We had two distinct automation needs. First, we aimed to simplify the process of obtaining weekly updates on new employees. This involved automating navigating a portal, identifying new employees, and distinguishing between contractors and full-time employees and aims to streamline maintaining an accurate and current employee database for your company.

The second use case focused on case number categorization. We needed to categorize cases originating from sources like SSM, DC Salesforce, and others into different categories, such as origin-related or finance-related, to prioritize and address them based on their urgency and type.

It offers an advanced and in-depth set of features, allowing for intricate and specific automation tasks. It is designed for a more user-friendly and localized experience, catering to individuals who aren't necessarily focused on development.

The ease of use in both running and developing automation bots is a key factor for us. We also measure customer satisfaction not only in monetary terms but also in terms of the hours saved. For example, if we can save ten thousand hours in a year, it's a substantial achievement because it translates into cost savings for the organization. Ultimately, the hours saved through automation equate to tangible financial benefits.

The concept of process analysis would be helpful. Having a tool that can assess the entire workflow of an automation created by someone would be highly beneficial. This tool could identify areas where enhancements or improvements are feasible, simplifying the process of refining and optimizing automation workflows. In the case of case number categorization, we encountered an issue. While creating the automation, the system was designed to detect and categorize cases into various specified categories.

I have been using UiPath for a year and a half.

The performance of the automation largely depends on the developers and the environment. For unattended automation, ongoing monitoring is necessary, especially when your team is actively making changes to the interface of the platform or system you're automating.

It is highly scalable as it can be deployed to handle large datasets and execute numerous processes concurrently. This scalability enhances its efficiency and productivity, making it a valuable tool.

My company made the decision to opt for UiPath over other vendors approximately five to six years ago. The primary reason for this choice was its superior technology and the seamless integration it offered for running our processes.

The initial setup was straightforward.

It doesn't have many direct competitors that offer a comparable blend of advanced automation features and competitive pricing. What sets them apart is their commitment to continuous improvement and innovation, evident in their advertising and technology enhancements.

Overall, I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

I use UiPath for a variety of tasks, including automating user interfaces, processing documents, utilizing process mining, performing test automation, and even handling natural language processing.

It contributed to revenue growth by enabling us to maintain a consistent headcount and resource level while expanding our business.

Unattended automation, particularly in the realm of UI automation, is the most valuable aspect.

Its ability to swiftly create automation in UiPath Studio is highly beneficial. It's highly effective in pinpointing areas within the organization where assistance is required.

There are several areas where I see room for improvement in the tool. One of these areas would be a more solutions-oriented pricing structure. This is because the platform requires a multitude of building blocks even for the simplest use cases and when dealing with newer clients, this can be challenging. One area where I'd appreciate additional or new features is in the realm of insights.

I have been using UiPath for seven years.

It offers good stability features with minor bugs from time to time.

When it comes to scalability, UiPath exhibits a high degree of proficiency.

The customer support is quite commendable and we often make use of TAM when needed. I would rate it around an eight out of ten because there is room for improvement.

I've previously used a variety of automation tools, including Blue Prism, OpenSpan, Automation Anywhere, WorkFusion, and Microsoft Power Automate.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I collaborated with my IT teams to establish high-availability virtual machines in Azure, whether on-premises or in a semi-private environment. I also partnered with my security team to formulate our digital worker strategy, which essentially involved managing identities, and I integrated all these components into a cohesive system.

It comes with a high cost, but the value it delivers justifies the expense.

We conducted evaluations of various automation platforms, including Automation Anywhere, Kofax, Pega, and Blue Prism. There were several notable distinctions. Firstly, UiPath stood out because it offered a free starting point, which was not the case with the others. Secondly, UiPath's integration with Visual Studio was more seamless compared to the other platforms. Their open and free-for-all community is an enormous advantage.

My advice would be to keep your problem-solving approach simple and avoid the urge to plan every detail. One common issue I've observed is people tend to overcomplicate the deployment, strategy, and overall decision-making process when adopting a new software platform. Instead, I'd recommend that if you can identify one or two use cases where the tool's benefits outweigh its costs, you have a solid starting point. Keep it straightforward, and you'll be on the right track.

