UiPath Reviews

I'm working for one project where we're trying to automate processes for a logistics company, specifically in their back-office accounting processes.

We're using Studio, Orchestrator and the bots. In other words, we're using the whole platform.

When we were implementing it, we were empowering people. In this company, everybody has their own work and they were really in their own area. Then we started this project and they got empowered to change the way they were working. UiPath is so open that everybody can take part in it.

That was one thing that changed right away. Another thing was the way they think about processes and where there are possibilities to automate has really changed. Before, they never thought about automating all these processes but we told them there is a possibility. Now, when they're having strategy meetings, they have dedicated time slots where they're just talking about processes that could be automated. The whole mindset is changing now.

We have a virtual environment that we use.

We haven't touched the processes where there would be human errors that much. We started with the really basic ones that are so easy that people don't make errors there. We will get to the more complex processes, but we haven't yet.

The solution has definitely saved time.

Orchestrator lets you start a credential stair, so you can get the credentials in a safe way. Before this, they were afraid that credentials would be stored somewhere and people could see them. I think it's really important for our customers that you can do that in Orchestrator. The scheduling feature is also valuable of course.

In terms of ease of use, I would rate this solution as four out of five. I think it's very easy, but our customers are sometimes not so technical. When they come from the business side, it's somehow hard for them to understand.

I would give the RPA Academy training program five out of five. Without it, I don't think I could have started implementing this solution. I did the developer program just for a general understanding of how everything works: how Orchestrator works and how it all works together. For me, it was really important to do the training then. It was very good, so I really liked it.

It's really hard for me to get all the machine learning and AI parts. I think maybe that's going to get a little bit easier for me to understand how to really use it in the company. I don't really know what to do with it at the moment. I think that is something that could be improved.

I tested the live sessions and we saw some parts of StudioX. There were some things that were so easy there. I think it would be good if they would put it also in Studio, for example. The carts they have are in color. We try to get people in the company, even if they're not technical, to implement the bots or processes by themselves. I think some parts they changed in StudioX could be really helpful in Studio skills.

I would rate their stability as three to four out of five, but I would say that's probably because we don't know how to use it best. That is why we sometimes have issues that something's not working.

We are a consultancy firm but the customer that we are working with has about five people in the core team that are working with this solution.

Both customer support and technical support are very good. I think the chief from my customer and the UiPath technical team had many phone calls because the virtual machine didn't work at first. They were in contact and I think two days later it was working.

I can only speak for my client, who is undergoing a huge digital transformation. They're a small German company and they just know if they don't change something other companies will get ahead. In Germany, there are many family-owned firms and the owner just saw the need to change. We told them about RPA and they got very excited. We showed them the first pilot bot and they were set.

We chose UiPath, for the same reasons you can read on the internet. If you look at the Gartner and Forrester reports, I think they all say UiPath. Also, it's just so easy to get started. You just download the community edition and you're starting. Then you do the Academy and you actually know how to do it. It's very easy and very fast. All the statistics say it's the best.

In terms of the setup, because we were using the community edition first, and then we licensed it afterward, we had the first bot running in about a month.

We have seen ROI and performance benefits. We are still at the beginning but we can definitely see it. I think we could see after about a week that we had processes that the company didn't have to do anymore and so they had more time. 

So far, our first customer started with just Orchestrator and an unattended bot, along with a couple of studio licenses. I don't know the cost. Maybe $25,000 for the year.

I would definitely say it's worth the money.

We did a little research obviously. We looked at Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, but that's it. We didn't really look too deep. We just saw UiPath and said, "Okay, I think that's a fit for us." And then we went for it.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten because of what I see from the stage we're in now. There are things that can improve and they are all working on improvement. I still think that at its current state, it's really beneficial for a lot of companies.

I would recommend UiPath. I like the company and I like their products.

We primarily use the Studio, which is for developing the robots, and we deploy to Orchestrator.

