UiPath Reviews

We work as a center of excellence and we develop automations centrally for other departments. All our deployments are unattended bots that are deployed and managed by us, centrally. They are all running on a virtual machine. Nothing is running on client computers or laptops. We do not have any attended use cases. The process owners are interacting with the bots.

We use the bots for a lot of reporting, including monthly and weekly reports. We are a construction company and we have a lot of reports for all kinds of things, such as construction projects, different construction sites, and various subsidiaries for regional departments. A region like Bavaria, for example, needs its reports. And there are plenty of controlling departments in all of the subsidiaries.

We also have some ticketing use cases. One of them is for IT services, meaning internal ticketing. That bot regularly checks our ticket software and automatically processes some of the tickets. For example, when an employee needs rights to a specific system, the bot checks whether they fulfill the requirements and approves or declines the ticket.

Another type of ticketing use case is more about processing customer tickets. As a construction company, we also do facility management, and that means there are a lot of external customers with their own systems in which they record tickets. The tickets are not visible in our local systems so someone has to go to the external systems, export the tickets, filter them, and then tell everyone what they're supposed to do to their buildings as a result. The tickets might be about small repair jobs, for example. We run this daily and, in the morning, everyone receives an email with all the tickets that have to be done within one day, three days, one week, et cetera.

Both of the ticketing use cases are connected with SLAs. If you miss a certain time frame before processing a ticket for external customers, you have to pay a penalty fee. For the internal tickets there are SLAs for internal tracking purposes. Because those tickets have to be processed within two hours, that bot runs every two hours and checks for new tickets.

Another IT services use case is for getting access rights to local drives.

We also have many recurring processes. For example, in HR they have to go to the system and confirm a process. It’s a necessary evil which is probably due to the legacy systems we have. Someone defined this process a long time ago and it still has to be done.

We also have use cases in finance and treasury. They are not tickets, but they process requests from employees. For example, they can request cash on a specific card and the bot will check the emails and then basically transfer data from an email, or from a PDF form attached to an email, and enter it into the finance system.

One last type of use case is where the bot works as an interface between systems. Data has to be exported from one system and imported to another system and there is no existing API. The bot exports and imports the data. We have one bot that exports PDF documents and sends them to an email interface. It defines a specific subject and then attaches the file. That file will automatically be uploaded to another system. Or the bot may log in to a system and upload the document. These use cases are due to the fact that there is no interface between two systems and they're either not big enough to develop an API or they may involve an external customer system and the customer has no interest in providing an API.

UiPath has freed up our employees' time and that's its main purpose. We don't have huge use cases, but for our bigger use cases it could be saving us 35 to 40 hours per month. With the smaller processes, people save about two hours a month. We have 23 use cases that are live at the moment and the total time saved by them is about seven or eight person-days a week. The big processes account for 50 to 60 percent of all the savings.

Employees have more time for more important things, but there are no direct cost savings from our automations. What we do have are a lot of efficiency gains and some time savings. Any cost savings are on the lower end of the scale.

The solution also definitely reduces human error. We have some processes that involve penalty fees if there is human error, so the reduction in errors has probably affected the business on a very small scale.

In terms of the cost of automations, before UiPath the whole automation process was much more complex. There might have been software providers involved in that process, charging us and providing APIs. And the whole process took way longer. Now that we have a UiPath license, the cost of implementing any automation is zero, other than our salaries, which would be paid anyway. The automation creation process is definitely a lot faster. It's also cheaper because there is no involvement of an external software developer, which is probably the most expensive part.

I like the REFramework. It's one of the unique selling points of UiPath because it gives you a framework within the software to structure your processes. It's perfect in terms of error handling and it provides a lot of functionalities for processing multiple transactions. It makes the whole solution more robust.

I tested the Process Mining at my previous company and I don't think it's suitable for RPA processes. It operates at a way higher level and, using it, you may find an area in which you can optimize a process, but it doesn't just give you a defined process for automation. It doesn't necessarily help you to identify the processes.

The Task Capture component offers the ability to record a process and it will give you process documentation. It tells you how many clicks are being made, and it will create screenshots. It tells you the basic activities that are being done in the process. When we tested it, the quality of these documents was very low. It took more time to take the output and make it useful than it would have taken to analyze and document the process ourselves. 

