Why robust integration between LOB systems matters
Line‑of‑business (LOB) systems are the specialised applications organisations use to run core functions such as CRM, finance, inventory and project management. Organisations rarely build these systems in‑house any more; they rely on third‑party products because those products are maintained by dedicated teams and offer deep, specialised capability.
That specialisation brings new challenges. When the same business entities — clients, products, teams, contracts — are recorded in multiple systems, organisations must ensure a single source of truth, maintain synchronisation, preserve data integrity, provide auditing and versioning, and enable joined‑up querying and reporting across systems. Achieving this reliably is a technical problem that requires careful design.
Key terms defined
Single source of truth (SSOT): a canonical repository that provides a consistent, authoritative view of important data for reporting and decision‑making.
Synchronisation: the process of copying, reconciling and keeping data aligned between two or more systems so that shared entities remain consistent.
Auditing: recording changes to data (who changed what and when) to support traceability and compliance.
Why consolidate into a unified SQL Server repository?
A practical and widely used approach is to synchronise relevant data from disparate systems into a single SQL Server database. SQL Server is purpose‑built for structured storage, relational queries, indexing and transactional integrity. Once data is represented in SQL Server you can:
- write integrity checks and constraints to detect anomalies;
- create indexed views and stored procedures for efficient cross‑system queries;
- implement auditing and versioning patterns that are consistent across sources;
- connect BI and reporting tools directly to a queryable, authoritative dataset.
These benefits are described in more detail in AxioWorks’ article on building a single source of truth for SharePoint data.
Practical examples
Example 1 — Reconciled customer records: a sales team updates customer notes in SharePoint lists while a CRM holds transactional history. Synchronising both into SQL Server enables daily reconciliation queries that surface differing addresses, duplicated records, or missing account links.
Example 2 — Product master and inventory: an ERP holds product master data, an inventory system tracks stock levels and teams annotate product changes in SharePoint. A central SQL repository lets operations run joins and alerts to detect mismatched product codes or negative stock after shipments.
Example 3 — Reporting and BI: many reporting tools work best against a relational store. A central database simplifies report development and improves performance compared with querying multiple APIs at runtime; see AxioWorks’ guidance on popular BI and reporting tools and when to leave data in the source versus copying it.
Implementation approaches and trade‑offs
There are several patterns to move data into SQL Server:
- Periodic extract‑transform‑load (ETL): scheduled jobs copy changes into a central store. Simple to implement and easy to control, but not real‑time.
- Incremental change capture: update only changed records to reduce load; requires reliable change tracking in the source.
- Event‑driven replication: systems emit events that are applied to the SQL repository. This supports near‑real‑time synchronisation but adds architectural complexity.
Each pattern has costs. Organisations must weigh latency requirements, operational complexity and the skills available in the team. Our article on exporting SharePoint data to SQL Server outlines common options and trade‑offs when the source is SharePoint.
Tools and practical options
For SharePoint specifically, synchronisation tools that map lists and libraries to SQL tables can dramatically shorten delivery time and reduce bespoke development. SQList is one such option that synchronises SharePoint lists and libraries into SQL Server tables; it is a pragmatic choice when SharePoint is a primary data source: SQList. AxioWorks also offers standalone synchronisation utilities for other sources, such as GMail2SQL and Xero2SQL, which can be useful when email or accounting systems need to be included in the unified repository.
When integrating with reporting platforms, consider whether reports should query the SQL repository directly or use techniques such as DirectQuery. DirectQuery can be preferable for live reports where caching is not acceptable; see AxioWorks’ discussion on why DirectQuery is often the better choice for Power BI.
Operational practices: keeping the unified store healthy
To make the approach dependable, implement:
- automated integrity checks that compare row counts, hash sums or key distributions between source and target;
- conflict resolution rules (for example, last write wins, source priority, or custom merging logic);
- auditing tables that record source system, original ID, timestamp and user for every change;
- alerting for failed synchronisations or integrity exceptions so operations teams can respond quickly.
Many of these practices are common to on‑premises integration projects; AxioWorks has applied them in multiple customer environments and describes patterns for secure SharePoint–SQL replication in Why SQList is a secure choice for SharePoint–SQL replication.
When is this approach appropriate — and who benefits?
The unified SQL Server repository approach is appropriate when:
- you need reliable, repeatable cross‑system reporting and cannot tolerate inconsistent views;
- multiple systems share authoritative entities and reconciliation is required for operations or compliance;
- your reporting tools or analytics workflows perform better against a relational store than multiple APIs;
- you have regulatory or audit requirements that demand consistent change history and traceability.
Typical beneficiaries are mid‑sized organisations through to enterprises that operate mixed landscapes (on‑premises and cloud), teams that maintain long‑running operational reports, and organisations with compliance obligations where auditable change history is essential. Smaller organisations can also benefit if they have a small number of critical shared entities and a need for reliable reporting.
Getting started — a concise checklist
- discover and catalogue shared entities and their source systems;
- define canonical keys and authoritative sources for each entity;
- choose a synchronisation pattern and define acceptable latency;
- implement integrity checks, conflict rules and auditing;
- connect BI tools to the repository and validate reports against the sources;
- establish monitoring and escalation procedures for sync failures.
Conclusion
Outsourcing core applications delivers specialisation and operational benefits, but without a dependable integration strategy the organisation risks inconsistent data, duplicated effort and fragile reporting. Consolidating shared information into a unified SQL Server repository simplifies integrity checks, auditing and cross‑system reporting, and reduces the operational burden of ad‑hoc monitoring systems. For organisations using SharePoint as one of several sources, tools such as SQList provide a pragmatic path to a reliable, queryable dataset. For further reading on related implementation patterns, see AxioWorks’ articles on single source of truth, exporting SharePoint data to SQL Server and practical considerations for BI and reporting tools.
#sharepoint #sqlserver #dataintegration #reporting #sqllist #auditing
