We use UiPath for claims processing, enrollment, and interpreting what's on documents, and then we use the data that's in them for different purposes. I'm sure there are many other use cases. We're still brainstorming and giving our leaders some ideas. Frontline employees also have process improvement ideas.

UiPath has improved efficiency, turnaround time, and accuracy while eliminating repetitive tasks. 

With generative AI, we can take on even more complex tasks. We've seen a return in claims and enrollment, which has freed up time and resources. There are lots of other possibilities. Our frontline people have seen how it can supplement and focus on more important tasks, and business leaders like seeing the resources freed for various reasons. The growth potential is immense, and we're only in the early stages. 

UiPath is a low-code solution that allows us to build automations fairly quickly and see the results promptly.

Overall, UiPath is relatively straightforward, but there are opportunities to simplify activities. Sometimes, I've hit roadblocks while developing RPA jobs and found it difficult to find the answer. I can usually resolve a problem through a support ticket or an online search. 

We have used UiPath for about a year and a half.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath support is good, but sometimes they give generic users. Maybe I need to take the initiative and give a little more information and context

Positive

There has been a return on investment, though I'm unsure of the specific amount. We've already saved time and thousands of dollars.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We have been using the RPA functionality in UiPath mostly for cash management. Our biggest use case is submitting wires and payments.

We aim to reduce routine tasks and allow people more time to do more important things. We were mainly looking at time savings for employees, and we may not have gotten all of the time savings that we wanted, but we definitely have found some. In addition to saving time, we also hope to mitigate risks for some of the tasks we've implemented and reduce human error in some of these processes, 

In bot development, we have had a lot of conversations about what we want bots to do, how to process exceptions, who exceptions go to, and who needs to be aware. Once the bot goes live, we have to keep the chats and lines of communication open to ensure everything's working.

The most valuable features are UI, web, and Excel automation, as well as the ability to package all of these in one software suite.

Setting up the infrastructure with different virtual desktops and making the connections stable in our environment present challenges. More direction on cleaning up these issues would be useful.

I have been using UiPath for about two years.

We've had some stability issues, but we're unsure whether UiPath caused them or if it was our company's older internal infrastructure. We haven't had any downtime caused by UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale as our environment grows and keeps up with demand.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. We receive good support from UiPath when we need it.

Positive

Personally, I did not use a different solution before UiPath, but some departments at the corporation have used other RPA tools, and some still do. We chose UiPath because we worked with some consulting firms that were familiar with the development capabilities of the solution. They could help with the initial development of the bots. We like the direction of the tool.

We worked with consulting firms familiar with the development capabilities of UiPath to assist with the development of bots.

We have seen a return on investment due to time savings with high-value employees. However, as we continue to make new things, it's hard to determine the exact return at this point.

I am not involved in the purchasing, but people have been generally happy with the pricing so far. Some pieces we use now may not provide expected value, and we might remove those in the future.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

We use AI mainly around sales processing and document understanding. Our current use cases involve traditional automation, processing different orders, order formats, languages, and language translation, and creating actual orders in any ERP solution.

We've done a Communications Mining POC, and we think that's promising, but we haven't used UiPath's process mining because we have another solution for that. 

We were already using a competing automation platform when we implemented UiPath. UiPath is a more cloud-based solution. We're biotech regulators, so we're trying to adopt new innovations as quickly as they are released. Regarding challenges, we're trying to simplify and automate processes to achieve a higher value and make problem-solving more seamless.

We engage our employees in automation in two ways. At the enterprise level, it's more about making it easy for there to be a centralized intake of opportunities and focus on the value of what comes through. Citizen automation is about empowering and training them on how to use it so they can build more. 

Our organization has experienced productivity increases, financial savings, error reductions, and streamlining of many processes in finance and accounting with UiPath automation. It has helped free up staff time so that they can focus on more value-added work, and when automations don't function as expected, employees can be upset because they don't want to return to previous manual methods.

I don't know about shareholders, but employees who learn to build automation can do more value-added work. It makes them happy. Customers within the company can have people in their teams spend their time on more value-added work, and they have better transparency.

RPA is always good, and UiPath's Document Understanding is interesting. We used the old model, but the new modern Document Understanding is much easier.

UiPath could offer better support for operations. It has all these cool features, but when you still need to build and run these bots. You need to have more features that make it easier to run bots, and they require fewer people to maintain. 

