UiPath Platform Reviews

With federal governments, a lot of the use cases vary around what they're doing, however, it's just a lot of PDF, Excel, and Microsoft Suite automation and then interacting with their custom and web-based tools for subject information.

We don't use it a ton internally. We do more consulting services where we help other organizations get it set up. We're trying to look at maybe more internal ways to use it, however, most of what we do is external. That's just our entire model.

The typical spiel with UiPath is you're getting rid of the tedious and redundant work and you're saving time for people and bringing them up to do more human-oriented tasks.

Anything and everything under the solution has been very helpful for us. UiPath Studio is the most valuable for what we're doing simply due to the fact that it’s development software.

The most valuable part is how it interacts with the websites. A lot of the other automation solutions aren't doing that. A lot of what we do is involved in web-based automation and that's pretty key.

As a developer, the ease of building automation is great. I don't know if it's easy for the typical business user that I interact with. That's why there are professional services to develop and things like that.

We do use the UiPath Academy courses. UiPath Academy is great. It's one of the best online training platforms I've seen. That said, it’s an average user base that we're working with. I've had to teach people how to copy and paste. That level of user is not going to learn how to do variables and selectors and things like that.

The science of the software's easy enough to pick up if you know how to develop and I thought the Academy was fantastic at helping the learning process along.

The biggest value that the UiPath Academy offers is just the ability to train somebody up and know how to use UiPath in roughly a week.

The solution has saved costs for organizations. The exact amount is very tricky to quantify as I have multiple clients. It depends on which client we’re talking about. A lot of them are coming up in the beginning stages. My first client saved around 200,000 hours, which was significant. More recent ones may be in the tens of hours at this point. Those numbers relate to nobody specific, just a fledgling RPA program.

UiPath has reduced human error. That said there's plenty of bot error that occurs. You have to be aware of that if you are going to replace humans. I haven't honestly tracked it to see what the percentage is on errors on any of my projects, however, I would assume it is a reduction, and yet not quite 100%.

Right now, reducing errors is not yet important for our business and the businesses that we consult for. We don't really come across processes where there are so many errors. That's what we need to fix. It's not why people are using it. They're using it for the ROI value.

The solution has freed up employee time. It generally allowed the employees to focus on higher-value work and their level of satisfaction with the job.

I’m not sure if the Academy fulfills all of our needs in terms of staying up to speed with the solution. I haven't really gone back to the Academy after I first got through the development training to look at other solutions and stuff. I usually just rely on meetings with UiPath.

The stability needs to be improved, as does the scalability. 

We've used the solution for four or five years.

In terms of stability, that's where there's room for improvement.

It just comes down to a lot of selectors and items of that nature. Selectors can fail randomly and then start working again and can cause issues. That's been our issue with stability.

The scalability is directly tied to the stability. It's a lot harder to scale the solution to run on a lot of computers. Each of these has some unique issues when it comes to deployment.

With my current client, we have probably around ten users at this time.

Technical support is great. Also, the UiPath forum is super helpful, however, when I've used the license key, you got actual support and that's been really good.

I'm not aware of the company using a different RPA solution previous to UiPath. I personally only use UiPath.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployments have taken six months to a year.

We have seen a return on investment from the companies that are utilizing this solution.

The individual robot and studio licenses are good. Usually what I see clients shake their heads at is the add-ons, the AI capability. Insights, for example, was very expensive. My client didn't want to get it due to the price.

Orchestra is usually acceptable as it's part of the package, however, the other stuff that's not studio or robot, usually, clients aren't, in my experience, interested in paying more.

