Category: Technology

Date: 29/09/2022

Subject: Do you have any of these Integration Symptoms or Pitfalls?

Audience: LinkedIn

Topic: Every organisation and its key stakeholders do their best when conceptualising their integration requirements for a critical business process. Even when they have best-of-breed off-the-shelf integration platforms and methods, these integration projects within enterprises are still high-risk exercises that require appropriate levels of skill and governance.

And once the project commences and the detailed design and implementation planning for the newly integrated processes are starting to visualise but yet to materialise, it doesn’t take long before the first ‘wheels-off’ appears, and the cracks in the solution landscape start turning into an abyss. These are characterised by:

➡️ Broken and missing data that require significant remediation in connecting systems

➡️ Data that still requires manual load, extensive validation, and error recycling

➡️ Additional recruitment of consultants and auditors to help fill the gaps

➡️ Workflows and business rules between systems are not aligned; hence low interoperability and additional changes to these connecting systems

➡️ Developers are only familiar with simple point-to-point integrations, not complex enterprise-level system-of-system approaches

➡️ The promised ‘low-code’ capabilities of the integration platform won’t handle an enterprise level of solution complexity; hence additional specialists become necessary

➡️ The design only includes ‘passive’ error reporting and data governance without any actionable error recycling capability across multiple systems

➡️ Technical debt increases due to ‘system version lock-in’, where it becomes challenging to singularly update a connecting system’s version or corrective capability

➡️ Filling of minor gaps in the solution with band-aid approaches that further increase technical debt and long-term restrictions

➡️ Corrective action on adjoining systems becomes a considerable anchor for IT support, and they become incapable of providing capacity for changing business dynamics

➡️ The resultant integrated solution transitions to sub-par and shall not meet expected outcomes.

The overall result is that these symptoms lead to approximately a 3 -5 times blow-out in the project schedule and a 5 to 10 times blow-out in project costs, which subsequently provides the means for complete project failures, shut-downs, damaged reputations, and impacted business opportunities.

To see how Diriger provides answers to the above, read our Case Study: DirigerHUB