What is our primary use case?
Our client's companies have extensive issues with SAP and getting information out of it. They have another technical ERP system with an in-memory database where they don't get the information out of it, then have to add it manually to SAP. That will be probably the first big use case for automation. So, we will get a bot reading it on the database from the Citrix environment and probably moving it to SAP.
The client will probably have it on-premise. They tend to be really risk adverse in terms of Cloud solutions. We have tried to get them to use the cloud more because it's just easier.
We are using Studio Orchestrator, and unattended bots. I have programmed attended bots before.
How has it helped my organization?
The client is eliminating human errors as they are eliminating some of the accrual processes from SAP, where a lot of mistakes can be made. If the bot is not making mistakes, then they are eliminating errors by 100 percent, but this depends on whether the bot is efficient or error-free.
What is most valuable?
You need an understanding of how to code, use the variables and arguments, etc. That was why I was excited for StudioX. I tried it earlier, and it was amazing. This is actually what they were missing. Studio is great because you can do so much stuff.
What needs improvement?
On a scale of one to five (where five is beneficial), I would rate the UiPath Academy as a four. There is some stuff that they could do better. I sampled the advanced, which is really difficult because it's just PDF. I had to use some YouTube videos to understand the framework that you need to pass for developer. They could do more videos on that.
They have three parts. The first is the foundation, and they are a lot of videos. The third part of it (advanced), there are no videos except one. That's only those PDF files, which you have to look and read through. I was like, "Okay, I probably can't do it." Then, I fell upon some community YouTube videos from other developers who just demonstrated it. This would be great if UiPath offered that, because I found out later that the developers made mistakes in their videos.
In the foundation, they get into much detail in the beginning. You're overloaded with information. You have to go through videos like three times to get it correctly. They could remove some stuff out of there. Those quizzes are really frustrating too. They are too detailed. If you sat with Uipath, you think it's really easy. However, it's not so much, if you get into those details.
Studio is a bit overwhelming in the beginning. They could get add some details, but not so many, into the foundation training. I've seen StudioX and loved the colors. Please get the colors into Studio. I loved the flow and that you got all these activities and colors too. It was so much easier. It was visually easier to understand where to click. It was really user-friendly.
I would rate the ease of use of the platform for automating our company’s processes as a four out of five (with five being very easy). I would rate it as a four because it didn't work in the beginning to get my bots active. I had to get into a lot of videos to get them running. I didn't understand how it needed to be designed or coded.
The Orchestrator training was much better, but I still somehow missed some details which I needed. However, it's not just do it, then it's done. You need some time to get into it. Though, it's much easier than Studio.
The integration with Outlook is not that good yet.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate stability as a four (out of five). I had some cases where Orchestrator didn't work in it. We couldn't login and the platform was slow.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We are still small and just starting out. We have five developers/solution architects involved in automation projects. We have done our certificate through UiPath Academy.
How are customer service and technical support?
Support is pretty good. It's responsive.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Our client was having some problems. They got a framework running on a scale:
- Which processes should be automated?
- What are the easiest processes to automate and more difficult?
How was the initial setup?
For our first client project, it took us five months from the time that UiPath license was purchased until we implemented the first bot.
The initial setup was straightforward. They identified several easier flows, and it was like learning with the client together. I know they are phasing out some more complex issues where you have to get into the details of HTML coding and stuff like that to get some stuff done. That is where UiPath gets difficult, because it's just coding and tech.
What was our ROI?
Our client saw ROI after one month. They realized after we showed them the first process that three people would be free to do other stuff. They got to sort of afraid of what they would do with those three people, and those people were afraid, which was a big issue.
We invented RPI and pizza. We all came to those pizza Fridays and showed them that they don't have to be afraid. They benefited from it more than not, and no one would lose their jobs.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We told the client UiPath is best. We looked for the biggest player in the market and decided UiPath was the platform.
We target medium-size companies and have long-term relationships with them. They trust in our opinion. We told them our reasons that we think UiPath is the best.
UiPath is biggest player in the market. They have this platform economy going. I'm really excited to hear that they bought the process goals. There's a lot of potential there, if they integrate process automation with process mining. That is a big thing for me.
We looked into other RPA tools, like Blue Prism. We decided it's harder to learn and implement.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate the solution an eight (out of 10). They need to thrive to get better.
If you have some tech experienced people, then UiPath is the better solution because it's easier to learn and implement.