UiPath Reviews

I use it for RPA in bank reconciliation, credit card operations, retail banking, vendor invoice management, purchase order matching, and employee onboarding.

It helps to minimize the on-premises footprint and speeds up and reduces the cost of digital transformation. It also reduces human error and that reduces costs and makes systems more reliable. 

UiPath can also free up employee time. It depends on how many automation initiatives you run, but you can probably automate 20 to 30 percent of tasks.

Overall, the most valuable aspects are the automation, UI navigation, and orchestration.

It's fairly easy to use and automation can be done by relatively junior people. It's a low-code platform, so it requires a little bit of scripting but nothing too crazy. A business analyst can use it in most cases.

We're an implementation partner, so we don't use it for ourselves because we're too small. But for our client base, it enables end-to-end automation. That's a very important aspect, especially in banking where there is a lot of competition, the margins are low, and operating costs are high. They can't make any mistakes. That requires them to have an automation solution that does manual and repetitive tasks for them. It's a cost imperative.

And being part of the UiPath user community is a positive. I have also done a couple of the sales-oriented UiPath Academy courses. They are really easy to consume and they are free for partners and they're very business oriented.

UiPath is not easy to work with, as a vendor, from a partner perspective. They are difficult to deal with.

I have been working with UiPath for two years, not as an engineer but in business development.

It's very stable. I've not heard of any major issues where the system collapses.

It's scalable. You can throw more and more robots at it.

Technical support from UiPath is slow but good enough.

Neutral

ROI depends on the customer and what they need, but you can definitely have a return on investment of 300 to 400 percent within about three years. It's a relatively quick payback.

They are the biggest RPA vendor with the highest market share. They have a good product and the company seems really innovative. They're branching out into AI and process mining, et cetera. Generally, as a vendor, they're the strongest one in the mix.

My advice is to start sooner rather than later with RPA.

There is a lot of hype around the topic of RPA and customers are exploring it, but they can't do it without partners; at least not the first couple of projects. Deployments with our customers take about six weeks.

We maintain the solutions we create. We normally have a support contract in place for at least the first couple of years. Maintenance, on our side, involves two or three people.

We primarily use the solution for legacy data transfer, UI automation, CRM and ITSM automation, and call centers. Specifically, in call centers, using UiPath forms and form render has been really helpful.

I love developing in Studio. For my clients, the approachability of the orchestrator is really valuable. It takes a little bit to learn the licensing structure and layout at first, however, once they get it, it's pretty smooth sailing from there. The modern folders have become a great thing for any enterprise that's looking to automate using an orchestrator as a server.

I like to automate in Studio as I'm familiar with it. I honestly just like the platform so I like automating with Studio.

I really enjoy Document Understanding. I like how it all integrates together. Some of the stuff I've seen now with just the connectors and the way you can scale implementations is really exciting. While I do like Studio, I also like how it works with the rest of the platform.

We most recently built an unintended bot that saves them about $500,000 a year worth of GS 14 labor.

UiPath saves costs for our customers’ organizations. That would just be the cost savings from RPA bots. I haven't really dug into the cost savings of the ancillary products, however. I know that one of my clients is using the test suite now after I had built a proof of concept for it, and they've fully implemented it. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of cost savings there as well.

In terms of ease of building automation, it depends on the process. For anything that's ultra-low or a low-level complexity, it's very simple. Once you start getting sprawled out into larger automation that very much becomes object-oriented programming and is basically making a workflow. That's when you really need to take hold of programmatic concepts. You need to be a strong scriptor to be able to make the best RPA bots.

Our clients have reduced human error. That's one of the things that I tend to talk about the most. The bots can get work done faster, however, the reduction of human error is probably more valuable in some cases than just speeding up work.

In terms of UiPath Academy, everybody's used it. I've used it myself. My entire team has used it. All of our engineers are some sort of Pearson VUE certified now. Most of us have the Advanced Developer. A few of our younger junior developers have the associate, the RPA associate, however, they're working on getting the Advanced Developer and they lean on the Academy pretty heavily.

The biggest value in the Academy is the videos, which are pretty helpful. Sometimes you have to slow it down, however, for the most part, the way it goes through concepts, especially for somebody that doesn't have much programming experience, the videos tend to go through some of the more elementary things like variables arguments. That can get a little bit boring for programmers since they've been through that 100 different times. That said, that’s really where the strength lies as it does target a large group of different employees. As an engineer, I might pass by some of the boring stuff, however, I will still find things later on in the training where I'm like, wow, I actually never knew that.

