UiPath Reviews

I did a proof of concept for a music industry client. It went well, and the client adopted UiPath. 

UiPath improved lots of features, like sequencing, recording, etc.

I had some issues with the ERP Automation features, and the setup is complex. 

UiPath is stable. 

UiPath projects are highly scalable. There are lots of customization options and ways to easily scale your existing bots. 

I haven't contacted UiPath support because the solution is stable and doesn't require support in most cases. The UiPath community is strong, and you can find answers from multiple places online. 

As a project consultant, I analyze the client's applications and set up everything for them. The initial setup is time-consuming. UiPath involves a longer setup process than other RPA tools.

I rate UiPath a five out of ten for affordability. UiPath costs a bit more than other tools like Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. 

I rate UiPath a seven out of ten. UiPath offers many customization options. I would recommend it to clients who want to do high-quality processes and complex use cases. You also must consider your budget because the license cost is a little higher than average. 

I use UiPath for PDF automation. About 10 to 15 employees use this tool in our organization.

UiPath saves us time and increases productivity for our organization. The solution is highly accurate and reduces human error. It freed our employees to spend time on other tasks, saving us time and money. UiPath reduced the time employees spend on these tasks by about 40-50 percent. It cut the cost by approximately 30-40 percent.

UiPath is highly user-friendly. Anyone can build automations without any prior knowledge.

Sometimes, UiPath becomes a little laggy when we move from one page to another. 

I have been using UiPath for the last six months.

There is some lag. Otherwise, UiPath works well for us. 

UiPath is highly scalable. 

I rate UiPath support a nine. They respond quickly.

Positive

We've seen a 60-70 percent ROI from UiPath.

The price of UiPath is reasonable.

I rate UiPath a nine out of ten. It automates manual tasks with accurate results. UiPath has been great for us.

We started using it to automate manual processes from other departments. We service other departments, to begin with, including the media between the business and the IT departments. 

We started automating very repetitive manual tasks that the business side typically had. For example, if they had to open an application early in the morning to try to process transactions. Then, late in the afternoon, they would have to do the same thing as well. Now we have a robot that does that in the morning and the afternoon, which saves a lot of overtime since it has to be done at six or seven at night, and previously sometimes people would be forced to stay. Therefore, this way, we save that time and overtime. 

Another example would be we use it to download ATM transactions from a webpage. The robot downloads those transactions and then uploads them into our data warehouse, which reports for them. Normally, we don't have that information there.

Another use case would be in a department that would print a bunch of wires late in the afternoon. The department would print them out physically and store them somewhere where they review everything later. Now, with UiPath, we scan the transactions from the Fed, and we just print in PDF and send it to them via email, and it saves a lot of time.

The solution has saved us not just in automating but also in updates. For example, all these service charge codes for these particular lists of credit card accounts. We let the bot run. It ran for a really long time. I can only imagine how much longer it would've taken with humans.

I'm not sure of the exact cost savings. We just started asking about time savers. Some customers have told us it saves about 45 minutes a day. There's another process that only runs once a month. To put it in general terms, it reviews all of our credit card accounts and itemizes them, and makes them into a lot of reports. That saves about eight hours a month. Also, when it comes to helping us avoid overtime, there are 15 minutes of actions to be done, yet we are saving an hour or two of pay every time. 

The ease of automation is great.

The unintended robots are very useful. Just letting it run and having visibility, and controlling how everything works is definitely helpful. Sometimes they want it to run a certain way. Sometimes they'll tell us, "Oh can we tweak it a certain way?" And they do that more often than would I thought they would. It's simple to handle.

I really like the user community. When I go online to search for help or anything else, it's very valuable. Everyone's so helpful online. Whenever I'm stuck, and I'm basically self-taught when it comes to UiPath, I turn to the community. I've learned everything through the community. It is easy to learn.

