UiPath Reviews

Most of the automations that we work with are internal to our systems. We are also trying to use it with BPM.

We are reducing people's activities in our organization. For example, there are monthly reports that we have to upload and read, and it was taking a day to do this activity. Then, using UiPath, we can reduce that time to two hours. 

It has helped a lot to minimize our on-prem footprint. This is really important because it minimizes tasks that people work on, including myself.

If you automate with UiPath, you don't have to worry about firing someone who is doing the same process. Instead, you are giving that person more time for analysis for the information that UiPath brings in.

The OCR is something that is really cool. You can work with a lot of systems and use the HTML feature to interact with websites. I really like that it interacts with websites. 

UiPath Portal works great for accessing features.

UiPath provides single sign-on, which is very important, because we don't have to manage a lot of passwords.

It is fast. With UiPath Studio, you can get the passwords and work in it quickly. 

The UiPath Academy is great for learning the solution. It helped us a lot.

We would like to know how to implement the artificial intelligence (AI) feature because we are working on some activities in this area.

The bank knows about UiPath, but not all people consider UiPath something they really trust, which is why there are just two of us working on it full-time. We do teach people about UiPath, but they are not 100 percent involved with it.

The stability is usually really great. However, at this point, we are uploading a new version because the stability is not right. They told us that our version, 18.4.5, is not 100 percent compatible with Orchestrator. Therefore, we don't have the stability that we had before.

The scalability works great for us. It is really fast when we ask for something.

It is really fast at scaling automations. At the beginning, it was slow because we couldn't work the way that we wanted. Now, it scales automation quickly.

We haven't had contact with technical support because UiPath has been working great for us.

This is our first RPA solution.

Before Orchestrator, we worked on an application to manage UiPath because we didn't have Orchestrator two years ago. So, we create our own application to manage UiPath.

It was very easy to set up UiPath the first time. We implemented UiPath with virtual machines, and that didn't affect our costs in a significant way.

The timeframe for setting up a new bot for implementation depends on whether it will be big or small. It might take a day, if it is really easy, or a week.

Getting the idea to have a new bot for the first time is kind of complicated. Once you can explain how it will work or be a solution, then you can just go for it.

I have to be involved in the beginning when implementing a new bot. 

Two people from our bank were involved in the deployment. One person develops the solution and another does the QA.

We worked with a third-party (BDG) to set up UiPath. They were really good.

It has helped a little to reduce our work. Before, we had people working at 6:00 AM because they had to inspect, analyze, or look into the systems for prevention. For example, they had to prevent the systems from going down. Now, with UiPath, that person doesn't have to come early because we get everything in reports from UiPath. So, that person doesn't have to come early anymore. That person now just has to look at the report and see, for example, that UiPath did a fix in the morning. 

The solution really works for its price.

The license cost is the only cost to start a new bot. However, if we want UiPath to do an activity and go through another machine, like Remote Desktop, or application, like Bloomberg, then we have a special license that is an extra cost.

We also evaluated Automation Anywhere, but decided on UiPath, which is friendlier. We also considered that UiPath has its Academy and more documentation.

We are glad UiPath has security because not all the RPA solutions have security.

We are getting into AI now, because we haven't worked with that yet.

Right now, we are 100 percent familiar with Orchestrator.

We didn't have to install a lot of features with this infrastructure. We just download some activities to work with everything, and it works fine. We don't have a lot of infrastructure for using data.

Our first step is getting Orchestrator because we really want to have the entire bank involved in UiPath. The solution is great. It can reduce costs, especially with all that stuff that people do. We have big plans for UiPath going forward.

I would rate this solution as 10 (out of 10).

We use Studio, the Orchestrator, and we have attended and unattended robots.

Our primary use case is automating back-office processes from the corporate side. One example is the automation for ticket closure for some of the customer complaints. We also use it to fill information gaps between systems. Instead of having information run through standard APIs, we have it copied over from one system to another.

We run automations in a virtual environment, and the implementation was pretty easy and quick.

We used the Community Edition before purchasing our license. From the point that we purchased our UiPath license until we had our first robot was approximately one week. We found it to be very easy and very fast. We, as a Contact Center, usually face a lot of problems when we suggest any requirements. When we started with RPA, it took approximately one month for a very complex process to be automated.

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. It is very easy. You can use the UI, or you can use APIs for the connection. In the end, you can do it.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five, for sure. In two or three weeks, an RPA developer can do everything.

In the Contact Center, the key issue is the handling time. RPA has helped us to decrease our time, and eventually, it will help to decrease the headcount.

