UiPath Reviews

I use this solution to automate business processes that are rule-based. This includes the automation of different applications and background processes, such as posting invoices.

UiPath makes it very easy to develop automations. The interface is user-friendly and makes it easy to perform operations or use services, whether it is a database or another product. We can perform tasks on Microsoft Azure, for example. Many operations can be completed using inbuilt packages.

For whatever activity we want to perform, it only involves using the drag-and-drop capability, so it is easy to do. Anybody can do it. No programming-specific knowledge, like .NET, is required.

It is easy to develop custom components, which makes life easier.

UiPath allows us to implement end-to-end automation starting with the process analysis and ending with the monitoring. This is important to us because for any new process that we identify, using the task capture methods helps us to gather the documents that are required to automate it. After we develop the automation in Studio, we can easily monitor it using Orchestrator. It is helpful to have a complete solution from start to end, with all of the features that it has.

Using automation means that we increase our process output with minimal effort, which is something that every company wants to do because there is a saving in terms of manpower. It is definitely helpful in our organization.

The amount of time or cost savings depends on the process. For example, some processes that take four or five people to complete can be done using a single bot. Also, people can only work six or seven hours a day, whereas, with automation, the bot can run 24 hours a day. Not only is the process done more quickly but at less cost.

Attended automation has helped to scale RPA benefits because we have some scenarios where human collaboration is required. These are business-critical processes, so any level of automation is important for us.

In addition to savings in time and cost, UiPath further saves us money because of the reduction in human error. When a human is performing a task, mistakes happen. When the bots are used, there are no errors and when the number of mistakes is reduced, the business has more income.

UiPath has helped to speed up digital transformation, although hosting it requires IT support. For example, if UiPath needs to be updated or our infrastructure needs to be expanded, then it requires the help of IT support.

One of the things that I like is that they keep adding new features, such as machine learning models. For example, if you are reading a PDF copy of an invoice then the RPA should be able to identify and understand it. Rather than using rules to identify different formats for different kinds of invoices, machine learning and AI should be involved.

We are using the AI functionality and it gives us the ability to have more automation, saving more time and manual effort, and at less cost. This is possible because UiPath provides pre-built and pre-trained AI models that we can import, depending on the use case.

Some of the processes we have implemented are very complex, and these are the ones that we need AI for. Some of them involve human interaction and cover use cases such as taking different formats of invoices and pushing them to SAP. We have had good success when working with the machine learning capabilities.

The Action Center and Task Manager are very good for business users. The features are helpful because these days, business users are expecting more than a simple rule-based operation in RPA systems.

UiPath Studio integrates well with third-party tools such as Git. It is easy to maintain code from within Studio.

Many of the features that UiPath has are good, although better documentation is required for them.

I have been using UiPath for three years.

I have had issues with previous versions but the latest updates have resolved my problems. As of now, the stability is very good.

Scalability is very good in UiPath.

We have five UiPath users in our project; one is a lead, another is a manager, there are two developers and a consultant. At this point, I'm not sure if we plan to increase our usage.

I have been in contact with technical support in the past, and I would rate them a ten out of ten. They respond very nicely and help to resolve our problems.

When we deploy processes, it takes about half an hour. It varies depending on the process but half an hour is the average per activity.

UiPath is easy to maintain and support. We have a support team and QA teams, and they are responsible for monitoring the processes and the bots. They will check the activities that take place in production.

The number of staff required for maintenance depends on the architecture that the client has.

The licensing model is very good.

We chose UiPath because it is more flexible and has better licensing terms than some competing products.

We use some third-party tools in conjunction with UiPath. For example, to maintain the code and for versioning control, we use Git. We have two or three years of experience with Git and not only is it compatible with UiPath, but it is also easy to use.

My advice for anybody who is implementing UiPath is to start with the documentation. There is a lot of good documentation that includes best practices and plenty of examples. Using the documentation, one can easily learn UiPath.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I have been using UiPath to develop automations for my company. We are a manufacturing company that uses SAP as our primary enterprise application. We are currently meeting with many different business areas and hearing about all of the different processes that they would like us to automate for them. Since UiPath works within SAP, it should help us get some easy wins!

UiPath has allowed us to remove tedious work from our daily process, saving us hundreds of hours. We are currently using it to process separations for people leaving the company. This was a 100% manual process before UiPath and it was required to be completed hundreds of times each month. The team doing the work was extremely overworked and UiPath has allowed them to see a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel. 

