Integration

Start where the work
can actually change.

Choose one consequential or long-running workflow. Agree on the current controls, the integration boundary, and a result both teams can observe.

Establish the strongest competent baseline

Identify the existing identity, permission, state, and orchestration controls. Repair native gaps first where that is sufficient. An integration is justified only by a remaining question worth testing.

Agree on the comparison before implementation

Define what should be allowed, held, continued, or recovered. Compare the same permitted workflow with and without the proposed control. Count unnecessary holds, missed changes, recovery errors, delay, retries, and restart behavior.

Observe the result in the system that performs the work. A decision to allow an action does not prove that it completed.

State the application boundary

Your team owns the application integration. Other paths to the same target need to be controlled separately or explicitly excluded. If state can change after a check, the receiving system must enforce the relevant current conditions.

Agree on data access, storage, responsibilities, and software terms before work begins.

Make a decision the evidence supports

The existing stack may be enough, the added control may produce a useful delta, or the result may be inconclusive. Keep that distinction visible. The partner keeps its own operational improvement and native repairs; retained generalized evidence and product learning require agreed terms.

Build with unFragged

Bring one workflow. Build the evidence together.

Establish the strongest competent baseline. Integrate where a residual control gap remains. Measure the delta. Keep a clean negative result if the existing stack already solves it.

Partner with unFragged