I have a question I've been thinking about for a while. Most, if not all GTM strategies and tools today are focusing on outbound, and its activities. What are we doing differently to get the inbound fully baked leads? I'd love to hear from other startup's and leaders on what channels, signals, strategies did you focus on to improve on marketing and their inbound leads
Data silos and team level trends/patterns for a manager. This is the single biggest hurdle at the moment as the data is scattered across multiple tools now. Native integrations make the data available, but don't offer the signals to take actions/learning opportunities, etc
Hi Shiran, really enjoyed your post. I liked your focus on observed behaviour over self-reported confidence. I’m building IncaZing, a sales readiness platform that also leans heavily on psychology research, just from a broader readiness perspective beyond interviews. Thought it would be great to connect and follow each other’s work.
Hey Dan, just replied to your LinkedIN Comment with my stack. See if that helps
Very true. Even at enterprise level, GTM teams don't formally claim anything at all. Would love to learn from others how they see this trend.
Hey everyone, Incazing is live now. It's a sales readiness platform built on validated psychological constructs. We offer sales readiness for individuals, teams, and hiring managers. Why others in this space fall short — Certifications teach a method and assume everyone breaks the same way. They don't. Someone stuck in AE to manager is dealing with a completely different problem than someone struggling with rejection on cold calls, but most programs run them through the exact same curriculum. That's why people finish a certification, hang the badge on LinkedIn, and walk into the same wall on the next call. How we're addressing it — We start with a real read on where you specifically break down, using validated psychological constructs, not a generic quiz. From there you get a personal gap map, private calls, and a plan built around your actual pattern. Nothing generic, nothing templated. Who it's for — Sales professionals trying to move up. SDR to AE, AE to manager, manager to director. Also sales leaders who want real visibility into their team's readiness, and hiring teams tired of guessing off a resume. Where — incazing.com, or drop me a DM here, happy to walk you through it directly. When — If you're serious about the next role, this is a good time to talk. Direct questions welcome, I'll answer in thread.
Same exact gap shows up in sales hiring. Self-report is basically always going to be flattering. Nobody's going to tell you in an interview that they fold under pressure. We built IncaZing around exactly this — instead of asking people to self-report, we put them into real scenarios and watch what they actually do versus what they claim they’d do. The gap between the two is usually what's built as training modules, decision reports and hiring decisions.
Out of curiosity, what was the structure for your bible and what would you add or take out to improve it in retrospect? -
We started painting the picture of what each one of us needed to have access to, view, edit etc by sales roles.
BDRs, SDR,s AE's, Sales Managers, Directors, C levels, partners, and Board members.
It included everything from views, dashboards, fields that can be edited, forced objective filters instead of subjective answers (Easier to draw metrics/dashboards etc)
This was the core starting point.
Once this was drawn, we wanted to see how far we were with the existing workflows. The gap was too large, we couldn't even achieve 20% from the picture we painted and had to built almost 80% of the fields. The simplest way was to built the flows by reading the data from the existing fields, and not by deleting the fields/data. I strongly recommend that you take a backup on Hubspot before making large corrections. This allows you to restore if things go south. Hope this structure helps.
How large was your team for the 8 week turnaround? How was work distributed amongst the team members? - We were 170 folks in total when this activity happened. The teams ranged between 2 folks to 56 folks across 9 different teams in multiple roles starting from BDR to CEOs.
How did you handle issues that surfaced during the rebuild phase? - There were no major issues as such. We learnt that during the first few days, major issues occur when you delete a field or replace a field. Remember, this will disrupt the entire workflow the teams were used to all these years. I strongly recommend you manually create fields and start replacing like-to-like fields, so both old fields and new fields co-exist.
Once the entire org is happy with the workflow and everything is working as expected and you've given your team to adopt the changes, just delete the old fields and migrate fully after 8 weeks or so.
• How did you define success and set KPIs for the RevOps team? - Success metric was defined based on the quality of data, timeline, adherence and reporting quality. • What timeline did you establish for the cleanup and rebuild effort? - Across 170 sales folks, it was a decent 8 week roll out in phases. L1 thru L4 depending on complexity. Weekly leadership cadence is non-negotiable. Adherence was a new norm. Top down approach. And then roll out was pretty easy to the entire team once leadership agreed upon the bible. • What metrics did you use to track progress (data quality, adoption, reporting accuracy, integration health, etc.)? - Everything essentials for BAU, the non-urgent ones, the ones that had to be recreated or built from ground up were pushed for Phase 2 after the initial 8 weeks. • Did you tackle the work in phases, and if so, how did you prioritize them? - we took the bible seriously. Classifed what was essential, what was optional. That was a great starting point. With Hubspot, leaving the fields already used will certainly help. Just replace with newer, lesser fields on CRM. Never, ever delete fields or data on CRM. This is the first step for the mess to happen. • How did you balance foundational cleanup work against ongoing business requests and stakeholder expectations? - Simple, we did not touch anything that was BAU, we started replacing them with more meaningful fields that are bare essentials. Hope this helps
We did this exercise a few months ago. The way we did it was to first create a bible of what's what. Get the entire leadership to agree on it. No more exceptions after that. Changes were done in phases. Leadership was expected to adhere to the changes, Revops flagged any non-adherence in a weekly cadence leadership meeting, corrections were made real-time before moving to the next phase. We did the whole exercise and took us under 8 weeks for the whole revamp. We stuck to the bible, no revisions, just adherence in phases. But creating that master bible took us about 4 long-haul meetings, once it was well worth the effort for the one-time fix. All the best 🙂
