Technical Partner: Agency (Revenue Share)

Hire a Pro Hire Help
1

Technical partner for AAA.

We have a strong outbound sales system in motion. More demand than capacity to fulfill. We need a technical partner to help implement the projects for clients across multiple niches.

% of implementation fee and % of retainer as well.

What you have: proficiency in Make, n8n and Zapier, APIs. Ability to report on processes. Fast response times and ongoing communication. Time availability (we promise our clients implementation in 7 to 14 days, and abide by that).

What we have: ongoing flow of clients.

Ability to make Looms, and process documentation.

We treat our customers like kings, but we are the consultants. That’s our culture.

If you want constant projects without having to worry about sales, DM.

What we offer: AI Recepcionists, AI Chat Assistants, Workflow Automations, Custom Dashboards (and custom implementations in specific cases).

We have a preferred tech stack for the voice agents. If you are able to build this you’re good.

Again, % on implementation fee, plus % retainer on every project. Bigger projects, bigger rev.

Proof of work: Send a screenshot or a loom of your most complex logic (and error-handling).

And your work availability.

3

Hi @Marco_Faccin , welcome to make.com community, I have worked and have experience with Make.com and l will love to collaborate with you on this you can schedule a call Here and you can checkout my upwork profile Here, for my pastworks and certifications

4

Hi Marco. I’m new on the forum and don’t see a DM option (your profile is hidden?), so I’ll reply here.

This sounds close to the kind of implementation work I’m looking for. I’m a Toronto-based Laravel/API developer building workflow systems around Make, webhooks, custom backend logic, client intake, SMS/email notifications, dashboards, and error handling.

My strongest fit is where Make is part of the workflow, but not the whole system: backend/API logic, structured events, webhook routing, human review, logs, retries, documentation, and handoff.

Relevant proof I can share: I have a short screen walkthrough showing a Laravel => Make bridge: backend event => Make webhook => router => Sheets log => Gmail draft => urgent/incomplete paths => error handling. I also have a reliability walkthrough showing queues, webhook logs, retries, failed-job visibility, and operator review.

To get a better idea if it’s a good fit, I’d want to understand:

  • What are your typical implementation fees and retainer ranges?
  • Who scopes the workflow before build starts?
  • Are you looking for pure Make/n8n builds, or also custom API/backend work when Make is not enough?
  • What weekly availability do you need from the technical partner?
  • Would you be open to starting with one scoped paid pilot before ongoing rev share?

If this sounds aligned, feel free to DM me and I can send the walkthroughs and availability.

5

This sounds like a good fit if the first engagement is scoped tightly enough to prove delivery quality before turning it into a broader revenue-share lane.

For overflow implementations, I would start with one client build where the intake, expected outcome, tool stack, handoff owner, and success criteria are clear. The Make or n8n side should have structured webhook inputs, error logging, retry rules, and a short operator handoff so the agency can support the client after launch instead of depending on one builder.

TinyOps Studio can take a paid pilot implementation first, then discuss implementation-fee or retainer share once the delivery pattern is proven. That keeps both sides honest on scope, speed, and support load.

If this is still open, DM me one representative client brief, the expected 7-14 day deliverable, and the implementation fee range, and I can say whether it fits.