The problem this solves
Companies scale their GTM headcount faster than their GTM design. The result: roles that overlap in some places and leave gaps in others, marketing reporting into whoever had time to manage it, a sales team structured for a motion the company abandoned a year ago, and critical work like pipeline operations that everyone touches and nobody owns. Hiring more people into a misdesigned structure makes the structure's problems bigger, not smaller.
How we work
We start from your GTM motion, not your org chart: how you acquire, close, and grow customers, and what functions that motion actually requires. Then we map the current organization against it: who owns each function, where accountability is shared or absent, how capacity is distributed across acquisition and post-sale work, and where reporting lines fight against the process they are supposed to support.
We interview leaders and a cross-section of the team, because org problems look different from above and below. The gaps between the two views are usually the most instructive part.
The output is an organizational findings report: role and ownership gaps, structural friction points, capacity mismatches, and specific design recommendations. It deliberately stops short of naming who should fill which seat; it gives you the structure argument, grounded in your motion, so staffing decisions rest on design rather than history.
Deliverables
- GTM function map derived from your actual go-to-market motion
- Role and ownership gap analysis against that map
- Capacity distribution review across acquisition, conversion, and post-sale work
- Reporting line and accountability friction assessment
- Structural recommendations with options weighed for your stage
What buyers ask before scoping.
Is this a performance review of our people?
No, and we are explicit about that with your team, because the audit dies the moment people think it is. We assess structure, ownership, and capacity, not individual performance. Findings are framed around roles and design, which also makes them far easier to act on without drama.
How is this different from the RevOps Alignment Audit?
The RevOps audit examines how work and data flow across teams: processes, handoffs, definitions. This audit examines the structure those teams sit in: roles, reporting lines, and capacity. Process problems sometimes trace back to structural causes, which is when we would recommend adding this audit to that one.
What do you need from us to run it?
The current org chart with actual responsibilities rather than titles, role descriptions where they exist, and interview time with GTM leadership plus a sample of the team. Two to three weeks of calendar time covers most cases; the interviews are the pacing item.
Related modules
KPI Framework & Performance Management Audit
KPI Framework & Performance Management Audit is a diagnostic engagement that examines what your company ...
AI Opportunity Identification & Assessment
AI Opportunity Identification & Assessment is a diagnostic engagement that inventories where AI can create ...
RevOps Alignment Audit
RevOps Alignment Audit is a diagnostic engagement that examines whether your marketing, sales, and service ...
Sounds like your situation?
30 minutes, your calendar, no slide deck. We tell you honestly whether this module fits.
Book discovery call