Orchestrator is essential, but I love how Studio includes so many activities that are pre-programmed to do what is needed.

Who doesn't love the recording feature? A recording is great to use when doing the first build of new automations!

The most important feature of all is the UiPath community and the forums, as they have helped me with countless questions!

One of the problems with UiPath is that it doesn't interact with some programs, such as AD and Chrome, and it would be great to have even more included!

We have been using UiPath for six months.

So far we have not had any issues with the stability.

We have not scaled, but from what I've read it should scale easily.

We did not use another solution prior to UiPath.

Understanding how everything connects was a little difficult, but UiPath offers classes that walk you through the setup. With the classes it was much easier. 

We implemented using our in-house team.

Do your research, the infrastructure piece is important to understand before purchasing. Also, you need Orchestrator to implement UiPath properly, so don't let anyone tell you different!

Finally, you don't need to start with 100 bots... my advice is to start small and then scale. 

We looked at Automate Anywhere and writing scripts, but UiPath seemed like the best path.

There isn't much that I don't like about the product. I love all of the new features and products they are releasing this year, and I can't wait to see where this goes in the future.

We are using Studio, the Orchestrator, and both unattended and attended bots. We are using the product primarily to index and process patient records into patient charts when records come in from outside sources.

An example of how this product has improved the way our organization functions is that it has doubled the number of records that we process per hour.

The most valuable feature for us is the unattended bots. They are valuable because records come in automatically from the vendor with a cover sheet, and that cover sheet has a QR (Quick Response) code. An unattended bot will take the record, and based on the code can index it and upload it to the patient's record with no human intervention.

On a scale from one to five where one is not stable and five is very stable, I would rate the stability of the UiPath platform as three right now. There are some nuances in it that are throwing some error codes when reading the QR codes. But we are in the process of working with UiPath to get that issue corrected.

Right now we have about five people in our organization involved in the automation program. We can expand that as necessary.

Our team used UiPath Academy RPA training. Two of the individuals on the team have gotten their certifications.

On a scale from one to five where one is the least beneficial and five is the most beneficial, I would rate the UiPath Academy as a four. The team really liked it. The two people that have certification are our two main developers. They had been doing their academy in concurrence with our deployment while they are still working on the project. They both said the academy has been very helpful.

We also have a customer support person dedicated to us. They call them Customer Success Managers. We use them and then we have also had to reach out to the home office in Romania. They are working on a solution for us right now. The service, on the whole, is very good.

I was part of the decision process in choosing UiPath as our RPA solution. We had not previously been using another solution but knew that we needed to invest in one because we looked at our employees' overtime records. We were paying for overtime and did not see the need to just for scanning and indexing. A bot can run 24/7, so the bot takes care of processes that can be automated instead.

The initial setup process was complicated because of us and the requirements of our organization. It was not because of UiPath. But even with those complications, from the time we purchased the UiPath license until we had our first robot in production took only about three months.

We did not use an integrator, reseller, or consultant for the deployment. We used internal staff and the UiPath engineers helped us along.

On a scale from one to five where one is very bad and five is excellent. I would rate our experience with UiPath as a five. They have been very responsive and have given us engineering support at no cost. They seemingly did that just to ensure that we were successful.

We are starting to see a return on investment. It has only taken us about a month to realize that. Basically, we have seen a performance benefit. Where it was taking a human about an hour to do ten records, we have estimated that we are going to be able to up that count to about 80 records an hour. One of the humans that is doing the manual part of it has already said that the product has helped double their workflow. The solution has also helped to eliminate human error by approximately 85%. I would say that it is going to save us at least 40 hours a week right now. I also think that is a conservative estimate.

For our licensing cost with this solution we have invested $90,000 right now, but that is to cover several facilities. The UiPath solution is not expensive considering that.

UiPath was the only RPA solution we looked at. They are TRM (Technology Reference Model) approved and they appeared to have the best platform.

On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is very easy, I would rate the ease-of-use of the platform for automating our company's processes as a four. The UiPath product has fit our model the best. Number one, because in the VA (Veterans Affairs) hospitals the RPA solution has to be TRM approved and not all RPA solutions are. They have also been very helpful because we have a little bit of a unique system. There are some nuances in an older system that we are still using that can not be changed at the moment. They have helped us work around those issues and they have provided the technical support that we needed.

