UiPath Reviews

We use the tool for mostly attended and unattended automation. 

UiPath's most valuable features are the UI library and object repository, which speed up the development. 

The tool needs to have more documentation and change logs. Minor upgrades break a few things. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

UiPath is stable. 

The solution is very scalable. 

We get good support with the help of an account manager who escalates issues. We had to escalate issues only a few times. 

Positive

We used Pega RPA and Microsoft Power Automate. We have high-volume workloads that are not feasible with Power Automate. We also have a lot of legacy applications that don't work well with product license applications. Pega RPA was not very user-friendly. 

The tool's deployment is easy. We use Jenkins in the pipeline. We are still on-prem and most of our processes are deployed through the Orchestrator to the dev instance. 

Our partner helped us with the deployment. We were also knowledgeable on the technical side. 

We have saved 10 million dollars so far. 

The solution's pricing is fair. 

We use UiPath to save costs and man hours. 

The tool has helped us improve accuracy on compliance and regulatory policies. The bots make it more consistent. We can document everything, which makes auditing easier. 

Some of our processes were manual. Now, five robots do it. We have not hired anybody despite the workload being increased. 

We used Task Capture for some documentation. 

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

My domain and expertise are in life sciences. In life sciences there is a process called pharmacovigilance, which involves monitoring the effects of medical drugs after they have been licensed for use. I create end-to-end automations, for case processing and full data entry. The customer will store details in an Oracle-based pharmacovigilance platform called Argus, where clinical data from the client and the product are stored. The UiPath bot has to capture the cases from Argus. Once a case has been input into UiPath, a mandatory status check, duplicate search, and case processing have to be done.

It then needs to perform full data entry in Argus. The full data entry consists of more details like patient information, product information, event information, and so on. The bot needs to validate and input those details into Argus and save the case. 

Some days there will be 1k records and on other days, there will be 2k records. On average the bot will process 12k to 13k records.

Pharmacovigilance is a big process. It would take almost 45 minutes for a human to complete a single case. By implementing UiPath robots in the customer's environment, the case processing time has been drastically reduced. The bot processes cases, end-to-end, within 20 to 25 minutes, depending on the case complexity, so that the customer is saving 20 minutes per case. The savings are equivalent to nine or 10 FTEs, which is huge. As a result of those savings, they have requested us to build more bots for them, for other processes.

The most valuable feature in UiPath is the UI interaction with UI Explorer. I have worked with other automation tools and UI Explorer is the standout feature of UiPath. For web-based applications, we can interact with every HTML element, from head to tail. UI Explorer is a valuable addition to UiPath for creating complex, web-based automation.

The AI Computer Vision and Orchestrator are also outstanding features. They make it very easy for developers.

In addition, the introduction of drag-and-drop APIs to UiPath enhances the development processes and decreases the time it takes, as well as the processing time. For example, if you wanted to read an email from Microsoft Outlook using UiPath two years ago, it would take about five steps or activities. Now, with the Graph API within UiPath, you can read an email message from Outlook within a span of five to six seconds, maximum. This API functionality is pretty easy for us to handle.

Along with this, UiPath also introduced Orchestrator access via API. It's not mandatory to log in to Orchestrator to create an asset manually in UiPath. Rather, you can use the Orchestrator API to call a bot process and the assets. This API functionality helps developers to develop components effectively, as well as reduces bot processing time drastically.

I have been into RPA for almost six years and I have worked in the three major tools: UiPath, Automation Anywhere, and Blue Prism. I have been using UiPath for four to five years. I'm an RPA developer and do development for my clients. That includes designing and deploying bots in the clients' environments, and making sure the bots are running well.

It is stable. We are using the 2019 version. The versions are continually upgraded with the latest being the 2021 version. There are frequent updates but the version we are using is stable. We don't have any errors or bot crashes or other unexpected system exceptions during development. The stability is good across all versions.

It's pretty scalable. It can be used across all major providers. If you want to automate Windows, web-based or PDF-based interactions, or do email or Excel automation, you can. We can also do terminal automation, mainframe automation, and Citrix automation. It covers almost every possible scenario for real-time data handling. 

We only have a couple of challenges, when a customer says we need to do this or that and UiPath doesn't have built-in functionality for that. We need to think differently and add some additional .NET components, for example. 

