UiPath Reviews

We use Orchestrator, Studio, and of course the bots for indexing documents received from outside providers.

The best example of the way this product has improved how our organization functions is by the increase in efficiency it has helped us achieve.

The most valuable features are the ability to schedule tasks and using Orchestrator to centrally manage our bots.

Areas of this solution that have room for improvement are a couple of activities that have issues. We would like to incorporate machine learning so that we can do some of the quality checks that we do automatically instead of relying 100% on manual quality review by humans.

Additional features that we would like to see included in the next release are those they seem to already have planned. I am very intrigued by the AI capabilities that we saw in demonstrations. Having that capability would be absolutely fantastic.

On a scale from one to five where one is not stable and five is very stable, I would rate the stability of UiPath platform as about a four. There are two activities that we use that fail about 5% of the time. UiPath is fixing that — as far as we understand — and so we should get a solution very soon.

We currently have just two people in our organization involved in the automation program. That could potentially expand under the right circumstances.

Our team has had the opportunity to use the UiPath Academy RPA training. On a scale from one to five where one is the least beneficial and five is very beneficial, I would rate the UiPath Academy in training our team as a five-out-of-five. We literally started at ground zero with UiPath software, and, without the training, I don't think we would know exactly what it can do.

I also think the source support and technical support for this solution are both very good.

From the time we purchased our UK UiPath license until we had your first robot in production was really before purchase. We had a proof of concept opportunity prior to purchasing the product, so we could make sure it worked for our purposes.

The initial setup process was straightforward. We started with just Studio, and not Orchestrator. Our deployment was just a simple matter of installing Studio. It was very simple to install.

We have not seen a return on investment in a way that we can account for exactly because we have not done that evaluation. At this point, we have projected some ROI numbers but we don't have the final ROI. I think it did not take long to see the ROI as it didn't take months. It probably just took a few days to see a difference.

The performance benefits we have seen at this stage of our deployment is in the form of increased productivity. So, in our development processes, we have at least doubled the performance of the process we have automated.

The solution also helped to eliminate human errors. I really don't know the percentages we have not done that evaluation, but I know it does eliminate them as it is evident in the results.

On top of that, the solution saves our organization time which is also evident in the fact that the staff members who are using the bots can double their performance.

On a scale from one to five with one being the most difficult and five being very easy, I would rate the interface of the UiPath platform as a four-out-of-five. I chose that rating only because our legacy software is a bit difficult to automate. The selectors end up not always being accurate.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the product overall as a nine. I don't think I have enough understanding to give it a ten. However, it seems from our investigation of other platforms, that UiPath is one of the easiest RPA systems to learn and use.

My advice to anyone considering RPA as a solution is to do your homework upfront. Learn what the platforms can do before you just pick one and start trying to automate.

Currently, we're using Studio and soon to be using Orchestrator. We have not actually deployed any bots yet, but we have looked into both Orchestrator and bots. We have just looked at the solution set of that on why do we need to deploy in the future.

Our primary use will vary from department to department. We have what we call 11 global practices. These range across different platforms, but the underlying theme of that is we want to automate different items which might be finance or accounting or HR or whatever. But where I think it will be most useful is in our core business where I'm looking to apply it to engineering project management.

The most valuable feature for us has been the ability to take data out of where we have it — Excel sheets or wherever it may be — and translate it into customer-owned Citrix environments. Our primary core is engineering. A lot of our business requires us to take data what we have developed as part of the design process and relay that into work orders or other process triggers, ordering triggers, or material ordering, or different things for our clients. Allowing us to interface local data with Citrix environments is going to be a big deal.

I'm not exactly sure what I want to see enhanced yet. I know that we do a lot of small processes. Depending on how good Studio X is and how easy that is to build and manage we could potentially do a lot of small little things inside of various design tools like Excel, Word, and Outlook and to be able to kick out the workflows from that.

We like to do a lot of the design side locally for Excel, whether that be in a BBA or an add-in type environment. Being able to manage and deploy or build those will be helpful. Maybe we won't call them bots, maybe we call them processes that are centrally managed. In addition to the Microsoft stack, we use many other vendors like AutoCAD, Bentley MicroStation, Revit Inventor, BIM 360 and Autodesk Forge. To us, the CAD world is where we can see a lot of time savings and benefit ROI on a solution. That would be our next horizon.