We went through a large SAP transformation and we had a lot of issues getting the users to accept the new systems. They were issues related to the adoption of new systems. We decided to build these attended bots in order to guide the users through the system. Essentially, it is navigation or guidance assistance. By helping the users with proper data entry and design, flowing in a logical sequence that is easy for the user to follow, it minimizes end-user training.

Running our automations in a virtual environment is something that we had tried during our PoC. Currently, we have attended bots deployed in more than twenty thousand laptops, and eventually, we're planning to have more than eighty thousand deployments. Because of the large scale, initially, we were having a lot of challenges because of things that go on with the users' machines. We wanted to explore Citrix because there is just one virtual environment that every user logs on to, and then run the processes from there. Unfortunately, it did not work for us. We were seeing a lot of issues and felt that it was much more stable deploying individually to each laptop, instead of using Citrix.

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. There is always room for improvement.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. The material is very sequential and logical. You don't get lost because you just follow the modules from beginner to intermediate to advanced. You cover everything from end-to-end, and it is very structured.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately one year. This included our pilot project, then the development and the UAT. When we went live in production there were three thousand users. 

This solution saves our users time. For example, on a standard SAP system where a user has no training, and you tell them to go and finish performing a transaction, it will take them between thirty and forty minutes. Now, with these attended bots, it is almost reduced to half. They can finish the same transaction with minimum training in probably fifteen minutes.

This solution has definitely reduced human errors. We have cleaned up the transaction screens and we help the user to focus on what is needed. We give them the right instructions to make sure that they enter the right information.

This solution is mainly used for navigation, position making, and reducing errors. It means that we have a quicker time to finish any transaction. We are a financial organization, so obviously, for us, it's important to record every sale that we make and every client that we have. It has significantly helped our client servers to reduce the time that they spend on these systems to finish a particular transaction.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of using it. This includes the way the activities are set up, and how easy it is to solve problems by searching with Google if we're stuck.

We did not have to do a lot of customization because the standard UiPath activities fit our needs. This is a big point for us because we end up customizing most of the products that we use just to satisfy our own business needs. In the case of Studio, we didn't have to create a lot of custom activities.

I find it difficult to set up the Orchestrator and it should be more user-friendly for non-technical people. I understand how we create packages and push them, but I find the maintenance hard to follow. As it is now, I have to contact our IT department, which takes two to three days. In the meantime, we just have to wait.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. In terms of attended automation, we did have a lot of issues. We have requested lots of product enhancements, which then came through the pipeline. Initially, we did see a lot of issues and they had to make some changes to cater to our needs. Also, we have some more requests that have been put in the pipeline to make it a bit easier for us.

We have about twenty people working with RPA in our organization. At this time we have automations running on more than twenty thousand laptops.

The technical support for this solution is very good. They're very responsive.

We have had people working on-site at UiPath too, and they have been hands-on trying to see what we are solving. They have given us very good and very relevant suggestions, which has been helpful for us. 

We did not use another RPA prior to this solution.

We knew that we needed to invest in this solution based on user feedback. When we launched our new SAP system, everybody kept complaining about how difficult it was to use. There is a lot of training involved, but it's not like you can remember the training. We replaced fourteen hundred systems and put them into a single instance, so even if you are trained for weeks it is hard to remember all of it.

Basically, we needed something that was easier and helps us navigate through the systems so that we can complete our transactions. This solution does just that. It guides the user, waits for the user to give the right input based on what is expected, and then takes the user to the next relevant screen so that they can perform the transaction.

The initial setup has been complicated for us. After we went live in production, one of the issues we saw, but didn't realize initially, was that even though the tray was not open, by default though, if the bot is pushed onto a user's machine then it will be connected to the Orchestrator. Even though the user is not running the process, the bot always stayed connected. That was causing a large load on the Orchestrator and we didn't realize it until we started increasing from three thousand to twenty thousand users. That's when we were seeing a lot of timeouts. The production connection kept dropping and we were not able to figure out why. UiPath helped us to restructure the whole SQL database and the way we established the connections.

