Solved: Hiring Facebook Ad Managers for Client Volume

Hi there,

Thanks for your enquiry about finding Facebook ad managers to help with your client workload. It's a great problem to have, getting that much volume. I'm happy to give you some initial thoughts and guidance on how you can go about finding the right people. It's not as simple as just posting a job ad, and alot of people end up hiring freelancers who talk a good game but can't actually deliver results, which ends up costing them clients. The key is to have a robust vetting process that tests for real-world strategic thinking, not just a polished CV.

We'll need to look beyond the CV...

Right, so the first and most common mistake people make is getting impressed by a long list of previous clients or 'X years of experience'. Tbh, that stuff means very little. Someone could have five years of experience just repeating the same basic mistakes and getting mediocre results for clients who don't know any better. What you need isn't experience; you need evidence of expertise. And the only place you'll find that is in their results.

This is where case studies come in, but you have to know how to read them. Most case studies are useless fluff. They'll say something like "Increased ROAS by 200% for an eCommerce client". So what? That tells you nothing. Was the starting ROAS a terrible 0.5x? Was the ad spend £50? It's a meaningless number without context. A proper case study should be a story. It should explain the client's initial situation, the specific challenges they faced, the hypothesis the manager formed, the strategy they implemented, and a detailed breakdown of the results, including ad spend, revenue, CPA, and ROAS over a meaningful period. I've seen countless freelancers show off flashy numbers that fall apart under the slightest scrutiny.

For instance, we've worked on campaigns where we've generated massive returns, like one for a prize draw client that brought in £107k at 618% ROAS, and another that hit a 1000% ROAS for a subscription box. The impressive part isn't the final number; it's the how. A proper case study should explain the strategy behind the numbers. A candidate worth their salt should be able to walk you through that level of detail for their own successes. If they can't, they either didn't actually do the work or they don't understand why it worked, which is just as bad. They should be able to articulate the why behind the what.

You need a repeatable process for vetting every single applicant, one that filters for this kind of strategic depth. It's not about being difficult; it's about protecting your clients and your own reputation. Hiring the wrong person can burn a client's budget in a matter of weeks and damage a relationship that took you months to build. A good process forces the real experts to the top and weeds out the pretenders quickly. Here's a simple framework I'd recomend using:

I'd say you need to test their thinking, not their resume...

The third step in that flowchart, the 'Expertise Call', is where you'll seperate the wheat from the chaff. Don't waste your time asking them to pitch you or tell you what they'd do for your client's account. They don't have enough information to give you a real answer, so all you'll get is generic marketing speak. Instead, you need to put them on the spot and see how they think.

Give them a scenario. For example: "Imagine you take over an account for a B2B SaaS client. They're spending £5k/month on Meta ads, aiming for a £50 CPA for a free trial signup. For the last two months, the CPA was stable at £45, but last week it shot up to £90. The client is panicking. You have 15 minutes to look at the (hypothetical) account. What's your diagnostic process? What are the first five things you would check, and why?"

A bad candidate will waffle. They'll give vague answers like "I'd check the creative" or "I'd look at the audience". A great candidate will have a methodical, logical process. They'll say something like:

"Okay, first, I'd check the campaign-level settings to see if anything was changed accidentally – budget, bid strategy, objective. That's the simplest explanation. Second, I'd look at the ad set level to see if the spike is isolated to one audience, which might indicate audience fatigue. Third, I'd check the ad level frequency metric. If it's shot up, we're saturating the audience and need fresh creative. Fourth, I'd check the auction competition and CPMs in the delivery metrics to see if our costs have just gone up across the board. Fifth, I'd look at the landing page conversion rate via the platform's metrics, because the problem might not even be the ads; the website could be broken. I'd check these in this specific order because it moves from the simplest explanation to the most complex."

See the difference? It's a structured, logical process based on experience. That's what you're paying for. You're not just hiring someone to click buttons; you're hiring their brain and their ability to solve problems. To do this effectively, they also need to understand the fundamental economics of the business they're advertising. The single most important metric they need to grasp is Customer Lifetime Value (LTV). If they don't understand LTV, they'll always be optimizing for cheap, low-quality leads instead of profitable, long-term customers. They'll be scared to spend £100 on a lead, even if that lead is worth £10,000 to the business.

