Integrate Rather Than Replace: Connect Your Tools Without Starting From Scratch
The scenario is almost always the same. Two tools don’t communicate with each other, someone has to manually transfer data between them, and eventually a data discrepancy becomes apparent at a client’s site. The conclusion is that one of the two—often the older one, sometimes both—must be replaced with a single solution that “does it all.”
This is the most expensive solution, and it’s almost never the right one. The problem at hand isn’t a software problem—it’s a problem with communication between software programs.
Why Replacement Is the Most Expensive Option
Replacing a tool that works means redoing everything it did well just to fix the one thing it did poorly. You pay for the cost of migrating data, rebuilding workflows, training, the months during which teams are less productive, and the risk of discovering along the way a feature that no one had mentioned because it was taken for granted.
And in the end, the original question may very well remain unanswered: the new tool won’t be any more compatible with other systems than the old one was.
What Integration Actually Addresses
Linking two tools means automatically passing information in one direction or both, according to defined rules. This addresses exactly four scenarios, and you need to verify that your problem is one of them:
- duplicate entry, when the same data is entered in two places;
- the discrepancy between systems, when two tools present two different truths;
- the delay—the time it takes for information to reach its intended destination;
- forgetting, when passing on knowledge depends on someone who may not be there.
If your problem is on this list, an integration is all it takes. If it’s something else—a tool that can’t do what you need it to, an interface that no one can stand anymore—then it’s definitely a case for replacement, and you have to accept that.
Note: The question to ask in a meeting isn’t “Should we switch tools?” It’s “What information isn’t reaching the right place?” The answer will help you decide between the two options in just a few minutes.
Three Questions to Ask Before Getting Started
Can the tool “talk”? Most recent professional software programs provide a way to interact with the outside world. Some older or highly specialized tools have no such capability—and in those cases, you have to resort to more fragile workarounds, which changes the equation.
In what sense, and which one takes precedence? That’s the question that causes poorly prepared integrations to fail. If both systems can modify the same data, you have to decide which one is correct in the event of a conflict. This is a business decision, not a technical one, and no one but you can make it.
How often? Data transmitted once a night doesn’t cost the same as data transmitted every second. Many requirements described as “real-time” are perfectly satisfied with a 15-minute interval, and the cost difference is considerable.
What This Means for a Decision-Maker
Integration can be quantified, implemented, and verified within a short timeframe—a few weeks, not a full fiscal year. It does not require change management, since no one is switching tools. And most importantly, it is reversible: if the organization changes, we can adjust the workflow without altering the systems.
It’s also a decision that leaves the door open for the future. A company that integrates its systems today remains free to replace a tool in three years—and it will do so more effectively, because it will have documented along the way what data is actually flowing between its systems.
What to Do
- Describe, in one sentence, the information that isn't reaching the right place.
- Please specify the direction in which it should flow, and which of the two systems takes precedence.
- Check to see if both tools can communicate with the outside world, and if not, which one is blocking it.
- Set a realistic frequency, and resist the default “real-time” setting.
- Calculate this integration before calculating a replacement, so you can compare two quotes rather than just one.
Step 5 is the one we skip, and it's the one that saves the most. .
If, despite everything, the conclusion is that a new tool is needed, the question of whether to use Power Apps or develop on Azure arises, and the issue of ownership must be resolved at the very first meeting.
Microsoft Sources
What an article Can't Know
An article describes what applies to everyone. What varies from one organization to another is the inventory: which applications, which accounts, and which pieces of equipment are actually involved in your organization. The inventory determines the scope of the effort, and it cannot be summarized on a single page.
You'll be speaking directly with the engineers who will be doing the work, not with a middleman. We'll respond within 24 business hours.
Check what is still true
Announced dates are sometimes postponed, products are renamed, and conditions change. The blog tracks these topics over time: when a rule changes, a new post announces it.
Search for a topic in the blogIn the same issue
Three articles on the same topic. The blog has 149 articles, all of which are freely accessible.