"When an order is confirmed, we first enter the deal into kintone, then create an invoice in freee, and then copy the revenue figures into an internal spreadsheet for executive meetings. When you think about it, we are typing practically the same information three times." This was a consultation we recently received from the administration department of a company with about thirty employees.
With each new tool introduced, that specific workflow becomes more convenient. However, as the number of SaaS applications grows, the manual task of transcribing data across the gaps between tools piles up. This double and triple entry does not just consume time; transcription errors and omissions give rise to an even more troublesome issue: nobody knows which tool contains the correct numbers. In this article, we discuss how to automate data integrations between SaaS platforms, from our perspective of building systems for clients.
What duplicate data entry quietly steals
First, let us make the cost of this manual labor visible. Even if transcribing a single record takes only a few minutes, handling hundreds of transactions a month adds up to dozens of hours. Converted into labor costs, it is a non-trivial expense, but the impact on quality is even more damaging.
As long as transcription is done manually, miskeyed digits, missed copies, or discrepancies where only one tool is updated while the other remains stale will inevitably creep in. Consequently, subtle discrepancies arise between the order amount in kintone, the invoiced amount in freee, and the revenue figures in meeting materials, triggering another round of end-of-month reconciliations to determine which is true. Duplicate entry steals time and creates additional work to correct errors using even more time.
Three paths to integration
How, then, should systems be connected? There are three main paths for integrating SaaS platforms.
The first is native integration (official connectors) provided by SaaS platforms out of the box. For popular combinations like kintone and freee, official or semi-official integrations may already exist; if these meet your needs, they are the simplest to implement. The second is iPaaS. These dedicated no-code integration platforms connect multiple SaaS tools, allowing you to build workflows visually, such as "transcribe to Tool B when registered in Tool A." The third is custom scratch development using APIs from each SaaS platform. This option is ideal when you require business-specific logic, branching conditions, or data transformations that native integrations or iPaaS cannot accommodate.
| Approach | Ideal use cases | Cost Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Native Integrations (Official Connectors) | Connecting standard combinations as-is | Low to free |
| iPaaS | Connecting multiple SaaS platforms conditionally / expanding in the future | Monthly subscription |
| Custom Scratch API Development | Requires proprietary business logic and complex data processing | Primarily initial implementation costs |
Many SMEs settle on a hybrid approach: using native integrations where they suffice, and inserting iPaaS only for parts that require extra flexibility. For the preceding decision of whether to build internal systems in-house or outsource, see our article on in-house vs. outsourcing; for turning operational Excel sheets into business apps, see our AppSheet article; and for reliable data synchronization design, see our article on Change Data Capture (CDC).
Case study: A company that eliminated transcription from order to invoice and inventory
Here is a specific example (the company name is withheld). Sales entered order details into kintone, accounting created invoices in freee while referencing that data, and another employee manually updated an inventory management spreadsheet. At month's end, the numbers across all three never matched, requiring half a day of reconciliation every single time.
We made the order data in kintone the single point of truth, using iPaaS to automate billing details and amounts sent to freee, as well as updates to inventory and revenue in the spreadsheet. The architecture utilized native integrations where possible, interjecting custom logic only for company-specific processing like rounding amounts and converting partner codes. As a result, three manual entries became one, and discrepancies disappeared entirely. What made the difference was not over-engineering everything, but "establishing a single origin point and creating a mechanism for data to flow automatically."
Where to start integrating: Choosing by frequency and the pain of errors
Pay attention to the sequence. When inventorying potential tasks to integrate, it is tempting to tackle everything at once, but you should start with areas that have high frequency and where mistakes are painful. Automating transcriptions that directly affect customer interactions or financial closing, such as monetary figures and inventory, produces a clear return on investment. Conversely, tasks that happen only a few times a month with minimal impact when errors occur can safely be postponed.
If you are entering the same information repeatedly, losing hours reconciling mismatched numbers across tools, or finding that manual work has increased despite adopting more SaaS solutions, please feel free to inquire via GleamHub's Development, AI, and Automation consultation. We will assist you within a realistic scope, from analyzing your current workflows to designing the right balance among native integrations, iPaaS, and API development, as well as prioritizing and building solutions.