While we haven't really taken any UiPath Academy classes, we were basically given the platform and just told to learn it ourselves. I did start doing the academy courses however, right off the bat, we had to develop already. I kind of had to do both at the same time, and that's where the online community comes in handy. The courses definitely taught me the basics, at least. And they helped me expand on that.

While UiPath works super well with other applications and browsers and app pages that we use in the RedLINK wires, when it comes to experience, sometimes it doesn't detect what it's supposed to be doing as easily. I have to do a workaround and so sometimes it can be tedious.

We've been using it for about two years.

We've never had an issue with performance stability.

We currently have 20 to 30 processes, and less than ten are via developers. We initially hired developers to help, and then they left, and now we are working on it ourselves. 

I see the potential of its scalability. We're still at a very small scale with it. 

I've used technical support once. They helped me. When the developers set up UiPath for us, it ended up being kind of faulty. What we really needed was the enterprise edition, and some other settings weren't configured for our purposes. I contacted them for help, and we had a Zoom call. They were very friendly. They helped me set it up correctly in the way we needed it. While there were some communication issues, they helped us in the end. 

Positive

We did not previously use a different solution.

I was not directly involved in the initial setup. However, the setup was not exactly right, and I contacted support for help. It seemed pretty straightforward in the end.

We had third-party developers from Peru that helped us to install it and then they just left. We were just given the platform, and we had to teach ourselves how to use it.

We have witnessed an ROI. The company has mentioned the hours saved, and I'm not sure about the money saved.

We did not evaluate other options. 

While we could use UiPath for good causes, like sustainability or the environment, we do not use it in that capacity yet.

We do not use the AI functionality just yet.

I'd advise other potential users to get a partner. We didn't have one. That's what we're doing right now. We're shopping for a partner so we can learn as we develop. Again, we were self-taught and it would've been much easier to dive in with a partner.

I would rate it ten out of ten as it does have massive potential. 

Our company uses the solution to automate formula-driven processes that are completed on a frequent basis. 

We create unattended bots to handle tasks for our finance, procurement, IT, and HR departments.  

At this time we do not use AI or ML.

UiPath has been instrumental to our success because we have an excellent relationship with our account executive and a lot of support from the leadership team. 

We have met with their C-Suites for one-on-one conversations and like that type of ownership. We appreciate their commitment and dedication to our success. 

The solution requires little or no code and can be operated with minimal technical skills. This lessens our dependency on third-party providers and allows use by citizen developers. 

AI and ML need further improvements to reach mature status. 

I have been using the solution for eight years. 

The solution is very, very stable with no issues when we deploy bots. 

The solution is very easy to scale. 

Technical support is stellar and available 24/7. There are no limitations on when support is available, including in the middle of the night. No organization is perfect and there is always room for improvement, support is rated a nine out of ten. 

The community forum is invaluable and very helpful for troubleshooting. For example, we sought support from different forums to learn how to use our in-house desk for L1 support.

Academy courses are used to upskill our team and keep up with the fast pace of new capabilities. The solution is always transforming and acquiring new technologies. 

Positive

I previously used Blue Prism, Pega, and Automation Anywhere. 

The initial setup is very straightforward and easy to use. 

Our team of developers and BAs are able to navigate the solution without requiring any handholding from the solution's SMEs.  

Our in-house team deploys the easier automations.

We work with multinational partners for more complex deployments. Our team is knowledgeable and has the same competencies as MNCs so that enhances the partnership. 

The solution has improved workforce efficiencies by 120% and reduced errors by more than 90%.

We saved several million dollars within three weeks of deploying the solution.

I love the flexibility because ownership is willing to work with us to make sure commercials are viable. They are committed to being our strategic partner and are reasonable in terms of our current appetite. 

Our company solely uses the solution. We find it to be more user friendly than other options. 

Most products are similar, so it comes down to commercials and that makes the solution much more cost effective than other options. 

