UiPath Platform Reviews

Most of our use cases are related to business, like reconciliation and reporting. Therein, they have some internal applications to automate SAP automation and Salesforce Automation. Our most recent use case is related to documents, like the invoices coming from customers. We have to extract that data from invoices via different formats, e.g., some are digital formats and some are scanned formats. So, we have to extract the data, which we are doing with the help of UiPath.

We are using both attended and unattended automation. For 90 percent of our use cases, we are using UiPath for unattended automation.

I use UiPath almost every day. When I finish developing one process, there is a new process to develop. If a process is complex, it almost takes six to eight weeks to develop it, then you have to deploy it for monitoring. After that, the next process comes up.

UiPath helps based on how it is configured. In our case, there are so many transactions coming in, it is not possible for a human to complete them in nine hours (working hours). So, we went with unattended bots, which we mostly run at night. We start the bots after the working hours of humans, so when the operations team returns in the morning, their work is complete.

From a developer perspective, the process is smooth and easy. You can find a solution on Google easily. You can develop your own code. From a technical perspective, it is 100 percent.

UiPath Studio is great. It has all the activities. You don't have to write anything. Even after that, if you feel that you have to do something for yourself, then you can write your on-premises code in it and develop your own framework. Everything is there. You just have to use UiPath Studio.

if you are a business user, even if you don't have a technical team, you can install the second version of the Community edition, which is StudioX. This is specifically made for business people who don't have a lot of ideas about technicalities. This is a great feature.

If websites are made in a recent programming format, it is very easy to automate them with the help of UiPath. However, if that technology is based on legacy applications, then it is very fragile and hard to do that. So, we have to choose the technology first, and if the technology is new, then you can easily automate it with other applications or the help of an RPA tool.

The process can be complex if an application is a legacy application or the data is unstructured. The analysis of some bots is lacking. If a customer asks for analysis of a particular bot, you cannot just get the data from the UiPath and give it to the customer. It is not that easy. I would rate this process as a seven or eight (out of 10).

The Document Understanding feature should be more developed and advanced. For example, you have to make a template with their ML model. Currently, we can't use our own ML model, and we have to use the UiPath ML model. UiPath has only a few ML models right now. They should come up with more ML models or make it easier for us to use our own ML model. While they are working on this, I have felt much difficulty in extracting data during our last process for Document Understanding. We had to go with the Python language. So, I think they are lacking in this feature.

After deploying the bots in production, processes are very stable, unless something happens with the machine. You don't have to monitor a process every time. So, I am very impressed and satisfied with things.

We are looking to update to version 20.

This solution is very much scalable. If you are working in a small or large organization, it doesn't matter. It is very much scalable, up to anything.

We have a team of around 100 to 120 people in RPA automation, in which 60 or 70 users have the developer license. 

I am very much impressed and satisfied with the UiPath solution. Earlier, I used the Automation Anywhere solution, and it is sort of messy and complex. You have to pull everything from a single workflow. Then, I moved to UiPath, and everything was very sorted. If you really like coding, you can do that. It gives you a real developer type feel.

Developing and deploying robots with UiPath is very straightforward. It hardly takes five minutes to deploy a process on Orchestrator.

The last process that UiPath covered saved the work of two people.

If you have repetitive tasks, you can apply UiPath and have your people trained to do other work.

If you want to start doing RPA, I think you should definitely go with UiPath because it has the Community edition. You can just install it and check whether or not your process works fine with UiPath. It will be an attended bot, but you can form an idea whether your bot can easily be automated.

We have one use case related to Microsoft Word Automation. Word Automation is not compatible with other tools. However, in UiPath, we were able to write our own code to automate and format the Word document, which is why UiPath Studio is the most valuable feature. We are also using the Automation Anywhere. But, in Automation Anywhere, we cannot write our own code. So, we can't automate Word Automation from Automation Anywhere as well.

Automation Anywhere has come out with its own new version of 2019, which is as effective as UiPath. However, when I have tried to run or deploy the bots, it still lacks in features. For example, in UiPath, AML activities are coming up very frequently. Whereas, in Automation Anywhere, these features are lacking, which is why I go with UiPath. Also, Citrix automation is very good with UiPath. You feel like you are able to detect the elements and images.

UiPath gives you REFramework, which is absolutely amazing for business use cases. Automation Anywhere also lacks this feature. With Automation Anywhere, you need to make your own framework, and if you are making your own framework, then the look becomes messy. If someone is trying to understand it, then they have to spend more time on the framework to understand it.

I use the IQ Bot of Automation Anywhere, and even after training a hundred documents, it's not picking up or extracting the data from documents. I feel like I have to train the model again, which is not the case with Document Understanding. If you properly make the templates in Document Understanding of UiPath, it gives you full text values. So, it is more advanced and suitable for me.

We use UiPath Assistant to run processes about 10 percent of the time. Most of the time, we are using Orchestrator. 

UiPath releases new features every 15 days to a month. They have already come up with AI and machine learning.

If scanned documents are coming in for some of the work, we are also using Python language for this.

If you already have a technical team, then you can ask them to look into UiPath Academy. If they have basic knowledge of programming or coding, then even in seven days, they can easily learn UiPath and start applying it in their organization. You don't need to hire outside developers.

Overall, the solution is a nine (out of 10).

We use it for financial use cases: purchase-to-pay processes, reconciliation processes, vendor payment, and merchant payments. This is just in finance. Then, we have retail order processing, order creation, PO generation, delivery note generation, and all those things in retail. We even have banking processes as well, such as a payments portal. We use it in most of the fields.

We don't use cloud licenses. Most of our licenses are on-prem.

We use both attended and unattended automation in UiPath.

