What I learned this week: Airport Runway Capacity

Over the past year, I have flown to and from New York 7 times. That doesn’t seem like a very large number unless, like me, you prefer the comforts of home and Electric Hero subs from a few blocks away.

Being in Grand Rapids, my direct flight options are a little bit limited. Specifically I can go to Newark, or I can go to LaGuardia. Or I can do a multi-leg journey to JFK. Since interviewing at Arkus, I’ve chosen LGA every time except one time going to Newark and questioning my life choices the entire time.

LaGuardia has been undergoing MASSIVE reconstruction since I started flying out there in 2016, and it has made traveling through the place a greater headache each time. If the standard traffic weren’t enough, you now have to compete against road closures, construction zones, and entire areas of the airport being suddenly inaccessible after they were there two months ago. Keeps me on my toes, that’s for sure.

On my last visit, I couldn’t help but wonder, sitting at a standstill in a line of cars, waiting to exit the airport grounds, and looking at brightly colored signs happily declaring that “a better LaGuardia is coming!” just how long this could possible go on. What sort of purgatory are collectively experiencing? So I Googled it, and apparently I’m not the first one to do this, since the suggestion was immediate.

2022. By the way. 

The part that intrigued me…that’s not fair. It was actually fascinating. The original airport was built in the 1920s, which blew my mind because…did Queens need an airport then? Apparently. The next terminal was built in the 60s, then then 80s, and finally the 90s, and so they ended up with this Tetris kind of place. Not the point.

The part that REALLY piqued my interest was a line toward the end that they are going to add 2 miles of runway, which will help increase the airport’s capacity and decrease some of the issues they have with delays. (Did I mention that I read this while my flight was delayed by over an hour? Yeah. So at least I could understand the root cause.)

What does that have to do with anything, though? How would two miles really have an impact?

As it turns out, this is a Thing. Like an FAA thing. They produce semi-regular Airport Capacity Profiles (last updated in 2014) that determine, based on things like runway space and layout, just how many flights any given airport has actual capacity for. Specifically these reports identify the maximum capacity within a single hour of operation. These overall capacity reports are then broken down by things like weather conditions (visual, marginal, and instrument), realistic operational conditions, and even external factors that may have improved capacity since the last overview.

And you bet they have one for LaGuardia. I read it. But it didn’t quite explain how the two miles of runway would improve performance, so I had to keep looking.

Did you know StackExchange has a whole Aviation subdomain?

LaGuardia currently operates 22 arrival runways and 13 departure runways. Adding two miles of space to increase the number could have a positive effect on the capacity of the airport, but adding runways alone does not solve the problem. For instance, depending on the layout of the runways – parallel or perpendicular – you may have better capacity when the weather is cooperating (parallel) or more options and better sustained capacity when weather is less than ideal (perpendicular).

The mix of aircraft sizes could have an impact. If a very large, heavy aircraft lands, it produces more wake turbulence than a smaller craft, so having a larger variety could mean smaller planes have to wait longer.

The sequencing of arrivals and departures – how many planes are arriving vs. leaving? Will we have room for them? Better get that right.

Sequencing across airports – LaGuardia is in what’s considered the NY/NY/PHL airspace, which supports flights to LGA, JFK, EWR, and PHL. And as it turns out, big freaking flying machines need room to maneuver, so it’s not just the flights into and out of LaGuardia that need to be considered.

Runway exits. Wind strength in the area. Noise constraints. Lateral separation. So. Many. Things.

By the time I read through the capacity report, learned from the experts on Stack Exchange, and took a moment to consider all of the other things going on around a tarmac, I realized two things.

  1. It is very unlikely that adding two miles to the runways at LaGuardia will have THAT big of an impact.
  2. It is kind of a miracle that we ever get anywhere when it comes to flying, so maybe be nicer to the folks at the desk.

What I am learning this year about: Living through historical moments

For years the Big question for people was “where were you on September 11th?”

That was the defining moment, the axle spin that took us all from Point A to an unexpected, uncertain, unplanned-for Point B.

And we could all pretty much describe in great detail – those of us old enough to remember – where we were, at that moment. What we were doing. What we were thinking. How we were feeling. The days that followed, too, are often cast in stark relief against more mundane times of our collective history.

No one woke up that day (well, of those of us not directly responsible) thinking “today is a day that will change the world, or at the very least, change my world and the worlds of many other people.”

