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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UiPath is very stable.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

The primary UiPath use cases are document processing and using automation solutions to eliminate repetitive tasks in administrative data entry.

Automation has helped our CoE understand the administrative structure and returns. It's a promising tool. We've already seen returns on the automation side, and we're beginning to explore GenAI. It helped us free up staff by taking them off repetitive tasks and transferring their focus to more important tasks.

The automation and the significant return on investment it provides are valuable.

I want more flexibility in licensing and how we can use AI units.

UiPath seems pretty solid.

UiPath has grown with us. We started on-premises and switched to the cloud, giving us greater flexibility.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath support is pretty good. It's adequate when needed. Fortunately, they have UiPath Academy and other information out there, so you don't need to use it often.

We were using ABBYY, but I can't compare the two solutions because I joined when we were transitioning to UiPath, so I don't have much experience.

UiPath provides a significant ROI in saving time and improving the employee experience.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

We primarily use UiPath's AI features to pull information from chatbot conversations with insurance providers and identify decisions made.

Implementing AI and automation has allowed us to collect information quickly. We have deadlines that we must meet for our clients, and AI has enabled us to get that information without manual intervention. There are delays while we wait for insurance to pay for claims, and taking humans out of the equation enables us to be as productive as we want.

We've been testing this emerging technology, and we're excited to see it continue to grow. So far, we've been successful in connecting, having interactions, training a language model, getting responses, and using that information to make decisions in the workflow.

The most helpful features are human-assisted and unattended bots. These features help us drive the workflow in the direction we want it to go. It allows staff to utilize their talents and the information they need. We can remove this small conversation and let them focus on the more important work.

Data integration is the biggest opportunity for improvement. We need quick connections to our complex in-house databases to set up automations more efficiently. It's time-consuming to connect those large databases.

I have been using UiPath for about a year, while our organization has been using it for about four years.

UiPath's stability is excellent, and its ability to forecast stability is improving. We have a lot of stable automations running.

Scalability is a challenge as we're a large enterprise, but task mining helps identify issues and pushes automation into the enterprise effectively.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. We have strong contacts with UiPath, and an in-house team managing implementations has built a really good relationship with them.

I am not aware of any solutions we used prior to UiPath. We developed our own home grown tools and UI automation.

We've seen a significant ROI by reducing the number of full-time employees. We haven't calculated a precise figure, but it has been pretty successful, and we believe it is promising.

We're a financial institution, and we started using UiPath for small, simple processes and day-to-day tasks, such as adding and removing users and updating information, but we're also exploring opportunities to automate lending processes.

We typically evaluate a process first to see if it's appropriate for automation. Sometimes, we've identified bad processes and needed to update documentation before we can implement them.

UiPath has allowed our employees to focus more on servicing our members rather than being bogged down by mundane tasks. In the last year, we have saved about 6,500 hours for our users, equating to the time of two full-time employees.

With UiPath, we've saved costs, increased productivity, and reduced stress on our employees. It has saved our employees time. They're thinking more about their processes instead of just doing what they're told. It places more onus on employee creativity.

I primarily work with task capture, which has been valuable. We have created a template for ourselves and reused it for all these processes. Other departments also use it for their procedures, even if the process is not automated.

We struggle to demo our processes. For whatever reason, we can't get the bot to run so that someone can watch it simultaneously. We press the button, and it shows that it's done rather than showing how the bot works.

We started using UiPath with a partner two years ago and transitioned to handling everything in-house last year.

The stability of UiPath is good. We do not encounter issues with logging in or frequent service failures.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. Their customer service is good. They are always willing to help us and address our concerns.

We initially used a UiPath partner but have since moved operations in-house. Our in-house experience has been better.

We have seen a return on investment. The 6,500 hundred hours we saved using UiPath translates to a savings of about $56,000 per year.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

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 use UiPath to replicate what medical coders do by inputting codes from certain medical systems into another. It also automates our billing cycle, allowing us to input the codes directly into the insurance billing system to receive payments faster.

Our hospital doesn't get paid if we don't get those codes to the payers fast enough. We wanted to speed up the process of getting paid from insurance companies. A full-time employee can only do so much.

