Document Review – Exceptional Promise (Cybersecurity)

1

Document Review – Exceptional Promise (Cybersecurity)

Hello,
I would appreciate guidance as I prepare to submit my endorsement application under Exceptional Promise in Cybersecurity. I am seeking support on how best to categorise my evidence and assess whether it is sufficient.

My primary focus within Cybersecurity is Identity and Access Management (IAM), with particular emphasis on using Microsoft security solutions to protect organisations, users, and endpoints.

Recommendation Letters

I currently have three recommendation letters from recognised professionals in the field:

  1. A Professor of Cybersecurity who served as my academic tutor during my master’s degree in the UK.
  2. A Cybersecurity professional and mentor I connected with through my active engagement in the Women in Cybersecurity (WiCyS) UK & Ireland community and have done some projects with her within the past two years.
  3. My Master’s degree research supervisor, who was also the Head of my department during my MSc in Cybersecurity.

Academic Qualifications, Certifications, and Professional Memberships

Academic Qualifications

  • Master’s Degree in Cybersecurity – Distinction (2024)
  • Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Science – Second Class Upper (2023)

Professional Certifications

  • Microsoft Certified: Identity and Access Administrator Associate (SC-300) – 2026
  • Microsoft Certified: Security, Compliance, and Identity Fundamentals (SC-900) – 2026
  • Certified in Cybersecurity (CC) – (ISC)² – 2024
  • ITIL® 4 Foundation – 2026

Professional Memberships

  • International Information System Security Certification Consortium ((ISC)²)
  • Women in Cybersecurity (WiCyS)
  • ITIL®

Professional Experience

  • Cybersecurity Helpdesk Analyst – NHS England (current role), Compliance and Risk Analyst, Security Administrator – Financial Services Sector

Mentorship, Leadership, and Community Impact

  • Currently mentoring aspiring cybersecurity professionals through Women in Cybersecurity.
  • Mentored over 20 women in cybersecurity and received Top 1 recognition badge from ABC for impact and contribution.
  • Collaborated in the co-development of a cybersecurity assessment template tailored for micro and small businesses in Nigeria, supporting improved security posture and awareness.

Research and Advanced Training

  • Recently admitted to a PhD programme, with research focused on Identity and Access Management in Cybersecurity.
  • Selected as one of 250 candidates out of over 5,000 applicants for an API Security Training Programme organised by the Cybersafe Foundation.

I would be grateful for guidance on:

  • How best to map this evidence to the Exceptional Promise criteria, and
  • Whether the combination of academic excellence, early-career impact, mentorship, and industry engagement is sufficient for endorsement.

Thank you for your time and support

2

@blessingokechukwu trust you are good.

The most important thing is that your Cybersecurity field is eligible. Your area of specialisation doesn’t really matter.

Letters from academics may not meet the requirement for authors being experts, because academics are not necessarily experts in the tech sector. The cybersecurity professional can be okay, but since the person also serves as your mentor, the letter may be seen as biased. Your research supervisor’s recommendation is weak, it can work as a reference letter, but not as a tech expert recommendation.

Academic qualifications, certifications, and professional memberships can support your positioning, but these are not evidence. They won’t increase your chances of getting endorsed if you don’t present evidence that rightly meets the criteria.

A distinction in Cybersecurity can support your academic positioning in OC4. Mentoring aspiring cybersecurity professionals through … is descriptions of what you did, but what evidence are you presenting? A badge is weak to show recognition for impact and contribution. You need to show metrics, reach, and a letter of appointment or invitation that shows you were recognised as an expert to become a mentor.

Your collaboration to develop a cybersecurity assessment template will not show contribution to the sector, innovation, or recognition as an expert. It doesn’t strongly fit into OC or MC.

Admission to study a PhD is not an evidence, but it can help your narrative. Also, being selected to study a course does not show the level of recognition Tech Nation expects, recent feedback makes that clear.

Is it okay if I suggest you read the Tech Nation guidance and go through this platform for useful information, so you can gather evidence that aligns correctly with the criteria and also help to make your narrative better.

All the best.

3

Thank you Raphael for always responding, I appreciate your time.

1 Like
4

You are welcome @blessingokechukwu

5

I think you first need to read TN guide and put your evidence into Mandatory Criteria and two optional criteria, that way It is easier to provide feedback. As it standards your evidence are academic heavy. Also bear in minds, if your PhD is in the UK, you can only apply for GTV after 24 months on the programme.