But we all knew, as we watched the day pass by, that we were watching and/or experiencing something that would be in history books.

So here we are, feeling that same sensation again. Change – monumental and unsure – is already here; we are living it.

It can be unsettling. Perhaps frightening, but I prefer the term unsettling because I feel it better encapsulates the length of time that we deal with it. A fright is a sudden thing for me, but that uneasiness, the lack of confidence in one’s footing – that is being unsettled. It’s like sitting on a couch or a chair and being completely unable to get comfortable for any real amount of time.

That’s where we are.

It sucks, right?

It’s easier to look back at things, to read about them from the safe distance of time, fantasize about how we would have done things differently, how we wouldn’t make the same mistakes. When secretly what we’re thinking is “thank the universe that isn’t me.” Even if we’re not conscious of it, there is a part of us that is grateful to have been spared the terrible events of the past.

There is a part of us that hopes we will never have to experience such events ourselves.

I have thought about this a lot, in fact. This idea that sometimes we have to go through to get out, and in those moments that through seemed absolutely impossible, I’ve always come back to the same place.

“I wish it need not have happened in my time,” said Frodo.
“So do I,” said Gandalf, “and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”

– J.R.R. Tolkien, Fellowship of the Ring

I’ve relied on it so heavily that a few years ago, I got part of it tattooed on my arm, my daily, sometimes hourly, reminder that all I can do is what I can do. This situation sucks. But this situation is what it is. We cannot close our eyes and make it disappear. We cannot be born in some other time. We are here. Now. And we must go through.

allwehavetodecide

What I reminisced about this week: TTRPG

Monday Eric sent me a text with a meme from a DnD group on Facebook (I think it was Facebook) with a cat sitting in front of a character sheet. The DM is saying that the adventurers have encountered a wizard, who has placed a chalice of some bubbling, smoking liquid on the table. And of course the cat says “I knock it over.”

Obviously I laughed about that for a half hour.

And then I got a little fixated on something: the character sheet in the picture. It was not a DnD character sheet. It was a White Wolf character sheet (or World of Darkness, I suppose – look, I can barely keep up).

This led to a day of hyper-fixating on WHAT FREAKING GAME IS THIS FROM.

It’s been YEARS, I mean over a decade, since I played any White Wolf game that wasn’t VtMB.

Things I remembered very vividly, right off the bat:

  • The different games had different borders – Vampire had a sort of gothic, wrought-iron looking border; Mage had a sort of geometric fade-out thing with the various symbols associated with the types of magic floating around; Werewolf was a relatively simple border with slashes through it.
  • Mr. Gone’s website was THE resource for character sheets
  • The character sheets and systems changed after I stopped playing
  • Every detail of some of my longest-played characters, playing their stories in my head like a movie,
  • Dr. Pepper
  • Faygo for a while there
  • The Combat Mix
  • Some other things that I’m not about to unpack for a bunch of people on the internet

Could not remember the specifics of this sheet, however. So I let it go.

For a couple of hours, during which I was still chugging the waters of Mnemosyne.

Obviously I love video games, and that love springs from my origins with pen, paper, and ten-sided dice. I love stories – hearing them, watching them, reading them, telling them – and it doesn’t get much better than building a story with friends.

What I liked (and still like) about the White Wolf World of Darkness games was that they always felt so character-driven to me. It was ridiculously easy to play a game with only one storyteller and one player or a very small group. The stakes always felt personal in some way, or if they weren’t, there was usually (with a good storyteller anyway) a very compelling, personal reason that your character was in the midst of whatever was happening.

DnD lacks some of that to me.

DnD also lacks the epic dice rolls. Listen, I like the simplicity of the D20. But there was something about putting points into my attributes and abilities and then rolling some crazy number of D10s that was just very satisfying. It’s like playing Warhammer and getting like 15 attacks and just chucking dice all over the table while laughing maniacally. It just feels good.

I spent years playing White Wolf, collecting lore about my characters, carefully taking notes, and organizing all of the matériel that came with lovingly playing those roles.

And it took me years before I was able to really start playing again. I play DnD now on Monday nights with a small group; we play online, and we have two people who are new to the game, and I find that the, let’s call it practice, that I got all those years ago comes in handy.

