BIM & Construction Coordination Expert

micro1 recruits BIM coordinators and VDC specialists to evaluate how AI models handle clash detection, model federation, and constructability review. Work is project-based and remote, with tasks ranging from scoring model-generated coordination advice to writing reference answers grounded in real project documents.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work involves

You review AI outputs against the kind of questions a BIM coordinator fields daily: whether a hard clash between a duct run and a structural beam is genuinely a conflict or an acceptable tolerance issue, whether a proposed sequencing change breaks a trade's install order, whether an LOD 300 model is being read as if it were LOD 400. Tasks typically arrive as prompt-and-response pairs to grade, side-by-side comparisons to rank, or blank prompts where you author the correct answer and the reasoning behind it. Some batches focus on software specifics — Revit families, Navisworks clash matrices, IFC export behavior, ACC/BIM 360 issue workflows — and others on judgment: RFI drafting, coordination meeting decisions, constructability flags a superintendent would actually raise.

Ratings need written justification. Reviewers who only mark answers wrong without explaining the mechanism or citing the standard usually don't stay on the roster.

What the platform screens for

Real project experience: which trades you coordinated, model sizes, delivery method (design-build, IPD, hard bid), and where you sat — GC, subcontractor, design firm, or owner's rep.
Depth under follow-up. Screens push past tool names into how you set clash tolerances, how you handled a federated model that wouldn't reconcile, and what you did when a coordinated model diverged from field conditions.
Ability to separate "the model says" from "the field allows" — the failure mode most AI answers exhibit.
Clear technical writing. Your justifications are training signal.

Logistics

Fully remote and asynchronous. Batches are released with deadlines rather than shifts, so most contributors fit 5–15 hours a week around project work; some weeks have no available tasks. Pay for this listing is undisclosed — micro1 sets rates per project and per reviewer, and observed rates in adjacent engineering review work have ranged widely. Confirm the rate, task volume, and payment cadence in writing before your first batch.

What they look for

BIM Coordination
Clash Detection
Blueprint & Construction Drawing Review
Construction Coordination
Problem Solving
Autodesk Revit
Navisworks
Technical Documentation
Analytical Reasoning

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Are you currently working on active BIM coordination on a live construction project, or have you coordinated multi-trade models on a delivered project within the past 18 months?
Active or recent BIM coordination experience · required
Have you coordinated BIM work across at least three different construction trades or disciplines (e.g., structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, architectural)?
Multi-trade coordination · required
Do you have hands-on experience using clash detection tools such as Navisworks, Autodesk Construction Cloud, or equivalent, or have you made tolerance and interference decisions in federated BIM models?
Clash detection and tolerance judgment · preferred
Can you provide examples of written coordination deliverables such as RFIs, clash reports, or model review justifications that you have authored?
Technical documentation skill · preferred
Are you fluent in Revit, ArchiCAD, or another BIM authoring tool at a level where you can evaluate model structure, family logic, and parametric behavior?
Revit or equivalent BIM authoring · preferred
Have you worked on BIM coordination under at least one of these delivery methods: design-build, IPD, or integrated project delivery, or on a multi-phase hard-bid or CM-at-risk project?
Familiarity with construction delivery methods · preferred

0 of 6 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 13 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether the candidate has genuine project experience coordinating across trades, can distinguish model-level conflicts from field-acceptable tolerances, and understands the decision-making that happens in coordination meetings rather than just in software.
A strong answer: A strong answer names specific trades involved (e.g., structural steel, mechanical ductwork, electrical conduit), describes the actual constraint or clash that emerged, explains the tolerance or trade-off that resolved it, and reveals whose authority or standard drove the final call — not just 'we fixed it in the model.'
Where people lose it: Candidates often describe what the software showed ("the model had a hard clash") without explaining what happened next: how you evaluated if it mattered, who you consulted, what field condition or code allowed the resolution. 'We made them not touch' is not a justification.