Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Medium-term (3-6 months)
When I walked into my client's B2B startup project, the brief seemed straightforward: revamp their website. But as I dove deeper into their operations, I discovered something that most businesses overlook completely - their client operations were scattered across HubSpot and Slack, creating unnecessary friction in their workflow.
The real challenge emerged when they closed a deal. Someone had to manually create a Slack group for each project. Small task? Maybe. But multiply that by dozens of deals per month, and you've got hours of repetitive work eating into productivity. This is exactly the type of problem automation platforms promise to solve.
But here's what the tutorials don't tell you: choosing between Zapier and Make isn't just about features or pricing. It's about understanding how your team actually works and what happens when these platforms hit real-world complexity. I learned this the hard way after implementing the same automation across three different platforms.
In this playbook, you'll discover:
Why budget constraints led me to start with Make.com (and why I regretted it)
The hidden dealbreaker with Make that stopped everything cold
How N8N became a developer's paradise but a client's nightmare
Why Zapier's higher cost actually paid for itself
My decision framework for choosing the right platform based on your actual constraints
This isn't another feature comparison chart. This is what actually happens when you implement automation in the real world, with real teams, and real constraints.
Industry Reality
What every automation guide tells you
Walk into any business automation discussion, and you'll hear the same recommendations repeated like gospel. "Start with the cheapest option and scale up." "All automation platforms do the same thing, just pick one." "Focus on the number of available integrations."
Here's what most automation guides recommend:
Compare feature lists - Count integrations, workflows, and pricing tiers
Start with free plans - Test basic functionality before committing
Prioritize cost savings - Choose the platform with the lowest monthly fees
Focus on complexity - Pick platforms that can handle your most advanced use cases
Consider integration count - More connected apps equals better platform
This conventional wisdom exists because it sounds logical. Why pay more when you can get the same automation for less? Why not start simple and upgrade later? These recommendations come from people who've never had to hand off a complex automation system to a non-technical team.
The problem with this approach? It completely ignores the human element. It assumes that the person setting up the automation will be the same person maintaining it forever. It ignores what happens when errors occur, when requirements change, or when someone needs to make a simple edit to a workflow.
Most importantly, it treats all automation platforms as if they're just different colored buttons that do the same thing. They're not. Each platform has fundamentally different philosophies about how automation should work, and those philosophical differences become critical when you're trying to scale or maintain your systems.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
My client's challenge was straightforward: every time they closed a deal in HubSpot, someone needed to manually create a Slack group for project management. They were handling dozens of deals monthly, and this manual process was becoming a bottleneck. The automation itself was simple, but the platform choice would determine whether this solution actually worked long-term.
The client was a growing B2B startup with a small team. Non-technical founders, one part-time developer, and a sales team that needed things to "just work." They didn't want to become automation experts - they wanted a solution that would run reliably and be manageable by anyone on the team.
Phase 1: Make.com - The Budget-Friendly Start
I initially chose Make.com for one simple reason: pricing. For the same functionality, Make cost significantly less than Zapier. The automation worked beautifully at first - HubSpot deal closes, Slack group gets created automatically with the right team members and project details. Everything seemed perfect for the first few weeks.
Then reality hit. Here's what the tutorials don't tell you: when Make.com hits an error in execution, it doesn't just skip that task - it stops the entire workflow. Not just for that specific automation run, but for all subsequent triggers until someone manually intervenes. This meant that when an API call failed (which happens regularly with any integration), their entire deal-to-project system would freeze.
I'd get panicked calls: "We closed three deals yesterday but no Slack groups were created." I'd have to log in, diagnose the error, clear the queue, and restart the automation. For a growing startup closing deals regularly, this became untenable. The platform that saved them money was costing them deals.
Phase 2: N8N - The Developer's Paradise
Frustrated with Make's reliability issues, I migrated everything to N8N. This was where my developer heart sang. N8N offered incredible control - you can build virtually anything, handle complex logic, and customize every aspect of your workflows. The error handling was robust, and the execution was reliable.
But here's what I discovered: every small tweak the client wanted required my intervention. Want to add a new team member to the Slack group creation? Need me. Want to change the naming convention for projects? Need me. Want to modify the welcome message? Need me.
The interface, while powerful, isn't no-code friendly. It requires understanding of technical concepts that non-technical teams simply don't have. I became the bottleneck in their automation process. What was supposed to give them independence had made them completely dependent on me.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
Phase 3: Zapier - The Expensive Solution That Paid for Itself
Finally, despite the higher cost, we migrated to Zapier. Yes, it's more expensive. Yes, it has fewer "advanced" features than N8N. But here's what changed everything: the client's team could actually use it.
