20VC: UiPath's Daniel Dines on Why Agents Do Not Mean RPA is F***** | Why We Have Reached the Upper End of Scaling Laws | The Future of Work in an Agent World and What Everyone Misunderstands About Enterprise AI

Summary

The Twenty Minute VC (20VC): Daniel Dines on the Future of Automation and AI at UiPath

In the December 18, 2024 episode of The Twenty Minute VC (20VC), host Harry Stebbings engages in a deep and insightful conversation with Daniel Dines, the founder and CEO of UiPath. As the leader of an $8 billion public company dominating the Robotic Process Automation (RPA) space, Dines shares his perspectives on the evolving landscape of automation, the integration of AI agents, and the future of work in an increasingly agent-driven world. This comprehensive summary captures the key discussions, insights, and conclusions from their dialogue.

---

1. Personal Reflections and Early Experiences

The episode opens with Daniel Dines sharing personal insights about his journey. Reflecting on his life, Dines admits, “I am a lonely wolf. I find life pretty lonely” (Daniel Dines, [00:00]). This candid admission sets the stage for a discussion that blends personal experiences with professional insights.

2. The AI and RPA Confluence: Agents vs. Traditional Automation

Dines delves into the core of UiPath’s strategic shift towards agentic automation. He emphasizes that while traditional RPA has focused on rule-based, structured tasks, the integration of AI agents introduces a more dynamic and decision-making layer to automation.

Product Over Innovation

Dines asserts that in the current AI cycle, "product matters more than innovation" (Daniel Dines, [04:12]). He explains that building a user-centric product with great UI and ease of use is now more critical for adoption than merely advancing technological sophistication. Drawing from UiPath’s early days, where they repurposed the OpenCV library for automation, Dines highlights the importance of creating reliable and user-friendly automation solutions.

Maturity of AI Models

He further discusses the maturity of Large Language Models (LLMs), stating, “I personally don't believe that the models can innovate in a material way in a reasonable amount of time” (Daniel Dines, [07:18]). Dines emphasizes that the focus should now be on leveraging these mature models to enhance product experiences rather than awaiting significant breakthroughs in model capabilities.

3. Specialized vs. Monolithic AI Models

A significant portion of the conversation revolves around the future landscape of AI models. Dines argues against the notion of a single, monolithic model dominating all tasks. Instead, he envisions a world with “multiple models” each specialized for different functions, akin to the human brain's diverse cognitive models (Daniel Dines, [08:51]). This specialization allows for greater efficiency and reliability in specific applications, making AI more practical for enterprise use.

4. Agentic Orchestration: Integrating Agents with RPA

Dines introduces the concept of agentic orchestration, where AI agents and traditional RPA robots coexist and complement each other within the same framework. He explains that RPA remains indispensable for rule-based, structured tasks, while AI agents handle more complex, non-deterministic processes.

Coexistence of RPA and Agents

“Very few people understand what are the use cases where RPA is really used and valuable and why actually agentic doesn't work for those use cases” (Daniel Dines, [11:54]). Dines clarifies that RPA excels in automating repetitive, rule-based tasks, whereas AI agents are better suited for tasks requiring adaptability and decision-making based on unstructured data.

Unified Platform for Automation

He presents UiPath’s approach as being the “platform that manages low skilled and high skilled” automation tasks within the same ecosystem (Daniel Dines, [15:24]). This integration ensures that enterprises can streamline their workflows by leveraging both RPA and AI agents without the need for disparate systems.

5. Enterprise Adoption and Misconceptions

Dines addresses common misconceptions about the incompatibility of RPA and agentic AI within enterprise environments. He debunks the myth that AI agents can fully replace rule-based automation, emphasizing the ongoing need for both technologies to coexist.

Reliability and Human Oversight

“There will be a progression from agents making recommendations, going to a human user for validating and then calling an action” (Daniel Dines, [18:50]). Dines highlights the necessity of human oversight in the adoption of AI agents, ensuring that decisions remain reliable and aligned with business objectives.

6. Company Strategy and Transformation

The conversation shifts to UiPath’s internal transformation as it embraces an AI-first approach. Dines shares the strategic shift from traditional RPA workflows to building agentic AI solutions from the ground up.

Building an AI-First Product

“We are building our agentic AI approach from the ground up. We gave up on some of our RPA stuff in order to come on the new technology, new frameworks” (Daniel Dines, [10:03]). This strategic pivot underscores UiPath’s commitment to leading in the next generation of automation technologies.

7. Leadership and Company Culture

Dines offers valuable insights into leadership, management, and maintaining company culture during rapid growth and technological shifts.

Founder Mode and Leadership Style

Reflecting on Paul Graham’s concept of Founder Mode, Dines discusses the challenges of transitioning from a founder-led company to one managed by hired executives. He emphasizes the importance of maintaining a founder’s vision and ensuring that leadership remains connected to both product development and market strategy.

Reenergizing the Team

“I speak really transparent to the teams. This is where we are, guys. It’s a lot of work ahead of us” (Daniel Dines, [39:15]). Dines advocates for transparency and reducing bureaucracy to empower teams, fostering an environment where employees feel valued and engaged.

8. Personal Reflections and Advice

The latter part of the episode delves into Dines’ personal life, offering listeners a glimpse into his mindset and philosophy.

Living in the Moment

When asked about personal regrets and desires for a more enjoyable life, Dines responds thoughtfully: “Everything that matters is here. And it’s how we think day by day” (Daniel Dines, [44:12]). He underscores the importance of focusing on meaningful achievements over material desires.

Advice for New Parents

Dines imparts heartfelt advice to new parents: “Enjoy the ride. It starts as very difficult and it’s becoming more and more enjoyable with every month that goes on” (Daniel Dines, [47:10]). His perspective highlights the challenges and rewards of personal growth alongside professional endeavors.

9. Future Outlook and Challenges

Looking ahead, Dines shares his vision for UiPath and the broader automation industry.

