UiPath Process Mining Reviews

I don't think Process Mining has any areas for improvement. I think once you start using it, it's absolutely vital for a project. It's truly one of the most helpful things for a project.

It should be an original part of the package and not just an add-on. Obviously, that makes it more expensive. But I think that once people see the value and they use it, it's so important for everybody. The BAs are really impressed and the developers really get a kick out of it — they love it. It makes it easier to sell. I believe it's even more valuable than Automation Hub.

I used to be a trainer and an instructional designer. I think the training has to be more specific — it's a little scattered.

I have been using this solution for two months.

We've never experienced any issues with either scalability or stability. My team never had trouble with it.

Customer support is excellent. My CSMs are phenomenal.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. Deployment takes one day. Once you have Orchestrator, it's not hard.

Our customers are extremely satisfied with their ROI with this solution.

You really have to know the product and know how it works with the initial studio and who you want to talk to at what level to make sure that you can sell the product.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

We're using ProcessGold on the UiPath to review one of the financial processes from accounts payable for all Latin American transactions in our shared services center.

When it comes to valuable features, I think the first one will be the way we can visualize the whole process. The other one is the automation percentage that gives us an idea or an opportunity to figure out what to do next.

The connection to other systems could be better. I don't think it's an issue right now, but I think it could be better. I would also like the connection between ProcessGold and the RPA's interface to be more transparent.

UiPath Process Mining is a stable solution.

UiPath Process Mining is a scalable product.

Technical support is very good. The team responds to us very quickly.

We used Celonis, but it was a pain to develop that solution. We chose UiPath because there was a pilot program to compare it with Celonis. It wasn't as expensive as Celonis, so we used the pilot to confirm the functionality and deployment time. Celonis took about six months to connect with SAP. With UiPath, it took about two weeks.

It was easy from an SAP perspective, but we needed to use more things on the server to connect it to ProcessGold. Some native connectors would have probably made it easier. It took us about two months to deploy the full solution. It was very fast.

We deal with UiPath directly, but I believe that UiPath used consultants from another firm to help us.

We pay yearly, and I believe a support fee is paid monthly.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give UiPath Process Mining a ten.

We are using Process Mining to identify processes to be automated. We are also using the product as part of our hyper-automation strategy. Right now we have been able to identify a lot of automation opportunities within the company based on the data that we are collecting from different system processes.  

My shortlist of valuable features includes all the different types of analysis. For example, you can do a root cause analysis. In other words, if you have a process that has many different scenarios, you can identify where the problem is. You can also identify bottlenecks with root cause analysis. You do this by looking at the time that has been spent in specific stages or steps within the processes being performed. So the benefit is identifying the root cause by identifying the time that it takes to release that specific bottleneck. You can then look for ways to remedy the bottleneck.  

To exemplify how this works, let's say you have a process that in the regular SLA (Service Level Agreement) takes two days for response time. The process is getting stuck in one step consistently and just that step is taking a day-and-a-half. The rest of your process is only half of a day, but just because there is a problem in one step, you are taking two days to complete the response. Now that the critical step is identified, you can look at taking measures to ease that pain point.  

Another great feature is the ability to see processes at a higher level and take in the whole picture. If a process has too many variances — say there are 20 different ways of doing the task — you can identify which process is the one where that happens more often. This will prompt you to focus on that process for any possible ways to automate it and simplify the complexity.  

One of the main pain points that I identified with the tool is the simulation. What I am looking for is a tool that is able to help us simulate scenarios. In practice, we pose scenarios to determine what happens if we change the value of a specific step in the process. A good simulation module would help you answer the question as to how well making that change will go. Process Mining is more of a pure process mining tool, but I think adding simulation capabilities will increase the value of the solution exponentially. Adding simulation capabilities would allow us to do some additional forecasting as well. I think my suggestion — considering the product category — is doing more to support integration with that type of simulation capability even if it is not directly in the product.  

A second pain point has to do with a deeper exploration of what you have mined. If there were an option to export to UiPath Orchestrator or the UiPath Studio functionality you can then further explore and utilize whatever you have mined. The export would make the process into some usable components that could be mined or used in other ways. I think that will be a great help and addition to the product. It would mostly be useful for development purposes.  

