Managed RevOps vs In-House RevOps
The decision between outsourcing revenue operations to a managed provider and building an internal team is one most SaaS companies face at some point. Both approaches have merit. Neither is universally better.
The right answer depends on where your company is, what the RevOps function needs to do, and what you're optimising for — cost efficiency, strategic depth, or some combination of both.
What Each Model Provides
Before comparing trade-offs, it helps to be clear about what each model actually delivers at its best.
Managed RevOps
An external team handles operational execution — CRM administration, data management, reporting, automation, and process documentation.
Scales quickly without hiring. Keeps headcount lean. Best when processes are defined and need consistent delivery.
In-House RevOps
An internal team owns the function end-to-end — strategy, execution, systems, and cross-functional alignment.
Builds deep institutional knowledge. Owns the outcomes. Best when the function needs strategic ownership and sustained organisational context.
The Case for Managed RevOps
Managed RevOps makes sense when the company needs operational throughput and the conditions support outsourced delivery:
- Speed to capacity — a managed provider can be operational within weeks, versus months to hire, onboard, and ramp an internal team
- Cost predictability — fixed or scoped pricing, without the overhead of salaries, benefits, training, and attrition risk
- Lean headcount — for companies that want operational quality without building a large internal team
- Defined scope — when the work is well-understood and benefits from standardised execution
- Bridge capability — covering operational needs while the company figures out its long-term team structure
The model works best when someone internal still owns the strategy and the managed team executes against it. Without that internal ownership, managed RevOps becomes a team following instructions that nobody is writing.
The Case for In-House RevOps
Building internally makes sense when the function needs depth that outsourcing can't provide:
- Institutional knowledge — an internal team understands the company's history, politics, and unwritten rules. This context shapes better decisions.
- Strategic ownership — in-house teams can own the full revenue operations strategy, not just execute pieces of it
- Cross-functional influence — internal team members build relationships across Sales, Marketing, and Customer Success that drive real alignment
- Career investment — team members who grow with the company develop expertise that compounds over time
- Accountability — in-house teams own the outcomes, not just the deliverables. There's no contract to renegotiate when priorities shift.
The strongest in-house RevOps teams don't just execute operations. They shape how the company thinks about revenue. That influence requires presence, context, and trust that outsourced models struggle to replicate.
Where Each Model Breaks Down
Both models have predictable failure modes. Knowing them in advance helps you choose with open eyes.
Managed RevOps fails when...
- Nobody internal owns the strategy — the provider executes, but nobody sets direction
- The work requires deep company context — outsourced teams rotate and institutional knowledge stays shallow
- The company treats it as a long-term substitute for building the function — managed RevOps solves for today's capacity, not tomorrow's capability
- Critical decisions get deferred because "the managed team will handle it" — they won't, because it's not their role
In-house RevOps fails when...
- The first hire is too junior — the company needs a senior leader who can set direction, but hires for execution instead
- Recruitment takes too long — the gap between deciding to hire and having someone productive can be six months or more
- The function gets buried under requests — without clear scope and authority, in-house RevOps teams become reactive ticket-takers
- Attrition wipes out institutional knowledge — if one person leaves and the function stalls, the model wasn't resilient
The Hybrid Approach
Many companies find the best answer isn't purely managed or purely in-house. A hybrid model uses each approach where it's strongest:
- An internal leader (or fractional leader) sets the strategy and owns the operating model
- A managed provider handles defined operational work that benefits from scale and standardisation
- Internal team members focus on the work that requires deep context, cross-functional influence, and strategic judgment
This approach is particularly effective during transitions — building internal capability while maintaining operational quality through an external partner.
The best operating model is the one that puts the right type of capability at the right layer. That usually means a mix — not a binary choice between outsourcing everything and building everything internally.
How to Choose
Ask yourself these questions before committing to either model:
- What does your RevOps function need to do? If it's execution of defined processes, managed works. If it's building the function from scratch, you need internal ownership.
- Who owns the strategy today? If there's internal leadership that can direct a managed team, outsourcing execution makes sense. If nobody owns the strategy, start there first.
- How mature are your processes? Mature, documented processes transfer well to managed teams. Immature or undefined processes need internal ownership to be built properly.
- What's your timeline? If you need capability next month, managed RevOps is faster. If you're building for the next three years, investing in the internal team pays off.
- What's the cost of getting it wrong? For operational maintenance, the downside of a bad choice is limited. For strategic decisions that compound, the cost of wrong direction is much higher than the cost of slower execution.
There's no universally right answer. But there's usually a clearly better answer for where your company is right now.
Weighing Your RevOps Options?
If you're deciding between outsourcing and building internally and want an honest perspective on what fits your company's situation, let's have that conversation.
Book Intro Call