We are not using any of that. Together with the customer, we are manually defining and documenting processes. We are doing the actual automation, of course, with UiPath. In terms of monitoring it afterward, it's 50/50. Standard Orchestrator definitely offers you some ways to monitor your processes. It tells you how many processes failed and why they failed. You could also define a process that sends you an email when it fails.

UiPath also offers some BI components, but that requires a separate license and costs. We are not using them. The whole BI reporting functionality of standard UiPath is not that great. We use external dashboards in Power BI.

We also have a calendar application because, with standard Orchestrator, there's no overview about when you have bots running and when you have free slots. So it's also not great for planning license usage. The whole visualization piece, out-of-the-box, is not so nice. UiPath is mainly the automation tool for us, and it's definitely great for that. But in terms of analysis and monitoring, there's definitely still potential for the software.

I have been using UiPath for two and a half to three years.

Their tech support replies quite quickly. But when we had technical problems, most of the time, we had to have multiple calls. It's not that great. They definitely provided us with all the experts, but they just didn't immediately find solutions, most of the time.

It often took two to three days to fix our issues. We would have to explain the issue one or two times and then they say, "Okay, we need to do a call." After the call we would try out the solution but it wouldn't work and there would be another call. Support is another potential area for improvement.

Also, we bought our licenses from a UiPath partner. We are actually supposed to talk to them for support, but they charge for their consulting services. They are the reason we didn't have constant communication with UiPath. From my experience at my previous job, where we worked with UiPath, we were in close communication with the UiPath success manager. There was way better communication and support because we always had a channel that we could talk to regularly. And they already knew what our issues had been. If you are working directly with UiPath, the tech support is good, although not great.

Neutral

We did not have a previous solution.

I started in RPA with my previous company. My boss just told me to get into this topic. I started with the UiPath Academy before we were even using the software, but I could follow all the courses. It's all video training, so it's easy to follow. The Microsoft training often consists of long sets of text and it says "expected reading time is 23 minutes," but it's 23 minutes just to read the text. Now, UiPath even offers training exercises. 

And because they offer the Community version, you can download the full-featured software without actually having a license, for personal use and for training purposes. That way you can try out whatever you learn. That makes the learning very practical. And the Community version is not limited to 30 days like test versions of some other solutions. It's a version that you can use for testing forever and you can use all the functionalities. That definitely helped me when I did the training. That's how I got from knowing nothing about RPA to knowing a lot about RPA, before working with it.

If you have a basic understanding of the software, the most important thing is to develop with it, because that gives you practical experience.

They also have very specific, deep-dive courses, for working with Orchestrator, among other things. They're easy to find. You can invest two hours and learn the most important aspects of the UI and look for what you need.

With the Advanced RPA Developer certification, there is an exam. That is where I got the most practical experience. It's not just quizzes, it's also practical projects.

Overall, the Academy is great. It has training paths as well as very specific courses. 

UiPath is quite expensive and whatever additional components you want to use will have additional costs. We are not using the Document Understanding feature because of the cost. For Document Understanding, the cost may be per transaction.

Compared to Power Automate, UiPath is quite expensive to set up. What we are trying to do, and likely everybody tries to do this, is fully occupy one unattended-bot license before getting another one. So it's not just a matter of buying a few licenses, because they are quite expensive. That definitely also affects the return on investment, especially if you automate smaller processes.

Also, we are currently working with centralized automation development, but we are planning to decentralize it with citizen developers as well, for smaller processes. For that, we intend to use Power Automate Desktop because in that scenario the pricing disqualified UiPath. If you give a UiPath Studio license to many people—to fulfill the vision of a bot for every person—or even to one person per department, they would have to work quite hard to see a positive return on investment. 

For UiPath, you need Orchestrator, which is already quite expensive, although you can use just one to start with. But if you have multiple unattended-bot licenses and multiple Studio licenses, it gets expensive quite fast. 

Also, the whole pricing structure is very unclear. You can't find out anything about prices before talking with UiPath or with a partner. At that point, you're still not sure what kind of price you're getting. Of course, they offer savings when you order many licenses, but there's no fixed reference point if you haven't talked to UiPath before. There is no real information about what you actually need and how much you can expect it to cost. 

