UiPath Platform Reviews

Currently, we do not have any AI use cases. I work for a healthcare system. Our main use case is using UiPath to replicate what medical coders do. We input codes from certain medical systems into another, and it automates our billing cycle. This allows us to input the codes directly into the insurance billing cycle, speeding up our payment process.

Our hospital does not get paid if we are slow to get the codes to the payers. By automating this process with UiPath, we wanted to speed up the process of getting paid by the insurance companies. It has been amazing. Just this year, we probably saved 45 million dollars, and the next year, it will be upwards of 80 million.

In health care in America, many processes are still paper-based. Document processing is valuable as it allows doctors to have documents processed in advance, making it easier to access and ask questions. Additionally, UiPath has freed up staff time significantly, to the point where some staff had to be laid off. Our use of automation sped up the process of getting paid from insurance companies, saving us substantial amounts of money.

We're looking to add AI, specifically generative AI, but it's a matter of our organization implementing it. With autopilot features like Microsoft's Copilot or ChatGPT, users can start chatting immediately. However, with UiPath, one needs the UiPath Assistant installed on every machine, which is unrealistic as many people use the same machine in the hospital.

My enterprise has been using UiPath since 2021. My team inherited it in 2023, so it has been about 11 years.

The solution just went live yesterday, so I don't have feedback on its stability yet.

The solution is scalable. We previously had an older solution, and UiPath helped us revamp and upgrade our systems, making them more scalable.

The customer support from UiPath is amazing. We are part of the hypercare, and I would rate it as a nine out of ten.

Positive

We use Power Automate a lot and still incorporate it alongside UiPath. Some hospital systems require us to be all on-premises, so we use both UiPath and Power Automate to get our systems working as needed.

Some automations were built in-house by our team of developers. We also worked with an external partner and UiPath to implement some other solutions.

We have seen a 100% return on investment. The process is night and day when compared to paying employees over time for the same work.

It is more expensive than other automation services, but I don't deal with the financial details much.

As automation software, I would rate UiPath a ten out of ten.

My main use cases for UiPath Platform in my current organization involve automation, so it helps with use cases where I don't want to do too much coding, where it's easier to pick up and I want Orchestrator. 

An obvious example of automations I've done is onboarding. We onboard users with various applications through UiPath Platform. So the ticket will come in, the bot will pick up the ticket, it'll go to all these applications, give you the access you requested and then it closes the ticket as well.

Originally for onboarding, we had many errors happening where the wrong access was given or admin access was accidentally approved. Now, when the bot picks it up, it'll check stuff like that. And if it's admin access, it will go to an extra approval step. Before, it might have been accidentally slipped through and it would be a lot of user error in that case. So now we don't have any errors for onboarding.

The features of UiPath Platform that I find most valuable are probably the orchestration part. You're able to see everything happen in real-time. You're able to see the logs as well. Everything's all in one application.

It's difficult to say where UiPath Platform could improve. Many of the improvements that I want are something they're planning to have done. 

An example would be Agentic AI; it was something that I wanted a bit ago. An integration with various other software that they spoke about today includes Google Cloud, Salesforce, and similar platforms. It's still coming out. I don't see everything, so it's hard for me to pinpoint something specific that they don't have on their roadmap.

I have been working in my current field for almost eight years now. I have been using UiPath Platform for six of those years, or five of them.

I would assess the stability and reliability of UiPath Platform and its bots or automations as pretty good. I would say reliability is very based on the developer. In terms of software, how it was built.

The plan is always to expand more. There's always something to do. As the company grows, so does the workload. So there's definitely a lot more work now. We currently sit at probably about 30 to 50 bots. We're looking to expand, probably double over time.

Prior to adopting UiPath Platform in my company, I had used other automation software, such as Power Automate, Automation Anywhere, and Python has a bunch of libraries that are available. 

We've used what we consider the best tool for the job. If it's within the Microsoft environment, we'll go towards the Azure stack rather than UiPath Platform. My current company, when I joined, already had UiPath Platform. They saw that UiPath Platform was pretty much a big leader in the space for RPA. It's a pretty big name.

