System integration services that do not become the next black box
System integration services connect separate business systems so data moves between them without anyone retyping it. We map what you run, build the integration layer, and ship it with retry logic, alerting and documentation your own team can maintain. CRM, ERP, commerce, finance, support and internal tools, over APIs, webhooks, message queues, or a database when that is all a system offers.
Almost never the API choice. Almost always the part nobody scoped
Six things we hear on a first call. Not one of them is about picking the wrong protocol.
The same record typed into three systems by hand, every day, by someone whose job is not data entry.
An integration built to hit a deadline. No retries, no alerting, no logs. You find out it broke when a customer tells you.
The vendor who built it is unreachable and left no documentation. Every change is a gamble nobody wants to take.
Two systems report different numbers for the same month, and nobody can say which one to trust.
A partner ships an API change without notice. The sync stops. Silently, and for eleven days.
It works, but only one engineer understands how, and they are the single point of failure now.
What system integration services actually cover
One integration layer, documented well enough to hand over
We map every system, every field and every failure case, then build the layer that moves data between them. Systems integration services in the ordinary sense: discovery, data mapping, the build, error handling, monitoring, and a handover pack. What is different is that the last three are in scope from day one, not added if there is time left.
Software integration services is the same work named from the software side. Some buyers say systems, some say software, some say enterprise application integration. The scope we quote does not change. What changes is what you already run and how much of it has a real API.
System integration consulting is the front half on its own. We audit what you have, map the flows, and tell you what to build and in what order. Useful when you have an internal team who will do the work, or when two vendors disagree about the approach and you need a third read.
API integration services, and what to do when there is no API
Most integration work is decided by the worst connection in the chain, not the best one.
REST and GraphQL
The straightforward case. We build against the documented contract, handle pagination and rate limits properly, and version our side so their next release does not break yours.
Webhooks and events
For anything that has to be current rather than hourly. Signature verification, idempotency keys and replay, so a duplicate delivery does not create a duplicate order.
Queues and streams
When volume or spikes would overwhelm a direct call. A queue absorbs the burst and keeps ordering, and a slow downstream system stops being an outage upstream.
Database, file and screen
The honest last resort. A read replica, a scheduled export, an SFTP drop, occasionally a scripted UI. We say when this is the only path, and we say what it costs you later.
The systems, by name
If a system has an API, a webhook, or a database we can read, there is a path.
CRM, ERP and commerce
CRM integration services for Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics 365. ERP integration services for SAP, NetSuite, Oracle and the mid-market systems nobody writes blog posts about. Shopify, Magento and custom storefronts on the commerce side.
Data, finance and support
Warehouses and search: Snowflake, BigQuery, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Elasticsearch. Payments and billing through Stripe and your own ledger. Support and delivery through Zendesk, Jira and Slack, so a failed sync reaches a human.
Cloud, queues and automation
AWS, Azure and Google Cloud, in your accounts rather than ours. Kafka and Redis where throughput earns them. n8n or a managed iPaaS such as MuleSoft when you already own the licence and want us to build inside it.
What we ship alongside the integration itself
Retry and backoff
A timeout is not a failure. Transient errors retry with backoff before anyone is woken up.
Dead-letter handling
What cannot be retried is parked, not dropped. You can see it, fix the cause and replay it.
Monitoring and alerting
Every sync reports. A broken integration raises an alert to a named channel, not to nobody.
Reconciliation
A scheduled check that both sides still agree, so drift is caught by a job rather than by finance.
Access and secrets
Least privilege, credentials in a vault, and every key revocable without a redeploy.
Documentation
An architecture diagram, a field-level mapping table and a runbook. The thing the last vendor did not leave.
What the engagement buys, and what it does not
Written into the agreement before kickoff, so nobody argues about it at the second milestone.
In scope
All of it, at the number on the quote. None of it is billed as an extra later.
- System and API audit, then a field-level mapping of every flow
- Integration architecture written down and signed off before the build
- The build, in your repository, on your cloud accounts
- Retry logic, dead-letter handling and reconciliation on every sync
- Monitoring, health checks and alerts routed to a channel you own
- Automated tests, including the failure paths, running on every commit
- Architecture diagram, mapping table and runbook at handover
- A knowledge-transfer session with your engineers, recorded
Not in scope, and we say so before you sign
Some of this we do elsewhere. Some is yours to buy directly.
- Licences, cloud spend and third-party API fees. You buy those in your own name
- Negotiating with a vendor whose API you need. We will write the technical ask
- Standing support after handover. That is software maintenance and support
- Running the integration for you long term. That is application managed services
- Engineers inside your sprints on your backlog. That is IT staff augmentation
- Building the application itself, not just its connections. That is custom software development
- Cleaning the data you are about to sync. We will show you what is wrong with it
Legacy system integration, without the rewrite
An old system that still runs the business is not a problem to be solved. It is a constraint to be worked with. Four things we do instead of proposing a replacement.
Read it before touching it
We trace what the system actually does, not what the documentation claims. Database schema, scheduled jobs, the exports nobody remembers setting up. You get a written map of the current state, which is often the first one that has ever existed.
Wrap, do not replace
An API layer in front of the old system gives everything else a modern contract to talk to. The legacy code keeps running untouched. This is usually weeks of work against years for a rewrite, and it buys you the option to replace it later on your own timeline.
Migrate history separately
Moving today's transactions and moving ten years of history are two different projects with two different risk profiles. We split them, so a data problem in the archive cannot stop the daily sync going live.