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. From everything that I've heard from the staff, the ease-of-use and the effectiveness of it are really good.

If I were to give advice to a colleague at another company who is researching RPAs, I would tell them to go with UiPath because of the product and the culture of the company. I think the culture of the company is one of the reasons that you are going to ensure that you will be successful.

We use Studio, attended robots, and Orchestrator.

Our primary use case is automating support services for accounts payable and accounts receivable. We are still implementing and our robots are not live in a production environment yet. For the time being, we are using attended robots but we are looking into unattended robots as well.

We run automations in a virtual environment using VMware, and the implementation was straightforward. It was easy to set up.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a four. You don't need any programming skills to be able to leverage the tools. We have used other tools such as Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, and this solution was easier than those.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. It is very simple and can be easily demonstrated.

From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately six months. 

In terms of eliminating human errors, this is the expectation once our robots are live in production.

Once our robots are live, we expect to see a fifty percent reduction in time for certain tasks. It will save thousands of hours.

We leverage all of the components in this solution.

The most valuable feature is Studio, which is a very powerful tool.

I am looking forward to new cognitive and artificial intelligence capabilities.

I would like to see voice recognition and better OCR capabilities. Today, we have to leverage other tools for this, so we are hoping that UiPath matures in this area.

This product is very stable, but we have some issues with security.

We have about five people working on automation in our organization.

We have a CSM and they are awesome. On a scale of one to five, I would rate our support from the CSM a five.

Before using this solution, we used to leverage our internal tools.

The initial setup of this application was straightforward. It was easy, and like other applications that use a Windows installer.

We used an integrator to assist us with deployment. I would rate them a three out of five.

We have not seen any ROI because our bots are not yet live. However, we have done a calculation and expect fifty percent savings in time.

The licensing fees for this solution are approximately $100,000 USD annually.

Before choosing this solution we evaluated Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. UiPath seemed to be the easiest one to implement.

Blue Prism seemed to be too technical for some of our business users, while Automation Anywhere did not have attractive pricing.

This is definitely a solution that I would recommend. From my experience, this is a technology that is easy to leverage among users that do not have a technical background.

This is a good solution, but there are still gaps and the product could be more mature. The OCR capabilities definitely need to be improved.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We have robots and we have Orchestrator and we are exploring the new analytics model over the next few months. Right now, our primary use is mostly operational processes and deploying apps for the global operations team. We have multiple automation processes in place for them already.

The product has improved the way our organization functions in a lot of ways. Mostly, I would say it improves our processing efficiency. When you have one person working eight to five to take care of tasks and can replace that, instead, with a bot that can work 24 hours a day to onboard customers or entering information to a form, that drives a lot of value for the organization. With that benefit and decreasing human error as well, that turns into a lot of value for a global organization like us.

The most valuable feature in UiPath is different from one process that we build to the next. I would say that the ease of configuring new processes may be one of the most consistently valuable features for our robot production. Creating a process is just a drag-and-drop solution most of the time. With this automated feature for process creation, it is very easy to make what we need, and that ease-of-use is valuable.

There are a few areas where the product can be improved for our use. Invoice processing, for us, is a major use case. I saw some examples in our research that mentioned machine learning models and how to implement that in the new, upcoming version. It seems that the machine learning would solve some of our current issues in processing. That is one feature that I would like to see and experiment with when it is released. I want to explore that to see not only what it can do, but how efficient it is and how it affects the performance of invoice processing models. The other feature we are interested in that is promised to be in the next release is the VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) desktop. 

Those two features, for us, are critical. But we also need them to be fast and efficient for us to be able to use it in practice. Otherwise, we are going to continue struggling with the solutions we already have. The solutions are kind of already there in UiPath, and I think they need to work hard on the performance of anything they release. This is especially true for those two solutions. For us to have a good business case for deploying them for use, we need them to be efficient.

A feature that we tried to use that clearly has room for improvement is the UiPath Computer Vision component. We have tried to use that but it was not efficient enough for our planned applications. It was a little disappointing. It needs to be improved in performance and in the design of the machine learning models. It is pretty easy to use for people considering the technology. I just don't think it is quite to the point where it should be.

On a scale from one to five with one being the least stable and five being the most, I would rate the stability of UiPath as pretty stable. For us, it has really been a five.

We have 35 employees involved in the automation program doing configuration. We also have three platform administrators and a bunch of automation champions right now — there are quite a few of the latter.

