UiPath Reviews

Our primary use cases are for invoice processing and some legal intake use cases.

The benefits we see from UiPath are always time savings. I've never seen another benefit. It's always that people don't have to do manual tasks anymore.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease UiPath's total cost of ownership, by taking care of things such as infrastructure, maintenance, and updates, if security isn't a big issue. 

With the cloud offering, you don't have as much control of where the data is and how it's protected versus the on-prem. If you're dealing with very sensitive information, you could introduce a compliance risk if you're using the cloud offering. But with the customers that we partner UiPath with, that's not an issue, so we use the cloud offering.

The screen automation features are the most valuable. There are some things, in an automation process that is complicated, that UiPath isn't very good at. And there are some things that are very repetitive and UiPath is good with it. For those repetitive aspects, it's obvious why it's valuable. It's replacing the amount of time that a human being would have to spend doing it.

We have seen that our clients have freed up time for their employees.

Our clients utilize AI functionality from UiPath. UiPath is really good at simple repetitive processes, but not as much at complex processes. The more complicated it gets, it breaks down because if it's less repetitive, it's less automatable.

AI functionality enabled our clients to automate more processes overall. It helped with end-to-end automation in the way that if you automate more processes, you save more time, and save more money for the company.

It is not very easy to build on automations. That's a problem with UiPath. I don't think it's very easy to build automation on top of it. 

Accessibility needs improvement. It would be easier to build on UiPath if they would have more employee-level users as opposed to consultants. Then that would increase the value of the product and the platform.

I have been using UiPath for two years. 

The stability is good. 

It's very scalable in our organization. The hardest thing is getting in and getting someone to build their first five automations and their first five robots in the first place. After that, it's very hard to rip out. Once you've already automated something and you've done all the in-depth work to set it up, it's pretty sticky.

There are around ten users and they're almost all solutions architects.

We've used Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, but I think UiPath is the market leader right now.

Even though UiPath is hard to use, it's easier to use than Blue Prism. And it has more features than Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup is never straightforward. There are always bugs. It doesn't matter if it's UiPath or any other company, it's always complex. It's never easy the first time.

The implementation takes around three months. 

Ideally you don't want to take someone's job, but if you free up the time that someone was spending doing something, you don't have to pay them to do that anymore, or you can reinvest their time somewhere else.

It's expensive, but it saves a lot of money too.

My advice to someone implementing UiPath would be to hire someone technical to do it. It's not as easy to use as they say it is.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. To get it to a perfect ten, it would need to be easier to use. 

Our primary use of this solution, as a company, was to eliminate or at least simplify and reduce the number of boring, repetitive administrative tasks that take our precious time.

We are a business consulting company and lots of clients try to contact us on multiple channels that we are available on. Our company, in partnership with UiPath, implemented an unattended robot that saves our time and energy. We call it our colleague that works independently, full time and helps us without requiring emotional support.

As employees, we no longer have to waste a significant period of time each day by copying data from one part to another. Instead of that, we can focus on more important things like customer satisfaction, consulting our partners, delivering business plans, etc.

This product improved our employee satisfaction rate, improved the sales department performance in general, and created a gap in the marketing department that can be covered by more complex projects like website updates, social networking with customers, etc.

I found the UiPath Academy very valuable and it has helped us to understand the product we are working with. I attended the course and I am about to complete more courses so that I can benefit from this brilliant opportunity. It is free for everyone who is interested.

UiPath Community Forum and UI Connect are free and can be accessed by anyone as well. There, I could find all of the information that I needed. The most interesting part was accessing UiPath Studio, where you can try to improve your technical skills and try building a robot.

The platform that shows the reports and errors is not too transparent. I experienced it at my workplace when showing the reports, where the platform looks unfriendly and it is not very transparent, especially compared to the other features of the product.

The monitoring period should be shortened as soon as possible, as most companies won't have one to two months available to implement and test the RPA. People want results instantly when talking about an investment.

I would also like fewer errors, please.

I have been using UiPath for between four and five months in the company I work for.

Technical support has been responsive and helpful. 

This is my first experience with RPA software.

The initial setup was as transparent as it could be.

We implemented through a vendor team and they were pure experts.

This solution is worth the investment.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing UiPath.

My primary use case of this solution was to automate BMC Remedy and SAP use cases. I used UiPath to automate various tasks in SAP. I developed several bots in client virtual machines using UiPath and then connected the virtual machine to the UiPath Orchestrator. Once connected, I scheduled the Bot.