We are primarily focused on UiPath due to the fact that that's what our clients are using, however, we're vendor agnostic. We support UiPath, Blue Prism, and Automation Anywhere as well. We have developers that are all trained in each of their usages. Whether we use them all at once or suggest them depends on the client. We have one client where they're using a bunch of them, however, most of our clients use UiPath I'm with the federal government, and UiPath is the only one that's really approved to do that. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

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

I would advise new users to be patient due to the fact that it's going to take a while for it to get stood up. Also, when you are working with the federal government, there are lots of approvals. Other than that, new users should make sure they get use cases and have everything very well documented. Users need to understand all the decisions and the logic behind it. That's the main advice I'd give.

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

Often, the solution is used for a lot of connecting data from different systems, et cetera. Also, a lot of tasks involve taking data from Excel or an email and putting it into different PDFs at high volumes and then saving everything in a certain spot in the file directory.

With UiPath, people can do more knowledge work and don't have to spend as much time doing menial tasks. For example, connecting the different systems and handling large volumes of Excel and PDFs. From what I've seen with clients, that's really common. Typically, tasks with data like that would take like a lot of time. The same with pulling reports from a website and then having to run a tableau dashboard and refresh R code. There are a lot of different layers that RPA is able to connect to and with, which is cool.

I like that you can automatically take a picture of what you're getting the selector for. For example, the next developer can tell what was on the screen. That way it’s easy to transfer from developer to developer, which is sometimes difficult.

I also really like being able to put notes on each of the activities. That's really valuable for me. Even if I'm not passing it to somebody else, it reminds me of what I was doing.

On a grander scale, there's definitely other stuff, however, those are just little things that I find valuable.

The one bot that pulls reports runs the R code and then refreshes the Tableau dashboard saves a lot of time. I can't recall the number exactly, however, without the bot, it takes a long time to pull those reports manually. I’m talking half a day for one person. And we may need to pull 20 or 30 reports per day. The website takes a long time to load, which means for a person it's just a lot of sitting time, which is very annoying.

We’ve used the UiPath Academy courses. It’s well-known that UiPath's training is the best of any of the tools, including Blue Prism, Power Automate, or Automation Anywhere. Power Automate in particular doesn't really have as much specific training. With UiPath, the pictures and the hands-on nature, and just the scrolling is cool. The training looks cool and it's very helpful. After you take the training, you can actually go and do something. It's not like you've just read about it.

The biggest value in the Academy is the paths. You can choose to go down a certain path. It's nice to have it curated. Also, there’s definitely the hands-on piece that sets it apart. In some other solution’s training, they just describe the different features of the tool. With UiPath, it’s interactive and you have to do it. Part of the assessment is you have to do that big RA framework process, which is good due to the fact that, with just training, you've already done it. You’re already using the tool.

Building automation with UiPath is very easy. It has a good interface. I like how you can nest certain activities. It makes things more visible. The modular approach of having different pages and then invoking them is very intuitive.

We just use attended automation right now as there is a lot of proof of concepts going on. We're hoping to get to more unattended automation soon since that seems to be a big, high-value area.

In general, and maybe this is not the tool's fault specifically, however, more awareness of the limitations for federal clients needs to be considered. There is a lot of the cool stuff that we've heard about, and I'm probably going to hear about today, that we can't really use due to security.

A particular part of the platform hasn't been ATOD. If there's any way that UiPath could help support even more the federal clients by saying "hey, this is not going to break your system" that would be really helpful as some of it would be very valuable to them. It's just getting it past the review process that is the challenge right now, and security is the main concern.

For citizen developers, Studio is difficult. It's just too over their head. They don't want to finish the training. They're getting fed up. They already have their own job and they're just not as bought in on the process which is the tone set at the top. Their management has to deal with that. It just doesn't seem very realistic overall sometimes for a lot of clients to have citizen developers.

I've been using the solution for about two years.

Sometimes clients think that they can just do something and then it runs forever. People who actually work with it know that it's going to break and you're going to have to fix it. However, that's part of the process. When it first starts running, you're going to have to make it better. There needs to be managing of expectations. It's going to give you value, however, it's not going to be perfect the first time, which is just not even the automation's fault. It's sometimes the systems. You have to learn the quirks of the systems and the systems that it works with. For example, a website might have a pop-up that you wouldn't expect. It'll break, and clients will ask "why is this broken?" You have to explain the bot doesn't know how to handle everything.

