UiPath Reviews

Our company, Block Mosaic, automates the creation and management of DeFi (decentralized finance) applications. This involves streamlining the development, deployment, and maintenance of these applications by automating repetitive and rule-based tasks. UiPath enables us to automate tasks such as data collection, communication with customers, integration with blockchain networks, and the execution of smart contracts.

We mostly use UiPath for the integration of bots in websites, as it provides integration features for AI chatbots, and we use it for the deployment of smart contracts on a large scale.

Automation not only accelerates our application development but also reduces errors and increases operational efficiency. It has accelerated our development process, and that means that our time-to-market has improved for DeFi applications, giving us a competitive edge in the fast-moving blockchain sector. It allows our team to focus on innovation and improving the user experience of DeFi applications.

UiPath is very important for our organization. It improves the workflow of our company, and it helps our company publish more DeFi applications. It helps accelerate the process of managing accounts in our company, as the DeFi applications we create are for managing many accounts on a platform.

It has helped with cost-cutting because UiPath chatbots have replaced many of the employees. The employees were not that efficient in comparison to UiPath bots. The bots are very efficient and productive and can do tasks in just minutes or hours, things that used to take a lot of hours to do.

We have also used the AI functionality by integrating AI chatbots into our website using UiPath. They help with amusing chats with our users for their entertainment. Our users do not like the simple Python or bots that are made with C++. They like modern bots like ChatGPT, so we have implemented that.

AI has played a significant role in improving our efficiency. Tasks that a person used to do in hours are completed by AI chatbots in a shorter time. Also, human error has been reduced when compared to bots. The bots are highly efficient. The AI functionalities have helped us manage all the smart contract deployments as well as the management of our user base. It has also helped with database and account management and in settling many transactions. And it has boosted the number of KYCs that are managed per unit.

Deploying most of the smart contracts and managing our user base are now done by the UiPath bots. This saves us about 30 to 40 percent of our time and gives us time to think more creatively about our solutions for making better DeFi apps and improving their functionalities.

Another benefit is that UiPath has reduced the cost of digital transformation because our projects require a lot of web services. We have saved money by using UiPath instead of cloud services.

One of the best features is the workflow automation. That is the most valuable feature for our company, as it plays a pivotal role in the efficient development of our DeFi applications. In the dynamic world of DeFi, where integrated financial processes and smart contracts are the norm, UiPath's workflow automation capabilities provide us with a valuable advantage. It enables the orchestration of complex sequences of tasks involved in DeFi application creation, from smart contracts to blockchain transaction monitoring.

By automating these workflows, we can ensure that all components work harmoniously and efficiently and reduce potential human error.

UiPath is also a very easy platform to use. It provides us with a canvas where we can draw from our imaginations, draw our settings, and then convert them to automations.

It allows us to enable end-to-end automation.

The user community of UiPath is very big and very helpful as well. When our team hits an error, the community is sometimes very helpful. And the customer support we are getting is also very full and good. I am satisfied with the community. I would rate it 10 out of 10.

The debugging capabilities need to be improved in UiPath because it is very difficult to find bugs in the chatbot. In Visual Studio Code, by contrast, we have an excellent debugger that fixes all the bugs.

Also, task management is complex and needs to be improved. They need to simplify the user interface so it can work properly.

I have been using UiPath for six months.

It offers a great amount of stability, and the team at UiPath is adding more and more features that are increasing the stability of the platform.

UiPath demonstrates excellent scalability with its consistent addition of features. It's impressive to witness that it remains current and continues to evolve and incorporate new capabilities. I rate the scalability at nine out of 10. It offers a great deal of scalability.

I used Blue Prism, which is quite a good solution, but it's not as easy as UiPath because it requires a high level of coding. UiPath offers good drag-and-drop functionality, which results in better automation. Also, there is no orchestrator in Blue Prism.

Automation Anywhere does not have the features that UiPath has. It does not have as good a web-based orchestrator as UiPath, which manages all the accounts and services.

Deploying the system took a couple of hours, done by a team of three to four people.

It doesn't require any maintenance.

After implementing UiPath, our organization realized a substantial return on investment. This was achieved through a combination of cost savings, increased productivity, and improved accuracy. We quantified the cost savings from reducing labor expenses and eliminating error-related costs. There is also ROI from optimizing overall operational efficiency.

