UiPath Process Mining Reviews

The most valuable feature is the capture process. That is really good because it helps you to understand how your process steps work and what you can do to improve them. It helps to make it more visibility and tangibility into what you are doing in terms of the processes.

There is room for improvement. It is a helpful tool, I don't want to imply that it's useless. It helps to figure out if there are any steps that can be removed. It also helps to simplify the process and with the standardization of tasks because if you ask two people who are basically doing the same thing, to capture those steps you'll figure out that there is a lot of redundancy improvements in terms of aligning the way of working and maybe reducing some steps or removing them completely.

I have been using UiPath Process Mining for three months. 

It is stable, but not the top of the curve. It can be improved, let's put it that way.

In terms of scalability, it's medium to high. In my company, there are around 10 to 15 users. No more than that. I think it's a good number of people because usually these kinds of processes are not used by everybody. It's for process experts who are trying to understand and to eliminate waste within your process.

The technical support is good although it can be further enhanced. By that I mean that it should have a faster response. When you have an incident or a ticket we expect a quicker response.

We also looked at Celonis. It does pretty much the same thing. The advantage of Celonis is that you can see that the log has a bunch of low activity in one Excel file and then the tool can process that information and provide you with some insight.

This is an aspect that we are interested in. Of course, it is not suitable for all processes because it is highly dependent on the technology that you need to have the log available in. But if you have the log available then it is quite helpful to have a tool to analyze that.

The initial setup was easy because it is a cloud version, so it's not so complicated. I'm not sure about the on-premise. Maybe the one on-premise would be more difficult to install but I don't have experience with that. 

Considering that the solution is not fully stabilized and is not a mature product, the pricing can be further reduced. I expect it to be a little bit lower, especially during this time because it is in a maturity curve so they are ramping up the product. I expect it to be a little lower than what it is. 

UiPath is a solid company. It's almost the best on the market today. Process mining is something that will help the RPA process because, in the end, those tools, like process mining/ process simplification and standardization are hand in the hand of RPA. Process mining will reach a certain level in the future. I think it is a company to look at and to invest in this technology. Grow with the company because it's a solid one.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

In the next release, I would like for there to be a way to automatically do mining activity instead of recording yourself on the screen. Similar to other products on the market.

We don't actually use it in our company, we deploy ProcessGold in our clients' premises and provide the services for this solution. We have deployed it for many processes, mainly for human resources, IT, marketing and also for sales. A new aspect is for procurement.

The features I have found most valuable include the procurement because that is valuable to the clients. The RPA covers so many features and platforms and offers the same features.

We have deployed all the features, for all the verticals that I have mentioned here. UiPath featured them recently, they were valuable to the customer.

In terms of what can be improved, what I've seen so far in most of the implementations is that the client's expectations towards the RPA solution and their road map for the solution are different. The road map should be very clear in terms of what should be done and why it has to be done.

As for features that should be included in the next release, I would say that the UiPath should follow a flow X where a person who has a business process understanding and has an understanding of UiPath would be able to automate their own processes.

I have been using ProcessGold for approximately three years.

With what I've seen so far in my three years of experience, I see that it is stable. If there are not a lot of changes in the process before it is automated, then it is always stable.

ProcessGold is certainly scalable.

In terms of how many people are using this solution, if you add the positions around the RPA, basically every process will have their own business people working on that particular process. So, typically, we have deployed more than 30 plus processes until now and more than 60 to 70 people are working on that particular process.

I am in touch with technical support when we are working for our client with automations. I know which product features we need to talk to the UiPath guy about. 

I am 100% satisfied with the UiPath technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward. For the whole UiPath implementation, it typically takes four to five days to set up the whole thing and make it run.

I am the practice head for the RPA. So my team has hands on experience on other tools, as well. This includes Automation Anywhere and NeoDesk, and their latest software.

The main differences between UiPath and Automation Anywhere are that typically, the features which are offered by the RPA vendors seems to be the same, except on the user interface level, the IDE. UiPath provides a kind of a work proposed structure. But with Automation Anywhere there's a different kind of flow. The flexibility of development is better with UiPath. Otherwise I don't see any difference at all - all the features are supported by every vendor. 