We have used UiPath since 2020, so it has been nearly four years.

The solution is stable, with, for example, only a thirty-minute outage in three years.

It is scalable, but successful scalability depends on how you build automations.

We have premium support, which provides excellent customer service. Our technical account manager is amazing, and that's one reason we keep paying for premium support. 

Positive

We previously used Automation Anywhere and switched to UiPath because it was easier for developers to use and could integrate with more products.

It was complex because UiPath didn't have a biotech-specific offering. We were the first biotech company to use this, so we had to develop a product that would work for companies under regulation. We needed something called delayering. We had to educate UiPath on what it means to do this for health care and biotech.

UiPath helped us save around 500,000 thousand hours. Over our entire automation journey, that amounts to an estimated $25 million worth of productivity hours.

The pricing is very expensive, making it challenging to continue using UiPath when competitors like Microsoft offer cheaper alternatives like Power Automate. Why continue to use UiPath when you're paying three to five times more? 

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use UiPath across departments, including HR, IT, procurement, and the supply chain. One use case is hiring and other simple HR-related tasks. We also automate complex processes, like using Document Understanding and machine learning to extract vendor contract information and input it into our procurement system. 

Many applications don't have built-in APIs, and some repetitive processes require a lot of staff to perform. We try to identify those processes and automate them. At the end of the day, it's about how quickly a particular process can be implemented, what kind of ROI we can realize, and the speed of completing the process. 

These processes take forever if you're doing it manually. For example, let's take something as simple as hiring. Evaluating a candidate probably takes 30 to 45 minutes to complete all the steps, and large organizations are constantly hiring. Another challenge is the number of staff you have. By automating using robots, you can reduce the number of people you need to hire and complete the work much faster. It also helps resolve turnover. You can run the automation 24/7, and robots don't take vacations, so things happen faster. 

Another benefit is SLA compliance. We have SLAs to meet for data, and we need to complete some tasks within 48 or 72 hours. Automation helps us meet those targets by completing jobs faster. UiPath frees staff to work on other tasks. Just one process that we use for hiring has easily freed two or three people. Now, they're doing tasks that require human intelligence and knowledge. 

Any solution, such as Power Automate, can do traditional RPA functions, but UiPath's Document Understanding sets it apart. The document understanding feature can handle a significant amount of handwritten notes and efficiently extract information. While there is a human-in-the-loop component for validation, it is still faster than manually extracting information.

My biggest problem is that UiPath is growing so fast and adding integration with so many different products that it's hard to keep up. The COEs at various companies and our developers aren't able to keep pace with what's happening. It's a good problem to have. I'm not complaining, but there are so many features and little time for developers to learn and implement them. 

If you need something new like a CICD pipeline or somebody for a test suite or to work with Document Understanding, you can't use our existing staff because they don't have the skills. Now, I need to go out and hire more people. I need to reduce the company's size to save money but also spend more to hire. 

I have used UiPath for about seven years.

We have not encountered any stability issues with UiPath. The cloud-based deployment has been stable, and we have not experienced any unexpected robot shutdowns. Issues tend to arise from other SaaS applications rather than UiPath.

UiPath has been able to scale effectively as our organization grows. Scaling with UiPath has been easy and efficient.

The customer service has always been good. However, it takes longer to reach support now than it did four to five years ago, this can be attributed to their increased customer base.

Positive

At my current organization, we didn't use a different solution before UiPath. However, I have previous experience with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup was straightforward. Despite using a partner, we managed most of the work in-house due to my previous experience with UiPath.

We worked with a partner for the implementation. Although the partner helped, we managed most of the work ourselves to tailor the solution to our needs.

When you start a program, it takes a while to reach the point where you achieve an ROI. Still, if you're not seeing an ROI with UiPath by the second year, you're doing it wrong. We are doing that right now. 

We've found a lot of processes working across different teams and departments. We spoke to the leads of various COEs and found processes that would realize the highest ROI or SLA compliance. A department might have only one or two procurement processes, but they are sizeable. Automating those will help you achieve an ROI faster.

UiPath isn't cheap, but it's priced competitively with other automation solutions, and it offers more resources.