With the Microsoft platform, you can directly see the kinds of packages they have and whether they're charging per process or per transaction. You see the price. It's very transparent.

When I compare UiPath with other providers' solutions, UiPath offers a very structured development interface. It is more structured than the interface of Microsoft Power Automate, for example. It offers a very visually appealing way of structuring the processes in flow charts as well as in sequences. It makes it easy to see an overview of a process. I definitely like UiPath's development interface.

UiPath Orchestrator is definitely great, and better than what competitors offer because it enables you to use queues very easily, which again helps to create robust automations.

In addition, the UiPath community is the best among all the software communities that I've seen. There's a great forum. Whatever question you have will either be answered by other developers or even UiPath employees who participate in the forum. Also, there is already a huge stock of questions and answers about automation. Usually, you will get an answer to any question within hours or even minutes. Together with the training platform, the whole ecosystem around the community is much better than that of any other software I've ever seen.

In my previous company, we evaluated the big ones at that time: Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and UiPath. 

In my current company, we mainly evaluated two solutions. The first was UiPath, because it's probably the most powerful solution. The second was Microsoft Power Automate, which is now becoming more mature. Power Automate is probably also the easiest to implement because we are Office 365 users. We could just provide a Power Automate desktop license to any of our employees. It's definitely much easier to acquire Power Automate licenses and provide them to the users. It's directly integrated. There's no need for IT involvement.

In my opinion, UiPath is easy to use. Once you have been using it for a while, it's pretty easy. If you're using it as a citizen developer, meaning that you want to automate your own processes, it's probably a bit complex. It offers a lot of functionality and properties that can be edited per activity. You have to have a basic understanding of variables, arguments, et cetera, if you want to build a robust solution.

The macro recorder is not that nice. It's not like you can just record a process and then run it over and over again. It definitely requires some experience to create a robust process. All in all, I think it's easy to use. 

I also tried the StudioX version, just for testing purposes, and that may be a bit easier to use, but it's still not a tool that you can give to someone and they will be able to start developing on their own. In particular, they will not be able to run something unattended because that requires a lot of testing. It requires basic knowledge, which comes with experience, about the HTML selectors.

In general, UiPath is the most powerful solution there is on the market right now for RPA, mainly because of the easy structure provided by UiPath Orchestrator for larger transactional business processes.

It's widely used across the bank. Some are dealing with regulatory issues, for example, taking documents out of one system, moving them into another. Others are opening new accounts for clients. Some are doing payment transactions and that involves looking at emails that come in and determining what type of document that is so it gets routed and processed correctly. We've touched every line of business within the bank.

The solution has improved our organization, specifically around all the operational aspects of the bot. Once we deploy them through the orchestrator we use insights to see how the bots are performing, what errors are referring to, and just the general health insights would be the biggest lift that we've gotten out of the solution. Building the automation is a little bit easier and quicker on the platform than where we were before.

The RPA is the most valuable aspect of the solution.

We are really getting into using AI Center and we use Insights.

The solution saved costs for our organization. That said, I can't quantify it.

UiPath has reduced human error.

In the initial automation that we're doing, we're migrating the ones that have run on another platform. Therefore, we already know how valuable they are to the bank. Sometime in 2022, we'll really be getting into new opportunities.

UiPath has freed up employee time. In my specific job, I’m responsible for the running of the platform, making sure it's up and available. The other teams actually take care of the delivery and are more in tune with the business side and can speak more to the freeing of time in quantitative terms. I’m a degree away from that. I'm aware of what's going on over there, however, I don't track it so closely.

We’ve used the UiPath Academy courses. The Academy is a really good platform to start training on. It really gets you into the platform and allows you to start exploring other things. Generally, they're really good courses.

The number of courses and the variety of the topics all seem to touch on whatever aspect you're looking to do with the platform.

With all the different tools that they have in their arsenal, sometimes it's hard to know how we can get the most out of them. We see it as a kid going into a candy store. There are all sorts of choices. However, we don't necessarily understand, you would take this, but not that? You seem to need to mix and match certain things. We don't necessarily understand that. We need them to be more clear in saying, for example, "if you want to do process mining, great, however, these are its strengths and these are its limitations." If we know the pros and cons, then we can make a decision about what we need to adjust in terms of how we go after new opportunities. Basically, we are seeking better guidance on how to use the suite of the products together.