The manual effort of employees for repetitive tasks has been tremendously reduced and thereby the employees are concentrating on different fields. Furthermore, human error is completely wiped out because of the Bots. The tasks that used to take a lot of time to get finished by humans are now accomplished in a short span of time by the Bots.

I found the Library option as most valuable because first, we can avoid the development of the same task again by developing and publishing a task as an activity into the Orchestrator, and second, in case of any changes required, the developer can make the required changes and republish in the Orchestrator with the new version. At this point, others can download that task as an activity and can use it with their Bots.

Apart from the library, I like the API activities and the activities which we can call Python scripts from.

The area that must improve is while releasing a new version, it must be capable of running the bots developed in the older version.

It would be nice if we can develop an intelligent bot that can make the right decisions.

Please include the option to select the time zone while scheduling the Bot in orchestrator.

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

One of the main use cases is stringing together different applications, like a financial system to a database for data manipulation or data extraction. Then, all sorts of little things are added onto that from a process prospective.

From a process perspective, every single implementation that we have done has saved time: Anywhere from 50 to 90 percent of eliminating the process time. There was an example where there was an analyst who was doing a manual comparison process of a bunch of different systems. The use case was that the bot just goes and checks a bunch of systems, then compares everything. They only have to manage the exception, but it almost entirely eliminated the time capacity.

There are pre-built activities, which let you build stuff quickly. It is a functionality where you can record, as a baseline, what a process looks like. Then, you can iterate off of that to build the bot and make it more stable. That is pretty nice because it saves you time.

It also lets you display something very quickly, so you can see exactly how it's going to work.

The product has met expectations in terms of ease of use. There is a lot of stuff going on underneath. In the Studio view, there is a right-hand side where there is a lot of configurable components of activities which are built. Some of those are exposed, and some are not. From a stability standpoint, it would be interesting if more of that was power user available.

Some of the documentation that UiPath has around the technical specifications, from a security perspective, are very factual and comprehensive, but they don't have an audience, like CIOs who need to approve this solution. Therefore, the documentation is one area where I might smooth the process out a bit, since the audience is different from the way the documentation is written as technical specifications.

In a Citrix environment, you can't directly connect to a lot of the applications that you can on a desktop environment, or in a server environment, where it is not a virtual machine and going through a pipe. However, that's just a technical restriction.

I would like it if UiPath could watch someone do a process, then builds the bot, but not in a recorder fashion. I want it to watch someone during their day and observe the processes that they do, then provide an informed assessment of what parts of that could be automated. This is because some people do stuff that they don't even realize could be automated, like an interpretation of people's tasks. Technically, that would be hard to do, but it would make a killer application. This make it a product to install on every single person's computer at a desktop level, or every environment, wherever the process is taking place.

There is some learning curve to using even the initial capabilities. While there are a lot of great tools to help you get up to speed and learn how to do it, I almost think there are two types of tracks which are only being addressed by a single product: 

1. People who are technical and know the stuff which going on behind the scenes. When they use it, they want to have more access and more ways that they can tweak it. 
2. People who have no coding experience, or low coding experience. In this case, it's great, but slightly limited, in terms of the activities which are pre-built and those are very extensive.
   

It would be nice to have a medium between the two or power user concepts, where you can open up all of the back-end. I do know you can do this in UiPath to access the code and take advantage of APIs, when you get into some of the really complex implementations beyond just send an emails and copying and pasting data from one thing to the other, which takes up a lot of people's time. There are additional things behind the scenes that would be great to have access to with UiPath.

It seems very stable. Like in a desktop environment, I can't think of any issues.

For scalability, it requires additional skews to orchestrate everything. While it is an area where I've had less experience, that is the key component to making it scale.

Automation technology at our customers' companies is in its early phases. They are beyond the pilot, but not at scale, which is pretty common.

A lot of the agencies that we work with, where they are doing a pilot, do one-offs and growing exponentially (one to two to three bots). They just keep using it, then reinvesting it. The bot process is pretty quick: We are doing sprints for them in six to 12 weeks, and they are done. 

As a partner, we have a lot of great people at UiPath who we can call and ask about things. 

They've been helpful with understanding what the timeline is for new stuff, like integration and new activity sets. 

From a partnership perspective, like in delivery, they've been really helpful.

Having a free Community Edition makes a difference. As long as you can get it installed, then there is no barrier to playing around with it and seeing what it can do.

