UiPath Platform Reviews

We play significantly in the BFSI and healthcare space. A lot of use cases have been related to BFSI. Insurance is much bigger, with claims and underwriting, policy admin, health benefits, and so on so forth. There are also good use cases on the functional level, HR and finance, and that cuts across industries. 

As an example, looking at fatality insurance for pets, clients had a high volume of documents come in, claims in all different forms, and they had to apply logic eligibility. There's a simple rule of whether you allow or disallow. If they don't allow the claim, then there's a comp process. By a sheer ability to read whichever way the document comes in, clients are able to load the system and quickly get the eligibility. 

This dramatically improves their claims operation by a big margin. Whenever there is some complexity in one, then we do an exception. We crunched the time so well and made the process so cost-effective it has given the client a huge benefit.

The democratization, automation, and attended automation, all of these are pretty good features. Those are all good value add to what it was there previously. 

The moment a machine takes over, there are fewer errors. That is inherent. When you say value, that is the cost-benefit. 

We have seen a lot of benefits on the backend, but then the algorithm is constrained, which can't transform because of the older technology. 

Sometimes in their partner communication, they aren't consistent. This maybe is related to the fact they are growing as a company.

The solution is fairly stable. 

The initial setup is always complex. Clients don't know the hardware, the licensing, or how it works. Any large organization will always have an initial hurdle. 

We have roughly around 164-165 trained RPA credentials on the engineering side, all on UiPath.

You do have complexity when it comes to maintenance, as you get to 50, 100 bots. 

As an example, one of the customers for whom we did an early bird, we estimated we could save this one division of their company $44 million. They only may have to invest about $4 million. There's $44.5 million for about 12 months. That's what we think we could save. 

The adoption of RPA has definitely been increasing and we know that all of that has been largely in the back office. In the back office, it's easier to check ROI. We've actually gone beyond ROI because ROI is a very simple statement, so we start showing clients value.

How long it takes to achieve ROI actually depends upon the client's way of implementing it. For example, some people will wait to take away the manual effort while they will stand by. Because what if it doesn't work? What if it fails? What if then my backlog increases dramatically? So, it is really up to them. If it is simple task automation, we can do it in about four or six weeks. In eight to 10 weeks they'll see the benefit. 

We're using all components of UiPath: attended, unattended robotics, and Orchestrator Studio. We have a very wide customer base and our clients use all of them.

Cloud adoption is increasing. Deployment models are a little bit more a logistic question than anything else because companies who want on-site are a little bit more conscious of security, but they take a normal amount of time, just to figure out the infrastructure. If we moved clients to the cloud, we can make it easier to implement. With email on the cloud, they have a huge set of processes. The larger the company, the larger the processing. With the cloud, it becomes faster. 

I've got a deep partnership with UiPath. I would absolutely rate them high. I'd give them a ten out of ten.

We have two customers. One is in the insurance industry. We are implementing it within our own company to automate HR and finance processes: back office. This is the same thing with the customer: back office. That's the focus.

We are using Studio, Orchestrator, and attended bots. We are not using unattended bots yet.

For one of our clients, their intent is to create a bot because one of their key folks was retiring. This person had a lot of knowledge of the processes and how things happen. So, the idea was to create a bot that helps. They want it to do 25 percent of most of the work, and this person would just validate instead of training somebody new to do the job. Their idea was to not hire for that position anymore. Instead, if the person is just doing validation, 25 percent of that load is then spread across their current staff.

It is easy to use. That is definitely one thing that attracts people. 

I really like the feature that you get to record actions. I wish that feature was a bit more advanced where I could build more automation. Sometimes, you have to stop the robot because the robot doesn't get the level of detail that I am expecting to see in the automation. Then, you have to stop the bot, and stop or break the recording. While it's nice in creating a first sort of brush off your automation, I wish it would just go a step further.

I really like the new products that were announced here. The apps have a lot of potential. I'm interested in learning more about that in the next few months. The same thing with StudioX. Although, it would be interesting to see if they're more business-friendly or not. While UiPath is advertised as a low code platform, you can't put it in the hands of a business user. They have no idea what some of the features are. Some things, they need to have extensive training and be tech savvy in several things before they can go there.

Several of us took training using the UiPath Academy. I thought the UiPath Academy was very intuitive and easy to use. I would give it a five out of five rating.

When you are tech savvy and been trained, it is a four out of five for ease of use. Having that automation recording feature operate better and capture more of the automation that you're trying to build would make it a five. 