I think this solution has room for improvement in the area of ease-of-use. It does require a little bit of coding background to be able to get in and really build out the solution. After I get in and look at Studio X a little more, I may change my opinion on that.

We have six people working in the organization involved in our automation program. We are pretty confident that can scale easily.

Since we have not deployed to production yet, we are not sure which direction we'll be going in. We were looking on-premises but the software as a service cloud deployment will likely be a hit with our IT department. We plan to run our automation in virtual environments through a Citrix interface but not in Citrix.

On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is very easy, I would rate the ease of the use of the platform as a three or four for now. I saw some things today I'd like to dig into a little farther, and I think that that Studio X would make it a whole lot easier for citizen developers to get in and do small tasks. Rebuilding tasks for accounting and finance where there are fairly rigid rules will be great. In the engineering world, our interfacing with the clients sometimes changes on a weekly basis. So having something that is very flexible like Studio X will make it possible to flex and change with those environments very quickly, very easily, very nimbly, and to deploy and redeploy. So if Studio X is what I hope it is, that rating may be closer to a five than not.

I primary use Studio, but I also use Orchestrator.

I develop robots for reducing tasks for our business users.

We run some of our automations in the Citrix virtual environment. We have found that the Citrix environment tends to present challenges, so it can take a little longer.

With a year and a half of experience, I am still learning with this platform. I find that the ease by which processes can be automated is not as much of an issue with the platform, but rather how it behaves with other applications that the robot controls. The learning curve is mostly how the robot behaves in maybe a Citrix environment, or in how it behaves with the applications that it's controlling. Sometimes they have their own little quirks that you have to learn.

I got started with this solution by using the Academy training. On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a three. It is easier to get started because you are learning by experimenting.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately seven or eight weeks. 

Some of the robots handle high-volume processing, where people would take months but the robots are doing it in weeks. We have probably saved two hundred hours so far, using robots. Timing is a big issue. The tasks can be completed quicker because robots can do it on-demand, rather than having to schedule a person's time. I would say that for the tasks, they are saving forty to fifty percent of the time by using the robot.

Not all of the tasks we have automated were existing in-house processes. In some cases, after using the platform, we thought about ways to create automated tasks that were never being done before.

Human errors have been reduced, if not eliminated by using the solution. When users have to complete a task in a timely fashion they sometimes miss one of the steps, but this is solved using the robots.

The robots that I have developed can take a process that is normally very complicated and simplify it. 

The licensing process is complicated and needs to be improved.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a four. The tool itself is quite stable and I haven't had any real issues with it. The issues that I have had tend to be with Citrix or the environment that the robots are running in, and not the platform itself.

In the US, we have two developers who are working with this solution.

The installation was straightforward but activating the license was slightly complicated. I'm not sure if it was a UiPath issue or something at the company.

We are definitely seeing performance benefits for users and the turnaround time for tests that we have to do.

I have seen a demo with Studio X and it should help with the coding so that we can go live quicker than we do.

Using RPA has given us another tool to offer with respect to business solutions. Automation is something that we're actively looking for places to make use of.

This is a good solution, but there is a learning curve. One you are familiar with it, this solution works well and it is fun to work with.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use the tool for robotic process automation to automate mundane business processes prone to human error.

Some of UiPath's best features are its ability to interact well with applications and its less proneness to errors. It allows us to implement end-to-end automation, which is very important for our organization since we have many time-consuming job runs.

The tool has improved our organization by reducing operational costs through process automation and cutting FTEs. We can do more regression testing for test automation, leading to better products. It's helped minimize our on-premises footprint to some extent and aided organizational restructuring.

We've used the academy courses, which are good for beginners and advanced users. UiPath has sped up digital transformation, allowing quick fixes without building entire new solutions. It reduces human errors by 60-70 percent and saves us around 2500 hours.

UiPath is pretty easy to use for small—and medium-scale automation. However, maintaining the code becomes a bit more difficult when building large-scale, enterprise-level automation. Areas for improvement include versioning for collaborative projects and reporting features currently lacking.