Second Act for UiPath

“We are getting our second act in the agentic space. It’s seriously the biggest opportunity for that is in front of us” (Daniel Dines, [54:03]). Dines expresses confidence in UiPath’s ability to innovate and lead in the agent-driven automation landscape, positioning the company for continued growth and impact.

Challenges in Transformation

“One of the biggest challenges is transforming the company to be an AI first company re energizing our people” (Daniel Dines, [35:42]). Dines acknowledges the internal challenges of shifting towards an AI-centric model, emphasizing the need for employee engagement and strategic realignment.

10. Conclusion

The episode wraps up with heartfelt acknowledgments and a reaffirmation of the strong professional and personal bond between host Harry Stebbings and Daniel Dines. Dines emphasizes that despite the complexities and challenges, his passion for creating impactful automation solutions remains steadfast.

Final Thoughts

“I’m 100% sure. And it’s the best time of my life. I feel way better than in my twenties” (Daniel Dines, [45:44]). Dines concludes on an optimistic note, reflecting on personal growth and the exciting future ahead for UiPath and the automation industry.

---

Notable Quotes:

• “Product matters more than innovation.” — Daniel Dines ([04:12])

• “I think the experience around the product will be so important.” — Daniel Dines ([07:18])

• “There will be a progression from agents making recommendations, going to a human user for validating and then calling an action.” — Daniel Dines ([18:50])

• “We are building our agentic AI approach from the ground up.” — Daniel Dines ([10:03])

• “Everything that matters is here. And it’s how we think day by day.” — Daniel Dines ([44:12])

• “Enjoy the ride. It starts as very difficult and it’s becoming more and more enjoyable with every month that goes on.” — Daniel Dines ([47:10])

This episode of The Twenty Minute VC offers a profound exploration of the intersection between traditional automation and the emergent role of AI agents. Daniel Dines provides a strategic roadmap for enterprises seeking to navigate this evolving landscape, emphasizing the necessity of integrating both rule-based and agentic systems to achieve comprehensive and reliable automation.

Transcript

[Daniel Dines]

This is a story that I never told anyone. I've wasted my late 20s, a big part of my 30s and 40s thinking in this way. It's a totally waste of cycles and energy. Man, I am a lonely wolf. I find life pretty lonely. Man, I live mostly in my head, thinking, analyzing, reflecting. This is how I spend my Life.

[Harry Stebbings]

This is 20 VC with me, Harry Stebbings. And I'm so excited to welcome back an incredible CEO and a very dear friend of mine, Daniel dines, founder and CEO at UiPath, the $8 billion public company dominating the RPA space. And everyone says bluntly, RPA. It's pretty challenged in a world of agents. Well, today we discuss the future of agents, how RPA and agents coexist in the future and what is BS and what is not in the agen. But before we dive in, what do Henry Ford and AI have in common? Neither could change the world without automation. In the future there will be two types of businesses. Those that have automated and those that wish they had. Uipath, the undisputed leader in automation, is taking us into the era of agentic automation. UiPath's new AI agents don't just follow rules, they think, they make decisions. They work alongside the world's most powerful software robots, all already trusted by over 10,000 businesses. If agentic automation sounds new, just think of UiPath as more growth, not more overhead platform or happier customers, happier employees platform. Whatever you want AI to do for your business, agentic automation with UiPath will make it happen. Try UiPath's new AI agents for free at uipath.com the future of automation is both agentic and robotic, so don't get left behind. And speaking of transforming your business with cutting edge technology, let's dive into another game changer, Atio. ATIO is the next generation of CRM. Setting up Atio takes less than a minute and in seconds of syncing your email and calendar, you'll see all of your relationships in one place, all enriched with very valuable data. Atio also lets you build zapier style automations, gives you powerful reports and works perfectly for any go to market motion from PLG to sales led and Atio is designed for the next era of companies like yours. And companies like yours shouldn't have to deal deal with inflexible one size fits all CRMs. So join industry leaders like 11 Labs, replicate modal and more to scale your startup beyond the next level. Head over to attio.com 20VC and you'll get 15% off. That's 15% off your first year at attio.com 20VC and if Attio helps you stay ahead by streamlining your relationships and operations Today I want to talk about a venture fund making waves with its unusual model when talking about the Fundrise Innovation Fund, which is democratizing venture capital as a public venture fund, for example, most of the AI revolution is being built and funded in the private markets. Companies like OpenAI, Anthropic Databricks. These are incredible multibillion dollar companies, but they're inaccessible to 99% of investors until they go public. Well, those days are finally over. Visit fundrise.com 20vC to check out the Fundrise Innovation Fund's impressive $150 million portf for yourself. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges and expenses. This and other information can be found in the Innovation Fund's [e-mail] innovation this is a paid sponsorship.

[Daniel Dines]

You have now arrived at your destination. Daniel Dude, I am so excited for this.

[Harry Stebbings]

Thank you so much for joining me.

[Daniel Dines]

In the studio again.

Well, I invited you basically on this podcast, so thank you for having me. Dude.

[Harry Stebbings]

Honestly, our first show did so well.

[Daniel Dines]

I got so many emails from young entrepreneurs and so I thought I would capitalize on the success of the first show.

[Harry Stebbings]

And I wanted to start with something.

[Daniel Dines]

That you said to me before, which is at this stage of kind of the AI cycle, product matters more than innovation. Can you unpack that for me?

