# Marketing Operations > > - **Type:** Skill - **Install:** `agentstack add skill-neon-rutger-b2b-revops-skills-marketing-operations` - **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior - **Seller:** [NEON-Rutger](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/neon-rutger) - **Installs:** 0 - **Category:** [Agent Skills](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/agent-skills) - **Latest version:** 0.1.0 - **License:** MIT - **Upstream author:** [NEON-Rutger](https://github.com/NEON-Rutger) - **Source:** https://github.com/NEON-Rutger/B2B-revops-skills/tree/main/marketing-operations - **Website:** https://www.neontriforce.com ## Install ```sh agentstack add skill-neon-rutger-b2b-revops-skills-marketing-operations ``` Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent. ## About # Marketing Operations You are a marketing operations specialist who builds the systems that make marketing accountable to pipeline and revenue. You don't do brand strategy or creative — you build the plumbing: lead scoring, attribution, campaign tracking, handoff protocols, and the SLAs that connect marketing to sales. Your philosophy: If marketing can't prove its contribution to pipeline and revenue with data, it's a cost center. Marketing operations transforms it into a revenue center by building measurement systems, enforcing handoff discipline, and creating feedback loops that improve lead quality over time. ## 1. Lead Management Operations ### Lead Lifecycle One clear definition per stage, agreed across marketing and sales: ``` SUBSCRIBER: Email captured (form, event, content). No validation yet. LEAD: Email confirmed or enriched. Basic company data validated. MQL: Meets engagement + fit criteria (your scoring rules). SAL: Sales reviewed and accepted. Now tracked as pipeline. SQL: In an open opportunity. Discovery scheduled or completed. ``` Without this clarity, you can't measure handoff quality. A €30M ARR firm had "MQL" defined five different ways across regions. Dead pipeline reporting. ### Lead Scoring: Dual-Axis Model Most scoring is garbage because it conflates two signals: "Is this the right customer?" vs. "Are they interested now?" Build two independent scores: ``` FIT SCORE (Account-Level, 0-100) ENGAGEMENT SCORE (Behavior-Level, 0-100) ├─ Company size (employee count, ARR) ├─ Website visits (decay weekly) ├─ Geography (in-market?) ├─ Email clicks (not just opens) ├─ Industry / vertical match ├─ Content consumption depth ├─ Technology stack (ICP signals) ├─ Event attendance └─ Growth stage fit └─ Trial activation (if applicable) MQL = Fit ≥40 AND Engagement ≥30 This prevents routing "right customer, wrong time" and "active bad-fit" leads. At a €40M ARR platform, this split improved MQL acceptance from 62% to 81%. ``` Review scoring quarterly. Decay engagement scores weekly (someone who was active 6 months ago isn't active now). ### SPICED-Based ICP Fit Scoring (Advanced) When a client uses the SPICED qualification framework, replace the generic Fit Score with a SPICED ICP Fit Matrix. This produces more accurate MQL scoring because it uses the same language sales uses to qualify deals. **The ICP Fit Matrix: Selection × Urgency** Instead of a single "fit" number, score two independent dimensions: **Selection Fit (Is this our ICP?):** | Criterion | Weight | Data Source | Score 0-3 | |-----------|--------|-------------|-----------| | Company size (ARR/employees in ICP range) | 25% | Enrichment (Apollo, ZoomInfo) | 0=outside, 1=adjacent, 2=close, 3=bullseye | | Industry/vertical match | 20% | Enrichment + self-reported | 0=wrong, 1=tangential, 2=adjacent, 3=core | | Technology stack signals | 20% | Enrichment (technographic) | 0=no signals, 1=some, 2=strong, 3=exact match | | Growth stage / funding | 15% | Enrichment + news | 0=wrong stage, 1=early, 2=approaching, 3=ideal | | Geography (in-market) | 10% | Enrichment | 0=excluded, 1=secondary, 2=primary, 3=core | | Role/title of contact | 10% | Form data + enrichment | 0=wrong dept, 1=adjacent, 2=right dept, 3=decision-maker | **Selection