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

We use the solution to automate our processes.

The tool's most valuable feature is its embedded activities.

UiPath needs to be easier to use.

I have been using the product for two years.

I rate UiPath's stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten.

The tool's tech support is good.

I have used Blue Prism before.

The tool's deployment was easy.

A consultant helped us with the tool's deployment.

We have seen ROI with UiPath's use.

The tool's pricing is fairly reasonable.

We wanted to minimize manual work so that our employees could utilize their time efficiently.

The solution has helped us save employees' time and money.

I rate the product a nine out of ten. You should utilize the training, practice exams, and all other information in UiPath.

We use the product for contact center, HR, and airport operations.

The tool's most valuable feature is unattended robots.

UiPath's process mining needs to improve a lot. The generated reports are difficult to analyze by ordinary people. Task mining reports are also difficult.

I have been using the solution for four years.

I rate UiPath's stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.

The support tickets don't get solved at times. We expect to support people with higher expertise when we open a ticket. However, we get less experienced individuals who waste our time.

The solution's deployment was straightforward.

Our partner helped us with the implementation.

UiPath is too expensive.

I have evaluated Power Automate and Automation Anywhere. The main differences include easy implementation and development.

The business objective that we tried to achieve with automation was enhanced productivity.

UiPath has fundamentally changed our organization's reporting and task-mining processes.

We use UiPath AI Center.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate the extraction of information from PDF files and populate websites with this data.

Our primary goal is to save time for our business users, allowing them to focus on more engaging tasks instead of manually clicking and inputting information on various websites.

The incorporation of AI in our automation liberates resources for other tasks. I believe we save approximately thirty minutes per employee each day.

The most valuable aspect is the ease of accomplishing tasks. It's incredibly user-friendly, making it accessible even to non-developers. Whether it's clicking in specific locations or entering data on a website, it simplifies the process significantly.

Updating the tool across multiple virtual machines can be time-consuming and somewhat cumbersome. It would be more convenient if this process could be automated.

I have been using UiPath for three years.

It offers good stability capabilities.

It is a highly scalable solution.

Their customer support has proved to be excellent. I would rate it ten out of ten.

I previously used Microsoft's Power Automate tool, but I switched to UiPath because it offers a wider range of features. Microsoft's focus seemed to be primarily on Microsoft-related costs, often neglecting comprehensive support.

The initial setup is straightforward, but the main challenge I encounter is related to updates.

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

We use the solution for automation. I have implemented the solution in many ways. Some clients need to send us files via email or through Excel. We are reading and creating the file into some internal systems.

Some other clients need the solution to read invoices from different vendors. We get them from Outlook email and fetch data.

We are working for finance organizations. For example, the Canadian government is creating rules to discharge loan applications within one month or suffer a fine. We are helping financial companies discharge files on a daily basis to help them maintain compliance and reduce fines.

Many features are quite useful for us.

The document understanding is something we use a lot. It's very good and easy to use. It was a unique solution at the time. More are providing it now. However, having document understanding at the time was implemented for a US-based client who really liked it.

It's useful for building automation. It's good for the client side.

The Studio is very useful for automation and development purposes.

It saves manual labor. Those that don't use it have to hire ten to 15 people to do the same job.

We are able to implement end-to-end automation. To start, we'll meet with the operations team and they'll describe their problems. For example, what they do on a daily basis and how many people they need. Then, we create a requirement document to find ways to move forward and streamline.

We work for a financial client. They have the top three or four Canadian banks attached to them. They are all providing files. There's money involved in every transaction on a daily basis. If there's any mistake it can cost a lot for the companies. By automating the processes, and removing human error, we are saving a lot of money for these companies.

We use the user community and forums. They are all very helpful. Every time we have a question, we find a solution to them. We can also find answers on YouTube. It helps us find solutions easily.

The product has helped us minimize the on-prem footprint. We're using the on-prem orchestrator and it's been helpful.

