UiPath Reviews

Currently, we're doing the digital transformation in finance. I'm more of a functional person who understands the design and the processes but not the programming, coding, and details. 

I am using their automation cloud offering.

One of the best benefits is that instead of just doing their single task, it gets people to think beyond what they're doing and how other things impact them; for instance, for PO distribution, we had to think about where our suppliers' lists are and what do the people do out in the field? I've never been as exposed to that as much as now because we are trying to automate it. What you find is that the challenge isn't just in the robot. It is what you do before you get to the robot that is critical, and if it forces us to fix that, it has been a success. It helps you to realize some efficiencies in your current processes.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease the total cost of ownership of UiPath by taking care of things such as infrastructure. We have gone and moved many more things to the cloud. We have a Hyperion solution in the cloud that we use for consolidation. We have FCCS cloud from Hyperion.

I anticipate that there would be a reduction in human errors and also time savings within these five processes. Inherently, it has to improve the accuracy. That's because now you're focused on a particular thing, and you're testing it. If it is not a hundred percent accurate, it is not going to production. 

The ability to follow and orchestrate what the robots are doing has been very valuable. I've been working on the automation hub because that's the next step after our test case of five robotic implementations. So, it is orchestrated to see how they're doing.

UiPath Academy is helpful in terms of the ability to connect the software to the processes that you're trying to automate. It has been helpful in understanding the functions, and it is where you would go to get a better understanding. I do find that their online help is very beneficial with examples. In fact, sometimes that's better than the training itself.

I'm learning it for the training for the RPA associate, and I'm about 70% through there. UiPath's academy courses have been helpful in onboarding or being up to speed with UiPath. However, it has been tougher because the programming that I learned in school is very different from the programming done today. I am sure the younger people will pick it up much faster. There is so much out there, and there is so much to learn because it is not one software package. It provides the ability to use all software packages and interconnect with them. So, the opportunities are amazing but also intimidating.

I started with UiPath training in July 2021.

I am not worried about the stability. I may be naive, but if others are using it in the cloud with much more complicated processes than what we are automating, it is not really a concern.

It is being used by accounting and IT. Finance is learning that, and they're taking the same training that I'm taking. They're probably 10% to 15% on that journey.

Currently, we're doing the digital transformation in finance. We expect to expand that out to operations based on our test case of five robotic implementations. In fact, in our naming conventions, we're trying to make sure that we leave room for HR, Operations, IT, etc, but right now, we're just in finance. Payroll processes, HR processes, onboarding, operations, filling in maintenance on equipment, and doing the routine things out in the field that they do every day will take adoption and interest. Raising four kids, I realize you can't get the response that you want until the people in the field decide that they want to change and adopt it. So, that will be the challenge. The challenge is not whether you can automate something. It is more like will they let you automate something.

I have not really had to use the support, but I will. I've gone back and forth, and I've lost some of my training. I'm a tenant who is just in the training phase. So, everyone has had issues with getting in, and it's more whether they're using Google or Explorer, and how they're accessing it. I am getting that standardized and having them do that. I am also a victim of the same thing that I'm teaching them, and what I'm trying to do is be the guinea pig.

Before UiPath, we didn't use any other RPA solution. We went for UiPath because it was really a move from our finance leader, the controller. We had automated many financial processes with planning, reporting, etc, but the accounting group was continually skipped over. We had a controller that came in, and they wanted to take many of our repeated processes. They took Rally and created an agile group to create the digital finance vector. There is a team of five members who went and looked at processes that we were doing and then told us about which ones we can change and do better with. By using his experience in other companies and having discussions with other people, along with the KPMG group, they did an analysis. They wanted to lead in the digital finance transformation. They're doing that by looking forward to five or 10 years and then coming back, which is really nice.

I will learn more about that. The workflow was nice, and the implementations that we have are relatively easy, but it is intimidating to see how much it takes to do some very small processes. It helps you understand more about the decision points and whether they're objective or subjective. With reporting, it will be helpful for us to understand which things are best to automate and which ones are the easiest. That's what I'm hoping to get from five implementations.

We are doing consulting with a collaborative effort with KPMG. So, they actually know more of the technical details, and they're supposed to be transferring data. 

KPMG did a sprint on the implementations. The sprints were such that it was really six week turnaround time, and that involved actually going backward and doing the assessments from those. By doing the cost benefits backward, we can set things upright and see what we do going forward. The key is not how quickly they were able to do it, but how quickly we can do it, and how quickly the people in the field can adopt that and have a robot actually be their assistant. I believe you call that the citizen developers.

Right now, it is way too big for me to even understand it. I feel like it's a universe. I'm just trying to get directions. The area that I'm looking at right now is analytics to make sure that we can properly report on how they're doing, and that's what is going to make management invest further into our idea. I come from a reporting background, and that's what I focus on in other financial packages that we have with PeopleSoft, Hyperion planning, and the FCCS cloud. In many of these automations, the need part of it is that you're not stuck within the software that you had; for example, a macro within Excel can only help you with what you're doing in Excel. It can't help you with an email. It can't help you with a PDF form, but you can bring these together, so the automation opportunities are endless.

So, at this time, it hasn't saved us money because we're just in the investment phase. That's why I want to do reporting so we can see. The decisions you make now affect the next 10 to 20 years. Everyone gets too short-term-focused. You should go to where you want to be five years from now and go backward. What you are doing today is going to make that five years strike. So, it is an investment.

It is pricey at the beginning, but we'll have to see going forward what we get for the tools. It is always expensive to buy a really nice car and not drive it very far and very much. So, it is about utilization.

I believe my company did evaluate other solutions, and they definitely liked UiPath best. The primary differentials were reputation, experience, and the level and quality of the tool.

I would advise others to give it a try. It can't hurt. Even if you didn't use it going forward, with the basic principles, you'll probably fix things and then come back to it. Some people just have bad processes, and it would be very frustrating to use them because they haven't fixed their processes. You have to get your processes aligned first and then take them to the point that they're standardized and understood by different people using them, and then you can automate across different software packages.

In terms of the ease of building automation within UiPath, that's something that I need to discover with the IT team, but what I do like is once you do something, you store it in a library, and then you have plug and play automation that you can add to others. So, you don't have to keep redoing the same work over and over again, and that's going to be a huge benefit.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. I'm learning it, but have to inject experience. I have to learn and understand, and then I have to utilize t. Like many solutions that I've dealt with, there are always three ways to do it, but there is the best way. I always wish you'd just teach the best way, but I understand that you want to make people agile and have an understanding of using it in different ways. However, learning all three ways is very cumbersome. You really want to learn the way you're going to use it.