Furthermore, UiPath automation capability significantly improved productivity, allowing us to process more and more transactions, take on more and more customer needs, and respond to the customers as fast as possible. We have been able to handle the increased workload. This has translated into enhanced customer satisfaction and market competitiveness.

By automating error-prone tasks, we also saw a remarkable reduction in errors and compliance-related issues, leading to further cost reductions and process efficiencies. After factoring in deployment and maintenance costs, we calculated a positive ROI, and the payback period for our initial investment was achieved in a very short timeframe.

We've seen about 30 percent ROI through the growth of our company.

The price of the Enterprise version is high, and the licensing is very complex. For small businesses like ours, licensing is a very complex task and takes too much time. I face many issues with that.

All our people, about 50 to 60 staff, use UiPath because we do not have an alternative. There is Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, and Microsoft Power Automate, but UiPath is the best solution. The only issue is that the pricing is higher, but it has all the features that make it worth it.

UiPath has reduced a good amount of human error, but there are some errors that the chatbots make. They are resolved within seconds or minutes, although longer ones can take hours. But overall, the bots make many fewer errors and increase efficiency. It has removed about 80 percent of human errors. Since using UiPath, we have gotten good customer reviews about the websites and improvements in all our sites and management.

Using UiPath has been a great experience. It's the best alternative on the market. No alternative is better than UiPath.

We use UiPath primarily to drive efficiency within the company and introduce a new technology, which is only going to become more popular and more prevalent in the industry in the next few years.

At the moment, we use Orchestrator, Studio, and unattended robots.

We invested in an RPA solution because competitors were doing it. They do it because it's the next wave of this industry, the fourth industrial revolution. Everyone's saying that you can't escape it. It's also because our company, in the shared services department, is thinking about how to challenge our existing models. Traditionally, you chose whether to take the processes onboard or streamline them offshore, but robotics and automation are a competitive alternative to outsourcing. It's very easy. We are challenging the status quo and making sure we're evaluating all our options effectively.

We had a process that was very manual and repetitive and took a team of 14 people, all keying in manually. Now, we've managed to automate it and save 14 employees worth of effort, which amounts to around 14,000 hours to date.

We run our automations in a virtual environment as well. We do Citrix environments when we're working with our offshore partner. We do it on Citrix when working locally. Both work well. I know UiPath has developed a lot on the Citrix platform lately, so it's getting better and easier to do.

Within my immediate team, I have eight people and we can also involve the other operational teams. Including everyone who's related to automation across IT and ops and us, you're probably looking about 20 or 30 people.

The main value within Orchestrator is definitely the scheduling aspect. That includes the way you can prioritize work and use queuing systems to make sure they're at the right points in time, as well as whether they'd be long term related, especially if we're looking at finance.

In terms of Studio, it's just getting easier to use. Studio X is basically the embodiment of that. Even at this point in time with the current Studio version, anyone could pick this up and run with it to develop simpler automations.

The best feature about unattended robots is that they do exactly what you ask them to do. They are as reliable as the code that you provide them with. I think as long as you've got the right governance in place, such as IDs you have created, and you looped in the right teams, the robots are just the shell that will do exactly what you ask them to do.

I'd rate the ease of use of automating our processes at three and a half out of five at this point in time. That is because we've been on a journey over the past year or so and it's not been smooth sailing. There have been issues. I'm not saying that UiPath's support hasn't been great. It has been, but there is still a lot of work to do. It's still a relatively new product in terms of the grander scene of the industry. There's still a lot of work to do there to make sure that the integrations with existing software providers as well as new ones and API connectivities are as they should be. Often, you'll find yourselves using the workarounds in order to address issues that they haven't quite solved yet. I know that's constantly being improved, but that is the journey that we've been on.

One of the issues is with the acquisition of new types of software and new companies. It's important to introduce process documentation and make sure that it's not just making it look like UiPath products, but making it feel and act like one to us. They need to make sure it's embedded and the integration is seamless. They should just keep improving how easy it is to use. I think it's very good already, but there's always room for improvement.