I haven't used the UiPath Academy courses, however, we direct new users to it. It's very easy to use and helps new people get up to speed and understand quickly.

It helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation. We're working to automate more on a daily basis. It's continuously upgrading and developing.

When it comes to document understanding, it's helped reduce human error. It's given us more power to check things, like inappropriate invoices are set aside and they give the user the chance to change the mistake where it makes sense.

It helps free up employee time.

These days, document understanding costs can be very high, so we've implemented it only for two or three customers. It can be very costly for clients, even though the functionality is very good.

They are continuously improving their product. I have no specific complaints as to its functionality.

It would be ideal if UiPath had more cloud functionality, similar to Power Automate.

I've used the solution since 2019.

The solution is usually stable. Sometimes the activity doesn't work as expected.

I'd rate the stability seven out of ten.

We have four developer licenses and five developer-attended bots plus five unattended bots. The machines are Azure and on-cloud.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is very helpful. I've never had an issue with them.

I'm also familiar with Power Automate, which allows you to run processes over the cloud. You don't need to run anything through the portal. You need to connect the bot to your machine to run any process in UiPath.

Another difference is the licensing costs. Power Automate offers very low pricing.

I don't work with any other RPA tools.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

There is some configuration required when upgrading. We don't have much maintenance and usually engage the UiPath support team when we need to do configurations.

The UiPath support team assisted our admin team with the setup.

I don't have specific details in regard to ROI.

The pricing is quite expensive compared to Power Automate.

Clients are charged on a yearly basis. I'm not sure of the exact amount.

I am a systems integrator.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

I'd recommend the UiPath Academy to new users and I'd recommend the product to other users looking to automate.

UiPath is a general automation tool that's useful in multiple cases, such as finance, HR, and cybersecurity. We have around 8,000 indirect users. Thousands see the reports generated by UiPath daily.

UiPath has helped my company to increase productivity, and it has financial implications. We can reduce the number of full-time employees we need, and existing FTEs can concentrate on more important work. It has reduced the time spent on repetitive tasks by about 30 percent. UiPath is particularly beneficial to employees who work night shifts. They don't need to wake up early to run the reports. It's automated, so they have the reports in their inboxes as soon as they wake up.

It gives us the power to scale up because we can process a greater volume of tasks by adding more bots, and we can accomplish things we could not do without adding staff.

UiPath reduces human error in terms of understanding what is written and changing it. It does not have the intelligence to think or manipulate the values that it sees, but it can change a value from x to y, reducing human error. It depends on the use case, but a bot is a lot less likely than a human to make errors when performing certain tasks, like converting a dollar amount to euros or pounds.

We have a hybrid environment with a small on-prem installation and AWS, but we plan to transition fully to the cloud by next year, so it has definitely decreased our on-prem footprint and the maintenance requirements from our side. We don't need to do as much stack maintenance on our physical infrastructure.

The UiPath Academy courses help the team to learn and understand what is going on. The great part is that it's free. With some products, you can only access the learning materials with an enterprise license. However, UiPath enables you to take the courses even if you are only using the community version.

We have experimented with UiPath's AI functions, but we have not used them in production. We are working with the solution's Document Understanding capabilities, and our AI team is creating a few use cases for us.

The most valuable feature is the UiPath Community, where developers can share and collaborate. We realize a lot of value and utility from developers coming together. That's a significant advantage UiPath has over its competitors. It has helped us understand what other people are doing and contribute to the community. Aside from that, the UI automation is pretty good with respect to error handling and other stuff.

The UiPath user community is pretty engaged. You rarely see this level of engagement on other platforms. There are thousands of questions, and when you post a new one, you can usually get an answer within five minutes. That shows how engaged the community is. You can also get a fast response from the company itself. They connect with their users through regular seminars and events like mini-hackathons and demos.

Building automations in UiPath is simple. It's a safe, low-code platform. The drag-and-drop workflows make it accessible to non-technical people, and it's becoming even easier with the advent of generative AI. You can just type whatever you want to create, and it can do it for you.

