Software consultancy building products focused on privacy, simplicity, and usability.

https://imblue.net/

Remote Growth Specialist (Freelance / Part-time)

I'm Blue · Remote · Freelance / Part-time

Apply for this role

We need help growing signups and revenue for our (new) products. You get to choose on which you want to focus on, and how, within our limits/constraints:

  • Do not use or promote Big Tech services (including but not limited to Google, Meta, Microsoft, X, Reddit)
  • Respect people's time, attention, and privacy; don't spam them
  • Limited budget of €300-500 (fluctuates per month, and grows if revenue grows further) to spend in this role (including partnerships/sponsorships/ads, as long as they're not Google/Meta/Microsoft/X/Reddit ads)
  • We do not believe in providing "Freemium" products; all our products require payment upfront and have a refund policy
  • We do not have, use, or want any social media, including Fediverse (if you have it and want to use it on a personal level, it's fine, but we only want our website, email, and Signal to be our "official face")
  • We do not have, use, or want any blogs or newsletters, especially if they'll just be AI regurgitations to "work as SEO"

Our products can be seen in our website; Uruky is doing pretty well, and we think there isn't much more we can do there, but the others have recently come out of private betas and need attention and care we want to spend focusing on building the products instead: Uruky Site Search, PodBy, FairATS, SimpleSoc2, and PriBrain.

We don't really care about attribution and sources. If revenue goes up in the product(s) you're focusing on, we'll attribute it to you and you'll be financially rewarded as such.

We prefer no use of generative AI/LLMs (we do not offer such features in any of our products, even if a new one is targeted at companies which use them), but understand that's many times unverifiable and respect other positions/opinions. You won't be penalized for using it if you're successful.

We do not have and would prefer not to add analytics to our products (some, like Uruky, can never have them), and prefer to look at revenue instead. Most people with growth/marketing/sales experience aren't comfortable with this.

This is a contract position, we'll pay an invoice monthly. You can work 1 hour or 10 hours, we care about results and transparent communication.

Role details
Remote hiring regions Anywhere in the world. Really.
Timezone overlap No timezone overlap is necessary. We can communicate exclusively asynchronously.
Annual pay range EUR 3,600–6,000
Application deadline 30 November 2026 (UTC)
Expected decision 30 November 2026 (UTC)

What to expect

  1. Answer the questions below and confirm your email.
  2. Every reviewer independently assesses your answers. Your name, email, optional CV and links stay separate.
  3. After shortlisting, an independent colleague may prepare your optional CV for a separate anonymous review.
  4. The responsible person explicitly reveals your identity before interviews or messages.
  5. Interview - Working together: Discuss a practical scenario and give the applicant time to ask questions.

You will have a private status page and an update at least every seven days. Email notifications depend on the company’s email allowance.

Applicant data is deleted 30 days after the role fully closes. You can request earlier deletion from your private status page.

Your application questions

  1. What would you do / start looking into, for any one of our products (please don't spend too much time investigating them, just reading the landing page of any one should be enough to provide a useful answer)? (required)
  2. Share any additional evidence or personal motivations relevant to the role. To preserve FairATS’s bias protections, do not include your name, contact details, age, address, links, names of employers or schools, or other personal or identifying information. Leaving this blank will not count against you.
Assessment information

Reviewers assess each answer against the relevant criteria. Each criterion receives a rating from 1 to 5, with written evidence.

What the ratings mean

  1. Not yet demonstrated
  2. Partly demonstrated
  3. Demonstrated
  4. Strong evidence
  5. Exceptional evidence

The descriptions below show the role-specific evidence expected at each rating.

Initial assessment

Audience and funnel reasoning

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Suggests tactics without investigating the audience.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Identifies a possible cause but gives little relevant evidence or a clear way to investigate it.
  3. Demonstrated
    Identifies plausible causes and explains which audience evidence to gather first.
  4. Strong evidence
    Prioritises causes using relevant segments, customer feedback and measures, and explains trade-offs.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Tests competing explanations, checks measurement quality and explains how new evidence would change the next step.

Experiment design and measurement

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Proposes an activity without a hypothesis or a useful measure of success.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Offers a hypothesis or metric but leaves the test scope or decision unclear.
  3. Demonstrated
    Defines a focused hypothesis, a feasible test, a relevant success metric and a decision rule.
  4. Strong evidence
    Also considers a fair comparison, budget, timeframe and possible harm to activation or retention.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Anticipates limited evidence, misleading results and measurement risks, with a practical plan for learning and follow-up.

Clear communication

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Gives an unclear update or presents an unsupported conclusion as certain.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Reports some findings but leaves their meaning or the recommended next step unclear.
  3. Demonstrated
    Clearly summarises the findings, acknowledges uncertainty and recommends a next step.
  4. Strong evidence
    Explains the trade-off between signups and activation, with enough context for colleagues to respond asynchronously.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Makes a concise, evidence-based recommendation, separates observations from assumptions and states what would change the decision.

Values alignment

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Gives no answer or an unclear one.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Mentions privacy or anti-AI sentiment, but doesn't take a stance.
  3. Demonstrated
    Mentions privacy or anti-AI and disagrees with it.
  4. Strong evidence
    Mentions privacy or anti-AI and agrees with it.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Mentions privacy or anti-AI and agrees with it, with proof backing it.

Optional redacted CV assessment

Relevant experience and learning

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Does not yet address the criterion; key evidence is missing.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Partly addresses the criterion, with substantial gaps in reasoning or examples.
  3. Demonstrated
    Addresses the criterion with clear, relevant evidence and sound reasoning.
  4. Strong evidence
    Addresses the criterion thoroughly, including trade-offs and practical detail.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Provides unusually strong evidence, anticipating limitations and explaining well-supported alternatives.

Interview - Working together criteria

Practical reasoning

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Does not yet address the criterion; key evidence is missing.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Partly addresses the criterion, with substantial gaps in reasoning or examples.
  3. Demonstrated
    Addresses the criterion with clear, relevant evidence and sound reasoning.
  4. Strong evidence
    Addresses the criterion thoroughly, including trade-offs and practical detail.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Provides unusually strong evidence, anticipating limitations and explaining well-supported alternatives.

Collaborative communication

  1. Not yet demonstrated
    Does not yet address the criterion; key evidence is missing.
  2. Partly demonstrated
    Partly addresses the criterion, with substantial gaps in reasoning or examples.
  3. Demonstrated
    Addresses the criterion with clear, relevant evidence and sound reasoning.
  4. Strong evidence
    Addresses the criterion thoroughly, including trade-offs and practical detail.
  5. Exceptional evidence
    Provides unusually strong evidence, anticipating limitations and explaining well-supported alternatives.

Applications at a glance

Received
0
Reviewed
0
Interviewed
0
Reviewers
2
Median to review
— No completed reviews yet

Ready to apply?

Take time to show how you think. No applicant account is needed.

Start your application

Already applied? Enter your email to get your private status link.