My experience with deploying UiPath Platform and robots is pretty simple. It's very user-friendly. You don't really need a software background to pick it up. Deploying is just a couple of buttons.

We reduced our onboarding time for new developers from one to three days of the ticket closing to within the hour, 30 minutes.

I have evaluated other RPA solutions to compare with UiPath Platform in terms of both pros and cons; probably the biggest competitor would be Power Automate. It has the backing of Microsoft, which is huge. They have OpenAI, they have native connectivity with their entire environment. So it's a really big pro. The con is they're not very good at orchestration; they're more workflow-based, so that's a drawback. That's where UiPath Platform has an advantage.

My advice for someone who is considering UiPath Platform is simply to do it. A ten out of ten for me would be having native integration with everything I'd want and I don't think that'll ever happen. I'd want is Teams, however, Microsoft owns it, and they wouldn't give it away. 

On a scale of one to ten, I rate UiPath Platform an eight. It's a really good platform in terms of what it does and what it's offering now; it's getting better.

We started using AI in Document Understanding by leveraging it against our models for different documents from our customers, primarily in the finance space. We have also used AI to train models for land management documents, helping them learn as we receive new document types. 

Recently, we've used it to analyze documents and articles online to understand sentiment toward our company. We analyze and summarize things people say in articles or posts elsewhere, which allows us to collect industry trend data. We are considering using Clipboard AI for smaller, ad-hoc data processing tasks because it can sometimes be more effective than Document Understanding.

We get a lot of projects that are on relatively short notice for the workload that comes with them. Historically, we would rely on leveraged services or contractors to do that work manually, which is costly. You can save tons of money by automating data entry, transcription, etc. Nowadays, as we get busier and busier, the work seems to bog people down more and more with tasks. UiPath gives them opportunities to free themselves up and focus on themselves.

We initially focused on time savings and how we could free people up more. We achieved that over time, but it took a while to get there in the first few years. We came in with some use cases that we later learned were not great fits for automation. We learned through trial and error and got better at identifying better use cases for automation. We've succeeded, and it's worked out for the better. 

But aside from saving people time, we also wanted to ensure that we brought in new technology to leverage some of those processes. UiPath forces you to look at the process from a high level and take a step back. You might have had the same person doing the same process for 10 years or more without thinking about how you can use new technologies to eliminate the process or make it more efficient. UiPath forces you to look at the process as a whole and the systems it's tied to. When you step back and look at it, especially with new people coming in, they start offering suggestions, like "Wait. You've been sending this email every time? That's something we can automate now. Oh, you've been trying to pull this information from a document and copy and paste it? That's something we can automate, too." 

If it's not automation, it's something else. We can look at other tools and applications our company brought in. There's usually some other solution they can use, automation or not. The natural way to work with it is by lining out a process and laying out all the steps on a workflow diagram. It allows you to rethink your process as you're doing it. 

Instead of just following step-by-step documentation or the way you've done it all the time, it gives you a chance to see it from a new perspective, and that's just part of working with the tool. As you build that out in UiPath using task capture or anything else, you will see that naturally and start thinking about ways to handle it better.  

Automation has freed up employees for other tasks. That's something that they like about it. The other thing it's done is build some excitement about IT and solutions in general. They're always looking at the new function that's coming out. They want to see what else we can do for them. Automation isn't always the answer, but we can get them to engage and talk to us during office hours to attempt to solve their problem with UiPath. We can also learn more about what they do. 

We're getting closer to our customers, talking more about their work, and they're feeling a closer bond with us. They're feeling like they trust us more in IT and are starting to see what other tools we have. Maybe automation wasn't the right fit, but we will always find better opportunities by building a report that sends an automatic email and an application for them in low-code software. UiPath has helped create a much better and fluid engagement process for us and our customers. 

Since it's a low-code tool that's easier for them to approach and understand, they're also more involved in the design process. The learning curve is shorter. When Studio first came out, it wasn't as user-friendly as they had hoped, but StudioX came out in 2020 and was approachable for most of our users. That's what our citizen developers use most of the time now. We have far more citizen developers with StudioX than unattended developers with Studio.