Customer support, in general, is pretty good. They are very responsive. We have one dedicated support person in New York and we always get support right away. But there are other facets to UiPath technical support.

The classroom and Academy training are both easy to use and beneficial. On a scale of one to five where five is the best, I would rate these resources as a five-out-of-five. It was and is beneficial and it is available to help the staff get oriented to the product and resolve production issues.

We have 35 configurators. Of those 35, I will say that only five or ten of them were formally and personally trained by a trainer at our site in Costa Rica. The rest — and really most of the configurators — have been trained only using the UIPath Academy suite. So, with some senior resources available and the Academy, you can establish a team of proficient configurators in a very short time.

The reason why we choose UiPath was because they let us play with the tool before we bought into it. We were looking at many vendors for an RPA solution, but the other vendors wanted us to pay first before they would let us explore the products and what they could do. With UiPath we were able to play first without paying and that's something that was attractive and showed that the company was forward-thinking and confident. We explored the product and saw that it was something that could help us to solve some of our problems. So that is why we identified it as a solution and eventually selected it as the product that was going to cover our processing needs.

The initial setup was pretty easy because we had the assistance of UiPath experts on-site. They helped us with the first deployment. They did a lot to help make it pretty easy. It might be more accurate to say it was not easy, but that because of them it went smoothly. That's what their group was there to do: sort out modeling problems pretty quickly and get the product to production.

We used a consultant and our experience with them on a scale from one to five where five is the best, I would say they were a five-out-of-five. They knew what they were doing and were excellent in promoting the deployment. We have no complaints about their services or the result.

We have automated a lot of things and realized about a million-dollar return on investment in about a year-and-a-half. There is still a lot more to do in our company. We are big, so we have a lot of opportunities for automation and we are expected to be producing even more benefits than we already have. But a million-dollar return on investment is pretty good and is only the beginning of what we will eventually realize.

Right now we have around 200 licenses in terms of the bots we have in production. I know the cost is about $200,000 or $300,000 per year. I am not sure about additional costs.

From what I understand UiPath is cheap when you compare the costs to other vendors in the same market. In any case, the price seems to be good in comparison to the actual benefit. We also have some type of special agreement for pricing discounts because we are one of the early adopters who engaged with UiPath for use of the product. I feel we have some very special treatment and the price, for us, is reasonable and convenient.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product as an eight out of ten. The reason why it is an eight and not a ten is because there are some specific considerations — especially in performance and machine learning — that we believe has a lot of room for improvement. They are starting to introduce the functionality, they are doing a good thing in introducing it, but there could be a lot of improvement.

If I would make a recommendation for people considering automation options, I would say that they should take advantage of manufacturers that let you play with their product to evaluate if a particular solution is convenient for you. This is the reason why UiPath became the more convenient option for our company when we were looking to start with process automation.

For us, the virtual implementation has been working well because we have deployed everything that we automated in our Citrix environment. Now the new question is how easy it will be to interact with target applications through our VDI desktop. Resolving that to this point has been pretty tough for us and it is actually one of our constraints in making processes work efficiently.

Robotic processing has helped to eliminate human errors and reducing human error is definitely one of the basic benefits that those moving into robotics should expect — if they are approaching automation correctly.

The solution also saved our organization time. For example, we had the one case where we had to onboard around 2 million customers. What that would take in terms of manual hours is about a month and a half. Instead, using RPAs, we were able to complete the task in one week. That is just one example. We have multiple examples in three years of automation. 

We are using Studio and Orchestrator, and we purchased an unattended bot.

Our UiPath is integrated with Kibana, which is a free tool.

Our primary use of this solution is to automate manual processes. We have approximately eighty use cases to automate.

The RPA team includes two developers, a manger, and two BPOs.

We run automations in a virtual environment, but I am not familiar with the details.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate this solution a five. We just drag and drop. If you want to write something we use "Type Into". If you want to click, we use the corresponding click application. For me, it's very easy, and we also have tutorials available on the UiPath website. That is something that is very useful for everyone who wants to learn, and even a non-programmer can start learning to become a developer.

The Academy RPA training was very beneficial and I would rate it a five out of five. You cannot skip one step. There are ten sections and you cannot skip any of them. It means that until you pass a certain test, it will not allow you to go to the next lesson. This restricts people from jumping directly into another section. I really like the training and it is very easy. The tutorials are not very lengthy, they are simple, and the way they are explained is relatable. The practice tests that were conducted at the end were really helpful.

