UiPath Platform Reviews

We use this solution mainly for data validation.

To start with, we are using Studio for many of our processes.

It reduces human efforts so our employees can put effort into other quality work.

I'm a manager, so we have UiPath for the team and my clients. I am a mediator. We are using Citrix for our VDI environment. We are going to implement the VDI.

Our client already has the UiPath Academy set up. It has been very beneficial in training our team, with its live involvement features, etc. It is good.

The solution has helped us eliminate human error. I would say, as it's now in its initial phase, this is somewhere around 80% to 90%.

It has also saved time for us.

We're just starting to use UiPath now but the automation process which reduces human intervention is the one we like most.

It's also very easy to use. I'm not directly involved in the program side. We have a team. I am the intermediator between our two teams. Those guys prepare the documentation and solution.

I would like to see them improve the validation part of the data categorization.

I would rate the stability of this product as five out of five. The team that works on this told me that once they come up with a use case, they can immediately implement it in UiPath. They have an idea and then can put that feature into practice. This can reduce many efforts.

We have about 500 people in our organization that are involved in the automation program.

We knew we had to invest in a new solution because when there are two categories of data, it is very useful to implement them with UiPath. We previously did this manually, as in with Excel and similar tools.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Every customer in our current scenario is looking to move to digital. They want to make their manuals digital. UiPath is one of the best solutions in the current market industry. That is why we chose UiPath. It is easy to use, plus it gives a lot of benefits to our clients and our own organization as well.

I would say that for the people who are using UiPath without any automation knowledge, the tool will be very useful. Apart from the UiPath platform, there are a lot of videos on YouTube. People can see a session from start to end. That will be useful.

We use Studio, attended robots, and Orchestrator.

Our primary use case is automating support services for accounts payable and accounts receivable. We are still implementing and our robots are not live in a production environment yet. For the time being, we are using attended robots but we are looking into unattended robots as well.

We run automations in a virtual environment using VMware, and the implementation was straightforward. It was easy to set up.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a four. You don't need any programming skills to be able to leverage the tools. We have used other tools such as Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, and this solution was easier than those.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. It is very simple and can be easily demonstrated.

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

In terms of eliminating human errors, this is the expectation once our robots are live in production.

Once our robots are live, we expect to see a fifty percent reduction in time for certain tasks. It will save thousands of hours.

We leverage all of the components in this solution.

The most valuable feature is Studio, which is a very powerful tool.

I am looking forward to new cognitive and artificial intelligence capabilities.

I would like to see voice recognition and better OCR capabilities. Today, we have to leverage other tools for this, so we are hoping that UiPath matures in this area.

This product is very stable, but we have some issues with security.

We have about five people working on automation in our organization.

We have a CSM and they are awesome. On a scale of one to five, I would rate our support from the CSM a five.

Before using this solution, we used to leverage our internal tools.

The initial setup of this application was straightforward. It was easy, and like other applications that use a Windows installer.

We used an integrator to assist us with deployment. I would rate them a three out of five.

We have not seen any ROI because our bots are not yet live. However, we have done a calculation and expect fifty percent savings in time.

The licensing fees for this solution are approximately $100,000 USD annually.

Before choosing this solution we evaluated Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. UiPath seemed to be the easiest one to implement.

Blue Prism seemed to be too technical for some of our business users, while Automation Anywhere did not have attractive pricing.

This is definitely a solution that I would recommend. From my experience, this is a technology that is easy to leverage among users that do not have a technical background.

This is a good solution, but there are still gaps and the product could be more mature. The OCR capabilities definitely need to be improved.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We are using Orchestrator and unattended robots.

We use this solution for automating financial tasks. Some of our use cases including reconciling amounts, such as those related to invoicing.

We run some of our automations in a virtual environment. We have been running into roadblocks with Citrix, so we run them on virtual desktops.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a four. Building automation using a standard set of rules is not a problem. It can become problematic depending on the data and the types of tasks.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a four. We are using it to gain experience with the platform.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was probably three or four months. The first robots that we created were for account reconciliation, and the implementation was straightforward.

At the least, this solution is making us rethink the way our processes work. Putting automations in place not only helps to save time, but it gets people thinking about where else we can use automation.

This solution is improving our employee experience, giving them time to do other things. From a resource perspective, we are staffed the same way, but our employees are able to make better use of their time. In total, we have saved thousands of hours.

