UiPath Reviews

We use Studio, Orchestrator, attended and unattended robots.

We use this solution to solve the things that people don't want to do. They spend a lot of time and there is a high potential to make manual errors. Quality suffers because it takes too long and users can get fatigued. There are the things that we are targeting and we have already seen some of the benefits.

We do not run our automations in a virtual environment.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a four. It is easy, but there are some improvements that can be made.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. It is my lifeline. 

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately six to eight months. I felt that the process was complicated, in part because of UiPath but also partly because of internal things.

Internally, in order to get set up, the entire infrastructure needs to be in place. All of the servers have to be set up and you need the right permissions because the bots need their own security. You have to explain to people that this is going to be a service account, and you have to explain the need for it. These are all internal, but necessary issues.

This solution has saved our organization time. I would estimate that the bots save us four weeks every month.

In terms of eliminating human errors, this solution absolutely helps in that regard. The bots don't make any mistakes. Rather, they point out the mistakes that have been made by humans so far.

The ability that this solution has to work with Excel is really good.

The SAP feature looks helpful and we are going to explore that functionality in our next project. 

We don't like the attended bot experience, where it requires the user to be hands-off. We installed it on the user's machine, and the user should not touch the mouse or keyboard because the moment they do, it crashes. It takes over the machine and cannot work in the background. For this reason, it is difficult to work out scenarios that are purely attended. 

For example, we have a process that downloads two files and then does some massaging of the data. Now, the data needs to be looked at by the user. An email is sent and the files are deposited into a common folder, and the user will address the task when they have time. After the user manipulates some of the data or makes decisions, it can proceed to the next step.

They drop the modified files into the common folder, but the bot doesn't react because there is no feature in Orchestrator to trigger based on the arrival of a new file. Instead, we have to put in a call to check periodically, whether it be five minutes, fifteen minutes or some other interval. This is something that we don't find desirable.

Creating a trigger that is based on either the arrival of a file or the arrival of an email is a common scenario and it should be built into the platform so that I don't have to code for it every time. As it is now, there are only two ways to trigger a bot.

Orchestrator does not have a good filtering mechanism to look for jobs, and the table view needs to be improved.

From the UiPath side, one thing that irritates me is that you cannot find the downloads to upgrade to the new version. I'm a paid customer and I log in with my credentials, but I cannot download it. I need to create a ticket, tell them who I am, and I have to give them a long list of things that I don't remember. They will address the ticket maybe today or tomorrow, and then finally I get a response. When I use other tools like Microsoft and SAP, as a customer or subscriber of the tool, I just download the latest versions and install them on my servers. When I have a mandate to do work, I want to be able to do it. However, when I can't download the file and have to wait for a ticket to be answered, this wastes my time.

The integration with Elasticsearch and Kibana is a struggle. They are not UiPath products, but they are recommended by UiPath. Some documentation is provided, but it is an Orchestrator installer package the just installs itself. I had to do a lot of experimentation on Windows machines because the configuration is different for Linux machines, and this gave me some trouble. There is a lot of information about this in the UiPath forums and I spent a lot of time on it.

Right now, I have a set of configuration data that I put into an Excel file. The users can change the file and my app will run using the configuration variables. A problem occurs if the Excel file is not closed properly because there are locking issues. This is a pain because the bot crashes when opening a locked file. There is something in Orchestrator called Assets, but it is kind of limited. It only accepts text and a credential. It would be nice if it had a simple database table, say to be able to create a couple of columns that I want to set up for a bot-related task. Rather than a single piece of text, there is a whole table of information. My users will be able to edit it, based on the permission that I assign. Then the bot will look at it and work according to what is specified. This would be a great feature to have.

I would like to see the Studio web-based so that we don't have to install it on everybody's desktop. 

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a five. I have never had any problems with the platform itself. I haven't had to restart the servers or anything like that.

We have three people in the organization who work with the bots.

We did not use another RPA solution prior to this one.

In deciding whether and RPA would benefit us, we followed the guidelines that UiPath provided, which is a twelve-step validation process. If processes are unchanging, there is a lot of manual work, there is the potential for errors, and it's simple to automate, etc, then RPA may be suitable. Based on this assessment, we made the investment in RPA.