Within a week of migration, the client was making their own modifications. They could navigate through each Zap, understand the logic flow, and make small edits without calling me. The interface is intuitive enough that non-technical users can actually manage their own automations.
The Business Impact
Here's what actually mattered: team autonomy. With Zapier, when they wanted to adjust their deal-to-project workflow, they could do it themselves. When they needed to add a new integration, they could test it without my involvement. When something broke, they could often troubleshoot and fix it independently.
The higher subscription cost became irrelevant because they weren't paying my hourly rate for every tiny modification. The platform that cost more monthly saved them thousands in consultant time.
My Decision Framework
After this experience, I developed a framework that has nothing to do with feature lists:
Choose Make.com if: You have simple, linear workflows with reliable data sources and someone technical who can monitor and maintain the system. Budget is your primary constraint and you can accept occasional downtime.
Choose N8N if: You have technical resources on your team and need complex, customizable automation that can handle edge cases. You're building automation as part of your product or have developers who can maintain the system.
Choose Zapier if: You need team accessibility and reliability trumps cost. Your team needs to be able to modify and maintain automations without technical expertise. Time-to-value and independence are more important than advanced features.
The Real Decision Factors
The choice isn't about which platform is "better." It's about alignment with your constraints:
Team Technical Level - Can your team actually use the platform independently?
Maintenance Reality - Who will troubleshoot when things break at 2 AM?
Growth Trajectory - Will you need to modify automations frequently as you scale?
True Cost Analysis - Include consultant time, not just subscription fees
Implementation Process
Based on this experience, here's how I now approach automation platform selection:
Audit current team capabilities - Who will actually maintain this system?
Define success metrics - Is it cost savings, time savings, or team independence?
Test with real scenarios - Build your actual use case, not tutorial examples
Plan for failure - What happens when the automation breaks?
Calculate total cost - Include training, maintenance, and modification time
Budget vs Reality
Make seemed perfect until errors killed entire workflows for days
Team Independence
N8N required my intervention for every small client modification
Platform Philosophy
Each platform has different assumptions about who will maintain the system
Decision Framework
Choose based on team constraints not feature lists
The startup I worked with is still using Zapier today, eighteen months later. They've expanded their automation far beyond the original HubSpot-to-Slack integration. They've built workflows for customer onboarding, invoice processing, and lead nurturing - all managed internally.
Measurable Impact:
Reduced project setup time from 30 minutes to 2 minutes per deal
Zero downtime from automation failures after Zapier migration
Team achieved independence - no consultant calls for modifications
Expanded from 1 automation to 12 automations managed internally
The cost difference? Zapier cost them an extra $50/month compared to Make. But they saved over $2,000 in the first quarter alone by not needing my intervention for every modification. The platform that cost more upfront delivered better ROI within 90 days.
Most importantly, they gained something you can't put a price on: the confidence to experiment and iterate on their own processes. They're not waiting for developer availability to test new workflows or fix broken automations.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
Here are the key lessons that completely changed how I approach automation platform selection:
User interface isn't just about aesthetics - it determines who can actually maintain your system long-term
Error handling philosophy matters more than feature count - how a platform fails determines your operational stability
Total cost includes consultant time - the "cheaper" platform often costs more when you factor in maintenance
Team autonomy is worth premium pricing - independence has measurable business value
Platform migration is expensive - choose carefully the first time rather than planning to "upgrade later"
Simple workflows hide platform differences - test with your most complex real-world use case
Documentation quality predicts user experience - if their help docs are confusing, so is their platform
What I'd Do Differently: I'd start with a 30-day real-world test using the actual workflows we needed, not simple tutorial examples. I'd involve the client team in platform evaluation from day one, not just present them with my technical choice.
When This Approach Works Best: This framework is most valuable for growing teams (5-50 people) who need automation but don't have dedicated technical resources. If you're a solo developer or have a full engineering team, different priorities apply.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups implementing automation platforms:
Start with Zapier automation if your team lacks technical resources
Test user onboarding workflows before customer-facing automations
Budget for team training, not just platform subscriptions
For your Ecommerce store
For Ecommerce stores choosing automation platforms:
Prioritize order fulfillment reliability over advanced features
Test with your highest-volume automation first (usually order processing)
Ensure marketing team can modify workflows without developer involvement