UiPath Reviews

We are using unattended bots, Orchestrator, and Studio.

We use this solution for doing a variety of things. It includes a lot of back-office finance and accounting, tax, and a little bit on our operations side. We're also using it for some test automation within our IT group, so helping to test our points of sale, and some of our data transfers as well.

Orchestrator runs on a dedicated server, but our bots all run on virtual dedicated machines in our data center. There were some challenges in setting everything up to run in a virtual environment. We implemented a couple of years ago, so I think that it has improved by now, although it was challenging.

Part of it was on our end, where our people were not familiar with it. The challenges included picking the right type of VM to run on, having the right kind of setup, and having the environment configured correctly. We needed this to allow the RPA team to have enough control over the day-to-day maintenance, and not have bottlenecks with the technical side. Managing things when we had issues or needed to add something new was also a challenge.

The documentation was kind of broad and didn't go into the detail that we wanted it to, although I have seen that get better, so that is really good. I'm sure if we were trying to implement it today, it would probably be a lot smoother with the tools that they've come up with.

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 think there are still a few things they could do and it looks like they are working towards that. It still requires a good bit of training and ramping up for someone brand new to it, especially without a programming background, to jump in and start building. I think they can continue to refine that and they definitely are moving in the right direction. It's a little bit of a technical hurdle to overcome to be able to build not only just basic automations but enterprise-scale automations and automations that are reliable and can check up on themselves. I think they can work some more of that into the actual tool because we've had to do a lot of figuring out how to build best practices and how to program it directly, and the best way to be able to allow us to support it cleanly through the lifecycle. It is good, but there are some things they can add in to truly make it a five. My standards are pretty high, but I'm sure they'll get there.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. We are big fans of it. I typically don't get the luxury of hiring people with technical backgrounds. We usually have people coming out of school or people transferring from other departments who are interested in RPA. So, the Academy tools have been a lifesaver for us and they've been very good, especially for the RPA developer track. It is very detailed and we can really get someone through that training and feel like they're at least able to perform the basic functions of the tool pretty well. From there it is up to us in terms of getting them familiar with our best practices and how we program things and get some hands-on training with the more senior RPA developer to learn some further tips and tricks. Overall, I'm very pleased with the Academy offerings and they're one of the best I've seen from many of them.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was perhaps a month or two. It did not take long, and that included time for training. When we started off, we bought the software, went through the training as a team, and then started building a few small things. We probably had the first one in production within two months of buying the software.

We have seen a lot of improvements to our organization.

We have one that was a really high-visibility project, where it was kind of a data entry thing that all of our retail managers were spending time on. The data was fed through to a vendor that we franchise through, and they were spending an hour or two a week across hundreds of locations.

We took that into the back office and got data feeds for all the data they were putting in, and then had a bot go through to the current system of reporting, and enter that data for every single store location. We were able to free up those managers with a bunch of time. It was about 5,500 hours a year.

In terms of eliminating human errors, I can say that it has happened but it is difficult to approximate by how much. This is in part because we have a wide variety of software of processes that we've implemented. So, in some, it's definitely higher than others. On the whole, it's been good and it's been helpful, for sure.

A lot of the value from this solution comes from Studio and the activities. They really enable us to make things happen accurately, with the clicks and the types they support. Of all the automation tools I've tried or used, they seem to be the most accurate and most consistent.

The Orchestrator management tools are growing a lot and are constantly improving.

I would like to see more interconnectedness of everything, including making the APIs a little easier to use, and having bots be able to call other bots and get them to start things. Having all of this a little more seamless would be really helpful.

I would like to see more seamless AI functionality built in to allow teams without data scientists or strong data people to be able to build and deploy simple models that will help enhance their bots further and let them do more.

The technical support is a bit of a weak point for this solution, and ideally, they can improve turnaround time so that we don't have to figure things out ourselves as often.

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

We've had some issues with stability, and I've talked to a lot of other companies who've had maybe more issues than us. It concerns ongoing support and the issues with bots not performing as expected or doing unexpected things as well. The problem is running into unexpected issues that can result from things that are not very readily apparent on the surface. This can be caused by underlying configuration differences in Windows, or patches that have happened, that sort of thing. It's still a challenge to manage and we often have bots that don't seem to have the issues when we are troubleshooting.

Sometimes it is our fault because we're not programming in enough breaks or logging enough to really track what's going on. It seems very dependent on the underlying operating system and things like update states of office applications. Occasionally, it'll just get stuck or hung up and we can't really figure out why, and that's frustrating. It definitely takes people time to go in and resolve those issues and figure it out.

