I wanted to share the outcome of my endorsement review and the detailed reasoning provided, in case it helps others preparing an application or appeal.
I applied under the Exceptional Promise pathway. My initial application was not endorsed, and my request for a review has now also been unsuccessful.
The appeal decision upheld the original assessment, and below is a summary of the key points.
Mandatory Criteria
-
My recommendation letters were assessed as describing competent professional work rather than sector-wide recognition as an emerging leader.
-
Being trusted by employers to deliver high-impact work was considered creditable but not equivalent to recognition by the wider sector.
-
The title “founding product designer” was treated as a role description rather than an accolade conferring recognition, especially as I joined after the initial fundraise.
-
A reference letter from a colleague or manager was deemed ineligible under the Mandatory Criterion, regardless of its purpose as supporting another mandatory piece of evidence.
-
Salary was not assessed relative to the local (Nigerian) market context, and equity in early-stage startups was considered unrealised potential rather than demonstrated recognition.
-
Being invited to judge at an international university’s design event was acknowledged but not considered sufficient for the Mandatory Criterion.
Mandatory Criterion was not met
Optional Criterion 2
-
Mentorship programmes, speaking engagements, tutorials, and open source resources were acknowledged as community contribution.
-
Participation as a design mentor in a colloborative -sponsored esign mentorship program (Tech4dev) was not considered evidence of advancing the field itself.
-
Usage metrics for my Figma templates (9K Downloads), while demonstrating utility, were not considered evidence of field advancement.
Optional Criterion 2 was not met.
Optional Criterion 3
-
My work as solo designer at an African HR-Tech company was assessed as competent professional execution within employment.
-
Designing systems that are adopted by clients and support contract wins was considered expected output of a product designer rather than a significant contribution to the field. Team and company success was not seen as sufficiently distinguished from individual field-level contribution.
-
My open-source plugin work was acknowledged, but because it was collaborative, the evidence was not considered to demonstrate a significant individual technical contribution.
Optional Criterion 3 was not met.
Overall takeaway
The appeal decision makes a clear distinction between:
Doing strong professional work, even at scale and in high impact environments, and
Demonstrating strong sector-wide recognition and contribution to the field beyond normal professional expectations.
Finally…
I plan to take a year or two to deliberately strengthen these areas before considering a future application.
Thank you to @Raphael, @Akash_Joshi, @Francisca_Chiedu, @pahuja, and everyone on this forum who has taken the time to share their experiences and guidance. Reading through other cases here has been genuinely helpful.
I hope this breakdown is useful to others navigating the process, especially those early in their careers or applying under the Exceptional Promise route. Wishing everyone here the very best with their applications <3