Yeah, actually I was thinking a lot lately what's our story within the AI narrative with where we can really bring a lot of value. So over the last two years we spend a lot of time really trying to fine tune LLMs, build around them and certain degree of success. But I've got really inspired by stories like Cursor AI and my development team loves that product. It's a beautiful product built on the top of multiple LLMs but just works. I recall actually how we started UiPath. Maybe there is a this is a story that I never told anyone. In the beginning we were always based on AI, but we were using a library called OpenCV, which among many other things provided a really cool feature to find a smaller image within a bigger image. And we repurposed that library for the sake of automation. So we can take a screenshot of an application and if you want to click on a button, we can take an image of that button and then find it during replay. Just call, you know a function, find this image of the button, I will get the coordinates and I will click on the button. But that was not the only thing that we did. We created, I think, a magical experience. So we let someone to record a flow on the screen, just show I need to click this button, indicate on the screen the button and then we will generate like a very simple statement, like click that button with the image. Everything was stored. So you could have recorded an entire flow based only on working with images, even typing in an edit box. So we will capture the edit box image and then like a label and we can, we will find them during runtime. But from the perspective of the user was really simple. So I remember it was like 2013 when I showed this product to some guys that were really Blue Prism experts. And in order to do the same thing in Prism, it would have taken like two days and the outcome would be not as reliable as in our case. I did in front of them this flow like in 3, 5 minutes, press run. And it worked. And I asked them, what do you think guys? Total silence. They couldn't believe their eyes. And that was our first niche where people would deploy and would prefer us versus Blue Prism. And from that one we have basically expanded, you know, into what we are today.

So do you believe that we're then in that stage in the AI cycle Stay which is like ease of use, product simplicity, great UI is the driver of adoption, not technological advancements, sophistication of models, you name it.

Yeah. I personally don't believe that the models can innovate in a material way in a reasonable amount of time. I think they reach maturity in a way. I think I am pleased with what LLMs can deliver. Both frontier models, but also something like, you know, smaller models. Look, for instance, we are using Gwen, which is a fantastic model built by Alibaba, which is totally open source. We are using it into understanding like a lot of our semi structured documents. It's a lot of product.

Why do you use an Alibaba model versus the other models?

Because at this point that's basically the best model for this particular job. We might change it. This is why I think the experience around the product will be so important. Because we do a lot. It's very difficult to use that model without the entire product experience, without helping people, tagging documents and retraining the model on the fly. So it's an entire experience that we make it extremely simple and we can exchange the model. If we find another model, maybe llama 3.3 is better. And it's always a cost versus speed and versus accuracy equation that we have.

To do you think we will continue to live in a world of many models which are specialized in many different areas. Or do you think there will be one or two monolithic models similar to what we have in cloud today with aws, Azure, Google Cloud?

I don't think models would measure the cloud development. I think there will be multiple models. Even if we look at the human brain development, we have multiple models, we have some general cognitive models, but we have a lot of specialized models that would do some tasks better than using my general model. One of the most difficult tasks to replicate today is to take this cup and drink out of it. I am doing, it's just perfect how I do it. But that's a dedicated model that we are training. Since we are very young, we train how to work, I don't think in how to work. So it's a dedicated model. So obviously there will be a world of few frontier models and a lot of dedicated models and dedicated models will be built on the top of. I think is more likely to be built on the top of open source models that close source frontier models with.

The recognition that cursor is the right approach. That product is so much more important than technological advancement in that respect or product matters more. How does that impact how you view the next chapter for UiPath and what you do?

It has a big impact. It's a very big shift that we have actually made in the company in the way we've built software. It's not enough to think building incremental Cursor was built from ground up really. And in an AI world it was an AI first product. This is how we should build. So we are, we are building our agentic AI approach from the ground up. We gave up on some of our RPA stuff in order to come on the new technology, new frameworks, building from scratch because we want to build an AI first experience.

What did you give up on the RPA side?

Look, we had a workflow engine for instance, that was like Windows workflow engine. And we have perfected it over the years. But now we have switched to a more modern technology, that workflow engine and we are building on the top of that. So I resisted for so many years and engineers in new IPAF realized how many discussions we had pro, should we bring another workflow engine? Should we not? AI finally convinced me that's the right moment where we should bring a new workflow engine that is specifically designed for what we call agentic orchestration. Specifically designed to facilitate very well the connection between agents and human users and other robots or Other models, dedicated models and some other APIs. Some other entry points help me understand.

When we think about kind of this entrance into agentic orchestration, people are skeptical about how RPA coincides in the future of agentic orchestration and agent use in the enterprise. Why are they wrong to think that they are incompatible?

Because I think very few people understand what are the use cases where RPA is really used and valuable and why actually agentic doesn't work for those use cases. I can elaborate.

Can we unpack them?

So the sweet spot for RPA is to automate tasks that span multiple business systems and are of medium to high complexity. So they can span multiple steps. Usually it can be even 100, 200 of steps. But the keys, they are rule based. The input is structured and then the steps that you go are rule based. But they in a way they capture the company knowledge within the rules. Even simple things like if the VAT starts with this particular two numbers, then you have to take this particular flow, but you capture it in rules. This is very important. But these automations are very reliable. They simply work until the underlying system changes. Now, when it comes to agentic, LLMs are actually not good at following repetitive steps. You are not going to have LLMs multiply to numbers. No, you are going to follow an algorithm and you are going to use creep language or you will program it right. This is kind of the same with automations. LLMs work relatively well. When we are dealing with unstructured parts in a business process. It's sometimes the enterprise knowledge. It's difficult to express in rules. You can eventually it's very difficult. There is a lot of tribal knowledge on the top of the public knowledge that human user is supposed to have. So when you cannot express in rules, then you can build an agent that will mimic what the user will do, but with the intent that will reduce the human input on that part of the process. You cannot really eliminate a task using agentic because in a way agentic AI, it's about delivering something autonomously.

But if we look at it as like rule based versus non rule based, because I think that's kind of the easiest distinction between the two. Does that mean that enterprise customers will essentially buy from two different vendors for rule based versus non rule based? And why would you not just go fuck it, we'll just do non rule based. And why will non rule based not just go solid? We can also do rule based.

Well, this is a great question.

Thank you.

