We use UiPath to automate PDF processing and extract financial and other information from PDF files. We store the extracted information in our database for our orchestration tool to process.

We have used UiPath both on-premises and in all the cloud services. 

Building automation using UiPath is easy even for non-technical people.

It enables us to easily implement end-to-end automation.

The UiPath User Community is helpful for our technical users.

UiPath has helped our organization because its ease of use for non-technical people makes it easy to understand and implement the automation framework. The automation server is of high quality, and UiPath is cost-effective. We realized the benefits during the training process.

We reduced our on-premises footprint with UiPath. For any organization that still requires all of its information to be secured on-premises, we can do that as well using UiPath.

I have completed two certifications using UiPath Academy courses. The academy has taught me a great deal about UiPath services, the automation framework, and how to use UiPath with SAP automation.

UiPath helped us accelerate our digital transformation and reduce the cost of that transformation.

UiPath has helped reduce human error to zero for any process that has been fully automated.

UiPath saves our staff time by automating the routine tasks.

It has saved our organization money by reducing the number of resources we need by 50 percent.

With UiPath, we can automate any module, whether it is a desktop application, web application, or native application.

The error notifications sent to users can be improved by including more detail.

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

UiPath is stable.

UiPath is scalable.

The technical support center is available through the web.

Positive

Deploying the system can be complex for non-technical users.

We have seen a return on investment with UiPath.

The license cost is expensive because we have to pay for each tenant.

I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We have almost 30 users of Uipath.

Maintaining UiPath is easy.

I recommend Uipath. UiPath is easy to learn and provides good-quality automation. 

The primary use case for document processing, automating data extraction from previously hard-to-access documents. This saves time, reduces manual work, and makes hidden data more accessible and usable.

It allows us to extract valuable information from various documents, categorize them based on their types, and make the data within these documents usable for our needs.

Assessing an AI center's role in orchestrating various elements of AI capabilities is quite constrained.

I have been working with UiPath for three years.

I find it to be highly stable.

Scaling on-premises can be cost-prohibitive due to the need to invest in hardware and infrastructure. This cost factor makes transitioning to the cloud a more attractive and well-designed option for scalability.

Our experience with their customer support has been excellent. We've encountered very few issues that required us to reach out, but when we did, we could contact our dedicated representative, and they efficiently escalated the matter, resulting in a prompt response from their support team. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

We have experience with Microsoft Power Automate, but it's important to note that UiPath and Microsoft Power Automate serve different purposes and have distinct target use cases. This uniqueness is a critical factor that sets them apart from each other.

The initial setup process was quite straightforward.

We initiated the POC to test the viability and implementation of automation before expanding the environment. The setup was designed with the understanding that we required distinct test and production environments. It was initially developed as an on-premises solution and is now transitioning to a cloud deployment. We've had a lot of success with Lydonia Technologies as a partner.

We now have access to critical data, and the accuracy has improved significantly. Additionally, the time it takes for processes or submissions to go through has been reduced from three or four days to just one day. While the cost savings in terms of dollar values may not be substantial, the real benefit lies in freeing up employees to concentrate on more meaningful tasks.

I find the pricing to be reasonable, especially when compared to other offerings in the same market.

My advice would be to begin with a small-scale approach and construct your automation incrementally. While it might be tempting to automate an entire process in one go, it's more practical to break it down into smaller components. This way, you can adapt and refine each piece as you go, reducing the risk of issues arising or changes occurring before the entire automation is completed. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate the repetitive tasks typically performed by knowledge workers, with a primary focus on areas such as finance, HR, and supply chain.

Starting with UI automation is valuable as it mirrors users' existing workflows, building their confidence before expanding into more powerful automation methods.

There are instances when the introduction of new features or concepts can be a bit overwhelming for users.

I have been using UiPath for five years now.

I would rate its stability capabilities nine out of ten as there is always room for improvement.

It offers excellent scalability. I would rate it ten out of ten.

