Somebody in your office is the integration between two systems.

Stop paying a person to be the bridge between two systems that will not talk.

The commercial shape of it

Timeline: 4 weeks to your first connection running unattended
Cost: Scoped per engagement rather than sold from a price list, and quoted in writing before anything starts. How pricing works
Built for: Manufacturing · Distribution and wholesale · Professional services · Healthcare · B2B software
Runs today as: Learning platform

What you get

A map of every system, and which one owns each fact
Connections built between them, running on a schedule or on an event
One sign-in across the systems we connect, where the tools allow it
Failures that raise an alert rather than going quiet
A machine-readable interface, so an assistant can drive it too
Documentation your own developer can pick up

The room it happens in

Every business ends up with software that half fits, bought at different times by different people. So a person retypes an order from email into the stock system, and again into the invoice. Nobody planned that job. It appeared, and now it is load-bearing, which means one person going on leave slows the whole company down.

Any of this sound familiar?

The same order gets typed into three different systems.
Everyone has four logins and one of them is shared.
You find out stock was wrong when a customer tells you.
A report is only right if somebody remembered to export it.
Your new tool cannot see anything the old tool knows.

If two or more of those are yours, this page is about you.

The integration in most companies is a person. They know that the order has to be entered in the stock system before the invoice, and that the export is wrong on Mondays. That knowledge is not written down anywhere.

What we do first

We work out who owns each fact. Two systems both holding a customer address is not integration, it is a future argument. One system owns it, the others read it.

We check whether the connection should exist at all. Sometimes the honest answer is that one of the two tools should go. Building a bridge to software you are about to replace is money spent twice.

We run this ourselves

The learning platform behind UpX signs people in through one central identity service rather than a separate login stuck on each app. That is a running system doing the thing this page describes, and we can walk you through it.

The part most suppliers leave out

Anything we connect gets an interface software can drive, not just people. That is how the systems we build can be asked questions by your own AI assistant later, without another project to make it possible. It is running on this website if you want to try it first.

Where this gets expensive

Moving history out of a system that cannot export it is a real job with its own date. So is anything touching payments or statutory records, where a wrong figure is not a bug but a filing. We put those in order rather than absorbing them and explaining a slipped date later.

Four weeks covers a first working version, agreed in writing before we start. Very large programmes, work spanning many systems, and moving data out of software that cannot export it are all priced separately. Read what four weeks includes.

On every engagement

You own it, and you can leave. Your code, your data, your accounts. Taking it in-house or to another supplier is a handover, not a negotiation.
Built for India's DPDP Act. Identity kept separate from the consent and audit record, no personal data in URLs, and none in logs.
Security enforced by the build. Secrets scanned on every commit, payloads size-checked before parsing, every write endpoint rate limited. If a check fails, nothing ships.
Anything with AI in it is measured. An evaluation set, a human review step wherever a wrong answer costs money, and drift monitoring after go-live.

How we build, where your data lives, and exactly where we stand on certification — all of it is on our security page.

Asked and answered

Our systems are old and one has no API. Is it hopeless?

Usually not, but be ready for the honest answer. Some products genuinely cannot export or accept data, and the sensible fix is replacing that one rather than building a bridge that breaks monthly. We will tell you which case you are in before you commit.

What happens when one side changes and it breaks?

It raises an alert with what failed and what it was doing. Silent failure is the real danger with integration work, because wrong data spreads for weeks before anybody notices. Nothing we build fails quietly.

Why does an AI assistant matter for integration?

Because the same interface that lets two systems talk lets an assistant read and act. We build that layer as part of the job rather than as a later project. Our own site runs one, and you can connect to it before you buy anything.

The other 11

Next step

Start with the one that hurts most

Bring the two systems somebody currently copies between, and roughly how often. On the call we work out which one should own the fact, and whether the connection is a week of work or a quarter.

Book a call Ask us to call you