Most of our use cases come in finance functions, however, we certainly have use cases spread across all sorts of other functions. For example, in HR. We've had a lot recently in IT operations and then also in broader operations. Obviously, that depends on the company we're working with. We're getting more and more customer-facing automation that is running all the way through the organization, from front office through middle office and back, across all different verticals within a company.

UiPath has improved our clients' companies and the way they function. For example, overall, automating the mundane and the repetitive allows people to do people things. Things like invoice processing and using Document Understanding to do that, enable your accounts payable team to look at the exceptions and do exception-based processing, which requires human judgment. Keying an invoice and working out who to send it to for approval should be rules-based. If it's not rules-based, it's probably an error or a miscommunication between the vendor who's sending it. Maybe it's a mismatch to the PO, and that requires human judgment. Therefore, just getting it out to a human to do that at the right time is critically important. If you're giving your people more time to do the exception-based management, you also give them the time and capacity to stop that from being an exception next time. Whether that's expanding the automation to be able to handle that use case, or whether it's educating your vendors when they're sending you invoices.

We work prominently with unattended solutions and larger end-to-end automation. What we're really loving about UiPath is the number of ways we can now inject human intervention at different parts of those larger workflows instead of looking at a big workflow and working out what parts of it we can automate, aiming to automate end-to-end and only working out the bits that we really need the human intervention in.

UiPath is constantly coming up with ways, whether it's through Teams or it's through apps, there are all sorts of different ways to get the human in the loop and get the automation throughput as high as we can.

Our clients use the UI apps feature. We use that for quite a few different functions. It helped to reduce the workload of IT departments by enabling end-users to create apps. That said, we generally work closer to the business than the IT side. We'd like to see it as taking the work away from the backlog that IT is looking to implement. You don't need an IT department that is quiet and doesn't have a big long queue of work. Allowing the business to be able to build their own solutions based on their business process is very powerful.

The UI apps feature has increased the number of automation. It’s certainly increasing the number of things you can automate and also the amount of a given process you can automate.

It has also reduced the time of creation. Certainly with the app creation, having a single platform reduces the time. You no longer need to integrate it with other different web forms or things you create on the front end, which we did a number of years ago. Now, it's one solution. UiPath can do it all.

For clients that use automation cloud offering, it has helped to decrease UiPath's total cost of ownership. It goes a little bit back to the IT side. You don't need to involve them nearly as much. Having a platform that is always on the latest version really, really helps. It also closes down the handoff between business and IT within the COE.

UiPath has saved costs for our client's organizations. The IT costs are different for each organization. We have clients who have an outsourced IT set up where they pay quite large costs to spin up machines and to maintain and upgrade those machines and services. Having the one solution as UiPath and offering the cloud is critically important for that.

In terms of on-prem instances, clients have saved costs there as well. We're very, very excited about the automation speed and the one-button deployment to the whole environment. That's certainly a step in that direction with on-prem. That will certainly save our client and us a lot of time. That way, everyone can spend more time building automation rather than building a platform to put them into.

The product has reduced human errors. On the same note, it also allows humans to spend a little bit more time on those exceptional cases. When the pressure may be on to get an invoice keyed it allows them to spend the right amount of time getting that exception handled. Then, of course, everything that's going through the bot is pretty much zero-error. The way the bots work, if there is an error it's going to let someone know. It's not going to guess and it's not going to fat finger.

We increasingly use UiPath's AI functionality. We certainly do on custom models with Document Understanding. We're just starting a project now to look at pulling entities out of emails. This is an exciting use case and I’m excited to learn about the capabilities that are being expanded.

The ability to automate processes is twofold. One of them is, it allows us to start to create human decisions. The human decision is the bit that you really need to automate around and starting to build that human decision-making into an AI model is critically important. The other side of that is that, when you're running automation, you have the ability to create a huge dataset. Everything that's being done is rules-based and it's data-driven so you can map everything every bot does, every button press if you want. That's a huge amount of data and a huge amount of input to AI models. Having it all in the UiPath platform is critically important for our customers. It's great that UiPath has lots of partners and we use partners, technology partners, to do that when required. However, the more that comes into the UiPath platform, the better.

We’ve utilized Academy courses from UiPath. UiPath's academy is amazing. It's unparalleled in the industry. We traditionally have done a lot of training for our clients over the years. However, we find with UiPath, we just point them in the direction of the Academy. We're always there to support, of course, and supplement any training that's specific to maybe a client environment or a client business system. That said, it's a fantastic resource for partners and for clients of UiPath.

The quality of the training Academy is great. It's also a tool to evangelize UiPath in our customer base. If someone hears about UiPath or they come to one of our demos through our delivery life cycle, and they really want to know something about UiPath, or want to get involved, or want to become a part of the COE or become a developer, it’s very, very easy to send them in the right direction. They can do the training they want to do, and they can get as deep as they want. It’s great and offers a low-effort way to evangelize UiPath.

The time to competency has been lowered with those that go through the Academy. It's not only learning. Learning things off slides. It's getting in there, it's whether it's a community edition or a training install, it's building things. Through the certifications, users can submit those things to get reviewed. This makes sure that people who are certified through the academy really do know their stuff. They've got hands-on experience. There's nothing quite like doing it in a real process. With the UiPath Academy, new users get as close as they can to that.

There should be extra ways for humans to interact with automation.

From what I've seen, and it's very early, however, there's certainly the direction they are headed, which is really, really great to see. It's my belief that Document Understanding will continue to improve. I'd like to see more predictive-type stuff, which again, we are beginning to see.  We'd love to get Document Understanding continually improving and having it more improved by the SMEEs who are performing the processes rather than the data analysts.

We've been implementing UiPath for just over four years.

The stability is amazing. Years have gone by and obviously, the product has changed a lot, however, of late, the last couple of years have been great stability-wise.

The object repository and modern folders have been great for the scalability of the solution. From the platform side, it's certainly easy to scale. We're very, very impressed on the automation suite side. You can deploy everything very quickly and you can scale everything up. 

The focus on reuse from a developer level is great to see. That's really improved in the last little while. On the other side of it, the actual scale through the organization, in terms of evangelizing automation, and making our customers an enterprise that automates first, there are numerous tools that do that really well. Whether it's the workshops that UiPath will come and do, or that we facilitate or it's through the pipeline itself, the scalability has obviously been a focus for the last little while. It's really, truly great.