We have not yet seen ROI, although I think it's too early because we only went live two or three months ago. The big expansion in users was just this week, so it is too early for us to say.

We do know that we have been receiving very positive feedback so far. The users with machines where these bots are deployed have been saying it is very easy to use and there is minimal training required. It's out there, on the desktop or laptop, and they just have to launch by clicking the play button and the process starts. 

When we started this project, we explored Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. I don't think that they were able to give us what we were looking for in terms of attended automation. When we looked at UiPath we found that it could satisfy all of our business requirements, which is why we chose this solution over the others.

I am really excited about the new Studio X. Ours is a consulting firm where not everybody is tech-savvy, but everyone wants to get their hands into automation. UiPath is saying that it is going to be very easy. Even for people without a technical background at all, they will be able to build their own process and bot. I'm looking forward to seeing how our users are going to make use of that within the UI.

This solution is easy to use and adopt in an existing environment. The best part for us is that even though some features were lacking, the turnaround time to have them implemented was amazing. We have always coordinated with our UiPath partner to tell them what it is that we need. When we have requested features, we have found that in the next release they are added. We found this unique among vendors.

My advice to anyone who is researching this type of solution is to definitely go for it. There are a lot of materials out there which will help them make the decision. Our own journey showed that it was easy for us to use, learn, adopt, and finally deploy.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using the unattended robots and Orchestrator modules of UiPath.

We have built close to fifty processes in the three years that we have been a client. Our primary use case, the one the gives us the biggest relief, is the processing of premium border rows. The robot will pick up Excel files with between four hundred and a thousand rows of data, and then does the data entry into our policy issuance system.

All of our automation runs in a virtual environment and we do not have any problems. At the start, of course, there were a few bumps in the road, but we got it figured out and now have no issues at all using the VM.

When we began working with automation, I was the leader and I had three BAs and three developers offshore. When our company decentralized, we created three other robotics divisions. There are now twenty-eight of us including the project manager, the BAs, the testers, and our developers. People are spread across four different divisions within the corporation.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, I will consider the individual components. With the Orchestrator, on a scale of one to five, that's easy, it's a five. It is very evident how to use it. The Studio, I am not a developer but I got six developers up and running on it in a very short period of time. It has a very short learning curve, so on a scale of one to five, I would rate it a four.

My rating of four is because I know that we had some challenges with using the recorder. Things would shift and there were a couple of things that had worked and then stopped working. We found a little instability, and it was hard for us to know whether it was us, or the application, or the studio. Ultimately, we were not able to get a final answer on the root cause of those problems.

We are no longer experiencing these problems. When we upgraded, a lot of that went away. Also, when we went to Orchestrator, a lot of that went away. Exactly as UiPath had told us when we went to them with the issue, they gave us some solutions and once we implemented them, the issue was corrected.

I did not attend the UiPath Academy, but my Business Analysts took the BA course and my offshore developers all took the Academy. On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five easily. Before the Academy came around, they were kind of self-taught. When they took the Academy, it closed some of their gaps.

When we started with this solution, we did a PoC with the help of a UiPath developer. In two weeks we built a PoC for a bank reconciliation, which was pretty fast. That helped us decide whether we wanted to go with the product, and of course, we did. After that, we took the code, which really didn't have a lot of bells and whistles in it, and we gave it to one of our developers to really soup it up and make it more robust. That took them about a month to do.

Orchestrator has given us a huge boost in terms of efficiency.

In addition to the resource-creating benefit that we get from this solution, it has given people the opportunity to move away from those mundane jobs and into something more challenging. Rather than sitting there doing data entry, they're able to move up, re-skill themselves, and add value to themselves as well as the organization.

We have been able to eliminate one hundred percent of human errors. We found that the robot was better than the human because when the human was doing some of the processes, they were supposed to be checking into another system. While testing our robot, we found that the robot's state was different from this other system that it's supposed to check against. We thought that the robot was wrong; however, we found out that the humans were eliminating that step. They were cutting corners. This stage of our development raised a flag to inefficiency on the human side.

