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.
What started as a simple website project became a deep dive into automation platforms - and honestly, it taught me more about choosing the right tool than any tutorial ever could. Here's what you'll learn from my journey through three different automation platforms:
Why budget-friendly doesn't always mean business-friendly
The hidden costs of "powerful" automation tools
My framework for choosing automation platforms based on actual constraints
Real implementation results from Make, N8N, and Zapier
When to prioritize team autonomy over cost savings
By the end, you'll understand why the "best" automation tool isn't about features - it's about finding the one that actually works for your team's reality. Let's dive into what I learned from migrating the same workflow across all three platforms.
Industry Reality
What everyone tells you about automation platforms
Walk into any startup accelerator or browse any productivity blog, and you'll hear the same advice about workflow automation:
"Start with Zapier - it's the easiest"
"Use Make (formerly Integromat) for complex workflows"
"N8N is the best for developers who want control"
"Always choose based on pricing and features"
"The platform doesn't matter as much as the workflow design"
This conventional wisdom exists because it's technically correct. Each platform does excel in its intended use case. Zapier is user-friendly, Make handles complex branching well, and N8N gives developers unlimited customization options.
But here's where this advice falls short: it completely ignores the human element. Most recommendations focus on what the tool can do, not who will actually be using it day-to-day.
I've seen countless businesses choose the "best" technical solution only to have it become a bottleneck because their team couldn't manage it independently. The most sophisticated workflow means nothing if it breaks and only one person knows how to fix it.
What the industry doesn't tell you is that the "right" automation platform isn't determined by features or pricing - it's determined by your team's constraints, technical comfort level, and long-term autonomy needs.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
This B2B startup had a seemingly simple problem: they were closing deals consistently but spending way too much time on post-sale setup. Their sales team used HubSpot, their project management lived in Slack, and someone had to manually connect these dots for every new client.
The manual process looked like this: deal closes in HubSpot → someone gets notified → they manually create a Slack channel → they invite the right team members → they set up the channel with client info and project templates. Simple enough for one deal, but they were closing 20-30 deals per month.
As I worked on their website, I kept hearing the same frustration: "We're spending 2-3 hours every week just setting up project channels." That's when I realized their real problem wasn't their website - it was operational efficiency.
The client was game to automate this, but they had one critical constraint: they needed to be able to manage the automation themselves. They'd been burned before by complex systems that only worked when the consultant was around.
So I proposed something that would change how I think about automation forever: let's test the same workflow across three different platforms and see which one actually works for their team's reality, not just on paper.
This wasn't about finding the "best" platform - it was about finding the platform that would still be working six months after I was gone.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
I decided to implement the exact same workflow across three platforms: Make.com, N8N, and Zapier. The workflow was straightforward: when a deal closes in HubSpot, automatically create a Slack channel with the deal name, invite specific team members, and populate it with project templates.
Phase 1: Make.com - The Budget-Friendly Start
I chose Make first because of pricing. For a growing startup, the cost difference was significant. The setup took about 2 hours, and the workflow worked beautifully - until it didn't.
Here's what I discovered: when Make hits an error in execution, it doesn't just fail that task - it stops the entire workflow. For a business closing deals daily, this was a dealbreaker. The client would wake up to find three deals from yesterday with no Slack channels created.
Even worse, debugging required diving into Make's execution logs, which were intimidating for non-technical team members. Every error meant calling me.
Phase 2: N8N - The Developer's Paradise That Became a Bottleneck
Next, I migrated everything to N8N. The control was incredible - I could build virtually anything. The self-hosted option meant no recurring subscription costs, and the workflow ran more reliably than Make.
But here's what the tutorials don't tell you: every small tweak the client wanted required my intervention. Want to change which team members get invited? That's a developer task. Need to modify the channel template? Call the consultant.
The interface, while powerful, wasn't intuitive for business users. I was becoming the bottleneck in their automation - exactly what we were trying to avoid.
Phase 3: Zapier - The Expensive Solution That Paid for Itself
Finally, we migrated to Zapier. Yes, it was more expensive. But something magical happened: the client's team could actually use it.
They could navigate through each Zap, understand the logic, and make small edits without calling me. When they wanted to add a new team member to the auto-invite list, they just clicked edit and added them. When they needed to change the channel naming convention, they figured it out themselves.
The handoff was smooth, and they gained true independence. Six months later, they've expanded the automation to handle project status updates and client onboarding - all without my help.
Key Discovery
Budget constraints matter less than team autonomy when the automation becomes business-critical
Platform Reliability
Make's all-or-nothing failure mode was a dealbreaker for high-frequency workflows
User Experience
N8N's power came with complexity that made the client dependent on technical support
Final Framework
Choose based on who will maintain the automation, not just who will build it
The results spoke for themselves, but not in the way I expected. This wasn't about which platform was "better" - it was about which platform matched the client's operational reality.
Make.com Results: Worked 85% of the time, but the 15% failure rate created chaos. Average recovery time: 4-6 hours (waiting for me to diagnose and fix). Total cost: "cheap" subscription + consultant time for every error.
N8N Results: 99% reliability, zero subscription costs, but 100% dependency on technical support. Every modification required 30-60 minutes of my time. The client felt trapped by their own automation.
Zapier Results: 98% reliability, higher monthly cost, but complete team independence. The client made 12 modifications to the workflow in the first month without any support. Time saved per week: 3+ hours that previously went to manual setup and consultant calls.
Six months later, the startup is still using Zapier and has expanded their automation to cover customer onboarding, project status updates, and invoice generation. The higher subscription cost was completely justified by the team's ability to iterate and improve without external help.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
This experience taught me that choosing automation platforms is fundamentally about understanding constraints, not features:
Reliability beats features - A simple automation that works 100% of the time is better than a sophisticated one that fails 15% of the time
Team autonomy is worth paying for - The "cheap" option becomes expensive when you factor in dependency costs
Error handling matters more than error prevention - Focus on platforms where your team can diagnose and fix issues independently
Interface complexity has hidden costs - Powerful tools that intimidate users create bottlenecks, not efficiency
Think maintenance, not just setup - The platform choice should be based on who will be living with the automation daily
Start with constraints, not capabilities - Map your team's technical comfort level before comparing features
Test the handoff, not just the workflow - The true test is whether your team can manage the automation without you
My framework now: identify the least technical person who will need to modify the automation, then choose the platform they can confidently use. Everything else is secondary.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups implementing automation:
Start with your least technical team member as the baseline for platform selection
Factor consultant dependency costs into your platform comparison
Test error recovery scenarios, not just happy path workflows
Prioritize team autonomy over advanced features
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce stores building automation:
Choose platforms your marketing team can modify without developer support
Focus on reliability over complexity for order processing workflows
Test platform performance during high-traffic periods before committing
Ensure your team can troubleshoot common e-commerce integration issues