Firecrawl AI Enablement Lead at Firecrawl owns internal AI usage, focusing on adoption and operational efficiency of AI agents. The role requires technical depth and emotional intelligence to drive change and maximize output from AI tools.
Responsibilities
Own the internal AI stack: the agent harnesses, configs, shared skills, and model routing every team uses. Set them up, keep them sharp, and ship changes as the tools change
Start with the revenue team. Learn how they actually work, find the jobs an agent should be doing, and get them running on it, then go team by team
Bring people who barely use agents along. Sit with them, build their first real workflow together, handle the skepticism and the "I'm faster doing it myself" honestly, and stay on it until it sticks
Work from our token spend data. Find who's burning tokens without output and who isn't using enough, then fix both. The second problem is usually the bigger one
Make cost per useful token a number we manage: model choice, routing, caching, and cutting the workflows that don't pay for themselves
Explain the why, over and over. Help every team understand what scaling with tokens means for their work and why it matters, in their language, not yours
Build what's missing in code (MCP servers, hooks, evals, internal tooling), and track what's changing in Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, and whatever's next so we're working the new way the same week
Qualification
You get why scaling with tokens mattersEQYou think about cost per useful tokenYou teach by showingAI-pilledOften an ex-founderWhat We're NOT Looking ForPrompt-tips influencersChange-management consultantsIT admins
Required
You get why scaling with tokens matters, and you can explain it to a salesperson, a lawyer, and an engineer in words each of them would use. A team that spends more on inference and ships more is winning. A team that spends more and doesn't isn't. You know how to tell the two apart
You've rolled out coding agents or AI tooling across a team and can show what changed after. An adoption, not a pilot
EQ. You can tell the difference between someone who's resisting and someone who's scared, and you know that most "I don't have time to learn this" is the second one. You bring people along without making them feel behind
An engineer or a very technical operator who lives in Claude Code, Cursor, or Codex and writes code. When the harness is missing something, you build it
You think about cost per useful token, and you've looked at spend data and changed something because of it
You teach by showing. Pairing for an hour beats writing a guide nobody reads
AI-pilled, bias to action, all in. You believe this is how work gets done now and you're already operating that way
Often an ex-founder, an early startup engineer, or the person who led your last team through a tooling change nobody wanted and made it stick
What We're NOT Looking For
Prompt-tips influencers. A following built on "10 prompts that will change your life" isn't a track record
Change-management consultants. You should be good at change management. You should not need a framework, a steering committee, or a deck to do it. We need the adoption, done by you, in the room
IT admins. This isn't seat provisioning and license management
