Pilla vs Microsoft Power Automate
Microsoft Power Automate positions itself as "Take advantage of low-code and AI to build automations that boost productivity across your organization". Pilla is AI workflow automation built for deskless teams — the people doing the work on their feet, not at a desk.
Compared against Microsoft Power Automate's own documentation · last verified Thu May 21 2026 00:00:00 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time)
The short version
- Choose Pilla if
- Pilla wins where the user is not sitting at a desk in front of an IT-built process.
- Choose Microsoft Power Automate if
- When the buyer is an IT or central-ops team inside a Microsoft 365 shop and the workload is back-office cross-application plumbing — generate a report, route an approval, sync SharePoint to Dynamics, scrape a legacy desktop app — Power Automate is the obvious pick.
At a glance
| Capability | Pilla | Microsoft Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
| AI automated action step | Yes | Yes |
| Photo input | Yes | Yes |
| Checklist | Yes | No |
| Location / clock-in input | Yes | Not documented |
| Group team chats | Yes | Not documented |
| Push notifications on new message | Yes | Yes |
| Public forms (external submissions) | Yes | Not documented |
| MCP server (connect Claude / Cursor / other) | Yes | Yes |
How Microsoft Power Automate positions itself
Power Automate sits at the centre of the Microsoft Power Platform as the low-code automation tool for Microsoft 365 and Dynamics 365 customers. It markets itself as a way to "boost productivity" across an organisation by automating repetitive cross-app tasks — cloud flows that wire together Office, SharePoint, Teams, and 1,400+ connectors, plus desktop flows (RPA) that drive legacy Windows applications and a hosted bot fleet for unattended automation. The 2026 narrative leans heavily on Copilot-assisted authoring and Copilot Studio agents, framing Power Automate as the deterministic execution layer underneath AI agents.
When teams choose Microsoft Power Automate
When the buyer is an IT or central-ops team inside a Microsoft 365 shop and the workload is back-office cross-application plumbing — generate a report, route an approval, sync SharePoint to Dynamics, scrape a legacy desktop app — Power Automate is the obvious pick. It is bundled into many Microsoft 365 SKUs at no extra cost for standard connectors, governed by familiar Entra ID, Purview, and DLP policies, and the ecosystem of connectors is enormous. For RPA against legacy Windows software, very few competitors match its breadth. Procurement is easy because it sits on an existing Microsoft EA.
When Pilla wins
Pilla wins where the user is not sitting at a desk in front of an IT-built process. Power Automate flows are designed for developers and IT-leaning citizen developers — they execute behind the scenes, with no native worker-facing UI for checklists, photo capture, video guidance, signature, location stamps, or in-context messaging on a workflow run. Power Apps can be assembled to fill these gaps, but that is a separate product, a separate build, and a separate licence per user. For a hospitality, retail, manufacturing, or field-services manager who wants to send the cleaning team a recurring AI-guided opening checklist with photo evidence and an audit trail today, Pilla ships the entire frontline surface out of the box.
Full feature comparison
How Pilla and Microsoft Power Automate compare across 72 capabilities. A dash means the feature is not documented on Microsoft Power Automate's own site.