For one of our processes, it reduced the time it takes from five minutes to somewhere between forty and fifty seconds. That saves a lot of time.

In terms of eliminating human errors, there has not been much difference because we have very strict processes and strict steps for them, so human error was minimal, to begin with. Our success is in the reduction of time to complete them.

The unattended, back-office robots are the most beneficial feature.

The Form Builder for back-end robots needs to be a web portal instead of a full desktop application. 

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution between three and four. For exception handling, it means that a senior RPA developer has to understand the reasons behind the process. If they have not been exposed to it then it is easier to perform some simple fixes and continue the process.

We have implemented eighteen processes so far, they are they used in several departments. In total, we have approximately four thousand people who are using this solution.

From a scalability point of view, we're not that confident that we can have the robots running twenty-four hours a day with a huge transaction. Being a telecom operator, we have a lot of transactions and the stability of the unattended robots needs some enhancement.

I think that both customer support and technical support are very good. When we have any questions or any issues, we are connected immediately. 

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

We learned about RPA because one of the contractors was working on an RPA PoC at our company, and we were convinced that it could help us a lot. The IT people were invited to see the technology and from there, they decided to implement it with our in-house IT group.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward. We used the Community Edition and it is very easy to use. 

We performed the implementation on our own.

We realized ROI in approximately six months. Our cost savings come from savings in agents.

From a cost perspective, unattended robots are better. They run twenty-four hours a day and do not require running on a client machine. The attended robots are not as cost-effective.

We did evaluate one other RPA solution before choosing this one. Our main reasons for choosing UiPath were the price and the ease of development. The Community Edition is very useful, and we are easily able to find RPA developers working in UiPath. This is different than with some of the competing products.

My advice for anybody researching this solution is that it is easy to download and it has a big community. A PoC can be done easily, and you can decide from there whether this solution is suitable.

This is a good solution, but the stability of the unattended robots needs to be improved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

My client is a bank, and we create bots for them. They had processes that their employees used to do manually. They gave them to us to mimic the actions that they did. We automated those processes.

UiPath has increased the net worth of our organization. From UiPath, our organization has gained much more than expected.

UiPath improves the workflow. When we automate the processes, they go into the bank environment where they are used by all the employees from all the regions or states.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It is very easy to build automation using UiPath.

UiPath improves efficiency. The last project I worked on had 1,200 people working on the process. We automated that process, and with automation, 1,200 people have been eliminated directly.

I have not used UiPath's AI functionality but my team has. It makes it easy to automate processes that are more complex or involved.

UiPath has not saved us costs. When we use AI Fabric, we have to implement it additionally to the production environment, and it costs more.

UiPath has reduced human error by about 70%.

UiPath has freed up employees' time. The time saved depends on the process. If a person is doing the same process the whole day and we automate that, he has the whole time for other activities.

The Excel activities are valuable. We can do browser automation through other sites or tools, but for Excel, using tools or options like Selenium or JavaScript is quite complicated because we have to import the file from the JSQL or other things, whereas, in UiPath, we get direct activities. We can directly perform the operations by using the activities. We can directly apply logic to it, and that is how UiPath makes Excel automation easy. This is why I like it.

We have been getting positive outcomes from the UiPath Community. Whenever I have any questions, I go directly to the UiPath Community. Most times, we get the answer from there.

Currently, we have to additionally implement UiPath Fabric. It would be easier if it is already integrated with UiPath rather than having to add it. We have to take the dependencies by searching them. We should be able to go for the default ones.

Its stability also needs improvement.

It has been approximately one and a half years.

The stability needs to be improved. The UiPath selector is consistently failing.

It is a scalable product. We have about 150 users using the solution. It is being used in multiple departments.

Technical support is much needed. It has to be there. 

Our team has used UiPath Academy and UiPath Community. Whenever we get stuck while building the solutions, we most often get a solution from there. It is quite efficient.

Positive

I have used Selenium. In Selenium, we write scripts. We use the Java language for automation. We have to write the code, which makes it more complex, whereas, with UiPath, we can use direct activities, which makes it easier to understand and write the code.

We work in the cloud. Its deployment is easier. For the older versions, it was quite difficult, but with the upgraded version, it is quite easy.

It takes five to ten minutes, depending on how many bots you want to implement. If you want to implement one, you can directly do it in ten minutes.

One person is enough for the deployment. For maintaining the bots, we have a team because the developers and users do not have access to the production environment.

We have seen a 100% ROI.

The price of UiPath is comparatively higher than Selenium. Selenium is a free tool, and UiPath is quite expensive. 

Some organizations make automation costlier than it has to be. They use UiPath, and while selling the products, they make it more costly. It depends on the organization.