In terms of the time that this solution saved, it equates to the equivalent of four full-time employees a year. At two thousand hours per year times four, that's a savings of eight thousand hours.

The Orchestrator is great because you schedule it, and that's it, you don't have to worry about it. It will tell you what passed and what failed if it had any issues. We don't have that dependency on someone needed to schedule tasks.

The code in Studio is easy to follow. I am not a developer, but I am able to read the code. When we have problems, the developer will display the script and I'm able to read it and follow it. Several times, I have been able to see where there was an error and the developer was able to fix it. It looks like it's easy to code.

We had some issues with instability for which we were never able to determine the root cause.

On a scale of one to five, I would rate the stability of this solution a five.

A UiPath consultant assisted us with our PoC, and the experience was incredible. They were really wonderful.

The technical support for this solution is excellent. They're very responsive and we never wait more than twenty-four hours for an answer. The developers have more contact with support than I do.

We did not use another RPA solution prior to this one. Our former CFO went to a meeting where they were talking about robotics, and when he returned from the meeting we had a discussion about it. I was working in Internal Audit at the time, and with his prompting, I left Internal Audit to head up the robotics process. From there, it just took off.

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward. To me, it just made sense.

In our first year, the development was a little bumpy, which is to be expected. I would say that it was fourteen to fifteen months before we hit a smooth path. Even with that, things go smoothly for a while until you start doing more challenging and more complex things, then you're back to a crazy path, then you correct yourself and things go smoothly again.

One of the issues is bad user requirements. Simply put, we don't know what we don't know, and we're dependent on the business to tell us. Even if you ask the same question in a variety of ways, if the business can't articulate it or tell you about it, then we can't build for it. Getting the right user requirements was our biggest challenge.

After that, we were trying to build for everything, instead of just building for the straight path. Trying to build in all of the exceptions and allow room for an imperfect world is what took us down. We've since learned that we're going to build for the straight path, and then look at the exceptions as we start to gather data on them. When we find exceptions that occur at a high frequency then we'll build for that. Failing is fine, and it is expected, as long as you can learn from it. Our approach is based on what we have learned from our mistakes.

From just one of our four divisions, A&H, we saved approximately $390,000 USD. You can multiply that to include the other three divisions (Estimate: $1.5 Million Dollars).

This past July, I completed a cost-benefit analysis and we determined that in the three-plus years that we have been using UiPath, we created the capacity to the equivalent of four full-time employees and have cost-avoidance in that we didn't have to hire five other employees. This is where the value is helping us utilize resources better.

Overall, we are giving ourselves a two year ROI.

We did not evaluate options from other vendors.

We went to Swiss RE because they offered to show us what they were doing. We saw their process and we were impressed by it, and it was a pretty nominal cost to buy the package. We thought, instead of wasting time, which could take months, and management wanted us to hit the ground running, we would try it. If we didn't like it then it wasn't a big loss of money. So, we totally circumvented the traditional route of purchasing and we are happy that we made the right decision.

From what I have seen recently, I'm excited to try the Community and start building my own robots because it just looks like it's gotten a lot easier.

I am looking forward to one of the upcoming options, the dashboard. It will give us the productivity of the robot, which is something that I do myself right now. I record everything on each robot that runs and we keep metrics on it. These include how long it took to run, how many transactions it processed, and what the error rate is. Then I have to figure out ROI. So, the dashboard is huge and at the top of my list of things that I want to see.

We have a process for obtaining the right requirements for someone to follow. We go and observe the business and we record the process. That way, when we have to sit down and write the requirements, we can refer to the video and don't have to keep going back to the business because that is going to annoy them. We include the video when we send it to our developers and that way they have a visual for it, as well. When we put together formal documentation we show screen prints of where to click. After doing it a couple of times, one of our developers had this great idea to make things configurable so that we're not hardcoding a lot of stuff in there. With that configuration file, we just keep improving.

