UiPath Reviews

I use UiPath for invoice processing. We download all the invoices from our application and then send them individually to the respective customers via email. This involves email automation and automation of the user interface.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. When compared to other automation tools, UiPath offers a more user-friendly development platform.

It enables us to implement end-to-end automation, from the basic extraction of data to the complete uploading of data to the respective applications.

UiPath's User Community is excellent. Whenever I encounter challenges or need information about new developments, version changes, or anything related to UiPath, the community is always there to help. Therefore, I find the community extremely valuable.

UiPath can be a useful tool for anyone. It doesn't require a separate environment or the need for a developer. It is beneficial for anyone dealing with any system. Therefore, I believe it can serve as a regular daily process tool, enabling users to automate various tasks effectively. There are numerous possibilities and applications with UiPath.

In my early days of entering this field of development, I completed the UiPath Academy courses to gain a comprehensive understanding of the interface, the approach we should take, and how to utilize the portal functionalities that UiPath offers.

UiPath has been instrumental in reducing human errors by 99 percent in applications that are maintained correctly, particularly in activities such as typing. There are certain tasks where humans are prone to making mistakes while working with applications, but UiPath ensures that such errors are eliminated. Initially, I had some doubts about UiPath's ability to extract data from PDF files, as the UiPath OCR engine seemed to have limitations. Consequently, we started relying on ABBYY FineReader for this task. However, we are now exploring UiPath's UI for document understanding. As a company, we have already developed around 200 to 300 templates using ABBYY FineReader, making it challenging for us to transition entirely to UiPath document understanding at present. Nevertheless, we are considering the shift because the early versions of UiPath were not very efficient, and we couldn't fully rely on it for data extraction. However, with the recent integration of Google Vision, UiPath has significantly improved and is now providing better results in terms of OCR technology.

The user interface is the most valuable feature of the studio version. It allows us to develop all activities and create custom activities as needed. Additionally, it seamlessly integrates with the latest technologies, such as AI, making it very helpful, even for integrating ABBYY FineReader. Users can extract data from the time scripts, which is also a project involving data extraction from all PDF files.

The UiPath Community does not provide version control for the community edition. Let's say I'm currently using a specific version, and then it automatically upgrades the community version to the latest version without the user having the option to decide whether to update or not. Consequently, we cannot use the older versions in the UiPath community edition.

I encountered some issues with my local machine. I created one of the bots using a different version from the community variation, there were problems with compatibility between different versions in UiPath. While those issues used to exist, currently, it has been a long time since I last modified any of the workflows and migrated between servers and my local machine. I'm not entirely certain at the moment, but previously, there were instances where a particular activity in one version would not work in another version and would result in failure. Additionally, sometimes the select task would not identify the select areas in the actual application, even though it worked on the validators. These scenarios are rare but they do occur.

I have been using UiPath for almost two years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The licensing fee is moderate and is based on the volume of tasks for which we use UiPath. The cost is satisfactory.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

Currently, we are handling approximately 20,000 units of data on a daily basis. Our focus is on efficiently processing this data and integrating it into the scaled servers. We utilize the scale servers for data connectivity, verification, and storage purposes.

We are currently not using the AI functionality, but our company is anticipating a new project. The assignment of this project will happen very soon, and the company is considering the use of AI for it. However, this decision will ultimately depend on the user and the environment. If we determine that using AI functionality is necessary, we will integrate it into the project. At present, we have not encountered any users who explicitly require AI in their business logic. Therefore, we are not utilizing AI at the moment. Nevertheless, if any future clients request it, we will be prepared to integrate AI functionality accordingly.

Our organization has started using automation with UiPath. Before implementing UiPath, everything was done manually.

If the initial development is done correctly, then the maintenance would actually be significantly reduced. As a developer, we need to ensure that the code is always reviewed by developers, and they should always be available for this purpose. If the initial development is not carried out correctly according to the requirements, then imagine the consequences in the future. The development might need to be revisited for up to 15 years, or at least five years. If it is not done that way, the maintenance cost would be very high because the business processes keep changing. Therefore, to keep the system functioning well and the applications up-to-date, as they are not static, we need to continuously maintain the code. For instance, in the past six months, we've had to make two changes to the application we are working on. Many alterations occurred, such as UI element changes, shifting locations, and complete interface and navigation changes. Hence, it's essential for developers to always keep the code protected and up-to-date.