When we were initially planning our move to the cloud, we reached out to the support team for guidance. Our account executive connected us with the UiPath professional service team, who were incredibly helpful in addressing all our inquiries and concerns. Even our cybersecurity team had many security questions, and they provided comprehensive answers to ensure our transition was well-informed and secure. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was complex due to the various components involved, such as Orchestration, Kibana, document storage, and databases. Each of these had its own installation and maintenance requirements, which was a constant task.

We needed to streamline the installation to focus more on building automation rather than dealing with upgrades and maintenance, so we migrated the deployment to the cloud. This transition reduced the complexity associated with interfaces and orchestration.

The pricing is quite reasonable.

Our company evaluated multiple leading tools and ultimately chose UiPath. One important factor was its open approach, offering a community edition for users to learn and explore the platform without an initial purchase. This approach fosters community development and creates a vast knowledge pool, making UiPath stand out. It encourages individuals to learn and explore the tool before transitioning to the enterprise version, while also providing a valuable talent pool for support and assistance.

My advice is to encourage exploring the platform, although it might be overwhelming due to its rapidly expanding features. While there may be initial confusion regarding UiPath's focus on AI, recent events have clarified its core message. It empowers users to deliver the models they create, integrating smoothly with enterprise systems. It enhances automation capabilities while incorporating AI elements, ultimately putting you in control of the AI within the platform. 

I would rate UiPath ten out of ten.

We use the tool for mostly attended and unattended automation. 

UiPath's most valuable features are the UI library and object repository, which speed up the development. 

The tool needs to have more documentation and change logs. Minor upgrades break a few things. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

UiPath is stable. 

The solution is very scalable. 

We get good support with the help of an account manager who escalates issues. We had to escalate issues only a few times. 

Positive

We used Pega RPA and Microsoft Power Automate. We have high-volume workloads that are not feasible with Power Automate. We also have a lot of legacy applications that don't work well with product license applications. Pega RPA was not very user-friendly. 

The tool's deployment is easy. We use Jenkins in the pipeline. We are still on-prem and most of our processes are deployed through the Orchestrator to the dev instance. 

Our partner helped us with the deployment. We were also knowledgeable on the technical side. 

We have saved 10 million dollars so far. 

The solution's pricing is fair. 

We use UiPath to save costs and man hours. 

The tool has helped us improve accuracy on compliance and regulatory policies. The bots make it more consistent. We can document everything, which makes auditing easier. 

Some of our processes were manual. Now, five robots do it. We have not hired anybody despite the workload being increased. 

We used Task Capture for some documentation. 

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We have a lot of SAP Extract, transform, and load (ETL). We have human resources and time management. We have a very diverse tool landscape due to natural growth. We are in a very early stage of transformation, so we use it to bring information into multiple systems at the same time.

We also have a good few financial use cases related to tax. We work in Europe. Within the EU, there are different regulations, and sometimes, we have very short deadlines. On the third or first business day, we have to get information out of 16 or 17 SAP systems and format them. We have to get them out to Italy and Spain for government stuff.

The objective that we were trying to achieve by implementing UiPath was hard cost savings, but I changed that a little bit. It is not the right technology for hard cost savings. We have now changed it to quality and efficiency, and what they do with quality and efficiency is up to them.

Currently, we only use the core RPA. We joined the company only eight months ago. We worked for another company before, and that company is at a very early stage. We are setting up our CVs and our citizen development program, so currently, we only use core RPA and core automation services.

We are not using AI yet, but we are about to change that with Document Understanding. In the company where I worked before, we used Document Understanding, and it helped us a lot.

UiPath automations have increased the accuracy of our operations. We have a lot of peak sessions with finance and techs. There are quite high penalties if we get something wrong. For example, if we calculate our tax incorrectly and we pay too much, that does not mean we get the money back. If we pay too little, we also have to pay a penalty fee. We have reduced the error rate by over 25%. We saved 1.24 million last year. That is one aspect. The other aspect is the peak time work. We had a team of people coming in on the third business day at 5 am. I had to download all the reports and things like that because they had to get the report out by 12 pm. If they were not out by 12 pm, we had to pay a penalty. After automation, people came in at 8 am, and the reports went out by 10 am. 