I've been using the solution for a year. 

The solution is very stable. 

The scalability is good. 

We have a team collectively between developers and product owners and general users, so the users are comprised of roughly 100 different people. At different points, our in-orchestrator has 30 or so developers across several teams. In general, in terms of human people using it, it's likely 80 to 100 users or somewhere in there.

We are looking to increase the usage.

Technical support is okay. They have some gaps that they need to close. I know some of their folks from firsthand experience aren't necessarily used to using the new modern folders. Therefore, when we get on the phone and say "Hey, we're having this problem". The support staff will say "Oh, well you're a modern folder set up. I mostly work with classic." That doesn't matter from my perspective. I still need help.

We used to use Blue Prism. Blue Prism only does RPA. Our goal was to consolidate, to have one platform for automation as a long-term solution for the bank. We went through a selection process and UiPath came out on top.

I wasn't directly part of the setup team, however, from the outside looking in, it seems it was a little more involved than we had initially thought.

Some of it may have been internal. Bank processes and having to have so many different people involved to install a server and configure it on the network and all that could have added difficulty.

The deployment was probably close to three or four months. We have four environments. Over the course of about three months, all four environments eventually got stood up. The first took the longest. We noted what went right and wrong and went from there. 

We probably have seen an ROI, based on the initial cost to stand it up. That pricing structure is increasing now from the initial offering, however, overall, we're probably seeing some benefit out of it.

The pricing is pretty fair for the size per the number of licenses. It's my understanding that part of that was influenced by the fact that they won their business from one of their competitors, Blue Prism. That probably helped.

We looked at Automation Anywhere. They had recently upgraded from their desktop to a web-based client. In the meantime, they dropped functions in the conversion and when I used it on the desktop, I noticed that there were certain functions that they didn't bring over onto the web version yet, which kind of surprised me. As far as just overall usability, integration with other technologies, whether it's Python or writing .net custom code, UiPath just kind of seamlessly works within the platform.

We are not yet utilizing AI.

I'd advise potential new users to do the due diligence and don't expect that UiPath is going to always outline the best ways to use it. A company just has to understand there's a lot there and try to be as specific in what they want to do. 

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a nine.

We're a consultant, so we help customers use this solution to develop automation and help set up COE. We provide the means for an entire organization to build its use cases. That's how we use Orchestrator both attended and unattended.

The solution has helped eliminate human errors. The amount varies by specific use case, but it is sometimes 50% to 60%.

It has also saved organizations time. Internally, we're not at a stage where we've measured it. I would say right now it's not that great, but maybe 15 or 20 hours per person.

Orchestrator's value really comes from scheduling and jobs, where robots can trigger other robots. I can't speak to the new versions yet, but they all seem great. Attended is where the human and robot interaction can happen seamlessly. With unattended, some of the processes that were earlier so mundane are all being done without any human interaction, so that provides true end-to-end uninterrupted automation.

I would rate the ease of use for this solution as five out of five.

The UiPath Academy RPA training is awesome. It's top of the line, so I would also say that it should get a five out of five rating.

I talked to the product team. They are very passionate about this. In my opinion, all the different components that they have now released should be integrated under a single umbrella, available through a single landing page. That way, everything integrates with each other and they are able to communicate data back and forth. To me, that would be the ultimate solution.

I get it. There is a roadmap and it's a journey. Still, I would like to get to a place where everything integrates with each other. Now that we have all these different means that can help us enable a customer in their journey, making sure that they're integrated would truly add value. That removes the overhead of combining data from all these different sources.

I would rate its stability as five out of five. With any tool, there have been occasions when a job did not trigger or aborted, but that's been very rare in my experience.

I would say we have more than 20 users. There may even be around 50 users, if not more.

It was very easy to install this solution.

It does not take long from the time one purchases the UiPath license until they have a real bot in production. We do this mostly for our customers, but also for our own internal use case. We were able to get it done and up and running in weeks.

We have absolutely seen an ROI. The time to get an ROI varies from case to case. 