We are partnered with UiPath. Sometimes, UiPath refers customers to us, bringing us business. We also give them business.

We have a third-party order processing portal, which keeps on changing its UI very often and has elements that keep on shuffling between the metadata. What we had in this case was the script running was shuffling the elements, and we are disabled that thing. Then, we used the selector technology instead. Selector technology is very important for all our UI-based processes. We rely on it. 

We used the AI Fabric functionality in one of our projects. We had to categorize users' reviews based on the sentiment scores. Everything was already available, including the model. So, we just have to click on all those things from UiPath now.

The new features that they are adding in, these are very different from other RPA tools in the market:

• AI Fabric
• Integration with different data models
• You can do all the data processing, data mining, etc., in the back-end UiPath. 
• You don't need a separate tool for data mining or other cognitive abilities. You can do all the cognitive abilities in UiPath. 
• UiPath Apps, which they're bringing in just now, is a really good thing. It has a good user interface.

Most RPA tools do not directly have these features. Also, we don't have to rely on other tools in order to develop these things. We can directly develop and integrate them with UiPath on one platform. So, we don't have to struggle within multiple platforms.

UiPath Apps is available only on Community. So, this was a best case scenario for us. It was pretty good. The only thing is that it has to be more advanced. Now, it is very basic. I would like more integration with the UI elements. It should be more user-friendly, especially if we go for any other application development. For example, in other UI development platforms, you can easily drag and drop to develop in a UI. However, it is a very initial phase for UiPath Apps, and maybe in the future, they might improve this.

We have used the Picture in Picture functionality for a few attended automations, where the user is monitoring or we are installing a new interface. Sometimes, in my experience, Picture In Picture is a bit buggy. It takes over your control, then the controls get mixed. That is one of few issues that I have found. Other than that, Picture In Picture works pretty well.

I had an instance when UiPath crashed on my computer. Then, the code that I was working on also crashed. This was a very crucial process for us, but we apparently didn't have a backup. UiPath also didn't have any way to recover that code. This was something which I found very strange, because ideally the source company should have a mainframe where they can recover a code. Or, if I give them a corrupted damage file, then they could easily recover that code. 

The stability is pretty good when we follow the best practices, i.e., whatever is in the REFramework. 

Scalability is something that we are still figuring out. RPA is something which we cannot do for everything, because there is a small gap between profit and the cost.

The support has been pretty good so far. The response time could improve, then it would be much better. However, once we get a ticket assigned to a technical person, then it is pretty straightforward. They are very fast, know their job, and know how to resolve the issue.

The on-prem setup is straightforward. There is very detailed documentation. We always get support from UiPath, so it is not difficult. I have never faced any issues, but I have only deployed on a small scale.

The timeline of the project depends on the project's complexity. Usually, the due diligence and everything else takes about two or three weeks. Then, the design takes another one or two weeks before we start with the development, depending on the inputs.

I get involved with small client setups.

There is a client-facing team of around 25 people who do due diligence and design work. There is also our back-end/technical delivery team, which includes mostly developers, a product project manager, project owner, and developer lead, who are there mostly for their technical abilities, not for their design abilities. 

The price of Orchestrator is pretty high in general as well as compared to other solutions, because Automation Anywhere does not charge for its Control Room.

We can develop our own packages and integrate them, which is pretty good. Other tools don't have that.

There are a lot of cons with Automation Anywhere, which we are using. They deployed a new version, 2019, which is very buggy, and they are still working on that. I don't know how or why they released it to the public. They did so much testing, but it is still buggy.

Power Automate (previously Softomotive) needs to improve on its UI. The ease of use is not there with this solution.

Go for it. It is a pretty good tool, which is straightforward and easy to use. They have training in place. Even if you are new to it, you can go ahead and learn to do it. 

They are bringing in new things. You can automate, integrate, and test things. It is even used for mobile testing. It is pretty good in that case. For most of people's use cases, UiPath will suffice for their use cases.

I would rate the solution as an eight (out of 10). 

One of the use cases that I have recently completed is related to SAP and the interaction with Excel and our internal application. We are going with the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne ERP application and we used UiPath to help in this area, and were able to do so within a few days.

Some of our people are going for process automation and some are doing desktop automation.

It helps our developers learn and implement things faster.

Also, the UI Targets feature has helped us with some difficult situations. We were using other solutions for these situations but our company has moved away from them to using UiPath, and it's working very well. 

UiPath provides lots of integration to our ERP application and lots of new updates are coming out day by day. It helps us to automate our tasks.

We are using the solution's selector technology for UI automation. That is the most important feature for us. For example, one of the applications in our company is being updated day by day, by the development team. We use selector to make it dynamic.

We also use the latest version of the desktop Assistant tool for some queueing activity in UiPath Orchestrator. The tasks in the queue are continually updated and then they are run by robots. Using Assistant, we get a lot of information about our queues, like if something fails, for example. Also if a robot fails we get robot status-type information from the Assistant. The Assistant plays a good role because, if a process is going wrong, we have control. Using the Assistant we can stop that process. It is a most important feature from UiPath.

An area which the UiPath team is rapidly working on is machine learning and artificial intelligence. At the moment, it is a little difficult to understand. If they could add some more training on it in their Academy, it would help customers to learn about these features.

I have been using UiPath for the last eight months.

We only use the stable versions, regardless of whatever they are releasing, to avoid bugs and errors. In the stable versions, we have never found any issues or any bugs. If there is any issue, we have a team that will contact the UiPath team and we will get quick solutions. But so far, we have never had any problem or issues with a stable version of UiPath.

We use the Assistant to handle all the robots' actions. We are scaling and tracking it. That is very important for us. The scalability features of UiPath are awesome.