I recommend conducting a proof of concept using UiPath to ensure that the budget and return on investment are sufficient to implement the solution within an organization.

I have used UiPath for a city utility. The main purpose is if they want to dig in a particular location, they need to know how many pipelines are underneath the road, what the situation is regarding high-tension wires, gas pipelines, et cetera. For that, we needed to go to about 18 websites and scrape the maps from them into a local repository. We use UiPath to save that data from all the websites.

From there, there is an AI/ML solution that identifies the danger signals and notations on the map. It summarizes them and sends them to a mobile application used by a person who is at that location. That person can determine whether they are able to dig in that particular location or not.

UiPath reduces human error by automating a lot of manual steps. 

It also helps free up employee time. The amount of time depends on the use case. For the use case I described above, for the utility, the whole process of preparing one package would take one person two and a half hours. Automating it using UiPath and AI reduced it to two and a half minutes.

In terms of costs, for that use case, it has saved that company 30 to 40 percent.

Scraping with UiPath is easy, as is integration with some services. It's also easy to deploy solutions. 

Building automation takes place in a normal programming environment like Visual Studio. It's the same environment developers use. If you know development, building automation in UiPath is easy. Visually, it's all interactive and easy to work on.

The platform also has features for logging and monitoring things and communicating when there are errors.

The UiPath user community is a very good ecosystem with information about a lot of new features like AI, chat integration, and WhatsApp integration.

For training purposes and certification, we use the UiPath Academy. It's a very good resource and you get very good support from the community.

We also use the solution's AI functionality but so far only on low- to medium-complexity processes.

I would like to see them transition to the cloud and provide services there. That would be an improvement.

Also, it needs more integration with external services, and I would like it to have generative AI and more artificial intelligence features.

I have been using UiPath for about one and a half years.

The stability is good. I am satisfied with it.

The scalability is also good.

UiPath's technical support is good.

Positive

I used Automation Anywhere. I switched because our clients switched since UiPath is cheaper.

There is definitely ROI from using UiPath. Based on the fees and the load of the input, ROI will be calculated and used to decide whether the use case is worthwhile or not. It will be decided in the analysis and discovery phases. If ROI is feasible, only then will development take place.

With UiPath, there is an additional cost for Document Understanding. If the use case demands it, that feature should be used.

Even though our clients may have an Automation Anywhere ecosystem, they choose UiPath due to budget and cost. Apart from cost, both platforms offer almost all the features. However, from a technical perspective, Automation Anywhere has more utilities and components for building bots.

If it weren't for the cost, I would personally choose Automation Anywhere, on the technical side, because it has huge utilities and components for building bots. The move to UiPath is driven by budgets and costs.

As for end-to-end processing, when you are trying to come up with use cases for RPA, you will probably look at existing legacy applications that are not extendable. They won't have any more new releases but we still need to extract value from them. Use cases include reducing the processing steps and manual steps done, day-to-day, by people. End-to-end automation will help to stitch all the gaps and reduce the processing time.

UiPath is not cloud-based yet, so most of the work is done on-premises.

In terms of maintenance, one person on our support team monitors all the bots and attends to any problems.

I would recommend UiPath for small and medium-sized automation. If a company doesn't have a large budget, UiPath is the solution.

We have tried more of the RPA part. We haven't used much of the cognitive part.

We use it for our client purposes. We don't use it much for internal use.

It has helped to automate many processes. One of the places where we have tried it is the Citizen Development Engagement Program. That's where some of the people who were tech-savvy were able to use it properly.

It enables implementing end-to-end automation to an extent. Having a single tool for everything is helpful.

It reduces human error. A person can focus on his or her core activities rather than doing repetitive tasks.

It has freed up employee time. The time saved could be 70% to 80% depending on the use case of an employee.

The product is good. It's highly scalable, and it's stable. Over the last one and a half years, based on whatever we have developed, we've found it to be pretty stable as compared to the other platforms, such as Automation Anywhere.

We have used UiPath Academy courses. In UiPath Academy, there are courses and role-based training programs. They are good and effective. They give you some exercises to perform, and the community edition is also available, which is good.

