Most revenue teams know they’re leaking pipeline somewhere — leads that go cold between marketing and sales, handoffs that rely on someone remembering to do something, reporting that contradicts itself depending on who pulled it. The issue is rarely a lack of automation tools. It’s that no one has mapped the full lead-to-cash workflow against what the tools are actually doing, found the gaps, and ranked which fixes are worth building. Without that picture, spend and build effort go to the wrong places first.
We run this as a 5–7 day engagement: stakeholder interviews, workflow mapping, a tools-and-data review, and an ROI model that ranks the top 15 automation opportunities by impact. We sit with the ops team, decompose the business process end to end, and produce a build-ready output — not a strategic deck. The audit is designed to feed directly into a sprint, so everything we surface includes the dependencies and risks that would derail a build if you skipped this step.
The diagnostic typically surfaces things the team already suspects but hasn’t been able to isolate. A common pattern: a CRM workflow that was built for one product line is now handling three, and the routing rules were never updated. Or a marketing automation sequence that fires correctly on paper but sends to contacts that sales has already disqualified. Or an ROI assumption baked into the board deck that’s based on a metric nobody actually measures. These aren’t exotic findings — they show up consistently because the tools evolve faster than the process documentation does.
To run the audit, we need CRM admin access, read access to your marketing automation platform, and time with the people who operate these systems day to day — not just the people who commissioned the audit. The ops team or RevOps lead is the most important voice in the room. We also need whoever owns the sales handoff: that’s usually where the most consequential gaps are, and it’s the conversation that gets skipped most often. The whole engagement is designed to be low-lift on your end — most of the analytical work happens on ours.
Occasionally the audit surfaces something that was outside the original scope — a data model problem in the CRM that would break any automation built on top of it, or a compliance gap in how consent is being tracked. When that happens, we call it out explicitly and recommend whether to address it before or in parallel with the automation build. We don’t expand scope without agreement, but we also won’t hand over a build roadmap that’s sitting on a foundation we know is unstable.
The deliverable is a lead-to-cash workflow map, a top-15 ROI-ranked automation backlog, a 30-day execution plan for the highest-confidence quick wins, and a risks-and-dependencies register. The primary audience is the ops lead and whoever is authorizing the build — it’s written to be presented internally, not just filed. The most common next step is a 90-day GTM automation roadmap or directly into a build sprint. Teams that act on the findings within 60 days typically see measurable cycle-time improvement within the first quarter — the quick-win items are sequenced specifically for that.