You should consider using the solution because there is a reason why it is the market-leading RPA provider globally.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We automate everything using the UiPath solution. We have some ongoing stuff, e.g., generating test cases and testing some of our development platforms. We need to define all the parts, such as how to test the entire environment to determine if everything is working okay.

We utilize all our services on the cloud, then they can be easily used across all our offices.

We only use unattended automation.

If a product is about to go live, we heavily rely on coverage from UiPath. This is during the development phase. However, when onboarding to production, we use other solutions, which don't rely on automation, for monitoring purposes.

When we are in the development phase, we have multiple edge cases, like iOS, Android, and other platforms, checking in. For a tester, it is difficult to check every edge case. Instead, we define automation test tools in UiPath, then our automated work does everything for us. Once it is done, it gives us a detailed analysis about where the product is performing well. We get handy videos before going live so we can improve everything and ensure that our end customer will not be impacted.

Our bandwidth has been drastically reduced, by nearly 60 hours, because of this solution. We have reduced the number of testers by three. 

The most useful feature of UiPath is that it is very easy to use. 

It helps us a lot with digital transformation.

The UiPath solution doesn't currently provide unique testing for mobile devices.

I have been using it for around six or seven months.

To the extent that we are using the solution, it is pretty scalable.

We use a third-party for support of this solution.

When we were facing some small issues going to the cloud, we tried to get help from the community. The community has been very helpful. Everyone has been willing to provide some good information to other users.

Previously, we were using an automated script to test everything. Now, with UiPath, we are automating everything. 

We used the community to help us with the setup.

The vendor helped set this up and guided us how to do everything during the onboarding process. Therefore, we didn't have any issues with the setup.

UiPath has reduced human error by 20%. 

We have reduced our costs by approximately $200 a month.

Creating our digital transformation didn't require any additional costs.

The vendor gave us a 30-day money-back guarantee. We were fine with that. We saw improvement during that time and kept the solution. 

We didn't consider any other solutions.

I would rate UiPath as eight out of 10.

We primarily use the solution for our clients. 

One interesting use case we've seen is that the product team leveraged UiPath to expose an API for their customers to then fulfill a service request.

It was part of their deal that, for them to sign this large contract with one of their clients, they needed this functionality. The product team has a huge backlog, and it wasn't going to make it based on everything else they had to deliver, so they actually leveraged UiPath to expose this and give them a service they just didn't have before.

When comparing it to, for example, Blue Prism, one of the key value points is, other than the full platform in general, the ability to trigger automation on demand. Basically, when the work gets loaded into the queue, the work can then be started without having to run things on a schedule.

The solution has improved the way an organization functions. For example, in general, in the context of RPAs, it's really about the focus of picking those tasks out of people's daily efforts so they can spend more time with the customers. What you get off the back of that is dollar for dollar savings. You invest in this tool, and you get back dollars by hours, however, beyond that, there are these peripheral benefits that you get that are a little harder to measure. You’ve got to have good guys out there to capture this.

In terms of endpoint satisfaction, customer satisfaction, you have to look at it within the business and their measurements before and after you've done something to actually see what is happening and attribute it to what you've done with UiPath.

We haven't done anything that hasn't saved money yet.

At the beginning of a journey, we were looking to get maybe 1X our money back in that first year. We try to get that at least. Depending on the size of the organization and complexity, it’s possible. As you go into year two, year three, you're almost looking at a multiplier reflecting that year. For example, a four-year-old program might get a company around 4X, if not more, in return. Of course, that also depends on how far you've implemented this product. You need to put money in to get money out, in a sense.

If you've got a pipeline of X and you only have three developers, you can only chew through that pipeline at a certain current rate. You want to look at the value and say, "Well, what if we doubled our staff?"

I have a calculator that shows, for example, if you have $10 million of savings sitting on the table through 20 things in the pipeline. If I put one developer on that, it will take me three years to go through that and build that out. At the end of that $10 million of value, imagine if instead, you had everything all automated on day one. That's a total max value, and you would get somewhere around 23% to 30% of that value returned.