This is the maths that truly unlocks aggressive, intelligent growth. A manager who understands this can confidently tell a client *why* they should increase their ad spend, even if the cost per lead goes up, because they can prove it will be more profitable in the long run. I've built a simple calculator below so you can see how it works. A great freelancer should be able to have this exact conversation with you.

You probably should define what 'good' actually looks like...

Even with the best technical manager in the world, your campaigns will fail if the core message is wrong. And the core message will always be wrong if you don't have a crystal-clear understanding of the Ideal Customer Profile (ICP). I don't mean the useless demographic profiles most people create, like "Companies in finance, 50-200 employees". That's a description, not a profile. It tells you nothing about their motivations, their fears, or their problems.

A true ICP is defined by a nightmare. It's a specific, urgent, expensive problem that keeps a decision-maker awake at night. For example, a Head of Sales isn't looking for a 'CRM'; she's terrified of missing her quarterly target and having to explain it to the board. An IT Director isn't shopping for 'cybersecurity software'; he's haunted by the thought of a ransomware attack crippling the company on his watch. A great ad manager's job is to understand that nightmare and then show how their client's product or service is the aspirin.

When you interview candidates, ask them how they go about understanding a client's ICP. If they start talking about age, gender, and location for a B2B client, that's a massive red flag. They should be asking questions like: "What is the single most expensive problem our product solves? Who in the organization feels that pain most acutely? What are the consequences for them if that problem isn't solved? What podcasts do they listen to? What newsletters do they read?". This is the intelligence that fuels great ad copy and precise targeting.

It also dictates the entire campaign strategy. An uncomfortable truth about platforms like Meta is that they will do *exactly* what you tell them to. If you run a campaign with the objective set to "Brand Awareness" or "Reach", you are telling the algorithm: "Please find me the cheapest possible eyeballs within my target audience." The algorithm happily obliges, showing your ads to people who are chronically online but never click, engage, or buy anything. Their attention is cheap for a reason. You are literally paying to reach the worst possible prospects.

A good manager knows this. They know that awareness is a byproduct of effective advertising, not the goal of it. For almost any business that needs to generate revenue, the campaign objective should be set to conversions, leads, or sales. This commands the algorithm to go find people who have a history of taking that specific action. It costs more per impression, but you're fishing in a much better pond. A freelancer who suggests running a 'brand awareness' campaign for a client who needs leads is either inexperienced or just lazy.

You'll need a clear process to filter the candidates...

Okay, that was a lot of theory. Let's pull it all together into a concrete plan. When you're dealing with a high volume of clients, you don't have time to make hiring mistakes. You need a system that's efficient, ruthless, and repeatable. It's about shifting your mindset from "hiring a freelancer" to "building a bench of expert partners." This means you need to be just as selective as you would be for a full-time hire, if not more so.

The goal is to find people who can operate independently, who you can trust to manage a client's budget as if it were their own, and who can proactively identify opportunities and solve problems without you having to hold their hand. This level of talent is rare, and they won't be the cheapest option. But paying a premium for a top-tier freelancer who delivers a 5x ROAS is infinitely better than getting a bargain-basement manager who burns through a client's budget and gets them fired.

I've detailed my main recomendations for you below in a table that summarizes the entire vetting process. Think of it as a checklist. If a candidate fails at any one of these stages, you cut them loose and move on. Don't let yourself be swayed by a good personality or a convincing pitch. The data and their demonstrated ability to think strategically are all that matter. Your clients are trusting you with their business, and you owe it to them to put only the best people on their accounts.

Going through this process is definately more work upfront than just hiring the first person who seems competent. But it will save you an incredible amount of time, money, and stress in the long run. Building a reliable team of freelancers is a massive asset that will allow you to scale your own business confidently, knowing your clients are in good hands.

This is the kind of strategic framework we use, both for our own team and when we build and manage campaigns for our clients. It’s not just about launching ads; it’s about building a predictable growth engine. If you'd like to chat through this in more detail, or have us take a look at one of your more challenging client accounts to show you our approach in action, feel free to book in a free, no-obligation consultation with us.

Hope this helps!

Regards,

Team @ Lukas Holschuh