The license model changing every year can be a little bit frustrating. It's hard sometimes when things go from being robot-based to being runtime-based.

Some federal users are still on the 2019 orchestrator or even a 2018 orchestrator. However, by being on them, they can't take advantage of modern folders. This issue is, once they get upgraded to 2020, and they start using modern folders, essentially you shouldn't really be using plastic folders anymore. Some of their frustrations aren't really long-term frustrations. Orchestrators have gotten really popular over the last few years. There are certain things that have made it so much better. That said, we're still in that transition where clients have been using classic folders and then they upgrade and they're going to have to change everything. Hopefully, they don't have to do it more than when they upgrade past 2020.

One of my clients upgraded their production environment from the 2019 orchestrator to the 2020 and everything was in plastic folders and I advised them to switch to modern folders and it was a pain. Once it was taken care of, it was great. It's just that it took a lot of convincing to tell them why it was better.

I've been using the solution for three years. 

It's pretty stable. The biggest issue is just that more companies need to really adopt a change management system, whether that's through Service Now or is built-in change management, those alerts need to be going to the RPA center of excellence. 

There are things that will change or break the UiPath bot sometimes. They're very stable and they've become more stable if there's a change management system. Automated testing can make it so you can catch things that have changed with applications with RPA testing before they've occurred and then you can fix things quickly.

The scalability was tough a few years ago, however, now it's exponentially easier with modern folders and the orchestrator.

I've worked with UiPath support. I would put them at a seven out of ten as they need to be a little bit more timely. There have been issues with a client where support has taken a really long time to get back to us or they haven't updated our support ticket, even though we've advanced. Maybe it was an isolated incident. I have worked with support before where that hasn't happened. I felt like I got in a bad run of working with the support folks and the client was definitely not pleased.

I actually don't have experience with other RPA solutions. I came from a web development background and I went straight into UiPath and now the way that it's scaled out and now that I work in the federal government, UiPath has such a large piece of the market share. I've never really seen a need to learn any other automation solutions. I may learn Power Automate at some point, however, I would really prefer to stick with UiPath.

The solution is pretty straightforward. I've run through complex issues, mostly the NuGet package and it's different with every customer. As far as the UiPath platform goes, it's pretty straightforward to deploy bots. It all depends on how an agency has its group policies set up for security and sometimes that causes issues. It's just about learning new ways to solve different problems that may be unique to an agency or may not be.

In the government, deployment takes a little longer. I would like to think development usually doesn't take that long, however, it's like going through ATO, especially if it's an unintended bot. Sometimes it can take like a few months. It just depends if they've got a center of excellence stood up or not. For example, if they've got an CI/CD pipeline or just a standard development life cycle, a lot of people don't have that set up and then it ends up taking longer as they have to go through ATO. It’s variable. Unfortunately, it's just a lot slower to get them deployed than in the private sector I think.

That’s no fault of UiPath. It's usually group policy security systems and things like that. I've had to talk to a lot of security folks and help walk them through things that need to be changed.

We've been implementing our UiPath as well.

I don't really have too much to offer about the pricing part of it. I don't really work on that side of the business. I would say my only gripe about the pricing would be something like a Studio Pro license being more expensive than a Studio license, just to essentially get something that links Test Manager. Some people might've found that a little bit hard to swallow. From what I've heard, Studio Pro is going away and Test Manager is just going to come into Studio. That would be the only thing I've noticed that I thought was a little silly. Everything else is typically not really my side of the business.

We have everything on-prem in our demo environment and the customers I work with typically have the on-prem offerings as well.

I have used UI path apps in our demo environment. I do not have any clients that are using it.

We have an AI center in our demo environment, however, I don't have any clients that are using it. I do have a client that's actually in the process of installing it right now and getting it through their governance model. That's as close as it would've come for our customers using the AI center.

To those considering UiPath, I would say, just go ahead and do it. RPA is pretty awesome. It's easy to get solutions out. There still needs to be a good bit of work done on the Citizen Developer Model, however, at the same time, as far as getting a team of engineers in there to automate things, if you get good RPA developers, you can get things automated really quickly. People can help you with your standard development life cycle. You just need to jump in.

I would rate UiPath solutions at a nine out of ten. The only reason I wouldn't give it a 10 is that, in terms of the installation of the product, sometimes the documentation leaves a lot to be desired. Sometimes it's tough to work through installation issues without actually contacting support. I do wish that was a little bit more streamlined.

