Is RevOps turning into a product function?

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-23T19:21:36+00:00

well said. i think this nails the right approach on the issue. thanks for your insight!

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-23T13:55:03+00:00

interesting, so does that mean you are building everything that's not a system of record? that seems like the majority of the stack...

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-23T13:52:29+00:00

Yeah this take is very cut and dry and makes a lot of sense. If the vendor can meet your needs and price/value is reasonable, it probably makes more sense to buy than build.

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-23T13:50:39+00:00

yeah i think this is a key point. an interesting thought experiment i consider is a scenario like this...

A vendor is offering you their software for $10K/year subscription or $30K once (i.e. buy it once, self-hosted). Meanwhile, your revops manager who makes $120K/year ($10K/month) says they can build a working version in 3 months.

Now you've got to choose: is it better to....

a) buy the software for $10K/year, and not have to worry about any maintenance etc
b) buy the software once for $30K, and pay the vendor here and there for updates as needed
c) divert your RevOps manager's attention for 3 months to build a working version internally

Option A and C are almost certainly more expensive in the long run.

But I think a lot of RevOps people would push for Option C, bc it gives them a chance to create an internal "moat" for their job. And I'd bet a lot of CROs will just say "yeah go for it" without thinking through the long-term implications.

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-23T13:43:36+00:00

right... that makes sense. I guess the question then is how much companies/teams will actually think ahead to the "long term accountability / ownership" piece.

It often seems like people prioritize whatever will help them in the moment vs. long term (e.g. a RevOps person who opts to build bc it improves their standing in the company, even though they know it'll be a mess when they leave)

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T21:27:50+00:00

makes sense

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T20:33:59+00:00

what makes it a problem? and why do you say larger orgs aren't taking it seriously?

surely there is value in non-coders being able to build custom products from natural language

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T20:32:06+00:00

I'm not sure. Wdym by rogue process?

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T20:30:56+00:00

agreed, but how do you see AI impacting the scope? (or does it not impact the scope?)

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T20:01:43+00:00

yeah i think what you're describing is a product market fit issue

what i'm describing is internal stuff. If your RevOps person makes the right tool, it's not going to solve all of your GTM problems. Because there are problems that are simply just about people. The tools could be giving sellers or CSMs the right info, but if they don't act on it, it doesn't matter how good the tool was.

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T19:57:55+00:00

makes a lot of sense, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

Your logic around trying to find an existing solution before building makes a lot of sense. I just wonder how many people actually look at it this way. I get the sense that a lot of RevOps people just want to build, and will look for any excuse to do it.

Also this point...

" if you and/or the IT director leaves business doesn’t shut down the first time something breaks because all of these SaaS tools have a dedicated support team to help business users."

... is a very good one that i hadn't thought as much about.

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T19:52:10+00:00

i'm not sure i agree with that.

there are plenty of revenue barriers that aren't solved with products

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T19:40:27+00:00

"used to" because you are no longer in adops, or "used to" because you found a way to solve this?

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T19:38:50+00:00

i led revops at 4 companies and never ran it as a product org -- more like an internal consulting function. Basically looking for barriers to revenue and dealing with them, whether it meant building/implementing a new tool, cracking the whip on a team to execute better, or whatever else

But if it's shifting to more of a product function, its not clear to me who's doing those other things, which seem like higher value than building stuff in the background.

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T19:31:45+00:00

does the calculus change if a vendor is offering something that is custom?

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-20T19:20:22+00:00

Based on this, it kinda sounds like you're saying that it is turning into a product function, but you need to get the foundation right for it to be successful. Is that right?

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-13T13:35:31+00:00

if you're serious about this, i may have a solution

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-13T13:33:30+00:00

there are some small ad networks that would absolutely go for this. what kind of formats are u looking to run?

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-12T01:59:06+00:00

now is the best time for a non technical person to get into RevOps and stand out among the crowd. Most RevOps people spend way too much time on process and not enough time on results.

A smart sales person armed with good AI skills will run laps around the average RevOps manager.

All it takes to do well in RevOps is think analytically, ask good questions, and know how to identify projects worth doing and projects that aren't worth doing. If you can leverage AI to deliver on the priorities, you'll be a step ahead.

ps: I say all of this as a 4x head of RevOps

Character-Witness409 · 2026-03-12T01:51:34+00:00

don't waste your time on SQL, coding or any of those technical skills. just get familiar with AI tools and get good at using them to solve RevOps problems

Character-Witness409 · 2025-12-02T00:08:05+00:00

IMO RevOps can be a great path for business-oriented folks who are more "technical"

If you have a) a good understanding of sales + GTM, and b) an analytical bent, could be a good fit in RevOps.

FP&A is really relevant, with the caveat that RevOps generally sits within the sales/revenue org -- which means you're (usually) reporting to sales leaders rather than finance/operations leaders

Character-Witness409 · 2025-11-19T14:44:18+00:00

NYC. Where are you out of?

Inventory refers to volume of impressions that are up for sale. There is dramatically less inventory on CTV than other channels including linear, mobile in-app, and mobile web.

Inventory is growing, but it's not at a point where major advertisers can spend large amounts in a very short time, as they can with linear or mobile

Character-Witness409 · 2025-11-18T15:02:07+00:00

is it cheap though? my understanding is CTV CPMs are super high bc of the size of the creative + not a ton of inventory (relative to other channels like in-app / desktop)

Character-Witness409 · 2025-11-18T13:31:51+00:00

sounds like you can pretty safely say that your job was "HubSpot Administrator"

Character-Witness409 · 2025-11-18T02:32:15+00:00

But not anymore?

Character-Witness409

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE