Back to portfolio
Community & GrowthSimulated project
Ambassador Manager portfolio brief
A simulated community & growth exercise for Ambassador Manager. Treat it as realistic practice, not real client or protocol work.
7 deliverables6 tools referenced3 linked interview questions
Objective
Reverse-engineer two real ambassador programmes
Expected deliverables
Programme charterApplication rubricOnboarding packTask briefQuality scorecardReward policyMonthly programme review
Recommended workflow
- Reverse-engineer two real ambassador programmes
- Design a cohort, task, evidence, and dispute model
- Run a small programme and publish an anonymized quality review
- Review the result against the rubric, then package it as a case study.
Constraints and safety
- Use only public sources or clearly simulated data.
- Never include seed phrases, private keys, or wallet secrets.
- Redact private user, company, security, legal, or compensation information.
- State every assumption you make.
Tools in practice
- Notion
- Draft, review, and maintain programme charter and application rubric, with owners, source links, and change history.
- Airtable
- Track applications, cohorts, evidence, quality reviews, rewards, and disputes across regions.
- Discord
- Coordinate stakeholders and capture decisions or issues that feed into programme charter and application rubric.
- CharmVerse or contribution tooling
- Publish programme tasks, collect contribution evidence, review quality, and keep reward decisions auditable.
- Google Sheets
- Track applications, cohorts, evidence, quality reviews, rewards, and disputes across regions.
- form tools
- Collect applications and evidence in a consistent format, then route incomplete or suspicious submissions for review.
What a strong submission shows
- A full ambassador programme design
- An anti-spam and review rubric
- A cohort tracker
- A postmortem explaining which incentives produced bad behavior
Weak submission patterns
- A quest list with no programme objective
- Signup counts with no proof quality
- Reward tables that ignore fraud and disputes
Review rubric
- Accuracy of claims and sources
- Relevance to the target role
- Decision quality and trade-offs
- Completeness of the deliverable
- Clarity of communication
- Honest limitations and next steps
Present it as a case study
- Explain the problem, sources, decisions, ownership, constraints, output, review, and what you would change.
- Show the final artifact before the process notes.
- State what you owned and what belonged to other people.
- Label the work as simulated, and keep any real contribution clearly separate.
Interview questions this project helps you answer
How would you stop an ambassador programme becoming a bounty farm?
What evidence would count for an event, localization task, or educational post?
How would you handle a regional lead who produces results but repeatedly breaks programme rules?