We have been developing some processes that can help with climate issues. UiPath can help us track our carbon emissions. We have various portals where we report our progress on our climate goals, and we can gather the data using UiPath quickly and provide timely updates to the government.

With UiPath, we can implement end-to-end automation involving integration with multiple products. We can add chatbots in the front and process mining or data mining. Through process mining, we can automate use cases as we get them. This capability was not available earlier. We can analyze the bots and derive insights from UiPath, which makes it end-to-end.

UiPath should make more of its advanced capabilities available to non-technical users through additional low-code features. They should also enhance their AI features and make more machine learning models available out of the box through the UiPath store.

I started using UiPath in 2016 when I was with a different company.

UiPath is a stable product, but there are still some areas where it could improve.

The scalability depends on the design of the board. If I follow single designs, there might not be a possibility to scale it. But if I follow a design where I have Master, the pro producer, and consumer problem where I have some bots that are just collecting the information and some parts just processing that information. That way it can be scaled, but that will be dependent on the design of the problem.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. The turnaround time is typically a day. We might get a callback the next day if it's something more complex, but the ticket is usually closed within two days.

I have previously used Automation Anywhere but not at my current company. A lot of people use Automation Anywhere. However, it's more of a closed ecosystem, so you don't have access to the creativity of other developers. With UiPath, developers can publish their processes to be reused by others. That is not available in Automation Anywhere. It's like the Android store where I can publish my app in the store, and people can use it whether it is monitored or not.

Our deployment took around four to six months. The initial deployment was simple, but it took some time to set up the architecture. We needed to get approval from our cloud team to set UiPath up and integrate it. Around five to seven people were involved. The solution is deployed across multiple locations and departments.

We have to perform some maintenance on the software that UiPath is automating. When we build a database, we need to archive it so that we don't exceed the requirements. We have to delete logs regularly, and the machines require software updates. It isn't specific to UiPath.

We've seen a significant return on our investment. For example, when we needed to do a lot of data migration because we were transitioning to a new platform, we previously had to hire outsourced contractors to do that manually.

This cost a lot of money and involved some data security risks because we had to share access with them. They would need to migrate the data manually using some tool, but we can now do that internally with UiPath. No one is looking at our data, and it can be done fast.

UiPath is on the higher side compared to Microsoft Power Automate and Automation Anywhere.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. If you are considering UiPath, you should think about whether you have strong use cases that can't be handled by a competing solution. For small use cases, your needs might be better met by another tool that is native to your environment.

We're focusing heavily on document understanding processes. We use it to extract invoices, data tables from PDFs, budget, and PITBULL automation that's heavily focused on UI navigation and PDF manipulation. That's our main focus at the moment.

We've had a few calls with UiPath where they've shown demos on how they use the AI Center, but we've yet to find something that we can look in and see because we are a financial institution. We want to trust AI. We need to build our confidence in that before we actually implement it. It's at an experimental stage for us.

It started off as optimizing redundant processes to make sure that we enhance department abilities. We moved into the research sphere last year, where we focused on taking large datasets and throwing them up into data tables, and getting that data from PDFs or web pages. We started using data extraction and table extraction, and that's what drove our projects from that point.

Document Understanding is a key feature for us. We find that really useful because the OCR technology, the RedJack extraction that it uses, is easy to implement with a very level structure involved, even for unstructured PDFs and structured PDFs.

We mainly use Studio and Action Center.

In some cases, we use Task Capture to build outflows.

We started off as pure RPA, focusing on building out a citizen developer program with low code person-by-person automation that users can trigger by themselves. That then evolved into unattended automation. We started looking into document understanding processes and trying to get involved with the AI Center as well.

From the start of the citizen developer program, it went really successfully. We moved into the unattended sphere, and we're looking into big data.

The document understanding has room for improvement. The handwritten documents need to be optimized further on the OCR extraction, making sure that we extract accuracy above 80% because we do see a lot of failure rates when it comes to handwritten documents. There's a lot of room for improvement there.