In theory, the scalability is great. In practice, if clients hear "oh, you can just build a bot and then put it out to everybody" - that's not really the case. There's going to be that deployment and configuration process where you have to work with each of the analysts or whoever you're working with to actually make it work on the computer. There might be more expectation management needed. Sometimes, for example, a computer has quirks, and we have to do this and that. That said, overall, after you get situated, it's very easy to manage from the orchestrator new packages, et cetera. My assumption is that it is good.

The responsiveness was quick, however, in my case, I wasn't really able to get the question answered. It was actually about licensing for one client. They were not as immediate in terms of their service, however, it was still good. We got an outcome. It just took a little bit longer than we expected to come to the conclusion.

The initial implementation was pretty straightforward. It wasn't specifically at my organization, however, one of the clients did an implementation from the ground up and we helped them get UiPath. It was us coordinating with UiPath reps, and it was pretty straightforward.

For our part, it was just knowing what licenses to get and working with, and knowing the client's situation. We were working closely with the UiPath reps to say "this is what they need" and then we just got it for them. I thought it would be a lot more complicated to know what license structure they would need, however, it turned out just fine.

I don't remember the length of that project. Deployment might have been around eight months for the whole thing to get situated and start being used.

We worked with UiPath to help our client set up the solution.

We've seen an ROI in UiPath. We just had a bot challenge with one client where they showcased different automation that they've made throughout the organization, and the numbers were great. I cannot remember the exact numbers, however, they were impressive.

The whole UiPath model is a bot for every person, so the attended licensing is obviously where the money goes. I don't know how realistic that is for a lot of clients. It makes a lot more sense to focus on making the process mining, task capture, and those type of tools, very user-friendly for people who would otherwise want to consider citizen developers.

You have to identify like the people who want to be citizen developers. There are really not many of those people, in my experience. One time I was working with somebody, and she didn't know where the start button was - and she was one of the people they had identified as a citizen. For her, this solution is not going to work.

Companies need higher-up people who know their organization and can identify those people. That's an internal thing. Overall, I would love to see UiPath figure out their financing to re-pivot and focus on citizen developers and get really good at identifying processes. Either way, we're still going to have dedicated people who actually develop and perfect as StudioX even is way above a lot of clients I've worked with. Taking into account all of my clients there has been one guy who could use Studio.

I've looked at Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

With Blue Prism, the pro is that the grid in the development environment makes it easy to align and then see from a very high level what your process is doing, which UiPath is lacking. Even though you have the workflows where you don't have to have everything on the page, you can invoke stuff from other pages. That's nice. However, it's still not as visually apparent in terms of what's going on, unless you put a lot of notes, which some people just don't do. Blue Prism is good at the high-level view. I don't like them for almost everything else. It's very antiquated. I know they came up with RPA, the name and everything, however, I don't think they've kept up with the current energy of the industry. Also, their training is not good and the online community is not at all as strong as UiPath. 

With Automation Anywhere, the development, everything about that has gotten better recently. It has mostly improved due to the fact that they were coming from a really low place. I did not like that tool a couple of years ago. Then, they redid their training, and the interface became a lot different. They've gotten better. However, they are still not my favorite tool. The use cases that the tool is geared toward are not always as broad as what UiPath can handle. I do not like the search functionality for the different activities. If you type into, which is a UiPath phrase for an activity, in Automation Anywhere it won't recognize the phrase. They don't use it as a search function. You have to type exactly the name of the activity. I understand that they don't want to accommodate the exact verbiage that UiPath uses, however, it's annoying. In UiPath, if you type in something similar, it'll still bring up similar activities, even if it's not exactly the name, which is nice. Sometimes you can't remember the exact wording and it's good there's an option to search in a way that will show you the closest options.

