01
Start RevOps earlier than most founders think
Early on you're rightly focused on the traditional cornerstones — sales, marketing, product — but Cameron argues it's never too early to start integrating revenue operations into the business. As soon as the engine is rolling, RevOps should be part of the plan, not an afterthought you bolt on after scaling.
Why it matters: Bake RevOps into your operating plan while you're still small. Waiting until things are messy means retrofitting systems and process onto a foundation that was never built for it.
FoundersRevOps Leaders
02
The first RevOps hire is a systems admin — the unsexy but essential role
The first role isn't the glamorous strategist; it's a dedicated systems admin who owns the CRM first and foremost, then wires in the connected tools that power marketing, sales, and customer success. Without a clean, well-run system of record, everything downstream is compromised.
Why it matters: Prioritize a dedicated systems owner before a strategic hire. A well-run CRM and integrated stack is the foundation every later RevOps investment depends on.
FoundersRevOps Leaders
03
The unicorn who does both systems and strategy is rare
The second skill set RevOps needs is business operations — process, analytics, and reporting, the 'gold standard' of what you want from the function. Someone who can do both the systems side and the strategic analytics side is a unicorn; most people are strong at one, not both.
Why it matters: Don't assume one hire can cover both lanes as you scale. Plan to split systems ownership from strategic/analytics ownership so each is done well rather than spread thin.
RevOps LeadersFounders
04
Don't make your VP of Sales or CRO build Salesforce
At an early-stage company, the sales leader often ends up implementing tools on their own — setting up Salesforce, connecting it to HubSpot — without training for it. The opportunity cost of a VP of Sales or CRO doing systems work is high, and it becomes a complete waste of their time.
Why it matters: Free your revenue leaders to sell and lead. A dedicated systems owner is cheaper than the opportunity cost of your most expensive people doing admin work badly.
FoundersRevenue ExecutivesSales Leaders
05
First choice: report to a true, full-scope CRO
Their number-one recommendation is for RevOps to report to a CRO — but specifically a true CRO who owns the entire go-to-market lifecycle, cold lead to mature adopting customer. That full scope across marketing, sales, and customer success is what makes it revenue operations rather than sales ops.
Why it matters: If you have a CRO with genuine authority over the whole revenue organization, that's the ideal home for RevOps — the function inherits the mandate to operate across the full lifecycle.
Revenue ExecutivesRevOps LeadersFounders
06
Most 'CROs' are really VPs of Sales — the true CRO is rarer than you'd think
Anecdotally, a CRO who actually looks across the entire revenue organization — without marketing reporting elsewhere and success reporting into product — is rare. Many CROs are moonlighting as a VP of Sales, over-indexed on the sales aspect. This should be part of how you interview and select for the role.
Why it matters: Interview explicitly for cross-functional scope and appetite when hiring a CRO. If the person only wants to run sales, don't hang your whole GTM operating model under them.
FoundersRevenue Executives
07
No true CRO? Go COO, then a strategic CFO
If you don't have a true CRO, the next-best home is a COO — a role responsible for the entire company that may already hold product ops and people ops. If there's no COO either (common in Series A–C startups), a strategic CFO works, provided they're strategic rather than accounting-led, because they own corporate planning and often act as the CEO's right hand.
Why it matters: Have a clear fallback for where RevOps sits. A neutral operator or a planning-oriented CFO keeps the function above the fray of any single revenue silo.
FoundersRevenue ExecutivesRevOps Leaders
08
Neutrality equals authority — the real reason placement matters
If you put RevOps under a CRO who only owns sales while a CMO runs marketing separately, RevOps won't have authority over the process that connects the whole lifecycle. A more neutral position under a COO or CFO gives it the authority to look over and be responsible for the entire process — and to be unbiased about which levers to pull.
Why it matters: Decide reporting lines around authority and neutrality, not org-chart convenience. RevOps can only be the unbiased connective tissue if it isn't captive to one function's agenda.
RevOps LeadersRevenue ExecutivesFounders
09
As you scale, build the RevOps team in layers — and don't skip enablement
Beyond the systems owner and a manager/VP-level strategic leader (give them the title so they have a seat at strategic tables), a scaling team adds a dedicated reporting-and-analytics owner, an enablement function, and eventually per-function RevOps PMs across marketing, sales, and CS. Enablement is the one people miss most: great process and tech underdeliver if teams aren't enabled to adopt them.
Why it matters: Sequence your RevOps hires deliberately and resource enablement on purpose. Change management and adoption are where tech-and-process investments either pay off or quietly stall.
RevOps LeadersSales LeadersFounders