UiPath Platform Reviews

We have several use cases. We're a telecommunications company. We use it for anything from order entry, design, activation, and interactions with technicians within our field. We really have an end-to-end solution.

We are using Studio, Orchestrator, and unattended bots.

It is deployed on-premise but on our own cloud.

We had a long-time situation where we were sending technicians to the fields unnecessarily, because they couldn't install the service. So, we worked through a process to wake up devices. We used RPA to implement it. 

With downsizing, we have been able to automate a lot of this space, so we can downsize and still function as a company.

Capitalize on the unattended automation, as there are a lot of different methods to evoke and schedule it. You can email it, trigger it via API bots or Orchestrator. There are a lot of different methods you can use. We don't really do a whole lot of attended. Not that we wouldn't at some point, but unattended is nice because it's out of sight and out of mind. Set it up and let it go.

We are the first company to bring UiPath Academy in-house on the 30th of September. When we signed our licensing agreement, we added it in our own LMS. So, we have that connection and everything else. We love it. We've implemented all of their modules: RPA Starter, all three of the development courses, Solution Architect, Business Analyst, and Build a Bot. It's super exciting. It's one of the best things that we've done. I would rate it a five out of five.

We now have a functionality that is being released for web forms. It's more for attended. I would like to have these web forms exposed in Orchestrator to be able to trigger a bot externally. I know we have partners that provide similar functionality. I would like to have that same functionality where you could deploy a form, but instead of having it pop up on somebody's desktop, they could go through a URL through Orchestrator and trigger the bots via a web interface. This is instead of having to be tied down to an attended bot.

For some of the Insights stuff, we have found that you have to be flexible on measuring your ROI. You have to be able to customize some of that because it's not as cut and dry as you think it is. 

I would look for the audits on the back-end. Performance-wise, make sure that it is still performing. 

I would rate the stability as a four (out of five), but some of it could have been us too. 

An overabundance of logging that we created crashed the SQL Server. We had to adjust and restructure the way we were doing all of our logging to prevent that from happening again. Ever since then, it has pretty much been fine. 

We have had issues with upgrades. However, from a normal day-to-day functionality perspective, it is pretty stable.

Right now, we have about 150 developers. Then, we have engineers and process analysts.

We have 400 automations on average and 1000 in the pipeline.

It's been fantastic. It doesn't matter what time of day or anything else. We get top-notch service.

It has been about our contacts and support team. They look at us, and say, "You guys want to do what?" Then, they stand behind us and help us get it done.

We had merging companies coming together with a lot of integration going on. With integration, there are multiple teams, processes, and systems. To keep up for our reduced expenses, we had to do it. This was another tool in the toolbox for us: automation.

It took us eight weeks from initial purchase to the first bot to be put into production. It took about two weeks for assessment and documentation, then another six weeks to develop and deploy it. The bot that we developed was complex. It wasn't super simple. We've done simpler, but that time frame was about average for us.

We did the deployment ourselves, but we had the premium support. So, we did have some support from UiPath. However, everything that we did, we did on our own.

ROI was almost instant. We measured everything from deployment. We measured our successes. We do audits once a month. ROI was pretty much from deployment. We don't audit anything in the first 30 days because there is a lot of settling in, some bumps, and, "Oh, we missed this step." For the most part, within 30 days, we were realizing and managing expectations on benefits.

We're really only measuring handling time right now, which is defined by our business clients. They define what handling time we are trying to define, then the measure of success. That's what we measure ourselves on.

We're probably in the tens of thousands of hours that we have saved, easily.

Because we have so many agents, that's why we went unattended. Attended was very expensive for us because it's a per person license. Where we can take entire workflows, do the triggering and scheduling, etc. We never have to have any human interaction with unattended.

We have a cost model for operating expense savings. It is usually about $100,000 to $125,000 and takes us six weeks to develop and implement. That's development, testing, and implementation. We do code reviews on everything. That does not include all the documentation, assessment, etc.

We just signed a very large perpetual agreement. So, we had 125 Studios and 1200 unattended licenses. We paid $3.7 million. Then, we paid maintenance costs for the next three years, which was 15 percent of that.

We evaluated Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, Pega, and UiPath.