With UiPath, the pros are the training. With getting new people up to speed, you would never say "let's start you on Blue Prism." It's too complicated. The UiPath training is really good,  and the developer community and online forums are usually accurate, which is more than you say for some other stuff. Overall, the usability of the UiPath tool, the deployment, and the interfaces of everything we've seen are a lot cleaner. Even on a basic level, the solution just looks cool. The main downside is the lack of awareness surrounding what government clients can use and what they can't and then work to tailor to that.

We are a UiPath partner. 

We have one client that is on version 20.4.3, however, most others are on the latest version of the solution.

We do not use the UiPath apps feature or UiPath's AI functionality right now.

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

I would love to see a change in the process mining and differentiation on how they're catering toward the citizen developers. That would be outstanding and would show a lot of self-awareness for the company. Maybe I'm just totally cut off from the commercial sector and maybe they have brilliant people who are just ready to develop immediately, however, that is not what I've seen across all of my clients.

Since we are a healthcare organization with HIPAA rules, we're on-prem. Our use cases boil down to claims testing and membership testing. It'd be institutional professional dental claims and making sure our membership is loaded correctly.

We have to configure our software to pay claims and pay providers. What we're realizing is that, the more claims that we can run through the system, the more accurate we can get, the faster the payment on the claims, and the faster the payment to our providers.

The only features we're actually using are the orchestrator and 32 unattended bots.

The value of that is the power to be able to run our thousands and thousands of claims and membership to make sure that everything looks correct.

The solution has saved costs for our organization. I know it's over a million, however, I haven't done the exact numbers.

UiPath has reduced human error. We’re finding out that what we've built for configuration in the past, we're finding mistakes that we did a year ago. Now, the bots are proving that and we've been able to correct those past mistakes. This way, we don't have inaccurate payments or recaptures.

The product has freed up employee time - and it's not just the employee time. We do have some triggers that run. Some jobs are run that people use to manually do at night and weekends. We also don't have to hire additional people just to learn 80 different types of things in a claim and identify correctness manually. The robots will go through and then they can identify if there are specific things that are wrong. That part will go to our experts and they'll review those exact issues.

This use of bots allows for employees to do higher-value work. We also have been able to up-skill some of those people to sometimes a leadership role or a different role they would normally never get due to the fact that they were always manually looking at the claims and membership. This has definitely affected their level of satisfaction at work.

I don't know if we have an accurate estimate of how much time we are saving. I just know we do volume and we do thousands and thousands of claims a day, and therefore, it really helps.

We use UiPath’s Academy. That's how we learned the system. We actually learned it in six weeks and then started the development after that. It's very powerful and I continue to use it today.

It’s helped employees get up to speed with the product. This is especially useful when we get newer versions or we onboard other people. That's part of our syllabus. The first thing a new user has to do is go to the Academy and take some of the classes that we recommend. Then we identify, “okay, did you like it? Is this for you? Is it not for you?” et cetera. It’s a quick win where we don't have to take our time as we've got other work that we have to get completed. It acts as a filtering system for us. Both us and the employee can see if it’s a good fit very quickly. We can find out at an early stage instead of a year later.

The biggest value of the Academy is just knowing that we can do so much more volume and get in some more accurately without human error, or having people working nights and weekends. That has always been a really big push and we've been able to slowly work away from that.

Obviously, we’re not in a perfect world yet, however, getting rid of the manual aspect has been great. People just get burnt out. You can only look at things manually for so many hours. If you've been doing this for 10 years, it's got to be frustrating for those people who are always afraid they’ll get their job taken away. At the same time, for them, it’s so much easier as they don’t have to look at 80 things. They can look at five things that failed and then enjoy time with family and have a work-life balance. That’s big.