I have been using the product for six years. 

As for stability, I'd rate it as six out of ten. Once a project is built, we face many issues, and we often have to go back to UiPath. So, in my opinion, stability could be improved.

My company has 10-15 users. Based on my experience, I would say UiPath is a scalable solution. I'd rate its scalability around seven or eight out of ten.

The user community for UiPath is great. We can ask about any issues we have on the community forum and usually get them resolved. Regarding technical support, it's amazing that they respond quickly. However, their level one engineer could be better educated on the tool before moving to level two support.

Neutral

We previously used an open-source Java Selenium solution but switched to UiPath for better security and platform capabilities.

We have the tool deployed in the cloud version. The deployment process was straightforward—it was pretty easy, mostly just drag and drop. Because of the number of projects we have, the initial deployment took days to months.

We use UiPath in multiple locations globally, including the US and India. The solution requires maintenance, particularly from a coding perspective.

I'd estimate UiPath has helped us save around 10-15 percent in costs.

UiPath is a pretty expensive tool compared to what the market offers, including open-source alternatives that can do similar things.

Overall, I would recommend UiPath to other users. The main reasons I like it and would recommend it are that it's very user-interactive and its capabilities are really good.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it overall around eight.

The solution is to get requirements over to Jira, then we use it to automate some of the processes. We can automate changes and statuses.

The solution is user-friendly and easy to handle. Anyone can understand it pretty quickly.

The robots are helpful. The orchestrator is easy to operate. 

The UI is simple and easy to understand.

It makes automation very easy. There are some use cases where you need a small amount of coding. It's a very low-code way of automating. That means you don't need much knowledge to start building what you need. Overall, it's easy to learn. You can even Google questions and find solutions to your queries. 

We can make end-to-end automation, even though I might now always use it that way.

The user community is very good. On their own website, you can find a lot of great information.Their documentation allows you to understand it pretty well. There are videos as well. They make it easy to understand and follow along. Seeing it visualized makes things much easier. And if you have any errors, there are many people all over the world that may have already dealt with those, so you can get information to help you adjust. 

Since it's low-code, we saw the benefits of using UiPath very quickly.

We've been able to minimize our on-premises footprint. 

I've used the UiPath Academy. I've been certified. There are lots of videos and you can go through and you can complete any number of certificates. 

When you make automation, you can save a lot of time. Using it, you can reduce your manual output. It helps VAs and managers save time.

The automation saves on manual labor.

They already have a good overview of the product and training. I haven't found anything significantly negative about the product. 

The pricing can be a big factor for a lot of users. It could be reduced to help more companies leverage its automation capabilities. 

I've been using the solution for the past five years. 

The stability is good. We haven't gotten any kinds of errors. 

The scalability is good. 

I've never contacted technical support. 

I've used other RPA tools, such as Automation Anywhere. People do need to have a bit more knowledge about AA before using it. 

The deployment is very easy. There are just some steps you need to follow. We were able to deploy it in three to four hours. We had three people handling the deployment process as well as testing and creating automation. 

There is maintenance if you make any changes to processes. For example, if an endpoint changes, the automation will need to be changed. 

Automation Anywhere may be more widely used than UiPath based on pricing. 

We're UiPath end-users. 

They have a feature called communications mining. However, I haven't used it yet. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's a good tool to start with when exploring RPA automation, and there are many free items available on the UiPath Academy website itself. You just need to log in, and you can get certified and start practicing. You can start practicing with creating your own bot. It's a very easy tool, and very user-friendly. With small, low-code capabilities, a non-technical person can learn it; it just requires small amounts of coding.

The use cases are quite broad.  UiPath is used in customer contact centers, supply chain management, operations, etc. It is useful for the intelligent automation of task-oriented processes.

It's easy to sell clients on a cloud-based solution like UiPath because it's the easiest to maintain and run. Some of the customers have already adopted a cloud-first strategy, so it's crucial for them not to have to operate their own data center. Others need to have a data center for privacy reasons. 

The solution helps customers reduce costs by about 20 percent. UiPath doesn't require any expensive or complex application upgrades. It has reduced human error. UiPath has improved outcomes like SLAs and customer satisfaction scores while reducing wasted time. 