Attended is fairly cheap. Anytime you bring in Orchestrator, that starts to become a little more expensive. I'm a little concerned about all the new SKUs that are coming in and the products associated with them. I am really interested in finding out if someone wanted a full product suite, what kind of money are they looking at annually.

I would rate UiPath as ten out of ten. I've done implementations across tools, so I'm familiar with some of the other market leaders too. Honestly, though, UiPath is very good at keeping up with the times. It's easy to implement. Its ease of use and how quickly you can get set up and going stands out, in my view. They've got the bolt on the market, so even with the new launches that happen with some of the new tools that came in, I think Connect really speaks to an overall automation strategy. I think that sets it apart.

The primary use case is around manual conversion of data from one system to another. These are big processes right now.

We are using Studio, Orchestrator and the robots.

Our organization is more efficient. The people that you're automating processes from are happy they are getting done. They are excited and like to be a part of the process. It's also new technology. It's innovative. and people enjoy being around that.

We don't have a baseline metric for the elimination of human errors. So, we don't know how many errors a human actually makes doing some of the conversion data entry processes. We assume they are about 90 percent accurate and UiPath is 100 percent accurate.

We have saved 18,000 hours so far this year.

With the robotics and management of Orchestrator, we are able to kick things off. We are starting to get more out of the scheduling of these and into more on demand triggered events, such as a RESTful service calls and things of that nature.

The ease of using the platform for automating your company's processes is a five out of five. It is super simple. Everyone who we have in our robotics team had no experience with automation or robotics previously. They went online took the classes from UiPath. They started with the Community Edition, just to play with it themselves, then they were probably experts within a couple of months.

Everyone has used the UiPath Academy training. I would rate it around a three or four out of five. While it's simple and you get a decent understanding of what's there, you still have to dedicate on an awful lot of time doing the automations to become proficient at them.

While it looks like it is being addressed, getting the unattended robots to every person's machine in the company and executing on their machines needs improvement.

I would rate the stability as a five out of five. it hasn't gone down yet.

We have a team of four people involved in our automation program.

I have only used the technical support to fix a licensing discrepancy. They were okay.

Everybody said, "We had to do more with less," from the C-suite on down. RPA is the only way that you can do that which seemed viable. So, we tried it out.

We were previously using VM. 

The initial setup is straightforward. With our proof of concept, it took us two to three weeks to develop it, then another week to make it production ready. When we deployed it into production, we had the license. We installed the robot and had it running through Windows Scheduler before we had Orchestrator, and it just worked

We started with a proof of concept, had it running in production, and bought the license that day.

We did have a systems integrator who helped us. Overall, for the initial implementation, I would rate them a five out of five. They came in, and it was great.

We have been able to achieve our ROIs on pretty much every process that we have done. You see it almost initially, as soon as the process starts running. However, until we get the actual feedback of, "Yes, I can tell this is saving us time and effort." It takes about a month for the business unit to really recognize it.

We haven't technically saved money because we haven't gotten rid of anybody, so our CFO will not let us claim money. However, we do calculate time given back. Right now, I believe for this year, we've been given back 18,000 hours so far.

Our licensing costs are around $40,000 a year.

We looked at the big three: Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and UiPath. Then, we chose UiPath because of cost and ease of use. The training was there. It was so quick and easy to pick up.

I would recommend UiPath. It's easy to use and learn. It just works and doesn't break. It's cost-effective.

We run our automations in virtual environments, such as Citrix. Orchestrator sits in VMware along with unattended robots. It kicks everything off behind the scenes. Most processes are set on a time schedule.

We prefer unattended bots. We're moving into that real-time trigger, but still like to run unattended to give some form of user interface for the user to call them.

I would definitely rate it a 10 out of 10 because of what it delivers and allows, along with the benefits. You can also see on their strategy on the roadmap, it's just expanding and getting better.

The primary UiPath use cases are document processing and using automation solutions to eliminate repetitive tasks in administrative data entry. 

Automation has helped our CoE understand the administrative structure and returns. It's a promising tool. We've already seen returns on the automation side, and we're beginning to explore GenAI. It helped us free up staff by taking them off repetitive tasks and transferring their focus to more important tasks. 

