UiPath Reviews

I am a UiPath developer and my role in the company is as an automation developer specialist. I'm working mainly in UiPath Studio, not Studio X, and I also work with Orchestrator. We are using attended automation.

We are automating the processes in our company, for example, in the finance department. One of the ones that are now automated is invoice coding determination, which no longer involves humans. At this time, 80% of our processes are completed by robots. The remaining 20% is approved by humans but I think that this will improve later. 

With respect to the ease of building automations using UiPath, from my experience, when you have a basic knowledge of programming, it is really easy for you to start your journey with the UiPath environment. You can do it without this knowledge but then, you will just need to spend a little more time learning the details.

I really like working in UiPath because the programming allows me to do whatever I want. I can declare any type of variable, I can check the locals, and I can add breakpoints whenever I need to check the states. For me, it's a very professional platform.

I really like that they offer the possibility to work with it from two sides. It can be operated from the full-programming side, as well as from the standpoint where you don't need this knowledge.

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-premises footprint, although I cannot estimate by how much because I am not responsible for that aspect.

UiPath has helped to reduce the cost of our digital transformation because it really speeds up the processes. When we compare the time it takes for a human, with perhaps a one-hour task, and it only takes 30 minutes for the robot to do it, we can see the savings. You just multiply this by the salary and we also see the reduction in cost.

UiPath has definitely reduced the number of issues arising from human error. We can confirm this with 100% certainty because we have compared it to when humans were completing processes on their own. I estimate that the error rate has been reduced by approximately 60%.

In my previous company, we managed to save about 20 FTE after our UiPath implementation. It was about two years of work. Thanks to the ease of access, as well as the fact that our employees did not require programming knowledge, we were able to show it to normal employees and explain the automation. After this, they were not afraid that they will be replaced by robots and instead, understand that they are co-working with them.

The most important part of Studio is the debugging feature. It gives you the ability to watch local variables, as well as highlight elements as it is moving through the process. The results of actions are displayed and indicate whether particular actions are performed successfully or not.

Outside of the company, I am using UiPath's AI functionality and it very much speeds up processes and improves accuracy for reading data. For example, the OCR is much better than Microsoft's solution. With UiPath, I was able to read handwriting samples but with Microsoft, I was unable to do it.

The AI functionality has allowed me to automate more processes in my own projects. It adds flexibility and improves process speed. I don't have to think about boundaries when I decide how to approach a project. 

It lacks something crucial, which is a map of the variables and arguments. When we are using a lot of variables and arguments, sometimes, we get lost. UiPath should create a map that connects different files and shows the connections between them. For example, from file A, we have variable B, and file C contains variable D. However, they are actually the same variable, but it's connected by argument and we don't know it. It is something that we have to remember explicitly. In this case, it would be really helpful for me, as a developer, to have this picture of the net. It would show me what is where and how it's connected to everything.

For the on-premises solution, if we ignore any problems that may occur with the infrastructure, such as the network, then stability is very good and the platform works well.

In my experience with cloud-based deployment, I haven't faced any problems with stability.

Scaling UiPath is really easy. When you get to the point where you have to think about scalability, you use the UiPath Installer to extend the Orchestrator by another node. There is an option for it and you don't have to know much about the network to do it on your own.

I am part of a four-person development team that is working primarily with Studio. We have approximately ten processes at the moment, and it is difficult to estimate how many employees are affected by the automation. 

The technical support is very professional and they work quickly. Usually, we are able to get responses in about two hours. Sometimes, it takes one day, but I have not faced a situation that took longer than two days.

The help from their site is also very professional, and well-described.

Overall, it is really easy to resolve errors.

Prior to UiPath, I used Selenium WebDriver. The problem with this product is that you have to know the Python programming language. You have to know everything inside Python, and there is a lot more typing. In UiPath, you have some clicking, and there is some decent orienting stuff, which you don't have to define. You already have some pieces of code that you can use, and this is a really nice feature.

I have also used Kryon RPA and the problem is that it's based on the OCR. This is something that I would never accept with an RPA tool unless the OCR is fully working. Right now, OCR is not a perfect technology and it causes many issues. UiPath allows us to use selectors, so we are able to track the exact area of the display in the program that we want to access.

