One connected flow across every system
Most operational friction is not caused by any single system; it is caused by the gaps between them. We connect those gaps deliberately — with clear contracts, one integration layer, and failure handling designed before the first live sync.
Three situations that belong here.
APIs, third-party integrations and data synchronisation that hold up under real load and real failure.
You are replacing manual handoffs
Someone is copying data between systems every day.
You are integrating
Two vendors whose APIs do not quite line up.
You are exposing
Your own capability to partners and customers.
What usually brings organisations to this page.
Recurring patterns rather than a fixed scope. If your situation sits next to one of these, it is still worth a conversation.
Every system talks directly to every other, so a change in one interface breaks several integrations at once.
A sync stops, nobody is told, and the data is quietly wrong until someone reports it.
API keys live in configuration files, chat messages and spreadsheets.
Because the systems were never reconciled, no one can state the current position with confidence.
The shape of a API & System Integration engagement
A representative sequence. The real one gets adjusted as soon as we understand the specific constraint.
Inside API & System Integration
Scoped separately, designed to work together. Most engagements take two or three of these rather than all of them.
REST API design
An API is a contract with people you have not met. Resources are modelled consistently, pagination and filtering behave predictably, errors explain what to do next, and changes are versioned so existing consumers keep working.
- Consistent resource and error conventions
- Versioned contracts with a deprecation policy
- Pagination, filtering and sorting that clients can rely on
- Interactive documentation generated from the implementation
Third-party and payments integration
External services are treated as unreliable by design. We assume timeouts, partial failure and rate limits, and we make our system correct even when the partner is not.
- Payment flows with idempotency and reconciliation
- Provider abstraction so vendors can be swapped
- Timeouts, retries with backoff and circuit breaking
- Sandbox and production behaviour verified separately
Messaging and webhooks
Where an integration needs to notify us, webhooks are signed, replayed safely and processed idempotently. Where we need to notify others, events are published with a stable schema and a replay path.
- Signed webhook payloads with replay protection
- Idempotent handlers for every inbound event
- Dead-letter queues with alerting and replay tooling
- Event schemas versioned alongside consumers
ERP, CRM and data synchronisation
Business systems disagree about identifiers, currencies, time zones and status values. Those translations are the actual work of integration, and they belong in one mapped, tested place.
- Canonical internal model with explicit mappings
- Reference data synchronised on a defined schedule
- Conflict rules documented rather than discovered
- Reconciliation reports between systems
Authentication and API security
Each integration gets the least access it needs, scoped to what it actually does, and every call is attributable to a known identity.
- OAuth 2.0 / OIDC for user-facing access
- Scoped service credentials, rotated deliberately
- Rate limiting and quotas per consumer
- Secrets stored outside source, never logged
The rules we keep when a date gets tight.
These are the lines we do not move under schedule pressure. They are also the reason the work tends to stay maintainable once we have handed it over.
One integration layer
No system talks directly to a vendor.
Assume failure
Every external call has a timeout and a retry policy.
Idempotent by default
Retries must never double-post.
Reconcilable
You can always prove two systems agree.
Tools are chosen per problem rather than running one stack for everything. The list above is indicative, not a commitment.
Sectors where api & system integration carries the most weight.
The capability is the same everywhere. The operating model around it decides what good looks like.
Healthcare
Consent, audit and record accuracy turn this from a productivity question into a safety one.
Healthcare solutions 02B2B
Multi-tenant delivery, permissions and billing behaviour tend to decide the architecture early.
B2B solutions 03Retail
Store networks and omnichannel enquiries add concurrency and integration problems that pure SaaS rarely sees.
Retail solutionsAI & Automation
If your problem turns out to sit outside api & system integration, this is the page we would read next.
List the systems you need connected.
We will map the dependencies, name the owner of each field, and tell you which connections are cheaper to replace than to maintain.