UiPath Reviews

We work in the healthcare industry. We are trying to establish a use case for our company to speed up our processes. Because with FDA regulations, there are a lot of processes to follow. There are a lot of phases of implementation to follow. For example, if you want a drug for cancer, a lot of time is spent, but it takes more time to release to the market because of all the manual labor intensive work which is happening. 

Therefore, I am working with legislators and the FDA to see where we can cut paths. There's a lot of scope for automation. UiPath is one of the best product for this.

UiPath is user-friendly, so when we are working with the customer, if they want something immediately they will jump in. We don't have to give the level of estimation, then how much price will be (quote) at all. They don't really talk about the price or the time. They say, "There is a problem," and they are very excited about solving that problem. This excitement is good, and that's what our CEO has always said, "Immersing yourself is always important."

Everyone feels positive when they want to talk about RPA and what they want to do. When we go and explain how easy and adaptable it is, people are happy. It is not complex, because we are simplifying the way how they use it. 

If you're able to discuss and give the layout and the architecture purposeful meaning along with the training, then people can adapt to it well.

It is easy to implement and use to provide training to people. With a lot of other tools, it is more about scripting. Whereas with this solution, it has a more hands on GUI-based feature.

It is easy to use and quick to install.

With every product that we have, there are still improvements needed in some areas. There are certain areas that we need to see improvements: performance, efficiency, and complex environment. We need to work with the product manager on these, and say, "Now that everything has met the industry standards, there's a way to go."

We need to be able to span across a bigger complex network. Right now, the decision-making is based on a five step rule. It would like to see this increased, so we can take on bigger productions and work more efficiently. Also, the performance has to be improved in some areas.

For the last three years, they have been very aggressive. They have been progressing nicely. So far, the stability has been good, because of the continuous product implementation. There has been a focus on the product and everything working. 

The people who started the company are still with the company, and this is a good sign that there is stability. This can be seen in the financial markets. 

Scalability is one of the nice features, because they're able to come up with the UiPath Orchestrator. They have improved this with the 20.18.3 version, which has a lot of good scalability features compared to the previous one. Right now, it is scalable, and there are always new use cases coming out. The more use cases that we pump into the product development team, the more scalability that we will see and more features will be added on, because they can only think of what they have on hand.

Being a partner, I have my own team that I work with.

The UiPath Academy RPA training is good, but we have a good geek squad. Our people have really gone to the community research and downloaded it, so most of my team is self-learning. However, the support people are always available, if needed, when we need some help.

The initial setup is pretty easy, because now my team has been implementing it a lot. For more than a year, we have been a partner. We have been doing a lot of PoCs.

Overall, the steps, documentation, and information are pretty straightforward when it comes to the product, so there is no ambiguity.

The staff that we need for deployment and maintenance depends on the complexity of the process. Typically, we start with a couple of people for the PoC. Depending on how many parallel approaches we have to do, we may increase to four to five people. With that number, we are able to create a good sizable environment and solution. These staff members would be responsible for the architecture, one would be the lead developer, and another would be the functional expert to understand the processes, then there could be a couple of people helping in the development environment and doing all the testing to make sure whatever they have implemented follows the process.

We have use customer support for implementation of the projects because the team is really good.

Some of the return on investments are quick. Because some of the processes that we have implemented, a person who does manual labor over two weeks will see a reduction in hours. Thus, that person is already focusing on some other intellectual work. 

Our goal is not remove all the people, but repurpose their work time in better ways, therefore these people can work better and their throughput is good. So, customers are able understand ROI very quickly.

Its performance benefits are the reduced time, making it is very efficient. If someone is taking two weeks, and now it is takes them ten hours, you already have a performance benefit. 

In terms of product performance, there are still things they need to work on.

I would rate the performance benefits at an eight (out of ten).

If you want to do a demo trial, it is a 30 days free. 

However, the community edition is completely free. Then, people say, "There is nothing to lose, let me try it."

Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism are competitors. They have been in the industry a little longer than UiPath, which is just coming up. One good thing about UiPath is that it is really capturing the market.

1. The company culture: We are an extended family, not just a partner. Their entire team is available to us.
2. As a product, it is really coming up in the market with a different architecture, most which is .NET and C#. For a lot of my developers, it is easy condition for my team to learn more quickly. We have not really used the Academy. My team was able to learn on their own. 
3. The product has more in terms of supportability, predictability, ease of use, and overall culture of organization.
   