The cognitive capabilities of UiPath are pretty time-consuming. If that can be improved, it would help a lot.

I'm not using it directly. Our team has been using it for the last seven or eight years. I have some experience with it but not to a very detailed level. 

It's stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

It's scalable. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

Their support was good, but at the same time, for certain areas where we had issues, we had to directly call them up and try to get support from their internal COE teams. I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

Positive

We weren't using any other solution previously.

I wasn't involved in its initial setup.

They would've not directly saved costs, but they certainly would've gotten some value in terms of time efficiency or productivity, which would've indirectly helped them to save costs. The savings also depend on the FTEs freed because of automation.

I didn't evaluate any other solution, but people in my company might have evaluated other options.

Understand the product first, go through their internal training, and then decide whether you like it and how you want to use it.

It can speed up digital transformation or reduce the cost of digital transformation, depending on how you use it and where you use it. This digital transformation doesn't require complex application upgrades, but support upgrades are required.

I've explored UiPath's community, but in a couple of instances, I didn't get any proper responses or proper answers. We had to directly get in touch with the UiPath team for insights and information about the queries we had.

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We have multiple use cases for this solution. We have applications built on Microsoft platforms and we use UiPath for our automation and automation testing. Being able to do this means that we do not need to keep reverting back to test every use case when we complete upgrades. 

We also use this solution for the automation of responses to support tickets. Any tickets that come through that can be automated, rather than it being done manually. 

UiPath has improved the ease of building automations. We were using SeleniumBase testing which is a legacy application and required a lot of manual work to maintain it. 

UiPath has made a significant difference on our staff's workload capacity and freed up team members to take on new endeavors versus getting stuck with manual tasks. 

This solution has been most valuable for our support ticketing processes. This has created efficiencies within our team and freed up time for them to focus on project work. It has prevented the need for them to stop what they are doing to complete a mundane task and then get back to what they were doing. 

We previously built automation repositories before it was offered by UiPath. There's no smooth migration from what we built to the newer studio that they have at the moment. This is the biggest hurdle we are facing. We would also need to rebuild all previous automations built in another solution called SeleniumBase.

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

We experienced some performance issues because our libraries are growing and we experience crashes from time to time. This usually means we need to reboot. The stability could be improved in this regard. The ability to handle large-scale applications or multiple applications could be improved as our operations and libraries are going to continue to grow. Currently, our libraries need to be split and this creates more maintenance for us. 

We are satisfied with the scalability. We are aware of new features coming in the future and we will be able to adapt and expand our applications based on these new features. 

The technical support for this solution could be improved. They take longer to respond than I would expect. We would like a 24 to 48-hour SLA in place to manage expectations. 

I would rate their support a six out of ten. This is not due to their ability to resolve an issue. It is due to their lack of transparency and keeping us updated on how issues are being resolved. They are not good at communicating when we can expect our issue to be resolved. 

Neutral

We used SeleniumBase. We needed a solution with enhanced technical capabilities and this is why we switched to UiPath. UiPath offered us a lot in terms of functionality. 

I was a part of the implementation team in our organization where I made sure there were no roadblocks. I was working with UiPath's points of contact and they were coordinating and making sure the implementation happened as planned.

The initial setup was complex. It happened three years ago and we still have some questions about the setup. In order to get answers to these questions, we need to raise a support ticket. I feel like the knowledge of the support individuals could be elevated so we could receive answers right away. 

We implemented this solution in-house. 

We have not yet experienced ROI using this solution as we have only been using it for a year and a half. We don't have control over the domain to see the metrics and KPIs at the moment. We are hoping that once some of our core applications are in operation, we will be able to assess the ROI. 

UiPath has reduced our manual effort and improved the overall efficiency of our team. 

We considered Microsoft's Power Platform which does offer very similar functionality to UiPath including a Desktop AI Builder. However, this solution had limitations that UiPath does not. UiPath is focused on automation and offers a lot of support in this regard whereas Microsoft focuses on so many different areas. 

I would advise others to hang in there for the first six to eight months as the initial learning curve can be frustrating. Once you get a hang of it, you will clearly see the benefit of using this solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. Our test automations need to be improved for migration purposes and overall performance could be improved. If those two were resolved, I would give it a ten out of ten. 

