This piece is not a prediction about the future of go-to-market. It is a personal reflection, based on 25 years across technology, sales, and marketing, on a structural shift that is already underway. Rather than asking which tools will win, it asks a more fundamental question: whether the way we design GTM systems themselves is changing.
Twenty-five years ago, I landed my first job right after completing my army service. I started in a technical role, but quickly moved into Sales and Marketing and later became an Account Director. One of my employer’s largest clients was based in Germany, and I spent several years working closely with some of the largest telecom providers there.
When I returned home, the market was already shifting. The introduction of the iPhone and mobile broadband, fundamentally changed the mobile industry. I went through several professional chapters, but at some point I began to clearly see how digital channels were reshaping B2B buying behavior. That realization led me to take the leap and start my current company.
The shifts we’ve already lived through
Since then, I’ve seen wave after wave of change.
Social media altered how companies communicate. Buyers became increasingly self-educating. Product comparison platforms reshaped evaluation and decision-making. Marketing automation emerged, followed by “revenue marketing” as a concept – while MQLs, unfortunately, remained a proxy for marketing effectiveness.
We also saw the rise of Account-Based Marketing and Account-Based Experience, often positioned as the answer to enterprise GTM complexity. Then came intent data, followed by growing disillusionment as many organizations struggled to turn signals into predictable revenue.
All of these shifts mattered.
But what we are seeing now feels different.
This time is not incremental
We are entering a much larger, and far less predictable, transition. To be honest, I’m still getting my head around its implications.
For the first time, individuals and companies can create purpose-built solutions tailored to their exact needs at a fraction of the cost required just a few years ago. This changes something fundamental: the relationship between technology and go-to-market execution itself.
Until recently, GTM platforms were built around a familiar core. A CRM such as HubSpot or Salesforce sat at the center, supported by marketing automation, sales engagement platforms, and a handful of adjacent systems. Everything else was layered on through integrations. Progress meant better plumbing.
That assumption is now being challenged.
Rethinking the “default” GTM stack
It is no longer obvious that every company needs a full-featured CRM implementation configured to support every possible use case. In many scenarios, a lean, focused setup — where contacts, accounts, and deals are treated as a clean, reliable data foundation — is sufficient.
The same applies to sales engagement.
Dedicated platforms such as Salesloft and Outreach remain powerful solutions, but they are not always the default answer. In some contexts, lighter, data-infused platforms such as Amplemarket or Apollo — where data, engagement, and signals live in a single environment — can deliver comparable outcomes at a significantly lower cost than tools that were considered mandatory only a few years ago.
What matters more than the tools themselves is the shift in what is now possible.
From integrating tools to building systems
Companies that are willing to rethink how they go to market can now turn processes, workflows, and motions directly into code.
They can do this without heavy infrastructure investments and without being locked into decisions made by product teams at large vendors.
This is not a cosmetic change.
It raises a deeper question: can GTM infrastructure be achieved not by integrating systems, but by building them?
Instead of Revenue Operations teams focused primarily on managing tools and processes, we may see the rise of revenue app creators or revenue tech designers — people who design architectures, data flows, interfaces, and motions, and then implement them directly in code for internal use.
A necessary reality check
There are real limits today.
I would not recommend replacing mission-critical systems with internally built tools created by non-experienced developers. Security, observability, reliability, and compliance remain real challenges.
But it’s also important to acknowledge that we are only two years into this shift — and experimentation is already possible at a meaningful level.
Two paths are emerging
In conversations with customers, partners, and thoughtful leaders across the industry, I increasingly see two distinct approaches.
The first focuses on doing the same work more efficiently: writing ten blog posts instead of one, automating existing workflows, or increasing productivity within defined roles. This can deliver real cost savings and incremental gains, especially in large organizations.
The second is smaller, because the challenge is much harder. These organizations are not asking how to do the same work faster, but whether the work itself should exist in its current form at all.
For example, if an implementation project that used to take X hours now takes X divided by ten, that alone doesn’t change the business. Productivity improves, but outcomes don’t — unless that efficiency translates into more revenue, better customer experience, or faster growth.
In very large organizations, these gains can accumulate over time. But for companies looking to truly capitalize on the shift underway, the opportunity lies elsewhere.
Starting from zero
The real advantage belongs to those willing to rethink how they work as if they were starting from scratch.
These companies are re-examining structure, roles, processes, and systems without being constrained by legacy assumptions — about what a CRM must be, what a sales engagement platform should do, or how GTM work must be divided across teams.
And because of that, they are the ones most likely to unlock disproportionate value.
No predictions. Just perspective.
This is not a prediction post. I have views on where this may lead, but I am still focused on understanding the scale of the change and its second- and third-order effects.
What is clear is that we are at the beginning of something meaningful.
Many businesses will disappear. Many small businesses will look entirely different. And many new businesses — built around new ways of working — will come to life.
monday.com lost roughly 70% of its value in nine months. The debate that followed was predictable: AI will replace SaaS camp vs. the no it won’t, evRead more...
A firsthand experiment in why CRM is becoming infrastructure.The field of AI-native CRM is moving fast. Most new products promise productivity gains. Read more...