We partnered with IVy to create our first two pilot bots, and from the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately six months. It was very easy because they helped us.

This solution obviously helps us when it comes to eliminating human errors. I cannot estimate the percentage, but our company is manual process-intensive. We have a lot of manual processes like invoicing, where we have a process with the business team. They pull out an invoice number and a purchase order number from a PDF, and the source PDF is not structured. When it was being done manually, they had encountered issues entering data into one of their applications. This is one place where human errors have been reduced.

Using this solution has saved us time. For example, we have a huge process and I have heard that it saves us millions of dollars every year. Each human takes forty hours to complete the task, whereas it takes the unattended bot between ten and fifteen minutes.

Any savings in time for humans gives them time to work on something else.

The most valuable feature in Studio is the macros. They are very useful but at the same time, it depends on how we write them.

UiPath is very easy to learn.

When we deploy code into Orchestrator, sometimes there are macro activities that worked in Studio but do not work correctly in production. For example, I have implemented a Text Reading Activity that worked fine in Studio, but after deploying the code into Orchestrator it does not read the text exactly. I was able to create a workaround by using a split function in the code. It was reading the text fine because the data is being read using split functions, but this is something that I would like to see fixed.

I would like to see more AI and natural language processing.

Having chatbots available would be a helpful inclusion in a future release of this solution.

Customer support and technical support are very nice. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

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

We partnered with IVy to assist us with the implementation. They helped us with two pilot bots. One of them was not up to the mark, so our CEO decided to have it reprogrammed. I would rate them a four out of five.

We have our own IT team that looks after connecting the servers with Orchestrator.

I am not updated regularly about how much money this solution saves us, but I have recently heard that we saved $400,000 USD in six months.

After our CEO decided to invest in RPA, we chose UiPath because it is easy to learn.

I have heard of Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, but I have not learned them or worked with them.

We are looking forward to the new tools, and when they launch, we are definitely going to use them.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to speak with UiPath. Many people do not know how to start. The basic things they should have are a proper PDD (Process design document) and a recording of the manual process. These two things are essential. It is also very important to hire the right partner if you do not have your own developers because some of them are not up to the mark.

This solution is simple and easy to implement. I know there are lots of new features coming and every year they are providing good solutions with every release. There is always something new that minimized errors in previous versions.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using Studio, Orchestrator, and bots.

We are a consulting company that is working with one of our clients to automate back-office accounting processes for a logistics company. There are five people in the core team who are working on the implementation.

We run automations in a virtual environment, but I was not responsible for the implementation.

With respect to how easy it is to automate the company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate it four. It's very easy, but it is difficult to explain to our customers who are not as technical. In other words, it is difficult for people who are coming from the business side.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. Without it, I don't think that I could have started the implementation. I completed the developer program just for a general understanding of how everything works, including the Orchestrator and how it all works together. For me, the training was really important. It was very good and I really liked it.

We were working with the Community Edition at first, but from the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately one month.

In terms of eliminating human errors, we expect to see this benefit later. Until this point, we haven't touched the processes where there could be human errors. We just started with the really basic ones, which are so easy that people don't make errors there, and neither do the bots. We plan to get to the more complicated processes next.

With respect to saving time, I can say that this solution has helped, but at this point, I don't know by how much.

While we were implementing this solution, we were empowering people. This solution changed the way people are working because it is so open and everybody can take part in it. It caused them to think about their processes in a different way, with automation in mind and possibilities for the future. Now, when they're having strategy meetings, they have dedicated time slots where they're just talking about processes that could be automated, so the whole mindset is changing now.

The most valuable feature in Orchestrator is that it stores the credentials in a safe way. Our clients were afraid that the credentials would be stored where somebody could see them and being able to schedule bots with the credentials available is very important for them. 

We would like to see Studio made a little easier so that our non-technical customers can also implement the bots. For example, some of the features from the upcoming Studio X should be put into the original Studio, as well.

I have trouble understanding the machine learning and AI components, so I would like it to be easier to understand how and what to do with them.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution between three and four. Sometimes there are issues where something is not working, although there are probably times where it happens because we don't know how to use the solution in the best way.

Both the customer support and technical support for this solution are very good.

The technical support has been very helpful. Our team has had many calls with UiPath regarding the virtual machine, which did not work at first. Within two days it was working.