We've coded up to like 80% of what's possible. We really cut our pain points and said "this gives us our value, our bang for our buck." What we're doing now is saying, "okay, well, how do we improve it?" We've got another area or we've got another part of the software that we use our application that UiPath interacts with. Right now, our main concern is what else we can do to make it even more accurate or get more information or test more information to make it a solid pro program.

I'm a developer and I'll move things around and they'll change order, or I'll try to save something and it won't save the first time. I'll have to open something twice, open something three times. I've got a list. I'm working out quirks with UiPath. There are just UX things where if I copy this and put it here, it should look the same as it was, and I don't know why it doesn't. It could be my machine. It could be my local machine and it might just be that conversation with the premium plus to say, "why is this doing this?" Or maybe there could just be a setting, where we didn't check that box when we set it up. 

I've used the solution for two years. 

We actually had to spend about four months of maintenance to make sure that we got the solution to how we wanted it. We brought in a contracting firm and they didn't know the company and they just kind of said, "here's what bots can do." 

What we did is we did an assessment program for two months. During those two months, we looked at what they built, which was great. This got us up and running and showed us what's possible. 

Then, we took those two months to identify, for example, if the database maybe should have been set up a little better to interact with our other databases. Or if the coding should have had different paths of risk that they didn't know about. If you don't know the business, you don't know the risks, and therefore, you don't know how to set it up. That's why we did all of that assessment and then we spent four months fixing it to adjust to what we thought was a better path or a more stable path in order to support the robots.

The scalability potential is astronomical. We've got so many areas in the company, including finance and pharmacy, and there are all kinds of different areas and authorizations that you can actually go down and say, okay, now we have time. Let's put it on our calendar. 

The next piece we're looking into is the citizen developer angle. We know that has some power potential, however, we have to have regulations and audits. We want to be careful if we do start moving in that direction to really understand if it is right for the company and is helping people versus if we build something wrong what that would mean to manually have to correct that. That's time nobody has.

Technical support has been great. We usually get answers within hours of a request. I thought we were on the premium support plan and now we're going to go to the premium plus, I believe they call it. That starts up here for us in November.

We've had some challenging solutions where it has taken us several weeks to work through it. They tell us "here's what we recommended". That said, we know our system. It's just like any other contracting firm. They don't know your system and your solutions, however, they give you the recommendations. At this point, we've been able to work through everything that we've had technical issues with. We decide to do some of them a different way. Technical support has been supportive of this approach. It's like a partnership, and that really makes a big difference.

We started with Rational Robot in 2005. I actually developed that. I've been with the company for over 20 years. I started with Rational Robot and then we moved to some C Sharp and some coded UI.

We tried Test Architect for a little while. We've used different RPA methodologies and UiPath seemed to fit a little better with where we are and the robustness we wanted.

We switched when we moved over to new healthcare software. The old one was just COBOL and green screens, and it was hard to automate it. We did, however, it was very difficult. When we moved to this new application, we needed to make everything more quality controlled, and the only way to do that was with the robots.

I was not a part of the implementation process. 

The deployment process took about eight or nine months via our vendor. 

We brought on some contractors to do our initial setup, including a proof of concept, and they built part of the system and after that, we took it over. They were what we called a vendor tracking firm.

We have definitely seen an ROI.

The biggest ROI was in the configuration. We're realizing we may be setting some things up wrong and that's not how the customer should have been set up. When we see things fail, we ask why is this failing? And then we go upstream and find out that we didn't even build a specific thing and realize that it was a mistake, a key entry, a mistype, et cetera, and the bots catch that on the backend.

We're able to do that quicker. It's manual labor and it's tedious. Now, manual labor's fine if you want to go in and manually check this, that, and the other thing, however, when that's your day job and you're checking the same 80 fields compared to a spreadsheet over and over, it's just got to be frustrating and employees feel it. You hear it on the call.

With UiPath, we can ask the question "what can we do to support you?" We're not going to replace people; we want to get them to a better place. Our employees understand that. It took them a while, however, they do understand that now and think the solution is really cool and are thankful for the support. It's a tool, not a human being's replacement. 

