Skip to main content

Connect your tools (integrations overview)

K
Written by Kristian Luoma
Updated over a month ago

In Parallel works best when it can see the execution signals your team already produces—without forcing you to migrate everything into a new workspace. Integrations provide that context, while the execution truth stays in the living execution plan.

In this article

  • What integrations are for (and what they’re not)

  • What you can connect

  • What information flows where

  • Best practices for low-noise setup

  • Common issues and fixes


What integrations are for

Integrations exist to support one goal: maintain a trustworthy execution plan over time by pulling in the signals that indicate execution has changed.

That means integrations are designed to:

  • recognize and support your recurring meeting cadence

  • capture execution signals from meetings and systems

  • reduce manual coordination and reporting

They are not designed to:

  • duplicate your task system

  • centralize all work into In Parallel

  • replace chat, docs, or ticketing tools


What you can connect

In Parallel can connect to common work systems including:

  • Slack / Teams

  • Email

  • Jira

  • Asana

  • CRM

  • Sheets

You don’t need to connect everything to start. The best setups begin with the tools that produce the most meaningful execution signals for your scope.


What information flows where

A healthy integration model is simple:

Signals come in

Connected tools provide context and change signals—things like:

  • meeting cadence and attendance context

  • work progress signals (milestone movement, status changes)

  • communication signals that indicate execution drift or risk

Execution truth lives in the plan

The living execution plan is where In Parallel keeps:

  • goals and commitments

  • ranked priorities

  • tasks and milestones (high-signal)

  • risks and dependencies

  • ownership

  • what changed (via snapshots)

Delivery detail stays in source systems

Jira/Asana/etc. remain the place where teams manage:

  • ticket breakdowns

  • backlogs

  • sprint execution

  • task-level workflow

Tip: If your execution plan starts to look like a duplicate Jira board, you’ve crossed the boundary. Pull back to high-signal actions, milestones, and ownership.


What to connect first (recommended order)

If you want value quickly, connect in this order:

1) Calendar / meetings (most leverage)

Meeting cadence is the backbone of the execution loop (pre-read → meeting → report → plan update). Connecting meetings is usually the biggest “day one” unlock.

2) Your delivery system (Jira/Asana)

Connect the system that best represents execution progress, so the plan can stay grounded in reality without manual updating.

3) Communication channels (Slack/Teams, email)

These help keep stakeholders informed where they already work and reduce the need for separate status messaging.

4) Metrics surfaces (Sheets / CRM)

If your scope is driven by numbers (revenue, pipeline, ops KPIs), connecting these helps keep execution anchored to outcomes.


Best practices for a calm, low-noise setup

Start with one scope, one cadence, a small tool set

Integrations are most useful when they serve a clear scope. If you connect everything before the scope is well-formed, you’ll pull in too much noise.

Prefer signals over syncing everything

You don’t need every field, ticket, and thread in In Parallel. The goal is: “enough signal to keep the plan honest.”

Keep ownership and priorities in In Parallel

Even when progress signals come from other tools, keep:

  • the ranked priorities

  • accountable ownership

  • and decision context
    in the execution plan.


Common issues (and fixes)

“We connected Jira/Asana and now everything is noisy”

Likely cause:

  • too much task-level detail is being treated as execution-relevant

Fix:

  • keep the plan high-signal (priorities, milestones, risks, accountable actions)

  • keep granular task breakdowns in the delivery tool

“The plan doesn’t reflect what’s happening in our tools”

Likely causes:

  • the wrong tool is connected for the scope

  • the scope is too broad (multiple unrelated workflows)

Fix:

  • connect the tool that best reflects progress for this scope

  • split scopes by ownership/cadence so signals stay coherent

“Stakeholders still want updates in Slack/email”

Fix:

  • use the post-meeting report as the default update artifact

  • share links into the plan/snapshot instead of rewriting status in chat


Related articles

  • What belongs in In Parallel (and what doesn’t)

  • Understand the living execution plan

  • Stakeholder reporting (without decks)

  • After the meeting: report → review → confirm

Did this answer your question?