Integration contract
Which data travels, in which direction, how often, and which system is the source of truth for each field.
Solution
We integrate the platforms your operation already uses so the data travels on its own, at the right moment and only once — with failure handling, reprocessing and a record of everything that passed through.
Which data travels, in which direction, how often, and which system is the source of truth for each field.
Consuming and publishing REST APIs, with authentication, versioning and rate limits.
Webhooks and messaging so information arrives at the moment it happens.
What fails is not lost: it enters a queue and is reprocessed under a retry policy.
Rules to recognize that two records are the same person before duplicating them.
A routine that compares both sides and flags divergence, instead of waiting for someone to notice.
A record of every message exchanged, with state, attempt and reason for failure.
Controlled resend of what failed, without duplicating what already came through.
The second column is the one almost nobody publishes. It exists because a scope with a declared limit is the only honest way to agree on price and deadline.
If one of the systems is about to be replaced, integrating now means building on something that is leaving. If the volume is a handful of records a week, the integration may cost more than the typing it replaces. And if the two systems disagree because their BUSINESS RULES differ, integration does not fix it — it only propagates the divergence faster.
An end-to-end integration between two systems with mature APIs usually takes weeks, not months. The schedule blows up when the API on the other side is poorly documented, unstable or non-existent — and that is discovered during the assessment, not halfway through the project.
Quality and stability of the APIs involved.
How many entities must be synced (customer, product, order, invoice).
Volume and frequency of the exchanges.
Whether syncing must be real time or batch.
State of the historical data on both sides.
Business rules that differ between the systems.
A solution is not a separate box: it is the same services applied to one specific problem.
A solution is not bought from a catalogue. It starts with an assessment of the real process, and only then becomes scope, schedule and proposal.
Almost never. Real time costs more, fails more and is rarely what the business needs. We ask what delay is acceptable for each piece of data — and most of it tolerates minutes or hours with no harm at all.
The integration is designed assuming it will. What does not get through enters a queue, is retried with increasing spacing and raises an alert if it persists. What we do not do is promise the availability of an API that is not ours.
With any system that offers a documented way to exchange data. When there is no API, we assess the alternatives and state plainly how fragile each one is. A closed system with no interface is a real technical limit, not a lack of willingness.
That is the first decision of the project, not the last. Every field has a source of truth declared in the integration contract. Without it, integration becomes a silent war between two databases.
In most cases, yes: the integration sits outside, consuming and publishing. When something inside one of the systems must change, we say so before we start.
Systems Integration
The first conversation and the preliminary assessment cost nothing. Only then come the scope and the proposal.