In terms of eliminating human errors, we have seen an improvement of approximately twenty percent.

The most valuable feature of Orchestrator is that it gives you the ability to control everything from a centralized location. You can have access to everything that is running.

For unattended bots, the best feature is the value that you get from not needing to have somebody there to do the job. It's a time-saving benefit.

Several areas of this solution need improvement including insights, the dashboarding of results, and process mining.

When it comes to scoring, you receive a score after the intake and a score after you build it, but you should also get a score after you build it.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. The system is generally pretty stable. Some of the things that cause instability are outside of UiPath, or the robots interact with them.

There are between fifteen and twenty people involved with the automation program in our organization.

We have used support and they are ok.

We hired LTI to assist us with the implementation. Our experience with them was not good. They had a few really capable people, but not the whole team. They were learning along the way.

We began to realize ROI after six months.

This is a good solution, and the availability of training helped us to get started.

Definitely, the Insights component needs to be improved.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is that the solution can be great, but it will only be as great as the design of your processes. You have to make sure that everything is done right to get the best results.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We are using Studio and Orchestrator.

We use this solution for financial analysis, accounting, invoice processing, and other menial tasks.

We run automations in a virtual environment.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a five. The ease of use comes from many things including the user interface and the coding.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a four. I feel that you can have people who are directly thrown into the training, but sometimes it is difficult for people to pick up on topics that are not related to the processes that they are dealing with.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately two weeks. The implementation was straightforward both on the setup and the development side.

This solution has a big impact on what we do. It gives us a bigger impact on a decreased employee base.

I can't say exactly how much time we have saved across the company, but I can speak to my own processes. We save about one hundred a twenty hours per week. This savings comes in part because it is making people's jobs easier.

In terms of eliminating human errors, our error rate has improved since automation. I would estimate we have twenty-five percent fewer errors.

The most valuable feature of Studio is the ease of use for developers who do not have a technical background.

The user interface is good.

I would like to see anything that can increase the reliability of the processes. It can be a really challenging task and there is certainly room for improvement.

I would like to see more selectors included in the next release of this solution.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. It's fairly stable and it's making good improvements. In some cases when you get an upgrade package, you can lose functionality that previously worked with some processes.

We have about six people involved in our automation program.

The technical support for this solution is good, but seeing the functionality break that worked in previous versions can be frustrating.

For my processes, everything was done in-house.

We have seen ROI with this solution. We began to see some in about a month, but a lot more after two months and greater.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is simply to do it. Dive right in. Gather as much information as you can about the processes, then use the community in place to help.

This is a good solution, but there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using Studio and Orchestrator.

Our primary use case is automating data processing for clients translating into other systems.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a three. I think that the technology that we use in the printing industry is a little more difficult to automate.

I am currently involved in the UiPath Academy training. We have third-party contractors who have been doing the development, and I am the first internal employee who will be developing. I find that the training is good in the first step, and also in the second step where we're learning about Orchestrator. However, when it moves to the third step and they are talking about the framework, I think that it is a pretty big leap and that is where I'm struggling. This is the section that I am in right now.

There was one project that was completed before I started, at my understanding is that from the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was less than six months. For my project, it has taken two months.

Using this solution has allowed us to enter a lot of customer data into our system in a much quicker and more efficient manner.

In terms of eliminating human errors, this solution has definitely helped. I would estimate an eighty percent reduction in the number of errors.

With respect to saving time, automation has taken a process that used to take two or three days to perform, down to several minutes.

The most valuable feature for us right now is being able to automate our process applications.

In the training, between steps two and three, there is a pretty big leap in terms of how difficult the material is. Moving right from the basics into the framework is causing me to struggle a little bit, and I think that there is room for improvement here.

With respect to the stability from a bot perspective, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. It has been pretty stable for us.

We have less than fifty people involved in our RPA program at this time.

We have contractors who are doing our development right now. On a scale of one to five, I would rate our experience with them a three. They seem to be struggling with the PDD.

In the project that I worked on, we have definitely seen ROI. We replaced a process that was being done manually, so we began to see returns immediately.

For the way in which we are using this solution, the features have been working very well. Our company is very young in this so we are still learning. We will get a lot out of this solution.