In the eight months I have been working with UiPath I have implemented seven or eight projects. Day by day we are increasing our usage of it, and UiPath is also increasing the product's features and adding technologies. That enables us to work on more projects, as it is easy to integrate.

We have been able to implement a lot of little projects. That is one of the reasons that it is cost-effective. In addition to the affordable price, it just takes a few days to develop solutions for these projects.

In India, a developer costs about 16,000 rupees per day. Using UiPath, all our projects have been done in 30 days. If we tried to do these little projects in another technology, they would be more costly because they would be more time-consuming.

Our company is based on automation. UiPath is the correct solution for this. It is cost-effective and has an affordable price.

UiPath is not the only technology we are using, but we are migrating to UiPath because it is cost-effective. The previous solution was Blue Prism, but for the little projects, it was not the right solution.

In addition, the Control Room is really required for other technologies, like Blue Prism, but there is no need for it with UiPath, because we manage and deploy it with our team only. We don't need to worry about the Control Room.

For the beginner the UiPath Academy has a lot of training available. It's important to go through the training. After the training you can easily work on any project in UiPath. So first of all, follow the training. For intermediate-level users, UiPath is the correct solution. These users just need to keep up to date, day by day, because the UiPath team is rapidly updating the features.

The Picture in Picture functionality for attended automations is a new feature. Up until now we have not used PiP, but we have some use cases for an internal project we are doing and are looking into it for the future.

We are using UiPath Automation Cloud, but we have not yet migrated our on-premises UiPath instance to it. We are thinking about the on-premise because it fully depends on our own enterprise. If we go to the cloud, we will be able to collaborate better with our team and what others, because it is "public."

We have a use case that involves an invoice billing process, where vendors from an external organization submit their details for the invoice. This automation works as expected, independently of anything else. It is also a good example of how we were able to scale RPA benefits in the company with the automation of a specific process that requires human-robot collaboration.

Our internal tools include the database where all of this information is stored, and we have a second automation that is used by the billers in our organization to tally the data that includes details such as what each vendor has submitted to get their payments.

We built a third automation in UiPath, which basically compares these first two. But, due to the complexity and the nature of the tally that has to occur, we require some human input in between certain steps.

For these particular steps, we have developed a four-bot configuration. These are four separate bots that run and a couple of them have an attended automation part, where a human can intervene. It's a verification step, where the human can decide whether or not something is okay. Specifically, the bot compares two fields and if they match, then it's great, but if not, it triggers a request to a human user for manual verification. If they approve then it is marked as a successful verification.

Because we use technologies like OCR, there are details that cannot always be interpreted properly. This is where we need an additional check, which is the reason that we have humans in the loop as part of the process.

We have saved a lot of time by using UiPath. We have also improved a lot in terms of accuracy and reducing errors in a lot of projects. In fact, in one of the projects, we automated the entire job, which involves coaching people on what has to be done end-to-end, by the robots. It was built on UiPath and on this project, we had a savings of more than €100,000 euros. That was a big saving for us, and it's continuing right now.

More importantly, a lot of the clients had complained about the end-user, which is outside of the organization, with respect to the accuracy of the data. There were errors. When we deployed robots based on UiPath, the accuracy has vastly improved and the clients are very happy with the results. They no longer have to keep coming back to our billers and telling them that things were not done properly. The robot functions like it has been programmed every single time. So, it's been perfect for that purpose as well. The customer trusts us more because of our deployments in robots.

UiPath definitely allows employees to delegate mundane tasks to their personal automations, saving them time. A major reason for a lot of our automation cases is because most people are not 100% involved in certain tasks. For example, if you spend two hours on a particular process, and then over the next four or five hours, you're supposed to be working on more complicated processes, but what happens during the first two hours is that things get complicated and the day is ruined dealing with small tasks. Now, suppose that the two-hour allotment for the smaller process is automated using UiPath, the person is free to dedicatedly perform more important functions. In the entirety of our automation effort, this has been a primary driver for all of the new use cases. It's a huge plus for us.

With respect to employee satisfaction, it has been a mixed result for us. In certain cases, it's been a huge boon because there was a heavy workload on the employees and UiPath really helped them cope with it. This was especially true during COVID when the workload increased exponentially, and people could not go into the office. However, there were times in the past when people were no longer required because UiPath was doing their jobs perfectly, making them redundant. As they were no longer required, they left the company.

So, we have had both scenarios, but moving forward, instead of telling people that they're no longer required, we have retasked them to other projects. Essentially, we have reabsorbed them and in turn, have simplified the hiring process. In this regard, we have adjusted.

The new UiPath assistant is very good.

The customizable forms that UiPath has recently launched allow us to give the user an exact input that they can provide. Being able to customize this is extremely helpful for us because we have other attended automation processes, and they can each be tailored to the needs of the business.

We use the selector technology for automating processes with dynamic interfaces on a daily basis in almost all of our projects. Our extensive use of this feature includes all of the different kinds of selectors that UiPath allows. We have the flexibility to modify these selectors as per our need. This functionality gives UiPath a big edge over its competitors and I know this because I've personally used products by other vendors. The selection-making process is much simpler with UiPath, with improved accuracy and reliability.

This feature is important because a lot of the processes are Citrix-based or remote desktop applications. Because the robot would not have a direct connection to the application, we have to use Citrix technology. All of the applications are different in nature, so having the flexibility to switch between different kinds of selectors and select our activities allows us to build the perfect solution for remote applications. Even the performance, in my experience, has been the best, especially for Citrix-based automations or remote desktop-based automations.