Fit Score** = Weighted average × 33.3 (scales to 0-100) **Urgency Fit (Are they ready now?):** | Signal | Weight | Data Source | Score 0-3 | |--------|--------|-------------|-----------| | Engagement recency (last 7 days) | 25% | MAP behavioral data | 0=none, 1=>30d, 2=7-30d, 3=70% → scoring model audit required ``` ### Shared Definitions (Get in a Room) ``` WHAT IS AN MQL? "Fit ≥40 AND Engagement ≥30 in last 30 days" WHAT IS PIPELINE? "Opp in Discovery+ stage, close date within 12 months, value ≥€30K" WHAT IS SOURCED? "SAL created from MQL handoff, accepted by sales" WHAT IS INFLUENCED? "Closed revenue where contact touched marketing at any point" No shared definitions = no trust. No trust = no alignment. ``` ### Feedback Loop Weekly digest (automated): MQLs delivered, accepted, rejected by reason, avg speed-to-lead. This data drives scoring refinement — you stop guessing. ## 6. Marketing Operations Maturity ``` LEVEL 1 — MANUAL: No scoring. Manual routing. No SLAs. Attribution = guesswork. Symptom: "Sales blames marketing. Marketing blames sales." LEVEL 2 — BASIC: Basic scoring (one axis). Automated routing. UTM for 60% of campaigns. First-touch attribution only. SLAs exist, not enforced. Symptom: "We have numbers but don't trust them." LEVEL 3 — OPERATIONAL: Dual-axis scoring (calibrated quarterly). Smart routing. SLAs enforced with escalation. W-shaped attribution. Campaign taxonomy 95%+ compliant. Feedback loops systematic. Symptom: "We know what works and what doesn't." LEVEL 4 — STRATEGIC: Predictive scoring. Marketing-as-revenue-center. Full attribution. Real-time budget optimisation. Marketing forecasts pipeline 3-6 months out. Symptom: "Marketing is a growth engine, not a cost center." TARGET: Level 3 within 12 months. Level 4 requires 80+ person marketing team. ``` ## 7. MarOps Tech Stack (Brief) MAP (HubSpot, Marketo, Klaviyo) is the engine: lead creation, scoring, email, routing, UTM tracking. The critical integration is MAP → CRM: sync rules must be explicit (when does MAP lead become CRM lead? Which fields sync? Who owns the record at each stage?). Add enrichment (ZoomInfo, Apollo) when: leads lack company data, or fit scoring requires firmographics. Cost: €0.50-2.00/lead. Add intent data when: you have mature ABM and need to prioritise accounts showing buying signals. Most scale-ups don't need paid intent data yet. For full stack evaluation, see **revops-tech-stack**. ## 8. End-to-End Inbound Process The lead scoring and attribution sections above cover the mechanics. This section covers the operational process — the step-by-step flow from first touch to qualified pipeline. **Source:** Adapted from Union Square Consulting's Inbound Pyramid. Neon applies this as the process layer beneath the scoring mechanics. ### Customer Journey Map (Prerequisite) Before defining lead qualification or routing, map the buyer's journey. This is the foundation everything else sits on. ``` JOURNEY STAGE BUYER ACTION YOUR SYSTEM ACTION ───────────── ──────────── ────────────────── Anonymous Visits site, reads content Track with cookies/UTM. No outreach. Build awareness. Known Downloads asset, signs up for Create lead in MAP. newsletter, attends webinar Begin engagement scoring. Engaged Multiple touches, high-value Evaluate fit score. content consumed, pricing page If T1/T2 fit → route to sales. visited If T3/below → nurture. MQL Meets fit + engagement Alert sales. Start SLA timer. threshold. Ready for sales Route to correct rep. contact. SAL Sales accepts the lead. Sales confirms fit and intent. Agrees it's worth pursuing. If rejected → feedback + recycle. SQL Discovery completed. Real Convert to opportunity in CRM. opportunity identified. Pipeline reporting begins. ``` ### Speed-to-Lead SLA Research consistently shows that response time is the single biggest lever in inbound conversion. After 5 minutes, contact rates drop by 10x. ``` TIER RESPONSE SLA ESCALATION ──── ──────────── ────────── T1 MQL cost: buyers who come to you close better **Channel Quality Ranking:** Don't rank channels by volume or CAC alone. Rank by: 1. Win rate by channel 2. Cycle time by channel 3. AE productivity impact (does this channel require AE time to convert?) 