UiPath frees up employee time, but the exact amount varies from client to client. It depends on your scope and your use case. You can obviously save time. It depends on how you design the process or whether you're automating one process or 10. 

I appreciate the stability of the UI automation, the studio, and the development environment. I also like the platform's rich capabilities. Stability and performance are always essential when automating through the user interface. This is what they definitely bring to the table. 

Regarding the ease of building automations, I would rate UiPath nine out of 10. It's the best tool in the marketplace. It's easy to build automations, and the interface is easy to use. I like how it integrates with the Orchestrator and everything works together. There are so many different use cases that we can easily connect through APIs, databases, and user interfaces to automate all kinds of applications. 

UiPath's end-to-end automation is critical. It's the most efficient way to automate. You automate mundane tasks so that people can focus on everything that requires expert skills or knowledge. 

The solution's user community is amazing. There's a lot of knowledge and experience, and it's easy to access that information. It's a highly active community. The UiPath Academy also has some attractive content that gives you hands-on experience with the product. The courses are easy to follow. 

I have been using UiPath for about three years. 

Excellent stability.

UiPath's scalability is excellent. 

I have had limited contact with UiPath support, which says something about the product. 

I have used Automation Anywhere and UiPath. I've looked at other options, but UiPath is at the high end.

Deploying UiPath is straightforward. It's fast. You can deploy UiPath in five minutes depending on what you need and how everything is configured up front. You need to get a platform account and set up the machines that will be part of the solution. You also need to set up users and assign them licenses. UiPath requires some maintenance based on the types of packages you're running. One person can do it. It isn't too complex. 

UiPath is relatively expensive. However, it's the leading product because it has so many capabilities. 

I rate UiPath 9 out of 10. When implementing, I recommend sketching out your costs over multiple use cases and comparing them to an alternative solution. 

There are multiple use cases. We have use cases for the ticketing system for assigning the ticket, resolving or maybe closing the ticket, and opening a new ticket. We also have a business use case related to insurance. I worked for an insurance client, and by using automation, we could create a policy that is used for testing purposes. If they had a new enhancement or an issue, they wanted to test whether it was working properly or not. They provided us with some raw data, and we tested that.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It is very important for us.

We use the AI functionality in our automation program. It helps us with decision-making. The AI functionality has enabled us to automate more processes overall.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation and reduces the cost of digital transformation.

UiPath definitely minimizes the operational expenses. By automating the static tasks that people are doing on a daily basis, there is a reduction.

UiPath reduces human errors. With static tasks, such as data entry, there are more chances of human error. With robots, there is less chance for error.

UiPath frees up employee time for other tasks. By automating static processes, we can save time and utilize it for other tasks.

UiPath definitely saves costs, but we cannot fully replace humans with robots. A human is required in certain cases. We can reduce at least 70% of manual tasks and for maybe 20% to 30% of tasks, we need human intervention.

The IDP feature is most valuable in UiPath because there are a lot of invoices and bills in every company. If they want to extract from a scanned document, it is very useful.

UiPath is very easy. We can build very complex processes within a few days.

UiPath has a very good community. If I am facing some issues, it is very easy to get the help of the community. They provide a solution very fast if I post an issue there.

UiPath Academy is good for learning purposes and certifications. They have beginner courses and advanced courses. By using them, it is easy to implement UiPath in a real-life project or process.

When it comes to decision-making, the robot will work based on what we feed it. It will not take any decision at runtime the way a human can. If they can put more intelligence in the robot for decision-making, it will definitely be beneficial for us. For example, if something is not working and it can dynamically decide at runtime what would be the next step, it will be beneficial.

Additional features such as chatbots and AI should be included in the UiPath itself. UI development is another thing. It could be improved for web development and app development.

I have more than six years of experience with UiPath. I have also worked with Automation Anywhere for a year, but I am more familiar with UiPath.

It is scalable. They have ML and also Python. They are adding a few more features.

We have around 1,000 people using UiPath. We have different groups in our company. We have separate teams. There are multiple different tools. UiPath is in one vertical. Automation Anywhere is in a separate vertical. 