And I think this is the essence why we have it right at the agentic AI TABLE the answer in short is rule based and non deterministic Part actually sit within the context of a business process. It's like a long, long business process like order to cash or procure to pay. You'll have non deterministic parts and you have deterministic parts. It makes really sense to have the same technology and put them in the same framework. This is why agentic orchestration is so important. We have the technology that connects all the parts of the process and we have the technology to automate those steps in the process. Think about as a metaphor like robots are more like low skilled employees, while agents are high skilled employees. But you manage them within the same platform. You don't have two different workdays.

And so you want to be the platform that manages low skilled and high skilled.

We are the platform that manages low skilled and we are adding something to manage also the high skill. And another thing that it's not so easy to realize, it's not enough to have a technology that automate a single task. You will have to be capable of automating thousands of tasks and manage them, deliver, deploy them, monitor them, get analytics out of them, access control, who can run agents, who can run these particular workflows, what applications they can access? We have this, we build a key differentiator in UiPath platform. It's our ability to orchestrate robots.

But do you have them because you have them in a rule based environment and rule based processes and now we're moving into a completely different universe of non rule based based ambiguity.

Well, it's not, it's not a completely different universe. You know, what's the common denominator? Both RPA and agentic imitates people. And when you imitate people doing a process, there are slightly different ways in order to deploy and manage because it's more fragile, you need to have a lot of exception handling into places. You need to have a lot of retries of different things. Maybe think about, you load a website, it's variable until it responds back where maybe it's a lot of things that you have to build within the technology to make it more reliable. We have the experience with robots and we are taking this experience to the agents. It's not so difficult to build an agent as to make it working reliably. Thousands of times you go there, you call it as part of a enterprise workflow and it has to work, otherwise enterprises are not going to deliver them in an autonomous fashion in production. One story that I keep hearing from our customers is they prefer our workflows to fail than to be too smart because their risk appetite for this type of workloads, it's low. This is the mentality of our customers. That will be the same mentality with delivering agents. Agents will make recommendations. Agents are not going to take actions directly. There will be a progression from agents making recommendations, going to a human user for validating and then calling an action.

And that and just so I understand, and that is because we are scared of them being too smart and making decisions that are wrong on our behalf.

Not because we are scared, because they are like idiot savants. Sometimes they can be extremely smart, sometimes they can be extremely dumb. You have no idea right now how to distinguish between these two scenarios with respect.

Is that not a little bit like workforces, they make mistakes, they make errors, they make errors of judgment.

This is why most enterprises will create a lot of rule based workflows and a lot of precision type of enterprise workflows. They would not let people every time to decide who should I call? Should I call Daniel or should I call Harry for this job? No, it's based on rules.

How long do you think it will take to move from a recommendation based engine adoption cycle to a fully trusting agent?

As long as it's going to take for the nice self driving cars that we have today to be fully autonomous and to drive, you know, sides with people on the streets and they will just work.

Do you really think that long? Because I mean the self driving car development has been.

I truly think it's going to be that long. In the same time we will reduce actually a lot the human input. We are going to a place where we will have a semi autonomous agent that will do most of the job and humans will just sit monitor their inboxes. They will get tasks like please validate this, please validate this. What? Answer this. I need this information and then feedback to the agents and to the enterprise workflow that will be orchestrating the work and the enterprise workload will be rule based.

So when we think about this kind of landscape, we've got the orchestration layer on top. We have kind of rule based RPA and then we have kind of non rule based kind of agent workflows.

But the orchestration is rule based. This is how work is done today. You'll have a lot of rule based workflows that will connect different people to do do their job.

Do you as uipath also want to be the provider of agent based, non rule based?

Yes, but we also will integrate with agents built with Other platforms we call a lot of APIs from different platforms. Right. An agent to me within the Salesforce platform will be just an API. I will just call an API, I will get an answer back and I will feed it to a human user, say what do you think about that answer? And then based on human response I will call another action maybe in another or call another agent in another enterprise. Because we will be the orchestration on the top. And there is also. It makes a lot of sense to have an orchestration technology that is agnostic. We call it the Switzerland of the platform because an orchestration engine should provide equally good access to different platforms. What's the interest of Salesforce to provide amazing connections to SAP and vice versa? No, it's not. So they will focus on building agents that work specifically for workloads that stay within their platforms.

Why will that? Respectfully, that's not true. Like Ben White. Ben, when. Because Benioff is saying I want to build customer support, I want to build marketing agents. Benioff wants to build your full suite of agents.

But it's not about what he wants, it's about what customers will actually do.

And why would they not do that? Because they won't want.

I will, I will give you a real quote from one of our largest health care customer in the United States. I was talking to the CIO and he said I will never put data from Epic into Salesforce in order to create an agent. Never. There is no chance to do this. It's as simple as this. They will, they will prefer to use us to have connectors feed agents only with the data they really need to make a decision and then have the orchestration in an agnostic way.

That's so interesting. So it's the data migration between the kind of core home of where the data is that they will not be willing to compromise on. And so what you're saying is we're going to have a future where we have specialized agents within data repositories and an orchestration layer on top.

Yes. And also agents that will be on our platform for tasks that require connecting to multiple platforms. Most of RPA tasks today don't work with one single platform. They work across platforms. There are so many tasks that you will create agents for that require data from two or more systems simultaneously in order to make a decision.

Can we just go into just like a little bit on the task side because we mentioned Benny often, what tasks are we like? We will meaningfully see game changing results in the next one to three years and where will we not?

Instead of going to see what kind of roles do you have in your company, like you have a BDR person and so on, we go and ask what kind of processes do you run today? How does your procure to pay process look like? What are the rule based parts? What are the parts that are non deterministic, that are good use cases for agents and let's go and deliver those is the same approach that we did with RPA that can lead to immediate successes because you actually look to smaller tasks in a healthcare system you are doing something more like processing denials or prior authorization. We will focus on this type of tasks and we will create agents specifically for this and we will connect them with the robots that do the rule based task. In this orchestration layer, what do you.