We very rarely need to reach out to UiPath support. If we do, we know we're going to get a prompt response, and we're going to get a good answer. That said, we rarely need it. It's very, very good in general when we do use it.

We've got a few clients that run multiple solutions. They've been legacy users of another solution for a very long time. Citizen Development through StudioX is unparalleled in UiPath. Attended automation is obviously a strong point and has been for years. There are also things like Document Understanding. Document Understanding is much stronger than any of the solutions on other providers. There are those value adds that come in for that full lifecycle.

The solution is relatively straightforward. We have a dedicated platform team whose role is to implement UiPath for our customers, whether it's integrating them into the cloud or getting their business applications on the cloud. Or, whether it's an on-prem solution where we'll interact with their systems and integrate with their CyberArk or AD groups or whatever they need.

Each deployment is very dependent on the customer. We've had them deployed in a few days and we've had some that have gone on a few months, unfortunately. We find that talking to the risk group, the security group, and the infrastructure group all at the same time on day one of the project will make sure everyone's aligned - and that is the best way to mitigate the risks. 

The last thing you want is someone from the security organization putting their hand up in week four and saying, "Hold on, hold on, start again. This doesn't comply with one of the controls in our organization." It's about educating and keeping everyone, all stakeholders from the IT side involved at all stages.

The ROI that our clients have seen is very process-dependent. We've seen some huge 300 to 600% on particular use cases. Some of them are very easy to calculate due to the fact that we're taking work away from manual users. We've also seen some really good ones recently that are actually increasing revenue. Whether that's giving the capacity to sales-type items or whether it's tasks such as processing refunds and all those sorts of things that shouldn't be taking time away from salespeople, it’s been helpful.

The licensing can get a little confusing. There's been a move recently to create personas around licensing. My feedback from customers is that it hasn't necessarily helped. Some of the new enterprise-type agreements, the per-seat arrangements, are interesting. That's likely the way it'll go. Even then, it's still a little on the confusing side at times. We do a lot of work with clients to get them to understand the licensing model.

We've been aware of other solutions, and in comparison, with UiPath, it's the breadth of the lifecycle that sets it apart. UiPath as a platform, from the moment the first person at an organization thinks about automating, to reaping the benefits of that and improving the day-to-day work of the business, there's a solution for all of that. Whether it's process mining and finding automation candidates, it's the way UiPath brings different users into the automation. Apps and insights make sure we're pulling the right data out to keep generating the business case to grow the UiPath account itself. Also, along with that, is the ability to provide the extra benefit and knowing what benefit we're providing.

We have clients across both on-prem and cloud deployments. We have about 25% cloud, 75% on-prem solutions. We use various versions of the on-premises model. We probably average about 12-month-old versions, however, we do have clients on the most recent as well. We also have a couple of clients who are lagging a little bit.

I'd advise potential new users to get in there and get started. You don't know until you've tried. You don't have to look very hard to get started, however, it's important once you get going to start to think about how you scale and how you build an operating model around it. Maybe start small, and think big, and make sure you plan accordingly.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for automation of the back office. When speaking about our customers and use cases, I wouldn't highlight one specifically, however, mainly, we are using UiPath to build a center of excellence. The aim is to automate a majority of the processes in the company, and that includes Order-to-Cash, HR, supply chain, and even IT, among others. We are not approaching needs for one or another specific process. We want to automate the enterprise end to end.

There are many great features in UiPath that our clients consider valuable. I definitely like Studio. The Studio's a very powerful product, which helps very easily to build automations. Nowadays, there's also a StudioX for citizen developers, which doesn't require coding.

Orchestrator, which helps users monitor and schedule robots, manage assets, credentials, et cetera, is also very useful.

The third feature worth mentioning, I would say, is Insights. It is reporting and dashboards. Once the robots are running, it is quite valuable to see how those robots are performing. You can see KPIs and other aspects of both robots and processes.

Worth mentioning is the Automation app, which helps to manage the automation initiative end to end, especially building the pipeline and collecting the ideas.

It is quite easy to build automations with UiPath, especially now that they are segregated depending on seniority, meaning that you have the regular Studio and Studio Pro, which are truly for developers, however, you also have StudioX, which is more for people without a previous coding background. That makes it quite easy to use. People with a business background find it quite easy to pick a tool up and use it in daily automation. They didn't have any previous experience with programming or making macros or whatever else, and still, they have no problem with UiPath.

UiPath enables users to build end-to-end automation, and this is what we are doing on a daily basis. UiPath enables mainly our clients (through us) to build end-to-end automation in their processes. When I mean end to end, I mean that we help them to automate the chain of processes and do not focus on the single practice itself.

End to end coverage within UiPath is a great advantage and offers great possibilities. It is really important to have the ability to do end to end. Though it is not applicable all the time, it still is a nice option to have and use when needed.

Very soon after starting the RPA journey, customers realize much more important benefits than time-saving itself and FTE saving or FTE reduction. There are things that happen, like quality improvement. Whenever the work is done by robots, it is running in a much more stable manner and without any human mistakes and errors. It is also sustainable, predictable work, meaning that robots do not get sick or have a bad day, or face conflicts with each other, et cetera. They just do their work. They also can’t get viruses, such as COVID which means that we don’t have to worry about losing staff.

We have a customer speech workload that was growing dramatically in relation to COVID and having processes already automated, it was very easy to sustain and even upscale the delivery. The customer experience is better as well. It is not only important to spend less time or fewer resources in delivering the service to the customer, it is also important that the customer gets a quick response. Overall, the customer experience can be much improved when using robots in the processes.

In terms of the Automation Cloud offering, UiPath handles infrastructure maintenance and updates to save time for our client's IT department. Having UiPath in a cloud enables enterprises and customers to focus more on the automation initiative itself, instead of managing all the hardware and dealing with all their hardware problems and having more or giving more time to the IT department. Instead, you can use everything out of the box from day one and focus on bringing benefits to your end customer or end employee.

The Automation Cloud offering has helped to decrease time to value from UiPath. I would say that Automation Cloud increases time to value dramatically in the sense that you can start from day one. Literally day one, you can go and start automating the processes without bothering with all the infrastructure topics. The time required to deliver the first benefits is reduced dramatically.

Automation Cloud’s offering helps to decrease the solution's total cost of ownership by taking care of things such as infrastructure maintenance and updates. It helps to reduce the cost of infrastructure maintenance, especially in the early stages of the projects, as well as on small and medium projects (for the long term). Not all customers or enterprises have strong IT departments or strong infrastructure in-house nowadays. Even large enterprises are moving more and more towards cloud services, even though they have strong IT infrastructure teams in place.

