Download this PDF file
Articles Open Access

API-Led Connectivity in Enterprise CRM: A Reference Architecture for Salesforce and Heterogeneous Enterprise Systems

Chakra Dhari Gadige
Independent Researcher, Austin, TX, USA

Abstract

Enterprise customer relationship management (CRM) environments are increasingly required to be seamlessly integrated with heterogeneous enterprise systems, including enterprise resource planning (ERP), billing, configure-price-quote (CPQ), customer portals and legacy applications and environments. Deep point-to-point integration with Salesforce can be tightly coupled, contain redundant integration code, lack scalability, and be complex. I will propose a reference architecture of API-directed connectivity in enterprise CRM in this paper that are based on three complementary layers of API layers: System APIs, Process APIs and Experience APIs, Salesforce being the primary CRM interaction layer. The abstracted enterprise systems are system APIs, which offer reusable services, and Process APIs are used to coordinate between systems. Experience APIs are Salesforce, customer portal and consumer-specific interfaces to external applications. The architecture has encompassed API security, lifecycle management, integration patterns and observability features to improve on reliability, traceability and operational control. The new framework offers a systematic way of merging the heterogeneous enterprise resources and decreasing system dependency and encouraging reuse of API. How the layered API-connectivity might provide scalable integration, controlled data exchange, and standard operations of business via the enterprise CRM ecosystems is also discussed in the paper. The reference architecture provides beneficial foundation to organizations seeking credible, lasting and monitors Salesforce integrating environment.

Keywords

API-led ConnectivitySalesforce CRMSystem APIsProcess APIsExperience APIsEnterprise IntegrationAPI SecurityAPI Observability

DOI

https://doi.org/10.15680/IRJIE.2022.0702002

PDF Download

pdf

Publication Information

JournalInternational Research Journal of Innovative Engineering
Volume7
Number2
Pages12125-12135
Published2023-03-08
IssueVol. 7 No. 2 (2023): International Research Journal of Innovative Engineering (IRJIE)

References

[1] Overeem, M., Mathijssen, M., & Jansen, S. (2022). API-m-FAMM: A focus area maturity model for API management. Information and Software Technology, 147, 106890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2022.106890
[2] Mathijssen, M., Overeem, M., & Jansen, S. (2020). Identification of practices and capabilities in API management: A systematic literature review. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2006.10481
[3] Jansen, S. (2020). A focus area maturity model for software ecosystem governance. Information and Software Technology, 118, 106219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2019.106219
[4] Arsanjani, A., & Holley, K. (2006). The service integration maturity model: Achieving flexibility in the transformation to SOA. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC’06) (p. 515). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SCC.2006.101
[5] Gámez Díaz, A., Fernández Montes, P., & Ruiz Cortés, A. (2015). Towards SLA-driven API gateways. In XI Jornadas de Ciencia e Ingeniería de Servicios.
[6] van Steenbergen, M., Bos, R., Brinkkemper, S., van de Weerd, I., & Bekkers, W. (2013). Improving IS functions step by step: The use of focus area maturity models. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 25(2).
[7] Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., & Pöppelbuß, J. (2009). Developing maturity models for IT management. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 1, 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8348-9317-7_3
[8] Pöppelbuß, J., & Röglinger, M. (2011). What makes a useful maturity model? A framework of general design principles for maturity models and its demonstration in business process management. In Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS).
[9] Proença, D., & Borbinha, J. (2016). Maturity models for information systems: A state of the art. Procedia Computer Science, 100, 1042–1049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.279
[10] Spruit, M., & Röling, M. (2014). ISFAM: The information security focus area maturity model.
[11] Hüner, K. M., Ofner, M., & Otto, B. (2009). Towards a maturity model for corporate data quality management. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (pp. 231–238). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1529282.1529334
[12] Prat, N., Comyn-Wattiau, I., & Akoka, J. (2015). A taxonomy of evaluation methods for information systems artifacts. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2015.1029397
[13] Ampatzoglou, A., Bibi, S., Avgeriou, P., Verbeek, M., & Chatzigeorgiou, A. (2019). Identifying, categorizing and mitigating threats to validity in software engineering secondary studies. Information and Software Technology, 106, 201–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2018.10.006
[14] Runeson, P., & Höst, M. (2009). Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering, 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-008-9102-8
[15] Poell, T., Nieborg, D., & van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation. Internet Policy Review, 8(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1425

Statistics

49
Views
24
Downloads