Think is the biggest misnomer that people have about the non rule based agent layer that they think but they're wrong about?

The biggest misnomer is that agents will be good at doing rule based tasks, which they are not for sure.

And that's because LLMs are creative and they're not fundamentally good at rule based things like multiplication or think about every.

Time you go to an LLM you have a certain error rate. So let's say your success rate is 0.99 right at every step. If you'll do 100 steps and you multiply 0.99, you will get to a very small number. That means that the error rate is huge for every step that you you are taking in a process. So they are not good at this. And LLMs will yield a different result every time you ask them even the same questions because they in a way they work like our mind.

If I'm blunt. If you already have the position in Switzerland, you already have the distribution. I think you mentioned the kind of product being more important than innovation. I think distribution is more important than product. If you have that position in Switzerland, if you have the orchestrator, why does Wall street not appreciate you more?

Because it's early. The agentic. It's really early and we have to deliver on the roadmap that we have. We have the orchestration engine, but we need to deliver the agentic orchestration workflows. We have to deliver the agent builder by the way, we have just launched it in private preview. It's the early innings of a huge movement to adopt agents. Geni was not so successful in enterprise so far. I think within next year we are going to see a lot more use cases, particularly in the agent space.

Why was Gen AI not successful in enterprise for the last few years because it's not predictable and it will be in the next few years because.

Because we will put it in the context of an agentic workflow and we will surround it with rules and we will limit the non predictable aspect and we will put humans in the loop to validate the outcome. It's not going to be like a chatbot, it's going to be the conductor will be this enterprise workflow that can be triggered by an external factor. Maybe client will send you an email, you know, asking for a mortgage application and then you will trigger an enterprise workflow that will call an agent that will process the application, will make a recommendation, is going to create a task that will come in my inbox, I will validate, I can reply from my inbox, I'm okay or not or anything that will trigger back the enterprise workflow that will resume and will go and we'll call a robot that will grant the mortgage and will do necessary changes in the banking system. This is a very different way of working compared to a chat bot.

It's a very different way of working. To what extent are your conversations with customers customer education versus selling? I think we are do enterprises get it?

I was never a seller myself and I'm not into, I'm not into selling, I'm into actually learning from customers and also educating them on how we see the world.

What's the best thing you've learned from customers in the last year?

Well, I would say that you need to think end to end process versus thinking piecemeal, task by task. We are a company thinking, let's go bottom up. Let's identify a few tasks that are rule based, let's put them in production, get quick return on investment and then move on. But many customers feel you have to have the end to end picture of the process. And I think for agentic will be truly important because I don't believe in so much in isolated agents that you know, business user will chat with rather than this enterprise workflows that will connect agents.

How does this change the structure of companies do you think? When you think about the internal roles, functions, how people work within large enterprises, how does it change them? Do we have more people in compliance, less people in BDRs, sales, whatever. How do we think about how functions change?

People will become more productive, roles will be changed more from doing things to more overseeing technology, doing things, validating what technology is creating for you.

I'm sorry, does that not sound really fucking dull? Like we're just Going to become validation monkeys. Tick, validate, tick, validate, tick, valid. Fuck. I prefer doing it.

No, I don't think so. These validations will be actually mostly on the, on the difficult cases in the longer term. So you asked me when agents will become like fully autonomous. I think there will be a progression to become comfortable with the output of an agent.

Does the democratization of agents with agent builders with the different elements that we've spoken about, does that mean that you can access a different part of the market? You are an enterprise company, very much so today. Does that mean that you can access SMBs in a way that you never have done before?

I'm not sure about it. The catch here is that building agents require some interesting skills. Today we are at the point where we know technology works, but in order to make it working you require, you know, very high skilled people in some particular areas. Building an agent requires creating a prompt. Building a good prompt, it's actually more difficult than building a script. A script is more predictable. You have the requirements, you just follow the requirements using logic, algorithm logic. With the problem, things are not like this because slight changes in the prompt can make it working like you want or not. Yeah, we put a lot of work right now into helping our automation developers building better prompts, suggesting them prompts, helping them build evaluation sets. It's much easier to test a script that works as intended than a prompt because you'll have to you the input data can make such a huge difference and it's very hard to test it.

Will we see the size of companies reduce in the future? You mentioned that we'll move to a more verification approvals based function for humans.

Jobs are changing over time. We are seeing in agriculture. If you think about 100 years ago, 50% of UK or US population work in agriculture. Nowadays it's only 2%. They are mostly people that supervise machines doing their work. Yes, many of the jobs today will change, but they will be new jobs. Society evolves. You don't want to be stuck in the existing society. This thing will create abundance and the only way to keep with the economical growth is to increase productivity. It's with population aging and actually on the verge of starting to reduce like in many first world countries. It's only increasing the productivity. This tool is essential to increase productivity. Why we are focusing on the doom day scenario when actually we live in one of the best world possible when it's the rate of unemployment is the lowest in. I don't know, ever. Maybe.

I mean I could pose a different argument back to you, which is that the speed of progression through this technology cycle will likely be much faster than any other technology adoption cycle. So you mentioned the farming industry. That was over multiple decades actually that you saw the adoption of farm machinery. People were able to transition this transition.

You underestimate the inertia of, you know, of corporations. Honestly, even with rpa, our RPA technology, it's pretty good. And it's not fully penetrated. Not at all. It's all about when you say not.

Fully penetrate, like 10%, 20%, I would.

Say it's probably less than 10, 20% penetrated. But the rest is it's not, it's not an easy technology to deploy. You need to put an entire program, you know, behind rpa. It's kind of the same with Agent Ki. It's not that, you know, suddenly you'll have an agent that sits next to you and you show, you do this and this and then you just go. And they will run the job. No, it's not. It's going to take next 5, 10 years. With the current state of the art LLMs, it's going to take next 5 to 10 years to get to very wide scale deployment of agentic plus automation. If LLMs of course will go to.