We work with TMS, a technology-management resolution division. We use UiPath to read the PDF documents that we get. We manage a business service for TMS and as part of that business contract, we read the PDFs and enter that information. We get that information out via documents from the templates where we have to enter information related to that particular case. 

These are the use cases that we are currently working on, but we are also looking to use this for quality assurance of all the steps because this is a highly visible, very critical process for TMS. We have to make sure that everything is done on time and that all of the information is relevant and responsive. Quality assurance is a big deal for us, and we are looking to use UiPath quality checks at different stages in the process.

We are in the initial stages, so I can't really say that we have achieved a whole lot of efficiencies using UiPath yet. We hope to achieve a whole lot of efficiency when it comes to the documents. Right now it takes about 45 minutes to do this process manually, to read that entire form. It is going to be reduced to two minutes. That is a huge efficiency gain, and that is the value that it will add.

When it comes to the ease of building automations, UiPath offers many libraries for developers to use. It's fairly easy to code it. 

We definitely expect that it will save us costs and human error. There is a lot of critical information in these forms and there is a human error because we process huge volumes. Obviously, when a robot is doing it, that human error will be reduced to a minimum.

The hope is that employees will be able to allocate their time to different work.

We use the Academy. We are enrolled in the partner program, and we have used a lot of courses from the Academy. It keeps us up to date and up to speed with the solution. Although, our needs right now are very focused and limited because we are just starting. I'm sure as we grow and as we advance in our RPA journey, there will be enough documentation and courses for our needs. 

Most of our PDFs are scanned PDFs and the OCR does not always capture all the information correctly. That's why the document understanding feature will be good for us. 

We have been using UiPath for about four months now. 

We haven't seen any issues with stability. It's definitely been good.

We have used technical support when I had some issues installing the system. 

I am looking for ways to get the technical support we need faster. 

I think that the pricing for the basic attended robot Studio is great. I think that all of the new features that they are rolling out if they are reasonably priced, they'll be useful because for people like the ones working on our projects who are funded by the government, they have a cap on how much they can spend.

Keeping the price in a reasonable range would be beneficial, and it'll be more usable and more in reach for people.

We considered Blue Prism, but through our research, we chose UiPath because of what they've already achieved with CMS. We thought it would be the best solution. 

The UiPath website has a lot of information and the Academy offers a lot of courses. I heard from different people in different industries and markets that this is the best solution. It's worth a try. There is more work in the beginning when you are getting it set up. But there are a lot of benefits, and you don't have to wait months and months to see them. You can start seeing the benefits early on.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. 

We're mainly focused on finance for the time being so we've used UiPath for invoice processing and e-billing reconciliation. It makes sure that all of our converting information matches within our client databases. We've done a couple of solutions that track budget spend for certain clients, making sure that if the budget overruns or comes close to overrunning, then someone gets notified. If we get a new client or if a new legal case is opened, automation can make sure that all that information is then uploaded into our database. 

We've done a couple of smaller automations for the legal teams. These have been fairly basic ones though. There were a couple that download files from an email for them, and then rename them with the correct naming conventions, and saves them into correct drives. 

Another use case is to remove outdated users or information from our databases in line with the GDPR system.

In a general sense, UiPath has helped with data lineage, understanding where a process starts, who it rests with, and where it ends. It has made the process that we have automated a little bit more clear of which parts of the process are necessary, which are the parts that hold up the whole process, and which are the ones that are needlessly complicated.

For starters, it just helps give a bit more of an understanding of our processes once they're automated. Secondly, it's changed the way that we approach problems. We're tied into contracts that we might necessarily not want to be, but because we rely on the solution, we don't have a choice. Whereas, because UiPath is so versatile, we can use that to fill in gaps to take over processes, which otherwise in the past, we thought that only one specific tool could do for us. Now, we feel like we'd be less reliant on these specific tools to do a specific job. 

Third, a lot of teams are starting to understand that things can be automated. Whether it's in finance, HR, or even the legal teams, we started speaking to all the different teams and now they're bringing work to us and they're getting an understanding of things that do need to be done by a person and which don't. People aren't just doing work for the sake of it now. If they think there isn't a point to something and it can be automated, they bring it to us and we automate it. So, it's changed the way that we look at processes and don't just hardheadedly get someone to do it for no reason.

