The Story
As our company planned expansion into new states, our compliance onboarding process was a clear bottleneck. One that would only grow worse over time. Each client was required to meet a unique set of regulatory and internal requirements, but the existing system was manual, inefficient, and lacked transparency. Clients had to submit all documents through a single, lengthy HubSpot form that didn’t save progress—if they missed something, they wouldn’t find out until days later, when a compliance specialist manually reviewed the submission.
This created a frustrating experience for both clients and internal teams. Clients had no real-time visibility into their progress, often unsure of what had been submitted or what remained. Meanwhile, compliance specialists were bogged down with repetitive, manual tasks—spending 30 to 45 minutes per case just to determine document requirements and follow up on missing information.
Recognizing that true optimization isn’t just about automation, but about designing scalable systems aligned with business processes, I stepped in to reimagine the experience. With a deep understanding of workflows and stakeholder needs, I saw an opportunity to use the strengths of our existing tools—leveraging Moxo for structured onboarding and HubSpot for automation, workflow logic, and reporting.
By aligning the right tools to the right parts of the process, we laid the groundwork for a scalable, transparent system that could grow with the business.
The Problem:
Before a client could work with us, they had to meet certain regulatory and compliance requirements based on local government rules and internal company standards. However, the onboarding process was slow, manual, and lacked transparency, causing inefficiencies across teams.
The Solution:
I replaced the flawed ticketing system with a structured deal pipeline in HubSpot, allowing us to track progress through each compliance stage and identify bottlenecks. I also automated the compliance determination process by expanding dynamic form logic and building workflows that generated tailored document checklists based on each client’s services and state. This eliminated manual effort, improved accuracy, and reduced processing time from 30–45 minutes to just 5 minutes per client.
Process Documentation is a Prerequisite for Automation
A common misconception is that automation or AI can "fix" inefficiencies, but the reality is that automation is only as good as the understanding and documentation of the process it’s applied to. If a process only exists in someone’s head, and automation is built without a complete understanding of it, the automation is useless.
This is why documentation practices are critical. I ensured that compliance logic was fully documented so that it wasn’t dependent on a few individuals' knowledge. Instead of compliance specialists manually determining requirements on a case-by-case basis, I built a structured, referenceable system that allowed for scalable decision-making.
This documentation didn’t just support automation—it also created transparency, enabling the team to train others, troubleshoot issues, and continuously refine the process without bottlenecks.
Stakeholder Buy-in, Training, & Implementation Velocity
Stakeholder buy-in wasn’t the only concern—minimizing behavioral changes also reduced the need for extensive training and accelerated implementation. The less a process disrupts how people are used to working, the faster it can be adopted without resistance.
The key wasn’t just making a better system—it was ensuring that the improvements worked within the natural flow of how stakeholders already operated, rather than forcing them to drastically change their approach. This allowed for a smoother rollout and meant that teams required far less time to get up to speed.
This again highlights the importance of having someone build the process who actually understands it. If a system is designed without deep knowledge of how people actually work, adoption slows down, training time increases, and resistance builds. By taking a process-first approach and applying technical solutions where they naturally fit, I was able to remove unnecessary friction and increase velocity.
Replacing the Ticketing System with a Structured Deal Pipeline
The original ticketing system was fundamentally flawed because it only tracked when a case was opened and closed, making it impossible to measure progress between stages. Since ticket pipelines in HubSpot are designed for support cases, they focus only on total resolution time rather than tracking step-by-step progress.
This led to several critical issues:
No way to measure time spent at each stage → We couldn’t track where clients were getting stuck.
No visibility into bottlenecks → There was no structured reporting on why onboarding was delayed.
Heavy manual effort → Compliance specialists had to manually check records to understand the status.
Solution: Building a Deal Pipeline for Compliance
Instead of using tickets, I built a structured deal pipeline in HubSpot specifically for compliance tracking.
Created two distinct pipelines to separate different compliance journeys:
Business Owner Compliance Pipeline → Ensuring the entity was legally compliant.
Service Provider Compliance Pipeline → Ensuring the individual provider met all regulatory requirements.
Designed deal stages that mapped to the actual compliance process instead of just “open” or “closed.”
Implemented workflow automations to progress deals based on milestone completions.
Automating Compliance Determination with Dynamic Forms & Workflows
One of the biggest inefficiencies was that compliance specialists manually determined document requirements on a case-by-case basis, which was time-consuming and prone to inconsistencies.
