UiPath Reviews

UiPath is an end-to-end automation tool that helps businesses accelerate their processes by providing solutions for automating routine activities. These solutions enable faster and more efficient business exchanges.

UiPath offers a user-friendly automation building process utilizing a drag-and-drop workflow feature for UI automation. Additionally, the platform includes recording capabilities and a playback feature to ensure accuracy. Advanced scraping options are also available for more complex tasks.

We utilize UiPath to automate processes that relate to good causes. Our approach involves creating a playbook task and subsequently automating the process. After that, the IT department assists us in collecting and interpreting data from various applications in the UA portion.

UiPath's automation capability is important because it saves us a lot of time. There are two sides to consider: the client side and the server side. On the client side, the UI allows developers or data users to communicate directly with the system. This can be done using tools such as RobotStudio or data browsers. Essentially, these operations can be seen as back-end tasks. On the server side, tasks and workloads generated by the user are stored in SQL databases.

UiPath has minimized our on-prem footprint.

The UiPath Academy courses are beneficial. 

The AI functionality in UiPath helps us save time by streamlining our workflows within the studios. Additionally, it enhances our automation capabilities, speeds up order processing, and enables us to make better decisions, ultimately reducing the risk of errors.

The automation has saved us between 70 and 80 percent of our processing costs.

UiPath has freed up employee time and increased productivity.

The screen recording feature is valuable.

The data team support that provides the UI and the chat services has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for six months.

The solution is stable.

UiPath is highly scalable.

The technical support is good.

Positive

Before, I used Blue Prism, but now at my new organization, we use UiPath. Unlike Blue Prism, which only specializes in back-end applications, UiPath works with both front-end and back-end applications.

I give the solution a ten out of ten.

Our client wants to reduce their manual work, so they feel an automated solution would work better. The company has one staff member who is well-versed in automation, but they wanted us to suggest more solutions. We decided we should stick with UiPath since they are familiar with it. It's a local community bank with many feeds at the end of each business day. They have about 50 agents handling those feeds.

The client caters to poor people in the community who tend not to trust banks. The community bank sends agents into the fields and shops. They show them a card and suggest that they save a certain amount of money each day. They collect it and take it in a book. They then have to bring the book back together with the money. They're helping the poorest of the poor to save money. Based on what they've saved, they can get a loan. 

The bank encourages customers to save, so they collect daily. They were bringing this data back to the office and entering it by hand. We showed them that UiPath could do all that for them.

We prefer a cloud-based solution because we are a digital-transformation company. However, the client wanted to keep everything on-premises, so we needed to show the benefits of migrating to the cloud. In Africa, power is a problem. Energy costs a lot, and power outages can disappoint customers. In the end, we won them over by showing them the advantages of the cloud, so UiPath is deployed on the cloud. It's highly available, and they want their data to be accessible all the time.

We have about 30 UiPath users, most of whom are IT Administrators. We use the generic term IT Administrators. The company is structured so anyone can be deployed anywhere at any time. We use UiPath extensively in the particular scenario that necessitated our initial use. If we get more clients seeking to reduce repetitive tasks, I believe we will continue to expand our usage. 

With UiPath, we could automate many of our client's data entry tasks, making the process easier and more efficient. I would estimate it helped us to eliminate about 80 percent of repetitive tasks. The Automation Cloud helped us reduce costs and ensured the solution was always available. In the event of downtime or disaster, everything can still be recovered from the cloud.

We would recommend cloud solutions from Azure, AWS, etc. Using UiPath made us see that we should not just rely on cloud-native tools alone; we should look outside the box. Because of our experience with UiPath, we are more open to tools that will help the client work more efficiently. This made the client's life easy because it enabled them to reduce hiring costs and become more efficient.

UiPath handles all the infrastructure, eliminating the maintenance burden because we don't have clients constantly calling us about technical problems. UiPath helped us achieve our objectives faster than we would've normally. The project was supposed to be delivered in 10 months. However, because we eliminated repetitive tasks, we delivered the project in about six months, saving time and costs. UiPath Automation Cloud also reduced the total cost of ownership from infrastructure, maintenance, and updates.

Automation Cloud helped us handle as many customers as possible because the vendor takes care of the maintenance and everything. We can spend more time focusing on the work we're supposed to do to handle as many customers as possible. UiPath provides a preconfigured solution, which offers more value to our clients because we do not need to configure anything. 

