Sales / Revenue / CS Operations Expert

$40–80/hr

rate as listed

Workload: ~15h/week
Engagement: Project-based
Location: Worldwide
Field: Generalist

micro1 is recruiting SaaS revenue operations practitioners to generate and evaluate training data for AI systems working on CRM configuration, data integrity, and cross-system workflow problems. The work is remote contract, paid hourly in an observed $40–80 range, and requires that you personally owned CRM admin work rather than managed someone who did.

What the work involves

You are not administering a live Salesforce org here. You are writing and judging the material an AI model learns from: realistic RevOps problems, worked solutions, and critiques of model-generated answers. A typical task might be describing how you'd reconcile opportunity records that diverged between Salesforce and a billing platform after a mid-cycle plan change, then reviewing whether a model's proposed fix would actually hold up — or whether it quietly breaks renewal forecasting three months out. Other tasks ask you to write the documentation a sales team would actually follow, or to grade two model responses to a territory-assignment policy conflict and explain, in writing, why one is more sustainable.

What the screening actually checks

micro1's screen is AI-led and follow-up heavy. It is built to separate people who configured systems themselves from people who sat in the meetings where configuration was discussed. Expect to be asked for object names, field-level detail, what you did when a validation rule blocked a deal at quarter-end, and which integrations you personally wired up. Vague ownership language — "we implemented," "my team rolled out" — gets probed immediately. The second thing it measures is evaluation judgment: whether you can look at a plausible-sounding answer and articulate the specific downstream consequence that makes it wrong, rather than saying it "feels off."

Logistics

Remote, contractor, largely asynchronous — tasks are claimed from a queue rather than assigned in meetings.
Part-time is normal; many contributors work 10–20 hours a week alongside a full-time role.
Pay is hourly within an observed $40–80 band, varying with domain depth, task type, and review quality. Nothing about the rate is guaranteed before an offer.
No AI or ML background expected. Writing quality matters more than technical vocabulary, because your written rationale is itself the product.
Volume fluctuates with customer project phases; treat this as supplemental rather than a replacement income stream.

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Do you have 4 or more years of hands-on experience in sales, revenue, or customer success operations within a SaaS company?
RevOps experience · required
Have you personally configured and maintained a CRM platform such as Salesforce or HubSpot, as opposed to managing others who did?
Direct CRM configuration · required
Have you worked directly with at least two revenue systems outside the CRM, such as quoting, billing, ticketing, or project tracking tools?
Adjacent tools · required
Have you authored operational documentation or runbooks that were used by sales or customer success teams?
Written documentation · preferred
Have you been personally responsible for the accuracy of reports drawn from more than one revenue system?
Reporting ownership · preferred
Are you able to work remotely as an independent contractor on an hourly, asynchronous basis?
Remote contract terms · required

0 of 6 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 10 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether you were the hands-on builder or a stakeholder describing someone else's build.
A strong answer: Name the platform and version context, the specific objects, fields, validation rules or flows you created, and tie them to a concrete process change — plus what you'd do differently now.
Where people lose it: Speaking entirely in first-person plural and outcomes ('we improved pipeline hygiene by 30%') without ever naming a single object, field, or automation you touched.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.