
Today, I’m talking with Daniel Dines, the cofounder and, once again, the CEO of UiPath, a software company that specializes in something called robotic process automation (RPA). We’ve been featuring a lot of what I like to call full-circle Decoder guests on the show lately, and Daniel is a perfect example.
He was first on Decoder back in 2022, right before he moved to a co-CEO arrangement with Rob Enslin, a Google Cloud executive brought on to help steer UiPath after it went public. In January of last year, Daniel stepped down to become chief innovation officer and Rob stepped up to become sole CEO — and then, less than six months later, Rob resigned, and Daniel took his job as sole CEO back.
Founders stepping aside for outside CEOs and then returning as CEO later on is quite a trope in the tech world, and Daniel and I spent a while pulling his version of that story apart. He made some pretty key decisions along the way to relinquishing control of the company he founded — and then some equally important decisions when coming back. If you’re a Decoder listener, you know I’m fascinated by the middle part of these stories that usually gets glossed over, so we really dug in here.

Listen to Decoder , a show hosted by The Verge ’s Nilay Patel about big ideas — and other problems. Subscribe here!
But there’s a lot more going on with UiPath than C-suite shuffles — the company was founded to sell automation software. That entire market is being upended by AI, particularly agentic AI, which is supposed to click around on the internet and do things for you.
The main technology UiPath has been selling for years now is RPA, which has been around since the early 2000s. It aims to solve a pretty big problem that a lot of organizations have. Let’s say you run a hospital with ancient billing software. You could spend millions upgrading that software and the computers it runs on at great risk, or you could just hire UiPath to build an RPA system for you that automates that software and presents a much nicer interface to users. This decreases the risk of upgrading all that software, it makes your users happier because they’re using a much nicer interface, and it might provide you some efficiency by developing new automated workflows along the way.
UiPath built a fairly successful business doing that basic version of RPA; I encourage you to listen to our episode in 2022 where we unpack it in great detail. But as you might expect, that’s all getting upended by agentic AI systems that promise to automate things in much more powerful ways, with much simpler natural language interfaces. So Daniel has to figure out how UIPath can integrate and deploy AI into its products — or risk being made obsolete.
Daniel and I really got into that, and then I also wanted to push him on the practical economics of the business. The big AI startups like Anthropic and OpenAI don’t have to make any profits right now. They’re just raising mountains of investment and promising massive returns when all of this AI works.
But UiPath is a public company, and it’s licensing this technology at a cost. So I wanted to know what Daniel thought about the cost of licensing AI tech, selling it to customers, and trying to have all of that make a profit while the underlying economics of the AI industry itself remain pretty unsettled.
We also talked about what all of this might mean for our experiences at work, and whether a world of robots sending emails to other robots is actually a good goal. This one really goes places — Daniel was game to truly dig in. I think you’ll like it.
Okay, UiPath CEO Daniel Dines. Here we go.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
**Daniel Dines, you 're the founder and — once again — the CEO of UiPath. Welcome back to **Decoder .
Thank you so much for having me, Nilay.
**I 'm very excited to talk to you. I love a full circle episode of **Decoder . You were last on the show in the spring of 2022 **. It 's been a little bit of a roller coaster since then. You were just about to have a co-CEO named Rob Enslin. You hired him from Google Cloud. Then, you **stepped down a little over a year ago to focus on being the chief innovation officer. Then, Rob was the sole CEO. Then, Rob stepped down, and now you 're CEO again . You 've made some changes to the company.
Explain what 's going on there, because that's a lot of decisions. Obviously, we're a show about decisions, and there's a lot of AI stuff I want to talk about. But let's start with that little bit of history. Why step down and why come back?
Well, roller coaster is a good word. Sometimes people exaggerate with it, but in our case, it's really what happened. Why? Look, I was always trying to do what's best for this company. This company is, in a way, my baby. I spent almost 20 years [building it]. This year, 2025, is 20 years since I founded UiPath. I thought that if we can get the best talent, and especially with [Enslin’s] background in go-to-market, this is going to help us. And Rob is a nice guy. We got along pretty well. And look, it's been mostly a good ride. It gave me some time off, so I switched to chief innovation officer. I ran our product and engineering teams.
In 2023, I had my own time for reflection, especially after I moved a lot of my responsibilities to Rob. I spent that summer in reflection mode, honestly, with a bit of soul searching around "what do I want?" I would say that I missed my early 20s craziness, with people having a lot of fun and going on spring break. I had to work. In post-communist Romania, there was a lot of turmoil, so life was not that fun for me at that stage. I thought maybe I will get to experience what it means to take it a little bit easier.
It was important for me because I discovered that UiPath is actually kind of an anchor for me. It gives me a framework of mind, a direction. It's very hard for me to wake up every day and give myself something to do unless I am in this big machine and this machine is on a trajectory. It forced my mind to be there. And I'm surrounded by great people. I talk to smart investors, analysts, customers, and partners. It's a living organism. So, I discovered that this is a gift that I have, being in the position to run this company.
Then, things in early 2024 didn't go well for us, from an overall market perspective. I think the macro was pretty bad for some companies. We had some execution issues. Our initial go-to-market was “land and expand,” and we over-rotated the company to go mostly after big deals. So, our float business suffered, and paired with some of the macro challenges, it created a difficult environment. Rob decided to leave the company in May 2024. In all fairness, at the time, I was ready to take it back. It came faster than I anticipated, but mentally I was prepared after my summer and my time off.
Did you go on a spring break? Did you take a minute? Were you in Palm Beach?
No, no, I didn't go to Palm Beach, but I spent a few weeks in the Mediterranean on a boat. So maybe close to it.
Spring break is not the same in your 40s as it is in your 20s, is the thing that I’ve discovered.
Yeah, exactly.
I always want to drill into the actual moments of change. I always joke that I watch a lot of music documentaries. There 's act one where everyone's in the garage, and there's act three where they're playing Shea Stadium. And act two, where the actual moments of change happen, are often glossed over. This is one of those moments. You made a decision to come back as CEO, Rob made a decision to leave. What was that conversation like? Did you initiate it? Did he start it? Was he leaving and you already decided that you were coming back? Walk us through it.
It was simple actually. We decided to meet in New York following Q1 2024. He told me that he thought it was better that I take the company back and he resign for personal reasons. Indeed, he needed to take some time off because some members of his family were not well. I told him, "Let's reflect a bit on this. Let's think a bit.” But in the end, he was resolute in his decision.
I also realized after that discussion that there will be many changes in the company. We needed to contract a bit. We oversized the company for this elephant hunting, so there needed to be a few changes. And I realized it's actually better that I do the changes. It's going to be a lot of pain, and we've already been through some pain. The last three quarters were not easy for us by any metric.
Would you have made the change if he hadn 't volunteered? Was it obvious to you that you were going to come back as CEO?
[Content truncated due to length...]
From The Verge via this RSS feed