I like the low-code/no-code approach and the graphical interface. Among all the RPA tools, UiPath is the one with the easiest interface.

Orchestrator needs an overhaul. They have added so many functions that it is sometimes quite hard to find the right settings. They have a tree hierarchy with the host and the tenant. Some settings you do on the host, and some settings you do on the tenant. You need to know at which level you are to find what you need. It all looks very same.

The other thing that I have been telling them for years is the width of the activity. You cannot change the width. I do a lot of training to show something, and I constantly have to go into the advanced editor to show what is in there, but the big thing right now is Orchestrator.

I have been using UiPath for 12 or 13 years.

I have not had any issues. If something happened, it happened because of the human network.

It is very scalable.

The USA support is okay. I would rate them a seven out of ten.

Their support in Europe is good or very good if you get the right people. I would rate them between six to nine out of ten.

Their support in Asia needs improvement. I would rate them a four out of ten.

I have worked with Blue Prism. I have worked with Automation Anywhere. I have worked with what I call the Microsoft suite, which includes Power Apps, Power Automate, and Azure Logic. I worked very shortly with OpenSpan, later known as Pega. I trained at a university. I trained others in automation as part of the robotics lab at the University of Hanover. We looked at several tools there. 

In terms of comparison between UiPath and Microsoft Power Automate, given the use cases for which I normally use them, they both have areas where they are good. If Microsoft could get their documentation right, the attended series of UiPath would be in a lot of trouble. Given the whole unattended and hyper automation or intelligent automation, which is the main focus of UiPath, you need orchestration. That is where the big bucks and the big savings are, but to get the technology out with the attended bots or shadow IT, Microsoft Power Apps and Power Automate are important because they help people understand what technology can do. What we see very often is that people start with Power Apps, sometimes even with a macro, and then they realize that they have hit a certain barrier very quickly. They come to us. Initially, we take what they have and just enhance it with UiPath, and then over time, we bring the functionality from the macro, Power Apps, or Selenium and migrate them into our things.

Currently, we are on-prem, but we are migrating to the cloud in November. We are currently not using the latest version, but with the migration, we will be.

I was involved in its setup. The Orchestrator setup could be easier. There are a few loopholes that you need to understand. UiPath Studio is straightforward, but the setup of Orchestrator has become a little bit more complicated over time. You need to connect them to bots, and you need to know what type of user you need for what type of robot, which has become more tricky. Overall, the setup of Orchestrator and certificates can be a bit challenging.

In terms of the implementation strategy, we took a test server and put it on. We did some testing with our network and information security team, and once they were happy, we moved it out to production.

For the current implementation, we did not take any help. The first one was done by a partner, but they did not do a good job. I did the second installation on my own because I knew how to do it.

In the previous company, they had a partner system. 

I do not like the enormous jumps that they have had in the past. The ROI has become a lot harder because of the pricing changes. When you have time to plan for it, the ROI is there. If it was cheaper, it would make my life easier, but on the other hand, it is worth it. These jumps year after year are a problem for me because then I have to go back and say that prices have increased by 30% percent, and I get asked, "For what?" It takes a lot of time.

In this company, UiPath was already chosen. In the company before, I looked at all the big ones. I chose UiPath for the ease of use. 

I would advise finishing UiPath Academy courses. After you have finished them the first time, finish them the second time.

I would rate UiPath a strong eight out of ten.

We use UiPath in all business areas like finance, HR, accounts payable, production,  etc. 

UiPath's entire package is valuable. It is a user-friendly solution. 

UiPath needs to incorporate French and Portuguese language-based training. It is not easy for people without an IT background. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

UiPath is stable. 

We have rolled out about 20 citizen development programs. We aim to reach 100 by the year's end. We use it all over the world. It is scalable. 

