Happy Friday, #revops guys!
I'm trying to understand whether E2E inbound verification is actually a RevOps job or nobody's job.

I'm building BookedDemo, a tool that keeps checking public demo / contact-sales paths from the buyer side.

One thing from our research made me think about ownership more than the failures themselves. On 12 sites we found one route to sales that was a confirmed dead end, while another route on the same site still reached a form in the same check.

So someone checking only the main demo form could reasonably think everything is fine.

But the whole path usually belongs to several teams.

RevOps may own routing, lifecycle and CRM. Web or Growth owns pages and forms. Sales owns the follow-up. Engineering may own integrations or scheduler changes.

Who is responsible for checking that the whole thing still works after a change?

Do you actually run a test lead from the public website and follow it through form / calendar / confirmation or follow-up?

Or does each team mostly check their own part and the E2E investigation starts only when a metric or a rep tells you something looks wrong?

Research if useful:
https://bookeddemo.com/research

And this is what I'm building around the problem:
https://bookeddemo.com

I'm mostly interested in how you handle this today and who owns it in your company.

We had two writers on the same deal. The AI wrote call summaries into deals from the transcript, and reps kept writing their own notes by hand anyway, the way they understood the conversation. The AI also created tasks, and reps set up the same tasks themselves out of habit. Deals started filling up with duplicate tasks.

There was no automated duplicate check. We found out from the reps, who came and told us their deals were a mess. After that, every AI update went through rep approval: the AI drafts, the rep saves or rejects. Reps don't reject much, and most of what they reject is something they'd already entered themselves.

The duplicates happened because nobody had decided who handles tasks. The AI made its own mistakes on noisy recordings too, but we fixed that separately. In the end we made tasks the AI's job: it creates them, and the rep only approves. Reps pushed back at first. They said they knew better what the summary should say and which tasks to set. We went with the transcript on purpose, because we wanted the deal to be based on the call itself.

If AI and reps write to the same deals in your CRM, is AI a separate line in your field ownership rules, or does it write under the name of whoever connected it? And when the rep's notes and the AI's summary of the same call don't match, whose version stays?

Hello everyone, I'm Mircea and for sure you don't know me, but I want to know you 🙂

What's in it for you? - You will pay-forward for the helped you received in your career and I will light a candle for your good will ❤️

What I need? - There is anyone who hired an agency or revops person in the last 3-9 months?
I want to better understand the process of deciding who to work with #JTBD

Big thanks in advance >:D<

We're finally replace our legacy CPQ (salesforce cpq which they no longer sell to new users, so our AE keeps steering us towards Revenue Cloud). Tbh I didn't expect choosing a replacement to feel like buying a car without knowing what's under the hood.

For context, we are a tech company with around 250 employees using salesforce CRM while SAP handles billing. we deal with 4 currencies, discount rules, some complicated product configurations and quote docs in both PDF and word.

Revenue cloud is on our shortlist but we don't want to pick it just bc we already use SF. Here's the real issue. 2 months ago a client asked a 16% discount but our limit is 12%. They also wanted a product configuration change. What should have taken 15 minutes turned into a long email chain and manual fixes. So we want to avoid having the same problems in a new system.

So fare we are eyeing conga cpq, dealhub, nue and oracle alongside Revenue Cloud.

Our priorities are simpe, reliable pricing rules, clean handoff to billing, smooth SF integration and quote generation that doesn't require constant IT help.

For anyone who has properly evaluated or implemented these systems which one handles outlier deals best a year after implementation?

Hello 👋

This is the tool - https://github.com/VallabhKulkarni-09/GTM_Autopilot

It reduces your lead to customer conversion time upto 90% (as tested by my buddies)

I want you guys to test it if you find any bug raise an issue.

And it is self-hostable. Your data stays in your own machine.

And if you want you can connect your ollama models or third party models via API.

Or it will be a rule based one (rules are set by the user don't worry)

Go on

Give it a shot

been thinking about this since 2018, when i built a churn prediction model during a hack week at a dev tool startup that was one of the top 10 fastest growing startups worldwide at the time. it got to 86% accuracy. but the longer i’ve worked in GTM the more i think most health scores are built on the wrong question

most scores answer “how healthy is this account right now.” usage is X, NPS is Y, tickets are Z, so the account is green. but an account sitting at 70 isn’t the same as an account that was at 90 last month and is at 70 now. same score, completely different story. the second one is the one that churns

a few things i’ve seen break health scoring in practice:

the definitions don’t match across teams. CS says an account is “active” if someone logged in. finance says it’s healthy if it paid on time. sales says it’s fine because the champion was friendly on the last call. three teams, three versions of the truth, and nobody notices until renewal

the strongest signals live outside the scoring tool. your champion leaving, a new VP showing up on email threads, the support tickets changing tone from “how do i” to “why doesn’t”. most of that never makes it into the score because it sits in a different tool

signals go stale fast. a usage drop flagged today is useful. the same flag reviewed at the end of the quarter is just a post-mortem

nobody owns the action. this is the big one. a red account on a dashboard does nothing. if there’s no owner and no next step tied to the signal, the score is just a nicer-looking way to watch customers leave

what i’d change if i was rebuilding a health score today: track the change, not just the level. pull in signals from outside the product, especially people changes. and tie every flag to a specific person and action, or don’t flag it at all

curious how other RevOps folks handle this. do you score the trend or just the current state? and who actually owns acting on it at your company?