I don't write the checks. I don't know what the actual cost is. That's always on leadership. My understanding is it's a reasonable price for the value that we're getting out of it.

We did look at the Power Automate desktop. It doesn't have the orchestrator to control things, and it has some other limits. When we do formulas and try to validate what the value should be, they are very difficult or impossible to set up on the Power Automate. At some point in time, I'm sure we'll be able to do that. In today's world, what we need right now is UiPath.

We're just a customer and an end-user.

We do not use the solution’s AI functionality in our automation program. We just do some checks and then just make sure via verification that everything matches in the configuration to the actual claims from the inbound files to the outbound.

There's an automation hub, test, capture, process, mining, all of these other features we haven't been able to purchase yet, due to the fact that we want to make sure that our bread and butter, the claims of membership, is solid. Once we have that in a good place, which we're hoping will be in 2022, we've already talked to our sales rep about the next steps. They've talked about the other features and offered recommendations. We'll go down that path next year and it'll be really exciting to see what else we can do to bring on the other areas of the company.

I'd advise potential new users that they definitely want to do some kind of proof of concept against other systems. I have heard other companies here that have said, okay, we're going up against four other automation tools. That's great. However, do your homework. You need to go and present everything to your leadership and showcase the solutions. 

As we get some of the demos of software, we can kind of compare them to what our system's needs are. A new user can say, well, maybe these are our top two. When you get to your top two, that's your time to bring somebody in, an expert to discuss what you're trying to do.  

If you do choose to go with UiPath, that UiPath academy is so valuable. That's a big asset. If you do the premium plus care, they will support you through and help you get things set up and running or make it better. We've been up and running for two years. Their goal and my goal is to see how to make things better to continuously improve the system and make everyone happy.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. There are just a few system quirks I'm trying to work through. 

We have 12 bots in production right now. I can't speak exactly to all the bots. My role is in process mining. With process mining, we're using the PDP process and we're building out a model for sales orders.

The most valuable features of UiPath are the possibilities. For example, we're excited about what's coming and we've saved some time with the bots, however, we're still learning. The idea is once we get really good at process mining it will be really good at building bots. We'll be able to uncover those opportunities and then execute on capitalizing on them.

I'm not sure of how much time we've saved, in the tens of hours per month. While it's not nothing, they've been small use cases to build up the capability. We are still figuring out how to build bots, and how to get the orchestrator all set up. 

We're doing a crawl, walk, run, taking our time and doing it right. We are building up the center of excellence. We're out of crawl and we're in to walk, however, we're not running yet.

So far, the conversation around automation and cultural change has been really powerful in terms of re-thinking our processes and asking if there's a better way to do it. right now, we're beginning to understand that we don't have to be stuck where we're at.

It's changed the dynamic of how we look at our processes and how we talk about why and how we do what we do. That's been tangible.

Our teams have used UiPath Academy courses. It has been instrumental and we couldn't do it without those courses. That was one of the reasons why we selected UiPath. They're robust and it is easy to access training modules.

The biggest value that we've realized from the Academy is confidence. Just getting over that initial hurdle of understanding what we're doing has been huge.

In terms of the ease of building automation via UiPath, it takes a long time to set up the environment and get the training and be able to do it.

The overall ecosystem and platform, which I know that they're working on, needs to be better. Being able to connect idea generation and opportunity into discovery and then into automation needs to be seamless. It needs to be end-to-end and also more robust. If I had to give them a piece of advice, it would be that the RPA is one component of process improvement, and they own the RPA space, so I realize that's their bread and butter, however, RPA isn't the only tool in the toolbox. I'd like to see more in relation to how we can eliminate waste and how we can lean out our processes.