If you double that or if you put a staff of three developers on that same pipeline, you finish earlier and you get about 75% of the total value. If you go to four developers or five, you get closer to 83%. Now, if you put 20 developers on there, you're only going to increment it to 95%, however, then you’ve just increased your total cost as you have to try managing 25 at the same time. The main idea being, based upon your pipeline and the size of your team, you can potentially increase your total return value within a fixed time.

The ease of the use of creating the building automation is actually improving year over year. For example, there are some training programs for UiPath, and it generally takes about a week to get through it. That’s on UiPath Academy.

If you actually use it with modern design, modern objects, and all the new things that have been released recently, you actually save time on training. If that shaves 20% of your training, you can also shave 20% off of your building capability or the requirements. BY using UiPath Academy, you save time on your projects.

It's fairly easy to learn, as a solution. However, it’s not that easy where you're just going to throw non-developers into it. Your first three days of UiPath training are actually doing .net. That's the one thing the market puts out there incorrectly is that your operations team can just jump on this. You still need a developer mentality as you're still dealing with exceptions and things that aren't the way humans think.

That said, in terms of usability, it's highly useful.

UiPath Academy helps streamline and keeps employees up to speed in the solution.

The biggest value of the Academy is that it's free. That's a major piece. It's fairly well organized, and they put things into channels based upon what your role is within your RPA program or your business, and that helps you stay focused in terms of what you need to learn.

The solution needs resource locking. This kind of leads toward scaling which is one challenge. It's not major. However, it is when you have multiple bots running the same process and they need to access the same piece of information to read and write. There's not a strong capability to manage the lock and have the capability to say "I have ownership of this file. No one else can touch it" and then release it, allowing the next one to pick it up. That's a key differentiator that I see between them and Blue Prism. That one feature is lacking.

The studio design is a little different. If you go from one tool to the next, you might be a little shocked at how things are organized. I don't see them changing that any time soon. However, the design could be improved upon.

I've used the solution for about four years. 

The solution seems to be stable. I haven't had any issues yet.

The solution is very scalable. I haven't pushed it to 100 plus or anything like that. However, based upon scheduling and triggers and SLA management, it's much easier to scale.

We did work with other RPA solutions in the past. The differentiation comes from the triggers, and the attended automation. The platform now is a big part of this. 

For example, Blue Prism is one of the tools that we work with as well. If you want new functions, new features, say, process mining, you have to go to Celonis or someone else, whereas UiPath is providing this platform with new capabilities almost daily.

It also depends on what kind of COE you want to build. Looking at Blue Prism, they have a nice UI as well. It's very business-focused. With UiPath, you need to have some developer capacity. There's .net in there, and some people just might not get that. However, at the end of the day, if they don't get that, should they be building processors? There's a bit of a challenge there.

The initial setup is not that complex. It's more about the client's setup. For example, the domain, entries, things like that, would add to the complexity you face.

If everything goes well, you can get things set up probably in a few weeks. I would say a month or so is needed for deployment and implementors should set expectations. For example, security depends on how much the organization is ready to take it on as well. If you don't get their buy-in right away, then you're just going to get delays.

Most of the companies see a good ROI from the solution.

The pricing and licensing get a little complex. There are so many different options that you can choose from, and practice adds to the time to figure these things out. Whereas, with, for example, Blue Prism. It's a pretty standard basic model. UiPath gets a little hectic at times.

The customers that use the on-premises version tend to use the latest version of the solution. 

While those using the cloud version of the UiPath apps feature are in the UK, the US users are not using that functionality. Mainly most of our focus has always been on RPA and then expansion. From what I've seen, we've mainly been using UiPath. At least on the North American side, it's been relatively new. That's why they aren't using apps yet.

We don’t have any clients that are using the solution's AI functionality in their automation program yet. I’ve only played around with it myself.