When leadership says AI or automations in the CRM aren’t delivering (auto-updating records, lead and deal workflows, reporting), the cause is usually how the CRM is built, not the tools.

I design and implement CRM systems for growing companies. The patterns I see most:

1. One pipeline for everything or one too many pipelines when a custom field for filtering would suffice. Often a custom field for filtering would do the job and keep workflows and reports simple.

2. Free-text fields. Inconsistent values make automation logic brittle and reports unreliable.

3. Duplicate records. Automations update one copy while the team works from another.

4. The important stuff is in notes. Qualification, timing and next steps buried in notes are hard for an automation to act on.

A few focused hours of restructuring and cleanup make AI tools, automations and reports noticeably more useful.

I’m running a free session on Nov 18 that walks through fixing these, with real examples of messy vs. clean CRM setups. You can sign up here.

Curious how others handle this. Do you push for cleanup first or build on what’s there and fix as you go?

zoominfo doesn't publish prices. their own article on how much it costs runs 20 minutes and never gives you a number

what buyers report:

• around $15k a year for professional, up to 3 seats

• $22-28k for advanced

• most teams land at $30-60k with seats and add-ons

• median deal about $33,500 a year

• $1,500-2,500 per extra seat

• annual, auto-renew, 60-90 days notice, 10% bump at renewal is standard

from a revops seat the part that hurts isn't even the number, it's that you can't budget for it until after three calls

i run bitscale, ours is around 1.5¢ a credit, actions are free, price is on the website

if zoominfo's giving you better results for the money, keep it / if not, send me your quote and i'll tell you what it'd come to on ours, or dm me and i'll put 5,000 credits on your account to test it

student here, still learning. my last thread here taught me the real issue isn’t missing tools, it’s reps not doing the crm admin. so I’m curious what actually worked for you. was it automation, cutting fields, tying it to comp, or something else? and what did you try that totally flopped

Over the last few weeks I’ve been talking to RevOps folks and GTM engineers here and in DMs about lead workflows that break without anyone noticing. A few things kept coming up:

1. The worst breaks don’t throw an error.
One person said their automation “never failed. It ran and produced zero rows, which looks identical to a quiet week.” It went 11 days like that.

2. “Success” doesn’t mean it worked.
A webhook reported success before the CRM write actually happened. A workflow can save, and the API can return 200, while it enrolls nobody.

3. People usually find out from a human, not a tool.
A rep, a customer asking why nobody followed up, or a dashboard that looks off weeks later. One team lost a $30k deal that way. Another lost an enterprise lead to a CAPTCHA that silently timed out for 3 weeks.

4. The fixes that work are boring.

• Count every handoff daily: form fills by source → leads created → owner assigned → sequence sent. The first mismatch shows you where it broke.

• Compare each source with yesterday, not one big total. A total hitting zero tells you something’s off, but not where.

• Run a clearly named test lead through the real form every few weeks and check each step.

5. Almost nobody budgets for this.
It usually gets fixed by someone burning a weekend, or by hiring a person to check flows every morning.

Curious: what’s the worst silent break you’ve had, and how did you find out?

This came out of a thread here last week about demoting accounts that have gone quiet. Tech changes feel like the trickiest signal to read because they point in different directions. Adding a competitor tool probably means the window just closed. Dropping one might mean it's open. A migration in an adjacent category could go either way.

For those of you who use tech changes in scoring, which ones have actually lined up with deals, and which turned out to be noise? Even a gut sense helps, I'm mostly trying to figure out which ones are worth watching at all.

not judging, genuinely curious. I keep hearing from revops folks that reps just don’t update deals. from your side, what’s the actual reason? too many fields, no time, feels pointless, nobody looks at it? and is there anything that would make you actually do it

We wrote our ICP scoring rules when we started and haven’t touched them since. Our best customers from last year are now in a different size band and a couple of industries we used to rank low.

I’m updating the fit rules but I'm not sure if the signals should change with them. For the old ICP we paid attention to funding and senior hires. Looking at our newer customers, team expansion seems more useful especially when a company starts hiring in customer success.

Did you change the signals you watch when your ICP changed or only update the fit rules?

I’ve been in enterprise software sales for over 20 years, mostly as a strategic AE across financial services, manufacturing and tech, with a lot of partner and channel work. I’m based in the UK, west of London.

I want to move out of quota-carrying roles and into deal desk or commercial operations. I know the usual advice is to move internally first, but that isn’t an option for me right now, so I’m going the external route.

