Most case studies show you the finished dashboard. This one shows you the mess it started as, because that is the part that actually tells you whether someone can do the job.
Where it started
195 leads for a hospitality and cultural-experiences business in Mexico City. No consistent categorization. No way to tell, at a glance, whether a record was a paying guest, a vendor, or a potential partner. Every lead used the same generic form, regardless of what it actually was.
What changed, step by step
- Built a two-axis taxonomy: type (guest, vendor, partner, sales) crossed with category (lodging, experience, transportation, marketing).
- Made the form adapt. A transportation lead sees transportation fields. A property lead sees property fields. No more scrolling past 40 irrelevant inputs.
- Automated the pricing math. Base cost plus commission tiers, calculated live inside the record instead of in a separate spreadsheet nobody kept updated.
- Used AI for the boring part. Extracting contact info and pricing from notes that were never meant to be structured data in the first place.
This mirrors what HubSpot's State of Sales research keeps finding year over year: the CRMs that actually get used are the ones built around how the team already works, not the ones with the most features bolted on.
Why I am telling you this instead of just listing skills
Anyone can write "CRM implementation" on a resume. Fewer people can walk you through the exact decision of why the property fields are different from the transportation fields, and defend that decision in an interview.
If you are hiring: next time a candidate claims CRM experience, ask them to describe one structural decision they made and why. The answer tells you more than the years-of-experience line ever will.