But UiPath is pretty scalable, and we can use it across all technologies for automation.

If you don't find a solution in the Community Forum, you can raise a technical support ticket with UiPath. The support team works 24 hours a day, and we can get a resolution immediately. Both the Community Forum and the technical support play a major role and both help developers.

UiPath also has partners. Cognizant is a high-priority partner and they have their own SLAs for everything. If I raise a ticket regarding UiPath, if something is not working, the response time is very quick and the resolutions they provide are pretty standard. We haven't faced any difficulties in raising a ticket. Everything has met our expectations with respect to the technical support.

Positive

The main thing that could be improved is the cost. I have worked with other tools and the licensing cost of UiPath is slightly higher than the others.

Also, UiPath has a built-in functionality called Computer Vision to extract values from a PDF. If we want to use Computer Vision, UiPath has one drawback. The cost is based on how many documents we are using Computer Vision on. That makes it difficult to estimate ROI. Computer Vision has a dynamic cost. To propose a project to a client, a project that includes Computer Vision, we need to have some kind of standard cost so that they can calculate the ROI effectively. Computer Vision should not be based on usage.

This is one of the main drawbacks that I have seen in real-life situations, when quoting a price for a client. If UiPath improved in this area, they might have many more customers who want to automate PDF interactions based on Computer Vision, because it has huge scope.

The advantage of using UiPath over Automation Anywhere is the UI interaction. Automation Anywhere doesn't have a specialized feature like UI Explorer, or any other options to click on an image or interact with UI elements. Automation Anywhere has a Capture command and we have to work with that one command to interact with all the UI-based elements. But it's completely different in UiPath. UI Explorer enables multiple clicks and interactive activities. You can mimic the HTML per your project's needs. You can't work in the same way in Automation Anywhere. With respect to web-based automation, UiPath stands tall. AA has limited functionality.

The disadvantage of UiPath is in the PDF interaction. Automation Anywhere has a bot called IQ Bot, which is included in the licensing of Automation Anywhere. It's pretty easy to train it for a PDF document within the span of a few seconds. UiPath's Computer Vision has the same functionality as IQ Bot, but Computer Vision is pretty costly.

Other than that, Automation Anywhere is cloud-hosted and it has multiple ways for a developer to code. If you want to code RPA, or you want to code in a flow-based manner, you can do so with Automation Anywhere. But UiPath has only one mode, a flow-based automation. UiPath doesn't have code-based automation.

From the developer's point of view, if you have a code-based structure then what AA offers is as good as UiPath. 

A major advantage of UiPath is that since it is a .NET-based application, you can use all the methods and the properties that are available in .NET. You don't have that functionality in Automation Anywhere. If you want to read or manipulate a string, you need to use separate activities in Automation Anywhere, but with UiPath you can use the built-in .NET methods to read a string in a single line. The complexity of the code is smaller in UiPath.  

Because I have worked in all the major RPA tools, I can say confidently that UiPath is very developer-friendly. If you are coming from a non-technical background, or you don't know coding, they have a separate portal for you to develop in, called StudioX. It's a low-code platform, a "citizen-developer" platform. Anyone who wants to use UiPath can use it without any background.

From the development, design, and testing points of view, I rate UiPath higher than other RPA tools for automation. Go directly to UiPath, rather than trying all the other tools. UiPath is number-one for development and testing.

It is mandatory in our company to use the UiPath Academy to do RPA certification. Almost everyone has completed advanced professional certification in UiPath. The Academy covers every topic extensively, as far as what developers need. I don't come from an IT background but I learned it. UiPath teaches everything from scratch. With a little bit of coding knowledge, it's very easy to learn development using the Academy portal. The major advantage is that, since it is a video-based series, you get a clear idea of the modern-day functionality. They explain everything with an example and they give you use cases for practice. 

If you want to be an architect, they have a course for that. If you want a developer diploma, they have a course for that. And if you want to learn a specific topic, like deployment or testing, they have courses for them.

For anyone with experience in another technology who wants to learn UiPath, or wants to do RPA projects, it's a matter of 10 to 15 days to go through all the videos and you can start working. That's a big advantage of UiPath. The Academy makes learning easy.

They also have a Community Forum. If we have any doubt, we can interact with other developers around the globe. It's very interactive and we can learn what things are intended to do. About 90 percent of the time, you can find a solution using the forum.