We chose UiPath because it is easy to expand the benefits program. 

The tool's deployment is time-consuming. 

UiPath is expensive. 

We implemented UiPath to increase quality and take away repetitive tasks from employees so that they could focus more. It helped us to cut down on time. 

The tool has helped us save a few minutes of employees' time. 

I rate it an eight out of ten. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I last used Process Mining in 2020. 

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

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

We automate business processes that take up a lot of effort and manhours. Our company deals with a lot of documents. 

The most valuable feature is Task Capture. 

We work with Google Cloud and are excited about the possibility of a partnership. 

I have been using the product for six months. 

The tool is very stable. The product's stability depends on the processes you configure it with. 

UiPath's scalability is impressive. 

UiPath's support is great. 

Positive

The tool's deployment was straightforward. There were a few inefficiencies within my company. 

We currently have the tool deployed across different business lines suffering from silos. In the future, we may move towards a centralized structure. 

We have seen ROI with the product's use. 

We want to reduce our employees' demand hours and have them focus on high-value tasks. 

UiPath has fundamentally changed our organization, and we want to learn more about its capabilities. 

The tool has freed up our resources' time. 

I rate the product a ten out of ten. I like working with the software. It might be daunting to start automation and get employees to accept it. However, having a good rollout plan and strategy will ease your concerns. 

We are a consulting firm. We started last year, and we are growing pretty rapidly.

We have quite a few document-understanding processes that we are working on. We are a partner of UiPath, so we have various clients in different industries. Currently, we are processing vendor statements to create payments in NetSuite. We also have a three-way match cache application process, and then we have a basic user interface for scraping vendors' websites for payment data and that kind of thing.

We are trying to figure out how to incorporate LOMs with everyday processes and get reliable information back. We are also training a lot of machine learning models to extract data from PDFs along with processing contracts. I hope that those get easier to train and that there are more reliable answers or outputs from the models that we train.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has fundamentally changed what our organization is able to achieve. Document processing has come a long way and become a lot more user-friendly with validations and Action Center. The straight-through processing has increased.

They are constantly making improvements to Action Center where you have more feasibility in assigning tasks. There is a lot more flexibility and data around it. We have been incorporating insights into our automations, which helps us create a business case for future automations based on what we have done in the past.

The use of AI in our automations has definitely increased the accuracy of our operations. It has also increased the ability to process certain use cases that were not available before. It gives us more opportunities to automate processes, and therefore, drive revenue.

The use of AI in automations has freed up time or resources for other tasks for our customers. The time saved depends on the use case, but they are probably saving about a thousand hours a month on the vendor statement processing. They are getting 2,000 to 5,000 statements a month. Each one takes roughly 45 minutes.

Their core platform of Studio is valuable. The ease of use and the ability to build these automations quickly is definitely a highlight for us. Our average process from start to finish takes three to four weeks. We can knock out automations as quickly as we can identify them. That is probably the best feature I see.

In Action Center, saving progress in data validation, specifically for table content, is currently not available. There should be more clarity around the feedback loop along with the auto-update feature when you deploy machine learning packages. They should give some rule-based options so that if the confidence is returned higher than the previous model trained, then it would auto-deploy. If it is less, then it should send you an email rather than auto-deploy.

With task assignment, if there was a round-robin feature within the bucket to automatically assign it to a certain group of people, that would be helpful. 

There should be the ability to add custom fields to validation tasks because there is a lot of potential for it. It would be helpful when somebody needs to identify a scenario. For example, we have a customer who is processing rate sheets for trucking, and sometimes, depending on their customer, they have an all-in rate versus an adding fuel mileage rate. If they are able to specify that, even if it does not say it on the rate sheet, it would allow them to process more documents successfully.

We use UiPath's AI Center, but some clarity is missing around when to use AI Center versus when to use the Document Understanding module within Orchestrator. We are trying to figure out the benefit of one versus the other. We have also seen that the out-of-the-box models that we train versus a custom model that we train with the same data end up with the same output result at the end. We are trying to see where these out-of-the-box models are providing value if we are going to take the time to train them.