It reduced our team's workload by enabling end-users to create their apps. We can easily walk them through the process over a Zoom call. Instead of throwing the whole backload at us, we can give them instructions over Zoom in an hour or two, and they can pick it up from there. It has dramatically reduced the stress on the IT department.

We've used the UiPath Academy courses. Sometimes, a client will call you, "Your company recommended this to us, and now we're having problems." They expect us to know everything, so we need to get information from the academy. The most significant benefit of UiPath Academy is that I don't look like an idiot in front of my boss and the customers. It makes me much smarter and more authoritative.

The UiPath community is also a valuable resource. When I have an urgent question, I post it on the community forum, and someone who has had a similar problem will respond quickly. I don't need to spend time researching. Product support is better with the UiPath community. 

UiPath reduced the costs of digital transformation. Digital transformation would always involve some costs, whether you like it or not, but when you look at it holistically, it's still cheaper than doing things the other way around. It also reduced the cost of automated operations by an estimated 65 percent and overall costs by about 45 percent.

The solution dramatically reduced human error. No one on my team or my boss would ever want to return to when we weren't using these solutions. We've discovered that it saves money on hiring costs and reduces many problems. It has freed up employee time. We delivered a 10-month project in six months. A technician gets assigned to a client for a specific number of months. If you finish earlier, you can spend time on another fun project you want to take on in the company.

It had a positive impact on employee morale. We were excited because we had four extra months. My colleague began attending an online school that his work usually would not give him time to focus on. He used that time to finish his master's degree, so he's happy. 

I like the fact that UiPath makes everything fast, and you don't need to employ as many people to do all the dirty work. All of our clients only used UiPath. I've never tested Automation Anywhere, but UiPath is excellent. They are doing a lot to stay ahead of the competition. I feel that if they continue doing what they're doing, the competitors would always have a lot of work to do because they will always be on top of the league. It helps with end-to-end automation. We discovered that we don't want to do tasks manually, so automating the entire workflow helped to achieve that.

The attended automation feature has been helpful in my experience because my company works on other companies' projects and solves their problems. If I'm assigned to a particular company, and I feel that this would be the easiest way to get the work done, I'll use any of the automation possibilities that we have.

The AI functionality makes life easier for everyone because it helps us deal with complex processes. We use machine-learning models for the most difficult problems. At the end of the day, the solution understood the problems because we had already created models. It understood what the problems were and could follow through to solve them.

What I'd like to see is more tutorial videos on YouTube. Maybe they could have a YouTube channel, and the community could empower more content creators to make how-to videos. When clients call us with issues, we wouldn't have to explain. 

If a client using Azure has an issue, we assign an engineer. Let's say you still have a problem after the engineer has consulted with you and referred you to the official documentation. It would be helpful if there were a content creator on YouTube to explain the problem in an accessible way.

I began using UiPath a little over a year ago. I work at a consulting company, and one of our clients uses UiPath. They needed advice about how to undergo a transformation. 

UiPath is stable.

UiPath is super scalable. We are a company that always likes to think outside the box. We invest in research and development to stay ahead of the market and our competitors.

I rate UiPath support eight out of ten.

Positive

In the beginning, we had some issues. We found it complex initially, but it became simpler over time. The deployment didn't take much time. It was less than a week. There was a learning curve, so that's why it took us so long. Maybe it would only take a day if we knew what we do now.

No matter how much you complain about the price of a SaaS product, it's still cheaper than building your own data center and other infrastructure. That's my perspective as someone who works for a company that does digital transformation. The price is cheaper than building and deploying your own solutions. 

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. I recommend trying it for a month. We tried it, and now we are hooked and still use it. I don't think anyone on my team or my boss wants to switch solutions anytime soon.

We have a cross-platform infrastructure, where two servers are sitting. We have Orchestrator, which we connect to our virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI). In the VDI, we have a UiPath stationed. 

From India, I work for an Australian client. Previously, I worked for a European client. In order to work with the client network, we have a dedicated Wipro laptop. In that Wipro laptop, we log in and connect via the VDI. In that VDI, we have UiPath Studio. Using UiPath Studio, we are doing development for the client and automating functional business processes.

We are extracting data from Salesforce using a particular report that is sent by the business SMEs. We pick exact fields end-to-end, then we put these values into Salesforce. Next, we extract the value and data from Salesforce, putting that into an Excel application. After putting the return to Excel application, we generate a service request for the business and send transaction reports of the bot's performance and accuracy at the end of the day. The business was taking around four to five hours. Our robot takes around eight to nine minutes in order to automate this end-to-end automation.