I would rate the product's stability as three and a half, based on our experience. This relates directly back to where we've had challenges. Some of the integration with more mainstream products, like Excel, for example, has been questionable at times. It's just striking that balance between the fact that we want it to be democratized and easy to use by everyone, while we don't want to be in a position where we're forced out of the route to use macros necessarily within Excel. We want the UiPath software to be just as quick and easy to use as that more technical solution. Otherwise, we lose the benefit of having it. It shouldn't be technically inhibited.

I think their support offerings are good. They're very responsive. I think the challenge that they face though, is that they don't always have the answer. They don't always know what the real root cause is. Unfortunately, that's where the real crap piece comes in, which is both a blessing and a curse. It gives me some way of getting around it but it doesn't give me confidence that the issue will be addressed.

It probably took us about nine months to deploy, from the initial UiPath license to implementing the first robot in production. The reason for that is the learning curve of the team as well as the education across the operational teams to bring them up to speed and make sure that everyone's on the same journey. We were also working very closely with IT to make sure that we've got the right infrastructure in place, as well as support models, governance frameworks, etc. Without it, you can't really get anything done. It's a new technology and it was a new concept for everyone. Needing a robot ID, for example, was something that was never discussed before. Lengthy conversations had to be had to make sure that we weren't putting anything at risk with data privacy, for example.

The setup was both straightforward and complex, really. Some bits we're quite straightforward, but other parts were more complex. Especially the infrastructure we're still dealing with now one year on still has some complexities. We're still thinking about credential management versus the use of virtual machines and whether we should be using high density or not. There is also the matter of all the different types of offerings. There's a matrix that you have to abide by and I don't think UiPath is even aware of all the conflicts between the different options. That's something that we're still working through right now, but I'm sure they're going to address it.

We outsourced the implementation.

The performance benefits usually you would see instantly. We had a realization that there were some process changes that we probably needed to make, which we hadn't done prior to going live. I think it took us probably three months before we really saw the benefit coming through.

It's the same as what you would see on any of their list prices. There is also a corporate discount because of scale. Overall, we think it was a competitive price offering. They were the cheapest out of the three, so that's why we went with them.

We looked across the big three: Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. We did have a few others we considered, such as Kofax and Pegasystems. However, they're not dedicated RPA tools. That narrows you down immediately to probably select one of the top three dedicated RPA providers.

UiPath is a very unique example of being very technology-based from its history, but also its culture is very different to the other two. They're trying to be humble. UiPath has a different background and cultural fit, which is very much like our company. That was definitely one of the reasons we chose them. The other reason was the views. We just find it easier to use. The strategy, especially at the point in time when it was announced where the product was headed, was very much that they're trying to push this out to a robot for every person. We want everyone to be able to access it, too.

Do what you would normally do with any vendor. Check out the competition and see what is right for your company. I'll be shocked if you don't think that UiPath is the best because there's a reason why it's at the top of the Gartner reports all over the shop. It's got great user feedback on places like IT Central Station and other review boards. There is absolutely a reason for that. Also, assess the other values that you place importance on. It's not all about costs. Cultural fit was a massive deal for us. What would you envision your company looking like with the uptake of automation? Is it a cultural thing? Is it purely about efficiency or do you want everyone to be up-skilled for what the workforce in the future will look like? That means that actually having everyone being able to access the tools is very important.

I would rate UiPath as eight out of ten.

I have used the UiPath Academy RPA training, although not completed it. I am a bit busy doing a few of the bits, but a lot of my team have completed level one and some completed level three. I have one member of my team who just completed all the training available online. He's done every single module that you have available, including obviously the RPA Advanced Developers training. I think there is a wealth of knowledge there. It's incredible, but it's the same training material that's used internally for UiPath as well as other companies. I think as long as they stay on top of it and make sure that it never gets overlooked, it's a great resource for anyone to get, in order to up-skill in the new technology. If they constantly talk about the democratization of RPA, this is fundamental to that.

The training has helped my team get up to speed, apply best practices, and make sure that we're not wasting time. We were trying to work it out for ourselves in a bit of a haphazard manner. It also forces standardization, of course. Anyone else who decides to get qualified can use it. If you're thinking about doing attended automations, I think it's the right way to do it. Everyone has the same set of standards and rules to build off of.

