My role is Solution Architect and Delivery Lead. We are exploring multiple use cases across different domains including banking, manufacturing, and insurance. Recently, we have been exploring manufacturing use cases, invoice dispute finding, three-way matching, and HR onboarding. We are also trying to automate the end-to-end underwriting flow in insurance.

When discussing the UiPath Platform components, we use Robot, Studio, and Orchestrator by default. We are extensively using Document Understanding for data extractions. For Agentic Automation, we use the Agent Builder and Maestro for Orchestration. We have implemented UiPath Insights at one of the largest banks in Malaysia, which is very useful for understanding transaction and bot status insights. This helps in making decisions based on operational and transaction data insights. The Agentic solution is our AI solution, where Document Understanding uses an AI ML model. For Agentic Automation, we integrate with Large Language Models to achieve end-to-end automation.

UiPath Platform is one of the top leaders. When developers are asked which tool is convenient for RPA development, they choose UiPath Platform. It provides extensive development options and is very convenient from a developer perspective. In terms of low-code, no-code capabilities, it competes with Power Platform and Automation Anywhere. The main area for improvement is pricing, as people are moving towards Power Platform due to license pricing considerations.

Regarding technical support, I would rate it 6 or 6.5. Previously, they provided excellent support, but now the support quality varies based on the client's license tier. Clients with fewer licenses receive support only through email. For critical errors, we may receive an initial email response within two to three hours requesting basic information, but resolution can take one to two days. This is a significant change from their earlier approach.

I have been using the solution for five to six years.

In terms of stability, I would rate it 7.5 out of 10.

The scalability rates at eight out of 10. We can expand whenever required. It is best suited for medium-scale to large-scale companies. Due to pricing considerations, especially in India, low-scale companies often prefer Power Automate.

By default, we implement both attended and unattended options. UiPath Platform is best described as a low-code, no-code platform. The Agentic Automation is completely no-code when creating agents. For robot development, it provides extensive options with low-code capabilities. For complex Excel automations or other automations, UiPath Platform offers numerous options compared to Power Automate. We can easily integrate VB code for string manipulations and complex Excel automations. The platform excels in debugging and selector fine-tuning for web automation or UI automation compared to Power Automate. We are a UiPath Platform partner. Overall rating: 7.5 out of 10.

I have worked on Adi FlexiCapture, and my reviews are good about it because the automation that I had to end up using is still running fine, the document is in proper format, and it works fine. For Microsoft, I have tried using Form Recognizer for some passport extraction, and at that point in time, the extraction was not good. 

The solution speeds up digital transformation, but the cost is on the higher side.

The biggest benefits I have seen from the UiPath Academy include getting familiarized with whatever products they have, as whenever they release a product, they also release a course in the academy along with it. This helps users get familiarized with the tool and understand the capabilities of that particular solution they are putting forward.

The features I have found most valuable in UiPath are the robots, and now they have started implementing more in the intelligent automation space. This is a good step because the document understanding when it got added with Gentry T AI is working very well. 

However, the Orchestrator setup and the licensing model are aspects I don't like, though their automation cloud is good. 

The solution enables me to implement end-to-end automation, and I always do this, as any automation should be end-to-end. 

The solution has reduced human error. The solution has freed up employee time.

An area where UiPath can be improved is the pricing. The licensing model is confusing.

I have almost seven years of experience working with UiPath now.

UiPath is not that stable. It has many issues sometimes. Sometimes selectors may not work properly, and I think UiPath should also have some models for when other applications apart from replication are supposed to automate it, as the automation trips. There should be some sort of mechanism to override that, and many efficiency issues are still there, which need to be addressed properly.

The scalability of my iPaaS is scalable enough, but the problem is that since the license cost is high and most of our solutions are deployed in Azure VMs, hosting Azure VM is also expensive. The customers are hesitant to invest in more bots or solutions.

I would rate technical support from UiPath around six or seven, as it is average. The importance of end-to-end automation is significant for me, and I always want it to be that way.

Before using UiPath, I was a Dartmouth developer, so it's more of a generic thing.

We are not very happy with how the pricing is, as most of the UiPath products are priced on the higher end compared to the competitors.

My relationship with the vendor is that my current company is a UiPath partner. We are a Diamond partner. We have used the vendors' UiPath Academy courses.