Many of these people who do medical coding don't have college degrees. They're normal people with a lot going on in their lives, so they can't commit to doing this coding every moment of every day. A person can code maybe 10 to 15 records daily, but the bot could do 50. You also don't need to pay bots or give them benefits and physical workspaces. UiPath enables our organization to be more robust in what we can do.

The company doesn't currently prioritize AI use cases, but we're trying to get the leaders to prioritize them by showing them the dollar value. AI is growing. Every year, it's getting bigger.

In healthcare, everything is still on paper. People still fax papers to each other. Doctors have a sheet of paper or a packet of information about a patient that they can't read quickly. UiPath's Document Understanding lets doctors get a document that's already processed, and they can ask it questions.

We are looking to add AI, such as generative AI, but it requires our organization to implement it. UiPath's chatbots and autopilot require UiPath Assistant on every machine, which is challenging because many people use the same machine in the hospital. Everyone knows how to use Microsoft Copilot or ChatGPT. Even a non-technical user can go on OpenAI.com and start chatting. But with UiPath, if you want to use their chatbot or autopilot, you need UiPath Assistant.

My enterprise has been using UiPath since 2021, but my team inherited the solution from another team in 2023.

The solution just went live recently, so its stability is not yet fully determined.

The solution is scalable, as UiPath helped to revamp and update our older systems.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. UiPath support is amazing, especially with hypercare.

We still use Power Automate and UiPath together. Our system is entirely on-prem because some of our hospital systems must be.

We build and deploy some of the automations in-house, but we also had a parnter build some of our stuff.

There has been a significant return on investment. The cost of replacing employees with UiPath has shown significant savings. We probably saved $45 million this year, and we're projecting $80 million in savings next year.

UiPath is more expensive than other automation services, but the ROI justifies the cost.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

We are a diagnostic laboratory that receives tissue samples from all over the country daily. To manage these, we implement UiPath for Document Understanding to process requisitions from clinical providers. This information is then loaded into our laboratory information system, enabling us to carry out the diagnostic process. We have a dozen bots operating across various functions, assisting in tasks such as screening resumes in HR and data entry on patient information.

Automation has increased our productivity. In my three years at the company, the number of employees working on data entry has grown from 15 to more than 50. We needed an alternative because we couldn't have 150 employees in one room doing data entry. UiPath has improved our efficiency by 60 percent and reduced errors by 87 percent in the assessment process.

In healthcare, our top priority is to eliminate as many mistakes as possible. A mistake in our business can kill someone. Our second objective is to build better security measures to protect patient privacy and the sensitive information we handle. We also hope to improve efficiency and help our employees work better. It has helped take people away from mundane tasks and allowed them to focus on what truly needs their expertise.

We've achieved some of these outcomes so far, but we've only been automating for a year. I came to this event last year knowing nothing about UiPath, but I met some people and hooked up with a partner to get started. I met some people. We got hooked up with a partner who could help us get started. Then, I started hiring developers. We're still early on in this relationship, but we've already seen tremendous gains in efficiency and error reductions.

Document Understanding has been particularly helpful, and so has UiPath's ability to interface with other applications. AI is the next phase. Document Understanding can only process about half the documents that come in. We need the AI component to start helping so that the half we can't process has a methodology on what needs to be done with it.

AI automation is a high priority. A year ago, I was the chief operating officer, and now I'm the chief innovation officer. Our CEO saw that we needed to have a dedicated technology group looking for solutions, and he asked me to move into this role. I have seven full-time developers on my team who are specifically looking for things to automate. When I saw the demonstration this morning, my mind was blown. They're doing so many things that we could do that will take us to the next level. We can have AI interact with our pathologists and assist them in diagnostic research. We can apply UiPath across our billing processes and everywhere.

While not a negative remark toward UiPath itself, our initial partner was limited in helping us achieve our goals. We are now directly working with UiPath support, which has been exceptional.

We have been using UiPath for about a year.

The solution is very stable.

I think it's we I think we we I think I don't have any barriers in my head of what we can do do or not do with it.

I rate UiPath support 10 out of 10. It's outstanding. Working with them has been a game-changer.

We did not use any different solution before adopting UiPath.

We initially worked with a partner who was limited in aiding our objectives, leading us to work directly with UiPath support.

We saw a 60 percent improvement in efficiency and significantly reduced errors.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.