With the new products that were announced, UiPath closed a few of the gaps. I can see how they could expand the products into other areas. There is potential there for some workflow capability. I know this would be going beyond RPA at that point, but having one platform that does a lot of things would be nice. Because as it stands, when you need to do a workflow or approval process, you need to send this out somewhere else. There are things the bot can do, but I can see some of that functionality already showing up though with the tasks and apps. However, I would like to see more. That would be good.

Moving bots to the cloud would be the next good step. The new product has Orchestrator in the cloud. I think moving to bots to the cloud could also be next along with having Studio in the cloud where you can do everything in the cloud: Deploy and run your bots from the cloud.

It is pretty stable. I would rate it a five out of five.

I haven't used the technical support.

We learned about this stuff about two years and a half ago. We started exploring it, then we decided to take the plunge and try it out. That's how it came about.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. 

It took us about four months from the initial purchase of UiPath to putting the robots in production. With our first deployment, we made a lot of mistakes. For us, it was like the first time you do something, you don't know exactly what you're doing, you just do it. Then, the second time, you're like, "Oh, now, I can go back and do other things differently." With us, it was very much like that. We learned sort of on the job.

We did the installation ourselves. 

I didn't do it, but I know that the people that did the installation didn't have any issues with it. They didn't need to open a ticket in particular or anything like that. This tells me that it was fairly easy. 

We have saved steps and time from people doing their jobs because they're not doing all this crazy validation anymore.

We evaluated the top three. UiPath at the time was number three, Blue Prism was number number two, and Automation Anywhere was number one. So, we weighed them out.

I liked some of the functionality from Automation Anywhere. The recording feature of Automation Anywhere was much better and easier to use than UiPath. Although, I haven't seen the new Studio. In 2019, maybe they changed some things in there. Regardless, the Automation Anywhere tool seemed easier to use. But, in terms of partnership, they were not a good fit for the values of the company. Those things all go into account when trying to partner with somebody. That's why we decided to go with UiPath.

Some of the features in the software looked the same between Automation Anywhere and UiPath. Blue Prism seems very hard to use. That one we kind of killed on the spot. Between like Automation Anywhere and UiPath, it was more about how the company's vision, and where things were headed. All of that sort of helped. So, we were at that point that we were not really looking at the software anymore. We were looking at other things. That's how we ended up here.

With the new additions that were announced yesterday, I'd probably give it an eight (out of 10). I still would like to see some other features, which I know UiPath would start crossing into BPM a bit when you start talking workflows and things like that. However, that would be a good next step given their market share, customers outreach, and beyond API and some partners that they have today.

We are using attended and unattended bots. The attended ones are very low profile. We are also using Orchestrator.

Our primary use case for this solution is to automate underwriting processes.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment, yet.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate it a four. I think that we still struggle sometimes with what kind of a bot we need to use for what kind of work. It may be a lack of understanding on our side. We need to have more clarity on this.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. This is what I have heard from my team members. I did enroll in the training but I didn't make much progress. That said, I have heard good things about it.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately a six-month transition.

In terms of eliminating human errors, I would say that this solution has done so to a certain extent. The stuff that we are automating was quite simple to begin with. As such, there was not a lot of room for error because we have multiple verification steps. I cannot estimate a percentage for the reduction of human error.

I would say that we have a time-savings of approximately fifty percent.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the unattended robots because I can schedule my jobs and it can run on its own. I don't need to pay much attention, except in the case of an exception. That is the only time that I need to deal with it.

We sometimes struggle trying to figure out what kind of a bot we need to use for what kind of work, and it would be nice to have more clarity on this.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a five. It is quite stable.

We have a team of ten developers who work with this solution.

We did not use another RPA solution prior to this one.

We got involved in automation because it makes us more efficient and we save money. These are a few of the important things that we are always looking for.

The implementation of this solution was done in-house.

We have seen ROI because a lot of the work is now automated, so the people who used to do these tasks, the monotonous work, are now doing better things. I would say that we saw ROI in five to six months.

The licensing costs for the unattended bots are a little too expensive. If it were lower then I think we could use it more effectively.

We are excited about the upcoming features with artificial intelligence and document understand capabilities. I think that those are features that would come in quite handy for us.

