We are an insurance company. We mainly deal with all types of insurance from casualty and specialty to even aviation and medical stop loss.

I have had use cases where we have been taking information from emails and phone calls to put them into a mainframe. We have done claims intake for insurance, and then we have notifications. For the policy system, we have done a lot of back-office accounting work.

By implementing UiPath, we were trying to seek a way to free hours up at critical times. It is not just about hours saved. It is also the quality of the hours that we save and freeing people up for more value-added work.

UiPath has definitely helped with scalability. The number one reason to use something like UiPath is to increase scalability so that we are less susceptible to changes in the market. We can grow our business without growing our staff hours.

UiPath has changed the way we perceive our processes because even outside of processes that we automate, we look at our processes in a new way in terms of process improvement. Not everything needs to be automated. Some things just need to have the process changed. It has helped us to be very critical of our processes and be more forward-thinking and not just sticking in the same ruts.

UiPath has helped with the accuracy. There is less fat fingering of things. When the robot is entering things into a system, it will put in exactly what was input into it. There is also a chance for transposing things, so there is a lot more accuracy in that respect.

UiPath has freed up time and resources for other tasks. That has been our main focus in terms of the ROI we look for. With the accounting back office practices, our close cycles are shorter, but people are not working more. With automation, we now have things that are on more of a 24-hour cycle. We are able to do a higher volume in less time.

We have saved thousands of hours not just in the back office accounting side for close cycles but also in insurance. We have busy seasons. We sometimes had to hire temporary workers. With the automation of our claims intake and other processes in that area, we are no longer hiring those temporary workers. We do not need them anymore.

The ability to connect various systems that do not have any kind of API between and the areas where we need to mimic what a human does to a system in terms of input and output is valuable. We primarily use UI automation where we simulate what a human does within an application. By using the right selectors, we try to find where on the screen we need to click. We take in information from input files. We use all the logic flowcharts and logic trees to determine where the information needs to go in a system.

Some of the areas around the administration aspect of UiPath, which is what I have been mostly working with over the past few years, can be better. From an organizational standpoint, some of the guidance there could use some work in terms of helping COEs know how to grow and how to take control of their organizations as they spread.

I have been using UiPath for about five years.

There are still some stability issues. There are sometimes issues related to bots acting up. It can be hard to tell whether that is something related to how we developed it or whether the bots are having an issue. We are not sure why, but there are some stability issues.

Its scalability is fine. It has definitely gotten better over the past few years with all the improvements there. I know there have also been new offerings for serverless robots, which we have looked into, but they do not fit our needs. The UiPath Orchestrator makes it easy to maintain its governability as we scale, which is one of the main differentiators of this solution.

They can sometimes be hard to get a hold of. There have been a few times we have had to go to the UiPath Pro support. While we have eventually gotten to the solution, it has sometimes taken us a while to get in contact with someone who has the right knowledge to help us with our problem. I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

This is the first one we have been using. We have a group in the company that started using Power Automate. They ran into a problem and turned that back over to us. We are the UiPath team. They tried to automate something with Power Automate, and we ended up taking over that project.

Orchestration is the main differentiator between Power Automate and UiPath. UiPath has orchestration whereas Power Automate does not. Without that orchestration, you lose a lot of the value for these robots, especially at the organizational control level.

I was brought on specifically to do the deployment at my current company. It was fairly easy. I did an on-prem deployment about five years ago, and now, I am doing the cloud deployment. We are using the automation cloud. Having the automation cloud made it much easier to do the deployment this time than trying to set up the on-prem Orchestrator the first time.

In terms of the implementation strategy, we essentially looked at how many processes we had as candidates and what we thought the bot load would be. We stood up that many VMs. We deployed unattended robots to those. In terms of Orchestrator, we just did some basic tenant separation, and as we have grown, we have seen where to increase the bots.

We used one called Accelerate to start with. Our experience was fine. Our goal was always to transition to our own, so after the proof of concept was done, we hired our own developers. We hired our own team and went from there.

We have definitely seen ROI coming from it. For any project we take on, we look at both quantitative and qualitative aspects. Quantitative is usually just the hours saved. If a process is automated, how many hours are saved as compared to the last one? Qualitative would be things like whether we have increased accuracy, whether we have increased any time to the next process in the chain, or whether we have gained redundancy and reduced the fragility of our processes.

If it can be lower, we will always take lower.

Blue Prism was what we looked at pretty heavily. We looked at Pega. We also looked at Power Automate, and some groups within the company decided to try and use that.

When comparing UiPath and Blue Prism, there is clearly a difference in power and capabilities between the two. We also had a solution partner who could work with us better with UiPath at the time.

We are currently setting up the AI Center. We have not used UiPath Process Mining and Task Mining. We tried to use the task binder where you record something and create a workflow from it, but it was not very useful for us. The output was not very useful for us. The documentation from it was also not useful for us.

If you are evaluating UiPath and other products, I would advise looking at what kind of model you are looking for. Are you looking for a more federated model or a centralized model? You should look at what kind of governance you need in place for the solution you are looking for. One type of solution is that you put it in someone's hands and leave it and forget it. If you want to empower people and maintain central control, UiPath would be for you.

In terms of deployment, I would go for the automation cloud every time. There is the ease of use of not having to worry about standing up your own servers to monitor that. The US cloud especially has been very stable.

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate business processes.

The tool's most valuable features are document processing and AI Center.

I want a dashboard on pending and ongoing automation in Orchestrator. Currently, we have to check folder by folder to see them.

I have been using the solution for two years.

UiPath is a stable product.

The solution is scalable.

The tool's tech support team is helpful. They will jump on a call immediately in case anything goes wrong.

UiPath's pricing is expensive but reasonable for the quality of service that it provides.

We have saved more than 1000 hours with automation. We have around 100 automation. We save a lot of hours.

I rate the product a nine out of ten. I recommend it to my friends and clients.

I work in finance, and we have diverse use cases for UiPath.We use it for invoice processing, ML detection, and tag categorization of items that we sell.

UiPath Action Center is very valuable.

We ran into issues during the upgrade. It was not warned before.

I have been using the solution for five years.

UiPath is stable.

The product is scalable.

We get good resolutions when we raise issues.

We did on-premise deployment and had to check load balancers, SQL server, and Redis. It took us about eight to nine months to get into production, which was cumbersome.

We have seen millions of dollars of ROI.

UiPath is expensive.

Our business objective in automation implementation was to eliminate manual labor. Initially, we started with RPA. The finance department has a lot of manual work, including prescriptive things like driver's licenses and transcribing. We started using RPA to gain ROI.

The use of automation has enhanced our accuracy.

UiPath has helped us save 100,000 hours, which translates to millions of dollars saved.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We have a variety of use cases, primarily in finance and HR, which make up around seventy percent of our use cases.

Our focus has primarily been on document processing and it has significantly reduced the time spent on reading documents and manually inputting data.

The AI center's automation has proven to be highly valuable, although we haven't yet harnessed its full potential. It's exceptionally beneficial, particularly when it comes to handling invoices.

With numerous hospitals generating thousands of invoices, this automation has made a significant impact. Implementing AI in our automation has significantly enhanced the accuracy of our operations.

These improvements have resulted in increased efficiency and a significant reduction in the time needed for these processes. The last time we estimated, it amounted to around 60,000 hours saved.

Integrating with tools such as Asana or other service and project management platforms would be a valuable enhancement.

I've been using UiPth personally for approximately a year and a half, while my company has utilized it for around five years.

The stability has been excellent, and we haven't encountered any problems.

Scalability is a bit challenging for on-premises solutions. We anticipate that the transition to a hybrid environment and cloud will provide more flexibility.

When we initially engaged with UiPath Professional Services, the experience was excellent, they replayed and assisted swiftly and seamlessly. However, recently that changed. I would open a support ticket, and it would sit untouched for a week with no response. Even after I inquired or raised questions, there was no follow-up. Sometimes, I had to call multiple times a day to get any action. It seemed that some managers had to step in to take control of the situation, and even then, there were delays in responses. I rate it four out of ten.

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We use UiPath for automating tasks for customer operations.

The most valuable aspect is its ease of use. The utilization of AI has resulted in a time-saving of either four or eight hours per week. When analyzing a customer's job workflow, it's done promptly.

There is room for improvement in browser automation, particularly regarding access and success rates. Success and failure recognition are key areas to focus on.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

It is relatively stable, I would rate it seven out of ten, as it should be improved.

I would rate its scalability features six out of ten.

I would rate its support team seven out of ten.

We have experience with NTT-AT WinActor and Blue Prism, but we opted for UiPath because it proved to be more effective and reliable.

The initial setup was easy.

It used to come at a high cost, but now it's more budget-friendly. Considering the features it offers, it's definitely a good value for the money.

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

The use cases have been really broad for us. We have been trying to go in a bunch of different directions. The use cases started out small with attended automation, trying to automate a bunch of reports for our operations departments. That's where we started just to prove the concept, and now we're branching out into some of the document understanding.

We're in the financial services industry. I work specifically for our security clearing division. I do stock trading, bonds, and all that kind of stuff. Our main objective was productivity, trying to prevent from having to hire so many people to run our ops department.

We have also done task mining. It has been really great for us. It's helped not only document what we're going to do for automation but also document processes in general. There are a lot of departments that just don't have any documentation.

We've really been leveraging it in that way to try and get better documentation around all processes.

The features we've used are somewhat limited at the moment. We've been doing a lot of basic reports. We automate daily reporting tasks.

A lot of our back-office business is driven around emails right now, and there's no automation whatsoever around any of that at the moment. That's where we're really looking to go.

The biggest struggle that we've had is understanding how to get in and properly set up all the architecture and orchestrate everything correctly from the get-go rather than trial and error and then fixing it as we go.

I have been using UiPath for a year.

I haven't had any issues with stability.

We have a very small team at the moment, so we're still trying to scale up.

Scalability is open to interpretation because it depends on how your environment is set up.

Personally, we have to deploy a lot of our stuff on our own servers, behind our own firewall. It's left up to us to maintain the scalability, whereas other firms may be able to use more of the cloud robots and not have to worry about it as much.

Scalability has been a little bit of an issue, but it's our own issue, not really UiPath's issue.

The customer service and support are very responsive and helpful. We have run into a few issues where they haven't been able to give us a definitive solution.

For example, one of the biggest issues we've had is that we have a lot of integration issues with our Outlook. I don't know if it's how we set it up or issues with UiPath activities, but we've been struggling there and going back and forth with support.

We use Microsoft Power Automate a little bit. Power Automate has a little bit of orchestration. UiPath is definitely a lot more sophisticated. That's definitely a big advantage at the moment.

Our use case for Power Automate has been very limited at the moment. Mainly, we've been targeting areas where we struggled with UiPath and using Power Automate, mostly in the Microsoft integrations where that works seamlessly out of the box. In contrast, we've run into some hurdles around certain Outlook and Teams-type activities with UiPath.

We're using Cloud Orchestrators so the setup was pretty straightforward. We have its cloud Orchestration by all of our robots running on-prem servers.

There were two people involved in the deployment process.

Initially, nobody bought in on the idea of automation so we started building small tasks that we could show to people. It was mostly attended automation on desktops to let the users see how the program works and get comfortable with it.

We started building a bunch of little automations that aren't huge time savers but demonstrate how UiPath can work for people. That was the implementation approach we took.

Now we've got some buy-in. People understand who we're starting to reevaluate, try and scale the program, and do it the right way this time.

We have seen a return on investment. We're mostly calculating the time saved at the moment. Now we're starting to get a little more into the cost-benefit analysis of things because we have a a program running.

For this first year, our biggest metric has been showing upper management the time saved so that we can calculate the number of employees that we need.

The pricing is justified at the moment. It's definitely significantly more expensive than other competitors out there, but at the moment, its technology is good enough to where UiPath can justify it. It'll be interesting to see in the years to come, once Microsoft starts competing more, what the pricing ends up looking like.

UiPath is definitely the leader right now. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

If you have the resources, try UiPath. Get some consulting to set everything up properly from the get-go, so you don't have to go back and redo it the way that we've done.

No matter what approach you take, you're going to see some benefit from using it.

We primarily use UiPath for RCM and it can handle most tasks effectively, especially when dealing with data extraction from PDF files. There might be more complex scenarios where AI could be more suitable, although the implementation might be challenging. We are in the process of evaluating these AI-powered use cases.

We have found UiPath to be quite valuable as we actively deploy and use bots, which have become a significant asset to our operations.

We were able to achieve the savings. It has freed up around ten thousand hours of time and resources for other tasks.

Improving financial and recording operations through the use of charts would be advantageous.

I have been using UiPath for approximately two years.

The stability is excellent.

Scalability is impressive, and it only requires the appropriate licensing.

The support is quite commendable, and they are very prompt in addressing issues. I would rate it eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward.

ROI is significant when the use case results in substantial cost savings, but it's important to note that not all use cases deliver such hard savings.

The cost is on the higher side.

My recommendation is to thoroughly assess use cases and choose the right tools to prevent possible setbacks. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

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.

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.