Automation Cloud is able to scale well due to the fact that we can, in a matter of minutes, or, in the worst case, hours, double the capacity. I would say that it positively and dramatically affects the scaling factor.

UiPath is a SaaS offering. It enables our customers to really quickly adapt and start using the technology almost from day one. It is very easy to start developing. It is very easy to start.

We are using UiPath Apps for our customers. However, this feature has not yet helped to reduce the workload on our IT department, or on our client's IT department by enabling end-users to create apps. Mainly, we are still involved as a service provider in the creation of the apps for the end-users. That said, where it brings added value is it reduces the limitations or the need to have an additional user interface, as you can create this app or user interface directly in UiPath to have an even better user, employee, or even customer interaction.

UiPath apps definitely increased the number of automations created. You can take more into the scope, what wasn't there before, with just attended or unattended automation, considering the fact that you can build a better user interface or any user interface from the very beginning. Before, there were only simple message boxes and prompts. Now, you can build really nice forms to interact with your end-users. It helps to accelerate initiatives.

Our teams have used UiPath’s Academy courses. Every team member of our company went through UiPath Academy. We always start with and actively involve UiPath academy.

UiPath Academy courses are a part of our standard onboarding procedure in the company, especially if we onboard junior developers. The very first thing we direct them to is UiPath Academy. Everyone starts with a basic foundation and goes through to a diploma and certification, and only then will we build on top of that more specifics about our standards, of our delivery approach, et cetera. I would say that UiPath Academy is a core and basic start for each and every employee in the company. Based on that education, we will later elaborate on different topics.

The biggest value I see behind UiPath Academy is its simplicity in terms of delivering the information. Even if you don't have any previous development experience and coding experience, all the explanations, videos, practical tasks, and reading material is formed in a way that is really easy to understand. The biggest value I see is its ability to bring people up to speed from really different levels, including very, very junior people with no previous experience in coding, programming, or the creation of robots.

UiPath's user community is excellent. Being an MVP, for me, the community has huge value in the whole end-to-end journey of RPA. Meaning that, at the very beginning, whenever you need to learn new things, you can always find a lot of useful hints in the forum and in the community. Later, when you already have delivered some solutions, you might face some problems. Luckily, very likely, you are not the first person to face those problems. There is always someone who already has had this problem and may have even raised it in a forum or on YouTube, et cetera. Even when you are already deep in delivery, sooner or later, there will be a point where you reach out for help to the community. The community, therefore, plays a crucial role for developers and automation specialists - be it business analysts, developer architects, et cetera. Having a strong community is definitely one of the most important factors that sets UiPath apart.

I'm not actively involved in other communities, and therefore wouldn't be able to compare UiPath to other similar communities. I can only say that the UiPath community is very supportive and very active in responding to any queries. The way it’s organized, it’s inspiring the next generation of forum members to help others and pay forward with insights based on the help they receive. UiPath’s community is really responsible and supportive.

In terms of reducing human error, at the very beginning, almost every company when starting the RPA and automation in Germany thinks of FTE saving as the main benefit. However, very quickly they recognize how huge the value is behind the quality improvements that happen after automation. It is quite obvious that robots are not doing human-like mistakes that may be caused by, for example, not paying attention or not getting enough sleep et cetera. Robots also cannot get bored. Very often, and whenever you have to process 1,000 or 10,000 records in more or less the same manner, it just becomes super repetitive. A mistake can appear in manual work as humans can lose focus on redundant tasks. This is not so when robots are involved.

In terms of time savings and error reduction, usually in our initiatives, we can see not higher than 5% of error rates when executed by robots. Even in those cases, I wouldn't say they are errors and more likely exceptions, which are documented and later handed over with specific explanations. A good KPI for our robots is to have less than a 5% exception rate. Related to this is that, by improving quality, we still save a lot of time as it can reduce the number of reworks which we might have afterward. For example, in one of the projects we were delivering, it reduced by eight times the amount of reworks or fixes, which the customer needed to process due to human-directed errors. Mistakes and fixes, therefore, were reduced by eight times.

What I would improve in UiPath, or I would just say, keep on improving, is the other products in end-to-end automation. UiPath started with Studio and Orchestrator as a core product, and still, we are actively co-operating UiPath and suggesting improvements for the other products. 

One of the products where I would definitely see a need for improvement would be a Task Capture. It is already good, however, there are many aspects and many ideas, which, for example, our business analysts have, which can be improved.

I've been using UiPath since 2016. It is already over five years. I'm familiar with the product.

Both on-prem and cloud solutions are very stable. The cloud is stable thanks to the UiPath team and on-prem, in our case, is stable thanks to our customer IT infrastructure team. Between the product itself and the infrastructure, be it Azure Cloud or on-site infrastructure, the stability is good. If there's any instability, it could be related to the people involved in using it as I've had a good experience with both cloud and on-premises stability.

The scalability of UiPath is one of the main competitive advantages, compared to other products. The software and the solution give you the opportunity to stably run it and scale it. With stable operations, you can focus on the new automation instead of maintaining already existing solutions. UiPath is very good at scaling in a friendly way and has good support that can help too.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. I never give ten, just to keep the motivation to improve high. I still believe that there are areas of improvement, though I really rate UiPath's support very high. The response time can always be shorter, the specification on solving problems can always be better, et cetera. Overall, I am extremely happy with the support UiPath provides in over 95% of the cases. For the remaining 5%, we still received the needed support, it only takes another iteration to move through another team and have a look at the problem.

Comparing the initial setup on cloud versus on-premise, the cloud configuration is much easier. This is one of the purposes of the cloud solution. It's meant to be easy to deploy and easy to scale. Documentation for the cloud is definitely straightforward. In terms of on-premise deployments, it is also quite straightforward, especially at the start, however, the complexity grows with the demands and requirements from the customer. If we have to get into the area of high availability and more of a complex server setup, it takes some effort to establish everything.

The simplest deployment on the cloud would take a matter of 15 minutes or maybe even as little as five. After five minutes you are ready to go and can use Studio and the cloud Orchestrator. It is very fast. You still need to have your admin rights available on your PC, however, that's the only prerequisite. 

For deploying on-prem, it's nearly the same for a simple deployment. If you only want to use the Studio and attend the job, it is very easy to configure in a matter of 15 minutes. Whenever you get into Orchestration, it will require more complex setups. It might take one or two days to set up, depending on how good of an infrastructure team you have to onboard.