Our own team was responsible for the implementation.

We have recognized ROI through savings in employee hours. For our PoC, with two projects, we saved one full-time employee.

It took us one year to see ROI, although I don't think that we have saved any money yet because of the development time. If we negate the development cost then it might be $60,000 USD, as a developer's salary, but we're not there yet. One of the things that I am trying to do is motivate people to look at more processes that we can automate because right now, my bots are sleeping and I want to put them to work.

Our licensing fees are approximately $140,000 USD annually, which includes all of the bots, Orchestrator, and the Studio.

In our company, there is another group that had already implemented UiPath, and they have had good success. We followed their lead, but in addition, we reviewed other sources such as the Gartner ranking. The features set was also considered during the evaluation.

I feel that the cost of the bot is worth it, provided that we make use of it. The unattended bot is cheaper, but it is useless for us right now because there is no use case. We think that Studio X might change that, and I've heard that the Studio X license includes the attended bot. So, if we swap the attended bot license that we currently have then we could take them away and then get the Studio X license, and that will motivate more people to make their own automations.

No organization has unlimited resources, but the business is changing around us and we are always tasked with new things to do. In that aspect, you have to make room for innovation, and you have to automate.

UiPath has shown tremendous gains with this solution. They're sitting on the shoulders of Microsoft .NET, and they've shown some initiative on what you can do with a generic platform. They offer free training and a Community Edition for people to experiment with, and it can do wonders for the world. We have seen that happening and I love that.

This is a company that is listening to customers' feedback and I think that they should keep doing that.

My advice for anybody who is considering this solution is to start by watching all of the videos. Go through the UiPath Academy and get a feel of what it can do. Read all of the case studies and see what other people have done. You will get a feeling for the ROI. Then download the Community Edition and play with it to see for yourself what gain you can get from this tool. Finally, start small and just keep adding to it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for invoice processing in combination with intelligent data captures. It's used for anything to do with lots of finance processes. Typically they go into lots of HR processes as well. They're the two main business functions that we work in.

Orchestrator has valuable scheduling and being able to run things on demand and dynamically as well allocating the transaction, and the studio are good features. Nothing stands out in particular. Everything's kind of equal, it just depends on the task you need to complete.

With an unattended robot, you can schedule it and have it running autonomously.

The solution is quick and easy to implement. It's fairly easy, and it means clients don't have to get IT involved. If you get IT involved in anything there's always blockers and there are always other priorities. 

They should expand on workflow type items and take another step up from the long-running workflows to offer more visibility of business processes within Orchestrator.

The solution needs a better integration team, different versions of Orchestrator, and to make it easier to identify problems with versions, as well as to be able to fix those kinds of problems. It's hard if you don't keep up to date all the time as well, for example, to go from 2018 to 2019 versions. It's quite a big jump considering activities and things like that.

I'd rate the stability five out of five.

When we were using technical support we were typically going directly to some people we knew in UiPath because we knew them very well. We haven't had that many instances that we needed to use the help though.

In terms of ease of setup, I would rate the solution four out of five. From an IT perspective, it's pretty simple, but from a non-technical perspective, I think people will struggle.

They've brought us Studio X which is starting to increase that to a five out of five. From a business user perspective a lot of the sales teams will sell it as a very easy to mend product which isn't particularly helpful because when you go into a customer environment and you have to build via a complex process and then integrate it with IT and all of the business systems then obviously it's not a five minute job. It's not overly complicated but can take three to four weeks for some processes to be implemented successfully.

From the time the UiPath license is purchased to implementing it virtually takes about three weeks.

ROI depends on the process. Some customers are using their people badly and they literally have a person doing the job of processing invoices all day long. It's very quick to realize their ROI because it's a 30-40 thousand pound salary that they get to replace very, very quickly. More commonly, on a big project, it takes 6 to 12 months to get to an ROI. Even if you are just breaking even, in a year or two you'll start to get an ROI.

There's information online. There's actually a section where you can go through training online for licensing. There's some documentation available as well from the UiPath sales team. You can just ask them.

