If you're looking for the optimal solution in each area, the best of breed option usually provides richer functionality, satisfying more users. But dollar savings, convenience, and efficient data sharing can make the integrated approach very appealing.

Integrated systems provide multiple applications with a common database and consistent user interface so that all modules have a familiar look and feel. The downside is that some applications may have anemic functionality, causing users in these areas to become disgruntled.

Best of breed systems, designed specifically to excel in just one or a few applications, can also pose challenges, such as increased training and support, complex interfaces with other systems, duplicate data entry, and redundant data storage.

So which way to go... best of breed or integrated system? Unlike "Who Wants to be a Millionaire," there is no "final answer" to this ongoing debate. However, here are some key factors to consider:

While money drives many decisions, higher costs must be weighed against increased revenue. Integrated systems, which may have lower licensing costs and do not require costly interfaces, are usually less expensive. And with easier access to shared data, the potential exists for both containing costs and earning additional revenue through better decision making.

However, with a best of breed system, specialized features can create a competitive advantage which may also serve to cut costs or increase revenue. A cost justification may be supplied by the vendor to show that the system's advanced features compensate for higher up-front and ongoing costs.

Once you are an installed customer of an integrated systems company, your power in the relationship may be significantly diminished. When adding new modules, you'll have less clout in negotiating price and terms. And if you decide to "walk away," the prospect of replacing an entire enterprise system is daunting vs. replacing one or two stand alone systems.

The old saw about the hardware vendor blaming the software vendor and vice versa is magnified in a best of breed environment. If a system goes down, more finger pointing occurs when multiple vendors are involved. And when other trouble occurs, such as the Y2K bug, it is easier to deal with one vendor than many different companies.

Like Pacmen gobbling up fruit, many so-called integrated systems are the result of larger companies acquiring specialized best of breed systems. If your proposed vendor has different hardware platforms, databases, or operating systems for each module, there's a good chance the systems were pieced together through acquisitions and may not be that easy to interface.

With a truly integrated system developed by one company, it is easier and faster to access shared data. However, use of a common database management system or data exchange standards (e.g. HL7 in health care) will allow the sharing of data in a best of breed environment. Some vendors will even certify that their system can interface with other identified systems.

While the strongest case for the best of breed option is richer functionality, integrated systems are starting to catch up with their "boutique system" cousins.

Yet areas within an organization that are very dynamic or competitive may need regular enhancements, which best of breed vendors are more likely to provide. Specialized systems may also be more web-enabled or technologically advanced since it takes longer for companies to re-write a whole suite of applications.

In choosing between an integrated system or best of breed approach, a lot may depend on your organization's size, culture and management style. If sub-entities within your organization are large or complex, they may require the advanced functionality that only a best of breed system can provide.

In a highly centralized decision making organization, easier access to shared data will likely take priority. Specialized systems that do not provide mission critical functionality will be sacrificed for the "greater good" of shared data and other integrated system efficiencies.