I was not part of the organization during the evaluation phase, but I know they chose UiPath because it was easier to set up with comparable costs to other solutions, more resources available, and robust training material for basic RPA functions. It's easier to train people to perform basic RPA functions.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

Our primary use case is IDP. We're in the Fed market, so a lot of it is all IDP driven. AI and automation are priorities. We're not exclusively a UiPath shop, but we're shifting to utilize it more because we know there are opportunities, especially in the realm of document capture.

For us, it requires fewer resources, and the time to get to the production environment is quicker. It hasn't significantly impacted our stakeholders yet, but people know the brand. When we talk with customers, they ask if we know about about UiPath and if we're a partner. 

We're moving away from the current platforms because they're less robust. The RPA tools we've used previously haven't kept up with the pace of change. UiPath is a leader that has continued to progress with RPA development and invest in improvements. 

We're still in the early stages with UiPath, but two things that will help are the Copilot and the Autopilot. We'll be able to generate new processes based on the learning that's taken place. It will have a significant impact on the things we do. Generative AI is not new to us. We've had these discussions for a while, and our CEO is well-versed in generative AI. Software companies are coming to realize the value and implement it. 

UiPath has spent the money on research and generating libraries. The out-of-the-box libraries are extensive. In the past, we used standard capture products, where we had to create all of the extractions in the zones and all those things. UiPath offers faster implementation. 

UiPath's pricing could be improved. The margins for us as a bottom-level tier partner are not great, which can be a hindrance, particularly when we present it to the customer. Other than that, I don't have any areas of improvement at the moment due to our limited experience. Maybe after six months to a year, we might have more feedback.

I have been using UiPath for several years, although I only started with this company a couple of months ago. Previously, I led a team for four years with another organization.

The stability of the solution has been good. I haven't experienced any platform issues. Any issues that arise typically relate to coding or interactions with third-party vendors.

Reflecting on my previous organization, UiPath was able to scale effectively.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. My previous experience with UiPath's customer service was really good. The support from the sales and presales levels and the technical specialists was excellent. They were all willing to help and work with us.

Positive

We eventually switched from our previous solution because it did not keep up with the pace of change. The company did not invest in their product and failed to keep up with the latest and greatest technologies.

It's too early to tell if there's been a return on investment with UiPath.

Pricing is a significant area for improvement. We see little margin as a bottom-level tier partner, which makes it challenging when communicating pricing to the customer.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We are considering implementing AI as we are a healthcare staffing company in the education sector. Our use case focuses on processing a large number of emails and resumes. We aim to mine resumes to determine which are best for rapid and successful placements. On the communication side, we wish to perform sentiment analysis to assess how well our salespeople respond to clients.

We want to mine, structure, and analyze data using data science methods. We also hope to use generative AI and large language models to perform some of the data analysis, saving us lots of time. My company tripled in size in the last three years, so we have a lot more people, but the backend operations haven't grown at the same pace as the number of salespeople. 

Automation helps us with operational and analytical work because we lack enough talent for that. By using AI, we can do the same amount of work without hiring more people, so we save money and improve productivity. Generative AI is part of our discussion. We had to decide whether to develop our own model or use existing software like UiPath to get things done faster and easier.

We have about 15,000 consultants working for us during the school year, and to fill those positions, we may need to interview five times that many. A lot of them might drop out by the time school starts. Using UiPath and AI, we can speed up processing and onboarding because that might be why people quit. They might leave for another job if we don't onboard them fast enough. We can save more candidates and prevent revenue loss from a potential placement by making the processing time faster.

After implementing UiPath, we automated many manual tasks. We save a lot of time, and those people who used to do manual work are doing more knowledge work. A lot of them now see what bots can do, so they're more open to the idea of developing bots. That set the stage for them to trust AI-powered bots in the future. 

The most valuable featire is the whole automation suite that helps develop automation processes. In the future, we might further explore Communications Mining and Process Mining. 

There's a push for cloud-based operations, but I prefer to develop things on the desktop. I'd appreciate the ability to develop things on the desktop and roll them out concurrently on the cloud. 

My company has used UiPath for about two years, but I've used it for about a year.

UiPath is very stable.

UiPath has kept up with our growth. However, there's a limitation with licensing.

I previously used Blue Prism in a different company. However, for the current company, they had no prior automation solution.

Our IT support company, Coretelligence's parent company, helped with the initial implementation. There were renewal delays prompting a desire to work directly with UiPath.

From a cost-saving perspective, we are seeing a lot of returns, including internal staffing cost savings and HR bot efficiencies.