I've already struggled with licensing a little bit. It's never been super clear because you have the notion of a mode lock and concurrent users and things like that depending on whether you want it on one machine or whether you want the licenses to be able to float around different users. The wording around it can be improved. They communicate in a simpler way.

Usually, the client looks at UiPath, Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and sometimes other smaller competitors but that's quite rare.

We use Orchestrator, Studio, and unattended and attended robotics. We typically use more unattended than attended generally. Increasingly we're using attended robots. We use Orchestrator but at 1:1 per client, and Studio for development.

For the larger clients, they still go on-prem, but mid-tier customers start to use the cloud solution.

We try to encourage clients not to run automation within virtual environments like Citrix. UiPath does work through Citrix but it's only if clients really don't have control of that environment. We have done it, but where possible we always ask clients to install either the robot on the local machine or to install the major Citrix extension. By running within virtual premises everything's a little bit more or less stable so you have to add more checks, which means the development time takes a bit longer; and the data coming out is a little bit less reliable. But with the Citrix extension, everything has become a lot easier.

I used a web tool for the UiPath Academy RPA training. I did a lot of the training before there was an Academy, and then when it came out I did the certification. We always put our team through every stage of the training. I'd rate the Academy four out of five. It's easy to follow and get through. The only thing that's lacking a little bit is, it's just that you can't do 2 weeks worth of training and then become an expert. Another thing is that there is a further certification which is an advanced developer certificate which needs product experience as well, and for me, there's not been enough distinction between the 2-week online training vs that proper diploma. There's always some confusion, when people say, "Oh yeah, we've got this", many people say it doesn't mean as much as it could, or other software companies have a better distinction between levels of certification experience. They need to offer a solution architect type certification for someone who knows the infrastructure really well and can prove it. There needs to be a proper qualification for that.

In terms of reducing human error with the solution, I've always been an advocate of the software benefit that comes out of automation. AFT savings are great but I think a lot the other benefits include less mundane work being done, fewer errors, better compliance, better visibility. One of the things that hasn't been exploited that well is the additional data that you get from automation. Where humans previously were just doing a job, for example, we automate a lot of processes.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

Primary use case is to find the highest value add processes and automate them to allow people to work on other things, which are of higher value and more strategic.

I currently have a team of about 15 people on my team, as a central team. We are at 35 licenses, so we have about 35 developers across the company.

We are still in the process of maturing to the point where people think about RPA first. We're still running around looking for the processes, teaching and helping people to get there. Our culture shift hasn't happened yet.

The solutions has meet our expectations, even a bit more than that.

• Rapid development: If we can develop something in four weeks, then see value back, that is big for us.
• The quick delivery is good.
• The solution is easy to use.

Managing the infrastructure UiPath is running on is a lot harder than it seems. In the app development world, there's things called Docker containers that sort of help you containerize what your thing is running on, then it is in code. If we could get that, it would go a long way. Otherwise, I will have trouble scaling, because every time I scale, it's another manual setup of the infrastructure. I could automate that too, but the right solution is to have this working in containers, not a bot running around getting rid of pop-ups, and installing and uninstalling Chrome.

Working at an enterprise is harder, because we have security concerns, infrastructure, and governance. So, how do you create these virtual users? Because now someone has to own the credentials, but that's an anonymous user who has access to the credentials, and they have access to systems. All of this stuff is hard.

The stability is not that good yet for whatever reasons. We have a lot of safety critical things that have to be 99.999% availability, so we're struggling a little bit with those. For the non-critical processes, it does a great job.

As a product, UiPath is very scalable. UiPath has to run on some infrastructure, and that infrastructure and security is not scalable yet. I'm not sure what the best practices are to avoid that. 

How do you leverage a scalable infrastructures? Let's say a Windows Server 2016 version, because I know UiPath supports it. However, in an enterprise environment, there are security concerns when I have anonymous users with internet access and interactive logins to a Windows Server. As a matter of fact, my security team says, "No." 

In these areas, there is a lot of opportunity. Because, in reality, this is what is keeping me from scaling. I have the business cases. My business users want it. I have the development talent to do it. My issue is with the infrastructure. 

Their customer support is very responsive. Sometimes it can be hard to communicate, because we are going back and forth in a forum type of environment. After three back-and-forths, it should just be a phone call. 