We have not really seen anyone moving from Automation Anywhere to displays or some other product.

Our customers want to see:

• Whether it is a viable product.
• Does it make sense for their business. 
• If it does makes sense and are there other companies, why should they go with UiPath?
• What are the benefits compared to other products? 
• What is the benefits that it is giving to the customer?

If I can layer all of those decisions, then I have walked them down the path of the realization of ROI and why they should be doing UiPath. So, it is an easy sell.

We use UiPath for automating tasks for customer operations.

The most valuable aspect is its ease of use. The utilization of AI has resulted in a time-saving of either four or eight hours per week. When analyzing a customer's job workflow, it's done promptly.

There is room for improvement in browser automation, particularly regarding access and success rates. Success and failure recognition are key areas to focus on.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

It is relatively stable, I would rate it seven out of ten, as it should be improved.

I would rate its scalability features six out of ten.

I would rate its support team seven out of ten.

Neutral

We have experience with NTT-AT WinActor and Blue Prism, but we opted for UiPath because it proved to be more effective and reliable.

The initial setup was easy.

It used to come at a high cost, but now it's more budget-friendly. Considering the features it offers, it's definitely a good value for the money.

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

I'm a network engineer at a nuclear power plant, and I oversee multiple crews. I use UiPath to automate the voicemail system, send alerts, and run tests. Our company has about 12,000 employees. 

UiPath has helped to reduce labor costs. 

You can set up processes using macros without basic knowledge of coding.

The hardest part is popularizing UiPath among our employees. 

I have used UiPath for around a year. 

I rate UiPath nine out of 10 for stability. 

UiPath is scalable. 

The South Korean team uses Blue Prism. That's a good solution, but it's too hard to use. 

Deploying UiPath is easy, and I'm teaching my crews. 

It's worth what we pay for it.

The cost isn't important because a good solution isn't cheap. 

I rate UiPath nine out of 10. There are still many other RPA solutions we haven't tried, so I can't say it's the best. 

I use UiPath for invoice processing. We download all the invoices from our application and then send them individually to the respective customers via email. This involves email automation and automation of the user interface.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. When compared to other automation tools, UiPath offers a more user-friendly development platform.

It enables us to implement end-to-end automation, from the basic extraction of data to the complete uploading of data to the respective applications.

UiPath's User Community is excellent. Whenever I encounter challenges or need information about new developments, version changes, or anything related to UiPath, the community is always there to help. Therefore, I find the community extremely valuable.

UiPath can be a useful tool for anyone. It doesn't require a separate environment or the need for a developer. It is beneficial for anyone dealing with any system. Therefore, I believe it can serve as a regular daily process tool, enabling users to automate various tasks effectively. There are numerous possibilities and applications with UiPath.

In my early days of entering this field of development, I completed the UiPath Academy courses to gain a comprehensive understanding of the interface, the approach we should take, and how to utilize the portal functionalities that UiPath offers.

UiPath has been instrumental in reducing human errors by 99 percent in applications that are maintained correctly, particularly in activities such as typing. There are certain tasks where humans are prone to making mistakes while working with applications, but UiPath ensures that such errors are eliminated. Initially, I had some doubts about UiPath's ability to extract data from PDF files, as the UiPath OCR engine seemed to have limitations. Consequently, we started relying on ABBYY FineReader for this task. However, we are now exploring UiPath's UI for document understanding. As a company, we have already developed around 200 to 300 templates using ABBYY FineReader, making it challenging for us to transition entirely to UiPath document understanding at present. Nevertheless, we are considering the shift because the early versions of UiPath were not very efficient, and we couldn't fully rely on it for data extraction. However, with the recent integration of Google Vision, UiPath has significantly improved and is now providing better results in terms of OCR technology.

The user interface is the most valuable feature of the studio version. It allows us to develop all activities and create custom activities as needed. Additionally, it seamlessly integrates with the latest technologies, such as AI, making it very helpful, even for integrating ABBYY FineReader. Users can extract data from the time scripts, which is also a project involving data extraction from all PDF files.

The UiPath Community does not provide version control for the community edition. Let's say I'm currently using a specific version, and then it automatically upgrades the community version to the latest version without the user having the option to decide whether to update or not. Consequently, we cannot use the older versions in the UiPath community edition.