The strategy in implementation remains the same no matter which deployment. In the end, you still have the same setup of products, be it Studio, Orchestrator, Task Capture, or whatever else. You have the same configuration of the products. It is only on the backend that is slightly different as it is hosted in another place. You don't really recognize the difference between cloud and on-prem hosted services.

At the very beginning, when we started the RPA journey, we were always tasked with understanding and looking at the potential return of investments. Therefore, we don't start automating the process before understanding the savings. For each and every process which we automate, we start with understanding what it will bring to the end customer. Even if we see minimal savings in the processes, we automate these. The biggest processes which we were automating were saving more than 20 FTEs (Full Time Equivalents). We are speaking to just about one process.

For us, FTE saving and time-saving are the same thing. It’s just different units of measure. You can measure it in people equivalent or in an hours per year equivalent.

The good thing about UiPath is that they are very active when it comes to listening to feedback. Every release incorporates some of this feedback into the product life cycle.

We are using both UiPath's Automation Cloud offering and the on-premise solution. We have customers, which need on-premise as well as customers which are running it in the cloud. On-premise, we have clients using different versions, however, it's my understanding that we are using version 2020.10.

I would definitely recommend, when starting the RPA journey, to start to use UiPath. Think about RPA as a robot factory, as a strategic thing, however, do not focus on one or another process. Think big and aim for automating all the manual processes in the corporation and from day one, and work to adjust all your procedures and infrastructure, the way that you've been able to get to this point. Do not get stuck at some point and feel you need to rework anything. Rather, change your standards in order to scale. In fact, aim for scalability from day one.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We are a happy partner of UiPath and we have had many successful implementations with our customers. I can confidently say, after five years of experience using UiPath, that I've been happy with it. I still believe that there is always space for improvement. However, I really do have an appreciation for the tools. They're making a really good product and they should keep on improving at the same great pace. We plan to keep on using this product to deliver the same great services to our customers.

Currently, we are using it for reading emails. We download the attachments that we get in emails. After downloading those Excel sheets attachments, we process the data based on a few rules. The processed data is input into the SAP application. In the SAP application, based on the business rules, we process the data and commit.

It is very user-friendly in terms of building automation. We don't need to be experts in coding. We can learn it easily and build complex business tools in UiPath. We don't need prior coding experience.

It reduces the cost of digital transformation. Every day, we get 10 Excel sheets, and somebody has to sit and read the Excel sheet and load the data manually into the SAP application. Three to four employees are required for the same job, but if we automate this process, it can be done in a minute. It is easy, and we save time and cost.

It reduces the time taken for a task. If we are manually filling timesheets, we need to open the website, fill the timesheet, and submit it. It can take 10 minutes. With automation, it will take just a minute.

Orchestrator is very useful for deployment and publishing, maintaining queues, and running jobs.

In UiPath, REFramework is useful for different use cases with predefined code templates. There are well-established steps. There is a step for code marginalization. Similarly, there are separate steps for initialization and processing. For closing an application process, a step is there. So, it is very well modularized for getting the transaction data. If there is one exception or anything wrong happens with an application, it will log the exception in the orchestrator and send an email. It can also close your applications and end data processing. So, everything is well organized and separated, and we can log the exceptions separately in the queues as business exceptions or application exceptions. We can have the complete report of a particular queue.

For document understanding, there are so many features. I haven't used them practically, but to read a PDF, there are patterns and semi patterns. A wait option is also there for somebody to come and correct it. It can wait until somebody comes and corrects it, and then it will do the processing. So, all of the features are very useful in UiPath.

In exception handling, wherever exception occurs, the out arguments are not being passed. It would be good if there is a way to pass the out arguments. 

Sometimes, when an element is not there, UiPath gets stuck, and it doesn't even throw an exception. It stays stuck for hours until we go and check the logs. When this happens, we have to kill it. It happens in some cases, so an improvement is needed there.

I have been using this solution for three and a half years.

Other than the issues related to the exception handling and UiPath getting stuck, it is very stable.

It can scale well, but we don't really have a need to scale it. Currently, we are automating 15 projects. We are planning to use other functionalities of UiPath to automate extra things.

Currently, we have 1,000 people who use this solution. They are consultants, developers, and business analysts. A business analyst takes care of making design documents and solution documents. The RPA developers develop the code and test it. After that, for deployment, someone is there to take care of all technical things. After that, the support team is there to look after the deployment.

I didn't call UiPath support, but I know about them from my friend. We had called them for some issues, and they answered those very well. I would rate them a nine out of 10.

I have worked only on UiPath.

Its initial setup is straightforward. It is not that complex. We need to install UiPath Studio, and then we connect it to Orchestrator for getting logs, etc. It doesn't take more than an hour.

I took the help of my colleagues.

I'm not sure about licensing and pricing, but the pricing for their certification is a little bit more. Previously, we could do it for no price.

I would definitely recommend it to my colleagues and others. It is very user-friendly.

In terms of reducing human error, it is not up to the mark. It detects human errors, but it waits until we place the correct files for processing. For example, when comparing files, a human can detect two almost-similar addresses as the same, but a UiPath bot cannot do that. So, in some cases, it won't work as humans. It cannot decide. It works on predefined rules.

Considering its areas of improvement and the cost of certification, I would rate UiPath a nine out of 10.

We are using the on-premises UiPath solution for both attended and unattended bots. At this time, we use unattended bots primarily to facilitate integration between applications, and we are not using the attended bot capabilities.

Generally speaking, we develop integrations for our core banking system, which was written in-house and running on a mainframe. It is a highly-developed system that we started using more than 30 years ago. When it was created, we didn't have the integration capabilities that exist in other applications or core systems, today. This means that in order to have external applications communicate with the core system, we need to develop integrations. Examples of this might be web services or other APIs, and that's why it takes time to do.

We have teams to do the integration, but considering that the core banking system is in Turkey and all of our teams are busy, we don't have enough resources to implement all of our integration projects. Now, for the past three years, we have been implementing bots to handle integration by moving data from the applications to the core system, and from the core system to the applications.

The biggest benefit for us is time savings in terms of developing satellite applications for the core banking system. We are developing the robotic API, and we are integrating our internal front-end applications with the core system.

Using this approach, we can easily get and set data from the core system, and we can see the results for each transition. We can learn about what happens in the core system with the help of the bots.