Scalability was probably the number one that we went with UiPath. Scalability, the ease of use of the software, and the existing functionality that was there were the main reasons. There is a lot more out-of-the-box in terms of embedded functions that were there at the time when we did our analysis. It seemed like UiPath was really on the cutting edge. They were more proactively implementing good features, where others that we were talking with seemed like they were behind in that perspective. 

We'd rather stay on the cutting edge with technology instead of having to wait for our partner to get caught up.

Obviously, there are cheaper options than UiPath.

I'm really excited about the new stuff. There is great new stuff. We wish we would've had this stuff a year ago because we had to build some of it in-house. We are really excited about the Explorer and process mining.

I would rate the ease of use of the platform for automating our company’s processes as a three and a half to four out of five (where five is the easiest). It depends on the skill set of the developer. If you are a developer with a .NET background, then it will be a lot easier for more of the customization. For the technology overall, it is easy to automate our processes.

We run our automations in the virtual environments, like Citrix. We struggled a bit with Citrix at first, because our infrastructure and systems are somewhat antiquated.

Nobody is perfect. I would rate UiPath as a nine (out of 10).

We use UiPath primarily to drive efficiency within the company and introduce a new technology, which is only going to become more popular and more prevalent in the industry in the next few years.

At the moment, we use Orchestrator, Studio, and unattended robots.

We invested in an RPA solution because competitors were doing it. They do it because it's the next wave of this industry, the fourth industrial revolution. Everyone's saying that you can't escape it. It's also because our company, in the shared services department, is thinking about how to challenge our existing models. Traditionally, you chose whether to take the processes onboard or streamline them offshore, but robotics and automation are a competitive alternative to outsourcing. It's very easy. We are challenging the status quo and making sure we're evaluating all our options effectively.

We had a process that was very manual and repetitive and took a team of 14 people, all keying in manually. Now, we've managed to automate it and save 14 employees worth of effort, which amounts to around 14,000 hours to date.

We run our automations in a virtual environment as well. We do Citrix environments when we're working with our offshore partner. We do it on Citrix when working locally. Both work well. I know UiPath has developed a lot on the Citrix platform lately, so it's getting better and easier to do.

Within my immediate team, I have eight people and we can also involve the other operational teams. Including everyone who's related to automation across IT and ops and us, you're probably looking about 20 or 30 people.

The main value within Orchestrator is definitely the scheduling aspect. That includes the way you can prioritize work and use queuing systems to make sure they're at the right points in time, as well as whether they'd be long term related, especially if we're looking at finance.

In terms of Studio, it's just getting easier to use. Studio X is basically the embodiment of that. Even at this point in time with the current Studio version, anyone could pick this up and run with it to develop simpler automations.

The best feature about unattended robots is that they do exactly what you ask them to do. They are as reliable as the code that you provide them with. I think as long as you've got the right governance in place, such as IDs you have created, and you looped in the right teams, the robots are just the shell that will do exactly what you ask them to do.

I'd rate the ease of use of automating our processes at three and a half out of five at this point in time. That is because we've been on a journey over the past year or so and it's not been smooth sailing. There have been issues. I'm not saying that UiPath's support hasn't been great. It has been, but there is still a lot of work to do. It's still a relatively new product in terms of the grander scene of the industry. There's still a lot of work to do there to make sure that the integrations with existing software providers as well as new ones and API connectivities are as they should be. Often, you'll find yourselves using the workarounds in order to address issues that they haven't quite solved yet. I know that's constantly being improved, but that is the journey that we've been on.

One of the issues is with the acquisition of new types of software and new companies. It's important to introduce process documentation and make sure that it's not just making it look like UiPath products, but making it feel and act like one to us. They need to make sure it's embedded and the integration is seamless. They should just keep improving how easy it is to use. I think it's very good already, but there's always room for improvement.

I would rate the product's stability as three and a half, based on our experience. This relates directly back to where we've had challenges. Some of the integration with more mainstream products, like Excel, for example, has been questionable at times. It's just striking that balance between the fact that we want it to be democratized and easy to use by everyone, while we don't want to be in a position where we're forced out of the route to use macros necessarily within Excel. We want the UiPath software to be just as quick and easy to use as that more technical solution. Otherwise, we lose the benefit of having it. It shouldn't be technically inhibited.

