Flagship case · Gotransverse

They needed three hires. I asked for one shot at all of it.

In January 2024, Gotransverse was rebuilding its marketing and revenue operations from the ground up. Instead of hiring a head of marketing, a RevOps lead, and a BDR manager separately, I made the case to own the whole engine myself. Here's what happened.

Company
Gotransverse (B2B SaaS)
Role
Head of RevOps → VP of Marketing & Revenue Operations
Timeframe
Jan 2024 → present
Scope
Marketing · RevOps · BDR
01 · The situation

A revenue engine being rebuilt from the ground up.

When I arrived in January 2024, Gotransverse was in the middle of rebuilding its entire marketing and revenue operations function. The systems were fragmented, reporting couldn't be trusted, and the plan on the table was to hire three separate leaders to fix it.

The conventional move was to staff up: a head of marketing to own brand and demand, a RevOps lead to fix the systems, and a BDR manager to run the pipeline. Three searches, three salaries, three sets of priorities, and three people who would then have to learn to agree with each other before anything actually improved.

I've spent twenty years watching that structure create the exact problem it's meant to solve. Marketing, sales operations, and the systems underneath don't fail in isolation. They fail at the seams between them. Splitting ownership across three leaders builds those seams in on day one.

02 · The bet

I asked to own all three, as one system.

Rather than fill three roles, I made the case to lead the whole thing myself: marketing, revenue operations, and BDR strategy under one accountable owner. One person who could set the strategy, build the systems to support it, and align the pipeline to both, without waiting for three leaders to negotiate a shared definition of "qualified."

Instead of hire #1

Head of Marketing

Brand, demand generation, product marketing, and GTM strategy.

Instead of hire #2

RevOps Lead

The systems, data, reporting, and automation underneath it all.

Instead of hire #3

BDR Manager

Pipeline strategy, routing, and the handoff into sales.

The value wasn't saving on headcount. It was removing the seams. One owner meant the strategy, the systems, and the pipeline were designed to fit each other from the start.

They gave me the shot. What I built with it is the rest of this story.

03 · The build

A year of building the team and the systems together.

Through the rest of 2024, I hired and built the team around the system I was designing, not the other way around. RevOps, marketing, and product marketing specialists brought on to fit a coherent operating model, rather than inherited silos I'd have to reconcile later.

Built the teamRevOps, marketing, and product marketing hires aligned to one operating model
Rebuilt the systemsCRM, marketing automation, routing, and reporting, rebuilt from the data layer up
Rebuilt the websiteNew site rebuilt as a demand and conversion asset, not a brochure
Stood up real reportingFull-funnel visibility and attribution the exec team could actually trust
Aligned the pipelineBDR strategy and routing wired to the same definitions as marketing
Set the GTM modelProduct marketing and demand gen operating from one shared plan
04 · The results

The results speak for the structure.

62%
of leads marketing-influenced, from a function that couldn't reliably attribute anything the year before
+87%
website traffic year over year, off the rebuilt site and demand engine
1
accountable owner for marketing, RevOps, and pipeline, instead of three

The single-owner structure worked well enough that the role grew with it: I was promoted from Head of Revenue Operations to VP of Marketing while continuing to own the operating systems underneath.

This is what owning the whole engine looks like.

If you're rebuilding revenue and marketing and weighing whether to split it across three leaders or trust one operator to own the system, that's exactly the conversation I want to have.