My advice for anybody considering this solution is to take a look from the grand scale to see which use cases are the prominent ones. Do not look at all of the tiny details because sometimes we can make a use case very complex. The end result is less valuable. Look for the high-level stuff that can be quickly automated, then come down to the final stuff later.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We are using Orchestrator, Studio, attended and unattended robots.

I am on the business analyst side, so I do not have much experience with Orchestrator.

We are using this solution to automate processes for our clients. They typically have mundane processes or something that's super repetitive, that we're able to quickly automate for them and see that return. We did do an attended bot with them as well, to improve their call center.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would say it's a four. This is a rating from the business side, as opposed to the development side. We understand what the features are, and when new releases come out we have an understanding of what's feasible. I am not rating it a five because sometimes we do not know whether a use case is feasible or not. It means that I may have to speak to one of the developers to see whether it can be done with the tools and the features that are out there.

We host the UiPath Academy RPA training every other month for our clients. I have not taken the full course, but on a scale from one to five, I would rate it a five. This is based on the number of people who sign up for it and look forward to attending it, just to learn the basics of RPA.

In terms of how long it takes from purchasing a UiPath license until having the first robot, the average is probably four weeks. It depends on the complexity of the process. 

We have helped our customers to reduce some of their manual work, but they also benefit by freeing up their time to use elsewhere. Some of the processes we have automated have people spending hours locked up trying to finish.

It is also that we are improving areas such as the production line, or even automating some of their dashboard reporting to get more accurate information a lot quicker. We've been able to help cut that down but then also provide accurate data, and faster as well.

With respect to saving time, this fiscal year we were at seventy thousand hours saved across the enterprise. That is significant and has been across different departments and different regions, as well.

In terms of eliminating human errors, we do not have an exact calculation. We do get a lot of good feedback about the bot's performance doing well.

The most valuable aspect is the different capabilities and features that can be applied to different processes. I don't consider one particular feature more valuable than the others because they are all relevant to what the need is.

I would like to have a guidebook of examples that help me to determine the feasibility of specific use cases, based on the tools and the features that are out there.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a five. I haven't had much in the way of negative experience with it.

There are approximately two thousand people working on RPA across the firm. On my current project, we are a team of about sixteen people at our client's site.

I cannot say for a specific client, but I do know that our clients are constantly looking for what's out there. Whether it is from banking, automotive, or retail, they want to know what they can do to improve their firm or their company. RPA has been on the rise in the last three years, so I would say they want to be able to get hours back and save time so that they can allocate resources elsewhere. They are always looking for a tool out there that'll save them money and time.

In regards to ROI, we track it upfront. We have asked for the information to assess if a candidate process is a good use case. Then we track it in our dashboard throughout the year just to ensure that we are actually calculating the hours correctly. We'll then follow up to make sure that they are seeing those changes and they are receiving those hours saved. We have found that over the year, they are seeing a return on investment.

We track data in terms of money savings that the tool provides. I don't have the dollar amounts, but I can say that there are some processes where we have saved $50,000 USD just on a single process. It really varies on the complexity of the process and the time it would take to complete without automation.

I have worked with other tools and I see them as pretty similar.

My experience is with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. I'm not developing, so I don't have any details on the tool itself. My preference for UiPath is based on what seems to be the goal, and what is easier to understand. It rolls out more features and newer features, faster.

I am looking forward to trying the new UiPath Connect feature. I have seen the demo and it seems like that would be helpful for my role, specifically being on the business side. It is able to assess the use cases and determine what percentage they are RPA-able. I think that it will be super helpful.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is to try UiPath Academy Live first before they invest in the tool. This will allow them to get a better understanding of how it works, and get familiar with the services provided.

Sometimes I have questions. If I didn't have any questions then I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

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

We are using Orchestrator for both development and production. We are using attended and unattended bots, and we are using Studio to develop them.

We use this solution for front-office processes, back-office processes, IT processes, and automating anything that we can.

We run our automations inside a virtual environment. We use Citrix and Citrix Server. We have sixty-seven processes that we've automated to run in the virtual environment and its very straightforward. It's deployed out of Orchestrator, and for attended processes, it's as simple as going in, opening a UI robot, and clicking the start button. It's phenomenally easy.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would say that it's a five. It's very easy. I'm a software developer by trade and I was able to automate several processes in a very short time span. In two weeks I can automate an entire process, end-to-end, which is incredibly fast for the ROI.

One of our processes was extremely complex, which was our customer onboarding process. The complexity was, in part, because it is handled by six different departments. The PDD for it was one hundred and forty pages long. One or two we've done were simple automations, and the rest have been medium to high complexity.