I think their support offerings are good. They're very responsive. I think the challenge that they face though, is that they don't always have the answer. They don't always know what the real root cause is. Unfortunately, that's where the real crap piece comes in, which is both a blessing and a curse. It gives me some way of getting around it but it doesn't give me confidence that the issue will be addressed.

It probably took us about nine months to deploy, from the initial UiPath license to implementing the first robot in production. The reason for that is the learning curve of the team as well as the education across the operational teams to bring them up to speed and make sure that everyone's on the same journey. We were also working very closely with IT to make sure that we've got the right infrastructure in place, as well as support models, governance frameworks, etc. Without it, you can't really get anything done. It's a new technology and it was a new concept for everyone. Needing a robot ID, for example, was something that was never discussed before. Lengthy conversations had to be had to make sure that we weren't putting anything at risk with data privacy, for example.

The setup was both straightforward and complex, really. Some bits we're quite straightforward, but other parts were more complex. Especially the infrastructure we're still dealing with now one year on still has some complexities. We're still thinking about credential management versus the use of virtual machines and whether we should be using high density or not. There is also the matter of all the different types of offerings. There's a matrix that you have to abide by and I don't think UiPath is even aware of all the conflicts between the different options. That's something that we're still working through right now, but I'm sure they're going to address it.

We outsourced the implementation.

The performance benefits usually you would see instantly. We had a realization that there were some process changes that we probably needed to make, which we hadn't done prior to going live. I think it took us probably three months before we really saw the benefit coming through.

It's the same as what you would see on any of their list prices. There is also a corporate discount because of scale. Overall, we think it was a competitive price offering. They were the cheapest out of the three, so that's why we went with them.

We looked across the big three: Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. We did have a few others we considered, such as Kofax and Pegasystems. However, they're not dedicated RPA tools. That narrows you down immediately to probably select one of the top three dedicated RPA providers.

UiPath is a very unique example of being very technology-based from its history, but also its culture is very different to the other two. They're trying to be humble. UiPath has a different background and cultural fit, which is very much like our company. That was definitely one of the reasons we chose them. The other reason was the views. We just find it easier to use. The strategy, especially at the point in time when it was announced where the product was headed, was very much that they're trying to push this out to a robot for every person. We want everyone to be able to access it, too.

Do what you would normally do with any vendor. Check out the competition and see what is right for your company. I'll be shocked if you don't think that UiPath is the best because there's a reason why it's at the top of the Gartner reports all over the shop. It's got great user feedback on places like IT Central Station and other review boards. There is absolutely a reason for that. Also, assess the other values that you place importance on. It's not all about costs. Cultural fit was a massive deal for us. What would you envision your company looking like with the uptake of automation? Is it a cultural thing? Is it purely about efficiency or do you want everyone to be up-skilled for what the workforce in the future will look like? That means that actually having everyone being able to access the tools is very important.

I would rate UiPath as eight out of ten.

I have used the UiPath Academy RPA training, although not completed it. I am a bit busy doing a few of the bits, but a lot of my team have completed level one and some completed level three. I have one member of my team who just completed all the training available online. He's done every single module that you have available, including obviously the RPA Advanced Developers training. I think there is a wealth of knowledge there. It's incredible, but it's the same training material that's used internally for UiPath as well as other companies. I think as long as they stay on top of it and make sure that it never gets overlooked, it's a great resource for anyone to get, in order to up-skill in the new technology. If they constantly talk about the democratization of RPA, this is fundamental to that.

The training has helped my team get up to speed, apply best practices, and make sure that we're not wasting time. We were trying to work it out for ourselves in a bit of a haphazard manner. It also forces standardization, of course. Anyone else who decides to get qualified can use it. If you're thinking about doing attended automations, I think it's the right way to do it. Everyone has the same set of standards and rules to build off of.

I would rate the training as four and a half out of five because there's always room for improvement. However, I think it's very thorough and they've covered all the aspects, both technical and not technical. It is very impressive.

I think there are different perks to using one type of robot as opposed to another. The unattended robot cost is higher, therefore the need to make sure the utilization rate is high is paramount to getting your value out of it. I think that makes it challenging but worthwhile. There are different types of processes you will end up pushing towards with an unattended automation profile, whereas an attended profile, which we're starting to move into now, leads to other types of automation opportunities. Attended robots are cheaper, which means it is easier to achieve ROI, but you can almost expect less utilization because it won't be people's full-time jobs. They won't get back all the time and there will be licenses to honor which are being consumed. That has to be baked into the business case. I think you will end up with a portfolio of both. The big opportunities probably sit within an unattended fashion.