The processes which are identified as the RPA candidates have to be thoroughly assessed. Unless and until the process is not qualified as a candidate, we should not take any chances by automating it. I would say that the process identification is a key part and the business owners who own that particular process should come up with an assessment.

On a scale of one to ten - I would rate this product a ten.

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.  

The primary use for this solution is for automating business processes.

These include data entry tasks that were being done by the bots. There was manual work for applications like Salesforce that was being done using integration activities provided by UiPath. One of our use cases involved doing sentiment analysis on tweets for a couple of brands. 

The most valuable feature is that activities are available to us just by clicking the box, so it doesn't require much time to make changes for future requirements.

The interface is very user-friendly.

The online platform for controlling the bots is very helpful. 

We do not have much confidence in the intelligence or cognitive capabilities and they should be improved. Automation Anywhere is really good in that area, so I'm looking forward to more advanced features in the future.

I would like to see better integration with the Azure and AWS machine learning platforms.

I have been using ProcessGold for about a year and a half.

In general, it is a stable solution. In one of our use cases, when the volume of data was quite high, we found that there were some crashes. We divided the load into smaller sets so that the whole thing is completed in two or three stages, which fixed the problem. 

I have not found any challenges in terms of scalability, other than an issue where we needed to divide the workload into smaller jobs. I would say that for certain activities that involve a very large number of documents, scalability is not up to mark, but in general, it is okay.

We have between 20 and 30 users and they are quite satisfied.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. We started with the Community Edition, which was really helpful.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

So far our primary use has been for process flow. How do you automate? In most of the cases, it was multi-source data collection systems from multiple sources and getting all the information to one point. There is an email or a message. Then how do you get the data from different sources and put them into one language? So far most of the use cases were just that.

Its most valuable features are that it is easy to use and to find people who actually use the UiPath.

The main thing that can be improved is the price, nobody wants to pay that much money for a scheduler.

Another feature they can add is, instead of doing only UiPath bots, it should handle other bots as well. Then I can deploy automation anywhere on any other software. It should not be only UiPath. That's the future of it.

I have been using ProcessGold for a year.

It is stable.

It is scalable. I think there are three people from my team using the solution now.

Overall the technical support is good. I'm satisfied with it.

The initial setup is straightforward. You just need to have UiPath and it's straightforward. Deployment time depends on the problem you're trying to solve. In our case, it took three to four days.

The client has the software and the licenses, and we are the guys who program it for them. The maintenance is up to the client. We just file up and give it to them, that's it. All the guys are on-site during development and deployment.

Our clients are enterprise sized companies.

Since it's a former client, they are generally UiPath resellers. They already have that connection with UiPath so they get a cheaper expert. But if we are looking for other deployments, they become really expensive because the ROI is difficult to attain for small scale businesses.

I would recommend ProcessGold, but I think the price has to come down. It's too high.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give ProcessGold an eight.

I've been using ProcessGold for business process management and optimization to give me a better understanding of operations around my business.

ProcessGold has given my organization extensive visibility and understanding of business operations. It helps to visualize the gaps in operations as well as where we're doing well.

In general, it gives me an idea of whether I'm going in the right direction with my team and if not, it points out where things aren't going smoothly.

In the last several months, my organization has grown quite a bit thanks to the improvements with ProcessGold.

The reporting features of ProcessGold are great.

Data mining and visualization provide extensive visibility and understanding of business operations. It makes the representation of the mined information very clean and provides a visual presentation that shows you what to improve next.

You can easily understand what actually happened in the process because of it. These reports also help me identify which areas need to be automated and which areas or different departments need to improve before automation is implemented.

The software at first is hard to use and you're not sure where to start. I would like a few tutorials that explain step by step how to start, including a few tips for new users.

I would like it to be more user-friendly and more visually appealing so that my eyes can keep watching for hours without getting so tired.

I would like to know what the exceptions are when they occur, including more details about them.

I would like to see enhancements to the recording feature.