There are a few features that could be improved, and one of them is good integration with the Microsoft ecosystem. For example, Microsoft launched Power Apps as its platform, and even though its capabilities are not as good as UiPath, it has the advantage of being so well-integrated with Excel Online, Word, and everything else. We don't have to perform a lot of development work, and it's pre-approved in our organization. Applications like SharePoint are another example of pre-approved solutions. But with UiPath, we have to prove that it's a secure process. Simply put, a stronger collaboration between Microsoft and UiPath in a lot of areas would be helpful because it would ease the development process for us.

Another example is with the Automation Hub. At this time, Automation Hub does not allow you a direct login process or single sign-on option using Azure Active Directory. This means that you're limited to going through either Gmail or something else. This is true for the on-premises solution, not the cloud one. Although we had decided to purchase the Automation Hub license, this lack of functionality held things up because we did not want to manually go in to update all of the new users again and again. We wanted the information to be picked directly from Active Directory whenever a user wanted to sign up for it.

I have been using UiPath Attended Automation for approximately three and a half years.

In the past, stability has been great. However, more recently I have been facing some issues, and I'm hoping for some resolution. For example, we recently upgraded to the new orchestrator in Studio, and we had to upgrade a few packages also, In particular, the UiPath automation packages.

Some of our GUI activities, which are not fully backward compatible, have been facing some issues. Consequently, some of our bots have been impacted. We have already raised the issue and we are in discussion to find a resolution. This was the first time we actually faced an issue in terms of reliability with UiPath.

Our past experience has been very good, and I cannot say that we have any complaints regarding the reliability of UiPath solutions.

Scalability-wise, it is very good. It is easily scalable and we have a lot of options for expanding and configuring as per our requirements. It is also customizable.

We have a team of between 20 and 30 people, which includes approximately 10 developers, 5 team leads, two architects, two production managers, and one overall manager. We have some contractual workers, as well.

We have approximately 35 automations that are in production right now. From a process perspective, we have pretty much worked on all verticals including finance, healthcare, internal IT processes that needed automation, and more. An example is ServiceNow, where jobs like creating user accounts, deploying new machines, and other administrative tasks have also been automated. HR processes, including onboarding, have been automated.

It is a very large organization, and there are lots of processes, so I expect that our usage will grow.

The technical support is excellent in our experience. Whenever we have had a problem, they've always been there to support us and help us with the problem. I don't have any complaints, as they've always made the effort. Even if things have taken longer than we had hoped or expected, they've always come back with the best resolution they can offer.

I have worked with Blue Prism and in my experience, UiPath does a much better job, both in terms of dev and listening to the community. For example, Blue Prism is a very closed community and very limited. They have improved, I would say, based on the success of UiPath, but it's not very open-source or open-natured.

The biggest advantage that I have noticed is with Citrix-based automations or remote desktop automations. There are cases where Blue Prism did not work, but UiPath was very good. I did not have to spend too much time with UiPath before it worked perfectly. The reliability was also great.

More importantly, UiPath listens to the customers as well as the developer community, and in turn, they implement features that make their lives easier. They constantly reach out for feedback and it's a good process because it helps to know that the customer is happy. If I am speaking about myself, I'm happy that if I have a need, or I'm facing some challenges, I put it in the pipeline for UiPath and within six months, I will see that feature live in production.

We started with a disaster recovery scenario, where we have one live production orchestrator, as well as one backup orchestrator and a load balancer installed. This is a high availability disaster recovery (HADR) configuration, where all of our live bots are on the main orchestrator. In the case that the live orchestrator goes down, we have the backup orchestrator kick in.

The overall deployment and installation process was simple. However, we did face some issues with the Redis part. Configuring Redis was one of our pain points, and we reached out to UiPath about it.

Although it was resolved, it took a lot of time and effort, from our end as well. That was the only experience that stood out as a problem for us. But overall, it was a smooth process.

It took about a week to set everything up, although we had constraints from our own internal infrastructure team. The delay was not related to UiPath issues.

The licensing is close to optimum; however, there is room for improvement in both the cost and flexibility of the licenses. It isn't the best pricing in the market but it's pretty close.

For developing our attended automation, we began by coding the bot to our requirements, and then made modifications to it for attended automation.

My advice for anybody who is considering UiPath is to be sure of what your needs are regarding an RPA product. If you're looking for something very small-scale, very easy, then there are a lot of options. But if you're looking for a long-term, feature-rich solution, which has access to third-party integrations, then choose UiPath.

You will require a development team, at least to some level. UiPath is now simpler with the Studio X products, but in the past, it was a bit more challenging to dive deep into UiPath directly. It required some training but now, things have definitely improved.

One of the major lessons that I have learned from using UiPath is to make sure that everything is documented well. There is a lot that needs to be tested before bots are put into production because a lot of things that work on your local machine may not work on another. It can vary from machine to machine and where something works on one, a change in environment for another may cause it to fail. This means that you should change from machine to machine during the testing phase.

Overall, I feel as if now UiPath is on the right path with its competitors. It is a very good long-term solution.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use it with ServiceNow for maintaining tickets. Our task works to automate some scenarios such as software updates. In that scenario, there are some repeated steps. We use UiPath with Python scripting to automate those repetitive steps.

One of our use cases is for our insurance team where we have built a prototype which has helped the insurance team cut pricing. That is one of the automations that has made a difference.

Also, the fact that this is a SaaS solution means we are able to innovate much faster when it comes to automation. We have been able to complete use cases in as little as one month. There can be problems with the on-premises version because there are certain restrictions for accessing that database. But because this is on the cloud, we can access the data from anywhere in the world. That is very beneficial.

UiPath has also helped to reduce the amount of maintenance work related to our automation operations. It has a feature to keep the different automatic tasks monitored. That monitoring helps us if there's any problem in an automation. We get notification that there is a problem. If we don't know about those problems then, after some time, maintenance on them will be harder. It does help us to maintain things.