The amount of time that we save depends on the use case. For example, if we implement integration between core banking and the applications instead of native integration through development, it saves a lot of time. I prefer native integration versus using the bots but sometimes, you don't have this opportunity because it will take too long to put into production. Other times, you can't justify undergoing a large development process for just a small integration, so it's enough to solve the problem using the bots.

There is another use case where our operations teams perform repetitive tasks using the bots. For example, when performing the task manually, users have to take the data from one screen and enter it on another screen. We have never tried to calculate how much time we are saving in cases like this, although I'm sure that we are saving a lot of time.

People in the organization have been asking for more projects to be automated because it is easier for them. When their tasks are automated, they are more relaxed and can focus on other more important tasks, as opposed to the repetitive ones. Getting away from repetitive tasks puts you in a position where you can make more decisions and be part of the smart part of the business. This leaves the easier, repetitive tasks for the robots.

There are a lot of really useful features in UiPath including the Orchestrator and the Studio.

The Orchestrator is one of the main tools that I use because I like to help orchestrate the bots. It is the heart of the tool and it gives me a lot of flexibility to automate or manage bots that are in the field. The Orchestration Server is one of the most important features and when you perform a deep dive, you see that it has a lot of functionality. It's great.

The Orchestrator has other features such as computer vision, AI, and machine learning, and it complements the bots and the Studio.

UiPath integrates well with Elasticsearch, which is a great search engine. ElasticSearch is more capable than UiPath for searching logs. I'm filling the gap in log reporting using ElasticSearch, where I'm feeding the logs into it and then creating dashboards, or using the analytics parts of ElasticSearch and Kibana.

The UiPath Academy is a very valuable component of this solution. Many of our employees have used the courses. With it, a person who has a little bit of an analytical mindset can easily learn to do many things. If somebody is willing to develop themselves in RPA, the UiPath academy is more than enough to do so. They will understand the components that make up the ecosystem. The academy is very good, well constructed, and has a lot of labs and exercises to help one learn the system by themself without any help, and very easily.

The logging capability that comes with Orchestrator does not allow you to create smart reports. You have the logs from the bots and what's happening on the machines because you get all of this information from the logs. However, UiPath is more capable when it comes to collecting information about your processes, time saved, or process execution. They have some smart report dashboards.

The installation and initial setup is difficult for non-technical organizations.

We have been using UiPath for more than three years.

Stability is something that we should consider in two parts. The first concerns the bots and how they are running the tasks on the machines. This comes down to what kind of developers we have because if you are developing properly, and implementing all of the exceptional cases that may occur during the execution of the process, it's very good. I haven't had any issues in cases like this.

The second part is the Orchestrator, and I haven't had issues with this either. In the more than three years that we have been using this environment, including the time in production and our test environments, we have never had an issue.

We have had two or three incidents because we didn't have enough space left on the database storage, but that was not related to UiPath. Rather, it is related to the infrastructure. Another time, the SSL certification expired so we had to renew it. Otherwise, stability-wise, we haven't had any problems.

Scalability is very good, although we have not reached a point where we needed to scale the infrastructure. The high availability and scalability are two of the main features in the UiPath environment but we have not needed to go in that direction yet. At this time, we only have five bots in the organization and that is enough.

We are not planning to increase the numbers at this point because the number of bots that we have can be managed on a single node. We don't have clusters or multiple bots because of the criticality of our processes, but these are things that you can add and set up to share the workloads. Although we don't use it, I think that it looks really promising.

In our team, we have a business analyst and developers. Some of the roles for the developers are varied. At most, we have three people on a project who are working with UiPath.

The technical support for UiPath is good. When we first started contacting them between two and three years ago, the support for everybody was the same. However, they're now offering different tiers of support that require a different license and cost. There is one basic technical support, where all customers have the right to open tickets and try to solve the problems. Then, there are different support levels where you can pay extra and you can get more assistance for solving your problems.

Up to this point, all of the problems that I have had are mostly related to upgrades and installations, and they have only been from time to time. So far, I have been able to solve problems with basic technical support. Some of the problems I have solved on my own, whereas with others, I have needed a small bit of help from technical support.

I can say at this point that the support is good, although really, I haven't had any major problems that necessitated a lot of support.

We have used other RPA solutions in the past, but not to the same scale as UiPath.

The initial setup is not very complex, but it depends on the profile and experience of the person who is using it. Considering we had a great deal of deep experience in the project implementation and also the technologies, we are familiar with everything. This includes tasks like installation of the infrastructure, configuring the databases, configuring the virtual machines, and installing the robots' features.

For less technical organizations or people, it will be difficult to implement the UiPath infrastructure. In that case, they will need the help of partners.

It's not so easy, but it's well documented. In fact, one of the good things about UiPath is that everything is very well documented. The deployment takes no more than two or three weeks.

Our implementation strategy started with developing bots using the trial license. We found the bot implementation was very easy. The trial includes everything that you need to develop workflows and the bots that run on the machines. When you get to the point where you need to run multiple bots in production, you need the Orchestration server.

We did not install Orchestrator until between four and six months after we started with the trial. In the beginning, we were testing UiPath and creating some small projects. These were very easy to implement. After that is when we decided to buy the license and move the bots to production.

In terms of maintenance, it is not critical for the bots. It's the Orchestrator that has to be maintained and kept up to date. Every year, you need to upgrade your infrastructure with the latest release, so there is some annual maintenance. If it is on-premises then you also have to maintain the hardware that everything is running on.

Of course, there should be somebody responsible for taking care of the databases and general system maintenance. The operating system, for example, should be maintained by someone. All of these things are layers and sublayers on top of the solution.

If instead, you implement the cloud version of UiPath, then you can get rid of all of the maintenance. In that case, you have only the bots and the Orchestrator, which are hosted on the UiPath cloud, and you don't have to worry about anything. UiPath does the upgrades and performs all of the maintenance, which is nice. In the future, we may go in this direction. However, at this time, maintaining the infrastructure in our organization is easy and not a burden for us.

I can't say that UiPath is expensive but I can't say that it's cheap. The cost that we are allocating for RPA doesn't burden us too heavily, so what we are paying is acceptable compared to the gains that we have in the organization. That said, it is relative because it depends on the size of the organization, the budget, and other factors. From our point of view, considering our budget, it is okay but for another organization, it might be expensive.

There are some features, such as UiPath Insights, that require you to purchase an additional license. The logging capabilities are also a feature that you need to pay extra for.