I still miss White Wolf sometimes. I still miss some of my old game group. But like anything else in life, I find that change is good, and while the mechanics may have changed, and the faces around the table, the core of it is still there, and that’s what matters.

It was an Exalted character sheet – a White Wolf system I never played, but boy was it fun to fall into the rabbit hole because of something so familiar.

And to solidify this as a week of thinkin’ ’bout old times, I later saw an internet friend post a picture of their OWN Exalted character sheet just before starting a game.

It all comes full circle. Play on, friends.

What I learned this week about: heavy cotton

There are some things we learn that feel like a well-earned, long journey. So much of what I know about Salesforce feels like that; it’s a lot of small steps that feel insignificant at the time, and then I look back, and I realize just how far I’ve come.

A lot of those steps don’t even feel like steps when they are taken. It’s just something that happens, and you realize some time later that that knowledge is in your bones now.

This isn’t one of those times.

What I learned about heavy cotton is a lesson learned that will stick with me because it was inconvenient.

I’ve been thinking, this whole series, or whatever it is, could actually be further broken down: what I learned (yay!) and lessons learned (wow, Sam, seriously?).

What I learned:

  • A new fun thing
  • Wow, that was really tough, but I got through it
  • Other people may be as interested in this as I am (and maybe not, but I posted it anyway)
  • This is a New and Fascinating thing
  • I didn’t know this even WAS a thing

Lessons learned:

  • Oh, there is a single tag missing on email templates that make it NOT responsive
  • Turns out I DO need a loop step in this flow
  • I should have asked these questions before starting this work
  • Make sure your friend isn’t squeamish before surprising them with tickets to the Bodies exhibit
  • Come up with a list of dumb things you’ve done BEFORE you start a blog post about it

About this time no one except me is saying “Sam, dummy, you have literally already done this. You had your guide to failure. You have a tag – literally a tag – called Lessons Learned. You are not fooling anyone.”

Cool. I’m right.

So this is really more a “lesson learned” then. That was the point.

Heavy cotton – think a heavy weave, stiff fabric that doesn’t fold so much as bend. Sure you can wash it. You can maybe even dry it, unless you’re trying to keep it from shrinking.

But here’s the thing.

It takes a long time to dry. Like a ridiculously long time. (Side note: My computer is telling me that I used to wrong ‘to’ in that first sentence, and I am just disproportionately angry about that. No, Apple or WordPress or whoever. It should NOT be time too dry. THAT MAKES NO SENSE. YOU SHOULD WRITE A LESSON LEARNED ABOUT BASIC GRAMMAR.)

If you wash your heavy garment at, say, 11pm the night before and dry it for a little while but then leave it out to air dry, don’t expect it to be done before 11pm about two days later. Definitely don’t plan on using it unless you like the feeling of heavy, damp fabric on your shoulders.

I don’t.

Sam, you might be saying now, this is ridiculous. No one cares about your heavy cotton blend. What does this have to do with anything?

Nothing. It’s just been one of those weeks. One lesson turns into frustration, turns into mistakes that really I should know better about, and here it is Friday morning, and I was Done with this week on Tuesday.

I don’t like to talk about my problems or frustrations with people, so when the little things add up, I find that my options are to either implode or write it out. Vaguely. Probably somewhat incoherently. But written nonetheless.

So yeah. I learned a lesson this week (a few). I’ll learn more lessons in future weeks.

But I definitely will not wash heavy cotton the day before I need it. That 100% will not happen again.

 

What I learned this week about: Pardot Form Handlers

A better title: What I learned last year about Form Handlers and am now getting around to posting. Holidays, amirite?

I could probably write a whole series on Pardot Forms and Form Handlers, but it’s also probably been done already. Plus there is documentation available. Or you could pop over to Jenna Molby’s blog for a lot of great content in that same arena.

I’m here today to get into some of the things that you really need to know and consider upfront because here’s how a lot of conversations about form handlers go:

Me: Pardot has forms, which are fully functional, hosted on your Pardot instance, and can take some custom styling, and it has form handlers, which allow you to identify the fields that you want to accept data for, and then Pardot generates a post-to URL.

You: So there’s really no difference?

Me: No, there is a big difference. One is a form. One is a post-to URL, so ANOTHER form can send data to that handler, and then the handler disperses the info to Pardot.

You: So form handlers are better for forms that have custom formatting?

