Evidence Review Request for Promise

Stage 1
1

Hi everyone, I’d really appreciate some help reviewing my evidence before I submit my application:

LOR1: CEO of my current company
LOR2: CTO of a top EdTech Startup serving Nigeria
LOR3: CEO of a reputable EdTech startup in Nigeria

CV
Personal statement

MANDATORY CRITERIA

MC Doc 1: Recognized Leading Talent - Media Features

Evidence:

  • Media Feature Article (1M+ monthly visitors) - August 2024: “How I am championing the rise of no-code talents in digital technology.” Featured as a thought leader in product marketing and the EdTech ecosystem
  • Media Interview - July 2025: “AI’s Impact: A New Era for Tech Marketing in Nigeria” Discussing the impact of AI on the tech marketing ecosystem

MC Doc 2: Leading growth at a chapter of Startup Grind (Powered by Google)

Evidence:

  • Ecosystem Champion Award from the Startup Grind community in that city - 2023
  • Recognition for organizing 10+ ecosystem events
  • Reached 5,000+ tech founders and stakeholders
  • Certificate/Award documentation

MC Doc 3: Speaking Engagements & Thought Leadership

Evidence:

  • Speaking engagement at Marketing Conference organised by a growing marketing community - 2024. Panel: “AI Solutions for Modern Digital Marketing” (500+ attendees)
  • Session on Product Positioning and Messaging
  • Event program/flyer showing my speaking slot
  • Invitation to a Marketing Masterclass Training from a top Edtech startup- 2022 + Invitation email. The Session focused on opening opportunities in tech for non-technical professionals
  • Event banner/promotional materials

MC Doc 4: Additional Recognition Letters

Evidence:

  • Reference Letter from the COO of a Y-Combinator-backed startup, acknowledging my leadership at Startup Grind Impact on the tech ecosystem of the city
  • Reference Letter from the founder of the Marketing Professionals Community + recognition for training marketing professionals.

OPTIONAL CRITERION 2 (OC2) - COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTION

Ev1: Product Marketing Facilitator at a reputable EdTech startup (volunteer)

Evidence:

  • Reference Letter from the CEO of the EdTech startup
  • Training Documentation showing 1,000+ students trained across multiple cohorts (2023-2025)
  • Invitation emails for Cohorts VIII and IX
  • LinkedIn post from the startup celebrating World Teacher Day (tagging me as facilitator)
  • Student testimonials from some students
  • Screenshots showing curriculum/topics covered:

Ev2: Startup Grind - Growth Director (Ecosystem Leadership)

Evidence:

  • Reference Letter from former Chapter Director
  • Engagement Letter (December 2019) outlining my role and responsibilities
  • Event Documentation for 10+ ecosystem events (2019-2023):

Ev3: Speaking & Training Engagements

Evidence:

  • Marketing community platform - Multiple speaking sessions
  • EdTech Masterclass - Panel conversation
  • Event invitation and promotional materials

OPTIONAL CRITERION 3 (OC3) - COMMERCIAL IMPACT

Ev1: Current employment- Product Marketing Lead (2025-Present)

Evidence:

  • Reference Letter from Co-Founder & Head of Marketing, highlighting my impact on the growth of the company
  • Dashboard screenshots + other screenshots & metrics showing scale of impact:

Ev2: Previous employer - Product Marketing Manager (2022-2024)

Evidence:

  • Reference Letter from former Content Marketing Manager, highlighting my impact on the growth of the company.
  • Combined metrics & screenshots showing the scale of my impact on the growth of the company
2

@emmatdayo

LOR authors look okay, but the most important thing is that they should be recognized experts in the digital technology field and know your work well, ideally having worked with you closely for at least 12 months.

Your MC Doc 1: Recognized Leading Talent - Media Features may not fit your narrative. You chose Promise, which connotes that you have the potential to be a leading talent, and your evidence set and narrative should support that. So you are not a “Recognized Leading Talent,” and your being featured as a thought leader may not carry so much weight. Also, 1M+ monthly visitors is the news outlet’s reach, not the number of people your feature reached. You may want to show this.