For another use case, there is an application that submits invoices for an insurance client in Australia. Right now, the business is doing this. Whereas, the bot operations reads a file on the hard drive, picks up that file, and puts it into SharePoint where the bot performs some operations. After doing those operations, the bot will report the status, whether it is valid, invalid, or an exception. When we get the file, we develop the application that submits the invoice. After that, we capture the data from the Excel application and submit a request. This is an end-to-end process. This bot only runs after business hours, five days a week, so it doesn't impact the application. With this process, we send daily transaction reports, the success ratio to the client, and present the entire picture to our peers and business holders.

We have set up our own cloud, which is internal. UiPath has a different cloud. Per our governance, we are not allowed to use another cloud. We are using our hosted internal cloud, which is hosted on our internal servers in Australia.

With our rule-based tasks, we pick the processes which involve a higher transaction volume and run many times in a week or month. Next, we analyze how much time the subject-matter experts (SMEs) uses to do their end-to-end journey. We calculate that, then decide the scope of the operation and whether to use an attended bot or unattended bot. We do analysis to determine which parts of the operation can be attended and unattended. Our preference would be the unattended bot, because it handles a lot of volume and is uninterrupted. 

In our analysis, we thoroughly check the scope of the application, whether it is a legacy or new application, and the dynamic nature of the data. Based on this, we define certain rules. Combining these rules, we design a complete end-to-end solution and give a presentation to the business that this is our commitment, e.g., this is the amount of Average Handle Time (AHT) and FTE that the bot will do. FTE means that if four people are doing a task, then it will give me back four FTEs. We then calculate the cost, meaning how much they are paying to that FTE and the cost of the bot. We compare the two and present our case. If the numbers are good, and the business agrees, then we proceed further in our discussions with them. This is the power of analytics.

We don't need that much infrastructure. If an analyst is doing reporting with an Excel sheet, then we can give him a bot and capture what he is doing without paying attention to the infrastructure. From the captured information, we give them a bot that will help them to do their regular task. This process helps them to understand automation while not investing in infrastructure. 

We design end-to-end solutions. We have different roles, teams, and divisions. I am part of the technical department, so I design the solution. I am responsible for analyzing and developing the solution. Once I develop the solution, I monitor the bot for two weeks, which is the "hypercare period". After the business is satisfied that the bot is performing, we give it to the support team. This is how our RPA lifecycle flows. It has around nine stages, including discovery, analysis, design, development, support, presentation, and solution. 

We have developed a bot process called "Padlock". In "Padlock", there is security development. It is very important that the user input his credentials. Per the governance of the process, we are not allowed to store the credentials on the cloud. It is very dynamic and encrypted. We have deployed about 25 robots for this particular process. The robot does its job after the SME. After a certain point, there is a CAPTCHA. The robot helps the SME do things, and they need to input their credentials and click the CAPTCHA, which happens in real-time. They verify all the information, giving them more confidence in their regular processes. We have deployed a large number of bots using this process. This has brought a lot of value because we have saved on a good number of costs when it comes to attended automation. 

I have found Orchestrator is UiPath's most valued feature. It has the ability to automate different applications, such as, mainframe automation and Excel macros. It is so efficient. We can download up to seven days back in just one click, monitoring errors.

It gives you the ability to efficiently monitor the bot.

With the new updates, a lot of analytics have come from AI Center.

Its features help us showcase what the bot has done and efficiently delivered to the business.

They are improving the OCR feature for reading text and images as well as the operations for automating that. They have integrated third-party OCRs, such as, SharePoint, ServiceNow, Salesforce, and mainframe automation.

The advantage of using StudioX is I can see how long the bot will take or what went wrong for any particular use case.

In the future, I would like new services that can utilize robots as a service (RaaS).

Our legacy applications are a bit old, so we get issues sometimes in automating those. However, modern applications are very compatible with the UiPath tool.

We have seen that UiPath doesn't have the capability to identify unknown pop-ups. This needs improvement.

The API needs a lot of improvements because it does not give proper results. There are always some issues with the logs.

When it comes to real-time scenarios, we see in production that Citrix automation always crashes. This integration could bring a lot of value to UiPath. Our business could save a lot of time and money if we could automate Citrix effectively.

All of our code resides in GitHub, which is our central repository for managing the code. There was a performance issue using GitHub with UiPath; it was slow. They have recently upgraded the performance so we are happy with it now.