I am a service provider and developer who implements UiPath for our clients. But in the company that I work for, we also use UiPath to make invoices for ourselves and, mainly, for payroll activities.

We need to get reports from our HR tool and combine them with another source of information where employees are recording the hours they spent with various clients. We then create the documents needed for the IRS. In our case, all the users of UiPath are data entry specialists in different departments, such as HR, finances, and marketing.

UiPath definitely helps reduce the cost of digital transformation.

It also reduces human error. We can be sure, given that our test case is successful, that there are no errors when none are reported. This definitely helps businesses. Errors generally lead to work being postponed. When errors come back to someone at a given point in time, they can rapidly overwhelm that person. With automation working, this is no longer the case because everything is smooth. And if there are errors, they will resolve them one by one.

In addition, it definitely frees up employee time. That is the purpose of automation. Unfortunately, I can't share metrics about this. But the additional time enables employees to focus on more important work and that affects employee satisfaction. Repetitive tasks make people irritated about the nature of their work. When they can work on new tasks that are more complex and creative, it makes an impact on their job satisfaction.

UiPath saves costs in our organization because we don't have errors where it is deployed and because it has reduced the number of FTEs who do repetitive tasks. On average, within a small company, it can save up to 10 FTEs.

One of the most valuable features is that UiPath is easy to deploy, especially for medium-sized companies. It is also easy to scale.

Also, the fact that you can scale automations without having to pay attention to the infrastructure for doing so is quite critical. The infrastructure could require a lot of maintenance resources and affect costs, so that feature is quite important.

UiPath enables you to implement end-to-end automation, with its full range of tools, starting from Automation Hub, which is the initial point for gathering your processes from business lines. It's driven from employees or a center of excellence, and goes on to include implementation, and the reporting in Orchestrator is quite powerful as well. The end-to-end coverage is important, as clients always like one tool that covers their needs and plans.

The only thing missing is something to track the development cycle. We use third-party tools to do that. That is the only gap in UiPath.

Also, scheduling of UiPath robots could be improved. Scheduling is a feature for defining in what sequence, and on what machines, you want your automations to be launched. That area could be improved.

I have been using UiPath for more than three years.

Overall, the stability of UiPath is about average. We do have some instability, because of workloads that are too massive for Orchestrator, but it could be that it was not installed in the right way.

Scalability is connected to the stability. The situation I noted when talking about the stability of UiPath happened for our largest client, where they already have 160 processes running. There are problems with the maintenance of such a large number of bots.

But in terms of increasing our usage, we are in a phase with our clients in which we are constantly enlarging the automation within their companies.

UiPath support is definitely willing to help. They will usually propose a call, if they think that will be easier for solving an issue. Their services are quite good.

We did not have a previous solution, except for Excel macros.

It is relatively easy to deploy. Of course, it's not as straightforward as a simple application installation, but with the help of UiPath, in particular, or with the help of the UiPath Community Forum, which is quite enhanced with answers about installation, it's not a big deal to install it.

Taking into consideration internal IT restriction and internal IT resources, deployment can take up to two weeks.

Our deployment strategy usually involves convincing clients that they need to start setting up a center of excellence for automation and then there are lots of initiatives that need to be undertaken within the center of excellence. Among the most critical are awareness, dealing with IT stakeholders, and of course, the capabilities of developers. Taking care of those things will lead you to a smooth path for digitizing the first processes, which are low-hanging fruit. The further you go, the more you can then enhance your automation with the more advanced capabilities, like AI, Document Understanding, or chat bots, et cetera.

Deployment of one robot takes about three months and up to five people. We need an SME who knows the process that is being automated. In addition, there is usually a business analyst who tries to help optimize the process so that it will work better with robots. We need a developer, of course, and we usually have a data solution architect who helps to ensure that overall infrastructure is functioning. It also helps to have an automation evangelist on the business side.

We have two roles for UiPath maintenance. One is the IT maintenance guy who makes sure the VM is working correctly, and that we can easily scale from the infrastructure perspective. The second role is the operator, whose day-to-day tasks include scheduling the bots correctly, implementing quick deployments by creating assets in Orchestrator, and maintaining things from an RPA perspective.

ROI usually takes six to 12 months.

Licensing is quite complex, and sometimes that's true even when we have to explain it to our customers. There may not be a way to do it more simply.

The only potential additional cost when implementing UiPath involves the third-party tools. It can be a quite big portion, of course, so you should consider that aspect. Examples would be integrating different systems within a company, systems such as Salesforce, SAP, or ServiceNow; all of the main CRMs that businesses use.