It just seems like there's a lot of times where we just rerun the bot and then it works fine. I find it odd that it would stop at one point and then you just rerun it again and it works. A lot of those are, I will admit, due to input data issues or the system going down, or a website not being available or loading too slowly when it checks. However, I would like to see them continue to focus on stability as a platform, to avoid those as much as possible any issue.

My team that I work with directly is probably about ten people in total. There are a couple of other teams who are working more on test automation that are kind of separate and that's probably a total of about five other people right now, and we're looking to expand to another couple of teams. That will probably be about five more people within the next year, and then my team is growing. We're looking to add a few more people next year as well.

I am the automation lead, and the users are RPA developers and business analysts.

When it comes to the technical support for this solution, I feel that it may be a little bit of a weak point. When we reached out to customer support, we haven't gotten a ton of help, or it takes them quite a while to dig through the issue. It is understandable because they're going through someone else's code essentially, to try to resolve an issue. So, usually, we end up relying on internal people, more senior developers.

Sometimes it's just a matter of rerunning it or changing some input parameters and then trying it again, which is not the cleanest troubleshooting by any means. The problem is we felt like we had to, given the slow turnaround time on their support desk. We've kind of had to have the internal ability to figure things out.

Overall, I would rate their technical support a three out of five.

I know that they're a growing company and that they have a lot of new people. It seems like we've maybe had some bad luck in terms of the people that we've been in contact with when we've reached out. Perhaps they were new and maybe not fully understanding. There have been times we've reached out to support where we feel like we know the system better than they do, and that's frustrating. Again, that's why we've had to focus on internal knowledge building, which is a strength of theirs, through the training offered.

We do have a CSM assigned to us who I work with and he's somewhat spotty at times. I think he has a lot on his plate. So, at times we have questions that take a while to get answered.

We did a proof of concept that was driven by a consulting company and it was not a success. After that, we decided to implement an in-house solution using UiPath and from there it was successful.

We began with RPA because our management was interested in the potential and in trying it out. Even though the PoC failed, I think there was a promise with the software that we were able to see, so we made the purchase and dove into it. Obviously, it has been successful.

Installing the software itself, the Studio, most of the elements of the licensing and that sort of thing, were all very straightforward, which is great. I would say that the technical side, regarding the virtual machines, took a while in terms of setting up accounts and getting all the VM stuff figured out. All of that took a little bit longer than we expected before we had a stable platform. I think that there could've been some more resources available there, which I think they've partially fixed by now.

We were calculating our savings and our estimate is that in a little under a year, perhaps as little as six months, we probably earned back the amounts that we had paid for the platform for a year. Even into the journey, we felt like we had broken even and were making more money on top of that. ROI was very fast.

I can estimate our licensing costs are approximately $100,000 USD per year.

In addition to UiPath, we evaluated Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism.

My main reason for selecting UiPath, I think, was the strategy of focusing on a very open platform and allowing anyone to try out the trial, and allowing anyone to register for the Academy. I'm really focusing on democratizing RPA and making it available to everyone. It was a big focus for me because the other two had very closed-off systems and while they were able to give us demos, we didn't really get as good of a feel for how the software works as we did with UiPath where we could just download it and try it.

Also, we just had very good experiences with the salespeople and the people who demoed the product. They were very positive and very excited about RPA, and kind of matched what we were looking for. We felt like it was a much better fit for us, focusing on easy to use automation, not as much on code security like Blue Prism, and Automation Anywhere didn't seem to have a clear strategy for what they wanted to do moving forward.

Ultimately, UiPath has been a successful choice, and I feel that they have continued to grow their lead on the competition.

I really liked a lot of the things I see coming in terms of the future improvements for Orchestrator. I think it's going to continue to grow into a true kind of Cloud Platform for end-to-end automation, whereas right now, it's a little more focused just on building things in Studio, and then managing monitoring them in Orchestrator. So, I'm excited about some of the further integration with the dashboards and everything for managing how it works.

Upcoming is better management of projects from end to end. I've built a lot of things myself to keep up with that. But having UiPath support, a lot of that, a little bit better, it's improved. This is including the focus on the process mining and the design phase, and it's often a bottleneck of not having enough time to go through and really thoroughly map out and document the processes.

I am interested in trying the specific Studio for test automation. I think UiPath has a big advantage in that space with their RPA software. It really solves an issue that a lot of other test automation platforms have, which is not being as consistent as they could be, or being too hard or too complicated to program correctly.