The initial setup is quite easy, although we faced a few issues. With the help of the UiPath service desk, we were able to quickly fix our problems. The deployment was completed in a few hours on one machine. This included checking everything to make sure that it was working fine.

We followed the documentation provided by UiPath, as well as their guidelines.

At this time, we are using the on-premises version. In the next few months, we plan to move to the cloud environment, so we are currently planning the transition.

In my previous company, I was responsible for moving to the new version of the UiPath, with the Apollo interface in the Orchestrator. Where I am now, this was already done. So, yeah. I was responsible for this transition. Right now, in this company where I'm working currently, the UiPath setup was already done but I helped with the optimization.

With respect to upgrades, once we knew what had to be done, it took about one hour to complete. Otherwise, there is no maintenance required.

I have calculated ROI for our project and it seems that we will reach our ROI point in approximately two years, which is quite good.

Price-wise, it is not the cheapest one on the market, but it provides the fastest automation and the best training that I have ever seen for RPA, through the UiPath Academy. It's really easy to set up a new developer in this environment. Everything considered, the pricing is very good.

There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We are currently evaluating Kryon RPA.

My advice for anyone who is implementing UiPath is to always check the documentation before you try to look for answers on the forum. Another good point is that when you have a problem, there are plenty of people in the UiPath community that can help you in a few minutes. This is the perfect solution, in this case.

From the maintenance side, you have to remember to increase your database with the scaling up of the automation because it can really slow down your process.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using UiPath is to always create a backup copy of Orchestrator before you update it. This was a very big lesson for us because we had an issue with the installation. It is also really important to back up the related databases.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use all three of the UiPath components which include: Studio, Roboyo, and Orchestrator. There are a bunch of use cases that we explored for the POC (Proof of Concept) to be sure the product fits with our expectations for automation. For example, one use case is reconciliation processes for insurance group retirement and LOB (Law on Occupational Benefits) plans. We built it, tested it, and now that is one of the primary things we use the product for.

This solution has improved the way our organization functions in several ways. It has helped to eliminate human errors. It already saves 20 hours per month for reconciliation and LOB. It helped clients schedule their transactions before the end of the month. All of that automates tasks and makes financial processing faster in the insurance industry. That works out great for us.

The most valuable features provide solutions for when I am using OCR (Optical Character Recognition) technology. It easily integrates with Google OCR, Microsoft OCR, and ABBYY OCR. We are using that integration feature to incorporate OCR mostly for reading scans. To interact with Google OCR, Microsoft OCR, or ABBYY OCR, you don't need to implement a separate component but you can just — in a blink of an eye — integrate those peripheral solutions into the UiPath Studio and use them in your automated processes.

If we can integrate other features that are not part of UiPath, it makes it far more useful in automation. In this case, UiPath is not building out an actual OCR component but they are just giving you an option to incorporate the other OCRs. That is very valuable.

In the next release of the solution, I would like to see the ability to grant permission to users at the job level. Some jobs or processes may need to belong to only one person. Right now, I believe we don't have that feature in UiPath and we can't assign a job to a user. We can give permissions on a tenant level, or we can give permissions on the environment level, but not at the job or process level. 

I would like to see the ability in UiPath to be able to assign each job or each process to a particular user and give that user some specific access and privilege. For example, maybe they should only be able to run or stop a particular job or a particular process, but they can not do anything else. That makes a lot of sense because all users may not need to see all the processes in Orchestrator in one instance or have access to administrative features. The same goes for a tenant or even in an environment. If UiPath can make that happen at the user-level or process-level for a robot, that helps a lot to enable customized bots.

On a scale from one to five where five is the best and one the worst, I would rate the stability of the UiPath platform at a four-out-of-five. The stability is a four instead of a five because the stability is not completely dependent on only UiPath. Underlying obligations play a part too. Sometimes when I am writing applications, I'm not up on how to handle every exception. That is not possible because a developer does not know all the scenarios an application can become involved with. In that scenario, the product can lag. But, otherwise, it is really a very good solution that is dependable and stable.

Approximately five people in our organization are involved in our automation program working in the CoE (Center of Excellence). There are four developers and there are 200 users including business users. So, you can say there are around 250 people currently involved in this. I don't think scalability is an issue.

