Automation & Integration
Stop paying people to move data between systems.
Every company this size has at least one process where a person exports a file from one system, reformats it, and retypes it into another — and it survives until that person leaves or the volume doubles.
not in scope · building the systems on either end · Custom Software
What this silo does not cover, stated in full rather than left to the rail: we connect the systems you already run. Building a system that does not exist yet is Custom Software & Data Products.
What the diagram above shows, in full:
- An ERP or finance system originates the record — an order, an invoice, an approval request.
- SharePoint holds the queue: the list or library where the record waits for its next step.
- Teams carries the routed notification and the approval activity around that step.
- SQL Server receives the reconciled or logged result, for reporting and an audit trail.
- A mailbox sends or receives the message where an external party has to be included.
- Every connector above is tied to one named owner, who is alerted first if the flow breaks — nothing here routes anonymously.
All of it sits inside the Microsoft 365 tenant boundary. Building the systems at either end of a connector — the ERP itself, a bespoke portal — is out of scope; see the rail note above.
What this usually looks like
illustrations · patterns from the work, not a named client system
- An order gets re-keyed from one system into accounting by hand.
- An approval lives entirely inside an email thread, with no record of who actually signed off.
- A report gets rebuilt every Monday morning from three exports nobody automated.
- Two systems hold the same customer or order and slowly drift out of sync.
Every one of these survives because it works — until the person who does it leaves, or the volume doubles.
What this work has looked like
company delivery history — reconciliation, close, integrations · founder-asserted ·
company delivery history — Jira, secure email, alerting systems · founder-asserted ·
full pattern · matching, exception queues, scheduled runs, routed approvals · Reconciliation & close
Reconciliations between systems that each hold a defensible version of the same number. Month-end close steps that used to be somebody's two days. Integrations between internal systems, databases and systems of record — across languages, accounts and products. Power Automate flows and Power Apps applications on top of SharePoint. Jira and Jira Service Management administration, with ticket automation built against its REST API. Secure email and document-pipeline automation feeding auditable records. Notification and alerting systems, and the custom scripts that hold a process together between two products that were never built to meet.
No client is named and no volume is claimed; neither is permissioned.
The fullest version of this specific pattern — invoice and inventory reconciliation, and the close itself, run as a scheduled, exception-routed process — has its own page: Reconciliation & close.
Should this even be automated?
An automation should pay for itself in a defined period. Before we build anything, we cost the manual process against the automation — the hours it currently takes, the error rate, and what a flow would cost to build and maintain. If the case doesn't hold, the honest answer is to leave the process alone, or fix the process itself rather than automate around it. We would rather tell you that on the first call than bill for a flow that pays for itself in name only.
Governance, so a flow doesn't become an outage
Every flow and integration we build gets a named owner, lives in version control rather than a personal account, and has a documented response for the 3 a.m. failure — who gets the alert, and what they do about it. Unowned, undocumented flows are the real risk in this kind of work, more often than the integration itself.
Automation that runs unattended, built like production software.
company delivery history · founder-asserted ·
A scheduled script and a production system look the same on the day they ship. What separates them is what happens the first time something upstream changes without warning — which is why unattended automation gets built to the same standard as anything else that runs without a person watching it.
- A watchdog and a heartbeat on every run, so silence gets noticed instead of assumed to mean success.
- Rate limiting, so a stuck loop can't take the system it's talking to down with it.
- Fail-closed gates — when a check fails, the flow stops and asks for a person, rather than guessing and moving on.
- Telemetry and alerting designed in from the start, not added after the first outage.
- A written postmortem when something does break, so that specific failure mode gets engineered out rather than repeated.
What it costs to license
Power Automate, Power Apps and the wider Power Platform carry their own licensing, including a per-user cost and a separate cost for premium connectors that reach outside Microsoft 365 — a line buyers are routinely surprised by.
licence cost · per-user, plus a separate premium-connector line [PLACEHOLDER] current Microsoft per-user and premium-connector figures, verified against the live pricing pages
This site's own flow
contact-form flow · live ·
We don't have a publishable client integration. A submission from this site's contact form goes into a SharePoint list, where a Power Automate flow, live since 20 August 2026, posts a Teams card and emails our mailbox — a notification system.
What this silo covers
How we connect systems
Find the process. We look for the point where a person exports, reformats and retypes data between systems — the re-keyed order, the approval living in an email thread, the report rebuilt every Monday.
Test whether it should be automated. An automation has to pay for itself in a defined period. If we can't make that case for a process, we tell you to leave it alone, or to fix the process itself instead.
Build the integration. Power Automate and Power Apps where the work sits inside Microsoft 365 — on top of SharePoint; APIs and scheduled services where the systems are further apart.
Name an owner. Every flow gets a named owner, lives in version control rather than a personal account, and has a documented response for when it breaks.
Built for
- A process where someone still exports, reformats and retypes data between two systems that don't talk to each other.
- Work that already runs inside Microsoft 365 — SharePoint, Teams, Outlook, the Power Platform.
- A process you can describe end to end, even if nobody has costed it yet — the costing is part of the work.
Not a fit
- You want a flow built before anyone has checked whether the automation pays for itself — we run that check first, even if the answer is 'leave it alone.'
- You need a payment-processing integration that touches card data directly — see the trust page for how we scope access to sensitive systems.
- The real problem is the process itself, not the system gap — sometimes the honest fix is changing the process, not automating around it.
Any flow or integration we build follows the same access standard as everywhere else.
Start with a call about what you are trying to fix.
Book an assessment call30 minutes · with the engineer who would scope the work
one-page recap within 2 business days of a call that progresses