You're scaling fast and it's time to grow your CS team. You get the headcount approved, map out some of the roles, and start the hiring process.

A few months later, things seem to be working. Tickets get handled. Customers get helped. But something just feels, well, off. It doesn't feel like a team, but more like a collection of people just going through the CS motions.

Looking back, I don't regret moving quickly in those early days. I regret some of the assumptions I made along the way.

What I've come to learn is that most leaders think about scaling CS like a staffing problem. We've all most likely thought or heard someone say something like, "We need more people to handle more stuff".

It's the most natural thing in the world to consider first, especially if you have never done it. After all, if volume goes up, people must go up too. Right?

But CS isn't a volume game. It's a trust game. And trust doesn't necessarily scale just because your team does.

The early team's magic – that scrappy, tight-knit, intuitive type of magic – well, it gets diluted fast when systems don't evolve with the people. What worked when Sarah knew every customer by name breaks down when there are fifteen Sarahs.

I've built CS teams from zero, and I've inherited them mid-flight. What I've learned is that you can't just grow bigger, you have to grow smarter.

If I had the chance to go back in time and do it over, here are four things I'd do differently.

First: I'd Spend More Time Defining Success Upfront

Most hiring job descriptions are about duties, not outcomes. Things like handle escalations, manage renewals, and own the customer relationship. All of those are true, but none of it tells you what great actually looks like.

I'd ask different questions about the type of team we are... What does great service look like here in 6 months? In 12? When a customer talks about us to their peers, what do we want them to say? When our CSM finishes a call, how should both sides feel?

Clarity and transparency on what success looks like up front would've saved my team a lot of confusion later. Because when you don't define success clearly, everyone naturally invents their own version. Some people on your team will optimize for speed. And others for thoroughness. Some will chase smiles, and the rest will focus on efficiency.

Different initial questions, lead to different customer outcomes, which often requires a different type of hire.

Second: I'd Design the First 90 Days as a Product, Not a Process

On one of my early teams, our staff onboarding wasn't broken... it just wasn't intentional. We had a checklist, some user shadowing sessions, and really good intentions. But we treated those first 90 days like a necessary evil instead of the foundation it actually is.

If I thought of those first 90 days like a product experience, I'd obsess over what CSM hires feel, learn, and believe at each stage. Are they learning what we do, or why we do it? Are they memorizing scripts or understanding principles? Do they walk away from Week 1 excited or overwhelmed?

That early clarity is so important. It scales significantly better than any checklists can. When someone truly understands the why behind the work, they make better decisions when nobody's watching. And in CS, nobody's watching most of the time.

Third: I'd Make Knowledge Sharing a First-Class System, Not a Side Project

In the rush, we treated knowledge like tribal wisdom. We'd have to hunt down the right person in order to get the answer.

That works when you team is 2 or 3 people. It starts to really break when your team hits double digits.

I'd invest early in systems that turn one CSMs hard-earned insight into everyone's baseline. Not just tools – although tools do help – but in habits. I'd include the rituals those early team members did to build a knowledge base and collaboration.

What if every tough customer issue came with a 2-minute debrief? What if we celebrated not just the wins, but the lessons? What if sharing knowledge wasn't extra work, but part of the work?

The goal isn't perfect documentation but more of a collective wisdom for the entire team to be successful and delivering a consistent customer experience. When your newest hire can tap into the learnings of your most seasoned CSMs, that's when you're going to see a new level of scale unlocked within the team.

Fourth: I'd Build Around Human Capacity, Not Just Ticket Volume

For some on those early teams, the burnout came quietly. Everyone was fine until they weren't. We tracked response times and CSAT scores, but we were undervaluing the emotional workload that CSMs carry every day.

If I were to build and scale a team from scratch again, I'd track different things. Not just ticket counts, but emotional weight. How many difficult conversations did someone have this week? How many frustrated customers? How many cases where there wasn't a good answer?

We'd talk more about the hard days, not just handle times. We'd build in recovery time, not just productivity targets.

It's not soft or too lenient to care about this stuff either. It's smart. Because a depleted CS team doesn't create customer loyalty... it erodes it because they lack the EQ needed to fully meet the customer where they are at in their journey. Customers can sense when someone's going through the motions versus when they're genuinely engaged.

If you're going through your first scaling exercise as a leader, ask yourself: Are we building a team or just filling seats? Because there's a world of difference between the two.

The best CS systems aren't the most complex. They're the ones built to hold people, not just tickets. Don't forget about the people.

The thoughts and opinions in this article are my own and don't represent the views of any organization or employer. If this perspective resonated with you, I'd love to have you along for more conversations about building better customer and employee experiences.

If you are interested in exploring a partnership with Customer Korner to assist your organization, please reach out to mike@customerkorner.com