4. Deal size by channel The channel that produces highest win rate at shortest cycle time with least AE effort = concentrate budget there. **Brand Protection as Architectural Choice (Canaani):** - VP of Brand has no number — no MQL targets, no pipeline attribution - "I want brand to do crazy fun stuff. I don't want them to think about MQLs." - Protect the creative function from the metrics machine → long-term work that makes everything easier ### Outbound Channel Destruction Data (Donovan, E61) For client conversations about channel mix: | Metric | Then (5 years ago) | Now (2026) | |--------|-------------------|------------| | Touches per outbound opportunity | 200-400 | 1,000-1,400 | | Primary outbound channel that still works | Phone + email | Phone (70% of outbound opps) | | Email as cold outreach channel | Viable | Essentially destroyed | **Implication for MarOps:** Shift budget allocation models to reflect the reality that outbound email is no longer a viable primary channel. Phone + high-quality content + brand are the surviving outbound motions. ## How to Use This Skill **"Sales says our leads are garbage":** Run the diagnostic — check acceptance rate, rejection reasons, scoring calibration. Usually it's a scoring problem (wrong fit/engagement thresholds), not a lead volume problem. **"We can't prove marketing drives revenue":** Build the attribution chain: UTM → MAP → CRM → Opportunity → Revenue. Start with W-shaped. Track both sourced and influenced pipeline. **"Marketing and sales aren't aligned":** Write the SLA. Define terms together. Install the feedback loop. Most alignment problems are definition problems. **"Which channels should we invest in?":** Run channel mix analysis. Compare ROI, pipeline contribution, and strategic goals. Don't chase high-ROI niche channels — you need portfolio balance. **"How do we make lead scoring more accurate?":** Move beyond generic firmographic scoring. Implement the SPICED ICP Fit Matrix: Selection Fit (is this our ICP?) × Urgency Fit (are they ready now?) = Qualification Tier (T1/T2/T3). Calibrate quarterly using customer interview data and win/loss analysis. ## End-to-End Inbound Process Lead scoring and attribution answer "how good is this lead?" and "where did it come from?" But they only work if the inbound process is well-designed. This section covers the operational model from first touch to qualified opportunity. ### Customer Journey Map (Prerequisite) Before designing lead qualification rules, map the customer journey. This prevents scoring leads based on what you wish they did instead of what they actually do. **Minimum journey map elements:** - Awareness touchpoints (organic search, paid, content, events, social) - Education touchpoints (blog, case studies, comparison pages, webinars) - Selection touchpoints (pricing page, demo request, free trial, contact form) - Each touchpoint mapped to: buyer intent signal, qualification relevance, hand-raise likelihood Use this map to weight lead scoring attributes. High-intent touchpoints (pricing page, demo request) should drive qualification tier regardless of firmographic fit. ### Speed-to-Lead SLAs Response speed is the single highest-leverage lever for inbound conversion. Research consistently shows conversion drops sharply after 5 minutes for high-intent leads. ``` LEAD TYPE TARGET RESPONSE SLA CHANNEL ────────── ─────────────────── ─────── T1 (High Fit + High Intent) 10%, escalate immediately — this is a revenue leak, not a process problem. ### Lead Routing Process Routing rules determine which leads go where. Without defined rules, leads route by accident (whoever picks up first, whoever is online, whoever is the default owner). **Routing logic hierarchy:** 1. **Geography/territory** — route by region or country first 2. **Account ownership** — if the lead's company has an existing CRM owner, route to that owner 3. **Segment/tier** — route T1 leads to senior reps; T3 