UiPath has referred to the fact that they are still building upon OCR and document understanding. But with the use of Generative AI, we're hoping to see improvements. We're hoping that might be something that we start later on.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

The stability of UiPath really depends on who builds the automation.

However, the latest version releases, such as 2023.4.4, have been known to contain bugs. For example, we recently upgraded to 2023.4.4 and faced a lot of studio bugs, which forced us to downgrade to 2023.4.2.

The upgrades on other orchestrators were fine, but there was a bit of a change to the UI that took some time to get used to.

Upon their version releases, there should be a bit more due diligence before they are pushed to customers because almost every time we're given the opportunity to upgrade, there are issues where we have to scale back, wait a while, and then upgrade again.

Scalability depends on the team. It depends on your vision, but UiPath definitely opened the doors for making sure that the framework is in place and that they are aligned with our vision so that they can help us in terms of scaling the automation to the degree that we want.

When we are looking to scale up the automation that we have, the customer support guys are very much on hand to give us the technical support that we require. UiPath's scalability is pretty enhanced.

When you buy the enterprise licenses at the tier that we're on, you're provided a technical or client manager, and we find that we can easily contact them.

We have a weekly call with our team, and any support question is rerouted through them because their portal can be a bit slow at times.

UiPath's endorsement of the community has helped drive the success of UiPath because no other RPA vendor really has the community of support that UiPath has. That's a big one for us.

UiPath does have a good community, but the support portal is probably something that they need to work on.

We use Power Automate as well. It is something that we try to marry with UiPath, especially when it comes to office app integration and things like that. Power Automate is simpler to use.

We previously had some free Prism automation, and then we decided to switch over to UiPath simply due to the fact that the cost savings were a lot better.

Orchestrator was a selling point for us because our control room is something that we would be very interested in in terms of monitoring insights and transactional items. That's why we switched over to UiPath.

We've tried to take both tools and get the best out of both worlds. Anything that any of our automated processes involve Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, Outlook, or anything like that, we tend to use Power Automate simply because of the ease of use.

We're using the local installation. Everything is localized to our premises. We have a lot of strict protocols, being a financial institution, so, we don't really want to open ourselves up to any sort of cloud orchestration.

We tried to utilize Automation Hub to predict our ROI. The reason that we're using automation is to assist teams rather than just kick the task away from them. It's just very robust.

We haven't seen any major cost savings, but we're an early team at Cowen. Maybe later on down the line, we'll get some solid figures.

The pricing is a bit convoluted. We have an overallocation of licenses at the moment. Citizen developer licenses are something that we probably need to refine.

They probably oversell it a bit to the point where we would propose that we may use x amount of licenses but in reality, we're probably only using a fraction of that.

There's room for improvement in how they sell their product.

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. Out of all the RPA vendors that I've had access to, UiPath is the easiest to use. It's the most in-depth when it comes to being able to have automation and it works in the way that you want it to work. Other vendors like Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, or Power Automate have rigid models. Some of them are web-based, which we don't really like because we're a financial institution, so we like local installations. UiPath tops them all.

For anyone looking to enter the world of automation, UiPath should be the first point to call. They have a much better idea of how to generate a productive automation team for companies.

We use UiPath for web scraping. We extract data from websites, store them in boxes, and analyze them later.

UiPath fails jobs sometimes and doesn't give you direct instructions on why it failed. A little more insight into failed jobs would be beneficial. It should have more documentation and short training modules.

I have been using the solution for a year.

UiPath is scalable.

The product's installation is easy.

Our business objective for AI automation included making our team members' time more efficient. We didn't want to spend an hour or a day manually downloading the data. We wanted to automate it and save time.

AI-powered automation has fundamentally changed our organization. We can get the data quickly and instantly anytime. It can be uploaded directly without needing someone to check it manually. A bot does it for us. It saves time, speeds up our time in the market, and scales up our business.

Automation has affected us positively. We often focus on data; having them at the right place and time is very important for us. UiPath helps us to achieve it with accuracy.

UiPath has saved us at least five to seven hours a week. We also save money since we don't have to outsource or seek the help of an intern to do the manual downloading task.

I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We do a lot of claims processing for healthcare providers. We handled the billing, and it was very beneficial for us to use automation to perform those claims management and submit the claims for those various providers.

We utilize Orchestrator, the robots, both attended and unattended, and team sites.

Our organization was trying to achieve better accuracy and better throughput with this AI-powered automation initiative. We were just getting all the claims processed that we needed to because we just couldn't keep up with the workload. Using automation was a requirement.

It is very important that UiPath has orchestration. Without Orchestration, we wouldn't be able to do anything we do. My team specifically manages the Orchestration, and after the automation goes live, they come to my team to manage.

Without Orchestration, I couldn't comprehend how we could do it. We have 360 machines running over a hundred processes with thousands of transactions a day. Without Orchestration, I don't see how we would be able to use the function.

Unattended robots with Orchestrator are our bread and butter. We don't do very many attended automations. It just seems that they are much more resilient when we run a program in a way that doesn't involve any users.

We did have insights at one point, but that was prior to it being re-engineered by UiPath. We have to pick that back up because it didn't really work for us back in the day, but I've been told that they've changed the vendors that they've used for that product. We've re-licensed it, and we're in the midst of reimplementing it.

We are working with a vendor, Namica, the UiPath vendor and we are starting with task discovery processes. We're just touching more on task capture instead of process mining.

We would like to see better connectivity with different technologies. We found credential management to be something that is a real problem for us, especially working with third-party systems.

Being able to manage those credentials and have a product that could help us with that would be nice to have. We've ended up using CyberArk WPM for this purpose. But it's not something that's prepackaged; we've had to do it ourselves.

I have been using this solution for five years.

I have no issues with stability. UiPath improves how the infrastructure works and how stable everything is. I haven't had many problems. There are a couple of quirks that different product levels will address or resolve, but it's documented pretty well on the support side.

Scalability is pretty good. We did scale. Our initial rollout was 65 machines within Orchestrator, and we have since gone to 360 with one Orchestrator and one tenant. It's pretty good—I don't have any complaints about the scalability.

When I need support, I need them to respond. I actually had an instance last week where Orchestrator was not performing well. There were a lot of locks on the database, and it was bringing the Orchestrator trigger down.

I opened a ticket and marked the criticality level as high. There's only one above that, and I didn't get a response back for a few hours.

I had to go back to my sales personnel and explain to them that it was unacceptable. There was a problem with support.

In that particular instance, it was pretty poor, but I hope they saw that it was a problem and are working to address it.

We used Microsoft Power Automate very briefly because it's just part of our Office 365 package. We've used it very sparingly. It was more of a means to an end than a plan.

We're actually looking to use it with a UiPath automation that we've created because it's Microsoft-centric, and it'll work quicker and do what we need it to do without having to invest a lot of time in the development. It might just be a subset of what we do.

We're currently on-prem, but we're looking to change that. We're up for renewal in January and are already discussing that shift over to the cloud. We can utilize AI better if we shift to the cloud.

I manage the infrastructure and the deployment of all the processes. I have a pretty solid background in infrastructure, so it seemed pretty straightforward.

We have a lot of departments within our organization that can do the implementations. But personally, I'd rather just do it myself and make sure it works.

We have an admin team that makes sure that the ROI is there before we even start.

The pricing is competitive. I like the solution's pricing structure. However, the development tools can have a better discount because we'd like to have more developers be able to do the work.

In the long term, running the product and running the automation unattended, I completely understand the pricing structure there, but on the Studio side of it, UiPath can come down a little bit on the pricing.

The product is leading the way toward AI, and there's some onus to make sure that we stay current with what UiPath is doing. It's the other way around too, where they need to understand where we are and help support us and our program. It's a two-way street. They need to make sure we understand where they're going, and they need to understand where we are.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I would recommend making sure your process discovery is done correctly because no matter how many automations you can put in place if you don't have a good understanding of your processes, it's not going to do anybody any good.

Process discovery and getting buy-in from management are key.