AGI, that is bluntly what many people are thinking is that scaling laws will continue. We are seeing more compute lead to an equal level of performance increase and that actually there is a lot more room to run in LLMs. Sam Altman says that we will see AGI in 2025.

[Harry Stebbings]

Well, which you have about 15 days.

[Daniel Dines]

Yeah, look, my definition of AGI, it's a bit different than their definition of AGI. So AGI for enterprises would be when I have an LLM that has the capabilities of a guy with an average IQ like 120 points, but predictably not 180 in some fancy math jobs and 60 into, you know, other type of job. Predictably this is AGI. When we will get there, the jobs landscape will change completely. And it's not about RPA or automation. I think it's a lot, it's every industry will, will be subject for a big change. I also believe that we need a new giant leap in order to get there. I don't believe that actual LLMs reason in the sense that I expect a guy with 120 IQ reason. It's a stochastic engine. In the end there is a big argument. Is the intelligence purely stochastic or it's something else? I believe there is something else in why I am stupid compared to LLMs in many tasks. But I am much better than LLMs in so many other ways. Why? LLMs make logical mistakes that I cannot do while can do solve some problems like Math Olympiad problems that I don't have any chance to do. Why this question has to be answered. It shows me that actually the essence is different. It's a different type of intelligence. But that intelligence is not equipped to work in the context of business operations where you'll need reliability.

I'm just actually thinking though when we were talking about the transition of labor forces and what happens to people, Massa said that there's 9 trillion of capex that will need to be invested to see AI agents fully deployed. That would then create 9 trillion a year in GDP gains.

It's very small to invest 9 billion to create 9 trillion a year. I think it would be an easy investment if there is a predictable outcome. But do you really think that just adding GPUs and with the existing algorithm to train they will suddenly become become godlike intelligent? I don't understand. There are many signals that the training kind of plateaued that some it's mostly it's. I heard even Sundar saying recently that they are not seeing much more gains by training alone. So there should be something else.

What do you think is the biggest challenge that you as CEO of UiPath have to embrace approach like wrestle with in the next 12 to 24 months?

My biggest challenge is transforming the company to be an AI first company re energizing our people.

Did they need reenergizing?

Yes, we. We had the rocky ride into the public markets and probably in 2021 we were.

To what extent was that avoidable versus unavoidable?

I think if I do a second IPO I would be better equipped.

What would you do differently if you did a second ipo?

I would look into into finance and go to market a bit differently.

What does that mean? Sorry? Go into finance and go to market differently.

You can plan maybe a bit less aggressively, but more consistently. I think it's better to plan and execute a growth of 30% year over year rather than 80, 60, 30, 2010 because in a way doing such a huge aggressive growth makes you maybe sometimes still from the future not knowingly, but you discover in time is an organic growth in a public market. It's better. You earned it.

Paul Graham wrote about Founder Mode and the incredible benefits of having founder led companies. You hired a CEO and then you come back as CEO. What are your reflections on Founder Mode and the importance of founder led companies?

There are stages where founders mode work better. When I hired Rob, she's actually a great guy. But when I hired him, I didn't realize that we were still at the stage where founder mode is essential. I thought we are at the stage where we are more established and we need, we need an experience that is stage appropriated for something bigger than us. So I think for 1 billion in revenue company, it's actually, it's not that established in a way. You need to get to a critical mass. I think maybe that critical mass is.

Do you think that's it? I think the revenue is actually irrelevant. I think what's relevant is the technology cycle. And I think when you see Larry and Sergey, they are back at Google, Bezos is at Amazon every day again. Everyone is coming back home because founders.

Larry and Sergey didn't get back to the CEO job.

No, but they.

I was trying. I actually, I never, I never left the company. I ran product and engineering directly while Rob was co CEO and CEO.

It's actually, I always think that's harder with respect to you because you're kind.

Of like in and watching someone else in many ways. It's hard. Yeah, it's hard. I know it's a bit of a dance. Maybe I didn't speak enough to him, he didn't speak enough to me. And it could have been probably better. I agree. It's in a time when there is such a huge change in technology. I think the CEO baton is so important because you, you connect instantly product and go to market and marketing and it's a powerful flying wheel that has to work.

Both of us are not very good at fluff. I hate empowerment. I hate alignment. I hate all the bullshit corporate words that people use which mean no. How do you reenergize a team? How do you say, hey, you know, kind of Wolf of Wall street style.

Look, my way is to speak really transparent to the teams. This is where we are, guys. It's a lot of work ahead of us. We made these mistakes. We have to fix these things. It's not easy. It's gonna, it's gonna require a serious, serious work. And maybe that's not a way to energize them, but it's a way to make them hurt. I think one of the things that as you grow bigger is that people feel smaller and smaller. I don't want. This is. This is hard. I don't. I want to work in a company where people have joy. People feel that they are empowered to do things not in a bullshit alignment, but it's very important that if you want to make a big change, go and drive a big change and have the voice to fight for it. If you are shut down, then it affects the moral more than the stock price. I think.

How do you actually do that though? You say, hey, go take big bets. I support you.

Yeah. We are trying to reduce bureaucracy. We are trying to empower the regions to have more in their control. We are trying to get closer to the customer. This is how we build a lot of shit inside. Taking cues from the customer up to the product.

And what do you think are the biggest rules of management that are most bullshit?

People put too much importance on being disciplined. Having regular one to ones, it just gives you the impression that you do work without actually doing work. I believe more in and understanding my priorities on a dynamic basis and do what is required to do. I don't believe in one to ones. I don't believe in one to ones. With my directs, we have to call each other. If you cannot call me, if we don't have an honest, candid discussion, it's not, it's not going to work. In a one to one, how many.

Direct reports do you have? Nick at Revolut, who we had on the show the other day, they both talked about having a 45, 50.

I think that's a great model to have as many as you can handle. I think I have around 12.

What do you think about the role of CEO you are not handling well enough today?