We did have the opportunity to use UiPath Academy RPA training. On a scale from one to five where five is the most beneficial, I would rate the training as a four-out-of-five. It is good for basic understanding. We have usually had UiPath foundation training for all of our developers. Really, I think you can say that we have not put fully utilized it.

Other parts of technical support we have only used very minimally. For example, we have not used premium support or licensed support levels. Sometimes we called customer support on tickets to integrate with mainframe obligations the first time or some more involved issues. But that type of situation was unusual. We have barely used the customer support because most of the information is available in Academy, in the portals, or the user forums. A few times when we left a ticket, it was not even necessary for us to get back to technical support because we resolved the issue on our own.

We knew that we had an opportunity to invest in a new solution when we heard about RPA three years back. UiPath and WorkFusion came to us at the same time and saying, "We have a solution to improve your work processes."

We spent some time evaluating which tool was right for us by doing a study inside our organization to determine how much manual work could be automated. With some analysis, we found out that there is a huge opportunity for implementing this type of RPA solution in AXA (global insurance, not an acronym) as it is a large organization with a lot of repeated processes.

Because there was a lot of manual work, people in our organization had to work for more hours at times to properly complete a job. Sometimes they had to stay overnight and work additional hours on weekends to complete processing on time. To avoid that we requested that operations consider our proposal for automation.

We showed operations where we could automate repeatable and mundane tasks. The response was very positive and they realized we need to implement these solutions to help us to buy some time for employees to properly do their work and reduce labor intensity.

Our previous solution was either no solution at all except for manual labor or some experience we had with one tool called OpenSpan. OpenSpan did not have a proper management console and was difficult to use so it mostly remained unimplemented. When we introduced the potential solution for seriously pursuing RPA to reducing the workload, that is when we started looking at UiPath.

The set up for the product is straightforward. It is seamless. In fact, you just need to know the server where it will reside. There is material available in UiPath guides and the UiPath forum where you can just follow along step-by-step and install your Orchestrator. So it is very straightforward. 

From the time we purchased the UiPath license until we had our first robot in production is not exactly clear. We had developed a POC, which was ready to be put into production and then we bought a license. After we bought the license, we just put it into production and it had already been built.

We did the entire implementation ourselves with some contact with UiPath.

We are not yet really realizing a return on investment as our deployment continues to be in progress. How much money we have saved is what we are hoping to eventually count in the ROI. In terms of the calculations that we started last year, we asked that the KPI (Key Performance Indicator) points look at time-saving and not really the dollar saving. The time saving you can say approximately 20 hours per month, which we have achieved consistently up until now. We have achieved something but we are expecting that to grow a lot.

The solution has also helped to eliminate human errors. I cannot say exactly what that percentage is —  say even 20% or something like that. There are a couple of instances before we automated the reconciliation process last month — before we actually put the bot into production — where people were getting the wrong details by mistake. I would say we have reduced the human error because those situations are being handled by the bot and they will not be repeated now. 

We license the product on a yearly basis and it costs us around $80,000. We are a very large organization. We have unattended bots and there is a pricing structure surrounding that but I'm not involved in the licensing terms.

What made us choose UiPath to automate our processes was evaluating the capabilities of competition and deciding on the best solution for us. We compared UiPath, WorkFusion and other products — and even other types of tools — in terms of infrastructure, setup, how easily it could be scaled, etcetera. UiPath stood out a little as it had the capability to invoke virtual machines automatically without any human intervention. A lot of other tools didn't have that capability at that point. But the time we had to come down to a decision, UiPath had features that were not available in any of the other tools. With other research into the company and product, we saw that UiPath listened to the customers' needs and was often upgrading. Now all the competition has seen them as the leader and they have tried to incorporate features UiPath had already deployed.

That initial difference we saw between UiPath and the other tools we compared was the reason we took this direction. We believed UiPath and we decided that this was our theater for RPA. Now, if we see some enhancements that need to be made in the product, we just communicate to UiPath and we know they will look at the idea and maybe implement it. UiPath has the capability of adding features immediately. They are releasing around 10 or more versions in a year with important new features. 