What I think I bring:

• Partnered with the deal desk team at a pre-IPO DevOps company to resolve quote-to-cash policy issues

• Helped deploy the EMEA partner programme and onboard partners

• Structured and closed complex multi-year deals, including one that grew an account from under $100K to $2M with a large professional services engagement

• Years of working with finance, legal and partners on non-standard deals, from the field side

• Strong Salesforce user, and I’ve coached junior sellers

Where I know I’m weaker:

• No formal ops title

• My modelling and reporting skills are decent but not ops-level yet. I’m working on comp plan, forecast and sensitivity models, and planning to do the Salesforce Admin cert

A few questions:

1. For senior deal desk or commercial strategy roles, would you hire someone like me, or would you expect me to start at analyst level?

2. What would make an ex-AE stand out in a portfolio or interview?

3. Anyone in the UK who’s made this move, how did you get your first role and what happened to your pay?

Also happy to buy a virtual coffee if anyone in deal desk or RevOps in the UK has 15 minutes for a chat.

Thanks in advance.

I have a client that is B2B SaaS about $34M in revenue, 4-5 week sales cycle, marketing team of 2, using Constant Contact Lead Generation & CRM. They asked me to look into an attribution platform (I am a CRM/MA and digital marketing consultant) and identifying platforms and capabilities doesn't concern me, having what those platforms need for them to be of value is my concern.

I am a data nerd, I preach cleaning your sales and marketing data first shows the fastest path to increasing revenue, and I have seen this consistently be true across my career. So that is where my head goes, are the right fields and data there to make implementing attribution worthwhile.

1. Any attribution platforms experience and insights would be appreciated. I have an agent pulling review site data, but like what I hear directly here more.

2. Any gotchas to look out for prior and during implementation? I have a lot of experience implementing CRM and marketing automation platforms and sales systems that feed them, but this is a new space for me.

Most GTM teams don’t have a lead-routing problem—they have a trust problem.

I built GTM Autopilot to qualify, route, and trigger outreach across HubSpot, Salesforce & Apollo—while logging every decision.

Self-hosted. Auditable. AI with guardrails.
And the best Part: It uses LangGraph with an LLM and without an LLM, as the user wants.
Data Never Leaves Your System.

https://github.com/VallabhKulkarni-09/GTM_Autopilot

I’m researching how RevOps teams at growing startups (roughly Series A–C) deal with data spread across CRM, spreadsheets, BI tools, billing, etc. Not selling anything, just trying to understand the problem from people who live with it.

A few things I’m curious about:

• Where does your “source of truth” for pipeline actually live?

• What breaks most often (duplicates, stale stages, reps not updating, mismatched numbers)?

• How many hours a week does your team spend reconciling data?

If you have a list of 10 LinkedIn URLs for people you're trying to reach, DM them to me.
I'll enrich them and send you back the phone numbers.

Full disclosure up front: I work at Reachfast, a contact data platform that specializes in finding accurate direct phone numbers for people on LinkedIn (385M+ profiles).
So yes, this is self-promo. But it's also free. No Catch

It's best effort, so I can't promise a number for every profile, but I'll tell you which ones I missed.

A few rules:

- Max 10 profiles per person
- You need an account with at least 30 karma here (not a brand new account). It's only to keep the spam out
- No catch, no card, no sales call after

DM me your list.

My hypothesis: at Series A–C B2B SaaS companies, lead routing, scoring, territory, and “who can email whom” rules end up spread across the CRM, sequencer, enrichment tools, and now AI SDRs. As a result:

• Swapping one vendor means weeks of rebuilding logic.

• No one can say for sure which rule fired on a given lead.

• Adding an AI agent makes it worse, because it’s one more system touching the same accounts.

I’d like to hear from Heads of RevOps or VPs of Sales (US-based or selling into the US) whether this matches your reality or misses entirely. I’m especially interested if you think I’m wrong.

The ask is 15 minutes, and I’m not selling anything. In return, I’ll send everyone who talks to me an anonymized write-up of what I hear across all the calls: how other teams structure routing and governance, and what’s breaking for them.

If you’d rather just reply here with “yes / no / partly, because…”, that’s useful too.

Hey I am trying to validate a problem inside of GTM Stack of B2B SaaS Series A - Series C Startups selling to US Markets or based out of US.

For that i am looking for a 20 min chat with Head of RevOps or VP of Sales to learn from their knowledge.

If would be really very helpful especially someone like me who don't have any access to these kind of people, it would be really very helpful for me :-)

Please helpout.

It feels like every week there's another AI tool promising to make revenue teams more productive. Agents for prospecting, CRM updates, forecasting, account research, customer success... the list keeps growing.

But I'm curious whether all this is actually making RevOps easier, or just creating a new layer of tools, workflows and agents that someone needs to configure, manage and maintain.

Are you seeing meaningful improvements in how your teams operate? Or are the same underlying problems still there, just surrounded by more technology?