From a road mapping perspective, I'd advise potential new users that your key is the business case. If there's no business case, then this solution doesn't make sense for you to get involved or do anything else. The first part is to really understand the business case. Just to substantiate getting it into the company. Once you have that, that's basically your low-hanging fruit. 

That said, the key is not to hang everything on one process, not to sit there and bank it, as the concept is a program approach. Over time, it is going to sustain itself. Companies need to be ready to look at a process and think if it's a good idea first. And as you move through the steps, you're basically doing additional checks. As you learn about the process, you're also learning what it's like behind each process and what the value add is. At each stage, users need to ensure that it makes sense to continue. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. While there's always room for improvement, market-wise they are at the top of their game. 

UiPath helps us to develop and build a center of excellence for our clients. I do development and technical implementation of the bots, best practices, and teach others how to do the development.

The client that I'm working with now is in the financial services sector. They do banking and life insurance. They do a lot of contracts and billing, backend, data entry-type work. We process all of the return mail that comes in, scan it using Doc Understanding, publish new bills, generate form letters, and all of those tasks that go along with managing the client for life insurance, annuities, 401K, etc.

A lot of the benefits we've seen are from FTE hours saved. We are looking at almost all of our processes, and it saves us at least a thousand or more hours per year before we go into implementation. We have around 20 in production. We're saving between 15,000 and 20,000 hours of process time.

From the user's perspective, people are happy that they don't have to do certain tasks that they didn't like to do. I only have one of those bots where I have a group of people that prefer the way they've always been doing tasks, but that's more of an organizational thing. I'm seeing across the enterprise with other folks that they're very happy to have this. They are putting more use cases in, and the frontline workers are bringing in use cases. Of course, we need to vet a lot of those so that we get enough bang for the buck, but we're finding a lot of adoption across, up, and down the whole scale so far.

There's also been a reduction in human error. There are so many use cases that have been more on the production side of things, like productivity as opposed to risk avoidance. We enter data and we do bank transfers, so it's important to key the data correctly. We use the attended bot to do that. We took a paper form. We push it in, it comes in as an unattended bot in the backend to read an email from a person and put a transfer in place. It gets approved and put in the queue.

When they run the attended bot, it allows them to do an RSA key into their external site, take the data, watch it go in, they see it, we audit it on the backend with a second user, it gets pushed in, saved, and submitted. From that perspective, if you're dealing with 10, 50, or 100 transfers a day, where you could key in the wrong number, it's important.

That's been helping. Employees are happy that they don't have to type it all in, and that they don't have to worry about the errors as well. It offers peace of mind for those folks.

Getting the bots going and working is the most valuable aspect. We have about 20 or so in production. We're building out from there. We've been very focused on Studio and Orchestrator, as opposed to some of the other product lines. Because a lot of what we're dealing with pertains to advanced technical people like myself that are helping them along that journey.  

It's easy for me to build automations but I am a computer scientist. I have a deep technical background. A lot of what I've been doing is trying to teach people how to build resilient bots, and how to build processes that will run. To me, one of the big things to meet your ROI is that you need to build things upfront that work. You need to verify them, test them, componentize them, and put them together. Otherwise, you're going to spend too much money on the backend with maintenance.

If you can get people to think about what do to in the event of a failure, even from the developer side of it, then they can create things that we can run, and we don't have to do so many new maintenance and operations tasks on it. That's vitally important.

I have used the UiPath Academy courses. I'm a certified developer. I didn't know UiPath at all. I went through the Academy and trained myself. When I brought in new developers, I had them do modules and I sometimes go visit them. 

The Academy is pretty good. It's very helpful to have something like that. Personally, my favorite side of things that UiPath is bringing to the table, is a community edition in the cloud. I can go out and play with the latest and greatest. I have my client's laptop, but I also have my own personal laptop and I go out to the cloud and do tasks out there.