Within UiPath Cloud itself, UiPath Insights has been excellent. Insights is one of the newer features we were excited about because we built custom reports, captured all that data in one place, and leveraged it in different areas. That was a challenge for us and created a support burden. We're automation developers, not report developers. When leadership wanted a new metric or anything, figuring it out was always a pain. 

Insights has built-in mechanisms for tracking time savings, usage reports, and the overall health of your automation program. Having that functionality built in by default is critical. I click it and tell it the report that I want to generate. It'll build it for me automatically, and I can share it with people who need it. It has made a huge difference for people administrating the platform and reporting success to leadership over time. 

UiPath needs work on the governance side. For example, they released Studio Web this year and have started work on its governance, but it initially lacked control from an administration standpoint. You could not lock down third-party libraries or other applications and integrations it had built in.

For example, people could use a Google account, but we might have concerns about that from a security standpoint. Cybersecurity is taking a more significant place in IT, and we're mindful of that. Having explicit governance over what our users can do inside those technologies is essential. We hope to see that more over the next few years. We've given a lot of that feedback as customers to UiPath, and they've been working hard to get that into the pipeline and implement those changes.

I have been using UiPath for about six years now.

UiPath can grow with us, especially since they developed a cloud environment. When we started, we had to make many changes in Orchestrator and other areas as we scaled up. We scaled up fast and automated dozens of automations in the first few years. 

However, we found that the default setup for the UiPath Orchestrator in 2018 didn't have all the features we needed to administer it to our customers. We had to build custom solutions in-house, but they've released many new features in UiPath Cloud that simplify management. 

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. The executive support team and customer success team have been great. All of them play a role, and they're super knowledgeable. If they can't solve your problem, they know who can and connect you with them quickly. We've leveraged them extensively and will use them more over the next couple of years as we finish our cloud implementation. 

There are still many features we don't use, and we constantly go to them for guidance and help on how to use them best and what they've done with other customers. They provide tons of great insight and have a solid network. 

Positive

We didn't have a low-code automation platform. We developed most of our automations using PowerShell. We didn't have citizen developers, but most business users would use Power Automate. Back then, it was known as Flow on the Power Platform. 

Our corporate leadership decided to bring in UiPath. It wasn't an IT decision.  They wanted something they could start using for their daily tasks. They didn't think we had something that could automate things well, and PowerShell is limited from a scripting and API standpoint. They wanted to automate things in SAP, and the APIs and other things are locked down in a custom shop like ours. We can't integrate with our environment in any way we want, so we need something that can interact through the interface. UiPath does that. It can click and type everything through the interface. 

The leadership started the process. IT got involved and supported it. Since then, we've helped it grow throughout the company. It's not just finance anymore. 

The initial setup was complex because UiPath didn't have many pipelines built in. We had to build custom pipelines for the technology we use. It was TFS at the time, and now we use Azure DevOps. I helped with the VDI setup. For unattended automations, you must have a platform or system they can run on. We had looked at doing HDRs—high-density robots—that UiPath. 

Due to applications such as SAP, it couldn't run on a server-side setup. It had to be on a desktop, so we used a VDI for every bot we created, and I helped create the user policies for our accounts and device policies for each VDI. I also set up all the installations and the presets. I helped set up a framework for that over the first year, from 2018 to 2019. We smoothed out the process from there. That was something we had to do on our side. It will be unique for a customer depending on their environment.

We used a partner during the initial setup.

The leadership is pleased with the outcomes. With Insights, we can show them how much time we're saving with each process.  We document savings in hours rather than monetary terms.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

We use UiPath to automate ERP and CRM portal processes, integrate them with SAP and various external applications, gather data, and perform functions to generate reports. UiPath enables us to carry out numerous activities, and its usage is not limited to a single variable but rather multiple ones.

UiPath's primary goal is to enhance the scalability and accuracy of daily tasks within any organization. The core concept behind UiPath is to boost productivity by mimicking human actions, automating repetitive tasks and freeing up time for individuals to focus on other activities.