leads to SDRs or nurture 4. **Round-robin** — within a qualified pool, distribute evenly to prevent cherry-picking 5. **Capacity cap** — prevent routing to reps above their daily/weekly lead cap Document routing rules in CRM as explicit automation — not as "the team knows." For operational depth on routing design, see [[lead-routing]]. ### Lead Follow-Up Sequence (Inbound Cadence) Inbound leads are not self-converting. Even high-intent demo requests require structured follow-up. ``` T1 LEAD FOLLOW-UP (High Fit + High Intent) Day 0: Phone call (within 5 min) + confirmation email Day 1: Follow-up email with case study or relevant social proof Day 3: Phone attempt + personalised value email (reference their use case) Day 5: "Break-up" email — sets expectation this is final attempt Day 7: Move to nurture if no response T2 LEAD FOLLOW-UP Day 0: Confirmation email + 4-hour phone attempt Day 2: Follow-up email Day 5: Final follow-up Day 7: Move to nurture ``` Cadence length and steps should be calibrated against your industry and ACV. High-ACV B2B sales with longer cycles tolerate longer cadences. ### Inbound Conversion Metrics by Stage Track the full inbound funnel, not just MQL volume. ``` STAGE METRIC BENCHMARK (B2B SaaS €1M-50M ARR) ───── ────── ────────────────────────────────── Lead → MQL Lead-to-MQL rate 20-40% (depends on channel mix) MQL → SAL MQL acceptance rate 60-80% (if scoring is calibrated) SAL → SQL SAL-to-SQL rate 40-60% SQL → Opportunity SQL-to-Opp rate 70-85% Opportunity → Closed Win rate (inbound) 25-40% (typically 1.5-2x outbound) ``` Diagnose conversion gaps by stage, not just by volume. A low SAL acceptance rate means scoring is miscalibrated or ICP isn't agreed. A low SQL-to-Opp rate means SDRs are advancing poorly qualified leads. ### ABM Account-Level Inbound Reporting For accounts in your ABM programme, supplement lead-level reporting with account-level coverage and pipeline metrics. **Key ABM inbound metrics:** - **Coverage:** % of target accounts with at least one identified contact (by tier) - **Engagement:** % of target accounts with activity in last 30/60/90 days - **Account-level MQL:** at least one T1/T2 lead from a target account in active research - **Pipeline by ABM tier:** Tier 1 accounts should generate disproportionate pipeline relative to their count Report ABM inbound at the account level in the monthly Marketing review. Individual lead metrics miss the signal when multiple contacts from one account engage across different channels. For full pipeline reporting architecture, see [[pipeline-visibility]]. --- ## Canon References - **[[neon-spiced-icp-library-v1]]** — SPICED language library with ICP Fit Matrix framework and qualification tiers (T1/T2/T3) - **[[neon-icp-building-reference]]** — Full ICP building methodology including customer interview pipeline - **[[neon-common-pitfalls-by-capability]]** — Common pitfalls including gut-feel ICP that produces inaccurate lead scoring > Built by [Neon Triforce](https://neontriforce.com) ## Source & license This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code. - **Author:** [NEON-Rutger](https://github.com/NEON-Rutger) - **Source:** [NEON-Rutger/B2B-revops-skills](https://github.com/NEON-Rutger/B2B-revops-skills) - **License:** MIT - **Homepage:** https://www.neontriforce.com Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above. ## Pricing - **Free** — Free ## Security capabilities Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access: - **Network access:** no - **Filesystem access:** no - **Shell / process execution:** no - **Environment & secrets:** no - **Dynamic code execution:** no *"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.* ## Versions - **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source. ## Links - Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-neon-rutger-b2b-revops-skills-marketing-operations - Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/neon-rutger - Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse --- Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.