The simplicity or complexity of the installation depends on the environment and the CIO's willingness to install it, especially in the Federal space.

It takes no more than six months to get to an ROI that is at least recouping the costs. Time and again, we are just seeing those cost savings get rolled back into doing the next project. It's like a self-funding, revolving process.

UiPath help our customers to eliminate human errors.

I would like to have transparency in pricing. We're creating more functional robotic process automation use cases all over the place. I'm never really clear on what the pricing model is, the skews, and how much of an investment can be made in letting new agencies do any of the following:

• Start to do pilots versus proofs of concept.
• Pricing per bot in production versus Orchestrator costs. 
• Fixed cost versus licensing cost per user. 
• Have access to Studio.

Our customer also evaluate Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

It is a really slick product. Just play around with it. It's doable for all skill levels.

The UiPath Academy RPA training is good and easy to use. There is a lot of content there in terms of going from a very basic understanding to being able to do developments. It was one of the first RPA training courses, from anywhere, that I took. I thought it was really good. I has a lot of use cases to practice on.

We are primarily utilizing the platform within our department to gain buy-in for the customer's system.

We are a traditional development team, and using this platform has enabled us to work with multiple teams efficiently.

The governance aspect is very important to us. UFS Studio is also crucial for our operations.

There are significant delays between the technical team and the actual team. We are also missing some integrations with Google.

I cannot specify the exact amount of time we've been using it.

We have a dedicated development team. That said, we do have the resources to help with implementation.

I cannot speak on how it compares to other models or other components.

We primarily use UiPath for RCM and it can handle most tasks effectively, especially when dealing with data extraction from PDF files. There might be more complex scenarios where AI could be more suitable, although the implementation might be challenging. We are in the process of evaluating these AI-powered use cases.

We have found UiPath to be quite valuable as we actively deploy and use bots, which have become a significant asset to our operations. 

We were able to achieve the savings. It has freed up around ten thousand hours of time and resources for other tasks.

Improving financial and recording operations through the use of charts would be advantageous.

I have been using UiPath for approximately two years.

The stability is excellent.

Scalability is impressive, and it only requires the appropriate licensing.

The support is quite commendable, and they are very prompt in addressing issues. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward.

ROI is significant when the use case results in substantial cost savings, but it's important to note that not all use cases deliver such hard savings.

The cost is on the higher side.

My recommendation is to thoroughly assess use cases and choose the right tools to prevent possible setbacks. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

I'm a consultant. Right now, I work on supply chain coordination. I have also used UiPath for finances, for building reports for engineering, and for human resources departments.

The solution is on-premises, but we are migrating to the cloud.

The solution helps a lot when we are dealing with big companies where governance is a must. We can have multiple centers of excellence at different places in the company. UiPath is easy to deploy and easy to manage for such companies as we can centralize a lot of things in one place.

For example, with Orchestrator not only can we monitor all the bots and processes, but it helps in the development phase as well. If we want to have custom libraries that solve specific problems for the company, we can create those custom libraries and share them throughout the organization. This helps a lot when it comes to governance, compared to other automation solutions.

I created a project based on attended automation and it was successful in helping the user. It was a bot to create engineering reports and the user was able to implement it on a daily basis. I have a positive view of attended automations. Having said that, unattended bots are preferable because we want most of the processes to be automated, end-to-end, and not require the user to start them. We use attended robots only when there is no other solution. So attended bots are not as relevant as unattended robots, in my experience.

In addition, because the user did not need to create that report anymore, he could focus on more analytical thinking. That is something that I always say when starting an RPA project. Users become freer to do analytical thinking and not robotic thinking where they just click here and there and move some Excel files. I would estimate it saved them five to eight hours a week.

In a lot of the projects I have worked on, reducing human error was one of the priorities for the automation. When working with human resources, for example, reports could go wrong if the user did not create them properly. This could cause the company to have to pay fees. Automating those reports reduced the risk to zero and helped with compliance.

UiPath also reduces the overall costs of automation operations. Although it's more expensive as a solution when compared to other vendors, because it's a very consistent application and there is really good support from the UiPath team, it is the fastest when it comes to developing and deploying automation. It is surely the most reliable in the long term. That's where UiPath is at the top.

The best feature, for sure, is the ease of development. It's very easy to create an automation from scratch. Time to production is really fast when everything is already set up and we have a clear view of what needs to be done. UiPath has a more friendly development environment compared to other vendors of RPA.