Compared to other RPA tools in the market, such as Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, Worksoft Certify for automation testing, and Selenium, which uses high-level coding, UiPath is a low-to-no-code automation platform. This makes it user-friendly and provides a comprehensive library built into the tool, enabling developers to automate various tasks and processes efficiently.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation. A negative side of this automation is that it replaces a human already doing that specific job. A human previously did any automation implemented through UiPath. However, by automating through UiPath, we free up that employee's bandwidth, enabling them to focus on other tasks or housekeeping activities instead of repeatedly performing the same repetitive task.

The UiPath user community is extremely active and knowledgeable.

I recall a situation where a business had to generate quarterly reports. Before automation, they could only produce 200 to 300 reports per quarter. However, after implementing bots, productivity increased to around 900 reports. Additionally, UiPath's logic query feature allows for Excel calculations to be done in a fraction of a second, a task that would typically take a human around an hour. Many bots have reduced business processing times from one hour to five minutes, and tasks that used to take one to two hours are now completed in five to ten minutes with high accuracy.

To learn UiPath effectively, we need a reliable source that provides accurate information. UiPath Academy serves as the ideal platform for this purpose—additionally, companies value certification as proof of UiPath proficiency. If we aim to become UiPath certified, UiPath Academy is our best option, as its courses are specifically designed to help us succeed in the certification exam. While other platforms like Udemy or Coursera offer UiPath courses, we may need more preparation for the certification, which involves a mix of theoretical, conceptual, and practical questions. We can learn practical skills elsewhere, but UiPath Academy is the best resource for mastering the theoretical and conceptual knowledge required for certification.

UiPath helps reduce the cost of digital transformation by around 30 percent.

UiPath helps reduce human error by 95 to 99 percent. The bot doesn't make mistakes. Because of the high accuracy, we started with ten bots and now use 200 bots.

A UiPath bot can save one full-time employee's time per year.

UiPath is highly versatile, offering multiple automation options for various applications. For example, UiPath can automate email, PDF invoices, images, Excel documents, and websites. This flexibility extends to its OCR feature, enabling the automation of any invoice or PDF invoice. Secondly, UiPath's exception-handling capabilities greatly simplify the automation process. Lastly, UiPath utilizes minimal code, making it a low-code or no-code platform. Consequently, even individuals with limited programming knowledge can automate tasks using UiPath after completing a basic course.

The Excel operation needs some modifications. Image processing is also crucial. For example, if the image is clear, UiPath can easily read it. If the image needs clarification, UiPath can't read the object easily. To some extent, Excel automation, especially handling macros, needs improvement. UiPath needs a comprehensive feature set for automating Excel and has limited options. In some cases, we must use macro-enabled Excel files. Therefore, Excel automation and OCR require enhancements.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

Bots rely on numerous third-party applications, and several factors can impact their performance, including the virtual machine's capabilities and the responsiveness of the applications the bot interacts with. Therefore, UiPath isn't solely responsible for failures; issues could stem from your server or the third-party applications UiPath connects with. UiPath's stability is rated at eight point five out of ten.

I'm a delivery lead. As organizations grow, they add technology and features to their ERP applications. This requires frequent modifications to automation bots developed for specific functions. UiPath's scalability feature allows me to implement change requests easily at any time. Instead of extensive development, I can lift and test the desired changes within the existing code. UiPath also incorporates AI/ML features, which are in high demand in this generation. This addition of AI/ML capabilities will likely enhance UiPath's scalability.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath seven out of ten.

I used Worksoft Certify for automation testing, but it doesn't compare to UiPath due to its limited features. Exception handling is not well-defined in Worksoft Certify, and I find flowchart programming much more complex compared to UiPath. In many ways, UiPath is superior to Worksoft Certify, which has many limitations.

The initial deployment is straightforward because the UiPath team will be available throughout the process, participating in calls and meetings to provide comprehensive assistance with the deployment.

The deployment takes one to two days, provided all approvals are in place. Approximately 12 people are involved, including five from our team, as well as members of the server and networking teams.

We implemented it in-house with the help of UiPath.

