/* CSS to modify the options in the menu when the user clicks on them */
/* CSS to disable the scroll when the menu is open */
Building a Revenue Operations (RevOps) team is a strategic move that can align your organization’s revenue-generating functions—sales, marketing, and customer success—into a cohesive, efficient system. However, the way you structure your RevOps team can greatly influence its effectiveness. This guide explores the most common RevOps organizational structures, their advantages and drawbacks, and provides actionable insights for go-to-market (GTM) leaders designing or refining their teams.
The structure of a RevOps team dictates how effectively it can align cross-functional teams, reduce silos, and streamline processes. A poorly designed RevOps organization can lead to inefficiencies, miscommunication, and overall internal friction. On the other hand, the right structure ensures that every team has clear priorities, accountability, and the tools to hit revenue goals, while also building operational agility.
But how do you decide on the right structure for your team? It starts with understanding the options available, the stage of your company, and your strategic priorities.
In the departmental model, the RevOps team is broken down by go-to-market departments (e.g., sales, marketing, and customer success). Each team operates semi-independently, reporting up to a Head of RevOps, and operational activities are segmented by their respective GTM departments. Each department—Marketing, Sales, and Customer Success—has its own dedicated operations team responsible for the listed activities. This model is most common in early-stage companies transitioning from siloed operations into a unified RevOps structure, when the organization needs to optimize each department’s processes before scaling cross-functional collaboration.
✱ Strengths of this Model:
✱ Weaknesses of this Model:
In this model, RevOps is structured around core functional areas: strategy, tools, enablement, and insights. Instead of aligning with departments, the team aligns by expertise, and each functional team supports all GTM departments, leading to greater integration and collaboration. This structure is ideal for companies that have established RevOps processes and are ready to focus on innovation and optimization across all departments.
✱ Strengths of this Model:
✱ Weaknesses of this Model:
A flat structure minimizes hierarchy, empowering individual contributors and promoting agility. We often see this model used by startups; it works well for small, nimble teams but will likely need to evolve as the organization scales.
✱ Strengths of this Model:
✱ Weaknesses of this Model:
1. Authority and Decision-Making
Authority within RevOps isn’t just about hierarchy; it’s about clarity. Leaders must define who can make decisions, who can take action, and who is responsible for ensuring alignment across teams. A well-communicated “North Star” ensures everyone is working toward the same goals.
2. Ownership and Accountability
Clear ownership over processes and metrics is essential. In RevOps, many processes cut across traditional departmental boundaries, making it critical to map these processes horizontally and assign accountability for each.
3. Resource Allocation
Budget constraints often dictate the structure of RevOps teams. Early-stage companies may lack the resources to hire specialized talent, while mid-stage organizations may struggle with prioritizing investments in tools, technology, and personnel.
4. Organizational Culture
Your company’s culture will heavily influence the shape RevOps takes. Collaborative cultures may adapt more easily to cross-functional structures, while hierarchical organizations may resist change.
5. Campaign Ops vs. Execution
While the initial infrastructure setup and campaign ops work should be done by RevOps, Marketing can own execution from there. Ultimately, the key is effective collaboration between marketing and RevOps to balance strategic alignment with operational efficiency.
Before RevOps is implemented, most companies operate with siloed sales, marketing, and customer success operations. While this can work in the early stages, it often leads to inefficiencies such as:
When companies begin unifying their operations under a RevOps banner, challenges often emerge:
The key here is communication. Cross-functional meetings, shared goals, and a centralized project manager can help reduce friction.
As RevOps teams grow, they typically move toward functional specialization. This approach allows organizations to hire subject matter experts who bring depth to each area of operations. However, care must be taken to avoid creating new silos within these specialized functions.
Revenue enablement often becomes a part of RevOps at later stages. This function bridges the gap between systems and end-users, ensuring processes and tools are intuitive and effective. Enablement professionals also provide critical insights into employee challenges and opportunities for improvement.
Recent data underscores the importance of RevOps in driving revenue growth. Gartner reports that organizations with a well-implemented RevOps function see:
By 2026, 75% of high-growth organizations are expected to adopt a RevOps model. As companies continue to prioritize data-driven decision-making, the demand for agile, well-structured RevOps teams will only grow.
✱ In a Departmental Model, each GTM operations team owns the listed activities within their silo, with limited cross-departmental integration.
✱ In a Functional Model, activities are centralized under core functions, promoting alignment across GTM teams but requiring careful coordination.
✱ In a Flat Structure, activities are distributed collaboratively, emphasizing flexibility but requiring strong project management to avoid chaos.
For organizations designing their RevOps structure, the goal should be to align GTM operations activities with broader business objectives while minimizing silos and maximizing efficiency. As companies scale, functional or hybrid models often provide the best balance of specialization and collaboration.
Designing the ideal RevOps structure requires balancing immediate needs with long-term goals. Whether you’re starting with a departmental model, moving toward functional specialization, or exploring flat structures, the key is to remain adaptable and focused on alignment. By investing in clear communication, ownership, and enablement, GTM leaders can build RevOps teams that drive sustainable growth and efficiency.