If you have a lot of manual and repetitive tasks in your company then this is definitely a great solution for you. That said, I know that things can always improve.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Studio, Orchestrator, and robots.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a two. It's been going for about six months now, and we are still having challenges here and there.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a three. The material is on the technical side, and not being a technical person, it makes it pretty challenging to get through. 

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

With respect to saving time, we have saved about fifteen hundred hours so far.

In terms of eliminating human errors, we have seen a reduction but I'm not sure by what percentage.

The most valuable feature is that you can save time when you have to run the same process over and over again with little variation. 

It is sometimes difficult to work with the exceptions, which can cause us a delay. We have a lot to learn.

I would like to see more options that we can quickly select to help improve the robots.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. Most of the time it is working pretty well, but there have been a couple of blips along the way.

We have approximately twenty people who use this solution in our organization.

We hired a consultant to help us with the implementation. I would rate our experience with them at three out of five. It was successful, but we had to redo some of the stuff that was originally done.

We have seen ROI but it is pretty far off right now. After about three months, we began to see ROI. I'd say that it is probably going to be about two years before we break even.

We are excited about the new features that were recently announced.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to hire a consultant who is familiar with the process. It is such a new technology that getting assistance would be helpful.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

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

Our primary use for this solution started with automating processes in finance, procurement, and HR. Now, we are researching various directions in logistics.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment. This is something that we are trying to avoid.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a four. I'm an IT-based person, and for IT people it is easy to learn. UiPath claims that it is easy to learn and it's for everybody, but it's not true. For business people, it is hard to learn and hard to understand how to code to make things work. They need a lot of help with things like exception handling. If somebody lacks technical or programming skills then it makes it much more difficult to use. Although UiPath is getting closer to business users, there are still some basic skills that they need to have to make it work.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. When I get new hires it doesn't matter whether they have previous experience in RPA or development, they have to go through all of the basic training from the Academy. This includes the Orchestrator and I've been recommending SAP training because we are experiencing growth in the use of SAP. Going to my team, this is the base, and then we have created our internal framework and standards that also require training. Some people may already have experience with UiPath or Blue Prism, but they still need to take the training from the Academy.

Before I arrived at the company, there were already some automations running. However, fifteen months ago we shut down a couple of robots because they were failing terribly. From that time, it took us five months to create the first robot.

We have a project that combines UiPath with OCR and our integration tool. This allows us to automate processes we use in different projects that are coming from different vendors in different countries. Apart from gathering the information, we are template invoicing. The robots take invoice information and post the results into our SAP and other systems. It is much faster than our original process. This has been implemented in Spain, and we are now releasing it to other countries, one by one.

Using this solution is not just about saving time or reducing the number of staff. It is also for improving stability and decreasing the number of errors that we have. In Spain, where we were implementing a pilot project for purchase orders, we saw a decrease in the number of human errors. When they started, there was an error rate of ten percent. After three months in production, the error rate decreased to five or six percent, and after six months it was one or two percent. Also, even though there was still an error rate, it was consistent and it is something that we can account for.

In terms of money savings, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars annually.

The most valuable feature is Studio, which allows developers to specifically focus on development. Orchestrator allows us to connect those things together.

I would like to see some use cases and additional information on the process mining and the OCR features that are being released. There are other products that offer OCR features, and at this point, it is hard for me to determine the benefit of using UiPath for OCR rather than integrating it with another solution. This is not just from a business perspective, but from a development perspective as well. For example, I would like to see how you can connect UiPath to all of the applications to collect the logs and the data. Then, how we can put that information together. If there is a thirty-minute delay then how do you identify whether it was because the person went to lunch, or rather that they were working and thinking.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a three.

The stability of this solution really depends on the developer or the execution. It's not always a UiPath issue. If the process is unstable, it's the issue of the business case and not the actual execution of any development. So it really depends on how you use the platform and how you understand it. We will use a more stable technology, such as alerting through an API, before we go to the UI path.

We have about one hundred licenses for production and four Orchestrators.

Both customer support and technical support are really good. Whenever I have a question, whether it is business, Studio, or Orchestrator related, I usually get an answer. We have our own customer success manager who helps us on a daily basis. I also have connections to the lab and to the production team so I can ask questions there as well.

At this company, they did not have an RPA solution in place before this one.