I have been using UiPath for more than four years.

We always design a stable unattended solution that helps the business.

If fields are scattered, then the bot might get confused. 

Maintenance is handled by our support team. When something crashes, our dedicated support team monitors the bot. If the application crashes in production, the bot will send an application link to the support team and business stakeholders because the bot has faced some downtime in the application and kindly look into that issue.

Because I have automated a lot of enterprise solutions, I would go with the UiPath tool. They are frequently rolling out updates to the software. It is very stable compared to other tools in the market.

Infrastructure is quite important at an enterprise level. There are a lot of mundane and repetitive tasks. Once we have the infrastructure, then we set up best practices and governance. Based on that infrastructure, everything can scale up. Though, if we are going to build a lot of bots on a personal laptop to automate something small, then infrastructure is not as important with that.

We started with two to three bots. Now, we have around 25-plus bots. There are around 300 to 350 using both attended and unattended automation.

I have spoken a number of times with the UiPath product team. Initially, we were not able to use Excel, so we contacted the UiPath team. They provided a solution. They support the product well. I would rate the tech support as seven out of 10.

I have previously used Selenium. We switch because of scope. The Selenium tool was good with bot automation. With UiPath, we can do various automations, like mainframes, ServiceNow, SharePoint, etc. In order to increase implementation of automation from my end, I started with UiPath. I liked it because of its ability to automate applications. Those are the main reasons that I switched from Selenium to UiPath and SoapUI to UiPath.

The initial setup and deployment are pretty straightforward. They provide free training, which is a good thing. We do the training correctly and religiously. Once we are good with the training along with a little programming knowledge that we have acquired over the years, it is easy to adapt and work on UiPath because it is structured and organized. 

Our setup is a mixture. Orchestrator is hosted on a server and the application is installed on a desktop or system.

In order to use UiPath on servers, we need to set up two servers: one in Australia and the second in New Zealand. 

The implementation is not that big of a task. It is very organized.

It has been a huge monetary benefit. Since the bot has been running for two and half years, it has given my organization a lot of business. When I joined Wipro in 2019, there was one guy who was developing the bot. We named the bot, "win-back". As the name suggests, 'win-back' means winning customers back. That was a maintenance bot which possessed a lot of qualities. If a person was physically doing the task, then we might need to spend $90,000 on them. This is the difference. While the robot has some costs, they are not huge when compared to the salary or compensation that we give to an SME. This is how an organization can scale up, because the bot works accurately 24/7 without any maintenance. Also, seeing the bot's accuracy, as well as the volume that it handles, motivates other business holders to go for automation.

We automated an internal solution because there were long keywords that led to spelling mistakes, since spelling mistakes don't look good on invoices. Therefore, we input this extracted data to an application, using end-to-end automation. This reduced human errors tremendously. For example, with the "win-back" solution, errors tended to happen because the volume is high. Therefore, we wrote a code that has reduced errors for the "win-back" solution.

Because of the bot's accuracy, it has saved us a lot of time and money, making the life of the subject-matter experts easier. It is a win-win situation. They are making the most of the bot, running it continuously. They don't need to wait for a particular report. For example, people, in our organization, work eight hours then send a status mail, which says, "I have done all these tasks." Instead of having us create the report directly, the bot saves a lot of time. 

The bot marks in the report what is successful and unsuccessful as well as the reason for not being successful, e.g., if it was an application, data, or particular element issue. There are a lot of areas that we call "exceptions". Every day, we are getting all these details in one go. Whereas, a person would be frustrated or bored providing all these figures. That is the cost of human error. If you are not paying attention to a particular task, then errors will happen naturally. 

The bot currently performs four times faster than the SMEs for the tasks that we automated.

After three or six months, we send out a survey to different SMEs in various production areas, asking how the bot is doing. From the survey, we have found that the bot is helping them out a lot. They are very satisfied with it.

The solution has reduced our costs by approximately five percent.

I have seen very high ROI from the processes that we automated. It is very good to invest in automation.

There are three leaders in the market: UiPath, Automation Anywhere, and Blue Prism. UiPath is in-between the two. BluePrism is on the higher end when it comes to pricing. Automation Anywhere is on the lower side when it comes to pricing. When comparing the automation of business processes, analyze the amount of work that your organization will save using automation, particularly compared to the pricing.

You will be compensated for buying the product when you see processes automating.