We do use a virtual environment such as Citrix when it is appropriate and that works out pretty well. The obvious advantage is there is no dependency on a physical machine being available and they are available 24/7 from anywhere. I am actually comfortable developing anything and everything in Citrix via virtual machines.

On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is very easy, I would rate the ease-of-use of the platform as a five. Ease of use is one other thing that I like a lot about UiPath.

Going a step further, on a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product overall as a ten compared to other RPA solutions. In comparison to its nearest competitor — Blue Prism — UiPath is way ahead in terms of providing features, giving customer support, ease of use, ease of access to our personal history, and surely in the development of robots.

Everybody can understand easily what exactly the product is doing and can become familiar with it quickly. With other competitors, there is a huge infrastructure to set up. Some of the products make it so each bot needs a control room. Those products are not centralized, which makes them more confusing to use.

People have to manage on their own how they are going to build all their RPA management solutions. When you are using UiPath, you just get Orchestrator instead of multiple robots and control panels, then you just scale whenever you want.

I definitely recommend UiPath for simplicity and ease-of-use. If somebody was getting an RPA solution, the advice I would give them is to definitely go for it. Setting up RPAs eliminates human error in tasks and lightens workloads for menial jobs. This lets people focus on more innovative work and it can lead to further integration. What I would think is the natural path for UiPath is that it can integrate the AI in the future. Right now, people think that this is already cognitive or AI integrated, but there is a very long way to go in the future for it to become truly like artificial intelligence.

So, what I am saying is I would take it as a first step towards the AI. I would definitely recommend people use it so that in future when AI comes in, you can just grab an AI solution from UiPath and improve your implementations further.

We are using Studio, Orchestrator, and mostly the unattended bots.

Our primary use for this solution is to give time back to the employees.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a five. It's drag-and-drop, and all of the activities are there.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a four. All of this information there is self-explanatory and it works. 

From the point where we started using the demo version, it was a couple of months until our first robot was ready.

This solution has probably helped to eliminate human errors.

I can definitely say that this solution has saved the organization time. With all of the processes together, we have saved one full-time equivalent person. 

The most valuable feature of this solution is the unattended automation.

This solution is easy to use and it saves you time.

In future releases, we would like to see more drag-and-drop, and more out of the box AI.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. We had some issues where we needed to get in contact with the support, and sometimes, UiPath crashes on our servers.

We have about eight people in our automation group.

Most of the time, the technical support for this solution is very good.

One one occasion, it was not very good. We had a problem with a new version. When we updated to 18.2, the robots stopped working after some time. We had a lot of emails that included session logs. I made it quite clear that it was really important because we were in the beginning phase and the robots had to run. In the end, I fixed the problem by downloading the next version, 18.3. When we asked whether the problem was version-specific, they never got back to us, which isn't very good.

We did not use another RPA solution before this one.

From the external consultants, we got the idea that RPA has the possibility to save us time and money, so we decided to do it.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. Orchestrator is easy to understand. You can connect the virtual machines to it and then run the robots.

In the beginning, we used a consultant from Roboyou to assist us with the process. Our experience with them was good.

We recognize ROI in terms of performance benefits as soon as a process is automated and an employee can do something else that is more meaningful. It is not a benefit listed on a spreadsheet, but the employees are happier.

Our licensing fees for this solution are €68,000 (approximately $75,000 USD) yearly.

Two years ago, we evaluated Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, in addition to UiPath. UiPath was the best overall solution then, and it still is now. It has a big community, and you can download the demo versions to start testing immediately.

This solution saves us time in all areas. We don't keep track of exactly what we have saved in terms of time, but we can say that we have more customer experience. If somebody has a mundane task and wants it automated then we do it.

My solution for anybody researching RPA solutions is to try UiPath. When you want to start, it is easy to register and get going.

This is a good solution and it saves us time, but there is always a path for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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

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

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

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

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

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

We have used UiPath since 2021.

We haven't had any issues.

UiPath scales well with our environment. 

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

Positive

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

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

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

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

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We use UiPath across departments, including HR, IT, procurement, and the supply chain. One use case is hiring and other simple HR-related tasks. We also automate complex processes, like using Document Understanding and machine learning to extract vendor contract information and input it into our procurement system. 