Other than the Computer Vision cost model, the features of UiPath are pretty awesome to use. As a developer, there aren't any drawbacks or difficulties when using UiPath.

We are on-prem but we will be migrating to the cloud by the end of the month. 

My company has 100,000 people and uncountable departments. One of the biggest bots is in HR and finance. So far we have almost 57 bots in production, almost 45 in pre-production. We will have almost 100 bots by the end of this year. Our target is to reach 800 bots by the year after. 

No one can beat the automation. It's like you can sit back and play Tetris and let the bot do the work.

We see time savings, precision, and speed. Time is the most precious thing in the world. My company has saved around five million dollars this year. 

We use a standard approach when it comes to developing bots. By the end of this year, we are going to use Insights for reporting and we are going to use data mining the year after. We are doing a pilot right now, that captures the activities and try to figure out which is the high potential area. Based on the data, we will figure out and decide which route we should take.

Insights helps to determine which processes we will automate next. Based on that, we can get the data and write the defaults for leadership so they can make the right decision.

It's very easy to build automations. That's why we want to deploy 800 bots by next year. Our assessment is that it only takes 5% to 7% effort. The rest is trying to figure out the deployment process, the platform struggle, networking, etc. The development is very easy.

AI is a good feature. I am looking forward to that making life easier. It has enabled us to automate more processes. Based on the requirement, chat can hand over the process and we can kick off that bot to do the job. If someone has a problem with a ticket or with a schedule, they can connect to the schedule department or schedule bot. 

We have a citizen developer program in the company so we have taken the UiPath Academy courses. We bring the citizen developer on board and they have to go through the courses on our portal. We have tight integration of UiPath Academy with my company's internal learning process portal.

It's a wonderful integration and it's a very organically arranged process. We can start a raw developer and let them deploy a bot in a couple of months. It's a remarkable achievement. UiPath is very good at developing those courses. 

Creating the pipeline for the automation and then deploying it and keeping it there, is where the focus should be. I think UiPath realized that and is working on it. 

Support could use improvement. It's always a struggle to engage with them. We have a very tight relationship with support, but when things are in hot water, everyone wants to fix it right away which doesn't always happen. 

We have been using UiPath since 2018. 

The stability depends on the client's infrastructure. We're using a Citrix environment and internal infrastructure security has a lot of parameters. It totally depends. Every client has different challenges.

The scalability is a big value. If we have 100 bots today and we want to have 800 bots next year, on-premises is very challenging and expensive but with the cloud, it's very easy to replicate.

The quality of support depends on the support person that you get and on the situation. We started getting better support because we have a dedicated team.

Neutral

I have experience with Blue Prism and Microsoft cloud automation. The difference between them is like the difference between a Ferrari and a Toyota. UiPath is a Ferrari. It's a very mature and solid platform.

The initial setup is very easy because we created the right pipeline with the help of UiPath. However, at the end of this month, we are going to the cloud and we do not know the challenges that will bring. 

The deployment will take a few minutes. 

UiPath is revolutionary. My advice would be to try it out. In the beginning, it looks a little difficult, but once you get your hands on it and get used to it, it's the most wonderful thing.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. To make it a perfect ten, licensing and support should be improved. They should use the Microsoft model, where it's free. Once you develop it, the user will deploy it. You can make money on that. But let users have a taste, let them sit down in the driving seat and drive it.

We use UiPath to replicate what medical coders do by inputting codes from certain medical systems into another. It also automates our billing cycle, allowing us to input the codes directly into the insurance billing system to receive payments faster.

Our hospital doesn't get paid if we don't get those codes to the payers fast enough. We wanted to speed up the process of getting paid from insurance companies. A full-time employee can only do so much. 

Many of these people who do medical coding don't have college degrees. They're normal people with a lot going on in their lives, so they can't commit to doing this coding every moment of every day. A person can code maybe 10 to 15 records daily, but the bot could do 50. You also don't need to pay bots or give them benefits and physical workspaces. UiPath enables our organization to be more robust in what we can do. 

The company doesn't currently prioritize AI use cases, but we're trying to get the leaders to prioritize them by showing them the dollar value. AI is growing. Every year, it's getting bigger. 