UiPath's licensing could be cheaper and more dynamic. The licensing can sometimes feel high, especially for smaller companies, but generally, the pricing is reasonable when considering the time saved and corresponding costs.

I wasn't the decision maker, but my CFO considered industry leaders and attended the Forward Conference. He was impressed and chose UiPath. One thing that he liked was that it was easy to learn and use. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. I enjoy working with it, and it seems to have everything we need. They're adding new features at a reasonable rate while not deprecating old stuff too fast. It's a smooth transition from classic to modern activities.

We're a food ingredient distribution company that receives documents on ingredients' nutrition, allergens, microbial testing, etc.  We primarily use UiPath to process these documents. It was our proof of concept for using the system initially, and we'll expand it to process invoices and other related use cases.

We operate using an enterprise operating system. It's not a technological thing. It's how you determine project priorities. Soon, we'll set up process mining. Then, the IT team and technology group will decide what we do. Right now, the business units effectively vote on the next quarter's priorities. 

We're a high-tenure organization. The average tenure is 15 years, so we want to avoid growing our headcount. We're continuously growing by 10 to 15 percent annually, so we've had to add enough staff to process the documents. Our primary concern was to stop the increase in staff. Even after we added staff, we were falling behind because they were much slower at processing those documents. 

We get documents from our suppliers and, as a distributor, send them to our customers. If the supplier hasn't sent them, we need to hound them. We were falling behind on our backlog of 250,000 documents. UiPath enabled us to avoid adding more employees. Automation was the way to go. We haven't added any more headcount, and the backlog is going down, but it isn't as much as we had hoped.

The automation has allowed us to provide customers with better-quality documents faster. It has also given employees more time to locate the documents we don't have, freeing them from mundane tasks. It's freed them from the work of typing data on a form into an ERP system. 

We are talking about using it for our environmental and social governance initiatives. We're considering bringing together some of those pieces through automation to track our energy usage or what we've spent on some of the other bits and pieces and have a better ESG profile.

I find the intelligent document processing features extremely interesting. They're fun and represent an actual practical use of AI. There are so many impractical ways to use AI, but this offers a tangible ROI, and you can see its benefits directly. 

There are small issues, such as the Action Center not auto-refreshing. The user has to keep clicking "refresh." It's minor, but if you're waiting for something in your queue, you don't want to sit there and keep clicking. Logging could be improved, and there are a few connectors where I would like to see enhancements, but nothing major.

We started using UiPath in January of this year, so we've used it for less than a year.

The solution is solid, and I've had no issues with stability. The one issue encountered was due to a version change, where the changes in that version were unexpected.

The solution is great for scalability, and we can always add more bots as needed. We haven’t found it limiting at all.

Our experience with UiPath support has been mixed. The responses take a little long, which isn't bad when we only need a question answered. However, our system went down twice, and it took four to eight hours to get our first response from support. If I submit a ticket at 2 pm, I might not get a response until 10 pm. That's still relatively soon, but I might not be paying attention that late at night or be available to respond. 

Positive

We did not use a different solution for document processing before this.

The initial setup was pretty easy and straightforward. It didn’t take much time to get UiPath running.

We implemented the solution in-house ourselves. We do have a partner, Empower dot AI, which we plan to work with on future projects.

We are probably just starting to see a positive dollar ROI versus what we spent implementing UiPath. We only started this in January, and it was fully implemented by late June or early July. Hence, we are still in the infancy phase of experiencing ROI.

UiPath's pricing is reasonable. The model of charging per AI unit makes sense, and the licensing for Action Center and other parts is good. The cost does not seem excessive.

We are using UiPath for traditional RPA automations at the moment. 

We are automating rule-based, repetitive business processes, but we're interested in the automation opportunities AI capabilities present. Of course, transactional automation has limitations, but in areas where it is applicable, we have been able to use it effectively.

The overall UiPath platform, including the Orchestrator, Studio, and the robots, is valuable. UiPath's competitors don't do orchestration as well.

The licensing policies and concepts change almost yearly, leading to difficult negotiations. All components are licensed differently, and it would be more straightforward to adopt new features if they were included in the same bundle.

I have used UiPath for six or seven years.

The solution is very stable for us.

It is scalable according to our needs.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath is customer-oriented and attends to the customers well. They're helpful when we have challenges and are open to our ideas. We've had challenges with technical support solving some tickets, but it's been excellent overall. 