We primarily use UiPath for RCM and it can handle most tasks effectively, especially when dealing with data extraction from PDF files. There might be more complex scenarios where AI could be more suitable, although the implementation might be challenging. We are in the process of evaluating these AI-powered use cases.

We have found UiPath to be quite valuable as we actively deploy and use bots, which have become a significant asset to our operations. 

We were able to achieve the savings. It has freed up around ten thousand hours of time and resources for other tasks.

Improving financial and recording operations through the use of charts would be advantageous.

I have been using UiPath for approximately two years.

The stability is excellent.

Scalability is impressive, and it only requires the appropriate licensing.

The support is quite commendable, and they are very prompt in addressing issues. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward.

ROI is significant when the use case results in substantial cost savings, but it's important to note that not all use cases deliver such hard savings.

The cost is on the higher side.

My recommendation is to thoroughly assess use cases and choose the right tools to prevent possible setbacks. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

I use UiPath to reduce any data entry, report generation, or anything where UiPath can help avoid human errors.

The solution is very user-friendly and easy to use. It comes with pre-built automation. The tutorials are very helpful. 

I have been working with the product for six months. 

The tool is stable. 

UiPath is scalable. 

The tool's support is helpful. 

I use UiPath to reduce human errors during report generation or data entry. Simple errors can cause delays down the stream. 

The product has helped us save hours, which can range from a few hours to tens of thousands of hours. 

UiPath has helped us increase accuracy. It is helpful in data validation. 

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

I use it for RPA in bank reconciliation, credit card operations, retail banking, vendor invoice management, purchase order matching, and employee onboarding.

It helps to minimize the on-premises footprint and speeds up and reduces the cost of digital transformation. It also reduces human error and that reduces costs and makes systems more reliable. 

UiPath can also free up employee time. It depends on how many automation initiatives you run, but you can probably automate 20 to 30 percent of tasks.

Overall, the most valuable aspects are the automation, UI navigation, and orchestration.

It's fairly easy to use and automation can be done by relatively junior people. It's a low-code platform, so it requires a little bit of scripting but nothing too crazy. A business analyst can use it in most cases.

We're an implementation partner, so we don't use it for ourselves because we're too small. But for our client base, it enables end-to-end automation. That's a very important aspect, especially in banking where there is a lot of competition, the margins are low, and operating costs are high. They can't make any mistakes. That requires them to have an automation solution that does manual and repetitive tasks for them. It's a cost imperative.

And being part of the UiPath user community is a positive. I have also done a couple of the sales-oriented UiPath Academy courses. They are really easy to consume and they are free for partners and they're very business oriented.

UiPath is not easy to work with, as a vendor, from a partner perspective. They are difficult to deal with.

I have been working with UiPath for two years, not as an engineer but in business development.

It's very stable. I've not heard of any major issues where the system collapses.

It's scalable. You can throw more and more robots at it.

Technical support from UiPath is slow but good enough.

Neutral

ROI depends on the customer and what they need, but you can definitely have a return on investment of 300 to 400 percent within about three years. It's a relatively quick payback.

They are the biggest RPA vendor with the highest market share. They have a good product and the company seems really innovative. They're branching out into AI and process mining, et cetera. Generally, as a vendor, they're the strongest one in the mix.

My advice is to start sooner rather than later with RPA.

There is a lot of hype around the topic of RPA and customers are exploring it, but they can't do it without partners; at least not the first couple of projects. Deployments with our customers take about six weeks.

We maintain the solutions we create. We normally have a support contract in place for at least the first couple of years. Maintenance, on our side, involves two or three people.

I work in development, creating robots, and I use UiPath for automation.

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-premise footprint and reduced human error. It has also sped up digital transformation and reduced its cost without requiring any expensive or complex application upgrades.

UiPath's best feature is that it's low code. UiPath also has the best community I can think of in the IT sector.

UiPath would be improved by integrating AI.

I've been working with UiPath for four years.

UiPath is very stable.

UiPath is very easy to scale.

