What I’d Do Differently If I Were Building a Marketing Ops Function From Scratch

The first time you build a marketing operations function, you learn the tools.

The second time, you learn judgement.

You stop asking what’s possible and start asking what’s necessary. You care less about clever configurations and more about whether the system will still make sense six months from now after priorities shift, people change, and reality sets in.

If I were building a marketing ops function from scratch again, here’s what I’d do differently.

I’d simplify the lifecycle earlier

Early on, it’s tempting to design a lifecycle that accounts for every scenario. Every persona. Every edge case.

In practice, that complexity slows alignment and creates debate where clarity is needed most.

This time, I’d start with fewer stages and stricter advancement criteria. I’d prioritize consistency over precision and accept that a “good enough” lifecycle that everyone understands is more valuable than a perfect one that no one trusts.

Clarity beats precision early on.

I’d delay automation longer

Automation feels like progress. Workflows are visible. They do something.

But premature automation locks in assumptions before patterns have had time to emerge. It codifies behaviors that may not be stable yet.

If I were starting over, I’d let manual processes live a little longer… by design. I’d watch how leads move, how sales actually follows up, and where friction truly exists before automating anything.

Automation should be the last step, not the first response.

I’d document before I configure

Early-stage ops often prioritize momentum. Make it work now, clean it up later.

The cleanup is where the pain shows up.

This time, I’d document earlier and more intentionally:

• What lifecycle stages mean

• Why workflows exist

• Who owns what decisions

• What assumptions were made

Documentation isn’t overhead. It’s leverage. It makes systems explainable, transferable, and far easier to maintain when context inevitably gets lost.

I’d align with sales sooner — and more narrowly

“Aligning with sales” often turns into endless meetings and philosophical debates.

That’s not alignment.

What actually matters is agreeing on a few operational truths:

• When should sales act?

• What context do they need?

• What happens if they don’t?

If a lifecycle stage doesn’t change sales behavior, it probably doesn’t need to exist. Alignment doesn’t require consensus on everything… just clarity on handoffs and expectations.

I’d stop trying to future-proof everything

Early in a build, it’s easy to design for the scale you hope to reach.

The problem is that most of that complexity never earns its keep.

If I were doing it again, I’d optimize for the next phase… not the final one. I’d design for reversibility, assume refactoring is part of growth, and resist building for edge cases that may never matter.

Systems don’t fail because they’re simple. They fail because they’re brittle.

Experience changes what you optimize

Early on, marketing ops optimizes for capability, or what the tools can do.

With experience, the focus shifts to clarity, maintainability, and trust. Systems don’t need to be impressive. They need to be dependable.

The goal isn’t to build something clever. It’s to build something that still works six months from now.