I cannot definitively state if this solution has saved costs for our organization, but most of the solutions are cost-effective as we did some automations for accounting in our old organization, and now most of the accounting staff are just doing monitoring rather than doing things manually.

I am uncertain about where we deployed in the cloud. We are not very happy with how the pricing is, as most of the UiPath products are priced on the higher end compared to the competitors.

Building automations using UiPath is much easier than using Power Automate or any other tools because I have most of my experience with UiPath, and they have tried to fine-tune the automation experience over time. It's much easier compared to other tools.

Minimizing my on-premises footprint is about migration to the cloud, and we are currently not using the on-premise version of UiPath. We have migrated to the cloud, and the migration process itself was very easy because they have a tool called the Cloud Migration Tool. 

It has more capabilities and is much easier for us to maintain when migrated to the cloud because we don't have to update the orchestrator after every release. 

The approximate number of end users in my organization of UiPath are more than twenty to thirty.

To someone evaluating this solution, I would say that it is good and it is a product that is evolving along with the current trend, looking into AI and moving into Accent Tech, so the future is still there. 

On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 6.5.

I am in consulting, and I implement UiPath for my clients across various use cases.

Immediate benefits include faster operation and the ability to run overnight, which clients value since the work is already completed when they start their day.

From my point of view, it is visual, making it easy to learn. It is super easy for me to learn and handle the automation, then replicate it, rather than using traditional code.

Everything is embedded. It is not only automation. It also includes document understanding and communications mining, with all add-ons in the same organization. 

We use Agentic automation. It's very good at automating processes. We're still at an early stage. We have access to the alpha version. I like what it is doing, however, it is not production-ready yet. I see its potential. Initially, I started playing with it via demos only. I've built a few things I have shown to clients, although I have yet to use it. 

We had a few use cases for Agentic. One use case was as an HR assistant, including providing invitations to candidates to say they are a fit for "x" roles and to set up interview times. Another use case was as a document extractor. I created an agent that could extract information from documents and provide a stable output and learn for itself. The third use case was for account payables, which is the one I've been demoing. I've created an agent that can read an invoice and provide recommendations, such as approving payments.

I have experience with UiPath's communication mining features. It can be used in real-time if you link it to a mailbox, for example. I don't see the power of linking to a mailbox. However, I see the power of using them to send an email and then get in return what the tool understands. I'm able to automate actions and responses. I have a demo on that. For example, I have an automation that scans the email, and it can tell what documentation the email is about. I can understand, for example, if the email or document is about a policy claim and then ask further questions or make further recommendations based on that.

It's fairly easy to build automation. I'd rate it overall a seven out of ten. It can get super-complex, however, it's fairly easy.

We can handle end-to-end automation for the most part. Now, with Agentic, it's easier, since you can connect automation. You just need to keep in mind there's a different approach.

I do use the UiPath forum. If I don't know something or if I'm facing an issue. Maybe someone has already faced it. 90% of the time, someone already has. I can ask questions and try to solve problems.

UiPath helps the team have less work. People, initially, when they use automation, fear they will lose their jobs. However, that's not the case. Now, people see that they can properly focus on other stuff. Their job isn't taken. They can focus elsewhere. Depending on the use case, UiPath has freed up 50% to 90% of a person's time.

The Academy is free, and there is a lot of content. For new joiners, they have to be certified, so for the first two to three weeks, we put them in full training mode. 

Licensing needs improvement. Licensing in UiPath is a bit confusing. They are already working on that, however, from my perspective, it is what I feel least safe discussing because the product changes two or three times a year. 

Additionally, it is confusing to understand the packages available, the number of packages, and updates with new versions. Therefore, from my perspective, licensing is an area for improvement.

The Agentic tool has a lot of noise. However, we have to get hands on to understand what the tool is capable of and what the tool is not capable of. That's one of the things that I am spending time with.

I have used all the platforms for five and a half years overall.

I have personally never experienced downtime. I'd rate stability nine out of ten.

Sclability is quite good, perhaps an eight out of ten. It depends on how the development is executed. If done properly, scaling is straightforward; otherwise, it can be challenging. However, the issue lies with the implementation, not the platform.

Every time I work with the official UiPath support, they are slow and might not have read my request thoroughly before responding, leading to incorrect answers.

If you know the right person, partner support can be good. I tend to not ask anything when I am trouble. The support in Australia is better for partners. 