I encountered some issues with my local machine. I created one of the bots using a different version from the community variation, there were problems with compatibility between different versions in UiPath. While those issues used to exist, currently, it has been a long time since I last modified any of the workflows and migrated between servers and my local machine. I'm not entirely certain at the moment, but previously, there were instances where a particular activity in one version would not work in another version and would result in failure. Additionally, sometimes the select task would not identify the select areas in the actual application, even though it worked on the validators. These scenarios are rare but they do occur.

I have been using UiPath for almost two years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath ten out of ten.

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

The initial setup is straightforward.

The licensing fee is moderate and is based on the volume of tasks for which we use UiPath. The cost is satisfactory.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

Currently, we are handling approximately 20,000 units of data on a daily basis. Our focus is on efficiently processing this data and integrating it into the scaled servers. We utilize the scale servers for data connectivity, verification, and storage purposes.

We are currently not using the AI functionality, but our company is anticipating a new project. The assignment of this project will happen very soon, and the company is considering the use of AI for it. However, this decision will ultimately depend on the user and the environment. If we determine that using AI functionality is necessary, we will integrate it into the project. At present, we have not encountered any users who explicitly require AI in their business logic. Therefore, we are not utilizing AI at the moment. Nevertheless, if any future clients request it, we will be prepared to integrate AI functionality accordingly.

Our organization has started using automation with UiPath. Before implementing UiPath, everything was done manually.

If the initial development is done correctly, then the maintenance would actually be significantly reduced. As a developer, we need to ensure that the code is always reviewed by developers, and they should always be available for this purpose. If the initial development is not carried out correctly according to the requirements, then imagine the consequences in the future. The development might need to be revisited for up to 15 years, or at least five years. If it is not done that way, the maintenance cost would be very high because the business processes keep changing. Therefore, to keep the system functioning well and the applications up-to-date, as they are not static, we need to continuously maintain the code. For instance, in the past six months, we've had to make two changes to the application we are working on. Many alterations occurred, such as UI element changes, shifting locations, and complete interface and navigation changes. Hence, it's essential for developers to always keep the code protected and up-to-date.

I recommend conducting a proof of concept using UiPath to ensure that the budget and return on investment are sufficient to implement the solution within an organization.

I have used UiPath for a city utility. The main purpose is if they want to dig in a particular location, they need to know how many pipelines are underneath the road, what the situation is regarding high-tension wires, gas pipelines, et cetera. For that, we needed to go to about 18 websites and scrape the maps from them into a local repository. We use UiPath to save that data from all the websites.

From there, there is an AI/ML solution that identifies the danger signals and notations on the map. It summarizes them and sends them to a mobile application used by a person who is at that location. That person can determine whether they are able to dig in that particular location or not.

UiPath reduces human error by automating a lot of manual steps. 

It also helps free up employee time. The amount of time depends on the use case. For the use case I described above, for the utility, the whole process of preparing one package would take one person two and a half hours. Automating it using UiPath and AI reduced it to two and a half minutes.

In terms of costs, for that use case, it has saved that company 30 to 40 percent.

Scraping with UiPath is easy, as is integration with some services. It's also easy to deploy solutions. 

Building automation takes place in a normal programming environment like Visual Studio. It's the same environment developers use. If you know development, building automation in UiPath is easy. Visually, it's all interactive and easy to work on.

The platform also has features for logging and monitoring things and communicating when there are errors.

The UiPath user community is a very good ecosystem with information about a lot of new features like AI, chat integration, and WhatsApp integration.

For training purposes and certification, we use the UiPath Academy. It's a very good resource and you get very good support from the community.

We also use the solution's AI functionality but so far only on low- to medium-complexity processes.

I would like to see them transition to the cloud and provide services there. That would be an improvement.

Also, it needs more integration with external services, and I would like it to have generative AI and more artificial intelligence features.

I have been using UiPath for about one and a half years.

The stability is good. I am satisfied with it.

The scalability is also good.

UiPath's technical support is good.

Positive

I used Automation Anywhere. I switched because our clients switched since UiPath is cheaper.

There is definitely ROI from using UiPath. Based on the fees and the load of the input, ROI will be calculated and used to decide whether the use case is worthwhile or not. It will be decided in the analysis and discovery phases. If ROI is feasible, only then will development take place.

With UiPath, there is an additional cost for Document Understanding. If the use case demands it, that feature should be used.