From a cost perspective, we have definitely got our money's worth on the unattended bots, which is what we have been focused on. We have bought a few attended bots to try them and this next year, we will be looking for good use cases. It requires a little more integration and using the API. We're looking at leveraging more attended bots, and we may end up buying more, but we're still evaluating how to use them. Unattended bots felt like the clearest advantage for us to implement, and we were successful in starting with those.

We were an early adopter of this solution in our region, so I often speak with people who are researching this solution. I tell them that UiPath is a really great platform and it's growing. It's moving in a really great direction, and I recommend people to take it in-house. Find a small team of people who are really passionate and interested in learning it, and then start small. Start with a few small things to get your feet under you, build an operating model that will support scaling, and then slowly scale it out over time. That's what we have done, and it has been successful for us.

Overall, I am very happy with UiPath, but I do have a few small quibbles. On the whole, it's been very successful and I'm very happy.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We're a bank, so we primarily use UiPath to automate tasks such as filling out Excel sheets, organizing PDF files into folders, and reconciling rejected checks and chargebacks.

We prioritize use cases by meeting with each business unit to operational challenges that they would like to solve through automation. They walk us through the process they want to be automated, and we prioritize the requests based on potential hours saved and the automation difficulty.

The business units don't interact with the bots much. We get requests via email, and our Center of Excellence develops and maintains all the bots.  

UiPath helps us improve operational efficiency. We want to grow our bank by increasing the number of accounts without adding more employees. Our headcount hasn't increased in the last four years while our assets have grown tremendously. By automating data entry and other monotonous tasks, UiPath has improved employees' sense of job fulfillment. It frees them up to work on more challenging tasks and work on new skills.

We like UiPath's integration with the ARIA framework and Orchestrator we use to manage our automations. The Copilot also helps us streamline the development process.

There could be better documentation for Copilot, and UiPath could provide solution design documents as part of the training.

We have used UiPath since 2021.

We haven't had any issues.

UiPath scales well with our environment. 

I rate UiPath customer service eight out of 10. I had one issue where they pointed me in the right direction but didn't fully resolve it.

Positive

We've done some simple tasks with homegrown automation that UiPath could handle, but we opted to build the processes with tools we already had.

The initial setup involved using a UiPath partner, which significantly facilitated our production and deployment environments.

We've saved about 2,500 hours annually with UiPath.

I'm not responsible for the budget, but I know that UiPath is more expensive than its competitors. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We have an online report, and our management tasked me with recreating it, but they don't allow bots to create things on the website. I'm responsible for the automation and engineering work, and they wanted me to evaluate the performance of our systems and solar panels. I need to go to the manufacturer's website and download the monthly report corresponding to our factory site. 

Each month, I need to go to the site, get their readings, and create a report. It's a repetitive task that takes about four or five hours. UiPath enables me to automate the finance side of the report.

Generating all these market analyses and data reports from various websites can be time-consuming. It might require a whole team with its own manager to check and update the docs. However, when UiPath came into play, we could automate a lot of that work from different platforms. That was the start of a digital transformation at our company. It saves about eight hours per report. 

UiPath decreases human error. A lot of the reporting on product quality was done through manual data entry into the database system. There is potential for human error. Now, we can a lot of that information automatically and perform the data analysis with UiPath. Since we no longer need a designated person to do the data analysis, we can save around $200 to $300 monthly.

UiPath is easy to use and learn. With some experience in automation, I could learn the solution in three or four hours. It's easier to build automations in UiPath compared to other tools. UiPath has a feature that allows you to build automations quickly. You can build your workflow in under 10 minutes. In UiPath Studio, you can do browser automation by recording it. You can set up flows where you click through the buttons on a website. For example, there's a button where you have to click to verify that you're human. That's something you can add to the flow. 

Having a workflow is beneficial. At our monthly meetings, we rectified the revenue generation, etc. We analyzed all these systems' performance and costs to create a plan and saved a lot of money doing that.

We're developing a use case for automated communications mining using Salesforce for one of our teams. It will be helpful, but we haven't implemented it yet. We have several reports and a script to perform this automatically. We will rate the responses from our team members and the outside groups we are using. 

The UiPath community is very helpful. When I started using UiPath, I had no clue about it, so I watched a few videos and learned how to do most of the integrations. I also reached out to some colleagues on LinkedIn who directed me to the Sri Lankan user community. They were amazing.