Most of the time, if we raise a ticket, they help us to resolve the issue. I would rate their support a seven out of ten. The response time is as per the issue. Sometimes, it is very fast, and at other times, I have to wait for a day or two to get help from UiPath, so I have had both good and bad experiences with their support.

Neutral

I have worked with Automation Anywhere. I have also done scripting, but I had to write a lot of code to automate, whereas, with UiPath, it is simple. It is drag and drop.

It is deployed on-premises. There was no issue at all in deploying it.

For the deployment of bots, we have different VM servers. They are unattended ones. The deployment of bots is a very simple task. 

I can do the deployment myself. It is not a big task.

It saves six to seven hours for one person in a day. It saves the cost of one FTE, which is very high in US dollars. It is more than the cost of a robot. There are definitely savings. If the utilization is more, the savings would be more.

When I started with UiPath, there was a desktop model, and we did not have to purchase Orchestrator. Now, there is a bundle or package of Orchestrator with attended or unattended robots, so the cost is a little bit on the higher end. They are selling the Orchestrator model or the admin model. If someone wants to purchase the standalone or desktop model, they cannot do that, so the cost is on the higher side, but if we purchase more licenses, it gets reduced. If we purchase fewer licenses, it will be high.

If you have good use cases, I would advise using UiPath. Compared to other tools, UiPath is very easy to learn. A trial version of UiPath is easily available, whereas the trial version of Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism is not easily available. Automation Anywhere provides a trial version nowadays, but previously, it was very difficult to train people on that. That is the reason UiPath is the market leader at this time.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for automation. It helps with Excel automation, validation, data extraction, et cetera. We use UiPath for a client project we are working on. 

It's helped improve the organization via an increase in ROI. The employees are much more productive and they no longer have to do repetitive, tedious tasks. 

The product is very user-friendly. It has great drag-and-drop features. My background isn't in computer science, and it was easy for me to get familiar with UiPath and the user interface. 

You can do almost anything related to automation. If it's related to email. databases, Excel sheets, et cetera. There's nothing that needs automation that can't be done on UiPath.

It's very easy to build automations. We can easily build end-to-end automation. We had a process, for example, that needed to be triggered once an email was received. The attachments needed to be downloaded and processed and a reply had to be sent back. UiPath could handle each one of those tasks. 

The user community is pretty great. You can find an answer to basically any query. You can participate and reply as well. 

I've used the Academy courses to learn more about UiPath since I started using the product in May. I started with the foundational course and then did the advanced course and action center and document understanding overview course. It's helping me learn everything fairly extensively. 

The solution has helped us speed up digital transformation. They have enabled very fast digital transformation to meet a company's needs.

It helps reduce human error. I've helped deal with processes that would require employees to deal with thousands of forms. Using UiPath can reduce human error quite extensively. If there was a chance of human error at 25% before, it's been reduced to a maximum of 2% to 3%.

The solution helps free up employee time. The employee, in turn, can be more productive and learn new things in the meantime. It's likely freed up more than 30% of employee time so far. 

I've only used the solution for six months so it is hard to consider improvements. It would help if there was functionality whereby you could upload something like a flow chart and the solution could process steps according to the flow chart.

I've used the solution since May of this year. 

The solution is stable. From what I have heard from my team, it's almost always stable. 

Our clients are large-scale enterprises. 

It is very scalable. You can add or change things as needed and update processes as necessary. We do have quite a sizable process that involves ten to 12 departments and it works well. 

Technical support is responsive. They were very kind when I dealt with them.

Positive

I've used other platforms such as Power Automate and Automation Everywhere. UiPath is a lot better as it is very high-level. 

I did not directly deal with the initial deployment. 

There is not too much maintenance required. 

Clients have noted an ROI. They've found employees are much more productive. 

I haven't seen the pricing or dealt with the licensing of UiPath.

However, I have heard of clients switching to Power Automate due to the fact that it was cheaper than UiPath. 

I do not exactly use the AI functionality. It's not part of my job at this point. 

I'd recommend automation for digital transformation. As for which platform to use, it would depend on which processes they need to use. UiPath is quite suitable for mid-level to large enterprises.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. It's an excellent product.