Me: They CAN be, but I tend to think of it as – ‘I have a longer, more complex form, and I only need SOME of the data to go to Pardot.’

You: But they can do all the same things, right?

Me: No. Because the form handler is just a post-to URL.

You: I get it. We want to do a form handler, then. Our web developer will create the form.

Fast forward a few weeks, maybe even months, and when troubleshooting happens, everyone is confused. Here are the reasons why and what you should know BEFOREHAND.

Troubleshooting a form handler takes place in two (or more) places.

Scenario: We have a form on a website that is accepting four fields, and some of those fields are not appearing in Pardot.

What you need to check:

  • The fields identified for your form handler
  • The data type of the field on your form
  • The data type of the field defined in your form handler
  • The data type of the field in Pardot accepting the data
  • The field name on your form
  • The field name defined in your form handler

If ANY OF THOSE are out of sync (as in not exactly the same), then you will not get data in that field.

When you bring Salesforce into the mix, it can become even more complicated, as you now need to consider your data formatting from form, to form handler, to Pardot Prospect field, to Salesforce field.

You have basically ZERO (0) options for form handlers.

Want a custom error message? You have to create it on your site.

Want progressive profiling? You have to create it on your site. (Oh, and you have a required field on your handler? Then guess what has to be on EVERY VERSION of that custom built form.)

Want to control accepted data values, like for a dropdown menu? You have to enforce that on your site.

Here’s what you can control with your Form Handler:

  • What fields will accept data from your form
    • What format that data should be in
    • What the name of that field is on the form itself
    • Is this data required?
  • A success location (where the form redirects on a successful submission)
  • An error location (where the form redirects if there is an error – but see note #1 above)

That’s basically it. If you want to change something, ask yourself – is it one of those three things above? No? Then it needs to be changed on your site.

The ONLY THING a form handler does is generate a post-to URL and then disperse data to Pardot fields.

Oh yeah – you should know what a post-to URL is.

To understand what Pardot is actually doing, you need to understand the two basic functions of an integration (like SUPER BASIC functions) – you can GET data FROM a place, or you can POST data TO a place.

With a form handler, we are essentially building half of an integration. We have a custom HTML (probably) form that we’ve dropped onto our website, and that form does All The Things. It controls the look and feel, what questions show up, the format of those questions, etc.

When someone clicks on that submit button, Stuff happens. One of the Stuffs that can happen is a POST method (a command that tells the form to send data to a place). When we POST, we have to tell the form WHERE to post. And we can do that via a URL.

Pardot provides that custom URL for us when we create a form handler. When the data is submitted, the data types that we defined, and whether or not a field is required, is reviewed, and a success or error message is sent back to the originating source. And of course the data that is accepted is then entered to a Pardot Prospect, based on the field mapping we provided.

Untitled Diagram.jpg

Speaking of fields…you should also know that

  • checkboxes are not going to work the way you think they will
  • date fields in Pardot use a different format than Salesforce date fields
  • you cannot add custom validation to the fields on the form handler (see section 2)

Checkboxes are the big one here.

What you expect: When I check a box, that means that the Thing is True.

What Pardot understands: Nothing. It understands nothing.

This is what adding a checkbox to your form handler looks like:

Screen Shot 2020-01-06 at 10.12.22 AM

Do you see a place for checkbox? Boolean? NOPE.

Guess where you can control what actually gets passed to your form handler? 100 points if your answer was “on the form itself on the site” or similar.

I’ll just write a whole other post about checkboxes in Pardot, actually, so stay tuned.

They aren’t inherently evil, but…

I am not here to just bash form handlers. They can be a useful tool, but it is worth mentioning that they come with additional complexity that assumes a certain level of comfort with some technical concepts – HTML, CSS, HTML methods, etc. They are not for the faint of heart, and they are not a good substitute for true forms.

So when do I recommend using them, for reals?

  • If you have a very long, custom form, and you want SOME of that data to go to Pardot AND the data is very simple
  • If you have very strict requirements for customization that a standard Pardot form cannot guarantee (this is unlikely, but you never know)
  • If you already have a form and just need to send the data to Pardot AND the data is very simple
  • You have a form tool like Form Assembly that has a pre-built integration and are figuring “WHY NOT?”

That’s pretty much it. And that last one even is meh.