My first robot went into production within a month of me being in my position. That included going through all of the UiPath training, getting familiar with our IT systems, and then actually vetting out a process and automating.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. It was very informative and very detailed.

We are using the unattended robots more than we are the attended ones, and we're trying to continue that drive. We understand that there's a need for some processes to run attended, but if we can, we do process optimization to make it work and be unattended.

We have definitely seen savings in time. I can only speak to one particular instance, which is one that I automated. It was taking a product marketing team roughly an entire month to process, so they were always a month in arrear processing invoices for orders. When we developed this quote-to-order process, it saved us something along the lines of seven thousand hours per month for the one group. I was able to shrink down what a team of twelve people was doing in a month's time, to about seven days.

Unattended robots are my favorite because it allows us to completely remove a process from a person's day. The process can be fully automated and scheduled out of Orchestrator to run. Whether it's several times a day or once a month or whatever it may be, that user no longer has to worry about whatever that task was.

I would like to see support for native C# capability. I have a .NET background, so it's easier for me to write in that language.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. There are some issues we've run into where we just can't exactly figure out what is causing the problems.

A robot would run through a process two to three dozen times with no issues and then on the very next run, it will stall in the middle of the process. When we tried to debug it, we can actually replicate that stall but clearly, it's not throwing an error. There's no rhyme or reason to why. It just stops and it just kind of hangs. I would say that it may be a stability issue.

The technical support for this solution is great. They're responsive, and always willing to help. We got infrastructure support to help us through an upgrade so I could actually migrate everything from our on-premises server into Azure. I would rate their technical support a ten out of ten.

This solution started as a homegrown operation by one of our satellite offices that downloaded a trial license and started using it. Once our IT department found out, we hired Deloitte to come in and talk us through the whole process. Then, Deloitte left and we started our own kind of homegrown development. The did not actually deploy it with us.

Prior to choosing UiPath, we evaluated Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. There may have been one more, as well. We are a very large SAP shop, and UiPath was the only one that touted that it was integrated well with SAP. For the most part, it did.

For anybody researching this type of solution, I would suggest that they try this out and they will instantly see the value.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We are using Orchestrator and Studio and we are using both attended and unattended robots.

We use this solution in the compliance space to manage risk.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment.

With our first process going into production just last week, we are just new to RPA. The RPA involvement across our organization is very small given our stage of development, with less than ten people. These are both developers and business users.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would say that it's about a three. The software itself is relatively straightforward and easy to use. However, the task of automating processes can be challenging. Each company is going to be different than others. My experience tells me that process automation perhaps is not as straightforward as businesses may think it is.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. I found the training at the UiPath Academy really good and easy to understand. We were able to download trial versions of the software and apply our training to the trial versions. It is very straightforward and easy for .NET developers to actually use the tools. They felt comfortable, and there was nothing new, just a different way of doing what they do.

My company is probably not a good example of judging how long it takes to build your first robot. We implemented the system and did the process at the same time. So, combined, it took several months. Going forward, because we're no longer putting a system into place, I expect that timeframe to shrink significantly.

Given that the processes were just implemented at the end of last week and the beginning of this week, we have not yet seen the benefits in terms of cost-saving, time-saving, or a reduction in human error.

Enhanced capability in the document management space would be a huge benefit to our organization. As part of our business process, we receive a high volume of returned documents. Managing that high volume, in the millions, can be a challenge. If we had inherent, out of the box tools to drive document manage principles, that would be advantageous for our business.

With respect to the stability, on a scale of one to five I would rate this solution a five. We have not incurred any stability challenges as of yet.

We did not use another RPA solution prior to this one.

I think that the industry as a whole is going in this direction. Knowing the industry as well as we do, we thought it product to get involved with RPA.

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward. The underpinning technology is familiar to us.

We performed the implementation ourselves.

I was not involved at this stage, so I am unsure whether other solutions were evaluated.

My advice to other companies who are looking into UiPath is to document how you do what you do. Document your processes first.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are using the attended, unattended, and Orchestrator components of this solution.

Our primary use case is developing automation around revenue cycle management in the healthcare space.

