UiPath Reviews

Currently, I'm dedicated to working within a finance organization. It develops processes in the scope of five months. I do not use the solution in a contact center environment. I work on projects for shared services.

It's FTE-saving. Since the beginning of this year, I have covered more than four FTEs. That means that for half a year, I saved three FTEs. That's a huge benefit.

The easy development process is very useful for us. I know how to use it, and I'm able to prepare and add to a solution in one or one and half weeks. It depends, of course, on the process, however, largely, if it's a simple process, it could be developed from the beginning very quickly.

It's very important that I can create end-to-end automation using UiPath. Thanks to that, the business is free to do more advanced processes and is not overloaded by less important, repetitive tasks.

I've noticed that UiPath has reduced human error. The first benefit is FTE saving, however, the second is quality of work. Human work, if it's repetitive, it's very often related to human errors. That said, if something is programmed really well and automated it works without the need for human intervention.

I had a problem with one thing and that was exporting activities packages between the test server and the production server. I'm not sure that it's my own issue, or a general problem from the global perspective of UiPath, however, I have a lot of problems with packages, using the test server and production server.

I've used the solution for quite a long time. I started using UiPath at the beginning of 2017. It has been more than four years.

The stability is good. Everything works well and I don't have any production bugs. I only have positive feedback, It works and there are no unexpected errors.

The scalability  depends on the developer. If we have an advanced developer, it is really easy to scale. If someone's preparing, for example, components, it is quite easy. From UiPath's perspective, it is easy to scale, however, that said, everything depends on the person who uses it and how familiar they are with the product.

I had a chance to contact UiPath when UiPath licenses needed updating. I had close contact. I wrote a ticket and I had contact with them in less than an hour. I was quite pleased with their response time. 

I made the right decision to go with a solution that can scale automation without having to pay attention to the infrastructure and to develop my skills in terms of RPA.

I had to do tests with Blue Prism and UiPath. Currently, I use UiPath, as I find it's much easier to use than other RPA tools. For example, I really like Orchestrator, from a user perspective. The control of both is really easy as it's centralized in NonProduction Orchestrator, and it's really easy to operate it. There's general ease of development. In Blue Prism, for example, if you want to develop something, first you need to prepare the object layer, and after that, you can go to the business layer and connect it in one solution. In UiPath, we create just a component and connect components together which is more logical.

I was not exactly involved in the initial setup as when I joined the company, UiPath had already been set up. Therefore, everything was prepared to start development. That said, for a few months, I worked in UI as a consultant for external clients. During that time I had the chance to install UiPath for external clients. In that sense, I've been involved in the installation of UiPath previously.

The initial setup's level of difficulty depends on a client's needs. At first, we need to think about the strategy of the client. In general, UiPath provides different types of architecture and it's generally straightforward.

The setup could take weeks if you need, for example, to order servers. However, if servers are already on-site, we can begin the installation. As I recall, I set up Orchestrator in a few hours.

We have calculations for that and we are on the right path. There is an ROI when using UiPath, however, I thought it would be higher. That said, we can calculate costs related to the UiPath environment and compare it to the automated processes created and we can see we are on a good path. It's hard, however, to provide exact numbers at this time. 

I'm not sure if UiPath has sped up or reduced the cost of digital transformation. It's a tough question, as the license for the solution is too expensive right now. In Western Europe, it may be okay to pay such money for a license, however, where I work now, in Poland, the license cost is too high for the local market.

We have a connection to ServiceNow. In ServiceNow, there is an approval process to publish UiPath processes on the Production Orchestrator, and that's easy. I'm able to set schedules or run a process model from our Production Orchestrator.

We have different servers for development, including a different server for Orchestrator and a different server for production. However, everything is in my company environment.

At this point, I only use unattended automation. Currently, there are no projects for attended automation as it's more for the business side. I am just a developer from the IT side. I am not involved in any business department.

I'd advise those considering the solution to find a really good developer and maybe a solution architect. Some time ago, UiPath had marketing such as, "everyone could be a developer," and so on. That said, it does not work like that. UiPath developers should have a large IT background. During my career, I've seen a lot of projects fail due to developers' lack of skills.

My biggest takeaway from the solution is that automation is a process that doesn't have a start and end point. It's an ongoing process.

Overall, I'd rate the product at an eight out of ten. If the licensing price matched the local market's capabilities, I'd give it higher marks. I would like to start deploying the UiPath solution in Polish companies, and there is huge scope to do it, however, for now, it's too expensive.

We are a communications company who works with a lot of clients in our country. Now, we started using automation when working with business clients. Many processes were being done manually, e.g., activation of numbers. In order to alleviate the work of our sales team, this process was automated.