UiPath makes it easy to build automations, monitor the activity of the robots, and let the business side interact with the robots. It also has a lot of applications, starting from test capture and process mining to reporting the activity of the robots. UiPath is a simple solution if you're looking to save time and money, but in the long term, I would suggest customizing the main applications you're using. I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

We use it for unattended automation. Most of it is centered around finance for various reporting purposes. We also use this solution to move data between systems.

The biggest improvement is giving people time back in their day. We're still not where we'd like to be with our automation journey, so we don't have the time savings that we would like at the moment. However, we are continuing on that journey and helping to free up users and allowing them to work on things they want to work on.

The Excel integration is definitely good. We use that a lot because our finance department uses Excel. Overall, I really like Studio and unattended automation. Automation Cloud is very good as well. The platform as a whole has been good for us.

I like the UiPath user community, and the forums are really good. Most of the time, I can find answers there to any issues I'm having. The UiPath forums are very active, and I like seeing the employees in there as well.

We onboard any new developers that we have for RPA using UiPath Academy. It reduces the amount of training time in which the RPA team is involved because the Academy courses can take care of a lot of the fundamentals on UiPath.

Integration is an area for improvement. I still encounter issues with it, like getting errors when I try to use a connection.

We've been using it since 2019.

I have no complaints regarding the stability of UiPath. We have never had any issues with regressions or weird bugs.

We're still in the early stage of our journey with UiPath. Right now, we have six unattended robots and about 25 processes running on those, which is not at a scale where we might see issues. However, I have no complaints with regard to scalability so far.  Also, achieving the scalability we may need seems pretty straightforward.

UiPath's technical support is on par with that of other companies. We seem to spend a lot of time sending logs back and forth, and because of that, I would give technical support a rating of seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was not too bad. We started in the finance units since they were the ones pushing for RPA, and they've been our biggest internal customers so far.

We worked with our reseller who guided us through the entire setup. They did a few automations for us until we had that practice in-house.

In terms of ROI, we are saving more than what the platform costs us. We are at about 1.5 million in savings due to recent automation. It was a little less than that before. These are soft savings and don't show up on balance sheets. We're trying to work toward automation that actually do lead to hard savings. We've saved about 43,000 hours in a year so far.

The licensing makes sense, but it does lead to a few adoption issues when a lot of the licenses are per user. Convincing some of our business units to pay for user licenses for either Action Center or attended robots can be a roadblock.

We looked at Blue Prism. The biggest reason for going with UiPath is that we are a heavy .NET shop. Therefore, the fact that UiPath is based on .NET and that we can write our own custom activities in C# bar and Visual Basic were big factors for us. It meant that we would be able to adopt UiPath faster and that it would fit with our current Microsoft stack as well. We also liked where the UiPath platform as a whole was going, becoming not just RPA development but integrations as well. In comparison, Blue Prism seemed to have stuck with RPA and not expanded much beyond that.

Take a look at UiPath's platform as a whole and what it can do aside from just RPA automation. I would also advise you not to discount the tech stack. Overall, I like the platform, and I think it's headed in the right direction. Because of that, I would give it a rating of nine on a scale from one to ten.

The use of this solution is spread out across our organization. On the IT side, we use it for synoptic notes like admission process, reviewing invoices and giving usage access.

The insights that this solution provides have been most valuable. We use these insights to report to higher management on the performance of our processes. 

UiPath also helps us reduce manual work although we do not yet use UiPath's AI functionality. We have learned a lot from the UiPath community and gained knowledge about future products and enhancements. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them.

I have been using this solution for six years. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them. We then need to go through the process again and reopen a ticket with the same information.

Neutral

I have a little bit of experience using Automation Anywhere, but I prefer UiPath. The coding with Automation Anywhere was not developer friendly. 

Our whole team was new to this solution so there was a learning curve involved for all of us which made the setup difficult at times. At this stage, UiPath was one or two years old with limited documentation. The deployment did not take long.

We deployed this solution with the help of a partner called Ernst & Young.

We have experienced a return on investment using the solution as it has led to three million in savings since we started using it. 

We would prefer it if the licences were packaged together. When it comes to developer licences, we need to pay to transfer licences when a developer leaves and this also creates additional work for our IT team. 

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I would recommend UiPath to others because it is a good tool and has a lot of potential to expand.