I don't handle the costing aspect as it's not within my scope. However, I understand that initially, businesses or clients might perceive UiPath as expensive. While this is true to some extent, the features and flexibility UiPath provides often lead clients to realize its value in the long run.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

We have 55 UiPath users in our organization.

Code maintenance is necessary for UiPath due to the bot's interaction with external applications and websites. The bot must be adjusted accordingly if any of these applications or websites are updated.

The primary challenge encountered during UiPath implementation is the disparity between development and production environments. Often, code is developed in a non-production system where access to certain applications, such as a client's portal, is limited. This necessitates dry runs in the non-production environment to ensure the bot functions correctly without making any unintended changes. Once the bot is moved to the production system, multiple controlled tests are required before it can be fully operational. The unavailability of a complete testing environment mirroring production conditions significantly hinders the development and deployment process.

I recommend UiPath to any user because it doesn't require a hard-code programmer to be an RPA developer. This makes it easier and more cost-effective to hire resources. Other tools on the market require good programming knowledge, which means you need to hire someone who knows both the tool and a programming language, making resource hiring expensive. Secondly, UiPath uses minimal coding, which makes debugging very easy. UiPath is also adding AI and ML features and upgrading the OCR features regularly.

My use case for UiPath Platform includes various automations such as web automation, desktop automation, SAP integration, and ServiceNow integrations. I have been involved in multiple developments and completed multiple end-to-end automations.

UiPath Platform has increased efficiency by around 50%-70%. It has helped reduce human error by about 60%-70%, and we even have some healing agents in recent upgrades that automatically identify any changes in UI elements.

The best features of UiPath Platform include its user-friendly nature; since this is a low-code and no-code platform, it is very accessible. Someone with technical knowledge of RPA can simply try downloading some community versions of UiPath and get started. It is very easy and friendly to access, and if you have any questions, the UiPath community and academy-level training are extremely useful for those who are initially unaware of the platform.

UiPath Platform has helped users who have limited programming knowledge, as those who are aware of basic coding can utilize features such as Autopilot, which corrects mistakes. If there is something wrong, it will guide them back on the right track. Users with basic knowledge can try learning through academy-level courses, and many community platforms such as YouTube serve as helpful resources for sharing questions and resolutions.

There are areas within UiPath Platform that could improve. While the interface is user-friendly and features are advanced, further simplification could enhance usability. One improvement could be addressing compatibility issues. Sometimes, when upgrading, users need to downgrade due to version compatibility problems.

I believe they should reduce the certification costs or offer better deals, especially around December or January when people may be interested in discounts. 

I have been using UiPath Platform for three and a half years.

I have not experienced any downtime so far. I would rate stability as a perfect ten out of ten. We receive notifications for any potential downtime, so we are prepared for any future occurrences.

The scalability of UiPath Platform is impressive and fits our capacity requirements. Our clients are primarily large enterprises.

Currently, more than 1,000 users in my organization utilize UiPath Platform, and I observe many migrations from other platforms to UiPath due to its accuracy and up-to-date versions.

I would rate the technical support for UiPath Platform a ten out of ten. The support channels are effective, and tickets receive prompt responses.

Positive

When comparing UiPath Platform with other solutions I have tried, such as Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, I appreciate the built-in REFrameworks. Understanding the REFramework allows me to build automations effectively, whereas other platforms lack such built-in frameworks and may lead to mistakes during automations.

I find UiPath Platform to be a bit expensive compared to other platforms, including certifications. Some organizations provide vouchers for free certification, but individuals need to invest their time and money for certifications, making it a bit costly.

It has a high cost, for instance, $150 for basic certification and $300 for professional certification plus GST, while unattended machines cost over $10,000. It is indeed expensive, but I still choose UiPath as the best option overall.

We use both the attended and unattended automation options available in UiPath Platform; during the development phase, everyone does attended automations, such as in debug mode or for testing purposes. When we transition from the development phase to UAT or system integration testing, we use the unattended mode.

The impact of UiPath Platform's analytics on our decision-making processes is significant; it is based on the processing and automation tasks. For example, for web automation, users need to log in, format data, and download files. Using community versions, you can conduct trial runs to see its effectiveness, and based on demo sample workflows, you can take the next steps. I feel UiPath Platform is the best, as I have experience with multiple platforms.