I have two ways of working with people. One, it's very direct and sometimes might be constructed as rude and tough. And one which is indirect when I avoid to really tell them what's wrong because I don't want to necessarily take the bull from the horns. But actually what I'm telling people that I work with in a very direct style, that's a sign of appreciation. The moment you see that I'm, you know, working around and I'm finding my words that's not really a good sign.

Have you changed a lot as a leader man?

In the essence, no. In understanding better what does it mean to run a company? Of course, but in the essence, I have not changed since I was 17 and who am I? And really my essence, I have not changed. I would have led this company as a 17 years old without the experience to run it. But in the same way as a person.

When you look back at the last few years, what did you do that you wish you hadn't done?

I hired for experience. I should have never done compromise on Chemistry for experience.

That's what you did that you maybe shouldn't have done. What did you not do that you should have done? Yeah, I should. You have lent into kind of agentic workflows two years ago or a year or sooner.

We should have landed into a gentic six months earlier. Yes, that's for sure.

Do you feel like you're behind?

No, we are not behind. It's. It's very early. It's very early, but we could have been even, even faster.

Benioff said on the show that went very viral, they are not hiring any more software engineers.

No, we are not hiring as well. We have repurposed a lot of engineers from products that we deemphasize into agenda.

He also said that the existing software engineer cohort have been made so much more efficient from the tools that they're now using, mostly AI tools. How are you seeing efficiency within development teams change internally at UiPath?

Look, with all respect to Salesforce, our technology is much harder to build.

As I say to someone with respect, your child's very ugly.

So it's in a company like ours where it's really difficult what we are building and it spends many different technologies. You will get some productivity improvement that I don't think will be gigantic.

Can I ask one final one, which is a weird one and it's personal too, and it's just kind of advice, which is I invited you around to mine the other night and you saw my apartment and you were like, wow, this is really nice and you're 28 and like great life. And I actually been thinking about that for the last few days because all I can think is, well, it's not as nice as yours and it'd be nicer if there was a bigger kitchen and it'd be nicer if this and it'd be nicer if that. And I was walking in the park with like one of my oldest friends today and I felt really guilty for this in my head because all I can think is it'd be nicer when. What do you advise me as a friend when you hear that I've wasted.

My late 20s, a big part of my 30s and 40s thinking in this way. It's a totally waste of cycles and energetic. I was fortunate in life to understand what does it mean to have it all. It doesn't fucking matter. Everything that matters is here. And it's how we think day by day. Thinking about a bigger kitchen will take cycles. From reading, understanding world, understanding people, understanding AI man, you're doing we we live in a pretty amazing world. Think about. With almost zero capital, you can build amazing stuff. Fucking incredible. I know. It doesn't really matter. There is not a single thing that I possess that it's worth spending cycles wanting it. Not a single one.

Do you think this is the best time ever in history to be alive?

I'm 100% sure. And it's the best time of my life. I feel way better than in my twenties.

How so?

You know, from a health perspective, from my. My mindset and not wanting things. It's so powerful.

Do you feel freer, not wanting things?

Yes. You feel free. That's. That's the right word.

When did you feel freer?

When you have peace and you don't want anything. But not necessarily in a Zen type of mood. But in the sense that I want to do my best, but irrespective of the outcome of my best is that.

I'm just trying to understand, is that because the outcome doesn't actually change your life at all. But whatever happens now, you know, if stock price goes down 20% or up 20%, still have everything.

Yeah, but it, it's going to affect employee morale. It's, it's. It's you. You have responsibilities in the world. Stock price is important not for my, you know, wealth, for how much money I can spend in this life, but it's important for what we can build, for the talent that we can attract. So it's. We are part in a much bigger game.

Final one for you before we do a quick fire. My brother is having a baby in a month, and I'm trying to offer him words of advice from great fathers. What advice would you give to my brother having a baby in a month for the first time?

I think the best is to enjoy the ride. It starts as very difficult and it's becoming more and more enjoyable with every month that goes on. Every year that goes on.

I said he could have two weeks off.

Not. Not in the first two years.

Listen, I'm going to do a quick fire. You're going to give me your immediate thoughts. Does that sound okay?

Let's try.

So what do you believe that most around you disbelieve?

I believe in certain lack of discipline. It's very important in order to stimulate creativity.

Where did lack of discipline hurt you?

Lack of discipline actually empowers me. That's an essential part of myself. Without that, I would have not created what I did.

What is the single hardest element of being a CEO of UiPath? That people don't see the Hardest, yeah. Do you find it lonely?

The hardest part is to manage the unhappiness of people. Good news, don't go to me, they are in day by day in their day by day jobs. But everything that is not working well goes up to me. So I have to deal. But that's not only being CEO of UiPath, it's being basically running any sort of company Will.

Do you find it lonely?

I am a lonely wolf. I find life pretty lonely, man. So that's not, that's not only about this job, but I, I live mostly in, in my head, thinking, analyzing, reflecting. This is how I spend my life. So it's not only about being CEO, but even when I was a software engineer at Microsoft, I felt do you find that hard?

But I actually find it hard to switch context again. I was on this walk this morning talking about it and talking about our conversation the other day. When I go to spend time with family, I find it hard to switch context because I live in my head. And then they're talking about TV and the weather.

Yeah, it's kind of hard. And I feel I am getting more and more disconnected. It's why it's hard. The more we get into our stuff, the more is difficult into providing bits of information. If someone is asking me what do you do? What have you done today? I need to tell. I need two hours to give you context of my job and then I can tell you what I did today. So I don't have this to offer. So let's talk about tv. It's easier.

I heard this brilliant statement, which is the heaviest things in life are not iron or gold, but unmade decisions, the big decisions that weigh on you. Essentially the big decision that weighs on me is should I have gone to San Francisco when I was 19, built a career there, become friends with Sam Altman and the biggest Silicon Valley founders, which I could have done. Or was I right to stay here? That's the decision that weighs on me. What decision weighs on you?