I would rate the training as four and a half out of five because there's always room for improvement. However, I think it's very thorough and they've covered all the aspects, both technical and not technical. It is very impressive.

I think there are different perks to using one type of robot as opposed to another. The unattended robot cost is higher, therefore the need to make sure the utilization rate is high is paramount to getting your value out of it. I think that makes it challenging but worthwhile. There are different types of processes you will end up pushing towards with an unattended automation profile, whereas an attended profile, which we're starting to move into now, leads to other types of automation opportunities. Attended robots are cheaper, which means it is easier to achieve ROI, but you can almost expect less utilization because it won't be people's full-time jobs. They won't get back all the time and there will be licenses to honor which are being consumed. That has to be baked into the business case. I think you will end up with a portfolio of both. The big opportunities probably sit within an unattended fashion.

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

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

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

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

The UiPath user community is extremely active and knowledgeable.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for four years.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

We have 55 UiPath users in our organization.

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

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

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

We're focusing heavily on document understanding processes. We use it to extract invoices, data tables from PDFs, budget, and PITBULL automation that's heavily focused on UI navigation and PDF manipulation. That's our main focus at the moment.

We've had a few calls with UiPath where they've shown demos on how they use the AI Center, but we've yet to find something that we can look in and see because we are a financial institution. We want to trust AI. We need to build our confidence in that before we actually implement it. It's at an experimental stage for us.

It started off as optimizing redundant processes to make sure that we enhance department abilities. We moved into the research sphere last year, where we focused on taking large datasets and throwing them up into data tables, and getting that data from PDFs or web pages. We started using data extraction and table extraction, and that's what drove our projects from that point. 

Document Understanding is a key feature for us. We find that really useful because the OCR technology, the RedJack extraction that it uses, is easy to implement with a very level structure involved, even for unstructured PDFs and structured PDFs. 

We mainly use Studio and Action Center. 

In some cases, we use Task Capture to build outflows.

We started off as pure RPA, focusing on building out a citizen developer program with low code person-by-person automation that users can trigger by themselves. That then evolved into unattended automation. We started looking into document understanding processes and trying to get involved with the AI Center as well. 

From the start of the citizen developer program, it went really successfully. We moved into the unattended sphere, and we're looking into big data.

The document understanding has room for improvement. The handwritten documents need to be optimized further on the OCR extraction, making sure that we extract accuracy above 80% because we do see a lot of failure rates when it comes to handwritten documents. There's a lot of room for improvement there.

UiPath has referred to the fact that they are still building upon OCR and document understanding. But with the use of Generative AI, we're hoping to see improvements. We're hoping that might be something that we start later on. 

I have been using UiPath for four years. 

The stability of UiPath really depends on who builds the automation. 

However, the latest version releases, such as 2023.4.4, have been known to contain bugs. For example, we recently upgraded to 2023.4.4 and faced a lot of studio bugs, which forced us to downgrade to 2023.4.2. 

The upgrades on other orchestrators were fine, but there was a bit of a change to the UI that took some time to get used to.

Upon their version releases, there should be a bit more due diligence before they are pushed to customers because almost every time we're given the opportunity to upgrade, there are issues where we have to scale back, wait a while, and then upgrade again.

Scalability depends on the team. It depends on your vision, but UiPath definitely opened the doors for making sure that the framework is in place and that they are aligned with our vision so that they can help us in terms of scaling the automation to the degree that we want. 

When we are looking to scale up the automation that we have, the customer support guys are very much on hand to give us the technical support that we require. UiPath's scalability is pretty enhanced. 

When you buy the enterprise licenses at the tier that we're on, you're provided a technical or client manager, and we find that we can easily contact them. 

We have a weekly call with our team, and any support question is rerouted through them because their portal can be a bit slow at times. 

UiPath's endorsement of the community has helped drive the success of UiPath because no other RPA vendor really has the community of support that UiPath has. That's a big one for us.

UiPath does have a good community, but the support portal is probably something that they need to work on. 

Neutral

We use Power Automate as well. It is something that we try to marry with UiPath, especially when it comes to office app integration and things like that. Power Automate is simpler to use. 

