Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Short-term (< 3 months)
When I started working with this B2B startup, the brief was straightforward: revamp their website. But as I dove deeper into their operations, I discovered something that most businesses overlook - their client operations were scattered across HubSpot and Slack, creating unnecessary friction in their workflow.
The real challenge emerged: every time they closed a deal, someone had to manually create a Slack group for the project. Small task? Maybe. But multiply that by dozens of deals per month, and you've got hours of repetitive work that could be automated.
You know what's funny? Most agencies charge thousands for "project management consulting" when the real issue isn't strategy - it's the dozens of manual tasks eating away at your team's time. This is the story of how I discovered that sometimes the best website project becomes an automation project.
Here's what you'll learn from my real experience:
Why I tested three different automation platforms for the same use case
The hidden costs of choosing the "budget-friendly" option (spoiler: it wasn't cheap)
How to choose between Make.com, N8N, and Zapier based on your actual constraints
A complete project management automation template that actually works
Why team autonomy matters more than subscription costs
Industry Reality
What every startup tries first
Most startups approach project management automation like they approach everything else - they want the cheapest solution that technically works. I see this pattern constantly in the SaaS space.
Here's the typical advice you'll hear:
Start with manual processes - "Don't automate until you have product-market fit"
Use the cheapest automation tool - "Make.com is 80% cheaper than Zapier"
Build complex workflows from day one - "Automate everything to scale faster"
Focus on technical capabilities - "This platform can do more integrations"
DIY approach is always better - "Why pay for what you can build yourself?"
This advice exists because it sounds logical. Startups need to be scrappy, right? And technically, all these automation platforms can do the same basic tasks. The problem is that this conventional wisdom ignores the most important factor: who actually has to maintain and update these workflows.
I've watched too many startups choose the "cost-effective" solution, only to become completely dependent on one technical person to make simple changes. When that person is busy (or leaves), the entire automation system becomes a black box that nobody wants to touch.
The real question isn't "What can this platform do?" - it's "Can my team actually use this platform independently?"
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
When I started working with this B2B startup, they had a simple but time-consuming problem. Their sales team was closing deals in HubSpot, but their project management happened in Slack. Every new client meant someone had to manually:
Create a new Slack channel
Invite the right team members
Set up the channel description and pinned messages
Update their internal tracking spreadsheet
Sounds simple, but it was taking 15-20 minutes per deal, and with their growth trajectory, they were looking at 40+ new clients per month. That's over 10 hours of manual work monthly for something that should take 30 seconds.
The team had tried to solve this before. They'd looked into expensive project management platforms, hired a "process consultant," and even considered switching away from Slack entirely. But here's what I realized: they didn't need a new system - they needed their existing systems to talk to each other.
Their CTO suggested building a custom integration, but I knew that would take months and require ongoing maintenance. Instead, I proposed we test automation platforms. The goal was simple: when a deal closes in HubSpot, automatically create the corresponding Slack workspace and notify the team.
What I didn't expect was how much this project would teach me about choosing the right automation platform. I ended up implementing the same workflow across three different platforms, and the results surprised everyone - including me.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
I approached this project like a proper experiment. Instead of picking one platform and hoping for the best, I decided to build the exact same automation across three platforms: Make.com, N8N, and Zapier. Same inputs, same outputs, different execution.
Here's the detailed breakdown of what I built and what I learned:
Phase 1: Make.com Implementation
I started with Make.com because the pricing was attractive - significantly cheaper than Zapier for the volume they were expecting. The workflow was straightforward:
HubSpot webhook triggers when deal stage changes to "Closed Won"
Extract deal information (client name, deal value, team members)
Create Slack channel with standardized naming convention
Invite relevant team members based on deal size
Post welcome message with client details
Update internal tracking in Airtable
The automation worked beautifully - for about two weeks. Then we hit our first execution error, and here's where Make.com's fatal flaw emerged: when one step fails, the entire automation stops. Not just that task, but every subsequent task in the queue.
This meant that when the Slack API hiccupped (which happens), not only did that specific channel not get created, but no new channels would be created until someone manually reset the automation. For a growing startup, this was unacceptable.
Phase 2: N8N Migration
Next, I migrated everything to N8N. The appeal was obvious - more robust error handling, better debugging capabilities, and the ability to host it ourselves. The technical implementation was more complex, but the control was incredible.
N8N handled errors much better. When something failed, it logged the error and continued with the next task. The debugging interface was superior, and the flexibility was unmatched. But here's what I didn't anticipate: the client became completely dependent on me for any changes.
When they wanted to adjust the channel naming convention, they called me. When they needed to add a new team member to the auto-invite list, they called me. The platform was powerful, but it wasn't user-friendly enough for non-technical team members to make simple updates.
Phase 3: Zapier Implementation
Finally, I rebuilt everything in Zapier. Yes, it was more expensive. Yes, it had fewer "advanced" features. But something magical happened: the client's team could actually use it.
The interface was intuitive enough that their operations manager could make changes without calling me. When they wanted to modify the welcome message template, they did it themselves. When they needed to adjust which team members got invited based on deal size, they figured it out in minutes.
The automation has been running for months without my intervention. The team makes updates independently, and they've even expanded it to handle other workflows.
Platform Choice
Choose based on team capabilities, not just features. Zapier's higher cost was offset by team independence.
Error Handling
Make.com's failure cascade taught us that reliability trumps cost savings for critical workflows.
User Autonomy
N8N was powerful but required technical expertise for simple changes, creating bottlenecks.
True ROI
Calculate automation ROI including maintenance time, not just subscription costs and initial setup.
The results spoke for themselves, but not in the way I initially expected.
Immediate Impact:
Reduced project setup time from 15-20 minutes to 30 seconds
Eliminated human error in channel creation and team invitations
Freed up 10+ hours monthly for the operations team
Unexpected Outcomes:
The biggest surprise wasn't the time savings - it was the behavior change. When project setup became frictionless, the team started creating channels for smaller projects and internal initiatives they previously wouldn't have bothered with. Their collaboration improved because the barrier to organizing work had disappeared.
Six months later, they've built additional automations for client onboarding, invoice processing, and team notifications. The operations manager, who had never touched automation before, is now their internal automation expert.
The Zapier subscription costs $20 more per month than Make.com would have, but they've built five additional workflows that would have required my help on other platforms. The ROI isn't just the time saved - it's the team's newfound automation capabilities.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
Here are the key lessons from implementing the same automation across three platforms:
Reliability beats features: Make.com's failure cascade was a dealbreaker despite its advanced capabilities
User experience matters more than power users admit: N8N's complexity created maintenance dependencies
Team autonomy is worth paying for: Zapier's higher cost was offset by reduced maintenance
Start simple, expand gradually: The basic automation led to five additional workflows
Calculate true ROI: Include maintenance time and team independence in your cost analysis
Test with real workflows: Sandbox testing doesn't reveal platform limitations
Consider the learning curve: The platform your team can actually use is the right platform
If I had to do this again, I'd still test all three platforms, but I'd weight team usability much higher in my initial evaluation. The "best" platform isn't the most powerful one - it's the one that empowers your team to be autonomous.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups implementing project management automation:
Start with customer success workflows - automate onboarding task creation
Connect your CRM to team communication tools automatically
Choose platforms your non-technical team can modify independently
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce stores implementing project management automation:
Automate order fulfillment task assignment based on product types
Create automatic project channels for large custom orders
Link inventory alerts to team communication tools for proactive management