From a cost perspective, I can't speak to the advantages of attended robots because we do not have any. When I look up the pre-automation cost of doing a process versus post-automation, we give ourselves a two year ROI. We're not going to automate everything immediately, so we give ourselves a two year ROI and if it's going to be a positive ROI, we'll go with it. Of course, based on what it is, we'll prioritize. If it's a nominal ROI it will probably go to the bottom of our pipeline, but that's what we do when trying to evaluate initiatives.

My advice to anybody who is researching this type of solution is to try UiPath. Use the free version. I have a friend who does this as well, and I encouraged him to use the free download and do something simple. After it worked, they would up going with the product. With respect to the cost, you're going to recognize the savings immediately for the cost of the tool.

We are very pleased with this product.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Primary use cases would be within the finance sector. We supply financial services for other government agencies. The main robots that we have in use right now are concerning floating of financial periods, uploading reports, commenting on these reports, and so on. We are starting to look at invoice processing, to a larger degree. Then, we have a few quality and control robots which do checks on data quality, customer information, customer carts, etc. 

We are using approximately 20 robots right now for different uses.

We've opted for professional, traditional developers and programmers to do batch robots. We don't use it in our business units. Possibly because we are a government agency, we don't necessarily get enough IT security around the users applying their own robots. 

It is not easy to use in this way because we do use traditional programming skills. We are considering moving some tasks out into the workforce for Attended Robots, etc. We think that this will be a problem for us in regards to getting it pushed out there and still maintaining good quality. However, we haven't tried it yet.

We are able to smooth out peak workloads. Because with a lot of the period closures, like monthly and yearly closures, we work in peaks. Everything has to be done within a few days. When we can prepare a lot of the data and reports through the night, the employees can start on those in the morning. Therefore, we are leveling out some of the workload features, which is one of the main benefits.

Automation technology for us is mainly a way to get around the long-term IT projects. This is the future for us, when using UiPath, to start moving into the AI part of it. In addition, the bundling of the offerings into UiPath is quite important, so we don't have to go to several different vendors. We can try it out on our own and see if this is something we want to do. Then, we might bring in another partner or vendor to do some specialized training, debug the networks, etc. We're never going to get that capability ourselves. We don't have a large IT department nor do we have data scientists. For us, it's important that one or more of these skills are getting baked into the system.

The ability to integrate between legacy systems is the most valuable feature. We use it mainly to replicate manual processes, where you just have to pull out data or pull down large volumes of customer information, in general. We work across many individual customers, who are individual entities or individual databases in our ERP system. We work across about 220 databases. Therefore, the task of logging onto different databases alone is quite cumbersome.

The main thing is to make data available to the employees when they start working mornings, instead of them starting drawing out reports to see if there is anything that they need to act upon. With these legacy systems, which work on a one-to-one basis, we tried to batch process them a lot more.

We have looked at it with Citrix, and there are problems with it. Some of the new features coming will address it.

We have been looking at Attended Robots, which result in the inability to lock your screen. That is simply a no-go for ever using them in most government agencies, as IT security will prohibit us from using them. If UiPath wants Attended Robots to be used inside a government agency, it needs to be applicable on a virtual desktop.

A lot of what is coming is what we are looking towards: Both on the skill set with computer vision, but especially also on the enhanced identity management and security. The ability to debug and lock at a less complex level for us to look at. 

One to three years.

UiPath's stability is quite good. We don't see any problems with the stability of the platform application. All our problems stem from the basic systems that we operate on, which are quite vulnerable to network problems, time outs in various systems, etc. However, these have nothing to do with UiPath. Perhaps some of the things which are on the road map will help with the debugging of some of these issues.

One of the things that we are lacking right now is not stability, but usability with debugging, e.g., when you can't see what went wrong. We have to look through 50,000 pages of logs or so. 

The scalability is quite good. 

