Case 11 / System-backed
Flat CRM records hid how companies and deals related to a long-running infrastructure project.
Product names and logos are trademarks of their respective owners. They are shown only to identify tools used in the work; no endorsement or partnership is implied.
Evidence note: Results retain the supplied evidence label and reporting context. Attributed or estimated results describe the available record, not an unsupported claim of causation.
Major projects involve owners, prime contractors, subcontractors, multiple locations, contacts, deals and years of activity. Tracking that information in flat spreadsheets or isolated deal records hides the relationship between project value and sales effort. The United States team wanted to reproduce an Australian model without flooding the CRM with unowned or inaccurate records.
The Rolfe Marketing team demonstrated and documented a HubSpot project model built around a custom object. Projects could hold overall value, status and activity, then associate to subprojects, companies, contacts and deals. The documentation defined association labels, consistent tags and salesperson ownership, including when CSV import or an external project-data integration could accelerate setup without sacrificing accountability.
The Australian system let sales leaders filter projects by value and activity. US stakeholders then defined the fields and statuses needed for their version. This gave both teams project intelligence they could use for prioritisation.
Custom project records linked overall value and activity to companies and sales owners.
Read the Google reviews ↗“attentive to our needs as we grow”
David Patrick O’Riordan, RSGx Google review
Next step
Design a CRM model that gives project-led sales clear ownership and reporting.
Request a Growth Review