Freshers can learn UiPath. They will get knowledge about logic building. 

I would recommend UiPath to others. I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

I have used UiPath for use cases that are both transactional and linear. It involves human resources, cybersecurity, OEM reporting, IT service management, service delivery, and examining of patents and trademarks. We work with federal agencies in the public sector. 

I enjoy the enhancement of UiPath's debugging tools. I like the IDE and integration services. There have been massive improvements. I love to work with Orchestrator. It has become more streamlined and helpful. 

UiPath needs to improve its documentation. AI Fabric's installation was an absolute nightmare. I tried to get help from the documentation portal and couldn't find what I was looking for. 

I have been using the product for four and a half years. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. One of my use cases involves the Patent and Trademark Office, where two GS-15 patent attorneys worked on patent suspensions. An unattended bot helped to save two full FTEs' a year's worth of work. 

We wanted to achieve less human error with AI-powered automation. We also wanted to streamline the process so that human involvement was less. Also, it helped us do more things than a human. 

AI-powered automation has increased accuracy for one of our use cases. We used AI Fabric and Document Understanding to help with reconciliations that came in PDFs. 

Automation has helped us free up our resource time by over 1000 hours. 

I last used Process Mining in 2020. 

I don't enjoy using Power Automate since its scope is limited. The environment where I use Power Automate did not purchase advanced licenses. UiPath offers more flexibility for programmers who are into API solutions. It wasn't available in Power Automate, which annoyed me. 

I run a team of developers and spend most of my time in Orchestrator. It is the best product from UiPath. 

We use UiPath in the telecommunications and banking sectors to automate various processes, including IT, HR, and financial receipt processing.

We began using UiPath to automate repetitive and rule-based tasks, such as extracting data from documents, inserting data into applications, and sending reports to end users using databases.

UiPath helps implement end-to-end automation by extracting information from documents using the OCR engine and automating procedures by integrating with Salesforce, SAP, and other systems.

The UiPath User Community is extremely helpful.

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-premises footprint.

UiPath Academy courses benefit our developers by providing them with certifications and badges that help them improve their UiPath skills.

We are currently testing the AI and machine learning capabilities of UiPath to make it easier to automate more complex processes.

UiPath has helped reduce the cost of our digital transformation and the number of human errors.

UiPath has helped free up staff time to focus on more valuable work by automating repetitive tasks.

UiPath has multiple valuable features, including stability, automation, and integration with different applications. In addition, the OCR in Document Understanding and the integration with the chatbot are also good.

The data extraction has room for improvement.

AI and machine learning always have room for improvement.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath is stable.

The technical support is good.

Positive

Compared to other automation tools, UiPath is expensive.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

Building automation using UiPath is moderately difficult.

I recommend UiPath.

We use UiPath to automate some of our financial and HR workflows and to send emails to clients.

UiPath helps automate end-to-end processes.

It helps reduce the speed and cost of our digital transformation.

We do not require expensive or complex application upgrades to speed up and save costs in our digital transformation.

UiPath helps reduce human error, reducing our labor.

It saves me three hours per week.

UiPath saves us costs.

UiPath is a strong brand.

I would like UiPath to work more with our local partners, to provide us with lower prices, localized functionality, and support.

I currently use UiPath once a week. 

I would rate the stability of Uipath eight out of ten. We have had some stability issues with our VMware.

The local UiPath partner we are working with provides very slow responses to our technical issues.

Neutral

UiPath is priced 50 percent higher than our local RPA solutions.

I would rate the pricing of UiPath eight out of ten with ten being the most expensive.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

We have many use cases, but the primary ones are on the finance side for intelligent automation. We use it for system updates and system manipulations.

UiPath has improved our organization in terms of 

• quality
• accuracy
• reduction in headcount
• working around the clock
• consistency.

It is the primary key to our digital transformation. And we have been able to do so without expensive or complex application upgrades or IT application support.

Our accuracy and compliance have improved manyfold. And in terms of employee time, our benchmark is to save three employees per bot, but we have achieved something around 2.1 employees per bot.

We are a consortium with multi-discipline businesses, and we are able to use UiPath automation across all our sectors, but it has mainly helped us with shared services.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation, and that is something that is important to us.

Of course, we have used the UiPath Academy courses, and that has been very handy and very useful. That is what we have used to significantly build up our capabilities. They are our entire training platform. We brought people who are not IT-savvy, complete laymen who were not in IT at all, into our platform of technology. To do that conversion, the Academy had to be very strong. It was not only the UiPath Academy that helped with their training, it was Microsoft PowerApps as well. The two of them together created this magic.