Jon MillerI’ve been following Jon Miller for years.In 2006, he co-founded Adobe Marketo, a company that revolutionized the industry with its marketRead more...
What roles does creativity have in a world increasingly dependent on the use of AI technology, especially in content creation?
Elad Ben David, HeaRead more...
From Integrating Tools to Building Systems
March 16, 2026
Kfir Pravda
Twenty-five years ago, I landed my first job right after completing my army service. I started in a technical role, but quickly moved into Sales and Marketing and later became an Account Director. One of my employer’s largest clients was based in Germany, and I spent several years working closely with some of the largest telecom providers there.
When I returned home, the market was already shifting. The introduction of the iPhone and mobile broadband, fundamentally changed the mobile industry. I went through several professional chapters, but at some point I began to clearly see how digital channels were reshaping B2B buying behavior. That realization led me to take the leap and start my current company.
The shifts we’ve already lived through
Since then, I’ve seen wave after wave of change.
Social media altered how companies communicate. Buyers became increasingly self-educating. Product comparison platforms reshaped evaluation and decision-making. Marketing automation emerged, followed by “revenue marketing” as a concept – while MQLs, unfortunately, remained a proxy for marketing effectiveness.
We also saw the rise of Account-Based Marketing and Account-Based Experience, often positioned as the answer to enterprise GTM complexity. Then came intent data, followed by growing disillusionment as many organizations struggled to turn signals into predictable revenue.
All of these shifts mattered.
But what we are seeing now feels different.
This time is not incremental
We are entering a much larger, and far less predictable, transition. To be honest, I’m still getting my head around its implications.
For the first time, individuals and companies can create purpose-built solutions tailored to their exact needs at a fraction of the cost required just a few years ago. This changes something fundamental: the relationship between technology and go-to-market execution itself.
Until recently, GTM platforms were built around a familiar core. A CRM such as HubSpot or Salesforce sat at the center, supported by marketing automation, sales engagement platforms, and a handful of adjacent systems. Everything else was layered on through integrations. Progress meant better plumbing.
That assumption is now being challenged.
Rethinking the “default” GTM stack
It is no longer obvious that every company needs a full-featured CRM implementation configured to support every possible use case. In many scenarios, a lean, focused setup — where contacts, accounts, and deals are treated as a clean, reliable data foundation — is sufficient.
The same applies to sales engagement.
Dedicated platforms such as Salesloft and Outreach remain powerful solutions, but they are not always the default answer. In some contexts, lighter, data-infused platforms such as Amplemarket or Apollo — where data, engagement, and signals live in a single environment — can deliver comparable outcomes at a significantly lower cost than tools that were considered mandatory only a few years ago.
What matters more than the tools themselves is the shift in what is now possible.
From integrating tools to building systems
Companies that are willing to rethink how they go to market can now turn processes, workflows, and motions directly into code.
They can do this without heavy infrastructure investments and without being locked into decisions made by product teams at large vendors.
This is not a cosmetic change.
It raises a deeper question: can GTM infrastructure be achieved not by integrating systems, but by building them?
Instead of Revenue Operations teams focused primarily on managing tools and processes, we may see the rise of revenue app creators or revenue tech designers — people who design architectures, data flows, interfaces, and motions, and then implement them directly in code for internal use.
A necessary reality check
There are real limits today.
I would not recommend replacing mission-critical systems with internally built tools created by non-experienced developers. Security, observability, reliability, and compliance remain real challenges.
But it’s also important to acknowledge that we are only two years into this shift — and experimentation is already possible at a meaningful level.
Two paths are emerging
In conversations with customers, partners, and thoughtful leaders across the industry, I increasingly see two distinct approaches.
The first focuses on doing the same work more efficiently: writing ten blog posts instead of one, automating existing workflows, or increasing productivity within defined roles. This can deliver real cost savings and incremental gains, especially in large organizations.
The second is smaller, because the challenge is much harder. These organizations are not asking how to do the same work faster, but whether the work itself should exist in its current form at all.
For example, if an implementation project that used to take X hours now takes X divided by ten, that alone doesn’t change the business. Productivity improves, but outcomes don’t — unless that efficiency translates into more revenue, better customer experience, or faster growth.
In very large organizations, these gains can accumulate over time. But for companies looking to truly capitalize on the shift underway, the opportunity lies elsewhere.
Starting from zero
The real advantage belongs to those willing to rethink how they work as if they were starting from scratch.
These companies are re-examining structure, roles, processes, and systems without being constrained by legacy assumptions — about what a CRM must be, what a sales engagement platform should do, or how GTM work must be divided across teams.
And because of that, they are the ones most likely to unlock disproportionate value.
No predictions. Just perspective.
This is not a prediction post. I have views on where this may lead, but I am still focused on understanding the scale of the change and its second- and third-order effects.
What is clear is that we are at the beginning of something meaningful.
Many businesses will disappear. Many small businesses will look entirely different. And many new businesses — built around new ways of working — will come to life.
These are genuinely exciting times.
From Integrating Tools to Building Systems was originally published in RevenueFlows on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.