Neutral

I have used Blue Prism at a beginner level and Automation Anywhere at a beginner level. As of now, I would not consider them competition. Blue Prism, for example, has not kept up with changes, and Automation Anywhere is making efforts, however, I am biased and would naturally choose UiPath. The main competitor would be Microsoft Power Automate.

Cloud deployment took me 15 minutes. A few years ago, most deployments were on-prem. Overall, the safe answer to fully deploy would be weeks, however, depending on the use case, it could be longer. The largest deployments I have done took four months due to complex automation. Typically, it takes three to four weeks, maximum.

We have around 500 UiPath specialists. Our clients are medium to enterprise.

The solution absolutely needs maintenance. If the applications change of something becomes unstable, you need to have maintenance to make changes. The same is true if a website updates, for example. It can affect an automation. 

We are already undertaking this at the regional level, so if UiPath has any activity in Australia, they will reach out to me.

I do not have the numbers at hand, however, there is clearly a return on investment when the automations are done properly, which is hopefully every time we develop anything for production.

From my discussions with clients, they normally find it expensive. This expense is generally not in terms of the bot or developer license. It's rather when it comes to AI units. Enabling document understanding, communications mining, or agents is considered expensive.

I'd rate pricing seven out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. 

We are UiPath partners.

The tool is already proven, so starting a proof of concept is a good idea. Users should create a POC that can scale. Automate steps one and two, for instance, so that you trust the tool and see what it can do. Then, quickly transition to phase one if phase zero was the initial step to see its scalability and impact on previously good information. 

I'd provide an overall product rating of seven out of ten.

We are using UiPath as an RPA solution, utilizing its capabilities for document extraction, intelligent OCR, and intelligent automation. Once it became available in-house along with the robot environment, we started using it.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation.

UiPath has freed up employee time because most accounting staff are now monitoring rather than performing tasks manually.

The robots are valuable, and UiPath is becoming stronger in the intelligent automation space, which is a good step forward. Also, Document Understanding integrated with Agentic AI is working well. The automation cloud is also good.

Their community is good. UiPath Academy is also good. You can get familiarized with the products. Whenever they release a product, they also release a course in UiPath Academy. So, you can get familiarized with the product and understand the new capabilities.

I do not like the Orchestrator setup and the licensing model. Its price is higher than others, and the licensing model is quite confusing. 

UiPath should develop models for situations when other applications disrupt automation and provide a mechanism to override that. Efficiency issues are present and should be addressed.

I have used this solution for almost seven years.

The solution is not very stable. Sometimes there are issues, for example, selectors may not work properly. 

The solution is scalable enough, but since the license cost is high and most of our solutions are deployed in Azure VMs, which is expensive, customers are hesitant to invest in more bots or solutions. If the licensing costs were to decrease, more bots could be deployed.

We have 20 to 30 people using UiPath.

Their technical support is average. Their community is good. For almost all the questions, we get answers. Initially, it was very difficult to get support, but nowadays, we do not have to go for support because most things get solved in the community itself.

Neutral

I was a .NET developer before using UiPath, so it was more of a generic transition for me. I have worked with ABBYY FlexiCapture. My experience was good because the automation has been running fine. The document is in proper format. It works fine.

For me, UiPath is much easier to use than Power Automate or any other tool because I have the most experience with UiPath. They tried to fine-tune the automation experience over time, so it is much easier compared to other tools.

The initial setup is straightforward and does not require much effort, just a bit.

We were using the on-premises version of UiPath, but we have now migrated to the cloud. The migration process itself was very easy because they have a cloud migration tool. We started using the cloud. It has more capabilities, and it is much easier for us to maintain. We do not have to update the Orchestrator after every release. So, it is good.

The deployment is done in-house.

Most RPA solutions are cost-effective. For accounting, we automated tasks in our old organization, and now, most accounting staff are monitoring rather than performing tasks manually. They are simply doing validations.

UiPath has reduced human error and saved employee time.

Its cost is a bit on the higher side. We are not very happy with their pricing. Most of the UiPath products are priced higher than competitors.

UiPath is evolving with current trends, particularly in AI, and is now focusing on Agentic AI. The future looks promising for UiPath. 

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten. It is a good product.

The primary use case for UiPath is to automate tedious tasks in my organization and previous organizations. It's very friendly, offering free licensing, which makes it easy for people to learn and work with it. The ability to automate repetitive activities that take a lot of time is a significant advantage.