Before, we were using the on-premises service for our automation activity. By using UiPath Automation Cloud, we don't need to go anywhere. There is a single tool where we can keep track of the maintenance. Doing so with the on-prem solution was much more time consuming and slow. With UiPath it's so much faster so it helps us cut costs.

And in terms of overall cost savings, before we implemented one of our automations there were around 100 people taking care of the task. Using UiPath, we have automated that task and we have saved the fees of 100 people.

The speed is much better because we're doing it on the cloud. With other solutions there were network problems, but in UiPath I have found that network connectivity is much stronger when transferring data from the back end to the front end. It is much faster.

The Portal for enabling business users to trigger jobs with business input and for monitoring those jobs is great.

There is also the granular, role-based access control and management which is very important in our organization because we have different roles. Our manager has a much higher role, so that if there are some changes in an automated step, there are permissions from that higher authority. Otherwise, low-level employees could make changes without informing the higher levels and there could be a lot of conflicts. This way, we don't allow the lower-level employee to make any changes without proper permission from the higher authority.

The solution's single sign-on is also important because without it, a user ID and password could be compromised by a third-party or hacker. Single sign-on gives us another level of security when logging in to UiPath. It's very important and a good security feature.

UiPath also continues to add services to the Portal. There are proper updates that come out monthly or quarterly. They update different features or any problems with features, so the updates are very useful for us. It's very important that all the services are managed from the same place because no matter where a team is, if there is a glitch and we raise a question with customer support, and they do some fixing, that fix is available for all the users who are using UiPath. It comes from the centralized location, which is a very good thing. It is available for all our users around the world.

They should include new machine learning and AI algorithms for better forecasting and analytics.

I've been using UiPath Automation Cloud for two years.

It is very stable. In most software, we find that when we increase the data size, there is some kind of decrease in network connectivity, a delay or lag. But UiPath is very stable because they release updates very frequently.

We use it for day-to-day purposes. The tools are working on different jobs, daily. We have plans to automate more scenarios and we are working on a PoC for them. If they go well they will be implemented in UiPath as well.

Their support is very proactive. When we reach out to them, they fix our problem within a day. We can also use the Portal to have a chat about any issues that come up. Customer support is good and the community support is also great.

The fact that we don't have to worry about future installations and upgrades of Orchestrator, was important in our decision to go with UiPath, because those things are already built in. We don't need to worry about the infrastructure part. It is maintained by the UiPath team. They also have better community support to help us if we face any problems. That is one of the great things about UiPath.

The initial setup was very easy. The vendor was very active and the community is very active so there was no delay in communication. It was very straightforward.

We started UiPath as a desktop application and then we slowly moved to the cloud.

And in terms of the setup costs of our automation operations, UiPath doesn't have a lot of dependencies, so it is quick. We don't need to contact another party to maintain things because the UiPath community helps us with every aspect. It works. 

The pricing is good compared to other software. Based on the features that UiPath is providing, and the community support, the price is reasonable.

I have used different tools like Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. When comparing all three, when it comes to cost, UiPath is great. It is also easy to use. Anyone can learn to use it within a couple of weeks. It is very useful and user-friendly.

The user interface and the usability of the other solutions is not as user-friendly. We also found some glitches in those solutions, things like network delays.

We haven't found any problems with UiPath. It is working great. It's a great tool. I would suggest that everyone go with a UiPath because it has helped us a lot.

We are using attended automation. I help drive a lot of products in UiPath. Now, we are using their data process mining and document understanding features. We are creating forms, then putting data on the forms, so our attended bots will work.

We use UiPath to resolve customer complaints by creating buttons that link to back-end integrations.

Employees can see information very quickly, reducing a lot of complications.

Uipth gives us as good speed and accuracy to improve all the bot la performance.

I like the document understanding feature. It gives us more accuracy. 

The AI and machine learning features are very useful for us.

UI Targets enabled us to quickly build automations within multiple applications, even without the right connectors. For example, we can drag and drop Outlook activities.

We use UiPath selector technology is a wonderful feature, especially compared to other RPA tools.

From mobile applications, we use Orchestrator where we can monitor processes and share them. 

Need more AI and Machine learning build technology and integration of 3rd party applications. Need some improvements in orchestrator

We have been using it for around two years.

5,000 people are using UiPath.

Any queries that we have, we can go onto their forums. If there are issues, we can contact their support and they will resolve them.

We have used Automation Anywhere, which is complex to understand. 

The initial deployment was not complex.

I will rate the level of expertise is 9(out of ten)

The attended automation has saved us time.

The pricing is average; it is not too high nor too low.

Its speed is better than other RPA solutions. They release more updates, details, and features compared to their competitors. 

We can learn from UiPath Academy.

I would rate the solution as a nine (out of 10).

We're mainly focused on finance for the time being so we've used UiPath for invoice processing and e-billing reconciliation. It makes sure that all of our converting information matches within our client databases. We've done a couple of solutions that track budget spend for certain clients, making sure that if the budget overruns or comes close to overrunning, then someone gets notified. If we get a new client or if a new legal case is opened, automation can make sure that all that information is then uploaded into our database. 

We've done a couple of smaller automations for the legal teams. These have been fairly basic ones though. There were a couple that download files from an email for them, and then rename them with the correct naming conventions, and saves them into correct drives. 

Another use case is to remove outdated users or information from our databases in line with the GDPR system.

In a general sense, UiPath has helped with data lineage, understanding where a process starts, who it rests with, and where it ends. It has made the process that we have automated a little bit more clear of which parts of the process are necessary, which are the parts that hold up the whole process, and which are the ones that are needlessly complicated.

