Make the systems you already pay for talk to each other
You bought good tools. They each solve one problem and none of them share. The gap between them is where your team loses hours, and where errors get introduced. When manual handoffs happen every day, integration is often a strong place to test for payback.
Typical timeline
2–6 weeks per integration
Starting at
$4,000 for a two-system sync
Ongoing cost
$50–$250/mo
You probably need this if
- The same customer exists in three systems with three different spellings
- A job is marked complete in the field app and someone manually invoices it later
- Your CRM and your accounting system disagree about revenue
- You export a CSV from one tool and import it into another every Monday
- A Zapier chain broke silently three weeks ago and nobody noticed
What you get
Reliable sync with real error handling
Retries, a holding queue for records that still fail, and alerts when something needs attention — rather than a silent failure discovered at month end.
One canonical customer record
Deduplication and matching rules, so "Bob Smith" and "Robert Smith" resolve.
An audit log
What synced, when, and what it changed. Essential when the numbers get questioned.
A monitoring dashboard
A simple view of what is healthy, what failed, and what needs attention.
Common questions
We already use Zapier. Why would we pay for this?
If Zapier is working, keep it — genuinely. Where it can stop being enough is volume, error handling, and workflows with more complex branching. The signal is repeated failures, manual recovery work, or task volume that makes a purpose-built integration easier to justify.
Our software vendor says they do not have an API.
Sometimes true. Some vendors have integrations or data-access options that are not obvious from the product interface, and where there genuinely is not an API there may be other supported routes such as scheduled exports or database access. Browser automation is a last resort, not the default.
Often paired with