UiPath Reviews

We are accountants and consultants and there are many mundane processes in auditing. Using RPA to automate not only allows us to be more precise, but we can also audit a larger population of material. We get accuracy and speed, and those are our main goals.

We have been able to do our work in a more timely fashion, more accurately, and it opens up other paths of customer use cases which will enable us to expand our business as well. 

In terms of performance benefits, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

• The OCR capabilities, to take somewhat structured data and put them into more structured data so that we can do our analysis.
• Screen scraping.
• The overall process of integrating it with other applications that we use in our analysis.
• It has also exceeded our expectations in the fact that it's a lot quicker to implement than we thought it would be.

It's easy to use but I think it will be a lot easier as it continues to develop. Right now, we do need some development capabilities, to understand certain computer languages, to put in the bots. They're on the right roadmap to make this even easier to engage so that anyone, even people without programming language experience, will be able to use it.

I would like them to continue to build and make Studio easier to use for non-technical people.

Looking at it as a marketplace, I think it's very stable.

We have used their customer support. It has been good for us, although it hasn't been perfect because they're growing so fast that there are a lot of new employees coming on board. That's a challenge to manage for any company. Certainly, the online tools, the Academy training, allow for a nice implementation. It's more an issue when it comes to getting in touch with someone, where we need something customized and we have questions.

I have used UiPath RPA Academy training. It's been great. I think it is developing as well. They continue to add training, change and modify some of it, which is great. You can feel that it is evolving.

With most of our clients, generally, it's humans who are doing manual, mundane tasks - what I refer to as the "low-hanging fruit" side of it. They see right away, when we take their current process that they're doing, how the automation can handle it and be more accurate than what the human employee is doing right now.

The important criteria for our clients in selecting an RPA solution are price, that is always one, but also accuracy and security are factors they're most interested in.

I was involved in the initial set up of UiPath in my company. On a relative basis, it's straightforward. There are certainly some complexities to it, but it is definitely less complex than I expected it to be.

Our clients have seen considerable ROI from using UiPath. Once our customers get their heads around it, and then we implement it, they see the benefits of using it straight away.

Scalability is there. There are so many use cases, certainly for our company. There are many opportunities. We're essentially automating what I would consider to be the low-hanging fruit, and there are so many things to build on top of that, as we get that foundation.

UiPath absolutely is capable of scaling.

Usually, it's Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

One of the main reasons that clients go with UiPath is the Academy, where they can get free training, where they can send their internal people to get the training. Having access to it and learning about it is a big hurdle a lot of times. Having access to the learning is a great thing.

I think it's the best RPA solution that I've looked at and I would suggest that you take a hard look. It's easy to start working with it. You can get it stood up pretty quickly and you're going to reap benefits right away.

This is a fast-growing industry, so staying on top of, and executing, plans is important. So far, from what I've heard regarding the roadmap, UiPath is certainly on their way to doing that.

Right now, we're in an interesting spot where a discussion point is how much our customer will own of what we sell to them. We're developing bots right now. The infrastructure, in our use case, typically, is owned by the customer. For us, it's about educating our customers on what we can help them with in terms of infrastructure: We can run it ourselves or they can own it. A lot of our customers want to own that infrastructure.

I think of all of the things it can do - the integration with different applications, solving what are important problems, and saving many labor hours for those who are using it  - and they are the main reasons I rate it a nine out of ten. The only reason it's not a ten is it's not totally done by someone that doesn't know technology and programing. I think they'll get there but you still need some skill sets in your organization.

My primary use case is mainframe automation from legacy mainframes that previously hadn't been automated with other automation tools. The product worked like a dream with the mainframe automation.

We're trying to get rid of the boring, mundane tasks that people do every day so that they can spend more time doing more important things like figuring out why there are issues happening rather than just putting a Band-Aid on.

In our first year of jumping into it, we set up the infrastructure and everything, so it's been less of a year of development, but we have saved a hundred thousand hours.

The automation efficiency depends on what the job at hand is and how much it saves. But some of the tasks done constantly throughout the day, even if it's only saving five minutes, add up really fast. 

We use Task Capture all the time. We have a bank business analyst who uses it and teaches people how to use it. We're constantly getting process definition documents to review and add to our pipeline.  

Studio itself has all its great features and is easy to use. 

There are bugs here and there. My only complaint is that each time we open a new ticket, we get someone new and have to explain how everything is set up all over again. 

It would be nice if they had that somewhere on record for support.

I have been using UiPath for two years. 

It is a stable solution; everything seems to be running pretty smoothly altogether. The biggest issues are not on the UiPath end, but on our company's end like, network issues and issues like that keep popping up every now and then.

The support's been pretty decent. We have a TAM, so we have someone we are constantly in contact with.

We meet with them weekly, and they're very helpful. If we do have to open up a support ticket, there's a bigger issue that they can't help with. They usually help get the ball rolling.

Support has been pretty helpful. Like any other support though, they ask all the basic questions in the beginning just to figure out what has or hasn't been done.

My only complaint is that each time we open a new ticket, we get someone new, and we have to explain how everything is set up all over again. So it would be nice if they had that somewhere on record.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. There's plenty of documentation that is easy to follow. 

The hardest part was more on our company's network and infrastructure, trying to navigate all the hoops that we have to go through just to make sure it's secure and the network's secure. Getting access to what we need to get access to.

We're still kind of new to things and working on migrating to the cloud. We're one small team in the organization. By moving to the cloud, we're hoping we can onboard more and more teams to be able to use it and spread it throughout the company.

UiPath helped us along the way. 

There are other automation tools that the company uses, but they can't do everything that UiPath can. All of the potential automations just kept being pushed to the side until we started using it.

We used Microsoft Automate for a very short time. We started looking into it for some tasks. The issue is that we're trying to automate it deep inside our corporate network, so, we haven't really been able to use Power Automate.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. The amount we could do in one year is pretty impressive. 

We use it for unattended automation. Most of it is centered around finance for various reporting purposes. We also use this solution to move data between systems.

The biggest improvement is giving people time back in their day. We're still not where we'd like to be with our automation journey, so we don't have the time savings that we would like at the moment. However, we are continuing on that journey and helping to free up users and allowing them to work on things they want to work on.

The Excel integration is definitely good. We use that a lot because our finance department uses Excel. Overall, I really like Studio and unattended automation. Automation Cloud is very good as well. The platform as a whole has been good for us.

I like the UiPath user community, and the forums are really good. Most of the time, I can find answers there to any issues I'm having. The UiPath forums are very active, and I like seeing the employees in there as well.

We onboard any new developers that we have for RPA using UiPath Academy. It reduces the amount of training time in which the RPA team is involved because the Academy courses can take care of a lot of the fundamentals on UiPath.

Integration is an area for improvement. I still encounter issues with it, like getting errors when I try to use a connection.

We've been using it since 2019.

I have no complaints regarding the stability of UiPath. We have never had any issues with regressions or weird bugs.

We're still in the early stage of our journey with UiPath. Right now, we have six unattended robots and about 25 processes running on those, which is not at a scale where we might see issues. However, I have no complaints with regard to scalability so far.  Also, achieving the scalability we may need seems pretty straightforward.

UiPath's technical support is on par with that of other companies. We seem to spend a lot of time sending logs back and forth, and because of that, I would give technical support a rating of seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was not too bad. We started in the finance units since they were the ones pushing for RPA, and they've been our biggest internal customers so far.

We worked with our reseller who guided us through the entire setup. They did a few automations for us until we had that practice in-house.

In terms of ROI, we are saving more than what the platform costs us. We are at about 1.5 million in savings due to recent automation. It was a little less than that before. These are soft savings and don't show up on balance sheets. We're trying to work toward automation that actually do lead to hard savings. We've saved about 43,000 hours in a year so far.

The licensing makes sense, but it does lead to a few adoption issues when a lot of the licenses are per user. Convincing some of our business units to pay for user licenses for either Action Center or attended robots can be a roadblock.

We looked at Blue Prism. The biggest reason for going with UiPath is that we are a heavy .NET shop. Therefore, the fact that UiPath is based on .NET and that we can write our own custom activities in C# bar and Visual Basic were big factors for us. It meant that we would be able to adopt UiPath faster and that it would fit with our current Microsoft stack as well. We also liked where the UiPath platform as a whole was going, becoming not just RPA development but integrations as well. In comparison, Blue Prism seemed to have stuck with RPA and not expanded much beyond that.

Take a look at UiPath's platform as a whole and what it can do aside from just RPA automation. I would also advise you not to discount the tech stack. Overall, I like the platform, and I think it's headed in the right direction. Because of that, I would give it a rating of nine on a scale from one to ten.

The use of this solution is spread out across our organization. On the IT side, we use it for synoptic notes like admission process, reviewing invoices and giving usage access.

The insights that this solution provides have been most valuable. We use these insights to report to higher management on the performance of our processes. 

UiPath also helps us reduce manual work although we do not yet use UiPath's AI functionality. We have learned a lot from the UiPath community and gained knowledge about future products and enhancements. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them.

I have been using this solution for six years. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them. We then need to go through the process again and reopen a ticket with the same information.

Neutral

I have a little bit of experience using Automation Anywhere, but I prefer UiPath. The coding with Automation Anywhere was not developer friendly. 

Our whole team was new to this solution so there was a learning curve involved for all of us which made the setup difficult at times. At this stage, UiPath was one or two years old with limited documentation. The deployment did not take long.

We deployed this solution with the help of a partner called Ernst & Young.

We have experienced a return on investment using the solution as it has led to three million in savings since we started using it. 

We would prefer it if the licences were packaged together. When it comes to developer licences, we need to pay to transfer licences when a developer leaves and this also creates additional work for our IT team. 

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I would recommend UiPath to others because it is a good tool and has a lot of potential to expand. 

I'm not currently using UiPath, but in my previous organization, which I left seven months ago, we had a complex trading application that included a web form and a Windows form. And on the Windows form was an Electron framework. If you want to run a web application inside a Windows application, Electron is a bridge between the web application and the actual Windows app. Because it was a complex application, it was not very easy to automate. That's where UiPath came in. It perfectly fit our automation testing scenario.

Before UiPath came into the picture, we were planning on doing automation testing with Selenium. The test plan with Selenium was going to take about three months. When UiPath was introduced and we started working on it, we completed the whole automation, end-to-end, in about one and a half months. It saved us that much time. And we made sure that our product was delivered with the required quality and that we did not compromise on that.

Because UiPath is SaaS, we were able to automate everything in a very productive manner. We were able to cross-verify all the flows and all the functionalities. And UiPath didn't require a huge amount of setup. It runs on minimal requirements.

In terms of human error, we saw a reduction, of course. It's not possible for a human to catch every error when new functionality is built. With UiPath automation, we were able to analyze errors right away and resolve them.

Another benefit was that it freed up employee time. It did a lot of the work by itself. The user only had to make sure that the correct workflow was involved and he could just sit back and check that everything was going correctly. It probably saved us 45 minutes daily.

UiPath makes you more productive because it comes with a lot of drag-and-drop features. You don't need to know the APIs to access particular elements on the screen. You can just drag and drop and define your actions and go ahead with the workflow. You can focus on the workflow rather than learning about the APIs, which is what happens with Selenium and other automation tools. That is one of the most beneficial features of UiPath.

I don't know if I was doing something wrong, and I did get assistance from the UiPath guys on this, but sometimes UiPath wasn't able to find an element on the screen. But that's what UiPath is for, and we wanted to make sure that our workflows were working correctly. Sometimes it was able to find an element and sometimes it was not. UiPath support did give us a solution, but it was not helpful enough.

The issue that I mentioned earlier, that sometimes it wasn't able to find the elements, was the only issue I saw with respect to UiPath. Otherwise, nothing was breaking and nothing was problematic on the UiPath side.

They were very friendly and they tried to be very helpful, but they weren't able to solve the issue I raised.

Positive

The version of UiPath that we used involved a direct installation. We asked our in-house team to get it installed because we didn't have the permissions to install software. They installed it in our system and we started using it right away. It was very straightforward.

I have worked with Selenium, which is an automation tool. That has quite a learning curve, but with UiPath it only takes you one or two weeks to get started. Once you're familiar with the basic tools, you can start writing a workflow. It is straightforward; nothing complex.

I never did the UiPath Academy courses because we had senior team members to help us and, in that company, we had a "learning playground" where we could go through the slides directly, without going through a whole learning process. We were then able to start our work right away.

UiPath did a good job. Before going into production, we needed to make sure that every test scenario and every case was handled. That's where we took advantage of the UiPath. We would run UiPath again and again and there were no breakages in our code and nothing was falling apart before going into production. I was working for an investment bank and every record was important.

I am an RPA developer and I am primarily using this solution to fill up timesheets in an internal portal. I use Windows 10, 64 bit. My team uses a mix of Windows 7, 8, and 10. It is suitable for daily and weekly tasks, which pretty much don't change over time, and is what I choose to automate parts of my team's work.

We are an IT company that works on both products and services. UiPath has helped to automate tedious data-filling jobs for test data creation (Testing), and data extraction jobs from public websites (HR). It has added a new capability which we can showcase to our clients.

Data Scraping is definitely a unique and useful feature that we had not known about before.

Smooth integration of OCR, which is very quick, is a useful feature.

Manage packages to get more packages.

Save as a Template feature.

Snippets are really useful as a reference for logic.

Plus button between activities & Ctrl+Shift+T is very useful in adding activities quickly.

Having the ability to run the bot from a single click will help to democratize the RPA.

Currently, I am running the XAML file from command prompt mode and this is causing inconvenience every time I update the XAML file.

The regular update of the Community Edition means that the UiRobot path is constantly changing on every update.

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

There are not many complaints on the stability of this solution. Though the regular updates of the Community Edition have given me trouble at times, it has been quickly resolved in the subsequent updates. I think that the UiPath Forum portal is one reason for this.

According to me, on one side it is creating a buzz and everybody wants to be part of it. On the other side, there is resistance to embrace new technology in their process. Only over time, this can be scalable and it cannot be done quickly.

This was my first RPA tool.

The initial setup is straight forward. This got better after integrating the Chrome extension setup in the UiPath studio itself.

I did not evaluate other RPA tools.

The UiPath product team is doing an awesome job. Keep it up.

Our primary purpose is to automate our internal processes so we can increase our profits and reduce our headcount. We are an IT service provider, so our main focus so far has been our Service Desk but we are starting to work with our Finance, Payroll, and HR teams in 2020.

So far, we have not realised much in terms of benefit because we have only just begun our RPA journey. However, we have approximately four FTE of savings in our pipeline. It has improved our business so far by creating an innovation-based way of thinking amongst our teams.

Personally, I find that Explorer Expert and StudioX appear the most valuable to my role as an Analyst. Explorer Expert allows me to easily "record" processes and gives the developer the skeleton of an automation project. StudioX allows me to build simple automation projects without the need to engage our development team.

StudioX could use some improvement to broaden the range of automation projects suitable. At this stage, it is limited in terms of the functions that are available and I would like to see a lot more options added to this tool so that our business users can get even more benefit.

We have been using UiPath for three months.

There have been no concerns with stability as of yet.

It appears to be very scalable but we have only had the tool for a few months.

Customer service has been great so far. We have received answers to all of our questions quickly.

This is our first RPA solution.

We had some issues with the licenses at first, but we were able to communicate with UiPath to get this resolved.

We used an in-house team to implement our solution.

So far we have not had a return on our investment, but this will change in 2020.

Pricing is quite reasonable with UiPath and there are some tools which are free to use.

We evaluated a range of options on the market including Blue Prism.

So far, I highly recommend UiPath. They are constantly introducing new tools and features and they all seem to provide extra benefit.

We primarily use it for delegating access permissions to help desks, for example. We use it to automate certain things, like onboarding new users, or deprovisioning leaving users. When we add somebody to a group, it triggers some kind of automation workflow. Lastly, we use it to sanitize data entry, so to make sure that capital first letter in the street name is used, certain zip codes aren't allowed, others are, etc., so data is controlled.

It helps mitigate the risks. With traditional native active directory delegation, it becomes real messy, real fast. You lose oversight on who has access where. We are an acquisition merger company, so we let go of certain companies and onboard new ones. With native delegations, you lose track of who has access where. With Active Roles, we can always see who has access and what they can do in a very granular way. You can modify the street name but you can't modify the city for example. Or you can modify the picture, but not the names and so that granularity is not available normally.

This product has eliminated a lot of tedious IT tasks, especially when people leave. There are about 10 or 15 actions that Active Roles does, scripted, in the same way, each time. It used to literally be a list of things that the admin would do, like: hide the mailbox, disable user, remove the groups, etc. Also, the auditing history that it keeps is very handy for us. We have a change record of what's been done to a user, who did it, and when they did it, which really helps us out.

We really needed this kind of product for its Active Directory delegation. We could not allow everyone to have native access to our Active Directory. The delegation bit was really the trigger. Automation is also a major reason we use UiPath. There was just so much room for human error that we wanted to script activities rather than rely on the admins to know what to do. This is especially important now that we are outsourcing many activities and dealing with a changing audience. In order to make sure that everybody does the same thing at the same time, tools like these make sure that you do everything in a structured manner.

The value for us is that it resembles the native tools that most people have grown accustomed to. Most people come from another company where they may not have used Active Roles. Active Roles resembles traditional tools like Microsoft's, which is really good because it eases the way people interact with the tool.

AD and AAD management features are really good. They're better than native tools; they offer an added value. They show more fields than traditional tools, such as password age and status of things that you normally wouldn't see. We still have the mailbox and user information all on one screen, whereas in native tools, you need two tools to show that information.

Active Roles works with policies and access templates, as well as workflows, which are really powerful. While it comes with a lot of example policies and access templates, there are zero built-in workflows. I would personally love for it to come with 10 to 20 sample workflows that achieve a certain task but are not enabled by default. In that case, I would be able to just look at those to see how it's done. I could clone them, copy them, and modify them to how I want them. Then I would be good to go, rather than having to reinvent things from scratch.

The solution is very stable. Even if components lose connectivity, or the database dies, as soon as it comes back up, it just reconnects and goes.

It covers all we would like to do. It's scalable; you can make it replicate databases. We don't use a lot of those features, but it is very scalable.

It needed a bit of getting used to, in terms of where you set what, but once you get the hang of it, it's really straightforward.

I think we're just paying for mitigating risks. There is the risk of leaving all authorized access behind and the risk of having Active Directory pollution. With that comes a risk of people getting access that they shouldn't have or having multiple accounts for the same thing. There's no money or value added from using the solution, but there is risk management. That is really what you pay for.

We did consider using the Microsoft solution because it's free and built-in, and that's what everybody does. However, when you grow beyond a certain ping, or scope, you find out that it just does not cut it anymore. We also considered using other tools, but at the time, I think Active Roles was very much alone in this world. I have to admit, now there are other vendors available, which I don't have any personal experience with, but on paper, they seem to do a bit of the same thing. At the time, though, there was simply nothing else that could even come close.

I would rate UiPath as nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement. This is definitely, really up there.