Our clients did not use another RPA solution before this one.

They are undergoing a digital transformation and wanted to give themselves and edge so that the other companies will not get ahead. They just saw the need to change and we told them about RPA and they got very excited. We showed them the first pilot bot and they were ready to implement it.

Our in-house IT department handled the initial setup.

We have seen ROI and performance benefits from using this solution. While I do not have specifics in terms of money or time saved, I think that we could see the benefits after a week. There were processes that the client no longer needed to do, so they had more time available for other things.

For our first customer, we started with Orchestrator, an unattended bot, and a couple of Studio licenses, all of which cost $25,000 USD for the year. It is definitely worth the money.

We had researched Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, but we didn't look too deeply.

The choice for UiPath was made based on what we read on the Internet, including the Gartner Report. It was very easy to get started after first downloading the Community Edition and then taking the Academy to learn how to do it. It is easy, fast, and the statistics say that it is the best.

Right now, this is a good solution that I would recommend. It is really beneficial for a lot of companies. At the same time, there are things that can improve and they are working on them.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I'd say our finance applications, like accounts payable, have been our biggest use cases for this solution. 

I would say just the ability to be able to go outside of the IT department in our organization to get things done and have a sort of agile group to do automation. It is difficult to get IT involved in this type of thing in our organization. So being able to have our own agile group is beneficial for us.

Another thing that is valuable is that I think it's just saved a lot of our finance and customer service people a lot of manual time on processes. We are just able to involve a lot more value-added work.

I really liked the insights dashboard. I guess that there is an additional fee for that. Being able to see your return on investment in real-time is definitely beneficial. We spend a lot of time manually calculating how many hours we saved and that would make it a lot easier. The improvement I want is already there. I have to look into implementing it.

The area of the solution that has room for improvement is the stability of the bots. It just seems like we have spent a lot of time trying to fix bots that are down and whether that is our coding or the product. I think there must be a better way to diagnose the issues and avoid them.

On a scale from one to five, five being the most stable, I would rate the stability of the UiPath platform as a three. We've had a lot of issues with bot stability. I don't know if it is how we go about development or if it is the platform itself, but we spend too much time trying to fix all the bots that seem to be breaking.

I have not used technical support personally but our IT group has. Everything I have heard about the customer services group has been positive.

I have used the UiPath Academy RPA training. On a scale from one to five where one is the least beneficial and five is the most, I would rate the UiPath Academy as a four out of five. I'm not an IT person, so would have given it a five if I was. Parts of the training may have been more advanced than I expected.

We had a lot of archaic processes in our company — a lot of paper-based processes — so we knew we needed a better solution. That meant we had to work through a lot of processes and re-engineer what we were doing. We knew that we needed to move in the direction of automation because the processes were just not sustainable. We had processes but we did not actually have an automation solution until we started using UiPath.

The initial setup for the product was something I found to be a bit complicated. At least the first couple were pretty complicated. It was just that we were all new to the technology and we didn't really know necessarily what we were doing. It is getting better. From the time we purchased the UiPath license until we had your first robot in production, I think we took about three months.

We did you use an integrator. It was EY Technologies (Ernest & Young). They helped us out a lot and our experience with them was good.

We have certainly seen a return on investment. As far as how many months it took to see real value, I think we just crossed that threshold. So it was about twelve months in total. We have probably saved — just at our platform — around $100,000. The solution has also helped to eliminate human errors with a couple of the bots that we've deployed for sure. It has also saved our organization time. If I had to estimate, I'd say probably 8,000 hours a year so far.

We looked at Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. We kind of landed on UiPath because it just seemed like it was a little easier to navigate than the other ones from a user experience.

Currently, we do not run any of our bots in a virtual environment and we use only untended bots so far. Either of those situations could change at any time. We have a couple of processes that we are looking at for attended processes, but we haven't implemented any yet.

We have about five people involved directly in the initiative. On a scale from one to five where one is very difficult and five is very easy, I would rate the ease of use the platform for automating as a four. It is a four because I would say it takes a little time to kind of get up and rolling for a developer, but it is not too bad.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product a seven. We have just had some issues with keeping bots up and running. I feel like the issue is the learning curve.

The advice I would give to a colleague at another company who is researching this solution is to just do it. Make sure you know what processes you are going to want to automate. If you need to do standardized anything in the processes, do that on the front end in the planning stages versus kind of chasing your tail on the back end.