We find every manual handoff
Including the Friday export and the spreadsheet that gets emailed around, which nobody counts as work.
The hidden half-day surfaces
Service
System integration for businesses where a person is the bridge between two tools
Every business has a place where somebody exports from one system and imports into another. We remove that person from the middle and make the two talk directly.
Free · You keep the write-up either way
85%average time saved on manual work
100%audit and visibility on every action
Typical focus areas
Data extraction·Lead routing·Status tracking·Report generation·Data reconciliationor anywhere your team spends hours doing repetitive data work.
In short
System integration connects the software a business already runs so information moves between tools without a person copying it. Most integration work is not technically hard; the difficulty is agreeing which system is authoritative for each piece of information, and what should happen when two of them disagree. Getting those decisions right is what separates an integration that holds from one that quietly drifts out of sync.
Works with the systems you already run
Airtable
HubSpot
SharePoint
Google Drive
n8n
AWSThe problem
Somewhere in your business, a person is an integration
They export a report on a Friday, open it in a spreadsheet, tidy a few columns, and paste it into another system. They have done it so long that nobody counts it as a task any more. It is just part of the week.
That arrangement works until it does not. The file format changes, or they go on leave, or they mistype a column and nobody notices for a month. A human integration has no error handling, which is the entire problem with it.
- 01
A weekly ritual that nobody counts as work
Download a report, fix the columns, upload it somewhere else. Half a day gone, repeated every week, and it appears on no plan or budget because it has always just been what happens.
- 02
Nobody agreed which system is right
The customer address is different in the CRM and the accounting system. Both were entered by a real person for a real reason, and there is no rule for which one wins, so it gets settled case by case forever.
- 03
The sync stopped in March and nobody noticed until June
The connection that was set up once and never monitored. It fails quietly, the data goes stale, and the first sign is a report that does not make sense.
- 04
It was built by someone who left
It works, sort of. Nobody knows exactly how. So it gets worked around rather than fixed, and every new project has to route around it.
What changes
The same week, run differently
How it runs nowHow it runs after
Someone exports and imports between two systems every week.
The two systems exchange it directly, on a schedule.
The same customer has two different addresses on file.
One system is authoritative for each field, and the rule is written down.
A broken sync is discovered when a report looks wrong.
A failure raises an alert to a named person the same day.
Nobody understands the integration that already exists.
It is documented, and the failure modes are written down.
What we build
What the integration handles
We settle which system is right
An agreed authority for each field, so two systems stop overwriting each other politely for months.
One answer per question
We make failure loud
Retries, a queue that holds rather than drops, and an alert to a named person when something stops.
No more discovering it in June
We write down how it works
What it does, what it assumes, and what to check when something looks wrong.
The next person is not guessing
Proof
What this has actually done
Integration is the part of every engagement we have delivered that nobody puts on the brochure. The document work only mattered because the results landed in the system the team already used; the invoice work only mattered because it posted into the accounting software. The connecting is usually where the time goes and always where the value lands.
How it works
From first call to running system
- 01
We find every place a person moves data
Including the ones nobody counts. The Friday export, the copy and paste, the spreadsheet that gets emailed around, the tab someone keeps open for reference.
- 02
We agree which system owns which field
This is the part that actually matters and the part usually skipped. Without it, two systems overwrite each other politely for months until the data is unusable.
- 03
We decide what happens when something fails
Retry, queue, or stop and tell a named person. A connection with no failure plan is a connection that will fail silently, which is worse than not having it.
- 04
We build it and document the failure modes
So the next person to touch it knows what it does, what it assumes, and what to check when something looks wrong.
How we compare
Agency vs in-house vs freelancer vs DIY
| Chronexa | In-house hire | Freelancer | DIY tool | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| System ownership | You own it | You own it | You own it | Rented (SaaS) |
| Time to production | 4–6 weeks | 3–6 months | Varies | Months of trial & error |
| Cost model | Fixed price | $120k+ salary | Hourly rate | Subscription + time |
| Maintenance included | ||||
| Security & compliance | Varies | Varies | ||
| Guaranteed outcome |
* In-house costs assume a full-time mid-level engineer. Time-to-production estimates are averages based on our client data.
Confidence & control
What happens when the system is unsure
- We agree the source of truth first
- Which system wins for each field, and what happens on a conflict. Skipping this is the single most common reason integrations quietly corrupt data over months rather than failing loudly on day one.
- Failures are loud
- A connection that fails silently is worse than no connection, because people keep trusting the numbers. Anything that breaks raises an alert to a person, and the queue holds rather than dropping records.
- Nothing is overwritten without a rule
- Where two systems disagree, the behaviour is defined in advance and written down. Nothing gets resolved by whichever job happened to run last.
- You own it when we leave
- It is built inside your own accounts and your own cloud. If you never speak to us again it keeps running, and another team could pick it up. You are not renting your own process back from us.
Scope
What an engagement covers
Included
- A map of every place a person currently moves data by hand
- A written agreement on which system is authoritative for each field
- The connections themselves, with retry and failure handling
- Alerting to a named person when something stops working
- Documentation covering what it does and how it fails
- A handover call and thirty days of support
Not included
- Replacing any of the systems being connected. That is a different and much larger decision.
- Cleaning up historic data mismatches beyond an agreed scope.
- Licences or connector fees charged by the platforms themselves.
- Connecting systems with no practical way in, without agreeing an approach first.
Scope, timeline and price are agreed after a short call, never before. We write down what the system has to do, and what it costs, before any build starts.
Questions
Frequently asked
Our older system has no modern way to connect. Is it hopeless?
Usually not. Older software often has a database, a scheduled export, or a file drop that can be worked with. It is less elegant than a modern connection and it needs more care around failure handling, but it is normally possible.
Can we not just use Zapier for this?
For simple two-step connections, often yes, and we will tell you when that is the honest answer. It stops being the right tool when there are conflict rules, volume, or a need to know reliably that something failed.
How do you decide which system wins when they disagree?
You do, and we make you decide it explicitly before anything is connected. It is a business question rather than a technical one: whoever owns that field owns the answer, and the rule gets written down.
What happens if a connection breaks at two in the morning?
It retries on a schedule, holds the records it could not deliver, and alerts a named person. Nothing is dropped silently, and when it comes back the queue clears in order.
Will this slow our systems down?
Not meaningfully. Integrations are scheduled around your usage rather than running constantly, and volumes are agreed up front so nothing gets hammered during your busy hours.
What does it cost?
Every engagement is priced to its own scope, so there is no list price. After a short discovery call we agree in writing what the work covers and what it costs, before any build starts.
Still deciding? Book a discovery call and we will tell you honestly whether this is worth building for you.
Related
Other things we build
Bring us the workflow that keeps eating your team's week.
Let's find the first one to fix.
The audit is free. If we can't find automation worth more than it costs to build, you owe us nothing, and you keep the roadmap.
Prefer email? info@chronexa.io
Or tell us what's slow
We'll review your workflows and come back with where AI saves the most time and cost.