Hi, I’m thinking about applying for the exceptional talent visa, but my background is unusual relative to the kinds of evidence they are looking for. I’m looking for advice or a reality check before I start asking other people to write evidence and letters of recommendation.
My background in short:
-
20 years at a top global consulting company, wherein I led innovation groups in Silicon Valley and in France, and wrote 3 books (with chapters in more), 30+ patents, and enough academic papers to still have an h-index on par with an average professor. During this time, I also did work that is in the Smithsonian collection (deep in the basement…) and was a presenter at many events. But… this was all 10+ years ago and in the cases of presentations, very little evidence.
-
4 years at a top US bank, where I and my group developed the initial concepts for a lot of what you’ll still see on their site today. The issue is that this was 6+ years ago, and there’s very little public evidence of my involvement. Banks being what they are, I don’t have internal documents, etc. Also, being a managing director at a top bank limits your presentation and publishing to basically zero.
-
2 years as the head of technology for another top US bank, overseeing a budget of nearly $500MM. Again, almost no external evidence.
After 2 years of that, I decided I’d rather do something more exciting than a slow moving bank. I had the good fortune to be able to take the risks of applying my experience to help companies grow.
-
2 years as a CTO of a startup that actually launched well, but dissolved when the founder started breaking the law. Because of this, there’s almost no evidence of our initial success.
-
Two years as the head of technology at another FinTech
-
One year at a consulting company, where my role has been to advise clients on new digital financial products. Again, the nature of the work is such that there’s very little public evidence.
So, my challenge is this: the evidence requirements seem to be biased toward things like publications and external presentations, but most of the people who are senior tech leaders in FS don’t do much of that. That was one of the reasons I left the consulting role: I was speaking around the world, and appearing in magazine and newspaper articles, but not making the impact that I did later at the banks (“silently”).
I’m wondering if others have had similar circumstances and how it affects the process. It feels disconnected from the way the rest of the world assesses “talent”. For instance, in a job interview I’d expect to talk about how I redefined the digital experience for a multi-billion dollar mortgage business, but I wouldn’t be asked for proof in the form of screenshots and speaking roles. Is there a different approach?
In some cases, I could probably provide evidence in the form of letters written by people involved with the work, but I don’t want to ask them to do that if my chances are low.
Thank you - any input would be greatly appreciated.