UiPath has enabled tasks to be done quickly and on schedule without human errors. It allows repetitive processes to be performed multiple times without issues, freeing human resources from tedious daily activities.

The user interface of UiPath is very easy to understand, and one does not need a technical background to learn it. The community is supportive, providing alternative solutions and quick responses. 

UiPath's flexibility allows for significant automation, reducing manual errors significantly. The ability to have an orchestrator to manage processes efficiently is another valuable feature.

There is a need for more videos and examples on upcoming enhancements and changes. If they can improve the OCR engine and provide more detailed documentation and multiple examples, it would be helpful for adapting to new updates.

I have been using UiPath for almost nine years.

Stability-wise, the tool is good, however, each upgrade requires a lot of preparation, as it involves changing infrastructure and testing new capabilities.

There are no scalability issues mentioned in the transcript.

Technical support is rated seven on a scale from one to ten due to long communication cycles before getting hands-on help. However, they usually provide solutions and alternative methods that are helpful.

Neutral

I previously used other RPA tools, including Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. UiPath offers free licensing for learning, which is an advantage over other tools.

The initial setup is straightforward. On-premises deployment involves getting the development package and deploying it. Hybrid models require coordination with others but are not complex.

While specific numbers are not provided, UiPath certainly performs well in automating repetitive tasks, which likely contributes to a positive ROI.

Based on past experience, UiPath's pricing is moderate when compared to other tools. I rate it at seven out of ten in terms of cost.

Alternate solutions evaluated include Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. Each has different strengths, but UiPath is preferred for its user-friendly interface and community support.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten based on my current experience. For people from both technical and non-technical backgrounds, it's a great tool due to its easy learning curve. The licensing makes it accessible for learning and development.

We adopted UiPath to leverage its generative AI capabilities for rule-based automation. This technology enhances the resilience of our automated processes, ensuring continued functionality even when underlying systems or data undergo changes that would typically disrupt traditional automation.

Our business challenges necessitated a combined approach of AI and automation. While automation initially streamlined processes, its rigidity proved limiting when faced with changing information. AI, with its learning and adaptive capabilities, addressed this by recognizing patterns and adjusting to variations. This synergy allows the AI to handle similar changes without requiring new automation, ultimately achieving the same outcome with increased flexibility and efficiency.

Our automations are now AI-centric, and this focus will expand significantly within the company as our organization refines its AI strategy.

Our company is developing a new AI automation strategy focused on employee engagement, partnering with Microsoft Copilot and utilizing ChatGPT for automation. While our AI policy is still being developed, we plan to carefully consider how to best leverage UiPath's AI capabilities, with a strong emphasis on security, once the policy is in place.

UiPath has helped save our staff time to focus on other tasks. 

UiPath's most valuable feature is Insights, which provides invaluable data on time savings and AI model performance.

UiPath should prioritize improving its updates and user-friendliness, particularly for new team members. Streamlining updates and simplifying the interface would enhance the onboarding experience and overall productivity.

I have been using UiPath for two and a half years.

In terms of what we use UiPath for, the stability has been great. 

We utilize both cloud-based and on-premises automation solutions. Our infrastructure began with two servers and has gradually expanded to four. UiPath has proven to be a scalable platform, provided we maintain the necessary licenses.

UiPath's support is generally good, augmented by the assistance of a Technical Account Manager who helps escalate requests when needed. However, resolving issues without a TAM would be significantly more challenging.

Positive

Prior to my joining the team, the organization utilized Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment was complex.

We collaborated with UiPath's service provider for the implementation, leveraging their expertise for the intake process and initial setup. Our experience thus far has been positive.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

I recommend UiPath due to its robust user community, which provides valuable feedback that contributes to the continuous improvement and development of the product with new features.

We are primarily utilizing the platform within our department to gain buy-in for the customer's system.

We are a traditional development team, and using this platform has enabled us to work with multiple teams efficiently.

The governance aspect is very important to us. UFS Studio is also crucial for our operations.

There are significant delays between the technical team and the actual team. We are also missing some integrations with Google.

I cannot specify the exact amount of time we've been using it.

We have a dedicated development team. That said, we do have the resources to help with implementation.

I cannot speak on how it compares to other models or other components.

We are primarily looking to solve business challenges related to processing unstructured documents.

Currently, we have not realized the business outcomes as we have not implemented the solution yet. The goal is to increase efficiency, throughput, and accuracy. UiPath AI and automation have not yet helped free up staff to work on other projects or tasks. In terms of environmental, social, and governance solutions, it is not applicable.

The Studio and the Test Manager have been valuable as they made testing with QA easier. We've been able to rerun numerous test cases quickly. From the UiPath platform overall, I find these features valuable.

The product documentation needs improvement as it tends to be self-contradictory and sometimes hard to access since we are on an older version. 

There is also a need for more consistency in product support and customer service.

I have been using UiPath for five years.

UiPath has been pretty stable since we are mostly on-premises. However, the stability is to be determined when we move our full infrastructure to the cloud. Outages could occur with SaaS solutions.

It has scaled with us efficiently despite the initial complexity in understanding licenses, runtimes, and utilization. No significant issues have been encountered yet.

There have been ebbs and flows with customer service. We are at Premium Plus, now called Enterprise Success. Initially, there wasn't much value, but there has been some improvement. Dedicated support provides more assistance and better outcomes.

Neutral

I'm familiar with Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, each of which offer different pros and cons. UiPath, being the market leader, differentiates itself with its capabilities and portfolio. It is easy to use from day one, flexible, and their vision is helpful.

I can't provide specifics as to ROI. That said, in general, we achieve financial benefits and a positive ROI on our implementations most years.

Pricing and licensing are challenging as they can be difficult to understand. They make it hard to determine utilization and necessary licenses for runtimes. Comprehensive components need to come together for a clear picture, making renewals and contract negotiations complex.

We have considered Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism as alternate solutions.

I would rate UiPath a seven out of ten.

I use UiPath to automate repetitive tasks within our organization. It helps us deploy processes without human intervention for some tasks.

UiPath has helped my organization, especially in the banking industry, by automating processes, reducing manual work, and saving costs. These improvements enhance process efficiency, reduce stress, and improve end-to-end efficiency.

The Studio is a valuable feature because it allows us to automate processes independently. It enables us to configure and manage everything through a web application called Orchestrator, which is particularly helpful for large organizations.

The documentation related to new releases needs improvement. It should provide a clear understanding of what was present in the old release, what's new, and how it affects users.

I have been using UiPath for around three years.

UiPath's stability is satisfactory. No product offers one hundred percent accuracy, but UiPath performs well overall.

The solution is very scalable. I would rate it eight out of ten for scalability.

Technical support comes primarily from engaging in UiPath's forum, where people share insights. I find the community engagement to be more helpful than direct product support.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment doesn't take much time once the development and testing phases are completed.

The implementation of UiPath saves a significant amount of money and reduces manual errors, improving overall performance.

The pricing and licensing of UiPath are expensive. I rate it ten out of ten in terms of expense.

I recommend using this automation tool based on the specific needs of the industry or organization.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I piloted the introduction of UiPath to my team with two projects. The first, domain monitoring, automated our ten-plus Pega applications' quarterly security and health checks. We designed an architecture that could be mapped across all domains, streamlining the process to run weekly instead of quarterly. This provided timely reports on application health via Webex. The second project was a more straightforward test suite automation for another UI-based application. These two successful pilot projects showcased the capabilities of UiPath, with the domain monitoring still in use today.

Building automation with UiPath is straightforward, but it's essential to be familiar with the target application and have a basic understanding of coding and if-else statements. This knowledge will help troubleshoot any unexpected errors. Overall, I'd rate the ease of building automation with UiPath an eight out of ten.

While working on the projects, we used two versions of UiPath: the enterprise and cloud versions. The orchestrator that comes with the enterprise version is different from the cloud version. The cloud version had better end-to-end automation, and the ease of use and accessibility were superior to those of the enterprise orchestrator, which is the on-premise version of UiPath. Although the enterprise version lacks a few features, the cloud version provides a complete solution.

I was impressed by UiPath's user community. We used an open-source library that someone else had built and generously shared with the UiPath community. It ideally suited our needs. The user community is also very responsive, and we readily receive answers to our questions.

We didn't see immediate benefits from UiPath because it was a new tool I was piloting. We had to prove to upper management that it saved significant time, and we eventually eliminated manual testing. It took until the project's end to demonstrate this, as management focuses on results, not processes. However, other teams adopted UiPath after completion, so benefits appeared after two or three months. It took time to get people on board, but they eventually embraced the idea.

UiPath has significantly improved our efficiency by automating domain and application monitoring, saving valuable time and working hours. These tasks were previously quite intensive and repetitive, demanding considerable focus and effort from our employees. With UiPath handling these processes, we've freed up our workforce to take on more engaging and strategic responsibilities.

My favorite aspect of UiPath is its user-friendly interface, as it's a no-code, low-code platform that eliminates the need for extensive coding. Its drag-and-drop functionality, coupled with UiPath's comprehensive library suite, simplifies automation tasks. For instance, the Microsoft Outlook and SharePoint libraries allow seamless integration with those platforms, streamlining processes like connecting to SharePoint in Microsoft 365. In essence, the combination of UiPath's robust infrastructure and versatile tools significantly enhances its usability and effectiveness.

I found the UiPath Academy courses to be a bit rigid in their curriculum. It was more beneficial for me to learn from the forums and YouTube videos. Their courses were tailored to particular roles, with a course on UiPath in data science being heavily focused on Excel. While it was a well-structured course, it didn't align with my job's limited use of Excel. Overall, their courses are well-built, but I found YouTube a more suitable learning platform for my needs.

UiPath Studio provides comprehensive tools and libraries for building automation, but it lacks a built-in feature to generate consolidated reports after automation runs, detailing successes, failures, and operational features. This absence of detailed logging information makes it difficult to troubleshoot issues and identify whether the problem lies within the application or the automation itself. While UiPath's orchestrator website provides some information, it's insufficient for demonstrating automation runs and accomplished features to stakeholders. Although a future release may address this, the lack of robust reporting capabilities remains a significant area for improvement. Additionally, UiPath's diverse suite of licenses can confuse end-users, making it challenging to determine the most suitable option. While the company has improved features, the increased number of licenses creates a knowledge gap between what's available and user understanding. Clearer explanations of each license would simplify decision-making for potential users and streamline adoption.

I have been using UiPath for one year.

Once we have the licensed version of UiPath, we don't anticipate issues with caching. We were using the 2021 Studio version because it was stable. Although the UiPath team suggested upgrading, I'm not certain about the reasons. I can't comment on the latest models, but the 2021 version was reliable.

The scalability of UiPath depends on the number of licenses. To deploy our automation, we need to utilize robots responsible for executing the automation we've built in a user-less environment. Scalability is directly proportional to the number of robots we have, which is, in turn, determined by the number of licenses. Therefore, more licenses translate to greater scalability.

The initial onboarding of UiPath was straightforward, but the only challenge we encountered was connecting UiPath Studio to the Orchestrator. UiPath Studio is where automations are built, while the Orchestrator is where they are deployed and run. This required some back-and-forth with the product team and my technical lead. However, this issue only arises during the initial setup. Once someone familiar with the process sets it up, it becomes easier. There were some challenges connecting and deploying the first automation, specifically between the Orchestrator and Studio.

Three people were involved in the deployment: my technical lead, who liaised with the product team to discuss progress and challenges; myself, responsible for building and deploying the automation; and one of my junior colleagues, who assisted me. In short, we had a three-person team.

We used UiPath and built and deployed that project, which ran successfully for approximately two quarters while I was away. However, the cost and licensing associated with UiPath became an issue. The license we were using offered excellent features specific to our needs, but it didn't provide much beyond that. It didn't make sense to continue spending much money on UiPath, even though it saved us time and money. The savings were essentially being reinvested back into purchasing the UiPath license. While UiPath licenses offer valuable features, they are expensive. For our single-use case, investing that much wasn't justifiable. We switched to Selenium, an open-source automation tool. Although it took additional time to deploy the same solution with Selenium, and it might not be a 100 percent match in functionality, it allowed us to save on costs.

The cost of UiPath is justified for organizations with many use cases but not for one or two use cases.

I give UiPath a seven out of ten.

The advice I'd like to give new UiPath users is to first understand their specific use case for UiPath. I've noticed some teams try to adopt UiPath by first figuring out a solution and then trying to retrofit it to their existing problems. Instead, I suggest thoroughly understanding the problem before creating a solution. Many teams see others using UiPath and assume it's a cool new tool they can simply apply to their existing issues. This approach rarely leads to optimal results. You might be able to build a solution, but it won't be the most efficient. For first-time users, I recommend understanding your problem, then exploring UiPath's capabilities to determine the best solution. There are plenty of resources available, like forums and YouTube, to help with the building process. Remember, understand the problem first, then build the solution.