We have been using the Process Mining (it used to be Process Gold) for about four months now.  

I am actually impressed with the stability of the product to this point in time. We have not experienced any issues with lagging or processing problems.  

Process Mining is definitely scalable. We have been able to add some other business departments to work with the product so they can start looking into the efficiency of their processes as well.  

The other thing that affects scalability is tenancy. With the on-premises solution, they were offering a multi-tenancy option, where then you can partition everything. On the cloud, it is a little bit different because everyone just gets a tenant in the beginning. Both are scalable, it is just handling the scalability differently.  

For now, the group of people using the product is more centralized. Use is limited to a few people within the Center of Excellence because we are the ones currently making all of the process analysis. We are making decisions based on the data we mine. It is not yet enabled for use by everyone at the organization. So, for now, less than 10 people have access to it. There is no reason to believe that this usage will not be easy to scale.   

Of those 10 people, just two or three are required to be involved with deploying the updates and maintaining the solution.  

I have not yet had to use technical support for Process Mining. I have used the tech support for other UiPath tools in the past with other technologies such as Orchestrator and Studio, and I have experienced a very good response from the tech support team. They act pretty quickly on anything that we ask them for and most of the time their analysis and their recommendations are very accurate. I assume that the tech support experience for Process Mining will be similar as it is within the same company.  

The initial setup is pretty straightforward because it is on the cloud. I am not really sure how difficult it is to install on-premises, but in the cloud, it is very simple.  

The way that we started here is by getting a trial version of Process Mining. With that, we got to play around with the tool and we got to see whatever we needed to see to make our decision about using the product. When we decided, UiPath just converted the license into an enterprise license and that was the extent of the difficulty of 'installation.' It was really a seamless integration that virtually required no installation time or configuration.   

We are currently working on an ELA (Enterprise Licensing Agreement), but usually, the pricing of Process Mining is based on an annual subscription.  

The cost per year depends on the users and what the clients are able to negotiate with their salesperson. The use case factors into the cost in the end.  

We did not actually evaluate other options before choosing UiPath Process Mining, but we did a broader assessment and analysis of multiple tools. The main drivers of our assessment were the integration with RPA (Robotic Process Automation) and road mapping the product and additional features that the particular product offered. We wanted to integrate the solution well with the RPA and we needed to know what the immediate capabilities of the product were. Of course, the cost played into this as well, but the cost is a consideration when you are effectively comparing a breakdown of functionality. Some features may be worth more to you than others.   

One of the things that I will suggest for people looking into this type of solution is to also look into task mining. That is another complementary feature within process mining that is going to allow users to see all their processes from a more detailed perspective based on individual tasks within the processes.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst, and ten is the best, I would rate UiPath Process Mining as a nine-out-of-ten. The capabilities are strong and the product performs at a high level.  

We use this product for robotic automation. With it, we are automating certain standard business processes so they do not have to be handled manually. We can build robots to run automated processes to complete these standard tasks that we would normally have to do manually, otherwise, on a periodic basis. So instead of doing these repetitive tasks manually, the robot is doing it instead of us and it takes care of them automatically.  

The product helps us in many ways. The ability to automate processes helps us to save time. When we save time, we also save costs. So we spend fewer man-hours on certain tasks and enhance productivity. It is a nice tool for us and streamlining workflow.  

The parts of the product that are most valuable are that it is easy to deploy and easy to manage. The user interface is simple and user-friendly. Integrations with other products are also very easy. This is why we continue to use the product rather than something else.  

Some things could be improved in ProcessGold even though it is already very useful. New integrations sometimes depend on new technologies or new hardware. The compatibility with the various integrations with new technologies should be enhanced so that these can be adopted as they become available.  

It is an expensive solution. It would be good if the company could consider some type of change to the licensing model that could help clients better regulate the costs in different ways.  

Another improvement would be on the development side for test management. It would be nice to be able to create new custom features for testing within that module.  

The stability of the product is fine. We are not having too many serious technical problems with deployed robots. It is all working properly.  

The scalability of ProcessGold is fine. I know of different companies that are using it with anywhere between 10 servers to 2000 servers. I do not think that scalability has any serious restrictions.  