A final note/rant on this stuff

Pardot forms (and handlers) are NOT meant to be a full form solution. You should not be using either of these options for things like applications. Think of a Pardot form/handler as a handshake. What is the most basic information you need from a person to get to know them? What is a FAIR exchange of information with your prospects at the lowest level?

If you keep that in mind, forms and handlers are much easier to deal with.

As always it’s about the right tool for the job. Just make sure you know exactly what you’re doing before you pick up a form handler.

What I learned this week about: Pardot Responsive Layouts

I built my first responsive email template in 2014 when I was just coming into the MOPs/Salesforce Admin portion of our programming and realized that my company’s marketing emails were NOT responsive.

Me being me, I ended up sitting through a free webinar put on by Litmus to gain the basic understanding of how responsive emails worked, and from there I was the go-to on the team for all things HTML and CSS. I fumbled my way through enough to ensure that our emails and custom landing pages would look good on mobile.

Side note: I did all of this because I had reviewed the open rates based on device and found that approximately 30-40% of our emails were being opened on mobile. That’s a pretty sizable chunk of people having to squint at tiny print on a small screen.

I am not an expert on this stuff at all, so I’m not about to sit here and break down how to do this – there are much better resources out there for that. All you need to really understand about this is that responsive emails are based on tables, as in:

<table>

<tr><td></td></tr>

</table>

That at least I understood having been big into building strangely elaborate personal webpages when in school. I wish I had screenshots of some of the work I did back then – it wasn’t terrible, all things considered.

For responsive emails these are important because you end up with nested tables – tables inside of table cells inside of tables. Tableception, if you will. (Is that joke still a thing? I use it a lot.)

And then on top of that, there are some special little tweaks you can make to the CSS itself to ensure that when the size of the screen shrinks, those tables all shift around into place, so instead of squished, you get stacked.

Screen Shot 2019-10-29 at 1.17.34 PM <– Like that.

So what does this have to do with Pardot??

In a few implementations clients have used one of the prebuilt responsive templates in Pardot and found that instead of stacking, their template just shrank down into a smaller version of the same layout.

For whatever reason this didn’t seem to happen in previews or even with all template layouts, but for this client it did, and I wanted to fix it. It took some digging. And by digging, I mean rewriting the code almost line-by-line to find the issue, but when I did find it, it seemed a little silly.

The key to that fancy table action above working is in the CSS that exists for that email, so before we even start adding our tables and rows and cells and tables inside of cells…we have our CSS classes defined. Think of those classes as references; later in the HTML tables, I can reference my CSS via the class name, and that is used to display the info according to that reference.

But what I found was a table referencing a class that wasn’t there. Simple mistake and simple solution – we just had to drop the appropriate class name (reference) in the CSS, and BOOM! We had a nice, stacked template.

So what happened??

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It’s possible that the client made some small change during editing that removed that class. It’s possible that on that particular layout, the class just wasn’t included. I don’t know, but what I took away from that was to just check.

This is true no matter the platform. Any time you are using work or designs created by another source for mass consumption and reuse, just take a minute and review it. Become familiar with it. In a way, the HTML/CSS of your email templates is like a manual for a new gadget you’re putting together. It’s tedious to go through it, and wouldn’t we rather just slap the thing together and be done? Sure. But if you take that time at the beginning to introduce yourself, you’re more likely to find little hiccups. You know, before you start putting any real weight on the thing.

 

What I learned this week about Medieval dagger fighting

I’ll not get into why I needed to know this…just trust that it made sense at the time. And it wasn’t because I myself need to wield daggers.

Fine. It’s because this year I am actually planning ahead of NaNo. I can’t say why. It went ok last year, when I had a flimsy sort of outline. Maybe this year I have a storyboard. Maybe this year I started researching things before they come up in the story, and I lose precious writing hours to watching YouTube videos.

YouTube videos about dagger fighting.

And one thing that kept coming up is the Arte Athletica by Paulus Hector Mair and the manuscripts of Joachim Meyer.

Arte Athletica is a manuscript from 1545ish, written by a German fencing master (Mair), and it’s generally considered one of the most complete manuals available today of fighting styles from this time period. It’s technically made up of two codices, each building off of an earlier body of work and updated to fit those more modern times. And it has waaaay more than daggers; have nothing hand but a sickle? My man Paulus has you covered.

