Systems integration

Connect the systems your business depends on.

Systems integration consulting connects tools and business systems around a workflow your team can understand, operate, and improve. Matt brings experience connecting dozens of services and business systems, with attention to ownership, boundaries, failure cases, and the people who rely on the handoff.

Start a conversationCompare advisory plans

Who systems integration consulting is for

This service is for a business whose work crosses tools, teams, or data stores and needs the handoffs to become clearer and more dependable. It can support a new connection, a review of an existing one, or a broader effort to bring order to a growing operational system.

Information is being copied between systems or re-entered by people.
An integration works in the happy path but its ownership and failure behavior are unclear.
Your team needs to decide which system is authoritative for a piece of work or data.
You want integration work documented well enough for the team to operate after handoff.

What this work covers.

Map the handoffs before choosing the connection

An integration is part of a business workflow, not just a technical link between two APIs. I begin by mapping what happens, who owns each step, which system holds the source of truth, and where a person needs visibility.

That map often reveals that the hardest problem is not the connector. It may be an unclear status, an undocumented exception, or a handoff that relies on one person remembering what to do next.

Once the workflow is visible, the team can choose a connection that fits the real need instead of automating an ambiguous process.

Design boundaries the team can explain

Good integrations make boundaries explicit: what one system owns, what another receives, how changes are represented, and what the team should expect when a connection cannot complete.

The design should fit the business vocabulary and the team’s ability to support it. Clear names, documented assumptions, and a small number of understandable states are more useful than an elaborate connection nobody can diagnose.

This is also where data access and permissions belong in the conversation. A connection should expose only what the workflow needs and make its responsibility clear.

Verify failure, recovery, and ownership

An integration is ready for real use when the team knows how it behaves outside the happy path. Review should cover incomplete input, duplicate work, unavailable systems, recovery, and the person who investigates when something does not arrive.

Changes are easier to trust when they are small enough to inspect and test. Automated checks can guard repeatable behavior, while human review confirms that the workflow still makes sense to the people using it.

The result is a connection that can be operated as part of the business rather than a fragile shortcut that only its original author understands.

A workflow-first integration process

The integration process moves from business handoff to technical boundary to verified operation. That sequence keeps the connection useful to the people who depend on it and gives the team a way to reason about future changes.

Describe the work across systems
Map the people, tools, data, statuses, and handoffs that make up the workflow today.
Choose boundaries and ownership
Agree on sources of truth, permissions, responsibilities, and the states each system needs to understand.
Build and review a small slice
Start with a bounded change that can be inspected, tested, and discussed with the team before expanding its reach.
Test exceptions and hand off clearly
Verify failure and recovery paths, document the operating expectations, and leave ownership visible.

What the work can produce

The output is shaped around the integration and the workflow it supports. It can be a decision review, a design, a bounded implementation, or a set of operating notes for the team.

Workflow and system map

The handoffs, sources of truth, dependencies, and people involved in the work.

Integration design notes

Boundaries, permissions, data expectations, and behavior that should be checked.

Review and test checklist

The normal and exceptional paths the team should verify before relying on the connection.

Operating handoff

The ownership, assumptions, recovery expectations, and next improvements that remain with your team.

Integrations need a defined priority

Integration work is agreed around a business workflow and its constraints. A monthly plan can carry bounded setup, design, or development work within its priorities; larger projects are scoped separately.

The team retains ownership of its systems, data, decisions, and operating practices.
An existing integration can be reviewed even when a rebuild is not the right next step.
One-time audits, larger projects, and emergency support are separate scopes.

Questions worth answering before you start.

What does systems integration consulting cover?

It covers the business workflow behind the connection, system boundaries, sources of truth, permissions, failure behavior, review, and operating ownership. The agreed work may be a design review, setup, implementation, or handoff guidance.

Can you review an integration that already exists?

Yes. A review can map the existing handoff, identify unclear ownership or failure behavior, and recommend the most useful next change. Rebuilding is not assumed before the current system and business need are understood.

Do you work with our existing team or vendors?

Yes, when coordination is part of the agreed priority. I can contribute hands-on technical work or guide the people already responsible for the systems, while your team retains day-to-day ownership.

Explore the surrounding work, read the background, or start a conversation about the decision in front of you.

Compare advisory plans and pricing

Audit an existing system or process

Clarify the technology decisions around the work

See public product work built by Matt