This is a guest post written by Rome Thorndike, VP of Growth at Firmograph.
I was at Highlands Park with my two sons, ages four and two, when this headline came across my LinkedIn feed.
GTM Engineers Are Eating RevOps’ Lunch
This narrative has been trending on LinkedIn for a while, so much so that I had our AI agent track GTM Engineer hiring on Firmograph. The data didn’t support it, so this was another LinkedIn post I brushed aside.
Until I saw this:
Last year I came across T‑shirt advertised by The RevOps Co‑op: “I would agree with you, but then we’d both be wrong.”...It’s a confession. If stakeholders disagree with RevOps, RevOps assumes that the stakeholder is stupid.
Suddenly, this became personal. That’s because one of their shirts commemorates me winning last year’s RevOps meme contest.
It’s still in their merch store, and simply put, I won’t let the author take down the only merch store that sells clothing inspired by me.
So I left the park so I could set the record straight.
Let’s start with the author’s stats, many of which are claimed, none of which are linked. While others are disputing his data, with Harris Odobasic making a great case, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume every single stat he shared was true.
Except for one, which I’ll get into later. Let’s break them down.
I mentioned this narrative earlier, and Firmograph’s AI agent disagrees.
Out of 725 B2B AI & SaaS companies, only 2 of them are hiring GTM Engineers right now. Meanwhile, 43 companies are hiring RevOps.
This discrepancy gets more glaring when you look at the total numbers, as there are only 304 GTM Engineers in all of North America.
And how much of RevOps is left after those GTM Engineers have supposedly been feasting on their headcount budget? Still over 16,000. The claim doesn’t add up.
The author states this is the first net decline in RevOps since the role’s inception, yet provides no baseline or source. But since we’re giving him the benefit of the doubt, all we can ask is “compared to what”?
Perhaps we should compare it to all white-collar work, which also declined last year.
Macroeconomic trends hit everyone, and RevOps isn’t uniquely suffering. They are navigating the same headwinds as other white-collar workers.
Once again, compared to what? LinkedIn’s July Workforce Report shows hiring in RevOps-heavy industries is down 9% - 17% over the same time period.
If RevOps-heavy industries are hiring less, it's no surprise that RevOps roles are also down. This isn’t a RevOps crisis; it’s a market reality.
Context still matters. If the rest of the job market is doing well, and only RevOps is declining, then job platforms like Indeed should be doing just fine.
Since Indeed is private, let’s look at their publicly traded competitor ZipRecruiter.
The stock price is down 50% over the same timeline, with revenue down 27%. Was this due to a RevOps “plunge”, or is there a broader slowdown in job postings?
Once you look at more data, it becomes clear that any RevOps drop was part of a broader trend of declining white-collar work.
This is the one stat I will disagree with. I cannot find the author’s 18,000 number to save my life, so let’s look at public data.
The RevOps Co-op has gained 6.8K LinkedIn followers over the past year, a 40% YoY increase.
But it’s easy clicking that follow button, what about adding the RevOps Co-Op to their LinkedIn profile? Unless they hired 400 people, that is also growing 29% YoY.
If the community is flat, like the author claims, why are so many more people adding it on their LinkedIn profile? And why are 40% more people following them than the year before?
The author compared the RevOps Co-op to Clay’s Slack instance growing 260% to 8,000 members. Make no mistake, Clay’s growth has been incredible, but I can't find any public data that agrees with the author's claim that the RevOps Co-op "sat flat at roughly 18,000."
Let’s go beyond the data and check with industry leaders. Akash Bose, Head of GTM Acceleration at Innovius Capital, remains a RevOps advocate.
RevOps are the critical bearings for your GTM engine, providing critical data for hiring, segmentation, and efficiency. Any blindspots will slow companies down.
Interesting feedback from a VC, especially after the author claimed that “boards are no longer convinced that traditional RevOps can deliver”.
But what about GTM Engineers eating their lunch? Akash did not hold back, and for the 304 GTM Engineers out there, I apologize in advance:
GTM Engineer is a glorified title, and it is fundamentally different from RevOps. Don’t chase the shiny object, build the foundation first.
Fair enough, but what about the author claiming that RevOps “over-engineer GTM processes” and “produce guardrails that slow deals”? I asked Brian Michael, a CRO who advises several companies and was previously CRO of Snapdocs, a Series D company.
Having poor RevOps doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have RevOps. That’s like saying you shouldn’t have sales because poor sales teams can also add complexity and slow deals. Great RevOps teams increase velocity.
So it seems like VCs and CROs still believe in RevOps, and are not pivoting to GTM Engineers, what about the market? I asked Jacki Leahy, founder of Activate the Magic, a Fractional RevOps Center of Excellence:
Our constraint hasn’t been demand, it’s capacity. We’re growing our own talent, and investing in high-integrity operators.
In all, I could not find a VC, sales leader, or operator who agreed that GTM Engineers were eating RevOps’ lunch. The VC and CRO still believe the function is critical, and the operator is getting more business.
The author wrote 1,200 words of complaints with zero fixes. He diagnoses RevOps as losing trust and not in a good place, yet provides no clues on fixing it.
The implied solution? GTM Engineers will save the day. They “are eating RevOps’ Lunch,” after all.
Unfortunately RevOps, like many roles, faced a tough year, but the data doesn’t support GTM Engineers overtaking them.
Which is why I disagree with the author’s title. GTM engineers are not eating RevOps’ lunch. These 304 GTM Engineers vs 16,000 RevOps are not the modern-day Battle of Thermopylae, with both sides fighting each other for budget. They’re distinct roles, not rivals.
As I stare out into the sunset, wondering why this GTM engineer narrative is so popular, it finally hits me…
My kids are still at the park.
Here’s the deal: RevOps isn’t just a “reactive help desk” in a “credibility crisis,” just like how I’m more than a guy who comes up with banger memes (and sarcasm about leaving my kids unsupervised at the park).
You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us. Time to find my kids, and thankfully, their outfits stand out.
Sincerely,
Rome Thorndike
VP of Growth at Firmograph