In healthcare, everything is still on paper. People still fax papers to each other. Doctors have a sheet of paper or a packet of information about a patient that they can't read quickly. UiPath's Document Understanding lets doctors get a document that's already processed, and they can ask it questions.

We are looking to add AI, such as generative AI, but it requires our organization to implement it. UiPath's chatbots and autopilot require UiPath Assistant on every machine, which is challenging because many people use the same machine in the hospital. Everyone knows how to use Microsoft Copilot or ChatGPT. Even a non-technical user can go on OpenAI.com and start chatting. But with UiPath, if you want to use their chatbot or autopilot, you need UiPath Assistant.

My enterprise has been using UiPath since 2021, but my team inherited the solution from another team in 2023.

The solution just went live recently, so its stability is not yet fully determined.

The solution is scalable, as UiPath helped to revamp and update our older systems.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. UiPath support is amazing, especially with hypercare.

Positive

We still use Power Automate and UiPath together. Our system is entirely on-prem because some of our hospital systems must be. 

We build and deploy some of the automations in-house, but we also had a parnter build some of our stuff. 

There has been a significant return on investment. The cost of replacing employees with UiPath has shown significant savings. We probably saved $45 million this year, and we're projecting $80 million in savings next year.

UiPath is more expensive than other automation services, but the ROI justifies the cost.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. 

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

Building automation using UiPath is easy.

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

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

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

UiPath has helped minimize our on-premises footprint.

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

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

UiPath has helped reduce human error.

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

UiPath has saved us thousands of dollars over the years.

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for five years.

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

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

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

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

One person is enough for the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

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

UiPath pricing is average.

I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

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

One to three people are usually required for UiPath maintenance.

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

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

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

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

We mainly use Studio and Action Center. 

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for four years. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Neutral

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We started using AI in Document Understanding by leveraging it against our models for different documents from our customers, primarily in the finance space. We have also used AI to train models for land management documents, helping them learn as we receive new document types. 

Recently, we've used it to analyze documents and articles online to understand sentiment toward our company. We analyze and summarize things people say in articles or posts elsewhere, which allows us to collect industry trend data. We are considering using Clipboard AI for smaller, ad-hoc data processing tasks because it can sometimes be more effective than Document Understanding.

We get a lot of projects that are on relatively short notice for the workload that comes with them. Historically, we would rely on leveraged services or contractors to do that work manually, which is costly. You can save tons of money by automating data entry, transcription, etc. Nowadays, as we get busier and busier, the work seems to bog people down more and more with tasks. UiPath gives them opportunities to free themselves up and focus on themselves.

We initially focused on time savings and how we could free people up more. We achieved that over time, but it took a while to get there in the first few years. We came in with some use cases that we later learned were not great fits for automation. We learned through trial and error and got better at identifying better use cases for automation. We've succeeded, and it's worked out for the better. 

But aside from saving people time, we also wanted to ensure that we brought in new technology to leverage some of those processes. UiPath forces you to look at the process from a high level and take a step back. You might have had the same person doing the same process for 10 years or more without thinking about how you can use new technologies to eliminate the process or make it more efficient. UiPath forces you to look at the process as a whole and the systems it's tied to. When you step back and look at it, especially with new people coming in, they start offering suggestions, like "Wait. You've been sending this email every time? That's something we can automate now. Oh, you've been trying to pull this information from a document and copy and paste it? That's something we can automate, too." 

If it's not automation, it's something else. We can look at other tools and applications our company brought in. There's usually some other solution they can use, automation or not. The natural way to work with it is by lining out a process and laying out all the steps on a workflow diagram. It allows you to rethink your process as you're doing it. 

Instead of just following step-by-step documentation or the way you've done it all the time, it gives you a chance to see it from a new perspective, and that's just part of working with the tool. As you build that out in UiPath using task capture or anything else, you will see that naturally and start thinking about ways to handle it better.  

Automation has freed up employees for other tasks. That's something that they like about it. The other thing it's done is build some excitement about IT and solutions in general. They're always looking at the new function that's coming out. They want to see what else we can do for them. Automation isn't always the answer, but we can get them to engage and talk to us during office hours to attempt to solve their problem with UiPath. We can also learn more about what they do. 