We put everyone through the UiPath Academy RPA training courses: The foundation and advanced framework. Some people struggle with the questions being asked which aren't on the videos. 

The advanced framework is a difficult course. People take it and they don't get the concepts yet, so it needs to be thought through again. 

We haven't actualized the value. We save people time, but then they're doing something else, and you have to quantify that into the value, which gets really grey and hard to do. As far as a head count reduction, we haven't done any of that.

The performance benefits are good. Everyone is happy. When the thing is working and it's working great, they love it because we are getting value.

There is a lot of focus on new features going forward, integrating more with AI, and that's great.

Get started using the product yesterday. You're already too late.

We are targeting utilizing Gen AI for some social media marketing. We haven't really implemented it yet.

Implementing AI and automation has streamlined our processes, allowing us to focus on more important day-to-day work instead of repetitive tasks. This has helped with customer satisfaction. 

We have been able to automate a lot of internal processes, saving significant time for our managers and increasing the accuracy of reports and monitoring. We saved about 350 hours, which corresponds to approximately $500,000 in money saved.

The most valuable features are the autopilot or copilot AI feature and Insights. We haven't used it yet. I know that understanding the document is highly powerful and really useful.

I would like improvements in UiPath Studio speed. The development environment is sometimes slow, depending on the workflows, especially with legacy workflows.

This should be the third year of working with the solution.

We utilize the cloud Orchestrator, and it has been really stable with no issues.

We started with three bots and have maintained that number, with the addition of one test bot test license. We are always using it to scale.

We access resources at UiPath to assist us, however, resources can be hard to get. Better access to resources might improve the process.

Positive

The initial setup was simple for us. I am aware it could be more challenging for on-premises deployments.

We didn't use a partner for the initial setup.

We realized a return on investment by saving about $500,000 due to automation of tasks that took longer manually.

It is probably in line with the market. I am unsure about pricing for AI units as we haven't implemented them yet.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use UiPath for social media marketing.

UiPath increases efficiency, speeds delivery, and automates repetitive tasks to save time. We can streamline tasks and make daily work more meaningful. Instead of doing the same things over and over, employees can focus on more important work.  

It also allowed us to automate many internal processes, saving significant time and increasing the accuracy of reports and monitoring. It also helped improve customer satisfaction and made significant time and cost savings.

The most valuable feature is the autopilot or copilot AI feature. While we have not used it yet, I'm told the Document Understanding feature is also highly powerful. SaaS is also valuable.

The UiPath Studio development suite response can be a little sluggish, depending on the workflows you use. I use a lot of legacy workflows, and the application response is slow. 

I have used UiPath for three years.

The UiPath Orchestrator has been pretty stable overall. There have been a few outages. 

We started with three licenses and still have that. We also have one test bot test license, and it's scalable.

When we opened a specific ticket, UiPath lacked the resources to help us. Getting someone to help you was hard because you needed to go through different channels. 

Positive

We needed to connect three unattended bots to the Automation Cloud and Orchestrator. Setting up on-premises for different applications that don't have their own infrastructure may be a little more difficult. 

We did not use a partner for implementation.

We've saved about 350 hours using UiPath, which equals about $500,000. When we automate jobs that take longer manually, the time savings are pretty straightforward.

UiPath's pricing and licensing are in line with the market. We haven't used AI units yet, so I'm unsure about their pricing.

The use cases for UiPath depend on the specific requirements of each department within an organization. We typically meet with small groups of employees to identify potential automation opportunities within their departments. If a use case is suitable for automation, we develop the feature and build the bot for the customer.

UiPath integrates seamlessly with our existing products. Leveraging its AI capabilities, we're identifying new use cases. Additionally, UiPath offers a "bring your own model" approach, allowing us to utilize machine learning models from other vendors if needed.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation.

As a team of six developers, we rely heavily on the UiPath user community for answers to our questions.

UiPath helps us significantly reduce our on-premises footprint. It provides an automated touchless environment that we use in the administration and finance departments to automate a portion of our business processes.

We incorporate UiPath Academy courses into our developer training program to ensure they achieve specific certifications. For instance, all developers must obtain the professional UiPath certification. Each year, we prioritize which modules to target based on relevant use cases.

