The project went live, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that we hadn’t delivered our best. The day after the demo, I took leave, checked into a hotel, and spent hours sketching down the “not-so-good” practices we had implemented. I was internally consumed, reflecting on how our attitude and resistance to feedback had impacted the outcome.
In enterprise integration, the true success lies not just in delivering a working system but in building one that stands the test of time. And for that, we must listen, learn, and lead with humility.
In the world of enterprise integration, success isn’t just about technology; it’s about collaboration, mindset, and the ability to embrace constructive feedback. A project I worked on back in 2004—the Global Cargo Tracking system for one of the largest oil and gas companies—remains one of my most profound learning experiences.
A Bold Vision with Java Swings
The project’s goal was clear – provide real-time visibility into cargo containers, tracking their positions and movements for the cargo department. The technology chosen was Java Swings, a part of Core Java that enabled us to build interactive user interfaces.
The team, led from Bangalore, was a mix of some of the brightest minds:
- Myself and Kiran, leading technical discussions.
- Chris Martin, our stakeholder and technical expert sitting in the UK.
- Three Java developers, two QA engineers, a project manager, and a program manager monitoring overall progress.
We were young, confident, and—if I look back now—somewhat stubborn.
Technology Without the Right Patterns
From the beginning, we were heads-down into coding. I was brought on board for my experience with Java Applets, which had coding techniques similar to Java Swings. But in our rush to meet timelines, we unknowingly prioritized speed over design quality.
One day, Chris called us out.
“There’s something wrong with the way you’re using the Java Swings framework,” he said.
Chris, being a seasoned technical expert, wasn’t criticizing us but providing valuable input:
- We had high code redundancy because we weren’t leveraging reusable design patterns like Command, Abstract Factory, or Observer patterns.
- Our focus was misplaced—we paid too much attention to naming conventions (camel case, Pascal case) rather than architecting reusable, maintainable code.
Unfortunately, instead of listening, we defended ourselves. With tight deadlines, management pressure, and youthful impatience, we lacked the willingness to pause, learn, and improve. I even remember telling Chris not to “overrule us”—words I regret to this day.
Missteps and Reflection
Our leadership supported us, but looking back, Kiran and I realized we were being tactical and emotional, not strategic. Chris, on the other hand, had a long-term vision for the project. He understood the importance of clean, scalable design and how patterns would reduce complexity.
The management brought in an external architect to review the code, but his inputs were largely cosmetic—focused on coding standards rather than deeper architectural changes. While we met our target date, the design flaws remained.
The project went live, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that we hadn’t delivered our best. The day after the demo, I took leave, checked into a hotel, and spent hours sketching down the “not-so-good” practices we had implemented. I was internally consumed, reflecting on how our attitude and resistance to feedback had impacted the outcome.
Attitude, Patterns, and Process
That project taught me lessons I carry to this day—lessons that are particularly relevant to enterprise integration
- Technology Alone Isn’t Enough
Using the right frameworks and tools is essential, but how you design and implement them matters more. In this project, reusable design patterns would have reduced redundancy and improved maintainability. Enterprise integrations today rely on patterns like Circuit Breaker, Rate Limiting, FIFO Queues, and Dead Letter Queues (DLQ)—all of which require careful thought and planning. - Process Isn’t the Enemy
Back then, we saw process as a hurdle. But today, I realize process ensures control, predictability, and accountability—especially in complex enterprise projects where multiple systems and stakeholders are involved. - The Power of Feedback
Chris was strategic in his input, but we weren’t ready to listen. Constructive criticism, when embraced, is a powerful tool for improvement. Successful integration projects thrive on open communication and shared goals across teams. - Emotions Can Cloud Judgment
Our youthful attitude and emotional responses stopped us from seeing the bigger picture. Integration architects must lead with clarity, calmness, and an openness to collaboration. Aligning thought processes across teams is just as important as aligning systems. - Strategic Thinking Over Tactical Execution
While tactical goals (like deadlines) are critical, they should never come at the cost of long-term design and quality. Enterprise integration demands a strategic approach—understanding patterns, scalability, and reusability from the outset.
The Enterprise Integration Connection
This project, though flawed, introduced me to the building blocks of enterprise integration—patterns that remain relevant today
- SOAP Framework Integration for service communication.
- Circuit Breaker to handle failures gracefully.
- Rate Limiting to manage load efficiently.
- FIFO and DLQ Queues to ensure message reliability.
- PUB-SUB Patterns for real-time event-driven architectures.
It showed me that integration is more than connecting systems, it’s about designing resilient, scalable, and maintainable solutions.
Growth Through Reflection
That day in the hotel room, I made a decision that shaped my career:
- Put emotions aside.
- Listen to others.
- Align with the team.
To this day, I advocate for patience, collaboration, and a process-driven mindset in every integration project I lead. Technology evolves, but the lessons of attitude, patterns, and process remain timeless.