I have been using UiPath since 2019.

We have run into issues with integration services where we developed something, implemented it, put it into production, and all of a sudden, it does not run unattended. It is a very frustrating situation to be in. 

There were some issues with sharing connections between different accounts, and we have learned from that experience to do more upfront testing of new features before we build automation on it. 

Event-based triggers not working is probably the biggest stability issue that we have run into, and integration services not working is probably the biggest gray area. Other than that, it is a stable platform.

It is definitely a scalable platform.

Their support is good. I have had good success with submitting support tickets and getting answers quickly. If it is a bug that is identified with the process or with the platform, they resolve it within a matter of a week. There was a production issue. It was a throughput issue for the AI model. We were not able to access a 100-page document because of this exception. They implemented it and fixed it within a week, which I thought was awesome. I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I did not use any other RPA solution previously. I have only used Power Apps a bit, but it was a very small part that we have looked into. Overall, we are strictly focused on UiPath.

I have probably set up 100 Orchestrators at this point, so it is straightforward. However, the initial setup is confusing for new people who have not done it where they are matching machines to the tenant and plugging it in their machine key, but I am not sure if there is any way to get around that. When you have done it once, it is easy. 

The other thing is the licensing aspect of it. You need to assign a license to the machine template and then the machine template to the folder, and then you have to make sure that the machine is connected. There seems to be some confusion amongst our developers on how to make sure it is all set up correctly, and then you have the robot account. You have to make sure that it is also set up correctly to run unattended automations. It is a challenge, but if you do it two or three times, you get the hang of it.

In terms of the implementation strategy, overall, we look for quick wins upfront so that we can build the program and get support behind it, and then tackle the more advanced use cases after we get three or four in production.

We have cloud deployments. We have had different cloud providers, such as Azure, AWS, and GCP.

We are a consultant. 

We have definitely seen an ROI in terms of hours saved and quality of work. Once you get off the ground, there are a lot of other departments that end up getting excited and looking forward to future automation. I feel that is a win for morale.

Overall, the model is fine except for AI units. It is usage-based, which makes sense if you are processing documents, and you have one unit per page. It is the hosting cost of the models where there are issues, so we are running into potentially designing poor solutions because we are having to say, "If the documents are very similar but different enough, even though you would prefer to use two models, maybe consider not using two because of the hosting costs."

Power Automate is something we might look at. UiPath has orchestration while Power Automate does not. Orchestration is vital for us.

If you are trying to do in-house development, the user experience is much better than any other platform that we have evaluated. It is easy to pick up. The UiPath academy, training, and forums are great. The biggest selling point for me is that you can pick it up as a business user and learn the platform in a matter of days or weeks as opposed to months or years.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use UiPath for web scripting, data loading, data uploading, desktop application scripting, file uploading, and data downloading. 

I am a developer, and I love the tool's easiness with features like drag and drop. The tool is ready to use with some minor updates. 

I have had issues with the selectors. I face problems during image capture, and I need to update them. It is not something that I can rely on. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

UiPath is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

I contact the support whenever I am stuck, and they help me. 

Neutral

My director explored a lot of RPA tools and selected UiPath. He convinced the organization that it was a good tool. 

UiPath's upgrade is easy. 

We evaluated WinAutomation and Blue Prism. 

Our business objective for implementing AI-powered automation is to reduce manual work. 

UiPath has fundamentally changed what our organization was trying to achieve. 

The tool has helped us save 3,000 man-hours. 

UiPath has enhanced our accuracy. We do government reporting where we are given templates. The Excel files are locked, and we have to type the data. There are thousands of cells, and we must generate weekly, monthly, and quarterly reports. We have to assign a person for each report. 100-180 such reports have to be generated. We use bots to populate the cells, and there are no errors. We can see that there is 100 percent accuracy. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten.