Reporting line
The first governance decision is the reporting line. RevOps reporting to a CRO, COO, or CEO meets the total influence determinant of an effective integrative device. RevOps reporting two layers below a single functional leader typically does not. The reporting line determines authority, which determines the function's ability to resolve cross-functional disputes — which is precisely what an integrative device exists to do.
This is not an administrative detail. It is one of the most consequential structural decisions in the entire deployment.
Mandate scope
The second governance decision is the explicit specification of which functions RevOps serves, with what authority. Clear specification prevents the function from drifting into either over-extension (serving everyone poorly) or under-extension (serving only sales).
Mandate scope should include first-tier audiences (always served, full SLA), second-tier audiences (served via standardised interfaces), and out-of-scope audiences (referred to other functions). The tiering should be reviewed annually as the function evolves.
Decision rights
The third governance decision is the explicit specification of what RevOps decides versus what it advises on. Ambiguity at this level produces friction with every function. RevOps that thinks it has decision authority when functional leaders think it has advisory authority produces conflict at every interaction.
Specific decision rights to specify: data definitions, system integration architecture, cross-functional cadence design, compensation administration, deal desk approval, territory and quota design. Each should be classified as RevOps-decided, RevOps-advised, or RevOps-executed. Write the classification into a formal charter.