Maybe the improvement solution isn't RPA. I'd like the solution to address how can I see more opportunities and capitalize on the improvement of any kind with an obvious focus on RPA. That's where the real power is going to come from. That said, it's not the only focus.

I've used the solution for over a year. 

The stability has been great. I don't have any issues or comments there. I don't have any concerns with the stability of the company or the platform's software. We haven't experienced many bugs or anything like that. We're happy with the stability.

The scalability is where the solution is going to come into play. Likely, it will, as we have learned the possibilities are ripe and endless. 

Right now we're using it extensively, however, we're only building bots and deploying process mining within our controller and finance area. That's our learning curve and it is probably the ripest ground for automation. We plan to increase usage. We've just scratched the surface there. We've only done maybe 5% of controllers. Then, we have the whole rest of the organization and the whole supply chain.

Technical support was great. They helped a lot during the implementation. I would rate them at an eight out of ten simply due to the fact that the premium support person was very, very helpful and honestly I don't know what we would've done without them. However, that did come at a price.

Making that service standard as part of the implementation process would probably pump my technical support rating up to a ten in that, while the experience was a ten, we paid for it.

In terms of the initial setup, once you have people that are familiar with the software and you have all your environments and connectors set up, the Building Box is very user-friendly. That said, it doesn't happen overnight.

From contract signing to putting our first bot into production, the setup and deployment were about six months.

Being on-premise, there was added complexity. Had we opted for the cloud version, it would have been a simpler process. We had the standard provisioning servers and had to get them set up and installed the software, et cetera.

The process was complex simply due to the fact that it's an advanced technology, however, UiPath is really great at helping out. We had a premium plus support person.

A lot of the details and things that we'd never done before, they were there to help us on their end and give us pointers and tips on our end.

We have not yet seen an ROI. When we look at the savings we have realized versus the upfront costs and the time investment, we're probably still under water, however, we recognize that this is a long game.

For the quality of the product that we get,  it's a fair price. I'm a believer in you get what you pay for. You always want to maximize your value, however, that doesn't necessarily mean a lower price.

Before choosing UiPath, we did look at Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. Those two were the ones that we actually did full demos of. We also looked at the websites of some of the smaller players.

The main one that we really looked at where and it came down to a head to head was with Automation Anywhere. The key difference for me, with my focus, was process mining. Automation anywhere had some capability there, however, it was a recording device and it was intrusive to the end-user. You also couldn't go backward in time. When you got everything plugged in and turned it on, you could start recording and building your processes. You could see last week's processes next week, however, the UiPath solution uses the audit tables. Therefore, when I turn it on, I can go back in time, for not just a week; I can go back two years. I can go back that far to see how the process has evolved and where we're at. I can build a more robust baseline to change from today rather than having to wait for six months to build my baseline.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we are using. We just installed it earlier this year, therefore it's probably the latest and greatest.

We do not use AI functionality in our automation process. We also do not use UiPath apps features. While we're learning about some of those new things, we're not using them today.

The main thing that I would advise others is to get leadership on board and get their ducks in a row in terms of the culture that they want to create and the long-term vision that they have for this.

You can't capitalize on it in six months. If you're going to throw in the towel if you're not seeing ROI in your first calendar year, then don't even start. It takes some leadership fortitude and some stick-to-itiveness. It doesn't happen organically or on its own. If a company is not dedicating the resources or not freeing up people's time, they won't get far. The bots aren't going to create themselves yet. Maybe with AI, in the future, that will be possible, however, that's way off.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a nine for now. I'm really happy with the program that we're building up. I'm happy with the solutions that they offer. It'll jump up to a ten when we get to scale and it's paying for itself. 

It's widely used across the bank. Some are dealing with regulatory issues, for example, taking documents out of one system, moving them into another. Others are opening new accounts for clients. Some are doing payment transactions and that involves looking at emails that come in and determining what type of document that is so it gets routed and processed correctly. We've touched every line of business within the bank.