It checks our invoice stage for one of the processes that we do for e-billing. Previously, there wasn't anyone to check the financial data that we have in our systems against our clients and our recipients, and making sure that it all matches up. That process wasn't done at all so a month or two months later, a client would come back to us and say, "Hang on, you billed a strong amount or you've put our billing address wrong" which is obviously a little embarrassing. These things went completely unobserved for months. The client had to chase us, complain, and tell us we needed to fix it. Whereas now, it's more of a proactive approach rather than waiting for clients to come to us and tell us that we've done something wrong. We actually have the automation that can check and then validate those mistakes before they're even a problem and before they're spotted by anyone.

We're still in the early stages but we are starting to reach the point where UiPath is speeding up the cost of our digital transformation.

The digital transformation has made a couple of the lawyers' jobs easier by getting rid of the admin staff. It's freed up time and it makes things easier for everyone.

UiPath has definitely reduced our processing times as well. It really depends on the process but it has sped up. 

It has also decreased our error rates. At the moment we're looking to purchase an orchestration platform. At that point, we'll be able to collect more information about exact numbers and we'll actually have the analytics. 

The ability to use APIs within UiPath is really helpful. The web scraping is really great. It's so easy to use, it's very intuitive, and it's usually pretty consistent. When web pages change you need to update it, but it makes it quick. If you need to do another quick process, it's really easy to get it quickly and set something up. I can just scrape data from a website and save it somewhere.

The ease of building automation depends. UiPath makes things that are fairly simple but looks a little bit tricky in another language really easy. But if you're trying to do something really complicated, then sometimes it can be a little bit more tricky. It depends, sometimes it's really simple for fairly basic automations, I think it's fantastic. But when you want to try and get into the nitty-gritty and try and write your own code and then stick in there, it can sometimes be a bit difficult to use.

The documentation can be a little bit lacking. I think they improved it a little bit last month. Last time I checked, it seemed like they spent a bit of time trying to improve it. Sometimes some of the processes are nicely documented. UiPath offers training, which they provide on their website. They teach you how to use it, but for some processes, it just seems like the documentation isn't really there. It makes it a little bit difficult when you're using a specific process from the first time. 

If you're trying to invoke a method in UiPath, if you're trying to write a C# in there directly,  or if you need to do something which can't really be done in UiPath, but it can be done in C# or Python or something else, sometimes it's not that intuitive. It can be a little bit more complicated than it needs to be. I think that integration with other languages could be a little bit better.

We have been using UiPath permanently for around eight months, but we've been using it in-house for about a year before that.

UiPath itself is very stable because it interacts with so many different applications. I noticed in the past, at times, when using it with browsers, for example, using it with Google Chrome or Firefox, occasionally Chrome or Firefox will update and UiPath can take sometimes a week or two to update with it. For that week, you're able to use any solution that involves Google Chrome or Firefox, because it's waiting for that update. I've seen that happen with a couple of different applications, not as much recently. UiPath itself is very stable because it can interact with anything. If anything is updated and UiPath doesn't have time to update drivers to match that, sometimes you can get left a little bit stuck.

It's not really easy when you're using orchestrator to scale up and create a server, add a new bot, get a new license, and get it running. 

At the moment, it's just me using UiPath. I'm a developer and the architect for the solution as well. But we're planning to expand the team next year. 

We have a couple of processes that are running constantly, so I think we're using it as much as we can, and as much as our licenses allow. We're at a point now where we need an orchestrator to keep track and run everything at the same time. We're in the process now of purchasing that. I'll see where we're moving to, to expand quite far beyond that after we've got it. We're just at the point of ramping up.

I've sent a couple of requests to support when we needed licenses and when we changed to a different computer or a different user, and they got back to us really quickly and solved it within a day or so. I've been pretty happy with UiPath so far. I think every time I've sent a request to them, it's been resolved pretty quickly, and even if they couldn't resolve it super quick, the response times are usually within 24 hours or so, which is really good. I can't remember a time where we've been stuck in the dark with them.

I've used Automation Anywhere, but I haven't really used it within my work.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I implemented UiPath for a couple of years before I came to my current company. It was quite easy, but even the first time it's always been quite easy and quite simple to implement.

