How The Tech-Diplomacy Academy Moved from Salesforce to HubSpot

RSM began by documenting the Salesforce environment and the future HubSpot operating model. That meant establishing an inventory of contacts, companies, leads, deals, pipelines, emails, segments, and the connected processes that used them. The seven pipelines received particular attention because a pipeline is more than a list of stages: it reflects how teams qualify, advance, manage, and report on work.

The discovery phase created a plan for the transition rather than assuming Salesforce concepts should be copied into HubSpot unchanged. RSM identified what needed to be moved, what needed to be mapped into HubSpot’s data model, and what had to be created new in the destination portal. That planning gave the project a structured sequence for cleanup, migration, configuration, testing, and validation.

That plan also set the order in which the operating elements would move, including when pipeline definitions, segmentation logic, and launch-ready assets should be configured in HubSpot. For a broader look at the controls that matter before a CRM migration begins, see RSM’s guide to what teams need to consider before moving from Salesforce to HubSpot.

Before the migration began in earnest, RSM reviewed the Salesforce data and process structure to identify the rules, overlaps, and exceptions that could affect the HubSpot build. This included examining the CRM record types, the seven pipelines, the existing email and segment structure, and the assets that would need to continue supporting the Academy’s work after the transition.

The audit established a clear destination standard. Instead of carrying forward every legacy decision by default, RSM used the review to determine how the Academy’s data and processes should be organized in HubSpot. That reduced the risk of recreating old complexity in a new platform and made the migration a chance to build a cleaner operational foundation. This audit-first discipline is the same type of structural review supported by RSM Audit, RSM’s HubSpot Portal Audit Tool.

RSM used the audit-first findings to make the migration decisions traceable and practical. The review established a clear standard for what belonged in the destination portal, what needed refinement, and what required testing before launch—looking past surface-level record counts to the configuration and process details that determine whether a portal will actually work for the team using it.

RSM migrated the core records the Academy relied on: contacts, companies, leads, and deals. The work required mapping those records into their intended HubSpot structure, preserving the relationships that make the CRM usable, and reconciling the information so the new portal could become a reliable place for the team to work.

The seven Salesforce pipelines were also translated into HubSpot. RSM reviewed the purpose and stages of each pipeline, rebuilt the destination configuration, and connected the migrated deal data to the appropriate process. This was not simply a matter of recreating stage names. The goal was for each pipeline to support the Academy’s active work, reporting needs, and day-to-day operating rhythm in HubSpot. The reconciliation work followed the same principles behind HubSpot CRM data hygiene: clean, trusted records are what make a CRM useful after a migration.

RSM also checked more than whether the information could be moved. The team needed to verify that records, relationships, and pipeline context would remain meaningful once the Academy began working in HubSpot. That validation reduced the risk of moving data that looked complete in an export but did not support the team’s real operating process in the destination portal.

The migration extended beyond CRM records. RSM moved the existing emails and segments that supported the Academy’s communication strategy, then built the HubSpot assets needed to run that work in the new environment. The project also included creating new webpages, forms, and workflows so the portal had the operational and digital components required after the Salesforce transition.

Those assets were built as part of the broader HubSpot operating model, not as isolated tasks. Forms needed to capture information in the right structure, webpages needed to support the intended visitor experience, and workflows needed to support the team’s process without creating uncontrolled automation. Bringing the communication and web foundation into the project helped ensure the Academy could use HubSpot as an active system, not just a database that had replaced Salesforce.

Each new asset had a job to do in the future-state portal. RSM connected the web, form, and workflow work to the Academy’s data model and operating process so the pieces could support one another after launch. That is the same practical build discipline behind RSM’s HubSpot implementation work: configuration should support a real process, not simply add features to a portal.

The final stage focused on confirming that the migration and new HubSpot build worked together as intended. RSM validated the migrated CRM data, reviewed pipeline configuration, tested the newly created webpages, forms, and workflows, and checked that the operational pieces of the new portal supported the Academy’s daily work.

Reporting was part of that validation—not an afterthought. The new system needed to give the team confidence that it could understand activity across its pipelines and work from reliable CRM information. The QA and testing process helped identify issues before handoff and ensured the Salesforce-to-HubSpot transition resulted in a coherent working environment for The Tech-Diplomacy Academy. For more on why that final validation matters, see RSM’s guide to why reports go wrong when data quality is ignored.

The final review also created a checkpoint for the Academy to understand how the new portal would be measured and maintained after the project. That matters because reporting only reflects reality when the underlying data and process are sound. For a deeper look at that connection, see RSM’s guide to why reports go wrong when data quality is ignored.