Many applications don't have built-in APIs, and some repetitive processes require a lot of staff to perform. We try to identify those processes and automate them. At the end of the day, it's about how quickly a particular process can be implemented, what kind of ROI we can realize, and the speed of completing the process. 

These processes take forever if you're doing it manually. For example, let's take something as simple as hiring. Evaluating a candidate probably takes 30 to 45 minutes to complete all the steps, and large organizations are constantly hiring. Another challenge is the number of staff you have. By automating using robots, you can reduce the number of people you need to hire and complete the work much faster. It also helps resolve turnover. You can run the automation 24/7, and robots don't take vacations, so things happen faster. 

Another benefit is SLA compliance. We have SLAs to meet for data, and we need to complete some tasks within 48 or 72 hours. Automation helps us meet those targets by completing jobs faster. UiPath frees staff to work on other tasks. Just one process that we use for hiring has easily freed two or three people. Now, they're doing tasks that require human intelligence and knowledge. 

Any solution, such as Power Automate, can do traditional RPA functions, but UiPath's Document Understanding sets it apart. The document understanding feature can handle a significant amount of handwritten notes and efficiently extract information. While there is a human-in-the-loop component for validation, it is still faster than manually extracting information.

My biggest problem is that UiPath is growing so fast and adding integration with so many different products that it's hard to keep up. The COEs at various companies and our developers aren't able to keep pace with what's happening. It's a good problem to have. I'm not complaining, but there are so many features and little time for developers to learn and implement them. 

If you need something new like a CICD pipeline or somebody for a test suite or to work with Document Understanding, you can't use our existing staff because they don't have the skills. Now, I need to go out and hire more people. I need to reduce the company's size to save money but also spend more to hire. 

I have used UiPath for about seven years.

We have not encountered any stability issues with UiPath. The cloud-based deployment has been stable, and we have not experienced any unexpected robot shutdowns. Issues tend to arise from other SaaS applications rather than UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale effectively as our organization grows. Scaling with UiPath has been easy and efficient.

The customer service has always been good. However, it takes longer to reach support now than it did four to five years ago, this can be attributed to their increased customer base.

Positive

At my current organization, we didn't use a different solution before UiPath. However, I have previous experience with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup was straightforward. Despite using a partner, we managed most of the work in-house due to my previous experience with UiPath.

We worked with a partner for the implementation. Although the partner helped, we managed most of the work ourselves to tailor the solution to our needs.

When you start a program, it takes a while to reach the point where you achieve an ROI. Still, if you're not seeing an ROI with UiPath by the second year, you're doing it wrong. We are doing that right now. 

We've found a lot of processes working across different teams and departments. We spoke to the leads of various COEs and found processes that would realize the highest ROI or SLA compliance. A department might have only one or two procurement processes, but they are sizeable. Automating those will help you achieve an ROI faster.

UiPath isn't cheap, but it's priced competitively with other automation solutions, and it offers more resources.

I was not part of the organization during the evaluation phase, but I know they chose UiPath because it was easier to set up with comparable costs to other solutions, more resources available, and robust training material for basic RPA functions. It's easier to train people to perform basic RPA functions.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

We use AI mainly around sales processing and document understanding. Our current use cases involve traditional automation, processing different orders, order formats, languages, and language translation, and creating actual orders in any ERP solution.

We've done a Communications Mining POC, and we think that's promising, but we haven't used UiPath's process mining because we have another solution for that. 

We were already using a competing automation platform when we implemented UiPath. UiPath is a more cloud-based solution. We're biotech regulators, so we're trying to adopt new innovations as quickly as they are released. Regarding challenges, we're trying to simplify and automate processes to achieve a higher value and make problem-solving more seamless.

We engage our employees in automation in two ways. At the enterprise level, it's more about making it easy for there to be a centralized intake of opportunities and focus on the value of what comes through. Citizen automation is about empowering and training them on how to use it so they can build more. 

Our organization has experienced productivity increases, financial savings, error reductions, and streamlining of many processes in finance and accounting with UiPath automation. It has helped free up staff time so that they can focus on more value-added work, and when automations don't function as expected, employees can be upset because they don't want to return to previous manual methods.

I don't know about shareholders, but employees who learn to build automation can do more value-added work. It makes them happy. Customers within the company can have people in their teams spend their time on more value-added work, and they have better transparency.