As far as how many users are using the solution and their roles in the company, generally, only admins are using the product. So we have only around six or seven people using the product directly in the company although other people may benefit from the processes that it handles. We need a maximum of only two or three people on staff for deployment and maintenance.  

In the future, we are planning to increase our usage a lot. Right now we have about 25 licenses with 25 robots.  We have plenty of reasons to build new processes and increase the number of licenses to about 50 and double our usage while leveraging the advantage that automation offers. What we actually do ends up depending on the business scenarios. If we see a lot of business enhancement and growth in the market, of course we will continue to expand what we do.  

We have not used technical support too much, but when we have needed to use it they helped us with any issues. Their performance has been okay for us. We did not have any problems with them.  

The initial setup was okay. It was not very complex. The implementation took around one month total.  

When it came to the implementation, there was a partner who helped me with the integration and deployment.  

We pay around $200,000 for licensing the product. We also have additional costs. There is a yearly maintenance fee that is 20% of the license. So that comes to an additional $40,000 a year for the maintenance and support.  

This is the first product that we have used for robotic automation. We did check into other options, but from the perspective of the available features and what we felt we needed, this was the best product and the best choice. The ease-of-use allowed us to adopt it quickly.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this as an eight. It is an eight rather than higher because there is always, something to do to make even a very good product better.  

The advice that I have for people considering adopting this product is that it is important to define scenarios in the beginning before starting to build them. It is best to start working with simple scenarios. After they have success with that, they can try things that are more complex. It is tempting to want to just jump in and do complex things right away, but it is important not to rush into complex development when using this kind of tool.  

It's a good solution. 

We like the P2P, Purchase-to-Pay aspect of the product.

It has been issue-free and works well.  

The solution is straightforward. 

We find the solution is scalable. 

It's quite stable. 

It's quite an expensive solution. It's not competitive right now. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It keeps on updating all the technologies, so it is scalable.

We have around 15 users on the product right now. We do have plans to increase usage. 

Technical support is very good. They are helpful and responsive.

It is easy to set up. We found the entire process to be straightforward and simple. 

Normally, it takes around two to three months to get everything up and running.

It's costly. They have to bring down the cost to be competitive in this market.

We are the service provider. We are not the user, we are the service provider. We are partners with UiPath.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations. 

They have good partner management, and they have a good solution. However, the pricing is somewhat high, and they need to work on the pricing part.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten. 

I'm using this product to improve the automation in our HR department. We are partners with UiPath and I'm the senior solution partner. 

The most important features for us are that the product is scalable and that it's user-friendly. It has a lot of connectors which is great. 

Compared to other technologies, the initial setup can sometimes be a little more complicated. It can be difficult to choose the best way to do something so maybe they could improve the roadmap. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

This solution is very scalable.

I recommend this solution and rate it nine out of 10. 

The initial setup can sometimes be more complicated than it is with other solutions but it's not difficult. We have five users of this solution in the company. 

UiPath Process Mining has a good roadmap ahead for the future.

I have been using UiPath Process Mining for approximately five years.

The stability of UiPath Process Mining is okay

UiPath Process Mining can scale well.

The technical support for UiPath Process Mining needs some improvement.

I have seen a return on investment from using UiPath Process Mining.

The price of UiPath Process Mining could improve.

There is a lot of good information on YouTube to train users.

I rate UiPath Process Mining an eight out of ten.

We are using UiPath Process Mining for procurement and finance automation.

UiPath Process Mining has improved our organization by clearing invoices. We use it to take information from the manual invoice, which is generated by the suppliers, to read, scan, and input the invoice data into the SAP system for clearance. We use the raw data from the supplier invoice and feeding into the system.

We feel there is some problem with the user interface, it is sometimes difficult to navigate to the area you want. Additionally, the bot hangs at times.

In the next release, it would be beneficial to have a conversational bot that can give voice alerts for problems.

I have used UiPath Process Mining within the last 12 months.

In our testing, UiPath Process Mining has been stable. We have had some bot delays, but overall it has been good.

UiPath Process Mining is scalable.

The return of investment happens over three years.

Those looking to implement UiPath Process Mining should go through the modules step by step and get familiar with the bots in the system, only then should they scale up. They should not scale up too many systems at the same time.

I rate UiPath Process Mining a seven out of ten.