We're getting closer to our customers, talking more about their work, and they're feeling a closer bond with us. They're feeling like they trust us more in IT and are starting to see what other tools we have. Maybe automation wasn't the right fit, but we will always find better opportunities by building a report that sends an automatic email and an application for them in low-code software. UiPath has helped create a much better and fluid engagement process for us and our customers. 

Since it's a low-code tool that's easier for them to approach and understand, they're also more involved in the design process. The learning curve is shorter. When Studio first came out, it wasn't as user-friendly as they had hoped, but StudioX came out in 2020 and was approachable for most of our users. That's what our citizen developers use most of the time now. We have far more citizen developers with StudioX than unattended developers with Studio.

Within UiPath Cloud itself, UiPath Insights has been excellent. Insights is one of the newer features we were excited about because we built custom reports, captured all that data in one place, and leveraged it in different areas. That was a challenge for us and created a support burden. We're automation developers, not report developers. When leadership wanted a new metric or anything, figuring it out was always a pain. 

Insights has built-in mechanisms for tracking time savings, usage reports, and the overall health of your automation program. Having that functionality built in by default is critical. I click it and tell it the report that I want to generate. It'll build it for me automatically, and I can share it with people who need it. It has made a huge difference for people administrating the platform and reporting success to leadership over time. 

UiPath needs work on the governance side. For example, they released Studio Web this year and have started work on its governance, but it initially lacked control from an administration standpoint. You could not lock down third-party libraries or other applications and integrations it had built in.

For example, people could use a Google account, but we might have concerns about that from a security standpoint. Cybersecurity is taking a more significant place in IT, and we're mindful of that. Having explicit governance over what our users can do inside those technologies is essential. We hope to see that more over the next few years. We've given a lot of that feedback as customers to UiPath, and they've been working hard to get that into the pipeline and implement those changes.

I have been using UiPath for about six years now.

UiPath can grow with us, especially since they developed a cloud environment. When we started, we had to make many changes in Orchestrator and other areas as we scaled up. We scaled up fast and automated dozens of automations in the first few years. 

However, we found that the default setup for the UiPath Orchestrator in 2018 didn't have all the features we needed to administer it to our customers. We had to build custom solutions in-house, but they've released many new features in UiPath Cloud that simplify management. 

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. The executive support team and customer success team have been great. All of them play a role, and they're super knowledgeable. If they can't solve your problem, they know who can and connect you with them quickly. We've leveraged them extensively and will use them more over the next couple of years as we finish our cloud implementation. 

There are still many features we don't use, and we constantly go to them for guidance and help on how to use them best and what they've done with other customers. They provide tons of great insight and have a solid network. 

Positive

We didn't have a low-code automation platform. We developed most of our automations using PowerShell. We didn't have citizen developers, but most business users would use Power Automate. Back then, it was known as Flow on the Power Platform. 

Our corporate leadership decided to bring in UiPath. It wasn't an IT decision.  They wanted something they could start using for their daily tasks. They didn't think we had something that could automate things well, and PowerShell is limited from a scripting and API standpoint. They wanted to automate things in SAP, and the APIs and other things are locked down in a custom shop like ours. We can't integrate with our environment in any way we want, so we need something that can interact through the interface. UiPath does that. It can click and type everything through the interface. 

The leadership started the process. IT got involved and supported it. Since then, we've helped it grow throughout the company. It's not just finance anymore. 

The initial setup was complex because UiPath didn't have many pipelines built in. We had to build custom pipelines for the technology we use. It was TFS at the time, and now we use Azure DevOps. I helped with the VDI setup. For unattended automations, you must have a platform or system they can run on. We had looked at doing HDRs—high-density robots—that UiPath. 

Due to applications such as SAP, it couldn't run on a server-side setup. It had to be on a desktop, so we used a VDI for every bot we created, and I helped create the user policies for our accounts and device policies for each VDI. I also set up all the installations and the presets. I helped set up a framework for that over the first year, from 2018 to 2019. We smoothed out the process from there. That was something we had to do on our side. It will be unique for a customer depending on their environment.

We used a partner during the initial setup.

The leadership is pleased with the outcomes. With Insights, we can show them how much time we're saving with each process.  We document savings in hours rather than monetary terms.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for two years.

UiPath is stable.

UiPath can scale to our needs.

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

Positive

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

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

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

We implement UiPath in-house.

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

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

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

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

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