UiPath Process Mining Reviews

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

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

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

I have been using this solution for two months.

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

Customer support is excellent. My CSMs are phenomenal.

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

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

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

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

The solution is primarily used in a few pilot projects. I don't have too much production experience just yet.

I like how they handle process work. It's amazing. It's very customizable, and you can visualize different items. 

It's very useful in turning raw data into actionable information.

I was surprised at how many possibilities the solution had in terms of removing bottlenecks from various processes. It can help you with a lot of things. 

The solution integrates well with other features. You can create simple RPA bots based on your process filing or task filing.

It's very comfortable to work with in terms of dealing with big data. You can easily visualize it by building charts, graphs, or tables. You can add fields for your data and feed into it. The product makes it easy to quickly modify, transform, and visualize your data. 

The solution can possibly help free up employee time. You can easily decide which processes can be simplified and create a bot to handle the work. It helps create automation opportunities. It can free employees from repetitive work. They can then do something more intellectual and valuable. 

Process planning to utilize for streamlining processes is difficult.

The solution has its own language to process the data, so it can be difficult for people to start using it quickly. It can be difficult to handle the first project until you understand the product a bit better. 

Data manipulation could be improved. It can be very hard to manipulate or work with data sometimes, especially at first, when you are not familiar with the solution. It can be hard to learn the solution. 

UiPath could provide more AI and machine learning tools to analyze processes. 

They could also improve the UI experience. For example, how graphs and charts look and how they can be placed in the dashboard. 

I've used the solution for almost a year. 

The product is pretty stable. I'd rate stability seven out of ten. 

The solution is scalable. I'd rate the scalability seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher, however, there are some limitations to scaling projects and uploading data. 

I've never used technical support services. 

I did not previously use a different tool.

I was a part of the initial implementation. The setup was straightforward.

Maintenance depends on the model of delivery. It can be done without involving developers, or it can be done with support.

I don't directly deal with pricing. 

I'm not sure of the overall transparency offered by process planning in our end-to-end processes and I don't have much experience with the solution. 

The time to value depends on the process and the people who work with it. If you can understand the process, and pick things up quickly, or have a good analyst to analyze the process, the time to value is quick.

Automation is cost-effective. When you compare numbers before and after, you'll be able to see the difference automation can make. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I'd advise users to learn the solution. UiPath has a great Academy for studying the solution. It's important to do some online courses and learn the ropes. Start a project and try it out in real life. 

What I find good in UiPath Process Mining is that it integrates well with SAP.

An area for improvement in UiPath Process Mining is that its pricing is too expensive, particularly when compared to Power Automate.

I've been selling UiPath Process Mining for a year or so.

UiPath Process Mining is a stable product.

UiPath Process Mining has good scalability.

I found the pricing for UiPath Process Mining expensive when you compare it against the pricing for Power Automate.

I evaluated Power Automate and Automation Anywhere IQ Bot.

I sell solutions such as UiPath Process Mining, Automation Anywhere, and Power Automate to my clients.

My rating for UiPath Process Mining is seven out of ten.

I'm an automation consultant, and I work with UiPath Process Mining and also UiPath Studio.

We are a consulting company, and I and a colleague are creating all the results, and we have to present them to the customer. My colleague is handling all the business conversations, and I'm the technical person creating all the dashboards and making whatever the customer is asking for available. 

Their support is really good, and it is a stable product.

It lacks certain features. For example, if we have data from one activity that is connected to another activity or number and there is a one-to-one connection, when we want to dig into that, it fails. I had to create another workspace and make heavy changes, which was time-consuming. 

It should be more intuitive and easy to work with. There should be more ways of creating filters, and it should be easy to make our own customized dashboards. Currently, if I want to create a dashboard similar to the one we have in AppOne but with different attributes, it is very difficult. There are activities, but I don't want activities. I want other attributes. Its user interface is not very intuitive. You need to play around with it. I have been playing around with the UiPath Process Mining tool for almost two years, and now I feel confident in handling it. It is a difficult tool.

In addition, if there were dropdown options for picking an activity and dropping it somewhere, it would make the work easy.

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

It is stable.

I am not sure about its scalability because I haven't scaled it. I have not
connected a process to different processes. I just had the data from one process, and I had to do the analysis.

In terms of its users, in my company, there are just two users. I and a colleague of mine are working with UiPath Process Mining. 

I have one contact person whom I contact whenever I have issues. He is supportive, very knowledgeable, and very prompt in answering the questions. I would rate their support a five out of five. 

It was easy. I'm using the AppOne template, which makes it comparatively easy. You just have to map all the basic attributes, and you can have the first look at your data. If the customer or business is asking for further investigation or features, then it gets difficult.

From the development or technical perspective, you should have a basic knowledge of coding. If a customer is asking for some specific features, it becomes a little bit difficult. Therefore, it is always recommended to have sufficient knowledge. With a technical background, you can easily work with UiPath Process Mining. 

I have been working intensively on it, and I like it, but a few small features are missing. I would rate it a seven out of 10.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UiPath's human-in-the-loop features are helpful.

It would be nice if UiPath's Document Understanding feature supported more languages. I don't think it supports Chinese or Japanese. We have been working in the Asia-Pacific region for a long time, and this prevents us from recommending the solution to some customers.

I've been using UiPath Process Mining for three years.

In general, UiPath is stable, but the document understanding part is less reliable. Some of our clients using document understanding were not happy with the results.

I think UiPath is scalable. That's what customers are looking for right now. 

UiPath is easy to set up on a machine, but it's a bit difficult to install it on a more complex cloud environment. For example, it's complicated to deploy across two AWS instances.

It takes a bit longer to see value. A customer will see ROI if they have a sizeable budget and the patience to wait until they get a return. 

UiPath is a bit on the higher side compared to solutions like Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. However, people tend to go with UiPath because it's more seamlessness.

I rate UiPath Process Mining eight out of 10. New products are coming out like ABBYY OCR that claim they can do these things better, but they can't. The cost per page for UiPath is on the higher side, so that is the reason.

Our primary use case of this solution for our client was for PDF automation which we used to extract data from the PDF, details such as invoice number and invoice structure. We extract all the data and it gets posted to the website. They post all the details inside a tool they use. Before implementation of UiPath this was a manual process which required 50 people all doing the same work 24/7. Once we implemented RPA, it reduced the time factor by around 80%. I'm a consultant and we are partners of UiPath. 

UiPath is a top product. We can write code with it and also write a Visual Basic .NET. There are active people in the forum and that's great. We can do everything we want in similar solutions such as Power Automate and Automate Anywhere, but in UiPath it's a lot simpler. It can be a struggle with the other solutions whereas UiPath has already answered all the issues and we can get problems resolved using the forum.

Documentation could be improved and the cost of the product is high, even if you're a middle scale industry. You might reject the solution on the grounds of cost. Power Automate Desktop is much cheaper than UiPath and Automation Anywhere is also cheaper. 

I've been using this solution for over two years. 

Technical support is very good when it compares to the other RPA tools. So in SAP automation, we had faced some issue and it got resolved. Within an hour we can get a response from the UiPath support team.

I've used other solutions but prefer UiPath. The cost is a barrier. 

The initial setup is very easy. We can download from Orchestrator. Solutions such as Elasticsearch takes more time because people don't know how to implement as well. GitHub also integrates with UiPath so if the client agrees to upload it in GitHub, it's very easy. 

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using ProcessGold for approximately three years.

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

ProcessGold is certainly scalable.

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

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

I am 100% satisfied with the UiPath technical support.

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

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

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

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

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