For starters, it just helps give a bit more of an understanding of our processes once they're automated. Secondly, it's changed the way that we approach problems. We're tied into contracts that we might necessarily not want to be, but because we rely on the solution, we don't have a choice. Whereas, because UiPath is so versatile, we can use that to fill in gaps to take over processes, which otherwise in the past, we thought that only one specific tool could do for us. Now, we feel like we'd be less reliant on these specific tools to do a specific job. 

Third, a lot of teams are starting to understand that things can be automated. Whether it's in finance, HR, or even the legal teams, we started speaking to all the different teams and now they're bringing work to us and they're getting an understanding of things that do need to be done by a person and which don't. People aren't just doing work for the sake of it now. If they think there isn't a point to something and it can be automated, they bring it to us and we automate it. So, it's changed the way that we look at processes and don't just hardheadedly get someone to do it for no reason.

It checks our invoice stage for one of the processes that we do for e-billing. Previously, there wasn't anyone to check the financial data that we have in our systems against our clients and our recipients, and making sure that it all matches up. That process wasn't done at all so a month or two months later, a client would come back to us and say, "Hang on, you billed a strong amount or you've put our billing address wrong" which is obviously a little embarrassing. These things went completely unobserved for months. The client had to chase us, complain, and tell us we needed to fix it. Whereas now, it's more of a proactive approach rather than waiting for clients to come to us and tell us that we've done something wrong. We actually have the automation that can check and then validate those mistakes before they're even a problem and before they're spotted by anyone.

We're still in the early stages but we are starting to reach the point where UiPath is speeding up the cost of our digital transformation.

The digital transformation has made a couple of the lawyers' jobs easier by getting rid of the admin staff. It's freed up time and it makes things easier for everyone.

UiPath has definitely reduced our processing times as well. It really depends on the process but it has sped up. 

It has also decreased our error rates. At the moment we're looking to purchase an orchestration platform. At that point, we'll be able to collect more information about exact numbers and we'll actually have the analytics. 

The ability to use APIs within UiPath is really helpful. The web scraping is really great. It's so easy to use, it's very intuitive, and it's usually pretty consistent. When web pages change you need to update it, but it makes it quick. If you need to do another quick process, it's really easy to get it quickly and set something up. I can just scrape data from a website and save it somewhere.

The ease of building automation depends. UiPath makes things that are fairly simple but looks a little bit tricky in another language really easy. But if you're trying to do something really complicated, then sometimes it can be a little bit more tricky. It depends, sometimes it's really simple for fairly basic automations, I think it's fantastic. But when you want to try and get into the nitty-gritty and try and write your own code and then stick in there, it can sometimes be a bit difficult to use.

The documentation can be a little bit lacking. I think they improved it a little bit last month. Last time I checked, it seemed like they spent a bit of time trying to improve it. Sometimes some of the processes are nicely documented. UiPath offers training, which they provide on their website. They teach you how to use it, but for some processes, it just seems like the documentation isn't really there. It makes it a little bit difficult when you're using a specific process from the first time. 

If you're trying to invoke a method in UiPath, if you're trying to write a C# in there directly,  or if you need to do something which can't really be done in UiPath, but it can be done in C# or Python or something else, sometimes it's not that intuitive. It can be a little bit more complicated than it needs to be. I think that integration with other languages could be a little bit better.

We have been using UiPath permanently for around eight months, but we've been using it in-house for about a year before that.

UiPath itself is very stable because it interacts with so many different applications. I noticed in the past, at times, when using it with browsers, for example, using it with Google Chrome or Firefox, occasionally Chrome or Firefox will update and UiPath can take sometimes a week or two to update with it. For that week, you're able to use any solution that involves Google Chrome or Firefox, because it's waiting for that update. I've seen that happen with a couple of different applications, not as much recently. UiPath itself is very stable because it can interact with anything. If anything is updated and UiPath doesn't have time to update drivers to match that, sometimes you can get left a little bit stuck.

It's not really easy when you're using orchestrator to scale up and create a server, add a new bot, get a new license, and get it running. 

At the moment, it's just me using UiPath. I'm a developer and the architect for the solution as well. But we're planning to expand the team next year. 

We have a couple of processes that are running constantly, so I think we're using it as much as we can, and as much as our licenses allow. We're at a point now where we need an orchestrator to keep track and run everything at the same time. We're in the process now of purchasing that. I'll see where we're moving to, to expand quite far beyond that after we've got it. We're just at the point of ramping up.

I've sent a couple of requests to support when we needed licenses and when we changed to a different computer or a different user, and they got back to us really quickly and solved it within a day or so. I've been pretty happy with UiPath so far. I think every time I've sent a request to them, it's been resolved pretty quickly, and even if they couldn't resolve it super quick, the response times are usually within 24 hours or so, which is really good. I can't remember a time where we've been stuck in the dark with them.

I've used Automation Anywhere, but I haven't really used it within my work.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I implemented UiPath for a couple of years before I came to my current company. It was quite easy, but even the first time it's always been quite easy and quite simple to implement.

The initial setup only took a couple of days to get it all installed properly and cleared with IT. In terms of getting the first process up and running, it took about a week or two because we already had a couple of processes that were available. That's just a case of tweaking them, making sure they're all okay, and then just getting them set up and getting more packaged up.

Our initial strategy was mainly to focus on finance and to try and reduce the outsourced headcount with a couple of the finance teams. We outsource a lot of our work to a couple of other companies and we want to reduce the cost of that, so I automate it in-house. Our other strategy was to try and free up as much time for our lawyers as possible to make sure they weren't bogged down with work. It gives them more time to focus on the clients and work up better relationships with them.