The main problem around scalability is the licensing structure and the inability to dynamically assign licenses across robots. While I know this is coming, this is our main gripe with scalability: the licensing structure. Because we are part of a larger setup with our own IT supplier, who does a multitenancy setup with Orchestrator, to have more flexibility with the use of licenses would be very valuable.

We are using virtual desktops to deploy and run the machines with robots. It is necessary, as we cannot scale it on individual on-premise machines.

We have used the customer support. Our main issue with them is they need to understand the problem that we are writing about, and not reply too soon with a standard answer.

All our developers are using UiPath Academy and are RPA certified. While they like some thing, some of the frameworks which were used in the Academy examples, the developers didn't agree with. This is probably because they are IT professionals themselves and are used to doing things a different way. Whether it's because the use case wasn't good or they were just used to something else, this was the main gripe.

The product has a lot of backing from our director, who has been pushing the agenda. To be able to stay relevant, even as a government agency, we have to reduce our costs every year by two percent. To be able to produce that, we need to be more efficient at what we do. The target is: Not to reduce staff, but keep up with the increased demand for production and costs.

I wasn't part of the very first setup.

We mostly did the deployment ourselves or with our own IT partner, who is not a partner of UiPath. So, it has mainly been done by our own IT people.

On the individual robots, we do have good return on investment. However, once you add in the governance, including when we are scaling up the solution and the maintenance of robots, then I don't think we are at a break-even point. This upcoming year, we are expecting positive ROI. For us, the return on investment is high quality data. 

It has helped us to eliminate human errors. We have a robot that is specifically requested to avoid, for example, uploading reports on the wrong customers because of GDPR cases, where data protection officers will have to get involved, even though, it's not sensitive data. We have seen problematic use cases drop from a couple of incidents from maybe 100 transactions to zero. We are looking to completely eliminate errors in some cases, not just reduce.

It has saved our organization time. We use the robots to try to address some of the peak workloads that we have. They are not there so much to address a certain number of hours that we want to save. We want to be able to use the robots to help address our customers' needs during designated time frames to reduce extra stress on our employees.

We would like to see improvement around the licensing and multitenancy. 

We also evaluated Blue Prism and Kofax Kapow. The reason that we went with UiPath has a lot to do with scalability, as our IT supplier has committed to a multitenancy set up, which was not possible with Blue Prism. 

We are quite happy with UiPath. We are not looking at other vendors at the moment. They are all offering similar solutions, but with a slightly different focus. We could use any other solution, but the development is so fast that even changing now would be no guarantee that we end up with what we want, because everybody is moving at a pace where we can barely keep up with the development of the products.

Try out different vendors and their labs. See how it fits to the processes that you are trying to automate right now. Some applications are better at old mainframe systems, and if that's what you will be focusing your efforts on, then maybe UiPath isn't the best vendor for you. There are others who focus more on that sort of environment. So, be realistic about what you want to automate, and choose your use case initially from that. 

We see the biggest benefit right now from Unattended Robots, but that's all we use. In the very long-term, Unattended versus Attended Robots will be able to generate a greater benefit. However, with the current licensing costs, they will need to change for it to be a positive business model. We have to be able to move licenses from one person to another. If we have to apply a fresh license to each person in the workforce, with our budget, it will not be possible.

We adopted UiPath to leverage its generative AI capabilities for rule-based automation. This technology enhances the resilience of our automated processes, ensuring continued functionality even when underlying systems or data undergo changes that would typically disrupt traditional automation.

Our business challenges necessitated a combined approach of AI and automation. While automation initially streamlined processes, its rigidity proved limiting when faced with changing information. AI, with its learning and adaptive capabilities, addressed this by recognizing patterns and adjusting to variations. This synergy allows the AI to handle similar changes without requiring new automation, ultimately achieving the same outcome with increased flexibility and efficiency.

Our automations are now AI-centric, and this focus will expand significantly within the company as our organization refines its AI strategy.