Even though our clients may have an Automation Anywhere ecosystem, they choose UiPath due to budget and cost. Apart from cost, both platforms offer almost all the features. However, from a technical perspective, Automation Anywhere has more utilities and components for building bots.

If it weren't for the cost, I would personally choose Automation Anywhere, on the technical side, because it has huge utilities and components for building bots. The move to UiPath is driven by budgets and costs.

As for end-to-end processing, when you are trying to come up with use cases for RPA, you will probably look at existing legacy applications that are not extendable. They won't have any more new releases but we still need to extract value from them. Use cases include reducing the processing steps and manual steps done, day-to-day, by people. End-to-end automation will help to stitch all the gaps and reduce the processing time.

UiPath is not cloud-based yet, so most of the work is done on-premises.

In terms of maintenance, one person on our support team monitors all the bots and attends to any problems.

I would recommend UiPath for small and medium-sized automation. If a company doesn't have a large budget, UiPath is the solution.

We have tried more of the RPA part. We haven't used much of the cognitive part.

We use it for our client purposes. We don't use it much for internal use.

It has helped to automate many processes. One of the places where we have tried it is the Citizen Development Engagement Program. That's where some of the people who were tech-savvy were able to use it properly.

It enables implementing end-to-end automation to an extent. Having a single tool for everything is helpful.

It reduces human error. A person can focus on his or her core activities rather than doing repetitive tasks.

It has freed up employee time. The time saved could be 70% to 80% depending on the use case of an employee.

The product is good. It's highly scalable, and it's stable. Over the last one and a half years, based on whatever we have developed, we've found it to be pretty stable as compared to the other platforms, such as Automation Anywhere.

We have used UiPath Academy courses. In UiPath Academy, there are courses and role-based training programs. They are good and effective. They give you some exercises to perform, and the community edition is also available, which is good.

The cognitive capabilities of UiPath are pretty time-consuming. If that can be improved, it would help a lot.

I'm not using it directly. Our team has been using it for the last seven or eight years. I have some experience with it but not to a very detailed level. 

It's stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

It's scalable. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

Their support was good, but at the same time, for certain areas where we had issues, we had to directly call them up and try to get support from their internal COE teams. I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

Positive

We weren't using any other solution previously.

I wasn't involved in its initial setup.

They would've not directly saved costs, but they certainly would've gotten some value in terms of time efficiency or productivity, which would've indirectly helped them to save costs. The savings also depend on the FTEs freed because of automation.

I didn't evaluate any other solution, but people in my company might have evaluated other options.

Understand the product first, go through their internal training, and then decide whether you like it and how you want to use it.

It can speed up digital transformation or reduce the cost of digital transformation, depending on how you use it and where you use it. This digital transformation doesn't require complex application upgrades, but support upgrades are required.

I've explored UiPath's community, but in a couple of instances, I didn't get any proper responses or proper answers. We had to directly get in touch with the UiPath team for insights and information about the queries we had.

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We have multiple use cases for this solution. We have applications built on Microsoft platforms and we use UiPath for our automation and automation testing. Being able to do this means that we do not need to keep reverting back to test every use case when we complete upgrades. 

We also use this solution for the automation of responses to support tickets. Any tickets that come through that can be automated, rather than it being done manually. 

UiPath has improved the ease of building automations. We were using SeleniumBase testing which is a legacy application and required a lot of manual work to maintain it. 

UiPath has made a significant difference on our staff's workload capacity and freed up team members to take on new endeavors versus getting stuck with manual tasks. 

This solution has been most valuable for our support ticketing processes. This has created efficiencies within our team and freed up time for them to focus on project work. It has prevented the need for them to stop what they are doing to complete a mundane task and then get back to what they were doing. 

We previously built automation repositories before it was offered by UiPath. There's no smooth migration from what we built to the newer studio that they have at the moment. This is the biggest hurdle we are facing. We would also need to rebuild all previous automations built in another solution called SeleniumBase.

I have been using this solution for one and a half years. 

We experienced some performance issues because our libraries are growing and we experience crashes from time to time. This usually means we need to reboot. The stability could be improved in this regard. The ability to handle large-scale applications or multiple applications could be improved as our operations and libraries are going to continue to grow. Currently, our libraries need to be split and this creates more maintenance for us. 