I haven't automated any of my work because the queue for processes that need to be automated is large.

My company uses Studio for our developers and StudioX for attended robots.

It is very important that we can scale automations without having to pay attention to the infrastructure. After one year, we have already automated almost 200 processes. Since the number of automated processes was large, a lot of people's time was freed. This solution is very important because we have a large subscriber base in our country, so we have become very efficient.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation, starting with process analysis, then robot building, and finally monitoring of automation. This is very important to my company because in the future we will have contracts with UiPath to sell licenses and provide the same experience to other companies, helping them automate their process. Therefore, it was very important to implement the entire end-to-end process in our company.

Attended automation has helped to scale RPA benefits in my organization by automating department or role specific processes in sales and HR that require human robot collaboration. This is important to my company. The department who works on automation of internal processes has had a lot of meetings with our employees. They realized that employees could be against their automation processes and sabotage them. This didn't happen, but they have effectively implemented the attended robots for our employees' work by explaining to them that the robots are not a threat to their job. They would only be helping them, allowing employees to do something more important than doing repetitive tasks on their computers.

UiPath has helped reduce human error. We are working with clients where it is very important to provide them their necessary services. We are a telecom company, so we are providing activation of numbers, etc. If people are doing this manually, it can cause inconveniences for our clients, but it might also put the reputation at stake. For example, because when people do it manually, they can send out the wrong invoice. This is a huge reputation risk, because sometimes we are working not only with just a person, but with a business. When we work with other companies, it is important to do things accurately. When the robots do things, there is almost a 100% probability that they won't make any mistakes, like typos.   

The most important feature of automation is it can automatically detect things where people are doing things repetitively and spending a lot of time. So, people can actually do their real tasks, like making decisions and talking to clients. Therefore, people's time, which was busy with doing manual tasks, is free now. They can spend it on more interesting and valuable work where they can apply their valuable skills.

UiPath Academy starts at the very beginning with how to set up and navigate in UiPath. I noticed that the Studio and StudioX are both user-friendly. It is suitable for people of different existing levels of programming skills, even with those with zero background.

The process mining feature is not being used because my company had some difficulties with it.

UiPath could improve integration with other platforms, like the SAP platform. I heard that SAP has their own automation processes in their platform and they are trying to avoid integrations with RPA platforms. Sometimes, that can be difficult. UiPath's room for improvement is having the ability to integrate with as many platforms as possible.

I have been using it for about three weeks. I have been practicing some tasks and just started learning, but I don't have any advanced development skills.

My company has been using it for a year.

We have automated hundreds of processes.

There are about 30 people on our sales team who are using it. The HR team also uses it.

We didn't use another automation before UiPath.

The initial setup is straightforward, based on what I have seen from UiPath Academy. On the platform, there are videos which describe how to set up. You just go to the platform and download the setup package. You have to set it up on your PC, then open the application. Once the application has been opened, you need to sign in with your email. For the first step, you need to add your email to the application, so email is sent automatically to you when you sign in and the signup is complete. Then, you can start using the Studio and StudioX. It is very convenient because both of them are in the same application, like an all in one software. You don't have to set them up separately because everything is in one place. You can just switch between them in settings, which is very easy and straightforward.

We have people studying how to work on UiPath who are developers. Therefore, we have a whole department doing the setup in our company. I don't think that they are asking a third-party to come in and help. 

We freed up a lot of our sales team's time. For example, they can now spend more time with clients. We have successfully implemented attended robots for our sales team. They now spend half the time doing the job which has been automated. This has made our sales team happy. 

It is very costly to implement RPA. However, I think the benefits outweigh the costs over a long-term period.

Building automations is doable. I understand that it is hard. Some processes need to be adjusted to be automated. Even though sometimes it can take time to create processes for automation, it is still possible and useful to apply automation for many processes. 

I didn't have any background in programming previously. I chose the learning plan for beginners in UiPath Academy. It was very convenient that they divided their learning plans for people with different backgrounds, e.g., beginners or developers. The course is very well-structured and concise. It works perfectly for me and I have the ability to study in the solution without any background experience.

Because we managed to successfully implement it in our company, we now want to help other companies to implement their automation processes.

For my country, UiPath is progressive. It is important for people's mindset that they are able to work with robots and understand they are helpful.

A lot of companies in our country refuse to implement it, or they think it is very expensive, and they don't need this thing, but they should definitely go for it.

My biggest lesson was not to be afraid that robots will do my job. I learned that they are very helpful and can save me time that I can spend on something more useful, like obtaining new skills.

I would rate it as eight out of 10 because of its integration limitations with other platforms. It is also expensive.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.