The core issue was that compliance requirements were dependent on two variables:
The services the client intended to offer → Each service had its own unique documentation requirements.
The regulatory requirements of the state they operated in → Different states required different compliance steps.
This meant that compliance specialists had to cross-reference multiple factors without a structured system, relying on memory or internal documents. As we expanded, this would become unmanageable and error-prone.
Solution: Expanding the Form Logic & Automating Document Determination
To eliminate manual document determination, I built an automated compliance workflow in HubSpot:
Expanded the existing dynamic form to account for all necessary variables, ensuring that all compliance requirements were captured.
Removed document uploads from the form entirely, allowing clients to complete the questionnaire quickly.
Created a custom HubSpot CRM property that stored the required compliance documents specific to each client’s responses.
Built multiple workflows that analyzed the form responses, determined which documents were required, and updated the custom property to create a customized checklist for each client.
Upon form completion, the checklist was automatically emailed to the compliance specialist, eliminating the need for manual assessment.
This meant that compliance specialists were no longer spending 30-45 minutes manually determining requirements—the system did it instantly, reducing the task to 5 minutes per client.
Results and Impact
Takeaways & Lessons Learned
1. Stakeholder Buy-in & Process Familiarity
Stakeholder buy-in isn’t just about securing agreement—it’s about reducing the friction of adoption. By designing a process that minimized required behavioral changes, I reduced training time, accelerated implementation, and increased overall adoption. The key was ensuring that changes preserved stakeholder workflows while improving efficiency, rather than forcing a disruptive shift.
This again highlights the importance of having someone with deep process knowledge design solutions. A technical implementation alone isn’t enough—without a strong understanding of how people interact with the system, adoption will suffer, and friction will increase.
2. Process Documentation is a Prerequisite for Automation
A common misconception is that automation or AI can “fix” inefficiencies, but automation is only as good as the understanding and documentation of the process it’s applied to. If a process only exists in someone’s head and isn’t properly documented, automation is ineffective.
Documenting compliance logic was critical—instead of relying on a few individuals’ expertise, I structured a referenceable system that allowed for scalable, repeatable decision-making. This ensured that new team members could quickly learn the process, automation could be built properly, and ongoing improvements could be made without starting from scratch each time.
3. No Single Tool is a Silver Bullet—Understanding the Process is Key
The expectation when adopting new tools is often that they’ll “fix” operational problems, but tools are only as effective as the strategy behind their use. The key isn’t just picking the right tools—it’s having a holistic understanding of the process and knowing how to leverage each tool’s strengths where they naturally fit.
Moxo was ideal for structured, phased onboarding and document collection but lacked advanced automation and reporting capabilities.
HubSpot provided powerful automation, logic-based workflows, and reporting, but wasn’t built for managing a step-by-step onboarding experience.
By deeply understanding both the process and the tools, I was able to design a system where Moxo handled what it did best while HubSpot provided the automation and transparency needed for scale. This approach eliminated inefficiencies while ensuring stakeholder adoption.
4. Future-Proofing Requires Proactive Problem Solving
At the time of implementation, leadership hadn’t yet felt the full pain of inefficiencies in compliance tracking—but I recognized that as the company expanded, the current process would become an operational bottleneck.
By proactively designing a scalable, automated compliance framework, I ensured that the company could grow without compliance becoming a hiring or workload constraint. Thinking ahead, rather than reacting to problems only when they arise, was essential in ensuring the longevity of this system.
5. Process Ownership Matters—Systems Need a Clear Owner
One major inefficiency was that compliance knowledge was fragmented across multiple people, meaning that determining requirements relied on who you asked rather than a standardized system. This created bottlenecks and inconsistencies.
By taking ownership of the process, I structured compliance determination into a single, documented framework, eliminating reliance on individual knowledge. This ensured consistency, reduced errors, and allowed the system to scale beyond individual expertise.
6. Process Iteration is Just as Important as Initial Implementation
A common mistake in automation is assuming that once a system is built, it’s 'done.' But real-world adoption often reveals unexpected challenges.
After launching this system, I actively gathered stakeholder feedback, monitored friction points, and adjusted workflows where needed. This iterative approach ensured that the process didn’t just look good on paper—it actually worked seamlessly in daily operations.