And the Task Capture feature helps implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis. Task Capture helps us map a business process from start, and it can generate code in UiPath's Studio development platform. If you use it correctly, it definitely helps.

And with Orchestrator, we can keep watch over all the executions and also create easy integrations with BI tools like Power BI and Tableau, if I need some extra analysis on the data that is being processed. Orchestrator provides everything that I need for monitoring.

Although they add a lot of enhancements every month to the solution in general, they could focus more on UiPath Studio. I would like to see them add more features for developers who have a deeper understanding of programming languages. 

They could also make it easier to integrate custom-made functions.

One of the downsides of Automation Cloud, and this is more an issue related to the Community version, is that they always place the newest features on the Community version. I have experienced some issues when implementing automations on that version because things can change from one day to another. Some of these changes can impact automations that were running. But when it comes to the Enterprise version, things are very stable. They will never change things like that from one day to the next.

I've been using UiPath for about three years.

It's pretty stable. I have never gotten errors on the connection between the bots, Orchestrator, and Studio. 

The errors I have found are generally related to the network or to a virtual machine with fewer resources than the minimum requirements. 

The overall execution of the automations is pretty fast, even when dealing with high volumes of data from Excel files, compared to VBA or another scripting tool.

I have opened tickets with UiPath and they have helped me a lot in solving the issues. I have never had major issues with support. If I need to open an urgent ticket, I get a response on the same day. They call me to solve the issue together with them, if needed.

It's also really good that UiPath has a strong community. They started the idea of sharing new features and engaging the community. That has definitely helped UiPath to be on the list of the top vendors. There were times when I reached out to the community and they were very fast in helping me solve a question or get through an error. The community, for me, is one of the differences when compared to other RPA vendors.

Positive

I have not worked with other solutions at an enterprise level. I have looked at them just to understand how they work and to see if they could serve my purposes better than UiPath.

The on-premises setup takes some time because we have to implement Orchestrator among other things. Generally, it's very fast. Sometimes there are issues, things like application and environment access, but they're usually more related to the customer that I'm working with. Overall, if everything is good to go, installation and configuration can be done in a day.

I worked with a national company on an on-premises solution and it took four hours to install Orchestrator, and one to two hours more to implement UiPath Studio and the UiPath robot. It was really straightforward with no configuration errors. Using the right versions of Windows Server and the virtual machines, the ones that UiPath recommends, helps everything go smoothly.

When working with a customer that is just starting to use RPA, I usually pick all the recommendations for installation and configuration from the UiPath vendor website. I then add some extra tips on configuring the Windows Server and ask the customer to provide the environments. That gives me access to everything that I need. 

There can always be additional details to deal with, but they are usually errors to do with infrastructure, permissions, or proxy configuration on the customer's side. These are usually things that they did not mention, and then we have to reconfigure things. But if I don't know how to handle them I can usually find a UiPath tutorial where they teach you how. UiPath always provides the knowledge that I need to implement the solution.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation. When dealing with a customer's first RPA implementation, and they are comparing UiPath with other vendors, the downside of UiPath is always the price because it's the most expensive platform. However, it is the fastest and most reliable. The community is great. The support is great. So it definitely speeds up the digital transformation process a lot.

When customers are comparing tools, we focus on the strong points of UiPath. For example, it's the least expensive over the long term because it's very reliable, and we are not going to spend too much time on the development. The development is always faster when compared to other tools.

If customers are only looking at the initial price for implementing RPA, they may go with other vendors. I have seen this happen a couple of times. When this is the case we will usually want to use the least expensive license possible from UiPath. For example, when a company has only one unattended robot, they will try to put multiple processes on the same robot before jumping to buy another robot and expanding the overall architecture.

Some things can be done with open-source tools, but they lack governance when implementing automation on a large scale. When we talk about scaling the solution, a solution like UiPath is the clearest choice.

Free automation tools are not going to be as easy to deploy and scale as UiPath.

When we are developing RPA projects for digital transformation, we want to provide a solution that is reliable and fast. UiPath helps on both of those counts. It enables us to implement automation in a fast, secure, and reliable way.

I have worked on some projects with UiPath Automation Cloud, but mostly using the same tools as usual. I didn't take too much advantage of what the cloud provides, compared to other projects, but it's easier to manage if a company needs to start from scratch. With Automation Cloud you don't have as much to maintain, such as handling an on-premises server. It also definitely helps for keeping things updated.