One functionality we would like to see is OCR.

I have been using UiPath for the last three years.

It's very stable.

It is scalable.

We have not had technical support from UiPath.

It's a very straightforward deployment, but any time we update the deployment, it becomes a bit complex.

We have a few VMs on-premises that we use for Orchestrator and the machines to run the bots, but the queue to run the bots is in the cloud. Most of our applications are on the cloud.

Implementing the first set of activities took us about nine weeks. We engaged a consulting party to identify the platform we should use. While we were doing that, we did opportunity assessments across the organization, to identify the processes that would be most valuable to automate.

UiPath is slightly more expensive than Automation Anywhere, from what I understand. But the pricing comparison is a mix between the two because UiPath attended bots are quite cheap compared to Automation Anywhere. If you bring in UiPath's unattended bots, that's expensive.

We have used Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and now UiPath. We had to decide among the three, but ultimately, there was no choice for us because Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism did not respond to some of our systems. This was especially true when doing screen grabs, specifically on the AS400. So it was a no-brainer for us.

I don't see a major problem with UiPath's ease of use, but I'm not a developer, I'm a decision-maker. But honestly, the development life cycle using Automation Anywhere is shorter. With UiPath, the development life cycle is slightly longer, but it is not a major issue.

The most important thing is to follow the best practices from UiPath in building the bot processes. What happens is, when application upgrades happen, if you haven't done it in the right way, your applications will fall apart. You have to make sure that the screen-grabbing methodology and referencing are done according to the best practices of UiPath.

We use it for making end-to-end projects. We are working with a commodity trading company where we have automated almost 150 processes. We have automated daily tasks or repetitive tasks.

It allows us to implement end-to-end automation. It's an ongoing activity where everybody is involved in automating things. Everybody is looking for a cost-effective output. With manual processes, there are chances of errors, but with UiPath, there are no errors.

It's cost-effective. For example, if ten members of a team are working on a given task, with UiPath, that task can be done by one member. It saves costs for our clients, and they can use the freed-up employees for other important tasks. So, it saves time and costs and improves accuracy for our clients.

It helps to minimize the on-premises footprint.

It speeds up digital transformation or reduces the cost of digital transformation. Doing so doesn't require expensive or complex application upgrades or IT application support.

It reduces a lot of human errors. It also frees up employees' time, but there is a drawback. Previously, if a hundred-member team was working on a given task, after automation, you don't need that many people, and they end up losing their jobs. That's applicable to any kind of automation case or any of the automation apps. The time saved with automation varies. It depends on the project.

It's user-friendly. The UI is very user-friendly. It's quick to learn. Anyone can learn this tool.

The Orchestrator feature given in UiPath is very good for monitoring processes. We get alerts for everything on time.

The ReFramework feature available in UiPath is widely used. We have almost 90% of the processes running on ReFramework. Other built-in features are also very good. Exception handling is a very good feature that has been introduced in ReFramework.

The Insights feature that they have recently introduced is also very good. We can create dashboards and configure alerts.

The UiPath community is good. They also provide free-of-cost UiPath Academy where any beginner can learn about UiPath free of cost and get certified. It's a very good service provided by UiPath. I used UiPath Academy when I started with UiPath. The courses are very well prepared and detailed. There are videos, and there is a theoretical part. At the end of every course chapter, you have to take a test, so you get to know how good you are at that part. Each and every point and detail has been covered in the UiPath Academy courses.

I have not used it that much. It has been more than enough for my needs. However, its stability could be better. There are cases where because of the UiPath upgrade, some of the activity features get upgraded, and the processes that we have designed using an older version of UiPath don't run after the upgrade. In such scenarios, we have to downgrade and use only the older version. We have seen issues in that part. It's good to add new features, but that shouldn't impact the existing development of processes that we have done for our end users. We shouldn't have had to design features using the older version. We find it difficult when they remove or change features with the upgrade. We have to reach out to the UiPath community for a solution.

We have been using this solution for 2.5 years.

I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of stability.

I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

They are very quick. They have separate teams. You can email them your query and you get a response within two to three hours. I'd rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I've used another tool previously, but we could only automate a limited number of processes with that tool, whereas, with UiPath, we don't have any such limitation. 

I wasn't involved in its setup.

I didn't evaluate other options. I had heard of Automation Anywhere, but more people were using UiPath, so I also chose that.

It's very good. I'd recommend it to everybody. You should use UiPath instead of any other tool.

If somebody wants to learn UiPath, I'd recommend UiPath Academy instead of purchasing a course from any of the other platforms or going to a class.

I'd rate UiPath a ten out of ten.