A Connected System is the Appian design object specifically created to store and manage connection information for an external system. It centralizes the base URL, authentication method, and credentials. This allows multiple integration objects, which define the specific operations or endpoints, to reference the same Connected System. By doing so, developers can reuse the connection and authentication details without duplicating them, which simplifies maintenance and enhances security. If credentials or the base URL change, they only need to be updated in the single Connected System object.

1. Appian Documentation

"Connected System Object": The introduction states

"Connected system objects represent an external system and contain all the information necessary to connect to that system... This allows you to create multiple integrations that all use the same connected system."

2. Appian Documentation

"Integration Object": In the "Configuration" section

it details that an integration must be configured with a connected system. It states

"The connection details

such as the server and authentication

are configured in the connected system." This confirms that the integration object consumes details from the connected system.

3. Appian Documentation

"Creating Integrations": This guide outlines the standard development pattern: "Before you create an integration

you'll need to create a connected system to store the base URL and authentication details for the external system you want to connect to." This explicitly defines the Connected System's role as the prerequisite for sharing connection details.

A database trigger is the most efficient design as it operates directly at the data source level, independent of the Appian execution engines. When a record is modified via any Appian action, the database trigger automatically captures the changes and writes them to an audit table within the same database transaction. This approach completely offloads the auditing logic from the Appian application, resulting in the lowest possible performance impact on Appian's servers. The auditing process is transparent to the Appian objects (e.g., process models, interfaces) that perform the data modification, ensuring minimal overhead and complexity within the application itself.

1. Appian Corporation. (2023). Data-Centric Design. Appian Documentation. In the "Leverage the Database" section

the documentation advises

"Leverage the database for what it does best: managing and manipulating large sets of data... For example

if you need to update thousands of rows in a database table

it is much more efficient to call a stored procedure from Appian than it is to loop through those updates in a process model." This principle directly supports offloading the row-level audit task to a database trigger for maximum efficiency.

2. Appian Corporation. (2023). Record Events. Appian Documentation. This document describes the Appian-native approach of using record events to trigger a process. While a valid pattern

this method still consumes Appian application resources to handle the event and execute a process

making it less efficient and having a greater impact than a database trigger that operates outside the Appian execution engine.

3. Silberschatz

A.

Korth

H. F.

& Sudarshan

S. (2019). Database System Concepts (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill. Chapter 8

"Advanced SQL

" discusses the use of triggers for maintaining data integrity and creating audit trails. The text explains that triggers are executed by the database system automatically as a part of the modifying transaction

which is inherently more efficient for auditing than an external application-layer process.

In the Scrum framework, the Product Owner is the sole individual accountable for managing and prioritizing the Product Backlog. This responsibility is central to the role and ensures a single, clear source of direction for the product's development. The Product Owner orders the backlog items to best achieve the product goals and maximize the value delivered by the Scrum Team. While the Product Owner may take input from stakeholders, the Development Team, and the Scrum Master, the final authority on the order of the backlog rests exclusively with them.

1. Schwaber

K.

& Sutherland

J. (2020). The Scrum Guide. Scrum.org. p. 5. The guide states

"The Product Owner is also accountable for effective Product Backlog management

which includes: ... Ordering Product Backlog items".

2. Appian Corporation. (n.d.). Appian Delivery Methodology. Appian Academy Online. In the "Project Roles and Responsibilities" section

the Product Owner is defined as the role responsible for defining and prioritizing user stories

which constitute the product backlog.

3. Rubin

K. S. (2012). Essential Scrum: A Practical Guide to the Most Popular Agile Process. Addison-Wesley Professional. Chapter 5

"The Product Owner Role

" details that a primary responsibility of the Product Owner is to be the "single-willed owner of the product backlog" and to manage its contents and ordering.

4. Pichler

R. (2010). Agile Product Management with Scrum: Creating Products that Customers Love. Addison-Wesley Professional. Chapter 2

"The Product Owner Role

" emphasizes that the Product Owner is responsible for the product backlog and for prioritizing it to maximize business value.