Personally, I have also used Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. From my perspective, it's about how you use the tool, and not about which tool you use. Personally, I don't like Automation Anywhere, and I used to be a Blue Prism guy.

I feel that Blue Prism is easier to learn because you can do things in terms of processes or objects. Logically, it is easier. In UiPath there are more options, but it's also harder to learn because you need to create a logical structure on your own. It doesn't show you how to do that in an easier way. UiPath has more connections and more inbuilt stuff than Blue Prism, but on the other hand, the navigation between the types of variables is slightly different. It's not a disadvantage, but it is something that takes time to learn.

I find that Automation Anywhere is not that user-friendly. For example, in Blue Prism you have loops that you can put a component into. In Automation Anywhere, you have to copy all of those stages, one-by-one. You cannot create a loop, which is basic.

We have not been tracking ROI yet, although we are working on it. It is difficult to calculate because to collect the information for each process it requires a logging system. Each project will require a specific logging system so that we can collect the same information to compare and evaluate it. We have to consider our development costs, maintenance costs, licensing costs, etc. At this point, we do not have enough people to work on this, so it is a work in progress.

They ran a selection process here and my understanding is that Blue Prism was not able to provide a free Studio license, unlike the policy they now have in place. This is the reason that UiPath was selected. 

The majority of our use cases are unattended, and that is the way that you should go. We do use attended bots as digital assistants, where you have small automations that are triggered by the users on their own to direct the robot. These are two separate products.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is not to be scared to use it. Play with it as much as possible and see if it brings value. There are different applications that can bring more value in certain cases.

Overall, this is a good solution, but there are always ways to improve a product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Studio, the Orchestrator, and we have attended and unattended robots.

Our primary use case is automating back-office processes from the corporate side. One example is the automation for ticket closure for some of the customer complaints. We also use it to fill information gaps between systems. Instead of having information run through standard APIs, we have it copied over from one system to another.

We run automations in a virtual environment, and the implementation was pretty easy and quick.

We used the Community Edition before purchasing our license. From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately one week. We found it to be very easy and very fast. We, as a Contact Center, usually face a lot of problems when we suggest any requirements. When we started with RPA, it took approximately one month for a very complex process to be automated.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a five. It is very easy. You can use the UI, or you can use APIs for the connection. In the end, you can do it.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five, for sure. In two or three weeks, an RPA developer can do everything.

In the Contact Center, the key issue is the handling time. RPA has helped us to decrease our time, and eventually, it will help to decrease the headcount.

For one of our processes, it reduced the time it takes from five minutes to somewhere between forty and fifty seconds. That saves a lot of time.

In terms of eliminating human errors, there has not been much difference because we have very strict processes and strict steps for them, so human error was minimal, to begin with. Our success is in the reduction of time to complete them.

The unattended, back-office robots are the most beneficial feature.

The Form Builder for back-end robots needs to be a web portal instead of a full desktop application. 

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution between three and four. For exception handling, it means that a senior RPA developer has to understand the reasons behind the process. If they have not been exposed to it then it is easier to perform some simple fixes and continue the process.

We have implemented eighteen processes so far, they are they used in several departments. In total, we have approximately four thousand people who are using this solution.

From a scalability point of view, we're not that confident that we can have the robots running twenty-four hours a day with a huge transaction. Being a telecom operator, we have a lot of transactions and the stability of the unattended robots needs some enhancement.

I think that both customer support and technical support are very good. When we have any questions or any issues, we are connected immediately. 

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

We learned about RPA because one of the contractors was working on an RPA PoC at our company, and we were convinced that it could help us a lot. The IT people were invited to see the technology and from there, they decided to implement it with our in-house IT group.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. We used the Community Edition and it is very easy to use. 

We performed the implementation on our own.

We realized ROI in approximately six months. Our cost savings come from savings in agents.

From a cost perspective, unattended robots are better. They run twenty-four hours a day and do not require running on a client machine. The attended robots are not as cost-effective.

We did evaluate one other RPA solution before choosing this one. Our main reasons for choosing UiPath were the price and the ease of development. The Community Edition is very useful, and we are easily able to find RPA developers working in UiPath. This is different than with some of the competing products.

My advice for anybody researching this solution is that it is easy to download and it has a big community. A PoC can be done easily, and you can decide from there whether this solution is suitable.

This is a good solution, but the stability of the unattended robots needs to be improved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.