RPA is always good, and UiPath's Document Understanding is interesting. We used the old model, but the new modern Document Understanding is much easier.

UiPath could offer better support for operations. It has all these cool features, but when you still need to build and run these bots. You need to have more features that make it easier to run bots, and they require fewer people to maintain. 

We have used UiPath since 2020, so it has been nearly four years.

The solution is stable, with, for example, only a thirty-minute outage in three years.

It is scalable, but successful scalability depends on how you build automations.

We have premium support, which provides excellent customer service. Our technical account manager is amazing, and that's one reason we keep paying for premium support. 

Positive

We previously used Automation Anywhere and switched to UiPath because it was easier for developers to use and could integrate with more products.

It was complex because UiPath didn't have a biotech-specific offering. We were the first biotech company to use this, so we had to develop a product that would work for companies under regulation. We needed something called delayering. We had to educate UiPath on what it means to do this for health care and biotech.

UiPath helped us save around 500,000 thousand hours. Over our entire automation journey, that amounts to an estimated $25 million worth of productivity hours.

The pricing is very expensive, making it challenging to continue using UiPath when competitors like Microsoft offer cheaper alternatives like Power Automate. Why continue to use UiPath when you're paying three to five times more? 

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We are primarily looking to solve business challenges related to processing unstructured documents.

Currently, we have not realized the business outcomes as we have not implemented the solution yet. The goal is to increase efficiency, throughput, and accuracy. UiPath AI and automation have not yet helped free up staff to work on other projects or tasks. In terms of environmental, social, and governance solutions, it is not applicable.

The Studio and the Test Manager have been valuable as they made testing with QA easier. We've been able to rerun numerous test cases quickly. From the UiPath platform overall, I find these features valuable.

The product documentation needs improvement as it tends to be self-contradictory and sometimes hard to access since we are on an older version. 

There is also a need for more consistency in product support and customer service.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath has been pretty stable since we are mostly on-premises. However, the stability is to be determined when we move our full infrastructure to the cloud. Outages could occur with SaaS solutions.

It has scaled with us efficiently despite the initial complexity in understanding licenses, runtimes, and utilization. No significant issues have been encountered yet.

There have been ebbs and flows with customer service. We are at Premium Plus, now called Enterprise Success. Initially, there wasn't much value, but there has been some improvement. Dedicated support provides more assistance and better outcomes.

Neutral

I'm familiar with Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, each of which offer different pros and cons. UiPath, being the market leader, differentiates itself with its capabilities and portfolio. It is easy to use from day one, flexible, and their vision is helpful.

I can't provide specifics as to ROI. That said, in general, we achieve financial benefits and a positive ROI on our implementations most years.

Pricing and licensing are challenging as they can be difficult to understand. They make it hard to determine utilization and necessary licenses for runtimes. Comprehensive components need to come together for a clear picture, making renewals and contract negotiations complex.

We have considered Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism as alternate solutions.

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case involves automating low-hanging fruit processes such as daily reporting, order entry, and AP invoice processing. We are a printing company with 33,000 to 34,000 transactions a year, and 70% of these are repeat orders that we aim to automate.

Implementing UiPath has increased speed and accuracy, freeing up staff to focus on higher-level tasks requiring creativity and attention. It has resolved the issue of order entry delays, reducing a process that could take two to four days to just five minutes.

The document understanding feature has been particularly valuable as it recognizes and extracts data from invoices and purchase orders, greatly saving time.

The fast growth of UiPath can be difficult to keep up with, so more informative sessions or webinars showcasing potential returns on investment for specific industries would be beneficial.

We started using UiPath in 2018.

In general, the stability of the solution has been positive.

UiPath has been able to keep up as our environment grows.

The customer service and support have been great, consistently providing answers or guidance.

Positive

We did not use a different solution previously. We chose UiPath for its user-friendly Studio and comprehensive resources.

We initially partnered with a company that was not the best fit, and have since switched to a more suitable partner, greatly improving our experience.

We have yet to realize a significant return on investment due to initial partnership challenges. However, we are now on track with a new partner.

Pricing is fair. That said, it requires justification for returns due to a tight budget.

I would rate UiPath a ten out of ten.