To execute an Appian Web API, the calling user or service account must have a minimum of Viewer permissions to the Web API object. This aligns with the principle of least privilege, granting only the necessary rights to invoke the endpoint without allowing modification. Higher permission levels, such as Editor or Administrator, also permit execution but provide additional capabilities (e.g., editing the object's definition, managing security) that are not required for an end user to simply call the API. Therefore, Viewer is the correct minimum privilege level.

1. Appian Corporation. (2023). Web API Object. Appian 23.4 Documentation. In the "Security" section

it states: "Users must have at least Viewer permissions to the web API to execute it."

2. Appian Corporation. (2023). Object Security. Appian 23.4 Documentation. This document outlines the standard permission levels (Administrator

Editor

Viewer

Deny) and their general functions

reinforcing that Viewer permissions are intended for users who need to see or use an object at runtime without modifying it.

The sprint retrospective is a key ceremony within the Appian Delivery Methodology, which is founded on Agile and Scrum principles. The primary goal of this meeting is to inspect the previous sprint and create a plan for improvements in the next one. The two most fundamental questions that structure this discussion are "What went well?" and "What didn’t go well?". These questions encourage the team to reflect on both successes to be continued and challenges to be addressed, fostering a culture of continuous improvement focused on the team's processes, interactions, and tools.

B. What are the blockers?

This question is primarily addressed during daily stand-up meetings to ensure impediments are removed quickly, rather than waiting for the end-of-sprint retrospective.

C. Who did well in this sprint?

The retrospective focuses on the team's process and collaboration, not on singling out individual performance, which can hinder open and honest feedback.

1. Appian Community

Appian Delivery Methodology

"Execute Sprints": The official documentation describes the Sprint Retrospective's purpose: "The purpose of the Sprint Retrospective is to plan ways to increase quality and effectiveness. The Scrum Team inspects how the last Sprint went with regards to individuals

interactions

processes

tools

and their Definition of Done." This inspection is facilitated by asking what went well and what could be improved.

2. The Scrum Guide (scrumguides.org)

November 2020

"Sprint Retrospective

" p. 11: While not Appian-specific

Appian's methodology is based on Scrum. The guide states the purpose is to "plan ways to increase quality and effectiveness." It suggests topics for inspection include "individuals

interactions

processes

tools

and their Definition of Done

" which are naturally explored by asking what went well and what didn't.

An integration designed to modify data can be invoked from several locations within an Appian application. It can be called asynchronously within a process model using the dedicated "Call Integration" smart service. It can also be called synchronously from any expression using the a!integration() function. This allows it to be used directly in an expression rule or, very commonly, within the saveInto parameter of a SAIL interface component to trigger the data modification in response to user interaction.

A. Web API (GET): A Web API is an endpoint that exposes Appian functionality to external systems; it is not a location within Appian from which you call an integration.

C. Web API (POST, PUT, DELETE): Similar to the GET Web API, this object is an inbound endpoint. While it can execute an integration internally, it is not a location where a designer calls the integration from.

1. Process Model (D): "The Call Integration smart service is a powerful tool that allows you to start an integration from a process model."

Source: Appian Documentation

"Call Integration Smart Service".

2. Expression or Rule (B) & SAIL saveInto parameter (E): "You can call an integration from any expression using the a!integration() function. This allows you to call an integration from an interface

web API

or other expression." The documentation further clarifies its use in interfaces: "For example

you could use this function in the saveInto parameter of a button component..."

Source: Appian Documentation

"Calling an Integration".

3. SAIL saveInto parameter (E): The a!save function

used within saveInto

can execute an integration rule. "The value parameter [of a!save] is...evaluated and saved into the target...when the user interacts with the component." This evaluated value can be the result of an a!integration() call.

Source: Appian Documentation

"a!save() Function".