I also evaluated Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and EdgeVerve (which I used in a previous organization).

The trend of the other technologies is moving to the cloud. Other competitors of UiPath, like Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, have already moved their applications onto the cloud. This brings more robustness to the product, because its performance is significantly increased. It is also very scalable when putting in new features. 

I have attended a lot of UiPath's webinars.

We are in the initial stages of using the AI functionality.

The RPA technology is part of our digital transformation. For example, we are doing digital transformation by automating the Salesforce application.

They roll out an update every three months. With every update, we see a lot of new features. We are always exploring using those features so we can automate the stuff.

Don't rely completely on the UiPath tool to achieve automation. You should have some background and knowledge to understand what can be automated. There isn't a magical algorithm for building robots. You educate the robot on what can be automated.

We always rate a product based on other products. I would rate this product as nine and a half out of 10.

We are using Studio and the attended robots, but we haven't implemented Orchestrator yet.

Our primary use is to automate tasks within the accounts receivable, accounts payable, and trade settlement realm that we work in. We're also getting into some more internal audit automation.

We run automations in Windows Virtual Machines. It was a long process for us to get started, getting our IS to buy into letting us set up this environment and get started with it.

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 two or three. They offer upfront training, the UiPath Academy, and that makes it easier but you still need to have a technical mindset to understand it, as it is now.

We have all used the Academy. On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. It's a great experience and very beneficial.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately six months. It took us a while because we had a bunch of other projects in front of getting our first automation. The process was hard, although it was not complicated. The approval process involved going through a security review. 

We have not found that our automations have saved us money, yet. However, it's giving people back the time so that they can do more value-added work.

With respect to saving time, we have just measured the out rate. We're probably saving thirty hours a week with what we have going now, so almost one FTE.

This solution has absolutely helped reduce or eliminate human errors, although I cannot estimate by how much at this time.

Using this solution has definitely increased the confidence and communication that we have between departments because we're saving a lot of department time, and they can focus on their value-added tasks. With this, they're a lot more willing to work with us, and they're happier employees.

The most valuable features of Studio are all of the activities that UiPath and their partners have developed.

The biggest problem that we have when working with this solution is the selectors. If there was a little more flexibility with the selectors, and they were a little bit more adaptive, I think it would be helpful.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution four and a half to five. We haven't had any problems.

Currently, we have twelve automations running.

In our organization, we have three people directly doing automation and design work. There are probably six or seven more than are trying to get the larger enterprise into UiPath and get their departments set up with it.

The technical support for this solution is excellent. They got back to me really quickly and provided the solutions that I needed. It was very helpful.

We were not using another RPA solution prior to this one. In deciding to invest in this technology, we recognized that people were doing a lot of tedious processes and that we can make better use of their time.

Huron Consulting assisted us with the implementation and deployment, and they were very helpful. On a scale from one to five, I would rate them a five.

We have been asked to start measuring for tracking ROI but have not yet begun. However, I can say informally that we have seen performance benefits. People are very happy with the things we've automated so far and they're just glad to be relieved of some of that tedious work.

Right now we only have a couple of Studio licenses and a couple of bots, so we're at about $8,000 USD per year. We're hoping to ramp that up pretty soon.

We evaluated Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere before choosing this solution.

One of the major reasons that we chose UiPath was because they gave a free trial at the time when we were looking at it, and none of the other vendors did. Then they also have the UiPath Academy, which allowed us to look at it first and then learn how to use it before we actually had to make an investment.

From a cost perspective, the unattended robots are going to be of more benefit because they can run twenty-four hours a day. At the same time, the attended robots are pretty affordable. I think we're coming up with more use cases where people have it on their desktop and want to be able to run it on demand. We have definitely benefited from both types of robots.

We are looking forward to some of the new features that are going to be released. One of them is in the UI, where you can document what your processes have and figure out if any have the potential for automation. That is going to be very helpful.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to first speak with a partner. If someone is new and hasn't been in this space before, it's going to be kind of confusing and they're going to need somebody to guide them it setting it up.

This is a really great product and there's a lot of potential for it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using unattended bots, Orchestrator, and Studio.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We have seen a lot of improvements to our organization.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

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

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

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

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

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

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

We have used UiPath since 2021.

We haven't had any issues.

UiPath scales well with our environment. 

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

Positive

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

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

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

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

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The cloud component of UiPath makes it scalable.

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

Neutral

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

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

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

UiPath is reasonably priced. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for close to seven years.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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