We're still looking at the process that we've automated and seeing how much time and money we're saving with this crisis, but we don't have that information at the moment.

The pricing is pretty fair. Sometimes the pricing can be a little bit strange. There are different prices if it's for a specific user, a specific PC or if it's an attended bot or unattended bot. The price can be quite different, but I think when you talk to UiPath or when you look at the pricing sheets, there's not always a justification of why a certain license is more expensive than another. 

Licenses are more expensive than another but I wonder why there's such a big difference, why attended is four times more expensive, and that sort of thing. In terms of the orchestrator, I think it was a bit too much. It used to cost about 20,000 pounds a year. Now, they are ramping up costs. If you get an orchestrator but with just a few blocks, it's cheaper and then you can add up more parts to the orchestrator. So the cost goes up, which I think is better.

Definitely to try and get as many teams involved as possible to open up the conversation about RPA within the business. It works best when you've got lots of teams who have an understanding of RPA and how it works. They can come to you with their potential projects and you can filter through them and see which ones are going to be the most helpful.

It's hard if no one else in the business really knows RPA or how it works, or if there's a bit of a wall there. It's important to introduce RPA to as many different teams as possible and to encourage people to get involved, think about the processes that they do in it, and try to identify what can be helpful.

It's important to keep RPA close to the applications and the IT teams because if you're using RPA or UiPath you're going to need to be able to be speaking to your team who need permissions or admin privileges, or you need apps to be updated. It's important if you're going to put it in, have it as close to apps and development as possible.

It's a case of understanding that it's not a case of trying to get everything automated that you possibly can. The goal shouldn't just be to automate everything. If you've got a process and you can do 99% of it automated but you can't automate the last 1%, you can but it's going to be really fairly inefficient. Understand that it's fine for a process to have some bits that are automated, some of which are done by a person. The hybrid workforce, rather than going into the strategy of just automating everything is ideal. I've learned that trying to find that balance and getting that communication between the two is good.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. 

Originally, we were using UiPath to draft documents and send emails on mass to where we had large communication exercises. We used a robot instead of a small army of paralegals to generate the documentation and draft up the emails where we had to communicate with 2,000 to 3,000 people. It was a little bit more involved than just doing a standard mail merge, but we were able to use UiPath to create a number of documents and email it to an individual customer, all through a central email address.

Fast forward to where we are now, we have a few of these things focusing in on what we call post-completion activity, like the things you do after you sign a contract. So, it may be you're uploading it to the client's contract management system, applying stamps, or registering the contracts in an official register. The robot is able to do that for us post-completion. Those are our primary use cases at the moment. We're looking at more data integrity type stuff, like comparing our internal data sources against public record.

The ability to displace some activity that was traditionally on our paralegal team has improved my organization. We're an outsourced managed legal services provider. We're primarily a people-based business and UiPath displaces some activity off those paralegals and brings in automation. For me, it becomes an additional type of resource. The long and short of it is that we are able to move work that was traditionally done by people and would be charged at a rate, off to automation where we can bring the costs down. It enables us to reduce our running costs of our clients. A single bot running post-completion has saved as two FTEs.

UiPath has helped to speed up case resolutions in a couple of ways. It's focused on doing particular jobs, so it achieves the job faster. People don't need to complete an entire task end to end. They can stop at a certain point and the robot takes over. That allows a person to get through more work. Also, the fact that the robots are able to do this stuff overnight 24/7, means that we have more capacity to do stuff.

It gives us the ability to respond to clients. It gives us an option in how we're going to automate work for clients. It's hard to say if it has reduced the cost of our digital transformation because we deal with all the people. I suspect it hasn't done it internally, but suspect that has made some things cheaper for our clients. It enables us to deliver digital services cheaper for our clients. 

UiPath had an effect on our legal staff. It takes work that people don't want to do at the moment, having to download the document, take some details off the top and the bottom of the document, apply a stamp, and then re-upload, it's not what our paralegals and new trainees want to be doing on a day-to-day basis. So we are able to shift activity nobody enjoys onto a robot and let them focus on the stuff they've been trained to do.

In terms of how much it has reduced the processing times, the task itself still takes as long but we've got a robot doing it instead of a human. I don't think that the impact isn't that dramatic on-site processing times. At the moment, humans are only involved in 80% of the transaction and 20% has been held by robots.

These automations have decreased errors but it's hard to quantify by how much. They've inserted 20,000 transactions a year. I have no doubt that the error rates improved. It's just a hard thing to quantify.

The most valuable aspect of UiPath is the fact that it's a low-code platform. Being able to use a low-code platform really lowers the barrier entry of introducing automation. Normally, you fill in a request to go to IT to get a development resource allocated, and then you spend six months trying to do a project. Because UiPath is a bit of a platform, you can quickly, within weeks, start to knock off automation and get it checked and then successfully deployed. The low-code development environment is key for us.

Now that we're scaling up and taking advantage of Cloud stuff, it's become a lot easier to use. When we started our journey, we just bought a couple of bots and had them sit around on machines. It was a bit chaotic and we thought that if we take advantage of their wider platform, the orchestrator environment, it would make life a lot easier because we have all the monitoring and management. We have access to that in one platform rather than having to watch the individual robots, which is where we started.

We're going to use the solution's AI-enhanced document understanding feature. It's something we're looking at to help us with invoices and incoming bills that come in. It's on the backlog. We haven't got to it yet.

UiPath enables me to free up capacity for people to work on new work because they are involved, they're less accessible. At the moment, the majority of our staff is focused towards the end time making sure that things are filed correctly. It's more about focusing resources rather than being more responsive.