While we were searching for solutions, we read the documentation for UiPath. We found out that UiPath was originally started as a Romanian company, where we are, so we figured that we would try it since this is where it was first implemented. Our tests showed that UiPath was very promising but we kept investigating other solutions.

We tried Blue Prism and we tried Automation Anywhere, which are both RPA tools. We also did some studying, looked at the Gartner report, and did some further analysis. Ultimately, we decided to buy the licenses from UiPath because it was solving all of our problems.

When you use this system, you are using features from several different modules. It's something like an ecosystem where you have the bots, Studio, and the Orchestrator. If you are not using all of them at the same time then something is missing. They complete each other. If, for example, you don't have the Orchestrator and are only running the bots then it is a different kind of automation.

In the past, as I was using UiPath, I found that there were additional features that I wanted, but regularly and with each product update, they were bringing in new functionalities. At this time, I don't have a project that is waiting and cannot be implemented due to missing features. All of the tools that they deliver, for the time being, together are enough to implement any type of project.

We are not yet using the AI functionality because to this point, although that is because we don't yet have a proper project for it. At the same time, the AI and machine learning functionality are very important to us because we are planning to use them.

We have not used the UiPath Apps feature because it is one of the new features that has come out lately, and we haven't had the time to gain a deep understanding of these technologies. We have some rough ideas about how we can use this feature, but for the time being, we do not have a project that needs to be solved with UiPath Apps.

My advice for anybody who is implementing UiPath is to start with studying the processes and trying to determine whether they are good candidates for RPA. In order to automate a process, you need structured data such that the inputs and outputs are somewhat predictable. Once you know what it is that you want to automate, you have to understand the capacity, and then if you have any candidate processes, you can begin developing.

UiPath is the RPA solution that I recommend. However, it is important to know, before purchasing a solution, which of the processes are good candidates for automation.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Most of our use cases are related to business, like reconciliation and reporting. Therein, they have some internal applications to automate SAP automation and Salesforce Automation. Our most recent use case is related to documents, like the invoices coming from customers. We have to extract that data from invoices via different formats, e.g., some are digital formats and some are scanned formats. So, we have to extract the data, which we are doing with the help of UiPath.

We are using both attended and unattended automation. For 90 percent of our use cases, we are using UiPath for unattended automation.

I use UiPath almost every day. When I finish developing one process, there is a new process to develop. If a process is complex, it almost takes six to eight weeks to develop it, then you have to deploy it for monitoring. After that, the next process comes up.

UiPath helps based on how it is configured. In our case, there are so many transactions coming in, it is not possible for a human to complete them in nine hours (working hours). So, we went with unattended bots, which we mostly run at night. We start the bots after the working hours of humans, so when the operations team returns in the morning, their work is complete.

From a developer perspective, the process is smooth and easy. You can find a solution on Google easily. You can develop your own code. From a technical perspective, it is 100 percent.

UiPath Studio is great. It has all the activities. You don't have to write anything. Even after that, if you feel that you have to do something for yourself, then you can write your on-premises code in it and develop your own framework. Everything is there. You just have to use UiPath Studio.

if you are a business user, even if you don't have a technical team, you can install the second version of the Community edition, which is StudioX. This is specifically made for business people who don't have a lot of ideas about technicalities. This is a great feature.

If websites are made in a recent programming format, it is very easy to automate them with the help of UiPath. However, if that technology is based on legacy applications, then it is very fragile and hard to do that. So, we have to choose the technology first, and if the technology is new, then you can easily automate it with other applications or the help of an RPA tool.

The process can be complex if an application is a legacy application or the data is unstructured. The analysis of some bots is lacking. If a customer asks for analysis of a particular bot, you cannot just get the data from the UiPath and give it to the customer. It is not that easy. I would rate this process as a seven or eight (out of 10).

The Document Understanding feature should be more developed and advanced. For example, you have to make a template with their ML model. Currently, we can't use our own ML model, and we have to use the UiPath ML model. UiPath has only a few ML models right now. They should come up with more ML models or make it easier for us to use our own ML model. While they are working on this, I have felt much difficulty in extracting data during our last process for Document Understanding. We had to go with the Python language. So, I think they are lacking in this feature.

After deploying the bots in production, processes are very stable, unless something happens with the machine. You don't have to monitor a process every time. So, I am very impressed and satisfied with things.

We are looking to update to version 20.

This solution is very much scalable. If you are working in a small or large organization, it doesn't matter. It is very much scalable, up to anything.

We have a team of around 100 to 120 people in RPA automation, in which 60 or 70 users have the developer license. 

I am very much impressed and satisfied with the UiPath solution. Earlier, I used the Automation Anywhere solution, and it is sort of messy and complex. You have to pull everything from a single workflow. Then, I moved to UiPath, and everything was very sorted. If you really like coding, you can do that. It gives you a real developer type feel.

Developing and deploying robots with UiPath is very straightforward. It hardly takes five minutes to deploy a process on Orchestrator.

The last process that UiPath covered saved the work of two people.

If you have repetitive tasks, you can apply UiPath and have your people trained to do other work.

If you want to start doing RPA, I think you should definitely go with UiPath because it has the Community edition. You can just install it and check whether or not your process works fine with UiPath. It will be an attended bot, but you can form an idea whether your bot can easily be automated.

We have one use case related to Microsoft Word Automation. Word Automation is not compatible with other tools. However, in UiPath, we were able to write our own code to automate and format the Word document, which is why UiPath Studio is the most valuable feature. We are also using the Automation Anywhere. But, in Automation Anywhere, we cannot write our own code. So, we can't automate Word Automation from Automation Anywhere as well.

Automation Anywhere has come out with its own new version of 2019, which is as effective as UiPath. However, when I have tried to run or deploy the bots, it still lacks in features. For example, in UiPath, AML activities are coming up very frequently. Whereas, in Automation Anywhere, these features are lacking, which is why I go with UiPath. Also, Citrix automation is very good with UiPath. You feel like you are able to detect the elements and images.

UiPath gives you REFramework, which is absolutely amazing for business use cases. Automation Anywhere also lacks this feature. With Automation Anywhere, you need to make your own framework, and if you are making your own framework, then the look becomes messy. If someone is trying to understand it, then they have to spend more time on the framework to understand it.

I use the IQ Bot of Automation Anywhere, and even after training a hundred documents, it's not picking up or extracting the data from documents. I feel like I have to train the model again, which is not the case with Document Understanding. If you properly make the templates in Document Understanding of UiPath, it gives you full text values. So, it is more advanced and suitable for me.