The maintenance requires some effort; typically, a developer focuses on code development, while support teams address issues post-deployment due to UI element changes or interruptions. I'd say if we have five developers, one support person is sufficient, and for maintenance of five to six unattended machines, two people can effectively manage the workload.

Overall, I would rate UiPath Platform a nine out of ten.

We use UiPath to replicate what medical coders do by inputting codes from certain medical systems into another. It also automates our billing cycle, allowing us to input the codes directly into the insurance billing system to receive payments faster.

Our hospital doesn't get paid if we don't get those codes to the payers fast enough. We wanted to speed up the process of getting paid from insurance companies. A full-time employee can only do so much. 

Many of these people who do medical coding don't have college degrees. They're normal people with a lot going on in their lives, so they can't commit to doing this coding every moment of every day. A person can code maybe 10 to 15 records daily, but the bot could do 50. You also don't need to pay bots or give them benefits and physical workspaces. UiPath enables our organization to be more robust in what we can do. 

The company doesn't currently prioritize AI use cases, but we're trying to get the leaders to prioritize them by showing them the dollar value. AI is growing. Every year, it's getting bigger. 

In healthcare, everything is still on paper. People still fax papers to each other. Doctors have a sheet of paper or a packet of information about a patient that they can't read quickly. UiPath's Document Understanding lets doctors get a document that's already processed, and they can ask it questions.

We are looking to add AI, such as generative AI, but it requires our organization to implement it. UiPath's chatbots and autopilot require UiPath Assistant on every machine, which is challenging because many people use the same machine in the hospital. Everyone knows how to use Microsoft Copilot or ChatGPT. Even a non-technical user can go on OpenAI.com and start chatting. But with UiPath, if you want to use their chatbot or autopilot, you need UiPath Assistant.

My enterprise has been using UiPath since 2021, but my team inherited the solution from another team in 2023.

The solution just went live recently, so its stability is not yet fully determined.

The solution is scalable, as UiPath helped to revamp and update our older systems.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. UiPath support is amazing, especially with hypercare.

Positive

We still use Power Automate and UiPath together. Our system is entirely on-prem because some of our hospital systems must be. 

We build and deploy some of the automations in-house, but we also had a parnter build some of our stuff. 

There has been a significant return on investment. The cost of replacing employees with UiPath has shown significant savings. We probably saved $45 million this year, and we're projecting $80 million in savings next year.

UiPath is more expensive than other automation services, but the ROI justifies the cost.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. 

We have been using UiPath for almost the last five years in the industry, where a lot of research development, and clinical trials are happening. Many of the processes are centered around clinical trials, especially around translation. 

Being a global company, we conduct a lot of clinical research involving various languages and regulations. Earlier, we were outsourcing translation services, which presented security and timing challenges. 

With UiPath, we built bots that collect clinical trial documents from various sources and translate them into the desired language, ensuring security and faster delivery. We no longer need to outsource, and translations are now super fast, sometimes within hours.

UiPath has significantly helped our organization by providing solutions that save time and enhance efficiency. It has automated many tasks, allowing our staff to focus on other projects. 

We've built attended bots for research analysts who can now complete tasks while attending meetings. These bots save 5,000 to 8,000 hours yearly, contributing to our overall efficiency and allowing us to save a lot of money. UiPath has also enabled us to achieve outcomes like speed, scalability, security, productivity, and quality.

The user experience that UiPath offers, particularly the ease of use with the Studio's drag-and-drop feature, speeds up development significantly. 

The connectors available in integration services are helpful for quickly connecting with applications like Salesforce and ServiceNow. 

I appreciate the orchestration capabilities and document processing integrations. 

Additionally, the prompt-based workflow-building feature, where you can use natural language to build workflows, is quite impressive.

While UiPath is exceeding my expectations, there is room for improvement, particularly in the studio's performance. Sometimes, it takes a while to open and launch workflows, and this speed issue could be addressed. Additionally, the support could be improved, especially regarding the availability and expertise of support engineers.