With everything centralized on Automation Cloud, it's very easy when it comes to a higher level of governance. For example, if I want to manage the licensing between Orchestrators, and create different tenants and manage the access between those tenants, that is all very easy to do. UiPath gives you a very clean interface.

A SaaS solution helps a lot when working on projects for many of our customers because they do not have any RPA infrastructure. They are often starting their first project and a SaaS solution has everything centralized. They can just buy one license for attended or unattended robots and start from there. It's great for the customers because they only need to worry about a virtual machine in their environment. We create a minimum viable product more efficiently because we don't have to worry about the configuration of their own Orchestrator and the like.

Also, when they want to scale, Automation Cloud will be much easier.

I keep myself updated on the news from UiPath and they are starting to implement serverless robots on the cloud. I don't know if this is already available in the Enterprise version, but when it comes out, companies do want to implement it because they won't even need to worry about an on-premises virtual machine. Everything will be in the cloud.

I started my learning about UiPath from the Academy. It's very good and very insightful, and the questions and exercises are everything that you need to learn how to automate using UiPath Studio or any other tool.

The Academy is a must for starting with RPA using UiPath. There are some other courses online in other learning platforms, but UiPath already provides everything that you need to start an RPA career. Not only can you learn the developer's role, but also the role of a business analyst and solution architect. It gives you an understanding of all the steps involved in creating and managing automations.

The certification is also very important. At the time I did the certification, it was free. It's very valuable for someone starting out who wants to get an RPA job.

I work at a financial firm where we do trade settlement activity. We are using UiPath for cleaning up data, doing reconciliation, and finding where the trade breaks and trade files are. It helps us lay the groundwork for the value add work, which comes later.

It allows us to grow our business. The use case that we have is a huge time saver because we do not have a lot of volume right now. We are looking to sell part of the business and get more clients onto it. The only way we could do that or even open that door for possibility is to automate and go through a lot more volume. 

Our teams are under huge pressure because trade volume has gone up over the past year. UiPath is just getting us back to the status quo and then also opening the pipeline for more volume to go through. We have a very strong program that encourages people to get trained up on tools. 

StudioX is going to be a big game changer for us. We found with the other tools that we use that as soon as we put UiPath in the hands of everyday users and ops users, they will be able to quickly learn it. This will make a big impact because we will get big volumes and projects coming through.

UiPath has done a good job coming up with the broadest use cases. However, I would like to see them dive into more industry-specific use cases. For example, checked OCR and brokerage statements are common. Anything unique to the financial industry would be useful for us.

We have using UiPath since February when it got brought into our team. We just had our first box go live about two weeks ago. We have had three go live so far; one using StudioX and two using Studio.

So far, I haven't heard any issues. We are always going to expect issues, but so far so good and I hope the stability is good. Alteryx had issues at times, which created some pretty big problems. Hopefully, UiPath will not do that as much, because we are expecting to lean on it.

I have not used them directly. 

It was not so much a switch for us. We are still using Alteryx. UiPath is a much better automation tool than what we were using before because it was self-service. We didn't have to have our COE build it and related solutions for us. We have similar functionality with Alteryx. Anyone can learn it and start building and go through our governance process. Doing so, they can have a huge impact on their team.

We are a large company and the initial setup took our COE quite a few months. However, I believe their experience was positive overall. A lot of the issues we had were internal and concerned how we were going to do our governance. We were very strict about that. 

Getting people access was easy and so was learning to build. Everything on the UiPath side went smoothly.

We're a mature automation team. Over the past four years, we've delivered well over 150 FTE. We're always looking for new tools and to pick up some of that automation that we couldn't do before. 

UiPath has helped with data scraping and plugging into websites and combining that with Alteryx. We can attack 90% of our use cases now. We can not deal with the other 10% for internal governance reasons and not so much capability.

The three use cases we have implemented with UiPath have saved about half an FTE. 

I know that the reason we went with UiPath is because it is a lot cheaper than the other vendor we were using. It is of a better quality as well, but it is less expensive to run on an ongoing basis. 

I'm not sure if we evaluated other options. My team does not look into the suite of options. We have a separate COE that sets everything up for us. We are tasked with implementation. 

My advice is to first build a good team that you can trust. Because great tools are useless if you don't have any builders or people that know how to use the tools. That is what we have been focused on. Also, have very specific support for your team.