Systems integration services for operations that cannot afford broken handoffs.

Systems integration services map how work and data move between applications, decide which system owns each record, create the connections, migrate or reconcile existing data, test failure recovery, and set up monitoring. The work can cover CRM, ERP, finance, support, commerce, fulfilment, data platforms, and custom or legacy software.

API development creates a stable interface that other software can call. Systems integration uses APIs, files, events, EDI, or other interfaces to make a complete business flow work across several systems. If you need a reusable interface for many consumers, see API development. If you need orders, invoices, tickets, or customer records to move across an operating process, systems integration is the broader service.

Use a native connector when it covers the fields, direction, volume, and recovery behavior you need. Use an iPaaS such as Boomi, Workato, Make, or Zapier when standard connectors and visible workflow management fit the job. Custom middleware makes sense when several systems need unusual mapping, strict sequencing, detailed reconciliation, high volume, or legacy access that a standard connector cannot handle.

Ownership should be set field by field. A CRM may own relationship and opportunity data, while an ERP owns product, stock, tax, invoice, and payment records. Shared customer fields need an explicit master, stable identifier, and conflict rule. A two-way sync without those decisions can spread bad data faster.

Often, yes. A legacy system may still expose scheduled files, a database, EDI, a local procedure, or a browser workflow. We first test whether that interface is stable enough to support a critical process. If the system itself is unreliable or blocks future changes, legacy modernization may be a better decision than another workaround.

We use stable external identifiers, idempotent writes, validation, retry queues, dead-letter handling, and reconciliation reports. Testing covers timeouts, repeated events, partial completion, rate limits, and records changed on both sides. Operators also need a visible queue showing what failed, why it failed, and who owns the next action.

Yes. The first release can include a controlled backfill alongside the ongoing sync. We profile the source data, define transformation and duplicate rules, test a sample, reconcile totals, and set rollback conditions before the production cutover. A one-time migration with no ongoing connection is usually a separate, smaller engagement.

Security starts with the data and systems in scope. We define service identities, least-privilege permissions, encryption, secret rotation, audit history, retention, and access to operating tools. Regulated work adds the controls required by the client's applicable obligations and acceptance process. We do not treat a connector as compliant merely because its vendor holds a certification.

The scope depends on the number of systems and business flows, source-data quality, undocumented rules, vendor access, security, historical backfills, transaction volume, recovery needs, and cutover constraints. We recommend proving one measurable flow and its support model before expanding the programme.

Scope and price follow a fit review. The main cost drivers are the number of systems and flows, data quality, security requirements, event volume, historical migration, cutover constraints, and the recovery and support model. We recommend starting with one measurable flow and put the agreed scope, assumptions, acceptance criteria, timeline, and price in writing before paid work starts.

Ask the killer question: what are the three most likely ways this project fails? A partner who cannot answer has not thought about your project. Ask where they have done this before, and insist on meeting the actual team before signing, not the sales team. The project fails or succeeds on the people doing the work, and you should know who they are.

Phase the engagement with go/no-go gates: discover failure in phase one or two, when the cost of stopping is small, not after a full build. Each phase should produce something you can evaluate, a working data flow, a tested sync, a reconciled report, before the next phase is approved. Fixed scope per phase, written acceptance criteria, and your right to stop are the three clauses that matter.

Ask where your data lives and how sync works. When a record changes in one system, how fast does it appear in the other, and what happens when it does not? Run the duplicate test: create the same customer in two systems and watch the integration reconcile them. Ask for the error log: every integration has failures, and the vendor's job is to surface and resolve them, not hide them. If you cannot see what broke and why, you are flying blind.

Your team receives the source code, configuration, mapping documentation, test evidence, monitoring, alert routes, and an operating runbook. We can continue supporting the integration, but the handover does not depend on RaftLabs remaining the only team that understands it.