I want to bring what's new, help bring to the forefront what we might want to do in the future, and get a hands-on perspective, without having to go to the client and bug them about bringing in a license for something. That's great and I hope they continue with that.

The fact that they're not charging for training is great. It brings on more developers. The barriers to entry for people are low. And the more developers you have, the more adoption you're going to get.

There's a lot of technological growth that should be done. They need to learn from customers. I talk to people about Doc Understanding which is relatively new. There's a lot of people in the document world that have more experience. They should learn a little bit more about what Kofax has done over the years with their validation actions and those types of things.

There should be more growth, but the platform is there. As they grow those things they should take each piece and make it better. If you start with a good platform and you build it up, it's going to get better. What we have today is very usable, and is only going to get better. I look forward to it.

They should talk to their customers and understand their use cases. Give customers what they need. 

I have been using UiPath for two and a half years. 

Stability has been quite good. I see technical glitches once in a while in the Studio, but when you're running on Windows, it happens. The glitches don't happen very often.

It seems very scalable, in terms of rolling out new processes. We're more limited by machines and getting things set up than we are by what Orchestrator can handle. We have one attended bot and we're 95% unattended.

We have plans to increase usage. Our clients are growing from two developers, a QA and a VA, to a VA, and a team of two pods of six or seven developer QA types, to implement use cases over the next couple of years. They're on a very high trajectory of growth.

I go out to the community a bit. I Google looking for what everybody else has said and figure it out. We only have a couple of different use cases where we've gone back to UiPath, and the ones that we had the most difficulty with, we went right through the local sales rep to get things going. I found their support to be good.

The initial setup was straightforward and easy.

I set up Orchestrator servers, I put bots out into the systems, and I installed Studio in the client's environment. The only problem I have is with the way the client environment exists. Security gets to be a hassle. 

One of the things the company focuses on a lot is employee satisfaction. From a cost perspective, we haven't necessarily gotten to that level. I've been there for two years. I'm a consultant. We have other consultants. We're saving $15,000 a year, while we're displacing certain cost dollars from the people that did those jobs, we get paid more.

Cost-wise we're fairly evening out, and probably bringing an MROI. This is a longer scale process for them, to take them along this journey. It's important for businesses that go under that, to not necessarily focus on year one, year two. We look at this as a longer-term endeavor for them. The key benefit that they see out of it right now is the future. The workers are satisfied not having to do the "bad" work.

I found UiPath to be pretty cost-effective. 

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten. I see it as a maturing product. It's done very well, because it is stable, and it does build real use cases. But I look forward to the future. There's a lot of good going on here.

We're a revenue cycle management company for medical billing. We've reallocated our charge entry employees. We're using bots now to do the charge entry on medical claims and then also payment posting along with eligibility and AR. We've been able to reallocate about, just within this last year, probably eight employees. They've been reassigned to more valuable work - things that the bot can't do and actually requires a human to do. We've been understaffed, so it's actually worked out great for our company.

The ease of building automation isn't a problem. It seems to be very easy to do to a point. Our challenge is we work in a live environment. We're not able to use a test environment when we build things out. We have to go very slowly.

I'm not that familiar with the product, with the solution, however, the UiPath apps feature and OCR are great. That said, we're not using any of the apps currently.

The biggest benefit we've seen is the accuracy. Even just with employees calling in sick or not having enough staff. We’ve been able to fill those roles.

The robotics piece has been a huge thing. We're doing medical claims. We're always worried about claims not getting paid. This has been able to capture those claims so that people get paid the first time. One of the other things we track is how many times we touch a claim. For example, how many clicks. We couldn't do that before. That's been very valuable to us.

We’ve improved our efficiency in a way for sure. Even just our cost analysis has improved. When we do new contracts, we know what it's going to cost exactly.

I don't know if it's UiPath as much as just what we do is really complicated. Even the consultants that we've used with UiPath, even they've said, wow, this is very difficult what you guys do. There are a lot of moving parts, so it's not as much of a UiPath problem in terms of limitations. It's just our own processes.