We have been using UiPath for almost the last five years.

UiPath is very stable. I have never experienced any bugs in the product.

UiPath has always met our expectations in terms of scalability, as we can scale it across the global enterprise level.

Support is one area that could always use improvement. There have been challenges in getting timely support, especially during emergencies, and sometimes we don't get experienced engineers to solve problems.

Positive

In my career in digital transformation over the last fifteen years, I have used tools like Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. However, UiPath has proven to be superior because of its ease of use and continuous improvement.

The initial setup of UiPath was straightforward and very quick. It took only a couple of hours to set up the environment.

I handled the implementation in-house with the support of UiPath and have been involved in every phase of the development life cycle, from infrastructure setup to discovery and deployment.

We are saving almost five million dollars every year. Our bots save about 5,000 to 8,000 hours yearly, equating to roughly $5 million to $7 million dollars in savings annually.

The pricing could be reduced as Microsoft Power Automate is becoming a strong competitor. There is a significant difference in cost between UiPath and Power Automate, with Power Automate being more affordable for some automations.

In the past, I have worked with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. I find UiPath to be superior due to its user-friendliness and innovative features.

Always explore using AI first, as it is often a cost-effective and simple solution. UiPath's integration of AI workflows in a user-friendly way brings a lot of potential for automation.

My main use cases for UiPath Platform at SAP, where I've only been for two years, mostly involve in-house applications. 

We build bridges. We use RPA as a bridge between different in-house applications. It's mostly web automation or database-related. That's what we have now, but we are in a transformation phase to SAP, so we're hoping to implement UiPath Platform there.

The examples I can provide about how these features have benefited my organization include the capability to work with all other applications. We have many in-house applications, and using UiPath Platform, I'm able to build that connection using APIs or directly with the database.

The feature I most appreciate about UiPath Platform is the Orchestrator.

I faced challenges after migrating to cloud recently. We were on-prem in our organization, and since we migrated to cloud, when we were on-prem, all the jobs were working. We never had any issues with processes getting stuck or triggers. We had a smooth running of processes for a very long time.

Recently, we migrated to cloud and we are seeing issues with jobs getting stuck without any reason. It's not in any loop or anything. When I see the logs, it shows that it started, but nothing after that in the logs. That's something I'm yet to figure out what is happening. I just noticed this one or two days before I came to the Fusion, so I don't know what's happening.

I have been using UiPath Platform since 2017.

I haven't really faced any issues with the stability and reliability of UiPath Platform, so it's really reliable. 

The only bad experience I had was after the cloud migration, with these bots getting stuck. I'm yet to dig deep into it. I don't know what's happening. Those were the same processes that were running on-prem for a very long time continuously without any issues. 

I just noticed it one day before coming here, so I don't know if it's something on our side. I have to research. If I don't find anything, I'll definitely reach out to our UiPath contact.

UiPath Platform scales with our growing needs of the organization.  We have expanded usage. We have two teams internally in our organization. We had around ten bots altogether, but we recently moved it up to 15.

I evaluate my customer service and technical support experience as very responsive. We've got all our tickets or concerns looked at very fast.

Positive

Prior to adopting UiPath Platform at SAP, I was using another solution in my previous organization. We started with a different tool. I was there at that time, but that was not as good as UiPath Platform.

I would describe my experience with deploying UiPath Platform as very easy.

I have seen a return on investment with UiPath Platform. We do monitor our ROI for every project we deploy to production. We do see a great return on investment, and that's why we continue to use it. At SAP, we have been using it since 2018, so we are continuing to use it because of the return on investment.

What was better about UiPath Platform compared to my last program was its compatibility with other applications. In 2017, when all these platforms were new, the other tool I was using didn't have as much compatibility with other applications. Also, for creating triggers at that time for that application, we had to use other batch jobs. UiPath Platform had all that in the Orchestrator.

My advice to another organization considering using UiPath Platform is that it will definitely save a lot of time. It's highly recommended, but do your research before deciding which feature to use. There are many options available, so consider the ROI before picking AI or the feature. 

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate UiPath Platform a nine.