I would love to see UiPath create a reporting application that you could deploy on the side and feed data directly into it. That would be an amazing tool to have. Microsoft has this data migration interface, so if you create an automation, it checks everything going into it. 

I tried UiPath a couple of years back for another project and worked with it for about a year and a half. I also worked with it more recently, and the experience is different.

We had some performance issues in the first few weeks. Apart from that, UiPath has been running okay.

The cloud component of UiPath makes it scalable.

I rate UiPath support seven out of 10. You can contact enterprise support. They're always ready to receive our calls and provide recommendations. 

Neutral

We previously used Microsoft Power Automate. Since we are using Microsoft ERP and CRM systems, all of our automation systems need to be compatible with Microsoft. We could use Power Automate for free, so it made sense to stick with one vendor. 

UiPath is easier to understand and use because we can record actions, and it has an amazing support community. It is also competitive in terms of cost. If you are sending information to databases with Power Automate, you need some subscriptions to PowerApps and Power BI. It costs you about a hundred dollars to get started. You can download and use UiPath Studio for free. 

Compared to our older platforms, UiPath is easy to install and integrate. On day one, you can deploy it to your system in a few minutes. Our previous solution required more infrastructure to do the automation. UiPath has UiPath Studio, so you can play the flow and record all your inputs. The main advantage is that you can build a solution in minutes. It's effortless to get started. 

UiPath is reasonably priced. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We are using it to automate business processes in the organization.

UiPath has impacted our operational efficiency quite a lot. There are a lot of scenarios where it has helped the end users. We also have benefited financially from it. We have streamlined the processes to an extent. We initially started with a basic data migration process, and now, we have our own intelligent automation and hyper-automation framework. We just get the requirement, put it in the framework, and start automating. We have progressed a lot.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. There are certain instances where we do not get end-to-end automation, but those are the things that are out of RPA's capabilities.

End-to-end automation is important because we can showcase our capability more efficiently in front of our management and the client. We can show that something can be 100% automated if there is a use of 100% automation.

They have UiPath Academy. When UiPath was new, we did not have any online resources to go and learn. The YouTube community was small. There were no courses on Udemy or any of the online platforms. The offline platforms were also minimal. UiPath Academy was one place where we could go and learn and prepare for the exam. I got certified when UiPath certifications were free. I have done all the learning from UiPath Academy. As I move up in my role and responsibilities, if I want to learn a few more things, UiPath Academy is still the best place. You get a very crisp and clear understanding of everything.

We use UiPath’s artificial intelligence and machine learning capabilities for hyper-automation. In my understanding, RPA in the initial days was limited to redundant process automation, whereas now, the use of AI Fabric and other components makes the automation more intelligent. We can add decision-making to existing automation. There were many processes where we had stalled the process just because the next step was a decision-making step, and someone had to come and make a decision to move forward. Now, we have our own AI team to build the code that can make decisions on behalf of a person and also learn from the existing behaviors. That helps quite a lot.

UiPath saves time. It saves about 50% of the time. It never saves 100% of the time because we also spend a lot of time maintaining and doing enhancements to the process. Processes are never stable.

We have integrated it with multiple tools. The outcome has been very good. There have been challenges at times with the development, but the integration has been smooth so far.

Computer Vision is one good feature. AI Fabric is another good feature. The holistic Orchestrator platform is another feature that is very useful.

The RE Framework provided by UiPath is quite extensive. It solves a lot of problems and gives us a lot of time back. We do not have to create our own framework.

UiPath is more user-friendly than other RPA solutions that I have used. UiPath also has the biggest community.

Automation Hub needs to improve a lot. About two years back, it kept on crashing. It has improved a lot. We use it but not to a great extent. We try to build our own dashboards by using any of the data analytics tools.

It should give real-time data, and the integration with the servers is not that great. It can be because of the infrastructure that we have.

They can also consider integration with other automation tools because nowadays, a company does not have one automation tool or RPA tool. A company has multiple RPA tools. They can think of integrating the data from other automation tools in one automation hub so that it becomes centralized.

I have been using UiPath for close to seven years.

UiPath is quite stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability. It does crash sometimes. That could be because of the infrastructure we are using.

The reliability of any process that goes to the end user is tested with a set of data. We do rigorous testing because, at the end of the day, any error in production ends up in a financial loss, so we test the automation that has been built to quite an extent.