I've been using ProcessGold for between three and four months.

I think that the information provided by data mining using ProcessGold is much more valuable than the few thousand dollars we invested in it.

I think ProcessGold is a great tool for process mining and I recommend others to use it. You will start noticing the great benefits of process mining that ProcessGold offers right away. No wonder ProcessGold is a world-leading vendor of Process Mining enterprise software at the moment.

I know that ProcessGold can help you as it helped me.

We have an order-entry application. We use ProcessGold to record all the steps that we have to perform to create an order. It helps us to create a static record from which we can use a UiPath bot.

The reporting features of ProcessGold are the most valuable. It creates things in a manner by which they can be easily represented to the business. Business can easily understand what actually happened in the process. So the layout and presentation of processes is very good. The UI is also useful for showing certain areas to the business.

The product has to be simplified because there are some facets that are just too complex. It's not easy for everyone to understand. You have to do training on ProcessGold and then you can use it.

I would like to see more enhancements to the recording feature. Also, more logic-based conditions and flows should be shown.

I have been using Process Gold for two to three months.

There have been some crashes when we are doing the recording part of the process. And sometimes the system will lag. But they have been improving it and I think it will get better with more iterations.

It is expandable. I would give it and eight out of 10 on scalability.

Right now there are only two people using this solution in our organization, but we are planning to increase the number when we add more components to the specification. Our users are in the admin department. Our intention is to add more managers to the solution.

They are really good with their technical support. They respond to us on time. I would rate them at nine out of 10 on support. They reach us within 24 hours and, most of the time, they are able to give us a solution. There are times when they have not been able to find a solution. But in general, they are good.

Before Process Gold we were trying to build our own solution. It did things like ProcessGold does, like record all the steps from the user system. We tried to use it to create a flow which we could show to the business and illustrate the steps users are performing.

But there were problems, including some scalability issues with our internal project and our internal model. We are not going with that solution and that's why we are using ProcessGold.

The initial phase is complex.

We did it by ourselves. We set up a team and trained them in ProcessGold and then we started developing.

We did not evaluate any other solutions.

The solution will be helpful for a person who has some admin and some managerial experience, but it won't be helpful for a person who has a technical background.

I use this solution for product mining and docking.

The valuable features really depend on your particular use case. We can easily identify based on your needs and prioritize accordingly.

Improvement depends on whether I can get the input information to explain why the exceptions are happening. Is it because of different policies or incorrect procedures being applied? If that information would also be integrated as part of it, it would make my life easier.

How the input is received from the medium and assimilated is important. The kind of application that we are using to process the particular process also plays a role.

I would like to know what the exceptions are when they occur. Is it because of the process selected needs or is it because of policy, legal issues, or incorrect procedural obligation? That would really help me.

In general, if they can provide the exceptions, as well as why those exceptions are happening from the input side and what applications had been used to process the information, it would be much easier for me.

This is a stable product.

ProcessGold is definitely scalable.

You should integrate this solution with process re-engineering also. For example, right now we have more focus on automation and intelligent automation in the UI path. At certain times, it can be costly to do automation or real-time automation. A customer might be looking towards the future.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

We mainly work with email notifications and attachments. We use it for reporting purposes. We handle validation or manipulation in that report and then notify or send it back to the customers.

If somebody opens an Excel book and they didn't maximize it, you have to open it in a maximized mode, the occupancy then will be identified properly by the pod which is opening. If you're using DL, it works fine, but sometimes our requirement is to put in a CC.

I have been using UIPath Process Mining for five years.

UIPath Process Mining is stable.

We sometimes can have some issues with the scalability on the platform because we are sharing the licenses. We are trying to focus on the queue concept where we can utilize it, to make it faster.

The setup is very good and explained well. People who are at least accustomed to this automation in UiPath, can read and go through the process without a problem.

I would rate UiPath Process Mining an eight out of ten.

UiPath's communication interface looks good. 

We started using UiPath for the past year.

I haven't used any enterprise editions. I just use the free dev version. 

I rate UiPath Process Mining seven out of 10. It's good. I haven't had any issues with it.