Right now, I don't think I've been on there long enough to know if there are missing features or functionalities I’d like to be added.

I’m talking to people right now, to see how it can do things better or how we could use it more effectively. We’d like to discover what worked for other people.

We've been using UiPath for about maybe a year and a half tops.

I haven't had any problems or concerns right now concerning stability. The biggest concern I do have is that we've already invested six people in this. We're going to have a lot more that will, more or less, not have the robotic piece as part of their job. That work will be reallocated. I have about a hundred employees that UiPath could technically reallocate.

When I look at that, I worry about if something does happen or it doesn't work or there's no backup. Then, suddenly, I don't have employees. Right now, we can jump in and some humans can do the work if necessary. My concern is that in the future they won't exist. This hasn't happened yet. I hope it doesn't.

Scalability hasn't been a problem at all. We can just continue to add bots every time we need them. It's been easy.

We started with two. Three months later, we added another two. After another three months, we add another two. From our standpoint, it's great. My UiPath rep was shocked that I keep adding more, so that's good.

I have not used technical support.

That said, we had one issue with UiPath where something didn't work. We talked to them and it was taken care of within a couple of days.

My vendor is working with them. They mentioned there was an issue with insights that they are working through. Insights are still not quite functional, or there are some resources we need. However, the vendor is dealing with it directly. It's a work in progress. 

We did not previously use a different RPA solution. 

The initial setup was pretty easy. We didn't have any challenges with that. I contacted one of our vendors and they ran with it. We didn't have issues at all.

With the vendor, it took us about 30 days to deploy UiPath. After that, in terms of implementing bots, the first bot took us about three months. Once we did the first one, it just went really quick after that. We could reuse some processes which made it faster. There was a lot of reusing of the same. We were also internally understanding what information they need and how it works.

It was all new to us. I'm still learning the acronyms they use. We need to learn what they are talking about. We’re not IT-based at all. It's definitely different.

We had the solution implemented by a vendor. They implemented it all. We didn't have any challenges as far as that goes.

Our experience with the integrator was good. I would say that they didn't realize how challenging it was going to be or, at least, the person who integrated didn’t. At the same time, they know almost everything about my business now.

UiPath has saved costs for our organization. For example, we’ve allocated six employees that are paid around $40,000 a year and we've implemented six bots to do those same functions and they're around $8,000 a year. In a way, we’ve doubled our staff, and almost tripled our ROI.

We had a problem before with the pricing, however, for the most part, it's fine where it is now. My ROI is fine. It works great. I have zero complaints.

You have to do a package at a time. That's my only challenge, where sometimes I don't need that many licenses. 

When you first sign up, it's a package that can renew every five years. I don't necessarily need everything. I'd prefer just to pay for certain pieces. 

We did not evaluate any other options. We started using UiPath due to a referral at a neurological healthcare conference about four years ago. The speaker suggested UiPath. I actually didn't know of any other company until after we were on UiPath. We've since talked to others who have used other solutions and they mentioned that we made the right choice when we chose UiPath.

We started on-premise for the first six months and then we actually moved to the cloud.

We do not use their UiPath apps feature as of right now.

We are mostly using unattended automation.

We haven't really calculated the reduction in human error. We're just moving on to our Insights app. We're just getting ready to launch that, so we're not there yet. We don't know what that turnaround will be.

We do not use UiPath's AI functionality in our automation program right now.

Our teams have not yet used the UiPath Academy courses.

I'm a little concerned about having to bring on more people that are not in this industry. We're going to have to start them over from the ground up, which takes time.

When we first started, we wanted to know if it really worked. We got a certain budget and just started using it, and now I can say that yes, it does work. We can see that now that we've stepped back. We should have done it earlier. That's what I would tell people. I would definitely tell people to look at it first, before anything else. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.