The automation and the significant return on investment it provides are valuable.

I want more flexibility in licensing and how we can use AI units. 

UiPath seems pretty solid.

UiPath has grown with us. We started on-premises and switched to the cloud, giving us greater flexibility. 

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath support is pretty good. It's adequate when needed. Fortunately, they have UiPath Academy and other information out there, so you don't need to use it often. 

Positive

We were using ABBYY, but I can't compare the two solutions because I joined when we were transitioning to UiPath, so I don't have much experience. 

UiPath provides a significant ROI in saving time and improving the employee experience.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10. 

We currently use UiPath to process birth certificates. One of my tasks was to apply OCR to the birth certificates and use a named entity recognition model to extract details like the names of the individuals, parents, and the place of birth. The project requires us to handle certificates from all 50 states, and every state uses a different format. 

We're supposed to be doing intelligent automation, but we're not there yet. I work in the applied analytics and statistics section, and we're supposed to find ways to inject more advanced analytical methods into some of these places where we can automate. Our IT department has a CoE that conducts intake processes. They use Automation Hub to review each process, and the executive governance board votes on it. I don't know how they decide internally because I'm not part of that. 

Automation through UiPath provided a framework and a low-code solution, which generally improved the process. It reduced the burden on the workers, freeing them to do what they wanted. 

It is also utilized in identity governance, especially within IT environments. For example, say I want to install a particular piece of software on my computer. There's a process to request access, and it goes through an approval chain. Ultimately, it gets to someone who has to click a button or provision an account. Someone will get an email and copy-paste the stuff from the email into another system and click "provision." 

And when an employee leaves or switches job roles, they no longer need access to a particular system anymore, so you must remove that access as soon as possible. Automation helps. Governance is one area that we would like to use it in more.

UI automation is helpful for interacting with legacy systems, mainframe systems, and various web applications. Someone might use all those things during their jobs, and many of them don't necessarily have APIs, either.

Although improvements have been made, such as auto-healing, there is room for improvement. Changes in the UI can break automations. If you upgrade from Windows 10 to 11, you may need to rewrite some of those UI selectors completely. That is probably the biggest weakness that I can think of.

I have been using UiPath for four or five years.

The solution can be fragile, but there have been significant improvements over the years. The unified target framework, which considers strict, fuzzy, and image matching, helps to stabilize the application somewhat.

UiPath has been able to perform as our organization grows or as the demands on UiPath increase.

In my previous job, I interacted directly with UiPath support, and they were always effective. Currently, support is accessed through IT, which escalates issues if needed, so I have less direct interaction with customer support.

Positive

I've used Python and VBA and experimented minimally with Selenium, but they're not as strong when it comes to UI automation. I've also used Power Automate for Microsoft products. Sometimes, I want to automate Outlook, but I don't want to ask the security to enable the UiPath activity to pull emails. 

We've saved time and reduced human error. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We have been using the RPA functionality in UiPath mostly for cash management. Our biggest use case is submitting wires and payments.

We aim to reduce routine tasks and allow people more time to do more important things. We were mainly looking at time savings for employees, and we may not have gotten all of the time savings that we wanted, but we definitely have found some. In addition to saving time, we also hope to mitigate risks for some of the tasks we've implemented and reduce human error in some of these processes, 

In bot development, we have had a lot of conversations about what we want bots to do, how to process exceptions, who exceptions go to, and who needs to be aware. Once the bot goes live, we have to keep the chats and lines of communication open to ensure everything's working.

The most valuable features are UI, web, and Excel automation, as well as the ability to package all of these in one software suite.

Setting up the infrastructure with different virtual desktops and making the connections stable in our environment present challenges. More direction on cleaning up these issues would be useful.

I have been using UiPath for about two years.

We've had some stability issues, but we're unsure whether UiPath caused them or if it was our company's older internal infrastructure. We haven't had any downtime caused by UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale as our environment grows and keeps up with demand.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. We receive good support from UiPath when we need it.

Positive

Personally, I did not use a different solution before UiPath, but some departments at the corporation have used other RPA tools, and some still do. We chose UiPath because we worked with some consulting firms that were familiar with the development capabilities of the solution. They could help with the initial development of the bots. We like the direction of the tool.