We run automations in a virtual environment and we are very happy with that ability. It is much more time-consuming when compared to running it directly on the server, but it is very reliable and it is a great way to create automations that you wouldn't otherwise be able to create. Of course, we prefer to go directly to the same environment.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate it a four. In order for me to give it a five, it would have to be such that a user could go in and develop it easily with a point and a click. I think it would be extremely difficult to build a platform that was that simple for the end-user, but I think UiPath has come a long way and is very good at making it easier and easier as we go along.

We have at least ten developers who have gone through the certification training with the UiPath Academy. On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training four and a half. The training is wonderful. There are certain elements of the training platform that are not keeping up with the product though. Also, some of the things that are in the documentation are not up to date. Being a little outdated, it can be kind of frustrating for the people that are going through it. But, it's a great way for people to get a good understanding of how to use all of the elements of the process.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately three weeks. 

In terms of eliminating human errors, they are one hundred percent gone. When we build the bots we build them right, and there are no more human errors.

With respect to saving time, for the processes that we have built, it saves at least ninety percent of the time that humans were taking. We have to have somebody that monitors the bots. In case they stop, they have to start them up again.

We are a development shop for UiPath, so we use the Studio all day long.

We really like the Orchestrator and how I'm able to see what's going on with all of the different automations.

On the development side, more documentation on how to structure the setup for different environments would be helpful. Our biggest struggle had to do with questions like:

• Do I need to have fifty monitors to run fifty different bots?
• Do I need to have fifty separate computers around fifty different processes at the same time?

There was no really good documentation to teach us how to do that, so there was a bunch of trial and error involved in figuring it out.

We know that we didn't want on-premises computers, but we didn't have any documentation to explain how to set them up in the cloud. We went through several different iterations before we finally got that right.

Ultimately, it took us about three months before we decided on the structure that we wanted, so better documentation on infrastructure would be very helpful.

The product, itself, is generally very stable. On a scale from one to five, I would rate the stability a four. We do have situations where we've run some updates and then ended up with some OCR things breaking on us. But overall, we build automations for our customers and they don't really know that there are any problems whatsoever, because they're generally pretty easy to resolve.

We have approximately twenty people involved in the automation side of the business, but it's growing rapidly.

I have not used technical support other than the online forum.

This was our first RPA implementation.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. It just works. You download it from the cloud and install it on your computer. You might have to update your .NET framework, so make sure that it works. It is very visual and very intuitive, so you're up and running in no time with Studio. With Orchestrator, it takes a little bit of getting used to in terms of matching up Orchestrator with the computers that it's linked to but it took hardly any time for us.

We deployed the solution ourselves.

We have seen benefits, but I would say that it took us longer than most because initially, we were building through an RDP connection. We were also connecting to a software platform that is inherently slow. Between these two things, it took a lot of extra work to get it running and recognizing all of the images and stuff like that.

I can say for sure that we've seen savings on efficiency and labor for performing the tasks that we've automated. As a result of that, we've invested a lot more in training developers and building their skills. We're cash negative on the deal, but it's because we believe in the product. For the processes that we are actually doing, we are seeing savings right away, which is why we're investing more in UiPath.

For people who are researching this type of solution, I would suggest that they test all of them out. All of them give you an opportunity to try them. We initially made our decision to go with UiPath after looking at Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. One of the primary factors that drove us to UiPath was developer feedback. Asking developers what platform they would choose to develop on, all of them said UiPath because it's very flexible and very intuitive. A lot of people are familiar with the .NET framework, so it's easy.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to first speak with people who have already deployed it in a similar type of target environment. Once you know how to set it up, it's easy. It depends on the infrastructure that you want, or need, for your organization. Otherwise, it's just going to be a bunch of trial and error.

From a cost perspective, the unattended bots are obviously much cheaper than the attended bots. However, to build a bot to automate a process where an unattended bot can run it is also more costly for the end-user. For us, it makes more sense to have attended bots. We also have access to a very low-cost labor pool. Because of that, it's cheaper for me to just have somebody monitoring the bots, running them manually.

Overall, this solution is awesome. I'm very excited about all of the new things. We've been doing automations for about eighteen months, and with the product from that time, to where we are today, many new things have come in. I mentioned the problems that we had with the RDP connection but Computer Vision comes out, and it makes things much easier and much more reliable. Fortunately, all those have now switched over to running directly on the servers where we're running the software, so the need for us has gone way. At the same time, I have used Computer Vision and it's great.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We are using this solution for a POC and Pilot stage for RPA deployment.

Ease of deployment means that business benefits can be developed quickly and easily.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the Studio.

Additional help with ROM and approach would be an improvement.