Positive

We installed the on-premise version in our environment seven years ago. It was very straightforward at that time.

I was involved in the deployment process by overseeing it.

We have seen a significant return on investment. The easiest to measure is the hours saved from manual work. We've saved the equivalent of 200 FTEs worth of hours each year. There are also less measurable benefits, such as improved quality and faster throughput.

We currently use UiPath to process birth certificates. One of my tasks was to apply OCR to the birth certificates and use a named entity recognition model to extract details like the names of the individuals, parents, and the place of birth. The project requires us to handle certificates from all 50 states, and every state uses a different format. 

We're supposed to be doing intelligent automation, but we're not there yet. I work in the applied analytics and statistics section, and we're supposed to find ways to inject more advanced analytical methods into some of these places where we can automate. Our IT department has a CoE that conducts intake processes. They use Automation Hub to review each process, and the executive governance board votes on it. I don't know how they decide internally because I'm not part of that. 

Automation through UiPath provided a framework and a low-code solution, which generally improved the process. It reduced the burden on the workers, freeing them to do what they wanted. 

It is also utilized in identity governance, especially within IT environments. For example, say I want to install a particular piece of software on my computer. There's a process to request access, and it goes through an approval chain. Ultimately, it gets to someone who has to click a button or provision an account. Someone will get an email and copy-paste the stuff from the email into another system and click "provision." 

And when an employee leaves or switches job roles, they no longer need access to a particular system anymore, so you must remove that access as soon as possible. Automation helps. Governance is one area that we would like to use it in more.

UI automation is helpful for interacting with legacy systems, mainframe systems, and various web applications. Someone might use all those things during their jobs, and many of them don't necessarily have APIs, either.

Although improvements have been made, such as auto-healing, there is room for improvement. Changes in the UI can break automations. If you upgrade from Windows 10 to 11, you may need to rewrite some of those UI selectors completely. That is probably the biggest weakness that I can think of.

I have been using UiPath for four or five years.

The solution can be fragile, but there have been significant improvements over the years. The unified target framework, which considers strict, fuzzy, and image matching, helps to stabilize the application somewhat.

UiPath has been able to perform as our organization grows or as the demands on UiPath increase.

In my previous job, I interacted directly with UiPath support, and they were always effective. Currently, support is accessed through IT, which escalates issues if needed, so I have less direct interaction with customer support.

Positive

I've used Python and VBA and experimented minimally with Selenium, but they're not as strong when it comes to UI automation. I've also used Power Automate for Microsoft products. Sometimes, I want to automate Outlook, but I don't want to ask the security to enable the UiPath activity to pull emails. 

We've saved time and reduced human error. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We're still in the exploration and discovery phase. We're learning about UiPath's capabilities and how they fit into the overall picture. We haven't separated AI from our normal process at this point. I work in our company's contact center, and we engage them in many different ways. We talk to management about their problems, report large volumes of transactions, and work side-by-side with the agency to find trouble cases and where they frequently perform manual tasks.

UiPath has helped our customer success unit and various technical teams. We were trying to understand the industry's current state and the direction our peers are taking. We're not so focused on eliminating positions as we are on using UiPath to free staff to work on additional tasks. There are always new tasks in the contact centers, and if we don't need to add staff, we can redirect them to other areas.

We were looking at implementing most of the features. I don't look at it with a specific lens but try to understand where all the tools are and how they can best help us in each situation. I don't have a favorite tool but try to understand how to use each one in combination to give the utmost business value.

Being able to escalate quickly is not a strength for UiPath and may be a focus area.

My department has been using UiPath for about two months.

The people from UiPath, from customer success to various technical teams, have been very helpful. When we open tickets, they respond quickly and escalate to the appropriate teams.

Positive

We did have a different solution. Deploying the solution to our agents' desktops was essential, and UiPath's advancement in that space and innovation position was enticing.

The initial deployment was fine. We had an on-premise deployment and weren't using the Automation Suite. It didn't work for us at the time. There wasn't a lot of flexibility there. I understand that it's changed, but we've already deployed on-prem. We've grown, and the complexity is through the roof, so now we think it's worth transitioning to an alternative solution.  That part has not been great, but at least there are places for us to go.

UiPath is expensive compared to competitors. We're examining where the value comes in and their ability to continue being a leader to justify the cost.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.