We looked at the main competitors, Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. The decision to go with UiPath was based on contacts we have, clients who had already implemented RPA. We got better feedback about UiPath from them.

The first thing to consider within your organization is whether it's easier to deploy it on-prem or via the cloud version. Then focus on how to structure your development team. It can be either entirely a third-party service provider, or in-house developers, or it could be a hybrid. The third thing to consider is what the cost center will be for RPA implementation in your company.

The marketing side of how easily you can build automations with UiPath is a bit exaggerated. You definitely need some programming skills to do very powerful automations with it. But it still provides various levels of development tools, meaning that you could have zero programming experience and still automate some processes in your company.

UiPath is definitely the market leader in RPA. The biggest lesson I have learned from using it is to start with the low-hanging fruit, and then go on to more complex stuff.

We have two customers. One is in the insurance industry. We are implementing it within our own company to automate HR and finance processes: back office. This is the same thing with the customer: back office. That's the focus.

We are using Studio, Orchestrator, and attended bots. We are not using unattended bots yet.

For one of our clients, their intent is to create a bot because one of their key folks was retiring. This person had a lot of knowledge of the processes and how things happen. So, the idea was to create a bot that helps. They want it to do 25 percent of most of the work, and this person would just validate instead of training somebody new to do the job. Their idea was to not hire for that position anymore. Instead, if the person is just doing validation, 25 percent of that load is then spread across their current staff.

It is easy to use. That is definitely one thing that attracts people. 

I really like the feature that you get to record actions. I wish that feature was a bit more advanced where I could build more automation. Sometimes, you have to stop the robot because the robot doesn't get the level of detail that I am expecting to see in the automation. Then, you have to stop the bot, and stop or break the recording. While it's nice in creating a first sort of brush off your automation, I wish it would just go a step further.

I really like the new products that were announced here. The apps have a lot of potential. I'm interested in learning more about that in the next few months. The same thing with StudioX. Although, it would be interesting to see if they're more business-friendly or not. While UiPath is advertised as a low code platform, you can't put it in the hands of a business user. They have no idea what some of the features are. Some things, they need to have extensive training and be tech savvy in several things before they can go there.

Several of us took training using the UiPath Academy. I thought the UiPath Academy was very intuitive and easy to use. I would give it a five out of five rating.

When you are tech savvy and been trained, it is a four out of five for ease of use. Having that automation recording feature operate better and capture more of the automation that you're trying to build would make it a five. 

With the new products that were announced, UiPath closed a few of the gaps. I can see how they could expand the products into other areas. There is potential there for some workflow capability. I know this would be going beyond RPA at that point, but having one platform that does a lot of things would be nice. Because as it stands, when you need to do a workflow or approval process, you need to send this out somewhere else. There are things the bot can do, but I can see some of that functionality already showing up though with the tasks and apps. However, I would like to see more. That would be good.

Moving bots to the cloud would be the next good step. The new product has Orchestrator in the cloud. I think moving to bots to the cloud could also be next along with having Studio in the cloud where you can do everything in the cloud: Deploy and run your bots from the cloud.

It is pretty stable. I would rate it a five out of five.

I haven't used the technical support.

We learned about this stuff about two years and a half ago. We started exploring it, then we decided to take the plunge and try it out. That's how it came about.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. 

It took us about four months from the initial purchase of UiPath to putting the robots in production. With our first deployment, we made a lot of mistakes. For us, it was like the first time you do something, you don't know exactly what you're doing, you just do it. Then, the second time, you're like, "Oh, now, I can go back and do other things differently." With us, it was very much like that. We learned sort of on the job.

We did the installation ourselves. 

I didn't do it, but I know that the people that did the installation didn't have any issues with it. They didn't need to open a ticket in particular or anything like that. This tells me that it was fairly easy. 

We have saved steps and time from people doing their jobs because they're not doing all this crazy validation anymore.

We evaluated the top three. UiPath at the time was number three, Blue Prism was number number two, and Automation Anywhere was number one. So, we weighed them out.

I liked some of the functionality from Automation Anywhere. The recording feature of Automation Anywhere was much better and easier to use than UiPath. Although, I haven't seen the new Studio. In 2019, maybe they changed some things in there. Regardless, the Automation Anywhere tool seemed easier to use. But, in terms of partnership, they were not a good fit for the values of the company. Those things all go into account when trying to partner with somebody. That's why we decided to go with UiPath.

Some of the features in the software looked the same between Automation Anywhere and UiPath. Blue Prism seems very hard to use. That one we kind of killed on the spot. Between like Automation Anywhere and UiPath, it was more about how the company's vision, and where things were headed. All of that sort of helped. So, we were at that point that we were not really looking at the software anymore. We were looking at other things. That's how we ended up here.

With the new additions that were announced yesterday, I'd probably give it an eight (out of 10). I still would like to see some other features, which I know UiPath would start crossing into BPM a bit when you start talking workflows and things like that. However, that would be a good next step given their market share, customers outreach, and beyond API and some partners that they have today.

The handling of different types of insurance tasks.

It has mainly taken the load off of employees. We had a huge amount of tasks which weren't being done. It provides our employees time to do their other work, since we automated very manual things. 

We are currently using automation technology at a small level, as we just got started with UiPath and its technology. 

Its ability to remove manual tasks.

I would like better stability and possibly some tools to determine why robots are failing.

The stability is not great. UiPath is okay, but when it interacts with our programs, it often fails. It is difficult to determine why it fails. We are utilizing a lot of time trying to figure out why it is unstable.

The implementation time was very long due to instability.

The scalability is good.

The customer support was slow at the start. After a while, they come up to speed, then everything was okay.

The initial setup was easy because it was logical, but afterwards, it was harder to make UiPath function. While it is simple to set up and get started on. To make it stable, that takes a lot of hard work.

We use it in Citrix. The implementation was easy. We just installed on some VM servers.

We did try Blue Prism in another part of the organization, while using UiPath in our part of the organization. We decided to stay with just UiPath.

Since it was two different parts of the company, so you can't compare the decision. It was a decision made by management.

Because we are spending so much time on debugging, it has not saved us time yet.

We just use Unattended Robots, not Attended Robots.

I am not using the UiPath Academy because I do not put in the robots. I make sure that they run in the background. I do know some of my colleagues are looking at using the Academy, but they have to find time for it.

This solution is to provide robotic process automation solutions. In simple words, it is to automate the steps a human user may have to take repetitively on one or more systems to complete any process flow.

Using this tool has improved the efficiency, accuracy, and compliance of certain automated operations by up to 75%, as it uses preprogrammed bots to execute tasks, which can operate 24/7 without getting tired. Such bots eliminate chances of human errors and increase speed and productivity by leaps and bounds.

I found the recording, screen scraping, data scraping, and integration with third-party tools like ABBYY most valuable because they not only make the whole automation easier and less effort taking, but also, they let us use the power of external systems by integrations.

Availability of free training and certificates is another most valuable feature of the product.

Debugging features need improvement maybe by providing a process and variable alteration abilities during the debug execution. Additionally, support with version control systems like Bitbucket and Git needs to be added.

One to three years.

It is reasonably stable.

It is highly scalable.

I did not use any other solution.

Very fast ROI, as it's the cheapest of the lot.

UiPath is cheapest. You can even start using it for free.

I evaluated Automation Anywhere.

• Automation of a range of processes (35 at the time of writing).
• Utilizing UiPath in a banking environment. 

Processes include areas such as payments, financial crimes, HR, and customer service (middle office).

• Currently, 10 FTE of work has been moved to robots (nearly 10% of operations).
• The staff has been retrained from operations into RPA development roles.
• Improved consistency and cost-effectiveness of those processes.

Combination of the free academy and the graphical IDE with a large number of built-in activities. This creates a low bar to entry, allowing technically minded business users to get involved with the initiative.

UiPath is experiencing some growing pains in their support at the moment (some of this is due to the rapid progress of the tool, I suspect). From our timezone (GMT+10), support expertise has always been a bit of an inconvenience, with the best staff only coming online after our work hours.

We mostly use UiPath for downloading reports into Excel files, reconcile reports and generate a result which is sent to the users. It is a faster means for automation. 

We like the ability to capture some of the features on a screen for the application. We also really like the UI, and the design is pretty good. 

I think the only issue we have faced is with the upgrade compatibility. 

We are considering other options that are more stable. 

We only have five really small programs right now. So, scalability is not an issue for us. 

We have not had a need for UiPath tech support. 

Other departments in our organization were using Blue Prism. I do not know why they chose that versus UiPath. It is possible that they were looking for a higher level of security and stability. 

The pricing is very good. The license does not have to be in a bundle, like in other competitor products. You only have to purchase at least 10 from the beginning, for one year.