We are satisfied with the scalability. We are aware of new features coming in the future and we will be able to adapt and expand our applications based on these new features. 

The technical support for this solution could be improved. They take longer to respond than I would expect. We would like a 24 to 48-hour SLA in place to manage expectations. 

I would rate their support a six out of ten. This is not due to their ability to resolve an issue. It is due to their lack of transparency and keeping us updated on how issues are being resolved. They are not good at communicating when we can expect our issue to be resolved. 

Neutral

We used SeleniumBase. We needed a solution with enhanced technical capabilities and this is why we switched to UiPath. UiPath offered us a lot in terms of functionality. 

I was a part of the implementation team in our organization where I made sure there were no roadblocks. I was working with UiPath's points of contact and they were coordinating and making sure the implementation happened as planned.

The initial setup was complex. It happened three years ago and we still have some questions about the setup. In order to get answers to these questions, we need to raise a support ticket. I feel like the knowledge of the support individuals could be elevated so we could receive answers right away. 

We implemented this solution in-house. 

We have not yet experienced ROI using this solution as we have only been using it for a year and a half. We don't have control over the domain to see the metrics and KPIs at the moment. We are hoping that once some of our core applications are in operation, we will be able to assess the ROI. 

UiPath has reduced our manual effort and improved the overall efficiency of our team. 

We considered Microsoft's Power Platform which does offer very similar functionality to UiPath including a Desktop AI Builder. However, this solution had limitations that UiPath does not. UiPath is focused on automation and offers a lot of support in this regard whereas Microsoft focuses on so many different areas. 

I would advise others to hang in there for the first six to eight months as the initial learning curve can be frustrating. Once you get a hang of it, you will clearly see the benefit of using this solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. Our test automations need to be improved for migration purposes and overall performance could be improved. If those two were resolved, I would give it a ten out of ten. 

We work with TMS, a technology-management resolution division. We use UiPath to read the PDF documents that we get. We manage a business service for TMS and as part of that business contract, we read the PDFs and enter that information. We get that information out via documents from the templates where we have to enter information related to that particular case. 

These are the use cases that we are currently working on, but we are also looking to use this for quality assurance of all the steps because this is a highly visible, very critical process for TMS. We have to make sure that everything is done on time and that all of the information is relevant and responsive. Quality assurance is a big deal for us, and we are looking to use UiPath quality checks at different stages in the process.

We are in the initial stages, so I can't really say that we have achieved a whole lot of efficiencies using UiPath yet. We hope to achieve a whole lot of efficiency when it comes to the documents. Right now it takes about 45 minutes to do this process manually, to read that entire form. It is going to be reduced to two minutes. That is a huge efficiency gain, and that is the value that it will add.

When it comes to the ease of building automations, UiPath offers many libraries for developers to use. It's fairly easy to code it. 

We definitely expect that it will save us costs and human error. There is a lot of critical information in these forms and there is a human error because we process huge volumes. Obviously, when a robot is doing it, that human error will be reduced to a minimum.

The hope is that employees will be able to allocate their time to different work.

We use the Academy. We are enrolled in the partner program, and we have used a lot of courses from the Academy. It keeps us up to date and up to speed with the solution. Although, our needs right now are very focused and limited because we are just starting. I'm sure as we grow and as we advance in our RPA journey, there will be enough documentation and courses for our needs. 

Most of our PDFs are scanned PDFs and the OCR does not always capture all the information correctly. That's why the document understanding feature will be good for us. 

We have been using UiPath for about four months now. 

We haven't seen any issues with stability. It's definitely been good.

We have used technical support when I had some issues installing the system. 

I am looking for ways to get the technical support we need faster. 

I think that the pricing for the basic attended robot Studio is great. I think that all of the new features that they are rolling out if they are reasonably priced, they'll be useful because for people like the ones working on our projects who are funded by the government, they have a cap on how much they can spend.

Keeping the price in a reasonable range would be beneficial, and it'll be more usable and more in reach for people.

We considered Blue Prism, but through our research, we chose UiPath because of what they've already achieved with CMS. We thought it would be the best solution. 

The UiPath website has a lot of information and the Academy offers a lot of courses. I heard from different people in different industries and markets that this is the best solution. It's worth a try. There is more work in the beginning when you are getting it set up. But there are a lot of benefits, and you don't have to wait months and months to see them. You can start seeing the benefits early on.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.