A media interview could be okay too, but beyond the interview, MC is about recognition. So the recognition element will be that you were invited because you were recognized. Adding the invitation letter and the reach of the interview would show that, because you are a recognized voice in your domain, it reached substantial people.

MC Doc 2: Leading growth at a chapter of Startup Grind (Powered by Google)
Whilst the Ecosystem Champion Award is a recognition element, it does not show that you led the growth. You want to show metrics in terms of sales and user acquisition. Since you are a marketing professional, the award should be shown as a result of your sales performance. Also, with your context, the award seems to be internal, it is weak; the award should be national or international.

MC3: Speaking engagement at a marketing conference could be okay, but you want to show an invitation letter and a video or pictures of you speaking on a stage. However, it is also dependent on the reputation of the event. Event banners or promotional materials are not convincing evidence.

MC Doc 4: Additional Recognition Letters - having two reference letters in one criterion will weaken your application, so you should have only one.

For OC2, training documentation showing 1,000+ students, invitation emails for Cohorts VIII and I, and student testimonials from some students can be okay.

OC3, I think, is weak.

Whilst you have achieved a whole lot, I think you need to give some time to get more convincing evidence to increase your chances of getting endorsed.

All the best.

1 Like
3

Thank you very much for the feedback, Raphael. This is really helpful

4

Hi @emmatdayo

You have a promising profile for GTV endorsement but you need to package a very tightly knit application for final success.

Specifically:
LORs: assuming all thee CXOs have a track record to be called tech experts themselves.

MC:
MC.1: good! Ensure you define the scale and prominence of these publications. If you have an invite email that was sent to cover your story, do attach that so it’s clear you were chosen to be published.
MC.2: championing a tech community chapter is great! Please ensure you also focus on the impact of your contributions, attach any pictures if you have. This specific evidence might also be a better fit for OC2.
MC.3: was this a leading tech event? Ensure you detail that out along with invite for a keynote speaking.
MC.4: please include the first letter as part of the 3-pager evidence doc for startup grind and similarly the second letter as part of the evidence doc for contribution to the community. Two separate letters will not be strong strategy.

OC2: mentorship evidence is good since it’s a structured program. Ensure you attach pictures and testimonials and structure well. If the LinkedIn post doesn’t have significant engagement please skip it. You won’t need to provide “every” evidence to support, you only need to “relevant and strong” evidence.

  • startup grind looks like a repeat evidence and that’s not allowed. It looks like a better fit for OC2 so you can move it here completely.
  • speaking engagements count if they are in leading tech events with large scale. If not then it will be weak.

OC3:

  • ensure you and the letter highlights the impact in terms of quantified core company metrics and is not just a qualitative light letter demonstrating you as a strong employee.

Your application has many strong elements,
Package it well and you should have a strong shot at this! Good luck.

2 Likes
5

I appreciate your help, Pahuja. Thank you

1 Like
6

Your profile has solid building blocks for a Promise application. The Startup Grind leadership role and structured mentorship at the EdTech startup show genuine community impact. Your work across two marketing roles demonstrates consistent career growth in the digital tech space.

For your MC evidence, focus on strengthening the recognition element. Media features work best when you can show invitation emails proving you were chosen to be published. Add metrics about the publication’s tech readership specifically, not just overall traffic. The Startup Grind award needs clearer framing as national or international recognition with supporting evidence like media coverage or official announcements.

Your speaking engagements need more supporting documentation. Get reference letters from event organizers explaining why you were invited to speak and the event’s prominence in the tech ecosystem. Include audience size and the event’s reputation in the digital technology sector. Move your reference letters into the evidence documents themselves rather than having them as separate MC documents.

For OC2, your 1,000+ students trained is strong evidence for structured mentorship. Keep the student testimonials and documentation about the program structure. The Startup Grind work fits better in OC2 as community contribution rather than repeating it in MC. For OC3, ensure your marketing impact letters include specific quantified company metrics like user growth percentages, revenue impact, or customer acquisition numbers. The committee needs to see concrete business outcomes from your work, not just qualitative descriptions of being a strong employee.

2 Likes