We use AI functionality in our automation. Communication mining and task mining are AI components of UiPath.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation.

It helps reduce human error and frees  up our staff time to focus on other tasks.

UiPath has helped save us costs overall.

The biggest advantage of UiPath is its user-friendly environment. Unlike Azure and Blue Prism, UiPath offers a robust orchestration platform that allows central management of our entire RPA ecosystem from a single orchestrator. Additionally, UiPath excels in automating web applications.

UiPath provides a comprehensive suite of solutions for robotic process automation. Beyond the core UiPath Studio for building robots, they offer a range of AI-powered products such as communication mining, task mining, and the Automation Cloud. These solutions seamlessly integrate within a unified environment.

The pricing is high and has room for improvement.

I find UiPath's development environment to be challenging. Ideally, I'd prefer a more user-friendly approach like Blue Prism's, which utilizes a building block concept.

I have been using UiPath for 4 years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath 8  out of 10.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath 9 out of 10.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I have used Kofax but UiPath is far ahead of it.

The initial deployment is straightforward. Deploying bots using UiPath is easy.

We used external consultants.

UiPath is priced high.

I would rate UiPath 8 out of 10.

I recommend UiPath to others.

We have a lot of use cases for UiPath including automation of processes and reconciliation.

Building automation using UiPath is easy.

It helps our operational efficiency by saving time and reducing costs. Manually processes that take an hour can be done in five minutes using UiPath.

The most beneficial feature of UiPath for our workflows is the seamless database connectivity.

UiPath facilitates end-to-end automation for well-defined processes. This eliminates interruptions caused by manual steps within the workflow.

The UiPath User Community is large. There is a lot of interaction and sharing making it easy for us to find answers to any issues we may have.

The biggest benefits we have seen using UiPath are the cost and time savings.

It has helped save around ten percent of costs.

The UiPath Academy courses are great. They have a lot of helpful courses.

UiPath has reduced human error by 70 percent.

UiPath excels at integrating with a wide variety of systems, including on-premises systems, legacy systems, and web pages.

The high cost of UiPath licensing significantly reduces the value we get from the solution. A large portion of the cost savings we achieve are negated by the licensing fees.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

I would rate the stability of Uipath eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Uipath eight out of ten.

The technical support is great with the premium service for enterprise-level clients.

Positive

I'm certified in Automation Anywhere and currently use Microsoft Power Automate. However, UiPath seems better suited for enterprise-level automation. Unlike Power Automate, UiPath is system-agnostic. It can connect to any system, regardless of platform, making it highly versatile. On the other hand, Microsoft Power Automate prioritizes integration with other Microsoft products. Connecting legacy systems with Power Automate often requires purchasing premium connectors and potentially hiring an expert for configuration.

The deployment took around two weeks to complete.

We engaged Deloitte as our consulting firm for the UiPath implementation. While we handled a significant portion of the on-premises work ourselves, their team provided some technical assistance. Overall, I would rate their services a six out of ten.

UiPath promises a 50 percent reduction in operational costs, but the high licensing fees may consume most of those savings.

I would rate the cost of UiPath eight out of ten with ten being the most expensive.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We have around 15 users that work with UiPath for the attended bots.

UiPath Orchestrator requires regular maintenance and updates.

I recommend UiPath. The only negative area of UiPath is the licensing fees. 

We use UiPath for marketing, accounting, and sales.

The solution has helped us save time. 

I like the automation capabilities. I particularly like Autopilot and documentation.

We don't currently use AI Center or process mining, but we want to learn more about these features.

The support team could be more responsive and helpful.

I have been using UiPath for one year. 

I would give the stability of UiPath a six out of ten. I've experienced some issues with it in the past.

I would rate the scalability a six out of ten.

I have had to contact the support team on a few occasions. It was a good experience. But the solution could be better with its support team.

Positive

We switched to UiPath because it's a better fit for enterprise companies like ours.

It might not be a good fit for smaller companies. It's a bit expensive for small companies, but it's worth the money for larger companies.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

UiPath is an RPA solution that is very easy to use and local. It's a good choice for companies that are new to RPA or have limited resources for training.