus on higher-value work, including more customer-facing tasks. We're getting a lot of financial requests and maintenance. They require human interfacing rather than doing manual transactions.

I can’t think of any direct places where improvements need to happen. Whatever I need, it appears to be there. That said, any app could use some form of improvement.

I've been using the solution for a year now.

The stability is very good.

I don't see an issue with scalability. We are nowhere near capacity yet.

While I have not dealt with technical support directly, I have not heard anything bad from anyone.

We did not use a different RPA solution beforehand. About two years ago, in the second quarter, that's when we started opening our eyes to the possibility of automation.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. We have a partner that assisted in the implementation. 

From the time we signed up until the time of setting up the COE and then getting going, it might have been a few days to deploy the solution.

We have a partner that has assisted us in the implementation process. 

Everything that we've done so far, due to the fact that we run everything through COE and then submit semi-annual budgets, has been good. From the perspective of everything we submitted so far, we've been pleased.

Over and above the subscription fees, we're paying probably $51,000 a year right now.

The pricing is okay. It's not out of balance with what it offers. We are definitely getting value for it. 

We didn't really evaluate other options. We were new to it, and we had a partner that steered us towards UiPath.

At this time, we do not use the solution's AI functionality in our automation program. We also have not yet used UiPath’s Academy courses. We may in the future.

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

We're using UiPath on the customer side, where we have lots of data and PPs on the customer information. We're trying to put in what the customer is including, and then using machine learning. We created a Python type of UiPath to do machine learning and automatically build that so that items can be automated. That was our POC. That said, we're exploring more, to get into the finance area, where we can take invoicing and general revenues and the closing worksheets and automate those processes.

The biggest improvement has been in the ROI we've seen, which has been $55,000 in six months' time. 

The whole bot process and the way scheduling is done is a very valuable aspect of the solution and it's really cool.

In terms of the ease of building automation using the solution, we’re very near achieving that. It's taking more time than what it's supposed to be taking, however, I don't see any complexity in building the code nicely.

So far, the solution has saved costs for our organization.

I’m not sure if the solution has reduced human error. It’s hard to tell at this point. We’re in the early stages. However, simply by looking at the way it’s built, it will.

The solution has freed up employee time. Once again, it’s too early to say too much, however, we are saving approximately 130 hours per month. This additional time has enabled employees to focus on higher-value work. They don't need to just go to the system to click here and there, they're spending more time with the customer.

The management team is more satisfied as it’s much cleaner, with less human error. Management reporting shows definite improvement. In terms of overall employee satisfaction, employees are still not quite trusting the bot. The bot does something and they will go and still validate that. They don't have a hundred percent trust yet. That's what we are trying to build right now.

We have used UiPath Academy courses. It's taking time due to the fact that we have a consulting partner who's helping us. The majority of the workload is being handled by the consulting partner. We're trying to play just the B role of supporting. We're not doing too much development.

That said, with UiPath Academy, just the ease of accessing the material has been great. It's simple.

The only thing which I see is missing, is it does not have an inbuilt machine learning. You have to teach the bot. The bot is not self-learning.

For example, right now, we are using a description. Based on the fields or the description, we're trying to identify what is the category to be used. I have data for the last five years. The bot should be able to go and learn by itself tasks such as "These are the five things which I need to add," instead of me manually maintaining it.

I've been using the solution for six months.

The solution is stable. I don't see any problems.

The scalability I still need to figure out. Right now, with the licenses we have, I don't think we're going to scale it out to where we want it to be. It's my understanding that it just involves increasing the number of parts or number of processes which we can run. It will probably be scalable, however, we have not tested that, and therefore I cannot say either way.

We have close to 30 users on the solution right now. It's mostly our customers' manager and their team.

We do plan to increase usage in the future.

Technical support is okay. I have not really invested a lot of time in getting support from UiPath, however, I get a response.

We did not previously use a different RPA. We had a CIO who'd used it before and based on their experience, we went to UiPath.

In terms of the initial setup, the system side is straightforward. It's the business side that took us a lot of time to understand the concept.

The deployment itself took three months.

The company is probably going to need to negotiate. It's competitive right now, however, once we scale it out, there's going to be some room for negotiation. Likely, UiPath will be responsive to negotiations.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing UiPath.

We're likely using the most up-to-date version of the solution, however, I don't know the version number.

We don’t use the solution's AI functionality in our automation program yet.

I'd advise potential new users to go slow. Always create the roadmap first. Take smaller pieces and then implement those. Don't wait too long, however. Otherwise, you will lose user interest.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.