We previously had some free Prism automation, and then we decided to switch over to UiPath simply due to the fact that the cost savings were a lot better.

Orchestrator was a selling point for us because our control room is something that we would be very interested in in terms of monitoring insights and transactional items. That's why we switched over to UiPath.

We've tried to take both tools and get the best out of both worlds. Anything that any of our automated processes involve Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, Outlook, or anything like that, we tend to use Power Automate simply because of the ease of use. 

We're using the local installation. Everything is localized to our premises. We have a lot of strict protocols, being a financial institution, so, we don't really want to open ourselves up to any sort of cloud orchestration.  

We tried to utilize Automation Hub to predict our ROI. The reason that we're using automation is to assist teams rather than just kick the task away from them. It's just very robust. 

We haven't seen any major cost savings, but we're an early team at Cowen. Maybe later on down the line, we'll get some solid figures.  

The pricing is a bit convoluted. We have an overallocation of licenses at the moment. Citizen developer licenses are something that we probably need to refine. 

They probably oversell it a bit to the point where we would propose that we may use x amount of licenses but in reality, we're probably only using a fraction of that.

There's room for improvement in how they sell their product.

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. Out of all the RPA vendors that I've had access to, UiPath is the easiest to use. It's the most in-depth when it comes to being able to have automation and it works in the way that you want it to work. Other vendors like Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, or Power Automate have rigid models. Some of them are web-based, which we don't really like because we're a financial institution, so we like local installations. UiPath tops them all.  

For anyone looking to enter the world of automation, UiPath should be the first point to call. They have a much better idea of how to generate a productive automation team for companies. 

We mainly use UiPath for automation testing processes. I am from delivery and project management, and I have a team member under me who is developing automation processes for me.

We had five members on our team when we started in 2019, and now we have 70 people in-house. We have achieved a very good scale in the last five years. We started with UiPath, and we have started adding other tools over the last one and a half years. Till mid-2023, we were just on the UiPath platform, but now we've expanded to other tools. We are the only organization across the globe that has achieved certifications in Document Understanding.

The most valuable features of UiPath are test automation, test suite, test manager, and document understanding.

Communication mining and process mining can be enhanced in UiPath. UiPath should improve its licensing because its competitors offer a cheaper and more sustainable model for even small-scale industries. Any company that wants to adopt UiPath has to pay straight away and then use it.

I have been using UiPath since 2015.

We haven't faced any issues with the stability of the solution because it is continuously evolving and upgrading. In some instances, we found that some solutions we had built in the past were failing, but that could be quickly fixed with their suggestions.

I don't feel any other tool has that much accuracy and stability of the applications. UiPath is a very scalable solution, and we can integrate it with any other application.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight to nine out of ten.

UiPath's support team has to improve a little because their responses regarding production incidents are not too quick. Initially, they try to resolve issues by email and connect on a call if that doesn't work. I think they have to improve a lot in this area. I rate the solution’s technical support a six or seven out of ten.

Neutral

In my previous organizations, I used Robot Framework and Power Automate.

The initial deployment of UiPath is easy.

We have several in-house experts who can deploy the solution. If we struggle with something, we seek the help of all the resources in our team. Mostly, we don't take any external help for deployment. If required, we reach out to UiPath for something that is missing or not working. However, that is just 2% to 3% of the complete processes. We manage the rest, 98% of the process, among ourselves.

Compared to other RPA tools, UiPath is a much more expensive solution.

UiPath's implementation depends on the process and budgeting. If clients have a good budget, we proceed with UiPath. Otherwise, we suggest some other solutions. Sometimes, we need to minimize the time frame to do the repetitive task. Manually, people take a longer time to process any files. We are automating the processes to streamline them and minimize the team members' costs and efforts.

If we have multiple tools involved, we have to put a lot of effort into analyzing them. If we directly go to development without thinking or analyzing, we lose time and effort. That's why it is very important to analyze the tools in depth. If the processes are straightforward, we suggest some improvements, which would be much easier. If multiple applications are involved, it takes a longer time. The complex process also requires some improvement, and based on that, we suggest whether to go ahead with UiPath or not.

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation for 90% of the processes. End-to-end automation is always important for us because it creates business for us. When we implement UiPath for the client, each client will be satisfied and happy with us, and we can get more business.