You know, one is should I have enjoyed life more? I didn't have enjoyable life. And if you measure it by the nowadays standard, what does that mean?

You weren't happy doing what you were doing?

I didn't live like a hedonistic life and for many reasons, not necessarily that I didn't want and I have a fantastic ethic about it, but it just happened that I didn't. So I had many years of anxiety. It was hard fighting with myself, fighting, you know, my way. I am wondering how it would have been to Try to have fun in my twenties, in my thirties, and even today, I still. I can give up on everything I do and I can just go, you know, for a life of a lot more pleasurable things. But I don't do it. And I feel there is something inside me.

Why don't you do it?

I. I don't know. There is something inside me that is. It's a more powerful aspect of myself that tells me, no, this is the right thing to do. And I always did. And it was so hard for me to work in Microsoft, especially the last couple of years, because I felt I'm doing as a compromise for myself, just to be capable of building later what I want to build. But I didn't want to do it. I felt so lonely, so depressed, so far away from the world that I like it. But it was a constant fight within myself because I believe that was the right thing. So there is a quest for the right thing.

When we see stories like UiPath where it's like zero to billions and everyone's like, wow, wow, fantastic. Zero to billions. That sounds great. There are times when you don't believe. When did you not believe? And what got you out of that?

No, I questioned the success most before actually raising any money. I bootstrapped the company for 10 years. Those 10 years were the most difficult. The moment I raised some capital, I got some people trust in me, something changed in my brain and all the fear disappeared. I just went killing it. It never kind of stopped. In a way, maybe the most terrifying moment was like March 2020, when with the onset of COVID when I was thinking, maybe the world is gonna stop, we will have to basically fire, you know, almost everyone in the company to survive. We were still bleeding money. So it was very hard moment. But it. It passed really quickly. We realized that actually it's.

How do you deal with moments of intense stress?

Look, I have my own sorts of coping mechanisms. I like to write poetry. This is a thing that makes me forget a bit the source of stress and it dials into a creativity aspect. The stress is painful. You can put this pain into words. Finding the metaphor somehow alleviates for me this type of pain.

God, that's a cultural thing to do. I was going to say something else.

What do you do, man?

Do you know what? I write poetry, actually. Yeah. No, I don't write poetry. Okay. You can buy OpenAI at 160. You can buy Anthropic at 40, or you can buy X AI at 50. Which one do you choose to invest in?

At those prices, probably anthropic. I think the upside is bigger.

The upside given the enterprise at 40. Yeah.

If I have only these three choices.

Yeah, you can be CEO of any other company for a day. Which company are you CEO of?

Maybe basics final one for you.

UiPath. In five years time, what would make you happy? If I showed you a chart of UiPath and what it is in five years time, what would be happy?

Very few companies actually get to have a second act. And what I realize it's, it's, it's actually kind of very hard.

Unpack that for me.

You, you know, as a startup, you become successful understanding a space very, very well. Getting into another space for a second act, it's kind of very hard. It's not enough to have capital, to have good developers. It requires in a way even a high degree of luck to get the second act. And I think very few companies are very successful in getting a second act. I hope that we are getting our second act in the agentic space. It's seriously the biggest opportunity for that is in front of us and it's going to change the company.

Daniel, I'm so grateful for the friendship. I'm so grateful to you for joining me again. I've learned from you in so many ways and I really reflect on our conversation. So thank you so much for doing this and I've loved having you.

It's absolutely. Likewise. It's so fun being with you, man. Not only on the podcast, I have.

[Harry Stebbings]

To say, I just love that show with Daniel. He is one of the great CEOs of our time. And if you want to watch the episode in full, you can find it on YouTube by searching for 20VC. That's 20VC on YouTube. But before we leave you today, what do Henry Ford and AI have in common? Neither could change the world without automation. In the future, there will be two types of businesses. Those that have automated and those that wish they had. Uipath, the undisputed leader in automation, is taking us into the era of agentic automation. UiPath. New AI agents don't just follow rules. They think they make decisions. They work alongside the world's most powerful software robots, already trusted by over 10,000 businesses. If agentic automation sounds new, just think of UiPath as more growth, not more overhead platform or happier customers, happier employees platform. Whatever you want AI to do for your business, agentic automation with UiPath will make it happen. Try UiPath's new AI agents for free at uipath.com the future of automation is both agentic and robotic, so don't get left behind. And speaking of transforming your business with cutting edge technology, let's dive into another game changer, Atio. Atio is the next generation of CRM. Setting up Atio takes less than a minute and in seconds of syncing your email and calendar, you'll see all of your relationships in one place, all enriched with very valuable data. Atio also lets you build zapier style automations, gives you powerful reports and works perfectly for any go to market motion from PLG to sales led. And Atio is designed for the next era of companies like yours. And companies like yours shouldn't have to deal with inflexible one size fits all CRMs. So join in industry leaders like 11 Labs, replicate modal and More to scale your startup beyond the next level. Head over to attio.com 20VC and you'll get 15 off. That's 15 off your first year at attio.com 20VC and if Atio helps you stay ahead by streamlining your relationships and operations Today I want to talk about a venture fund making waves with its unusual model. I'm talking about the Fundrise Innovation Fund, which is democratizing venture capital. As a public venture fund, for example, most of the AI revolution is being built and funded in the private markets. Companies like OpenAI, Anthropic Databricks. These are incredible multi billion dollar companies, but they're inaccessible to 99% of investors until they go public. Well, those days are finally over. Visit 5FundRise.com 20VC to check out the FundRise Innovation Fund's impressive 150 million dollar portfolio for yourself. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges and expenses. This and other information can be found in the Innovation Fund's [e-mail] innovation this is a paid sponsorship. As always, I so appreciate your support.

[Daniel Dines]

And I can't wait to bring you.

[Harry Stebbings]

An incredible 20 growth on Friday.