{% include "martechulate-header.html" %}
  1. Home
  2. MarTech & Data Architecture

B2B MarTech & data architecture.

Stack audits, data design and platform migrations for B2B marketing teams in the US and Europe, so your pipeline reporting holds up and AI has clean data to work with.

Book a call See services

Sound familiar?

MarTechulate is a B2B MarTech and data architecture consultancy led by David Frederick, an Adobe Certified Master in Marketo Engage Architecture. I audit B2B marketing stacks, design the account data, lifecycle and pipeline attribution underneath them, get data ready for AI, and migrate teams between Marketo Engage, HubSpot, Salesforce Account Engagement (Pardot) and Eloqua.

Adobe Marketo Engage certification badges, including Adobe Certified Master

What I help with.

Architecture audit

MarTech stack and architecture audit

Most stacks grow one tool at a time. Each purchase made sense, but nobody designed the whole thing: data flows three ways, two tools score the same lead, and pipeline reporting depends on a spreadsheet someone rebuilds every month.

An architecture audit maps every tool, integration and data flow, then gives you a written report and roadmap ranked by impact and effort, including what to consolidate or cut.{% if cfg.timeline_audit %} Audits usually take {{ cfg.timeline_audit }}.{% endif %}

  • Stack map and tool overlap
  • Integrations and data flows
  • Field ownership and sync rules
  • Lifecycle and lead routing
  • Attribution and reporting
  • Access, governance and consent

Fixed-fee audit{% if cfg.price_audit %}, from {{ cfg.price_audit }}{% endif %}

Book an audit

Data and attribution

Marketing data, attribution and AI readiness

Reporting and AI are only as good as the data underneath. If a lifecycle stage means something different in every tool, one person exists as four records, or contacts aren’t linked to the right accounts, no dashboard or AI agent will fix it.

I design the data model, person-to-account matching, lifecycle and attribution so marketing, sales and RevOps work from the same definitions, then set guardrails for what AI agents can read and write.

  • Data model and field standards
  • Identity and deduplication
  • Account matching and enrichment
  • Lifecycle stages and sales handoffs
  • Pipeline attribution and channel mapping
  • AI readiness and agent guardrails

Fixed-scope project{% if cfg.price_data %}, from {{ cfg.price_data }}{% else %}, quoted after a scoping call{% endif %}

Scope a project

Migrations

Marketing automation platform migrations

A platform migration is the best chance you’ll get to leave old problems behind, and the easiest way to break lead routing to sales in launch week.

I start with an audit so only what’s worth keeping moves across, remap the data, rebuild the automations, then run old and new side by side until a planned cutover date. You get a launch date, not a weekend of emergency fixes.{% if cfg.timeline_migration %} Most migrations take {{ cfg.timeline_migration }}.{% endif %}

  • Migration plan and cutover date
  • Data and field mapping
  • Workflow and program rebuilds
  • Integration and routing tests
  • Parallel running
  • Documentation and handover

Fixed-scope project{% if cfg.price_migration %}, from {{ cfg.price_migration }}{% else %}, quoted after a scoping call{% endif %}

Plan a migration

Moving to Marketo? See Marketo Engage consultancy.

Recent architecture projects.

{{ cfg.cs1_client }} · Attribution

A lead source model that marketing and sales both trust

The problem
Lead source was set inconsistently, and channels were mixed up with tactics, so no one could say with confidence where pipeline actually came from.
What I did
Designed and built first-touch Person Source and Most Recent Lead Source, each with a detail field, wrote qualification rules for every channel, and documented why a tactic isn’t a channel so the team applies it the same way.
{% if cfg.cs1_result_big or cfg.cs1_result_text %}
{{ cfg.cs1_result_big }}{{ cfg.cs1_result_text }}
{% endif %}

{{ cfg.cs2_client }} · Lifecycle

Redesigning the MQL so it means something again

The problem
MQLs were firing inconsistently, and fit and behaviour were tangled together in one score, so sales had stopped trusting them.
What I did
Split the two: Marketo keeps behaviour scoring, while fit scoring and MQL stamping moved out to a dedicated system with rules by company size. Stranded legacy leads were handled in a one-time batch rather than extra campaign logic.
{% if cfg.cs2_result_big or cfg.cs2_result_text %}
{{ cfg.cs2_result_big }}{{ cfg.cs2_result_text }}
{% endif %}

MarTech questions.

{% for f in faqs %}

{{ f[0] }}

{{ f[1] | safe }}

{% endfor %}

Let’s talk.

Thirty minutes on Google Meet with the architect who’d do the work. Bring a stack diagram, a report nobody trusts, or the migration you’ve been putting off.

Nothing suitable? Email david@martechulate.com and I’ll find a time that works.

{% include "footer.html" %}