UiPath's user community is very helpful. We learn about different technologies and aspects when we get involved with the user community. Sometimes, we interact with problems that we have never worked on. We learn about such challenges and their solutions because of the solution's user community.

If you are struggling somewhere, you can post the issue on the user community forums and get an immediate response. With UiPath support, we have to wait for 24 hours to get a resolution. We get quick responses in community forums because experts respond to us. Compared to other solutions, UiPath's community forum is much stronger.

Most of our resources are first going ahead with UiPath Academy courses. After that, we give training because that is a basic point to start with. We are even onboarding the freshers. We ask them to go through their Academy courses, and after that, we allocate an in-house mentor. It will be much easier for us after they have an outline in their mind regarding the processes they have to go through. Once they finish it, we have an internal assessment and a training team that will assist in complex use cases.

The biggest benefit of UiPath Academy is its proper outline and structure in terms of education. Anyone who can follow will at least get 40% to 50% of the learning from there. After that, they will learn a lot based on their practices. They can practice some examples from there if the basic concept is clear. The courses are structured in such a way that even kids can also start with them. The courses in UiPath Academy are well structured and planned.

We cannot add the solution's AI functionality for every project. Around 50% of the projects we have done so far are related to AI. AI is helping a lot in terms of AI Center. The AI functionality helps connect with each application and for documenting. The solution’s AI functionality has enabled us to automate more processes overall.

Other than licensing costs, the solution reduces the cost of digital transformation. Our complete business depends on UiPath. As a solution-based company, we are automating the processes. We don't have manual resources except the project manager and business analyst to analyze the processes. Our complete business depends on the solution's automation or the AI model.

UiPath has freed up employee time for us. We have delivered two projects to a European-based client. UiPath has freed 90% of employee time in one of the processes and 85% in the other. It was a very big logistic company where we implemented UiPath using a Document Understanding to extract all invoices and feed them into the application. Earlier, they used to allocate these tasks to nine resources. Now, one resource can handle everything.

We have been expanding into other tools for the last year, but UiPath has been beneficial and has saved us overall costs. We don't have any licenses with us. We just provide the solution. We deploy UiPath on-premises or on the cloud, depending on the end user's requirement.

UiPath is usually deployed across multiple locations and departments. Maintenance will be required for UiPath in terms of new functionality during upgrades. I would recommend the solution to other users.

We always suggest to every client and whoever reaches out to us not to proceed with UiPath without having proper knowledge. We say this because of the licensing cost and several factors involved. If the processes are just one time, it's not recommended to use them. Overall, the learning is good. If anyone wants to try UiPath, they should first explore smaller processes and then proceed to the bigger ones.

Whenever new upgrades are available, sometimes they break the functionality, which we have faced a few times. If you are using version 12, stick with that and disable the updates directly from UiPath. First, try on the smaller instances, then proceed with the bigger ones. Otherwise, some production activity might fail.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use UiPath to automate various processes in the energy industry, including invoice processing and contract registration.

Building automation using UiPath is easy.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. This is important for the impact of the work and the satisfaction of the client.

The UiPath User Community offers great value because it allows us to find support, ask questions, and collaborate and share with other members.

UiPath has improved our organization by enabling us to automate repetitive tasks.

UiPath has helped minimize our on-premises footprint.

We utilize the Academy courses to prepare for certification. The Academy, a structured learning environment, provides me with the opportunity to acquire knowledge systematically. While it offers a wealth of valuable information, it primarily serves as a foundation for earning the certification. To gain practical experience and proficiency with the tool, additional hands-on work is necessary. Nonetheless, the Academy courses serve as a valuable starting point.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation. The digital transformation does not require expensive or complex application upgrades.

UiPath has helped reduce human error.

UiPath helps save around 80 percent of our client's time.

UiPath has saved us thousands of dollars over the years.

While I haven't explored all of UiPath's features yet, I'm interested in using some of them to discover potential use cases, scenarios, and projects relevant to my work. For instance, the collection center functionality seems promising. It allows clients to create tasks, fill in fields, trigger activities, and log execution process details. Additionally, verifying and managing jobs while switching between different items.

