Marketing and tech are supposed to move in sync. Campaigns are planned, messaging is signed off, and momentum is there. But when it’s time to launch, progress often stalls behind technical bottlenecks and sysadmin queues.
What looks like a workflow issue is usually something deeper. The real problem sits in how marketing and tech are connected, and what the platform allows each team to do. When marketing depends on technical handoffs to go live, speed, timing and confidence suffer.
This article looks at why marketing still waits to launch, even when everything else is ready. It also explores what kind of infrastructure helps marketing and tech work together, so teams can move fast without losing control, stability or compliance.
- Why are marketing ideas still waiting in sysadmin queues?
- What’s really causing the gap between the strategy and marketing tech stack?
- How did sysadmins become the middlemen for campaign launches?
- Is this really a workflow problem, or is your platform to blame?
- What happens when DevOps and marketing work together?
- What would a sysadmin-free launch process actually look like?
- How can marketing own their delivery without risking platform integrity?
- Why won’t fixing the front-end solve delivery delays?
- Where should you start if you want to break the dependency?
Why are marketing ideas still waiting in sysadmin queues?
It's because many platforms still require technical intervention for routine publishing. When marketing can’t make changes independently, even simple launches end up competing with operational work in a sysadmin queue.
Even small updates often need a support ticket. Simple changes compete with infrastructure requests and patching jobs, so minutes turn into days.
These delays break campaign rhythm and signal a deeper problem. The platform wasn’t designed to give marketing direct control. Instead, it locks teams into technical handoffs that slow delivery and make outcomes unpredictable. That’s not a workflow flaw. That’s a platform problem.
What’s really causing the gap between the strategy and marketing tech stack?
The gap exists because many marketing tech stacks were built for control, not autonomy. They prioritise technical safety over speed, leaving marketing dependent on processes that no longer match how they work.
This is where marketing and tech fall out of sync. Strategy moves ahead, but the marketing tech stack can’t support the pace without technical intervention.
That gap exists because most platforms:
- Favour stability over agility
- Are optimised for technical users
- Hide core functions behind permissions and processes
- Treat publishing as a risk to be managed, not a task to be streamlined
The impact becomes obvious as teams grow. More stakeholders. More approvals. More pressure to deliver results, fast. But instead of gaining efficiency, delivery slows down:
- Campaigns pile up behind support tickets
- Publishing rights sit with a handful of developers
- Teams work in isolation, chasing status updates instead of shaping content
That delay starts to shape behaviour. Marketing stops pushing the pace. They settle for what they can get out the door, not what the strategy demands.
Execution begins to drift away from intent. And that drift is more visible in businesses that lack marketing autonomy. As the 2025 State of Martech & Marketing Operations Report notes, “Mature businesses are mapping martech initiatives directly to customer journey needs, with dedicated frameworks and documented impact models becoming more commonplace.” That level of structure only works when the platform lets marketing keep pace with the strategy.
And no amount of meetings, workflows or project plans will close that gap until the platform stops holding the team back.
How did sysadmins become the middlemen for campaign launches?
Sysadmins became central to launches because older platforms required technical oversight for every change. Even as tools evolved, the processes stayed the same.
That caution was justified then, but the habits it created have lingered. What began as a safeguard became a process. Support queues were set up, roles were formalised, and even as tools matured, the handoffs stayed in place.
As IBM highlights, "CMOs and their sales counterparts are grappling with the Sisyphean task of syncing workflows across disparate systems, wrestling with data fragmentation that renders insights incomplete, and drowning in a sea of too many tools and platforms to manage effectively." This level of sprawl reinforces the habit of relying on sysadmin support, even when the underlying tech no longer demands it.
Platforms are now far more capable. CMS interfaces are friendlier. Automation handles testing and deployment. Access control protects what matters. The technology evolved, but in many organisations, the process did not.
The sysadmin role has become a default part of the launch process. Not because it’s needed, but because no one stopped to question whether it still makes sense.
And until that shift happens, marketing will keep depending on a queue that should no longer exist.
Is this really a workflow problem, or is your platform to blame?
It’s rarely a workflow issue. Most delays are caused by platforms that don’t allow marketing to act independently, forcing basic publishing tasks through technical gatekeepers.