As things become more and more data-heavy and accessing other people's products and managing things, like obtaining the data through APIs, it feels like there could be a lot more for them to do, to make interacting with data or manipulating simple things like text strings. You need quite a strong development background or a reasonable level of understanding to achieve that. I think that could be made a little bit more achievable.

Three years ago we started using UiPath relatively small and we are looking to scale up significantly this year. Originally we started on-prem and as we're scaling up, we're going to move towards the cloud instance.

So far the stability has been good. With all of the low code platforms, it's actually more of a problem of what we've developed and deployed. It's how well we make our own software so that the platform will provide. It seems to stand up very, very well. I have not really had an issue. Anytime we have encountered a bug or whatnot, it's something we've introduced to ourselves, but thankfully there's a strong community where we can post questions and queries to get a response within a couple of hours.

I don't see scalability as being too much of a challenge. If we need more capacity on the robots, we're able to buy more licenses and additional VMs on the machine. If we need to expand or scale, it's just about deploying more machines. I don't feel it's that complicated. I suspect there are some constraints on how you build your applications, but that's more of an internal decision rather than UiPath's.

There are three people who are responsible for how to put a source of business analysis as well as development. Their role is to work with SMEs or people within our business units to understand a customer's process, get them deployed, and work with them to do it. The stuff we've taken on tends to be the easier, quick wins. We have three internal developers who were able to break down processes. We're a large organization. We have a large IT function that helped us with virtual machines and data centers, etc. We're not directly involved with them.

It's very easy to build an automation and just let it run. One of the key lessons we learned is the fact that you have to keep an eye on these things and that things change in the environment. Passwords run out and expire, folders may move as people move things around the network and a robot is just as susceptible to everything else that our user is. In terms of when you're designing any solutions, you have to pay a little extra attention to things that may cause you problems in six months' time. The simple fact that a password that you were using has been reset or is expired or something else, could cause the robot to failover. While the robot can tell you it's got a problem, you still have maintenance effort to keep an eye on. There is a maintenance commitment that you need for everything that is put on it. You need to spend a bit of extra time detailing exactly how you are going to respond to those things. Just because it's easy to deploy stuff, it doesn't do away with the fact that you have to keep an eye on it.

There are three analysts who are respondents to book fixes, etc. We have people in the business who we work with to automate these processes. They take a level of responsibility and keeping an eye on anything we try to automate. They're the first line of support. If anything's going wrong or something they can keep an eye on it and then if it is a technical book fix or something that needs to be resolved, that's then escalated to one of those three developers.

I only had one issue which was to do with the proxy setting when deploying some of the software. I raised the ticket on the website, got a response within half a day and it explained what I needed to do to fix it. That's my only experience of having to deal with them. I raised a ticket, I got the answer, and it worked. My experience so far has been fairly good.

We decided to use UiPath three years ago when RPA was starting to become a bit of a buzzword. We took a look at it and realized that it would be a very, very good solution for the right project by allowing us to automate mass activity all at once. One of those projects came around and we had to communicate it to a large audience. The process once agreed upon and nailed down could be very heavily scripted. We looked at a way that we would communicate it to the 30,000 people, all with documents that are pretty much the same but with a slight variation. We knew we wanted to try an RPA solution. UiPath was a very strong contender in those days and it was easy to access. That's why we ended up with it. We're able to achieve something with a single bot. All of those things make the software easy to test out. And then from there, you're able to make a decision.

The initial setup was really straightforward. In such a large law firm that has high data security obligations, we set these things up, appoint the orchestrator, and it just works. I have not encountered too many problems. 

It doesn't feel like a heavyweight ERP system or some larger workflow tool. These things are deployed onto a desktop and they speak to a server. It's not heavy. It doesn't feel like a piece of software with a heavy footprint.

The deployment took a week. It took us longer to end-to-end to get the invoice approved.

We've taken advantage of the architecture. Our IT team set some ground rules about where the virtual machines need to be hosted and deployed, but it's not that heavyweight. We increase some standards with IT and then install the software on those machines. We're using the Cloud version so there's not a lot to worry about.

We were able to do the deployment internally. 

Some of our ROI is quite dramatic. We have to email lots of stuff out to different people and our projector will require this to have a team of six or seven staff working solidly for a couple of weeks. The robot was able to get it done after a couple of weeks of configuration. This thing was able to pay for itself in a matter of hours once it was done. One of our post-completion robots took a week or two to develop and get stable enough to deploy. It's able to offset seven or eight hours a day. If we target the use cases correctly, we are able to get a return on the automation we deploy.

Take advantage of the Cloud-based implementation. You'll have to handle the Orchestrator licensing costs. It's obviously different for every organization. It's beneficial to get away from the on-premise installation. Also make sure that your business case justifies whatever the license cost is for an unattended or attended bot. 

Show your business case and that the automation will help you to exceed the license cost. You want to look at things that are going to give you a return on investment in about six months' time. Take advantage of the Cloud-hosted version so as not to pay the cost for Orchestrator. Then for your bots, make sure you will see a six months ROI in terms of how much automation you've gotten and how much you can get the robot to get done.

We also looked at BluePrism and Automation Anywhere. We took a quick look over the top three solutions at the time. UiPath seemed to be one of the leaders in the area.

We partnered with an organization to help us deliver it. We got some consultants in and sorted out what they were comfortable with using and what they recommended. For us, it was the size of the platform. We were looking at Automation Anywhere or BluePrism. It just felt like it would be a bigger project to implement when in reality all we wanted was one robot to do one job for us at the start of the project. It was more about the barriers of entry to getting started.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. It feels like nothing deserves a 10, and I highly recommend every organization has a handle on RPA. There are still a huge amount of features we're still yet to explore.