| Feature | Pilla | Microsoft Power Automate |
|---|---|---|
Workflows | ||
| Recurring workflow templates | Yes | Yes |
| Ad-hoc workflow creation | Yes | Yes |
| Reusable workflow blueprints | Yes | Yes |
| Reusable element templates | Yes | Yes |
| Custom tags & categories | Yes | Yes |
| Issue reporting on workflows | Yes | No |
| Activity audit trail | Yes | Yes |
| Public template library | Yes | Yes |
| Public forms (external submissions) | Yes | Not documented |
| CSV data exports | Yes | Yes |
| Bulk operations | Yes | Yes |
| Template impact analysis | Yes | Not documented |
| Template analytics & insights | Yes | Yes |
| Template version history | Yes | Yes |
Input Steps | ||
| Text input | Yes | Yes |
| Number input | Yes | Yes |
| Date input | Yes | Yes |
| Time input | Yes | Yes |
| Location / clock-in input | Yes | Not documented |
| Checklist | Yes | No |
| Single-choice input | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-choice input | Yes | Yes |
| Cascading select | Yes | No |
| Rating scale | Yes | Not documented |
| Photo input | Yes | Yes |
| Video input | Yes | No |
| Audio note / input | Yes | Not documented |
| File input | Yes | Yes |
| Signature input | Yes | Yes |
Guidance Steps | ||
| Rich text guidance | Yes | Not documented |
| Video guidance | Yes | No |
| Photo guidance | Yes | No |
AI Steps | ||
| AI context briefing step | Yes | Yes |
| AI decision gate step | Yes | Yes |
| AI decision tree step | Yes | Yes |
| AI automated action step | Yes | Yes |
Communication | ||
| In-app 1:1 direct messages | Yes | Not documented |
| Group team chats | Yes | Not documented |
| Team-wide broadcasts | Yes | Not documented |
| Photo, video & file attachments | Yes | Not documented |
| Threaded replies | Yes | Not documented |
| Emoji reactions | Yes | Not documented |
| @mention teammates | Yes | Not documented |
| Read receipts | Yes | No |
| Push notifications on new message | Yes | Yes |
| Messages linked to workflows | Yes | Not documented |
In-app agent | ||
| Plain-English Q&A on how it works | Yes | Yes |
| In-product walkthroughs and tutorials | Yes | Yes |
| Saved chat history & resumable sessions | Yes | Not documented |
| Cites help docs and source data | Yes | Yes |
| File feedback, bugs & feature requests from chat | Yes | Not documented |
| Q&A on your workflows | Yes | Yes |
| Q&A on your team's performance | Yes | Not documented |
| Q&A across connected integrations | Yes | Not documented |
Integrations & API | ||
| Native integrations | Yes | Yes |
| 100+ MCP integrations | Yes | No |
| Public REST API | Yes | Yes |
| Outbound webhooks | Yes | Yes |
| MCP server (connect Claude / Cursor / other) | Yes | Yes |
| IP allowlist on API keys | Yes | Not documented |
| Custom API rate limits | Yes | Yes |
Administration | ||
| User roles (staff / manager / admin) | Yes | Yes |
| CSV user & team import | Yes | Not documented |
| Tenant-isolated data | Yes | Yes |
| Account-wide audit logs | Yes | Yes |
| Custom step run allowances | Yes | Yes |
| Annual step run pooling | Yes | Not documented |
| SSO & SAML | Yes | Yes |
| SCIM provisioning | Yes | Yes |
| Dedicated success manager | Yes | Yes |
| Custom onboarding | Yes | Yes |
| Service-level agreement (SLA) | Yes | Yes |
Pricing
Pilla
£19+ / team / month
Free tier to start. Priced per team, not per seat, so every user is included.
Microsoft Power Automate
$15 / per user
Free tier available. Enterprise plan available.
Frequently asked questions
- Is Pilla a good Microsoft Power Automate alternative?
- Pilla wins where the user is not sitting at a desk in front of an IT-built process.
- What can Pilla do that Microsoft Power Automate can't?
- Checked against Microsoft Power Automate's own documentation, Pilla offers issue reporting on workflows, checklist, cascading select, video input, and video guidance — none of which Microsoft Power Automate documents.
- When should I choose Microsoft Power Automate over Pilla?
- When the buyer is an IT or central-ops team inside a Microsoft 365 shop and the workload is back-office cross-application plumbing — generate a report, route an approval, sync SharePoint to Dynamics, scrape a legacy desktop app — Power Automate is the obvious pick.
- How much does Pilla cost compared to Microsoft Power Automate?
- Pilla starts free and is priced per team rather than per seat, from £19 per team per month with all users included. Microsoft Power Automate offers a free tier and starts at $15 per user.
Run your workflows where the work happens
Pilla brings AI workflow automation to deskless teams. Start free, no credit card needed.