When the marketing tech stack limits who can publish, when, and how, delays become inevitable regardless of how well the workflow is documented.
Workarounds start to appear. Shared inboxes. Asana boards. Manual checklists. These aren’t solutions. They’re symptoms. Signals that the platform can’t support the speed or independence the team needs.
Marketing teams are expected to react in days or hours, not weeks, which makes platform-level delays impossible to ignore.
Platforms should enable autonomy, not create more handoffs. When the foundation is built right, the process stops being the problem.
What happens when DevOps and marketing work together?
When DevOps and marketing share ownership of delivery, handoffs disappear. Automation replaces tickets, visibility improves, and both teams move faster without sacrificing governance.
Developers can focus on higher-value work while marketing moves faster. For CTOs, this approach also strengthens governance by maintaining visibility over uptime, performance and security.
With the right infrastructure, autonomy and control coexist. Compliance is built in, changes are tracked, and delivery finally matches the pace of modern marketing.
What would a sysadmin-free launch process actually look like?
In a sysadmin-free process, marketing controls publishing within clear guardrails. Launches happen without tickets, while security, tracking and rollback remain intact.
This doesn’t remove the role of sysadmin support. It repositions it. From gatekeeper to enabler. From blocking progress to setting the system up so others can move confidently on their own.
The difference between a ticket-led process and a sysadmin-free launch model is structural, not procedural:
| Traditional process | Sysadmin-free process |
|---|---|
| Marketing raises a ticket | Marketing publishes directly from CMS |
| Sysadmin reviews and deploys changes | Pre-approved workflows and guardrails handle checks |
| Updates require manual sign-off | Version control tracks all changes |
| Campaign timing depends on queue load | Launch dates stay in marketing’s hands |
| Risk managed through restriction | Risk managed through smart automation |
The result is a smoother, faster delivery cycle. One where compliance is built into the workflow, not layered on top. Where technical oversight is proactive not reactive. And where marketing can finally move at the speed the strategy demands.
How can marketing own their delivery without risking platform integrity?
Marketing can own delivery safely when the platform enforces boundaries. Guardrails, automation and access controls protect infrastructure while allowing content teams to move freely.
A well-structured system can support safe autonomy through:
- Role-based access controls that limit who can make changes, and where
- CI/CD pipelines that automatically test updates before they go live
- Version control that tracks every edit and makes rollback simple
By drawing a clear line between infrastructure and content, you avoid the risk of accidental damage. Infrastructure remains protected. Marketing can operate freely within their zone.
Trust is a product of structure. When the system is built to support shared responsibility, teams don’t need to double-check every move. They know the limits, they trust the process, and they stay focused on delivering.
This kind of autonomy isn’t a gamble. It’s a sign that the platform is doing its job.
Why won’t fixing the front-end solve delivery delays?
Delivery delays are structural, not visual. If the back end still depends on sysadmin approval, a new design won’t make launches faster.
The root cause is how the platform is built.
- If marketing still can’t publish without raising a ticket, speed won’t improve
- If every change needs technical review, campaigns will still miss their moment
- If the infrastructure is rigid, no amount of polish will make it faster
A polished interface won’t compensate for a rigid marketing tech stack that still relies on sysadmin intervention for basic publishing.
Fixing the front end might help with perception, but fixing the structure is what solves the problem.
Where should you start if you want to break the dependency?
Start by identifying where marketing still depends on manual technical approval. Those dependencies reveal whether the issue is process, habit or platform design.
Then look for what can be automated or restructured. If sysadmin approval is still needed for basic updates, ask why. These are often relics of older systems that no longer fit how teams work.
Next, assess the platform itself. A readiness roadmap should support autonomy, protect stability and scale with the business.
As Gartner reports, "Global business leaders predict that 44% of workers’ core skills will change in the next five years, challenging CMOs to build marketing teams with modernised skills to help them prove marketing's value to the business."
Breaking dependency means rethinking both the tech and the team.
Are your marketing and tech teams aligned, or still separated by a sysadmin queue?
If launches rely on tickets and technical handoffs, your platform is likely dictating pace instead of supporting it.
If you’re unsure whether that’s a workflow issue or an architectural one, we’re happy to review your Drupal setup and give you a straight answer.