We worked with consulting firms familiar with the development capabilities of UiPath to assist with the development of bots.

We have seen a return on investment due to time savings with high-value employees. However, as we continue to make new things, it's hard to determine the exact return at this point.

I am not involved in the purchasing, but people have been generally happy with the pricing so far. Some pieces we use now may not provide expected value, and we might remove those in the future.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

I use UiPath for work projects that involve various applications, including license rebate processing and healthcare licensing. I develop reusable components for these projects.

Specifically, the process involves launching different licensing websites and extracting essential information such as license number, status, effective date, expiration date, and any disciplinary actions. This data is collected from providers like physicians, dietitians, opticians, and speech therapists. We validate the extracted information against existing databases or applications, updating records where necessary.

This validated information is crucial for determining the approval or denial of applications, such as those related to provider enrollment. Essentially, my work centers around creating processes with defined inputs and desired outputs.

Currently, I'm focused on a project within the manufacturing sector, specifically a constant bidding branch. Here, we gather order information for stakeholders, including tracking numbers, tracking statuses, and approximate order values. We store this data in an Oracle database, generate a CSV file from it, and distribute this file to stakeholders via email.

Building automation using UiPath is easy for developers. It is easy for them to manage and start building with the automation.

UiPath empowers organizations to improve their staff's time management and become more cost-effective. By automating routine tasks, it frees up employees' valuable time to focus on higher-priority work. 

UiPath enables end-to-end automation. Our process begins with meeting stakeholders to determine which processes are suitable for automation. We assess if existing tools are sufficient or if new ones need to be implemented. We also identify applications that automation could potentially replace. If all requirements are met, we obtain sign-off for automation and prepare process documentation, such as Process Definition Documents. We then consult with business stakeholders and obtain managerial approval on the Solution Design Document. This phase can take several weeks and involves outlining the specific solutions and applications required for the automation. Next, we create a video demonstrating the automation workflow and explain the process to stakeholders. After securing sign-off from management and SMEs, we begin the development phase. The completed development is sent for UAT and then moved into production. We typically monitor the automation in production for one to two months. Any errors trigger email notifications, allowing us to promptly address issues within UiPath Studio and re-deploy to the live production environment.

The UiPath User Community is a valuable resource for developers. It allows us to share knowledge and find answers to questions or issues we encounter, without needing to submit a support ticket.

It has significantly improved our efficiency by automating many manual tasks, leading to a noticeable benefit for patients. Now, thanks to automated benefit processing, patients receive instant approvals or denials from their insurance providers.

Our company encourages us to complete UiPath Academy courses to further our understanding of Robotic Process Automation. These courses equip us with the skills and knowledge necessary to solve complex problems encountered in real-world scenarios. Completing the Academy courses and obtaining certifications can be beneficial not only for career advancement within our company but also for understanding new features and process flows implemented in future updates. Additionally, these certifications can be valuable when transitioning to other companies as they demonstrate our expertise in UiPath products.

Human error is minimized by utilizing exception handling.

UiPath helps free up our time.

The most valuable feature is the easily accessible tool, such as the ARI framework, which I have used extensively. My interest in the ARI framework has grown significantly because the templates are built directly into UiPath, making it possible to automate more complex processes, while also simplifying the development and understanding for developers.

The UiPath Community Edition lacks some key features that developers find essential for learning and building their knowledge base before transitioning to the paid Enterprise Edition. To provide developers with a more comprehensive evaluation experience, UiPath could consider including all features in the Community Edition for a limited trial period. This would allow developers to fully test the solution's capabilities before making a purchase decision.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

UiPath operates reliably around 80 percent of the time. However, automation speed can sometimes be hindered by internal applications.

I had to contact their support once and they were extremely helpful in resolving my issue.

Positive

While I have experience with Automation Anywhere, I find UiPath to be more user-friendly and offer a more robust orchestration tool. Although Automation Anywhere offers child bots and AI IQ bots, it is not as well-suited for handling complex automation scenarios.

The initial deployment is straightforward. We can sign up with UiPath and set it up on our local desktop, or we can deploy it from our cloud cluster.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

The amount of maintenance required depends on the project and the bots being used. On average maintenance is done monthly.