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten for scalability. No technology is 100% scalable. As technology evolves, new features, such as GenAI features, need to be added. Scalability-wise, it can never go to a ten. Another reason why I rated it a seven is that I want Automation Hub to be scaled to its full potential. It has not been scaled up properly. I have got this feedback from different people across the organization.

The organization I belong to works on the use cases for building automation for given processes. We have around 15 developers doing this work.

I would rate UiPath support a ten out of ten. They have been quite supportive when we have raised any query with them.

I have been in the automation field for the last 12 years. I started with RPA with Blue Prism. I have worked with almost all main RPA tools such as Power Automate, Automation Anywhere, etc. I find UiPath to be the most user-friendly. There is the ease of having all the activities in the same panel. You can have the Studio setup and you can review the code as well with the analyzer. It gives a lot of flexibility when you are developing.

The one feature that is very good is that the marketplace is open. People can build their own set of activities and post them there, which is very useful. I myself have built a lot of activities. I have also used activities by other developers to complete my work. The marketplace is very helpful.

UiPath has the biggest user community. Its community is bigger than Power Automate, Automation Anywhere, and Blue Prism. Other than the community, there are also several groups. There are a lot of developers. If you are stuck with any issue, which is quite common, someone will have a solution for it.

Developing automation with UiPath is much easier compared to Power Automate, Automation Anywhere, and Blue Prism.

The deployment is handled by another team. I do not handle the deployment because the infrastructure team handles it. It should be a one-man job. It is not that difficult.

The deployment duration of a process depends on how big the process is and how much time and resources it requires for development. Usually, it takes two to three weeks. It can also take ten weeks depending on the process. 

All tools require maintenance in terms of upgrades, but that is probably handled by UiPath. We only maintain our own processes. If there are some changes to the selectors or any of the UI components, we have to update the project.

With RPA, it takes one or two years to see an ROI. It is not cost-efficient till then. When you start building hundreds of processes and utilizing the full capacity of the bots to work 24 hours, you get a good return on investment. Initially, it was expensive, but as we scaled up, we could see an ROI. We have seen a good profit.

Initially, the ROI is less. It is about 5% to 6% per year, but as the processes mature, the headcount reduces, and the human intervention also reduces. It eventually moves to 30% to 40% ROI.

It is the most user-friendly RPA platform, but it is also the most expensive RPA platform.

I would recommend UiPath to others because it is the most user-friendly. It is also developer-friendly because of the community. It also works across systems. These are the three reasons for recommending it.

We run a roadshow across the organization to understand which processes are redundant. We try to understand which part of a process can be automated by using the general RPA automation and only one tool. We also categorize them in terms of what can go under intelligent automation where a certain amount of decision-making is required. Another category is hyper-automation where we try to understand how to include different tools, such as machine learning code, AI code, NLP data set, or data mining set. If we have an existing tool for data mining and process mining, the final steps can be automated. These are three major criteria. For basic automation, we try to assess the type of automation. Is it desktop automation? What kind of resources are required? Do we need an attended automation or an unattended automation? Based on my experience, almost all of them are unattended automation. We then try to pull in the use cases, prioritize them, and start automating.

UiPath keeps on enhancing its product. Four years ago, there was no AI Fabric or Automation Hub, and now, we have all those things. They help a lot in delivering the project and having a prototype view for all the projects that are running.

Overall, I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

The use cases for UiPath depend on the specific requirements of each department within an organization. We typically meet with small groups of employees to identify potential automation opportunities within their departments. If a use case is suitable for automation, we develop the feature and build the bot for the customer.

UiPath integrates seamlessly with our existing products. Leveraging its AI capabilities, we're identifying new use cases. Additionally, UiPath offers a "bring your own model" approach, allowing us to utilize machine learning models from other vendors if needed.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation.

As a team of six developers, we rely heavily on the UiPath user community for answers to our questions.

UiPath helps us significantly reduce our on-premises footprint. It provides an automated touchless environment that we use in the administration and finance departments to automate a portion of our business processes.

We incorporate UiPath Academy courses into our developer training program to ensure they achieve specific certifications. For instance, all developers must obtain the professional UiPath certification. Each year, we prioritize which modules to target based on relevant use cases.

We use AI functionality in our automation. Communication mining and task mining are AI components of UiPath.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation.

It helps reduce human error and frees  up our staff time to focus on other tasks.

UiPath has helped save us costs overall.

The biggest advantage of UiPath is its user-friendly environment. Unlike Azure and Blue Prism, UiPath offers a robust orchestration platform that allows central management of our entire RPA ecosystem from a single orchestrator. Additionally, UiPath excels in automating web applications.