We use UiPath Assistant to run processes about 10 percent of the time. Most of the time, we are using Orchestrator. 

UiPath releases new features every 15 days to a month. They have already come up with AI and machine learning.

If scanned documents are coming in for some of the work, we are also using Python language for this.

If you already have a technical team, then you can ask them to look into UiPath Academy. If they have basic knowledge of programming or coding, then even in seven days, they can easily learn UiPath and start applying it in their organization. You don't need to hire outside developers.

Overall, the solution is a nine (out of 10).

We are in the finance industry, so we use Studio and Orchestrator to automate a lot of Excels and making reports.

The product has given us the opportunity to automate processes for our industry and specifically for our business. We have set up best practices. So we know what description needs to be at the top in the code. We just start there, read what's going on. Automation just makes everything simple and standardized while reducing human error.

I don't know all of the features so the scope of my view is a little limited as to what may be best or most valuable overall. For me, the ease of use is definitely valuable. Assembly of processes is just drag-and-drop and that simplifies a lot of things. Annotation is also very easy to do and it helps to make things clear to understand during development. I can go look at someone else's code and within an hour understand what it's doing without having to consult the other developer. On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is great, I would rate the ease of use of the platform a four. 

Even though there are things I'd like to see, I also know that most or all of them are already being announced for new releases. As a developer, I would probably say the most important thing I would like to see is that the IDE (Integrated Development Environment) a little bit more fleshed out. It could use more debugging capabilities, for example. But again, we've been seeing that they're adding stuff like that. It will be getting in there and playing with it when it is released to make sure that it has got all the stuff I want and I might be able to be more specific after that as to what still needs to be added.

On a scale from one to five where five means the product is very stable, I would rate the stability of the UiPath platform a five. It works and nothing breaks that is directly related to the product itself.

The technical support, communities, and resources are all pretty good. We use the forums and I like the forums a lot. It's crazy how many people actually spend time on it and reply. You get your answer pretty quickly. The guys are really open to work with, so if we need help we just reach out and we get all the help we need.

We also use the UiPath Academy. On a scale from one to five where one is the least beneficial, I would rate the Academy as probably four out of five. It is easy to use. You go in there and you know what training you are looking for and what you need to take. Most of the training is in-depth enough so that when you complete it, you really have a good grip on what's going on. It eliminates barriers to getting the information you need when you need it.

The initial setup and implementation happened before my time at the company.

A lot of our return on investment has to do with time savings. It is definitely amazing to see processes that could take eight days before actually run in ten minutes. Just because of automation. It eliminates Hangouts and just makes the whole process and the people involved in the processes more efficient. As far as how much gets saved exactly, it depends on the complexity of the project and what it resolves. We have to invest in our BA (Business Analyst) work so all together it may take a couple of months for anyone project to pay off.

We use the solution on-premises right now, but I think we are going to move to the cloud because of the advantages. We also do not run our automation in a virtual environment, such as Citrix either. Our bots run on a physical server, but there may be reasons in the future to explore virtual environments for that purpose. 

The approximate number of people in our organization involved in the automation initiative, strictly considering developers would be my team of six. It is harder to say how many are using the bot solutions who are not directly involved in the development.

We currently tend to stick more with attended bots which just helps take a measure of human error out of the way. A lot of problems that we had in the past have come from users not updating their personal machines. That can obviously cause things to break. We try to make bots unattended if we can, but it isn't always practical to deploy in that model.

In any case, the solution has definitely saved our organization time and reduces human error either way.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the product as a nine or ten. Beyond just the product, there are tons of resources that we have available. Finding things other people have already made is an additional benefit. There's no point in reinventing the wheel if something's already been built.

My advice to people considering the solution is pretty simple. Buy it.

We play significantly in the BFSI and healthcare space. A lot of use cases have been related to BFSI. Insurance is much bigger, with claims and underwriting, policy admin, health benefits, and so on so forth. There are also good use cases on the functional level, HR and finance, and that cuts across industries. 

As an example, looking at fatality insurance for pets, clients had a high volume of documents come in, claims in all different forms, and they had to apply logic eligibility. There's a simple rule of whether you allow or disallow. If they don't allow the claim, then there's a comp process. By a sheer ability to read whichever way the document comes in, clients are able to load the system and quickly get the eligibility. 

This dramatically improves their claims operation by a big margin. Whenever there is some complexity in one, then we do an exception. We crunched the time so well and made the process so cost-effective it has given the client a huge benefit.

The democratization, automation, and attended automation, all of these are pretty good features. Those are all good value add to what it was there previously. 

The moment a machine takes over, there are fewer errors. That is inherent. When you say value, that is the cost-benefit. 

We have seen a lot of benefits on the backend, but then the algorithm is constrained, which can't transform because of the older technology. 

Sometimes in their partner communication, they aren't consistent. This maybe is related to the fact they are growing as a company.

The solution is fairly stable. 

The initial setup is always complex. Clients don't know the hardware, the licensing, or how it works. Any large organization will always have an initial hurdle. 

We have roughly around 164-165 trained RPA credentials on the engineering side, all on UiPath.

You do have complexity when it comes to maintenance, as you get to 50, 100 bots. 

As an example, one of the customers for whom we did an early bird, we estimated we could save this one division of their company $44 million. They only may have to invest about $4 million. There's $44.5 million for about 12 months. That's what we think we could save. 

The adoption of RPA has definitely been increasing and we know that all of that has been largely in the back office. In the back office, it's easier to check ROI. We've actually gone beyond ROI because ROI is a very simple statement, so we start showing clients value.

How long it takes to achieve ROI actually depends upon the client's way of implementing it. For example, some people will wait to take away the manual effort while they will stand by. Because what if it doesn't work? What if it fails? What if then my backlog increases dramatically? So, it is really up to them. If it is simple task automation, we can do it in about four or six weeks. In eight to 10 weeks they'll see the benefit. 

We're using all components of UiPath: attended, unattended robotics, and Orchestrator Studio. We have a very wide customer base and our clients use all of them.

Cloud adoption is increasing. Deployment models are a little bit more a logistic question than anything else because companies who want on-site are a little bit more conscious of security, but they take a normal amount of time, just to figure out the infrastructure. If we moved clients to the cloud, we can make it easier to implement. With email on the cloud, they have a huge set of processes. The larger the company, the larger the processing. With the cloud, it becomes faster. 

I've got a deep partnership with UiPath. I would absolutely rate them high. I'd give them a ten out of ten.