Hello Everyone, I plan on applying for Exceptional promise. Id just like to know if my evidence is strong enough especially the MC.
MC1-
|Evidence 1|1. Client deployment/testimonial |3-page case study PDF:
• Page 1: Challenge, my Solution Architect role, architecture diagram
• Page 2: Technical decisions
• Page 3: a signed testimonial letter on company letterhead from their CTO or Head of IT highlighting my leadership/impact.
MC2-
CEO letter(Co-founder and Majority shareholder) & Shareholding Evidence 2-3 pages:
• Letter from CEO focused on my technical/business impact and leadership in company projects,
• Attach official share certificate or shareholder registry showing my equity .
MC3-
Certifications & Industry Recognition 1-2 pages:
Scan/certification details of your SC-100, CISA, AWS Solutions Architect, Sophos Cloud Provider. MS learn badges
MC4-
Deployment script/project impact evidence 1-2 pages:
• Short write-up on the TLS 1.0 project , focusing on problem, solution and business impact.
OC2
|Evidence 1|Solution Diagram + Rationale + reference||
|Evidence 2|Limesoft Article of Association|CAC, AoA|
|Evidence 3|Audited Account 2023/2024|2 years financials comparison|
OC3
|Evidence 1|Mentee forms signed by mentees + Certification obtained|Comptia Security cert obtained|
|Evidence 2|Recognition of Contribution award from RCCG||
|Evidence 3|Microsoft Certified Trainer (MCT) Badge||
I plan on applying as a Cybersecurity professional- Solution architecture.
I’d appreciate if i can get feedback on how strong the evidence are and what i can do to improve
You have clearly put in a lot of effort, well done on getting this far. That said, to honestly answer your question, the MCs are fair but not yet convincing enough for an Exceptional Promise
Also, I noticed, the OC2 and OC3 evidence seems more focused on documents than outcomes. For instance, financials and articles of association show company status but does not directly show your individual impact, innovation or recognition within, outside the organization or even the tech industry.
Overall, you are on the right track, but strengthening the narrative and adding more direct, outcome and metric based proof of impact, innovation and recognition will help.
Looking at your evidence structure, you have solid technical certifications and good foundational elements, but your mandatory criteria need stronger impact narratives. I’ve seen many applications with similar technical backgrounds get rejected because they focused too much on credentials rather than demonstrating exceptional impact. Your client testimonial approach in MC1 is good, but make sure that testimonial specifically highlights how your solution architecture led to measurable business outcomes, not just technical implementation.
Your MC2 CEO letter and shareholding evidence is interesting, but I’d recommend strengthening this by quantifying your technical contributions to company growth. In successful applications I’ve reviewed, equity holders who got endorsed always connected their technical decisions to specific revenue increases or market expansion. Also, ensure your CEO letter comes from someone who can speak to your technical leadership rather than just business partnership, since Tech Nation focuses heavily on digital technology impact.
For your Optional Criteria, particularly OC2 and OC3, you need to shift focus from documentation to demonstrable outcomes. Company financials and articles of association don’t show your individual technical impact, which is what reviewers are looking for. Instead, focus on specific projects where your cybersecurity solutions prevented incidents, reduced costs, or enabled business capabilities that weren’t possible before. Your mentorship evidence in OC3 looks promising, but structure it to show selection criteria and measurable outcomes from your mentees’ progress.
Thank you @Raphael. for the feedback. It’s quite challenging to focus on Outcome as a cybersecurity professional if you are not in the product or commercial space. I will think about how i can provide tangible evidence
I totally understand, it can be challenging outside the product space. However, I believe there are ways to demonstrate outcome driven value, to highlight your impact, collaboration, and contributions in the tech space.