UiPath provides a comprehensive suite of solutions for robotic process automation. Beyond the core UiPath Studio for building robots, they offer a range of AI-powered products such as communication mining, task mining, and the Automation Cloud. These solutions seamlessly integrate within a unified environment.

The pricing is high and has room for improvement.

I find UiPath's development environment to be challenging. Ideally, I'd prefer a more user-friendly approach like Blue Prism's, which utilizes a building block concept.

I have been using UiPath for 4 years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath 8  out of 10.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath 9 out of 10.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I have used Kofax but UiPath is far ahead of it.

The initial deployment is straightforward. Deploying bots using UiPath is easy.

We used external consultants.

UiPath is priced high.

I would rate UiPath 8 out of 10.

I recommend UiPath to others.

We use UiPath to build attended and unattended automated processes for public and private sector clients. I try to make the processes as slim as possible so that they aren't as dependent on external applications. We have an abundance of documentation, and the goal is to have very little overhead. 

All the businesses where we've deployed UiPath were pleased with the solution. They saw immediate benefits to the bottom line, and employees were no longer stuck doing repetitive stuff. Organizations typically start realizing the benefits in the first month.

UiPath has reduced human error. It also offers visibility that helps build rapport between contractors like me and my clients in the federal government or other process owners we're working with. The solution cuts the costs associated with digital transformation. The more you want to digitally transform your business, the more expensive it will be. With UiPath, that means the solution needs to use more of the product offerings, like IDP, the AI panel, and other stuff like that. But even with the minimal architecture, it will still cost at least a little bit.

UiPath significantly frees up employee time. On average, I estimate it saves between 50 to 100 hours per automation annually. The amount of money saved offsets the cost of licensing because you're saving time and reducing headaches. 

I like UiPath's Orchestrator. It's the core piece.  Automations are relatively easy to build. There is a learning curve initially, but I would rate it seven out of 10 for ease of building automation. The end-to-end automation is critical. It helps us develop a strategy where everyone has their things automated, saving time throughout the organization. The UiPath community forums are a helpful resource where you can contribute and get answers. 

I think UiPath's documentation for new features is a bit incomplete at times. 

I have used UiPath for around four years.

The stability depends on the VM you're running UiPath on, so that's not even really UiPath at that point.

UiPath prides itself on being very scalable. The unattended RPAs make it easy to scale. If you need to add more bots to run more processes, you can just have your IT department provision a new VM and buy more unattended licenses. 

I rate UiPath support five out of 10. Sometimes, UiPath support is like a lottery. They have many intelligent people who can get you what you need, but it depends on whether the person you're assigned knows the solution. It might be that they have so many customers and not enough staff. The ticket response times can be pretty slow.

Neutral

Previously, I used Power Automate mainly for its API integration and cloud workflows. I wasn't using it as an RPA solution. 

Due to the ridiculous nature of the government and the premium associated with adopting newer things, we can only do attended bot deployment right now. That means we publish new packages, send them via email, and deploy them on their type of system. In any other RPA shop, we would publish to Orchestrator and manage the process from there. The deployment is straightforward once you know what you're doing, but we need to maintain some oversight on the beginners to ensure they publish the processes correctly.  

I would like to see a GitLab model. In a CI/CD pipeline, it runs a series of tests after every commit to ensure that everything's functioning. It doesn't require maintenance so long as the engine keeps running, but we review the processes annually to see if there are any pain points or if anything needs optimization. 

There's an ROI despite the high cost. We save time, and many of the processes are much more robust than they could be if they were performed manually. UiPath can process an Excel file with thousands of rows. Human employees can do that by themselves, but bots can do the job so much faster. 

I think UiPath costs too much. They know they're top dogs, and that's fine, but I would never recommend them for anything other than a large enterprise or the federal government. There are development costs and unattended bot licenses are more expensive. UiPath has additional apps you can purchase that all have separate costs. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We are a consulting firm. We started last year, and we are growing pretty rapidly.

We have quite a few document-understanding processes that we are working on. We are a partner of UiPath, so we have various clients in different industries. Currently, we are processing vendor statements to create payments in NetSuite. We also have a three-way match cache application process, and then we have a basic user interface for scraping vendors' websites for payment data and that kind of thing.