The initial setup only took a couple of days to get it all installed properly and cleared with IT. In terms of getting the first process up and running, it took about a week or two because we already had a couple of processes that were available. That's just a case of tweaking them, making sure they're all okay, and then just getting them set up and getting more packaged up.

Our initial strategy was mainly to focus on finance and to try and reduce the outsourced headcount with a couple of the finance teams. We outsource a lot of our work to a couple of other companies and we want to reduce the cost of that, so I automate it in-house. Our other strategy was to try and free up as much time for our lawyers as possible to make sure they weren't bogged down with work. It gives them more time to focus on the clients and work up better relationships with them.

We're still looking at the process that we've automated and seeing how much time and money we're saving with this crisis, but we don't have that information at the moment.

The pricing is pretty fair. Sometimes the pricing can be a little bit strange. There are different prices if it's for a specific user, a specific PC or if it's an attended bot or unattended bot. The price can be quite different, but I think when you talk to UiPath or when you look at the pricing sheets, there's not always a justification of why a certain license is more expensive than another. 

Licenses are more expensive than another but I wonder why there's such a big difference, why attended is four times more expensive, and that sort of thing. In terms of the orchestrator, I think it was a bit too much. It used to cost about 20,000 pounds a year. Now, they are ramping up costs. If you get an orchestrator but with just a few blocks, it's cheaper and then you can add up more parts to the orchestrator. So the cost goes up, which I think is better.

Definitely to try and get as many teams involved as possible to open up the conversation about RPA within the business. It works best when you've got lots of teams who have an understanding of RPA and how it works. They can come to you with their potential projects and you can filter through them and see which ones are going to be the most helpful.

It's hard if no one else in the business really knows RPA or how it works, or if there's a bit of a wall there. It's important to introduce RPA to as many different teams as possible and to encourage people to get involved, think about the processes that they do in it, and try to identify what can be helpful.

It's important to keep RPA close to the applications and the IT teams because if you're using RPA or UiPath you're going to need to be able to be speaking to your team who need permissions or admin privileges, or you need apps to be updated. It's important if you're going to put it in, have it as close to apps and development as possible.

It's a case of understanding that it's not a case of trying to get everything automated that you possibly can. The goal shouldn't just be to automate everything. If you've got a process and you can do 99% of it automated but you can't automate the last 1%, you can but it's going to be really fairly inefficient. Understand that it's fine for a process to have some bits that are automated, some of which are done by a person. The hybrid workforce, rather than going into the strategy of just automating everything is ideal. I've learned that trying to find that balance and getting that communication between the two is good.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. 

I work in finance functions, so typically implementing it within our finance accounting hub that we have out in Manila when most of our processes are stabilized and globalized experts. So, it's a very good fit to have our processes automated out in Manila.

We are in the early stages of implementing our robots, but at this stage, you already see things like our customer satisfaction, so we're supporting your finest teams, so they are already getting benefiting it, and very much tedious tasks that sitting with the team, they're actually find they don't need to do the tedious tasks. 

Funny enough, that out in the Philippines, they are actually welcoming robotics because it creates capacity for them in order to bring more work into our accounting hub, so that would be where I can see a real benefit in our organization already. 

I think we very much focus on traditional development opportunities, so API to API connectivity and those type of things are very much the way that we're doing things. We have development teams out around the world that develop, and I specifically work with financial functions and develop our finance systems, typically more of a traditional development focus rather than using robotics opportunities, but we are starting to see robotics becoming a bit more prominent. People are more interested in it, and people are starting to engage a bit more with the robotic side of things. I think the benefit of using robots is actually becoming a bit more visible within the organization.

We are making use of attended bots. Unattended bots are of course a huge benefit. I can see the future if I use the 80/20 rule; I can see probably 80% of our bots will be unattended when we will implement 20% into attended bots for our organization at the moment. I don't know how that will look like if we say everybody in organization using bots, then of course attended bots will become very prominent, but where we are right now, I can see unattended bots will become very attractive for us right now, so probably seeing the bigger opportunities at the moment, and those big opportunities, unattended bots will be well suited for.

It is difficult to get your head around attended and unattended bots, but once you get to understand the differences, I think yeah. I can see benefits and pros and cons on both sides, but typically where we are now, we use attended bots. I can see us moving with our big opportunities into unattended bots, and where the future takes, I don't know. I'll let you know then.