Joachim, on the other hand, made treatises that were compiled into Gründtliche Beschreibung der Kunst des Fechtens, or as I like to call it “how to royally destroy a dude’s day.” Where Paulus compiled what was there, Joachim decided to reinvent the wheel. Kind of.

Regardless, each of these sources provide thorough instructions, and in some cases, pictures, that have been used by SCA enthusiasts looking for that authentic Germanic medieval feel.

Daggers were not meant to be a primary weapon but used in conjunction with (or as a backup to) a sword. Ironically (perhaps) one of the only games I’ve played where a rogue in fact fights with a sword and a dagger, instead of two daggers, is Dragon Age: Origins. So kudos to BioWare…even more kudos to them. They brought me Mass Effect.

The bulk of blocking came from the concept of aiming at the wrist, but given its size, more often than not, a fighter would miss, and so the follow through movements of blocking over or under (too soon or too late) make up a good portion of the maneuvers that one would use.

To avoid slicing through your own arm during a fight, a common dagger of choice was a Rondel, a three-sided blade that was only sharp toward the tip, used for puncturing. As one video I watched pointed out (ah ha!), it was the ice pick of daggers.

I learned that the techniques for dagger fighting, as with any martial art, come down to basic principles, the same basic movements upon which one builds.

I also learned that in today’s world, it’s still primarily white dudes who seem to be worrying about this.

What I learned this week about Pardot Business Units

Okay, listen.

I started out with Marketo. I cut my teeth with it, learned what marketing automation was, re-acquired some HTML and CSS skills to make email templates better, and I yelled a lot about how important it was for us to be segmenting our content. So much power.

I say that because now I work with Pardot. Pretty much exclusively.

And it’s different. Different.

There are parts that I have really enjoyed learning, things that I think it maybe does better. There are things it doesn’t do as well. But I’m not talking about that now. Just sort of setting the stage here.

What I want to talk about today is Business Units. Because I’ll tell you…over the past few weeks I have learned a LOT. Almost exclusively through trial and error because the documentation is thin on the ground.

What’s a Business Unit?

I have two very distinct teams – a US-based sales group and a UK-based sales group. I don’t want them touching each other’s data, but historically when I bring them into Pardot, they get all blended together.

Business Units.

Marketo had a similar function back in the day that my at-the-time company considered, but it wasn’t necessary.

Business Units create two distinct databases within a single Pardot instance. Or more. I’m using two because it’s simple.

What are the prerequisites?

Hooo boy. Hold onto your pants for this one.

Pardot changed their connector in February (2019). In theory, if you purchased Pardot any time after that, you’d be using the Version 2 Pardot Connector – this is a prerequisite for business units. It’s also not entirely true? I definitely had clients onboard in April who didn’t have the Version 2 connector.

But that’s the first prerequisite.

Also you need to, you know, pay for them.

Finally, and I cannot stress this enough, you need to read, re-read, and re-re-read the documentation. Plan this out. Know your business units ahead of time:

  • What will the name be? You cannot change it in Setup after the fact.
  • Who will be the admin for that Business Unit? If you purchased BEFORE April 25th, you will be UNABLE TO SWITCH BETWEEN THEM.
  • Which users will be assigned to which Business Units? (see note above)
  • Which Contacts and/or Leads will be assigned to which business units? Like users, a Contact/Lead can only be assigned to ONE Business Unit.
  • How will you identify the appropriate Contacts/Leads for each Business Unit?

Go over that list of questions more than once. I promise if you think you have it in your head and are ready to go, it will not hurt you to 1) go over it one more time and 2) write it down.

Know what you have available

In one year alone we’ve had all of these changes to options. If at all possible, figure out ahead of time which version you have. If you have the earlier version of Business Units, again, you cannot switch between them. That means duplicate user records, if you intend to have users in more than one business unit.

Plan Ahead

If this theme hasn’t been made clear enough, it is so important that you plan through this ahead of time. If you encounter an issue, it could take weeks before it is resolved.

Ultimately the idea is a good one – we have multiple corporate entities that share a Salesforce instance, but their marketing efforts are different, and we need to keep them separate. Once upon a time you would have done this by potentially purchasing multiple Pardot instances and connecting to them to your shared Salesforce org, but with the way Pardot’s connector behavior is changing, that would no longer be possible.

Thus Business Units.

It’s a good idea, and with the most recent updates to the product, they are moving in the right direction. Just be diligent. And plan ahead.