Revops Hiring

RevOps Hiring

Build the packet a hiring manager needs to recruit a RevOps or Sales Ops person: role definition, interview loop, scorecard, work sample, ramp plan.

The frame is the scorecard tradition of Geoff Smart and Randy Street's _Who: The A Method for Hiring_ - a mission, 3-8 ranked measurable outcomes, then competencies. It applies to the archetypes practitioners actually recognize:

• RevOps Co-op's five career tracks: analyst, systems administrator, enablement, deal desk, project manager.
• Compressed for hiring into three profiles: systems, analyst, strategist.

Two decisions come before any packet exists:

• Whether to open a requisition at all rather than take a fractional operator or a scoped agency project.
• Which archetype - because most failed RevOps hires are an archetype mismatch, not a competence failure.

This is the hirer's side only. It does not source candidates, post jobs, or track applicants, and it reports published compensation bands with source and date as scoping input - it never writes offer letters or gives legal or HR compliance advice; those need HR/legal review.

The candidate side - preparing for and landing a RevOps role - is the mirror-image sibling mbfinotti/revops-skills@revops-career. Onboarding a _customer_ after closed-won is mbfinotti/revops-skills@sales-to-cs-handoff, a different job entirely.

Interview

Ask before designing. One question per message; offer multiple-choice answers where possible. Skip anything already answered.

• What stage and size is the company? (a) pre-Series A / under 25 people, (b) Series A-B / 25-150, (c) Series C+ / 150+, (d) not venture-track - describe.
• What does the GTM team look like - roughly how many sales reps, marketers, and CS people?
• Is this the first dedicated ops hire, or joining an existing ops team? If existing: who is on it and what do they own?
• Which pain is driving the hire? (a) admin and ticket backlog - capacity, (b) nobody trusts the reporting or the forecast - analytics, (c) problems that cross team boundaries - process and alignment, (d) several of these.
• How mature is the stack? (a) CRM barely configured, (b) CRM plus marketing automation working but messy, (c) full GTM stack including a data warehouse and BI.
• What budget and level is the req funded at - and is that number negotiable if the market says it is too low?
• Who will this hire report to, and who is the executive sponsor?
• Who is on the interview panel, and how many rounds can you realistically run?
• By when must this be solved? (a) a dated event forces it inside a quarter - board meeting, quota reset, migration, (b) this fiscal year, (c) open. A hard date inside a quarter deletes the senior in-house options: the search alone outlasts the deadline.
• Do you want a one-off fix or a compounding capability? A one-off promotes fractional and agency; a compounding mandate promotes the in-house hire, and is the only answer that justifies its first two quarters.
• What is your effort ceiling - how many manager hours per week you have, whether panelists are available, whether headcount is actually approved, and whether you could unwind this in a month if it went wrong? A freeze or unapproved headcount deletes the requisition options outright; low tolerance for irreversibility promotes the contract ones.

Workflow

1. Run the Interview; collect every answer before designing anything.
2. Decide whether to open a requisition at all, using the ranked profile-choice test in references/role-archetypes-and-leveling.md. By value returned per hour you spend: fractional operator > scoped agency project > in-house specialist > in-house strategist, with the in-house rows routed by pain - reporting-trust to the analyst, admin backlog to the systems specialist, cross-boundary process to the strategist - and pain confined to one function routed out of RevOps entirely to Sales, Marketing, or CS Ops. Delete the options the Interview answers rule out rather than ranking them last, and name which you deleted. Re-rank the rest against what you already know about this company: an agency already retained, an in-house recruiter, a fifth ops hire versus a first. Only an in-house outcome makes the rest of this workflow apply - then name the archetype and level in writing before drafting anything else.
3. Gate the req: lock the reporting line and a VP-or-C-level executive sponsor in writing - practitioners call sponsorship the single biggest predictor of first-hire success - and pressure-test the budget against the published bands in the same reference. Quote every band with its source and date. RevOps Co-op's warning applies: "It's better to fight for more money to hire an experienced professional than [to] work with the money you have and fail your new hire."
4. Write the role definition as a scorecard - one-line mission, 3-8 ranked outcomes with dates that are objective and observable, then competencies - and turn its must-haves into a requirements matrix. Sketch what "good" looks like even roughly; RevOps Co-op: "Your job is to sketch out what 'good' could look like - even if it's just a napkin drawing." Score experience level-relative - overqualified and underqualified both score low - and make a vendor certification a must-have only for a systems archetype at a company standardized on that platform. Requirements-matrix rules:

• Write around problems, not tools.
• Cap must-haves at 5-7 and weight them to sum to 100%.
• Keep nice-to-haves as additive bonus points.
• Hold disqualifiers in a separate checklist rather than as negative points inside the score.

1. Define 4-6 competencies and build the question bank from references/competencies-and-question-bank.md: 2-3 behavioral and 1-2 situational questions per competency with follow-up probes, domain failure modes as hard-to-fake probes, and red/green answer pairs as scoring anchors.
2. Map the loop as a stage table - stage, interviewer, competencies assessed - with each competency owned by exactly one stage and each panelist assigned a lane. Keep it tight: Matthew Volm (CEO, RevOps Co-op) argues for one roughly two-hour take-home and "keep it to 3 rounds max".
3. Fix the scoring discipline before anyone interviews. Write an anchored rating scale carrying a behavioral description of what each anchor point looks like for this specific role - a bare number is banned - and require every submitted score to cite evidence, a quote or a concrete example. Interviewers score independently before any discussion, disqualifying signals are recorded separately from the score, and the recommendation is weighted by confidence, not fit alone: "insufficient data" is a valid output, and no single score overrides the loop.
4. Design the work sample from references/work-sample-design.md. Pick the format from the ranked menu there - live mock > paid take-home > unpaid take-home on signal per hour spent, with the unpaid row carrying both the drop-off of your best candidates and a real compliance cost, and the eight-hour unpaid exercise deleted rather than demoted. Then build:

• A prompt that looks like a real defect, not a project.
• A hard time cap.
• A rubric written before the first submission.
• A debrief plan - the debrief carries more signal than the artifact.

1. Build the ramp plan from references/ramp-plan-template.md: pre-start, Day 1, Week 1, then 30/60/90 - branched on seniority and archetype, with the week-one access list, ticket-queue protection, honest milestone expectations, and closing watch areas.
2. Emit the packet (next section) section by section for user validation, grounding each section in the matching example from references/worked-examples.md.
3. Iterate the packet until every item in Pass Threshold holds.