I think it's the ease of use for the developer, so we can actually make use of people within subject matter experts rather than having fully fledged developers, so that's one of the main features. And, I think, based on that, it is actually the speed in which we can deliver some of these automations, so the delivery and the build of the box is actually much quicker than your conventional development, so those will be my two top points at this stage.

We've created a bot within our collections team. We are doing a reconciliation, and since implementing the bot, which was at the beginning of this year, we hadn't needed any changes onto the bot. 

Scalability very much so, so exactly that reconciliation bot we were able to apply to different reconciliations within our collections team, and they fall. Yes, it's very much scalable as well, so we are running four different bots at this stage for our collections reconciliation process.

I think we will probably make use of the community more, so asking questions within the community forum. I've not really had to engage with technical support directly apart from our sales person that we could ask questions from, etc., but generally, the technical questions are more posted onto the discussion forum and answers being given and taken from there.

Our proof of concept was done using PwC, and they've helped us build our proof of concept. The reason for that is they've delivered a piece of work where we wanted to see whether this has already been delivering a piece of work where this really fell into, so we engage with them often to help us deliver a proof of concept, and that was very successful, and of course that helped us roll up more into the business and taking a little bit more on internally rather than continuous support from PwC.

Coming from a person that doesn't' know much of robotics or anything of that, as it's a new technology. I think it was quite difficult to get your head around that first. Setting it up, installing the software's very easy on occasion, but getting a grasp and understanding of the difference between the studio and the difference between the robots in that regard was quite difficult to get your head around not only for us who's been setting up the center of excellence but also for explaining to the business the different components and then just understanding what the different components does, and I think it's maybe more around terminology. We're building a bot that's running on a bot, but the building of the bot is in studio.

It's a very easy concept, but it makes it difficult for the business to understand what you're talking about and what we're working in and what actually runs the bot and those type of things.

We are starting to see a return on investment. I won't be able to answer that right now, probably only be able to answer once I start analyzing it, but we are starting to see a return on investment. I think it will probably take a good few months before I can analyze how well we're doing. I think fairly soon we see a return on investment.

Does it fit in with the business, what they expect? I don't know. That's a given that the solution absolutely does, so if I come back to our original example of the reconciliation bot within our collections area. I think there's almost 100% human errors reduced. The bot doesn't make any errors, so we've seen it running smoothly for the last since the beginning of the year, so last nine, 10, 11 months.

Citrix environments are quite difficult. It takes more time to develop the bot itself. Accuracy's maybe a bit of an issue there, so from a Citrix type of environment, I'd probably try to avoid it from my side, but it's just because I don't like to work with the images. I'd rather work directly within hotkeys or whatever.

I think I would rate the product probably at about an eight, which is coming down to the usability. It's really easy to use. It is easy to implement and roll out getting people involved. I think there is drawbacks in terms of the understanding of where the process is, so it's maybe on our side, understanding the process and which processes are suitable for the bot and what the bot will be able to do then with those. I think taking a subject matter expert and giving them the expertise to build bots limits your ability to understand the full capacity of the product. I think there's a lot of things changing within the product very quickly and to keep up with all of the enhancements that you're making makes it a little bit difficult, but over all, it is very good, and if you apply correctly to your processes, you will definitely seen an improvement in your process and return on your investment.

UiPath is used to automate processes, eliminating the need to increase headcount.

There was an increase in both quality and quantity while not having to increase admin simultaneously. We have successfully automated the majority of our automation projects.

The UiPath automation has helped us to keep our bottom lines down across the board.

UiPath has helped our organization with its environmental and social initiatives.

It has freed staff time for other tasks, improved their work quality, and saved hundreds of hours per month.

UiPath is the best automation solution available today. The process and task management are the most valuable features.

UiPath's Unassisted Task Mining has room for improvement.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

UiPath's stability is reliable, especially now that we've moved to the cloud.

UiPath scales well. We have not had any issues.

UiPath support has been responsive to us.

Positive

UiPath has successfully met our expectations by reducing project costs through automation, demonstrating a strong return on investment.

I would rate UiPath ten out of ten.

I have used UiPath in my last three companies.