We are trying to figure out how to incorporate LOMs with everyday processes and get reliable information back. We are also training a lot of machine learning models to extract data from PDFs along with processing contracts. I hope that those get easier to train and that there are more reliable answers or outputs from the models that we train.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has fundamentally changed what our organization is able to achieve. Document processing has come a long way and become a lot more user-friendly with validations and Action Center. The straight-through processing has increased.

They are constantly making improvements to Action Center where you have more feasibility in assigning tasks. There is a lot more flexibility and data around it. We have been incorporating insights into our automations, which helps us create a business case for future automations based on what we have done in the past.

The use of AI in our automations has definitely increased the accuracy of our operations. It has also increased the ability to process certain use cases that were not available before. It gives us more opportunities to automate processes, and therefore, drive revenue.

The use of AI in automations has freed up time or resources for other tasks for our customers. The time saved depends on the use case, but they are probably saving about a thousand hours a month on the vendor statement processing. They are getting 2,000 to 5,000 statements a month. Each one takes roughly 45 minutes.

Their core platform of Studio is valuable. The ease of use and the ability to build these automations quickly is definitely a highlight for us. Our average process from start to finish takes three to four weeks. We can knock out automations as quickly as we can identify them. That is probably the best feature I see.

In Action Center, saving progress in data validation, specifically for table content, is currently not available. There should be more clarity around the feedback loop along with the auto-update feature when you deploy machine learning packages. They should give some rule-based options so that if the confidence is returned higher than the previous model trained, then it would auto-deploy. If it is less, then it should send you an email rather than auto-deploy.

With task assignment, if there was a round-robin feature within the bucket to automatically assign it to a certain group of people, that would be helpful. 

There should be the ability to add custom fields to validation tasks because there is a lot of potential for it. It would be helpful when somebody needs to identify a scenario. For example, we have a customer who is processing rate sheets for trucking, and sometimes, depending on their customer, they have an all-in rate versus an adding fuel mileage rate. If they are able to specify that, even if it does not say it on the rate sheet, it would allow them to process more documents successfully.

We use UiPath's AI Center, but some clarity is missing around when to use AI Center versus when to use the Document Understanding module within Orchestrator. We are trying to figure out the benefit of one versus the other. We have also seen that the out-of-the-box models that we train versus a custom model that we train with the same data end up with the same output result at the end. We are trying to see where these out-of-the-box models are providing value if we are going to take the time to train them.

I have been using UiPath since 2019.

We have run into issues with integration services where we developed something, implemented it, put it into production, and all of a sudden, it does not run unattended. It is a very frustrating situation to be in. 

There were some issues with sharing connections between different accounts, and we have learned from that experience to do more upfront testing of new features before we build automation on it. 

Event-based triggers not working is probably the biggest stability issue that we have run into, and integration services not working is probably the biggest gray area. Other than that, it is a stable platform.

It is definitely a scalable platform.

Their support is good. I have had good success with submitting support tickets and getting answers quickly. If it is a bug that is identified with the process or with the platform, they resolve it within a matter of a week. There was a production issue. It was a throughput issue for the AI model. We were not able to access a 100-page document because of this exception. They implemented it and fixed it within a week, which I thought was awesome. I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I did not use any other RPA solution previously. I have only used Power Apps a bit, but it was a very small part that we have looked into. Overall, we are strictly focused on UiPath.

I have probably set up 100 Orchestrators at this point, so it is straightforward. However, the initial setup is confusing for new people who have not done it where they are matching machines to the tenant and plugging it in their machine key, but I am not sure if there is any way to get around that. When you have done it once, it is easy. 

The other thing is the licensing aspect of it. You need to assign a license to the machine template and then the machine template to the folder, and then you have to make sure that the machine is connected. There seems to be some confusion amongst our developers on how to make sure it is all set up correctly, and then you have the robot account. You have to make sure that it is also set up correctly to run unattended automations. It is a challenge, but if you do it two or three times, you get the hang of it.

In terms of the implementation strategy, overall, we look for quick wins upfront so that we can build the program and get support behind it, and then tackle the more advanced use cases after we get three or four in production.

We have cloud deployments. We have had different cloud providers, such as Azure, AWS, and GCP.

We are a consultant. 

We have definitely seen an ROI in terms of hours saved and quality of work. Once you get off the ground, there are a lot of other departments that end up getting excited and looking forward to future automation. I feel that is a win for morale.

Overall, the model is fine except for AI units. It is usage-based, which makes sense if you are processing documents, and you have one unit per page. It is the hosting cost of the models where there are issues, so we are running into potentially designing poor solutions because we are having to say, "If the documents are very similar but different enough, even though you would prefer to use two models, maybe consider not using two because of the hosting costs."