In UiPath, when debugging an issue, we cannot revert to previous steps while retaining variable values. Compared to Blue Prism, UiPath presents greater difficulty in troubleshooting bugs. 

The orchestrator may occasionally disconnect and lose communication with the machine, failing to provide real-time warnings. Additionally, error messages displayed throughout the solution lack clarity and conciseness. Furthermore, workflow names cannot contain spaces or symbols, leading to complications during package download within the project. However, no warning is issued for such naming inconsistencies.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath is not 100 percent stable but it is within acceptable range.

UiPath is scalable and it allows us to build scalable solutions.

We use both UiPath and Blue Prism, depending on our client's specific needs. However, in most cases, we recommend and utilize UiPath as our preferred solution.

The initial deployment was straightforward, but it does require some fine-tuning. I use the framework for deployments and customize it according to our client's needs.

One person is enough for the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

UiPath provides a good return on investment. It saves on employee costs through automation.

UiPath pricing is average.

I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

The environments and number of endpoints we deploy UiPath in vary by client.

One to three people are usually required for UiPath maintenance.

We managed over 500 global tasks worldwide, leveraging UiPath to automate procurement, financial accounting, customer service processes, and customer relations.

We evaluate resumes through the RPA and ChatGPT four. We also arrange service for customers who need repairs to their devices through automation we developed using UiPath.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation. The end-to-end automation is important because it allows us to reduce our testing and reporting time from 28 hours down to 15.

UiPath has helped us shorten the time for our supply chain and revenue report generation. By using UiPath Document Understanding the OCR can read the PDF documents and automatically drop the file into the ERP system significantly reducing our time.

UiPath has streamlined our operations by digitizing our documentation and converting it to easily accessible PDF files. This has significantly reduced our physical footprint, eliminating the need for paper storage and manual document handling.

As a partner of UiPath in our region we are required to take all the Academy courses so we can better service our clients and share our use cases.

We have 1,000 clients around the world, each with unique invoice formatting preferences. Our AI system efficiently sorts these invoices based on their specific formats. By automating more processes through AI, we've significantly improved efficiency. For example, while standard OCR takes a minute to process a PDF invoice, our AI system does it in just two seconds.

UiPath has helped speed up our digital transformation. We have created a large data lake to help with analytics.

We require human verification for the final invoice numbers. Using UiPath the number of human errors has been reduced to one percent.

UiPath has saved ten percent of our employees' time by automating the invoicing process, translating the invoice language, and emailing it to the original user.

UiPath helps save costs. We can keep the license costs down by using one API license to convert all our PDF files into Word.

UiPath is well-suited for automating tasks within Oracle applications and can be deployed on-premises or in the cloud. This flexibility is particularly advantageous when dealing with sensitive data that cannot be migrated to the cloud for security reasons.

UiPath needs to improve its integration with Microsoft products such as Office, SharePoint, and PowerPoint.

I have been using UiPath for two years.

UiPath is stable.

UiPath can scale to our needs.

The technical support is good. We rarely have to use them.

Positive

For general automation needs, we choose Microsoft Power Automate due to its cost-effectiveness compared to UiPath. However, for Oracle-centric automation, where stability is paramount, we rely on UiPath.

The initial deployment was complex. Many settings within the orchestrator need to be set before running a job. Once we implemented UiPath we had our user team keep an eye on it for one month to ensure it was stable, scheduling only attendee jobs before moving onto more complex automation.

In our region, we have a team of 15 to 25 people for the deployments and a smaller team of five in North America.

We implement UiPath in-house.

UiPath is expensive compared to the competition. We pay a license fee that is over 20,000 USD.

We evaluated Automation Anywhere, Power Automate, and UiPath. Automation Anywhere and UiPath are more expensive than Power Automate.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We do require the assistance of IT to help increase our digital transformation.

Maintenance is required when updates are made to a process or component. Our team of 25 is responsible for the maintenance as well.

We use the solution for robotic process automation. We use it across the value chain for our business. We've used it in accounts, including cash management, and in HR for management tasks and IT for password resetting. 

The automation has been quite useful. It's been helpful in our journey towards transformation. 

I've used this solution for a while and I utilize the whole tool and get a lot of benefits out of it. 