The solution has improved our organization, specifically around all the operational aspects of the bot. Once we deploy them through the orchestrator we use insights to see how the bots are performing, what errors are referring to, and just the general health insights would be the biggest lift that we've gotten out of the solution. Building the automation is a little bit easier and quicker on the platform than where we were before.

The RPA is the most valuable aspect of the solution.

We are really getting into using AI Center and we use Insights.

The solution saved costs for our organization. That said, I can't quantify it.

UiPath has reduced human error.

In the initial automation that we're doing, we're migrating the ones that have run on another platform. Therefore, we already know how valuable they are to the bank. Sometime in 2022, we'll really be getting into new opportunities.

UiPath has freed up employee time. In my specific job, I’m responsible for the running of the platform, making sure it's up and available. The other teams actually take care of the delivery and are more in tune with the business side and can speak more to the freeing of time in quantitative terms. I’m a degree away from that. I'm aware of what's going on over there, however, I don't track it so closely.

We’ve used the UiPath Academy courses. The Academy is a really good platform to start training on. It really gets you into the platform and allows you to start exploring other things. Generally, they're really good courses.

The number of courses and the variety of the topics all seem to touch on whatever aspect you're looking to do with the platform.

With all the different tools that they have in their arsenal, sometimes it's hard to know how we can get the most out of them. We see it as a kid going into a candy store. There are all sorts of choices. However, we don't necessarily understand, you would take this, but not that? You seem to need to mix and match certain things. We don't necessarily understand that. We need them to be more clear in saying, for example, "if you want to do process mining, great, however, these are its strengths and these are its limitations." If we know the pros and cons, then we can make a decision about what we need to adjust in terms of how we go after new opportunities. Basically, we are seeking better guidance on how to use the suite of the products together.

I've been using the solution for a year. 

The solution is very stable. 

The scalability is good. 

We have a team collectively between developers and product owners and general users, so the users are comprised of roughly 100 different people. At different points, our in-orchestrator has 30 or so developers across several teams. In general, in terms of human people using it, it's likely 80 to 100 users or somewhere in there.

We are looking to increase the usage.

Technical support is okay. They have some gaps that they need to close. I know some of their folks from firsthand experience aren't necessarily used to using the new modern folders. Therefore, when we get on the phone and say "Hey, we're having this problem". The support staff will say "Oh, well you're a modern folder set up. I mostly work with classic." That doesn't matter from my perspective. I still need help.

We used to use Blue Prism. Blue Prism only does RPA. Our goal was to consolidate, to have one platform for automation as a long-term solution for the bank. We went through a selection process and UiPath came out on top.

I wasn't directly part of the setup team, however, from the outside looking in, it seems it was a little more involved than we had initially thought.

Some of it may have been internal. Bank processes and having to have so many different people involved to install a server and configure it on the network and all that could have added difficulty.

The deployment was probably close to three or four months. We have four environments. Over the course of about three months, all four environments eventually got stood up. The first took the longest. We noted what went right and wrong and went from there. 

We probably have seen an ROI, based on the initial cost to stand it up. That pricing structure is increasing now from the initial offering, however, overall, we're probably seeing some benefit out of it.

The pricing is pretty fair for the size per the number of licenses. It's my understanding that part of that was influenced by the fact that they won their business from one of their competitors, Blue Prism. That probably helped.

We looked at Automation Anywhere. They had recently upgraded from their desktop to a web-based client. In the meantime, they dropped functions in the conversion and when I used it on the desktop, I noticed that there were certain functions that they didn't bring over onto the web version yet, which kind of surprised me. As far as just overall usability, integration with other technologies, whether it's Python or writing .net custom code, UiPath just kind of seamlessly works within the platform.

We are not yet utilizing AI.

I'd advise potential new users to do the due diligence and don't expect that UiPath is going to always outline the best ways to use it. A company just has to understand there's a lot there and try to be as specific in what they want to do. 

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a nine.

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.