Power Automate is something we might look at. UiPath has orchestration while Power Automate does not. Orchestration is vital for us.

If you are trying to do in-house development, the user experience is much better than any other platform that we have evaluated. It is easy to pick up. The UiPath academy, training, and forums are great. The biggest selling point for me is that you can pick it up as a business user and learn the platform in a matter of days or weeks as opposed to months or years.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We do not have any specific use cases for UiPath. We automate areas where we have a large volume of work.

UiPath makes it easy to build automation because it uses a drag-and-drop interface and requires little coding.

We use UiPath to automate our repetitive processes. This reduces manual effort, freeing up employees to focus on other tasks, such as learning new skills and improving their careers. Doing repetitive tasks on a daily basis does not help employees develop their skills or advance their careers.

An associate in the loan approval process must validate licenses, forms, and certain records of the floor person before approving the loan for the next level. This person goes through a lot of paperwork on a daily basis, which can be very tiring. However, we now have UiPath, which uses artificial intelligence and machine learning to extract all the information from the licenses. This reduces the associate's workload by 50 percent, allowing them to complete the rest of the job more easily.

UiPath's automation has resulted in zero errors.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. The solution includes all of the components necessary for end-to-end automation, from process identification to deployment. End-to-end automation is very important because it can help businesses save time and money. To identify a process that can be automated, we can either speak with the business team or use UiPath's process mining capacity. Process mining is a technique that can automatically analyze business processes and identify areas that can be automated. Once we have identified a process that can be automated, we can use UiPath to create a robot to automate the process.

UiPath's user community is very large with millions of users. Everyone has questions, and if we have a question, we don't have to post and wait for an answer. There is always someone who already answered the question. For example, if I have a question about selectors, there will be answers to my question. The user community is like a database of answers.

UiPath helped our organization by eliminating repetitive job tasks.

UiPath helped us minimize our on-premises footprint, which is important. For example, let's say an employee used to have to come into the office to check papers or documents to determine if a loan could be processed for a particular individual. Now, that employee can do that work remotely. There is no need for them to go to the dealer and collect all the papers, which can then be submitted or uploaded into a software program. The employee can now do all of this work from their computer.

All team members are required to participate in the UiPath Academy courses suggested by UiPath and to complete the certification. Access to UiPath Academy is great because our employees do not have to go to a particular coaching center to get a certification. They can do it on their own, on their mobile devices, at home, or on their laptops. They can learn at their own pace and in their own time. UiPath Academy has excellent examples and assessments for each chapter, which makes it easier to complete the course.

The AI functionality affects our ability to automate more complex processes. For example, in the UK, there are five different types of licenses that individuals may need to obtain in order to be approved for a loan. This means that there are numerous licenses that need to be processed for each loan application. In order to determine whether a license is expired or legitimate, we need to manually review each one. This can be a time-consuming and error-prone process. However, using AI and machine learning, we can automate this process. AI can be used to identify the different types of licenses that are required for a loan application. Machine learning can then be used to train a model to determine whether a license is expired or legitimate. This allows us to automate the entire process, which can save us time and money.

In our data center, we are unable to develop certain processes because existing rule-based automation is not sufficient. End-to-end automation helps our data center implementation.

UiPath helps reduce the cost of our digital transformation and it does not require upgrades or IT application support.

The solution helped reduce human error by 100 percent. We now have zero errors.

UiPath freed up our employee's time to work on other processes that can not be automated.

By eliminating the need for human intervention in repetitive processes, UiPath saved us costs.

The most valuable features are CR capabilities and logistics automation.

UiPath can improve its AS center region by expanding its reach and addressing technical difficulties in certain areas. While the platform works well on-premises, there are some technical issues that can be resolved when moving to the cloud.

I have been using UiPath for five years. 

I give UiPath's stability a nine out of ten.

I give UiPath's scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward. However, it requires some technical knowledge, as we will need to connect to the SQL Server and Elasticsearch to create the tables. There is documentation available online that we can use, and we may also need to contact UiPath for assistance.

One person is enough for the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

We have seen a return on investment with UiPath through the elimination of quality errors.

UiPath is a bit more expensive than other similar solutions, and its price is increasing daily.

We evaluated multiple tools to verify our requirements, cost, licensing, and support capabilities.

I give UiPath a nine out of ten. I recommend UiPath to others.

UiPath does not require maintenance.