Leave it maintainable
The point of the exercise is that the next change does not need us. Diagram, field mapping, runbook and a recorded walkthrough with your engineers. If your team cannot make a small change without calling us, we did the job badly.
Us, a typical integration vendor, or your own team
| Criterion | InApps | Typical integration vendor | Your own team |
|---|---|---|---|
| What happens before the build | A field-level map of every flow and every failure case, signed off | A list of the systems and an estimate | Whatever the sprint has room for |
| Error handling | Retries, dead-letter queue and reconciliation, in scope from day one | Added if the budget survives the build | Usually version two, if there is one |
| How you find out it broke | An alert in your channel, the same hour | A customer, or a month-end report | Depends who is looking |
| Who you talk to | The engineers building it, directly | An account manager, then a project manager | Each other |
| When there is no API | We say so in the audit and price the alternative honestly | Discovered mid-build, then re-scoped | You already know, and that is why it is not done |
| What handover includes | Code, diagram, field mapping, runbook and a recorded walkthrough | A repository link and an invoice | Nothing to hand over |
| Where the code lives | Your repository and your cloud accounts, from the first commit | Their platform, sometimes their licence | Yours |
| Time to a first sync in production | Weeks once the map is signed off, not quarters | Fast to sign, slower to staff | Whenever it beats the roadmap |
Who is actually on your integration
Four roles, named before you sign. Sized to the number of systems and the number of flows, not to a package.
Integration lead
- Your single point of contact, on the weekly call
- Owns the mapping document and every change to it
- Says no to scope creep in writing, not quietly
Solution architect
- Decides the pattern per flow: API, event, queue or batch
- Signs off the design before the build starts
- Stays on the project, not just the kickoff
Integration engineers
- The build, in your repository from commit one
- People who have connected these platforms before
- The same names for the whole engagement
QA engineer
- Tests the failure paths, not just the happy path
- Verifies replay and reconciliation actually work
- Signs off each flow before you are asked to
From a list of systems to a sync you can stop watching
Nothing moves to the next stage without your sign-off. That is what keeps the mapping document honest.
Discovery and mapping
Interviews with the people who use each system, then an audit of what each one can actually offer. You get a data flow map, a field-level mapping table and a list of the risks we found.
Architecture and sign-off
One pattern chosen per flow, with the retry and failure behaviour written down beside it. Signed off before a line of production code exists, because this is the expensive part to change later.
Build and test
Sprint by sprint, one flow at a time, with a live demo each week. The failure paths get tested as deliberately as the happy path, because those are the ones that decide whether this becomes a black box.
Go live and hand over
Cutover with a rollback path, monitoring switched on before the first real record moves. Then thirty days with the same engineers watching, and a recorded walkthrough so your team owns it after that.
What moves the price
We audit before we quote. Pricing off a system count is a guess, and you pay for it later.
| Driver | Why it moves the number |
|---|---|
| How many flows, and in which direction | Six systems is not the number that matters. One-way pushes are cheap. Two-way sync means deciding who wins a conflict on every field, and that conversation is the work. |
| Whether each system has a real API | A documented REST API prices in days. An undocumented endpoint, a partner with a two-week support queue, or a system with nothing but a database prices in weeks and carries risk we have to absorb. |
| How clean the data already is | Duplicate customers, three formats for the same country, records with no owner. None of it is our fault and all of it is our problem, because a sync makes bad data spread faster. |
| How much history has to move | Today’s transactions are a different project from ten years of archive. The second one needs its own reconciliation pass and its own rollback plan. |
| What has to happen when a sync fails | An internal report can wait until morning. A payment or a stock level cannot. The harder the consequence, the more testing and reconciliation the flow needs, and that is real engineering time. |
When to call us, and when to call someone else
A good fit
- Two or more systems hold the same data and someone keeps them in step by hand
- An integration already exists, nobody trusts it, and no documentation came with it
- You need the failure cases handled, not just the happy path demoed
- An old system runs the business and is not going anywhere this year
- You want the code, the diagram and the runbook at the end, in your own accounts
- You would rather hear that a system has no usable API in week one than in month three
Not a fit
- You need the application built, not just its connections. That is custom software development
- You want someone to run and monitor it for you long term. That is application managed services
- You want engineers inside your own sprints, on your backlog. That is IT staff augmentation
- The pipeline and the deploys are the problem, not the data. That is DevOps consulting
- You are deciding whether the existing system is worth keeping. Start with a code audit
- You want an AI agent to act across those systems rather than a data sync. That is AI agent development
What clients say about working with us
Every quote below is from a verified review. None of them were written by us.
“Clear expectations, rules that actually hold, delivered on time. And the people are genuinely easy to work with, not just professionally, but as humans.”
Answered without the hedging
Not sure where to start?
Send us the list of systems and what has to talk to what. We will tell you which connections are straightforward, which are not, and why.
Book a callWhat are system integration services?
Can you integrate with our specific systems and vendors?
What happens when a connected system changes its API or goes down?
Is this the same as software integration services?
Can you work with a legacy system we cannot replace?
Who owns the integration code, and can our team maintain it?
How do you handle access to our systems and data?
Your team is in Vietnam. How does that work day to day?
Tell us what needs to talk to what
Send the list of systems and the one flow that causes the most manual work today. We come back with which connections are straightforward, which are not, and what we would build first. If a system has no usable way in, we will say so rather than quote around it.