Our company is developing a new AI automation strategy focused on employee engagement, partnering with Microsoft Copilot and utilizing ChatGPT for automation. While our AI policy is still being developed, we plan to carefully consider how to best leverage UiPath's AI capabilities, with a strong emphasis on security, once the policy is in place.

UiPath has helped save our staff time to focus on other tasks. 

UiPath's most valuable feature is Insights, which provides invaluable data on time savings and AI model performance.

UiPath should prioritize improving its updates and user-friendliness, particularly for new team members. Streamlining updates and simplifying the interface would enhance the onboarding experience and overall productivity.

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

In terms of what we use UiPath for, the stability has been great. 

We utilize both cloud-based and on-premises automation solutions. Our infrastructure began with two servers and has gradually expanded to four. UiPath has proven to be a scalable platform, provided we maintain the necessary licenses.

UiPath's support is generally good, augmented by the assistance of a Technical Account Manager who helps escalate requests when needed. However, resolving issues without a TAM would be significantly more challenging.

Positive

Prior to my joining the team, the organization utilized Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment was complex.

We collaborated with UiPath's service provider for the implementation, leveraging their expertise for the intake process and initial setup. Our experience thus far has been positive.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

I recommend UiPath due to its robust user community, which provides valuable feedback that contributes to the continuous improvement and development of the product with new features.

We primarily use UiPath's AI features to pull information from chatbot conversations with insurance providers and identify decisions made. 

Implementing AI and automation has allowed us to collect information quickly. We have deadlines that we must meet for our clients, and AI has enabled us to get that information without manual intervention. There are delays while we wait for insurance to pay for claims, and taking humans out of the equation enables us to be as productive as we want. 

We've been testing this emerging technology, and we're excited to see it continue to grow. So far, we've been successful in connecting, having interactions, training a language model, getting responses, and using that information to make decisions in the workflow.

The most helpful features are human-assisted and unattended bots. These features help us drive the workflow in the direction we want it to go. It allows staff to utilize their talents and the information they need. We can remove this small conversation and let them focus on the more important work.

Data integration is the biggest opportunity for improvement. We need quick connections to our complex in-house databases to set up automations more efficiently. It's time-consuming to connect those large databases. 

I have been using UiPath for about a year, while our organization has been using it for about four years.

UiPath's stability is excellent, and its ability to forecast stability is improving. We have a lot of stable automations running.

Scalability is a challenge as we're a large enterprise, but task mining helps identify issues and pushes automation into the enterprise effectively.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10.  We have strong contacts with UiPath, and an in-house team managing implementations has built a really good relationship with them.

Positive

I am not aware of any solutions we used prior to UiPath. We developed our own home grown tools and UI automation.

We've seen a significant ROI by reducing the number of full-time employees. We haven't calculated a precise figure, but it has been pretty successful, and we believe it is promising. 

We are using UiPath for traditional RPA automations at the moment. 

We are automating rule-based, repetitive business processes, but we're interested in the automation opportunities AI capabilities present. Of course, transactional automation has limitations, but in areas where it is applicable, we have been able to use it effectively.

The overall UiPath platform, including the Orchestrator, Studio, and the robots, is valuable. UiPath's competitors don't do orchestration as well.

The licensing policies and concepts change almost yearly, leading to difficult negotiations. All components are licensed differently, and it would be more straightforward to adopt new features if they were included in the same bundle.

I have used UiPath for six or seven years.

The solution is very stable for us.

It is scalable according to our needs.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath is customer-oriented and attends to the customers well. They're helpful when we have challenges and are open to our ideas. We've had challenges with technical support solving some tickets, but it's been excellent overall. 

Positive

We installed the on-premise version in our environment seven years ago. It was very straightforward at that time.

I was involved in the deployment process by overseeing it.

We have seen a significant return on investment. The easiest to measure is the hours saved from manual work. We've saved the equivalent of 200 FTEs worth of hours each year. There are also less measurable benefits, such as improved quality and faster throughput.

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for five years.

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

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

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

Neutral

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

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

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

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

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten.