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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have used UiPath for six or seven years.

The solution is very stable for us.

It is scalable according to our needs.

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

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

I was involved in the deployment process by overseeing it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have been using UiPath for four or five years.

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

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

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

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

We've saved time and reduced human error.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

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

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

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

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

My department has been using UiPath for about two months.

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

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

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

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

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We primarily use UiPath to move data and consolidate data formats efficiently. We are involved in claims management within healthcare. We are also exploring DevOps tooling and CI/CD pipelines, and automated testing.

UiPath has significantly improved how we claims. We provide this product for our customers directly, so we want to ensure they reap the benefits of the automation program. We serve as a product team and make sure that our products are directly open to the customers. Although we are not extensively using AI yet, there is significant interest in the org. We aim to recommend automations to users and intend to develop AI capabilities down the line.

Our teams are heavily using integration service, especially following our cloud migration. Having further insights and program visibility is crucial for longevity.

It would be helpful to be able to double-click and drill down into the data we see in the APIs and get a little more interactivity, especially in the Studio and Studio Web. I want to be able to pull in fields dynamically.

I have used UiPath since 2021, so it has been about three years.

UiPath is relatively stable. I've seen a few bugs in some of their newer tools and Integration Service. There are some issues with feature clarity across platforms, but it's not necessarily a stability problem. Occasionally, cloud may experience downtime, but stability is always reliable.

Most of the scalability issues from an implementation fall on the customer's side because they don't understand how to scale out their VM presence or set up systems in a way that relies on siloed teams. They're using it on-premises and have to manage the instance with teams outside of their automation team. I haven't had any scalability issues in the cloud. The cloud might go down once a year, but I haven't had issues scaling it, and if it has an outage it's normally not long enough to make a dent.

I rate UiPath support seven out of 10. UiPath's support is quite reliable and significantly better than most alternatives. Some competitors don't get back to you or have meaningful solutions.

There's room for improvement. They could make their online support pages easier to navigate. They're integrating support with Automation Cloud, which will make raising a ticket more seamless. When you open the ticket, it should automatically provide them information about your deployment. They're good about following up with you, but getting solutions for some products takes time.

I have always worked with UiPath, sometimes using other platforms such as Salesforce and Power Platform when they better fit specific needs. However, they are not as suitable for making enterprise scale automation.

The on-premises deployment when we started in 2019 was somewhat complex. It's different for every customer, whereas the cloud is consistently distributed the same way, and you can customize it for your business.

We work with an implementation partner for staff augmentation and architectural support, with a proactive offshore development team experienced in best practices.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

One of our simpler UiPath use cases involves running an SQL query, copying the results into a spreadsheet, and then emailing them to the appropriate people.

We also have a third-party system for parking at the hospital. Visitors need to fill out a web form, and the automation process kicks in once the web form is filled out. The data is input into a database and then automatically processed in bundles. The form is filled out automatically for them, and it batches every thirty minutes.

UiPath helps us automate many tasks people do daily that they don't want to do. They can spend that time on tasks that humans are better at, such as being creative and thoughtful instead of copying down information, filling up databases, making spreadsheets, sending emails, etc. I have one automation that normally takes me about four hours to do.

Automating certain tasks can potentially save employees approximately 60 hours per week. This was particularly true in our parking pass processing. People used to get overwhelmed with that task, so automating it saves significant time.

Computer Vision helps us read and process handwritten documentation. That will be incredibly important. The unique aspect about UiPath is the robustness of the Academy that's built into it.

UiPath could be more intuitive in how it formats strings, variables, or databases. This can sometimes be difficult, even for someone with a computer science background. Additionally, some tasks require a team effort as one person can get overwhelmed or discouraged.

We are only about a month or a month and a half into using the solution.

The stability is generally good, but it can't really be driven without support for prolonged use.

Scaling UiPath is easy. You just purchase more bots.

Previously, we used Power Automate and a proof of concept for Automation Viewer, but we decided to switch to UiPath because it has a better deployment model. We use the Orchestrator. It's a server that we can add our robots to and configure them.

UiPath is good at handling the sequential flow of processes. The way it breaks down sequencing is commendable. It was shocking how disorganized some of the other solutions we reviewed were.

We are seeing a good return on investment potential, but we haven't fully realized it yet since we are only a month and a half in.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We use UiPath for social media marketing.

UiPath increases efficiency, speeds delivery, and automates repetitive tasks to save time. We can streamline tasks and make daily work more meaningful. Instead of doing the same things over and over, employees can focus on more important work.

It also allowed us to automate many internal processes, saving significant time and increasing the accuracy of reports and monitoring. It also helped improve customer satisfaction and made significant time and cost savings.

The most valuable feature is the autopilot or copilot AI feature. While we have not used it yet, I'm told the Document Understanding feature is also highly powerful. SaaS is also valuable.

The UiPath Studio development suite response can be a little sluggish, depending on the workflows you use. I use a lot of legacy workflows, and the application response is slow.

I have used UiPath for three years.

The UiPath Orchestrator has been pretty stable overall. There have been a few outages.

We started with three licenses and still have that. We also have one test bot test license, and it's scalable.

When we opened a specific ticket, UiPath lacked the resources to help us. Getting someone to help you was hard because you needed to go through different channels.

We needed to connect three unattended bots to the Automation Cloud and Orchestrator. Setting up on-premises for different applications that don't have their own infrastructure may be a little more difficult.

We did not use a partner for implementation.

We've saved about 350 hours using UiPath, which equals about $500,000. When we automate jobs that take longer manually, the time savings are pretty straightforward.

UiPath's pricing and licensing are in line with the market. We haven't used AI units yet, so I'm unsure about their pricing.

We use UiPath for our accounts receivable and accounts payable. We are a wood company that uses it primarily for customer care and finance.

UiPath helps us to reduce human error and eliminate some repetitive tasks involved in processing invoices, so our employees can focus on critical work. We have been able to assign users to different tasks. These tasks are done faster with fewer errors, and our customers our happier.

The task recording is awesome. I love being able to see the processes and find out the issues a lot better.

I can't really say about the pricing and licensing.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

For two years, I have focused on automating workflows related to processing documents in formats like PDF, Excel, and CSV. Using the document understanding feature, we have handled forecast orders and purchase order invoices.

If you use input files like Excel, PDF, and CSV, we can automate file validation, such as checking data accuracy, format compliance, or missing information. It's integrated with Boomi, so after the files are validated, they're sent to Boomi for further processing.

Boomi provides us with the RTF file, and we use UiPath to validate its contents and correctness. It automates the process of converting the RTF file into an Excel file. Another process is remittance, where we can get files from clients, validate them, and submit them to the credit managers for correction.

UiPath reduces human error by eliminating manual work and intervention. Some human intervention is still necessary, but it has been reduced. Realizing UiPath's benefits takes some time because you may have some issues after the initial deployment. The UiPath Academy was helpful. I took some courses and achieved developer certificates. I'm still learning.

It hasn't saved time in my work because I'm still spending a lot of time learning the software. It was new, so learning and implementing those things in my work takes time.

My favorite feature is Document Understanding. I haven't used most of the new features, such as AI-enhanced document processing and process mining. The document understanding feature is especially valuable because I can use it to extract and process invoice data efficiently. It enables the quick and accurate handling of structured and unstructured data.

The flexibility to work with templates and machine learning models for document extraction has been helpful when dealing with various invoice formats and forecast orders. Data extraction from PDF has been smooth, especially with UiPath's capability to handle scanned documents using OCR and AI-based models.

The taxonomy manager lets you define the structure and categorize data from multiple document types. AI center integration allows continuous improvement in document extraction accuracy by training models based on historical data. I have utilized AI and machine learning models in UiPath specifically for processing complex PDF and Excel documents.

UiPath's AI capabilities, such as pre-trained invoices and receipts models, have effectively extracted structured and unstructured documents. For example, when processing purchase orders, the AI model identified key fields, such as invoice numbers, dates, line items, and currency details, with high accuracy. I have found the machine learning models to be especially useful when working with documents that have different formats. In some cases, additional training or validation was required to fine-tune the models for complex or irregular documents. Overall, AI models and document understanding are my favorite features.

UiPath is highly user-friendly because it has drag-and-drop functionality to design and develop complex workflows without much coding knowledge. This has been particularly beneficial when working with different document formats. UiPath's built-in tools and integration capabilities simplify the automation process, leading to greater efficiency.

We have end-to-end automation and integration with other applications. For example, we have portal automation that's end-to-end. We use it to log in to the website and sign in to different accounts. It enters the CAPTCHA, downloads the files, and logs out. It can complete the automation without human intervention.

UiPath has many resources online. We use its academy and online documentation. If we face any challenges, we can find an answer on the forum or one of these resources. I've never had a problem finding solutions to problems. They have the best resources.

I would love more integration with Third-Party applications. Expanding the library of pre-built, plug-and-play connectors to include more industry-specific applications.

I have worked with UiPath for two years.

I've never experienced lagging or crashing with UiPath. The app has never given me trouble.

Installing the community version of UiPath was easy and only took five to ten minutes.

I am using the free community version. The enterprise version is obviously a little expensive.

We use the tool for robotic process automation to automate mundane business processes prone to human error.

Some of UiPath's best features are its ability to interact well with applications and its less proneness to errors. It allows us to implement end-to-end automation, which is very important for our organization since we have many time-consuming job runs.

The tool has improved our organization by reducing operational costs through process automation and cutting FTEs. We can do more regression testing for test automation, leading to better products. It's helped minimize our on-premises footprint to some extent and aided organizational restructuring.

We've used the academy courses, which are good for beginners and advanced users. UiPath has sped up digital transformation, allowing quick fixes without building entire new solutions. It reduces human errors by 60-70 percent and saves us around 2500 hours.

UiPath is pretty easy to use for small—and medium-scale automation. However, maintaining the code becomes a bit more difficult when building large-scale, enterprise-level automation. Areas for improvement include versioning for collaborative projects and reporting features currently lacking.

I have been using the product for six years.

As for stability, I'd rate it as six out of ten. Once a project is built, we face many issues, and we often have to go back to UiPath. So, in my opinion, stability could be improved.

My company has 10-15 users. Based on my experience, I would say UiPath is a scalable solution. I'd rate its scalability around seven or eight out of ten.

The user community for UiPath is great. We can ask about any issues we have on the community forum and usually get them resolved. Regarding technical support, it's amazing that they respond quickly. However, their level one engineer could be better educated on the tool before moving to level two support.

We previously used an open-source Java Selenium solution but switched to UiPath for better security and platform capabilities.

We have the tool deployed in the cloud version. The deployment process was straightforward—it was pretty easy, mostly just drag and drop. Because of the number of projects we have, the initial deployment took days to months.

We use UiPath in multiple locations globally, including the US and India. The solution requires maintenance, particularly from a coding perspective.

I'd estimate UiPath has helped us save around 10-15 percent in costs.

UiPath is a pretty expensive tool compared to what the market offers, including open-source alternatives that can do similar things.

Overall, I would recommend UiPath to other users. The main reasons I like it and would recommend it are that it's very user-interactive and its capabilities are really good.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it overall around eight.