
Guides for each industry, a side-by-side of the two programmes, and what licence-ready data actually looks like. Free, sourced and dated.
Check in 60 seconds whether you fit, see an indicative range, then apply directly to the programmes.
Take the fit check →Join each programme's referral scheme free, introduce clients who fit, and earn up to $50K per company (paid by the programme, not guaranteed).
For advisers →See how many of your companies could fit, run the same checks across the group, and map the portfolio in 30 minutes.
Portfolio playbook →Both license internal records from established companies. They differ on who they want, how they price and what you hand over. Many companies qualify for both.
| micro1 Company Data Partnerships | Mode Data Partnerships | |
|---|---|---|
| Published payouts | Tiers from $100K+, $500K+ and $1M+ | $100K–$5M |
| Backing | $1bn, 12-month commitment announced 9 Oct 2026, with capital from Citi and Hercules Capital | Publishes a pricing formula based on staff numbers and years of records |
| Company size | 30+ staff | 20+ office staff; accounting firms from 10, law firms from 6 |
| Where | Many countries; strongest demand in the US, UK and Canada | Mainly US companies |
| What they look for | English-language documentation of how work gets done | Years of internal records from office teams |
| What you hand over | Agreed in scope after review; micro1 states companies keep ownership | Mode exports and de-identifies an agreed copy; no passwords handed over |
| Process | Short assessment on their site, review, then a discovery call | Estimate, then a non-binding letter of intent, then an offer |
| Timeline | Not published | About three months from first conversation to payment |
| For advisers | Referral scheme with a sub-affiliate feature | Referral scheme with a second-level referral feature |
| Apply to micro1 → | Apply to Mode → |
From each programme's own published material, October 2026. Terms can change; check their sites before relying on anything. These buttons are our referral links: the programmes may pay us a referral fee, which never comes out of your payout. Not sure which fits? The 60-second fit check matches you.
Programmes pay for the work: the problem, the steps, the judgement calls and the outcome. Personal details have to come out first. Flip between the stages to see where people go wrong.
Illustrative Every record on this page is invented by TrackImpact. No real data is shown.
A message on its own teaches little. A message that leads to a meeting, a decision, a document and an automation shows how work actually gets done. Commercial datasets are built synthetically to imitate this. Your company already has the real thing.
user: staff_B
act: request
"Can you review the Q2 budget before Friday?"attendees: staff_B, staff_G
decision: proceed with
Q2 plan, cut travel 10%owner: staff_G
due: 2026-04-05
"update budget + share"doc: budget_q2
v1 → v2 (staff_G)
approved: staff_Bstatus: approved
time: 3 days
automation: monthly
reminder createdIllustrative Invented example. Note the consistent stand-ins (staff_B, staff_G): who did what survives without anyone's name.
What we saw again and again in commercially licensed datasets.
Consistent fields, stable IDs and timestamps on every record. A clean export of one system is worth more than a dump of five.
Ticket to fix to review; brief to draft to sign-off. Don't break the IDs that connect them when you export.
Resolved, approved, placed, rejected, escalated. Reviewer comments too. That's how an AI agent learns what good looks like.
The same person or client gets the same tag everywhere ([client_9], staff_B), so the story survives without the identity.
One row per source: what it is, language, date range, size, contributors and how the team worked. Template below.
Ten to fifty representative records, in the same structure as the full set, is normal for a first review.
Buyers expect a short description with every dataset. Fill one row per system you plan to license.
| Source | What it is | Language | Date range | Size | Contributors | How the team works | Personal data |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service desk | Customer tickets, notes and resolutions | English | 2018–2026 | ~48,000 tickets | 22 agents | Two-tier support, weekly QA review | Replaced with stand-ins |
| Process wiki | SOPs, checklists, onboarding | English | 2016–2026 | ~1,900 pages | 35 editors | Owned by ops, reviewed quarterly | None found |
| Project tracker | Projects, tasks, comments, status changes | English | 2019–2026 | ~6,200 projects | 60 staff | Small project teams, PM sign-off | Names replaced |
Illustrative Invented example for a 60-person services firm.
The four most common ways company data leaks after it has been "cleaned". Easy to miss, hard to undo.
A log of what each tag replaced ("customer_1 = Sarah…") undoes the whole redaction. Keep it internal, or don't create one.
Fields get redacted; notes, quotes, reviews and file names don't. So do business names, phone numbers and short forms of names.
Passwords, API keys, private keys and database dumps turn up in repositories and debug logs. Scan for them before any export.
Scanned documents carry text-recognition errors. Export from the system itself wherever you can.
The programmes state they remove or de-identify personal information. One exports and de-identifies the agreed copy itself. Agree in writing who does what, and have counsel check your contracts and data-protection obligations first.
Much of what matters sits in the licence, not the headline number.
The full checklist is in section 8 of our open guide. Not legal advice.
What a firm in each industry can license, where the legal lines are, published ranges with a worked example, and how to apply.
Ten questions. About a minute. No sign-up.