It helps save time. We've had efforts that would take more than four hours a day, yet, when done through UiPath, it takes less than a minute.

The useability is very good - even for non-technical people. I'm an accountant by education and now I'm also an automation expert by profession. Its interface is user-friendly to those of us who are non-technical.

Anyone who wants to automate any task that is rule-based and repetitive can do it through UiPath.   

We can use the solution for automation emails or notifications.

It enables end-to-end automation. We developed a use case where people from different business units have large amounts of data, Excel files, we've made it so that we can combine it and enter it into the ERP system. Everything can be checked via the rule book and can create the report and send back the information to the customer. It simplifies the data and organizes and compiles it for them. Users have gotten the benefit of five FTEs by using UiPath. It saved many man-hours. 

I haven't used the UiPath Community too much. I often Google questions to find answers. It is a good place to go for development work, though. 

It reduces our footprint. We historically did have many items on-prem. I like it on-prem and on the desktop.

It can reduce the cost of digital transformation. Where processes can have faster response times, UiPath helps with efficiency. However, if the response time of the application is slow, and we need to provide workarounds, it isn't helpful in that it hasn't efficiently helped us save time.

UiPath reduces human error by 100%. Whatever you give to the robot, it will do it correctly. That said, it needs to be programmed correctly - if it's programmed wrong, it will do it 100% wrong. If it's programmed right, it does it 100% right. 

It's freed up human time. It's not well-utilized in that sense. It should be available to everyone so that they can find ways to save time by creating their own automation according to what they need.

There are a few shortcomings. For example, even in their latest version, there are still older features even though they've introduced new ones in parallel. They should do something where they update the solution and then close off the older version after a year or something like that. That might help with standardization. 

Sometimes it is very useful for automation. However, sometimes it is really, really frustrating when it is unable to manage the more dynamic items. When an element is stable, it's great. When it comes to changes to IDs or the dynamics of the website, it lets us down in front of our customers. It needs to be better at handling volumes of data. 

Automation on the cloud has had issues. It can be slower. 

The Academy classes could be improved. There should be a portal for use cases. There should be more business examples.

They should offer different licensing tiers, especially for daily individual users. 

I've been using the solution since 2016, more than five years. 

It is a stable product. There were some issues while interacting with different applications. For example, with Microsoft, we have issues with One Drive. When UiPath is working on a file, it cannot quickly get to the file. We need to move the file to a local drive before processing the data. Microsoft applications seem to give it trouble. 

We have multinational business units. Company-wide, maybe 500 people are using it. Where I am, there may be a team of ten people working with it and 50 to 60 automations. The solution is in multiple locations and departments. 

The solution is scalable. It depends on how an organization wants to utilize it. 

Technical support is very flexible, however, they do not respond quickly. Sometimes they just tell us "this is how it works" and we have to try to explain our framework.

Neutral

I have also tried Blue Prism. I didn't work with it much; I just studied it theoretically. 

I also tried to work with Power Automate. Initially, it wasn't very good, however, later, it began to echo the style and functionality of UiPath.

UiPath is easy to use and easy to get started with. 

The deployment was a long journey. I was one of the first people in Pakistan to use it. Now, once you get a license, you can deploy it in two weeks. However, it depends on the complexity of the processes in terms of deploying automation.

We have around ten people maintaining the solution. It requires a lot of maintenance. If anything needs to be changed in the target application, it needs to be incorporated into the robot. 

Someone told us you do need three to five years before you get an ROI. However, in our first year, we were able to save more than 8,000 hours. 

The solution is on the expensive side. 

There should be standardized packages. If an organization already has a license with UiPath, UiPath should offer special licenses to each employee so that each employee has their own UiPath automation capabilities for each of their individual tasks.

There should be regional packages and costs. Different regions cannot necessarily afford UiPath. What is affordable in Europe may not be affordable somewhere else. 

We're a UiPath customer. We serve internal customers with robots.

We do not use the UiPath AI functionality, however, we are on a journey towards building our own internal solution. 

I'd like to see UiPath cut the cost of their license. For end-to-end automation, for developers, I understand why it needs to be expensive, however, for day-to-day users, it should be cheap. 

I'd recommend the solution to new users. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It's still the best out of all related products.