The applicant has provided an extremely high amount of external links which extended the application to an extreme degree. As such only a small fraction were taken into consideration. Google Drive links leading to evidence housed outside the submitted application were not considered applicable.
The recommendations speak well of the applicant’s work but they do not demonstrate how the applicant
stands out as one of the world’s leading talents in digital technology with current and sustained national
or international industry recognition. Additionally, 2 of the 3 letters are docusigned but not paired with a signature verification audit trail to increase their credibility. As noted in the Tech Nation Visa
Guidelines, letters alone, which are not backed up with third-party objective evidence to corroborate the
claims made, are insufficient to demonstrate how an applicant meets any criteria.
For MC1, the letter is docusigned but not paired with a signature verification audit trail nor is the letter backed up with third-party objective evidence to corroborate the claims made. Neither this evidence nor the screenshots demonstrate how the applicant achieved notable industry recognition on a national or international level in the past 5 years. The Cofounder of company y and Company x letters are not backed up with third-party objective evidence and do not demonstrate this level of recognition either. Compensation alone is insufficient to meet this criteria. Overall the evidence does not demonstrate how the applicant has shown extraordinary ability that places them at the forefront of their field and has gained them notable, current and sustained industry recognition on a national or international level in the past 5 years. MC1 is not met.
Does anyone know what they mean by Third party Objective evidence as evidence was provided for each one of them from YouTube links to snapshots and websites, all documents were docusigned with the appropriate ids shown on each page for signature trail
which are not backed up with third-party objective evidence to corroborate the claims made, are insufficient to demonstrate how an applicant meets any criteria.
This statement is also nowhere on the Tech-nation Guidelines so I am quite baffled even though i provided evidence for everything said by my referees and recommenders
I would really appreciate if anyone can give me more insight on this
Hi Ugo, this is really hard to read - the way you’ve formatted it. Could you please list the evidence you’ve submitted alongside the feedback received? This would make it much easier to review the response you’ve gotten here.
Hi @Akash_Joshi
Thank you Below was the strategy I used :
Here is my strategy
3 letters of recommendation
LOR 1 from CEO at company A
LOR 2 from CEO at company B
LOR from Engineering manager at Company C
Mandatory Criteria
Letter of reference from Former Manager of Product Marketing at Company C to show “You led the marketing or business development at a product-led digital technology company, demonstrably enabling substantial revenue and/or customer growth or major commercial success”
Evidence of leading growth in company C to add a backup to the reference letter (snapshots of growth within the company from when I joined till date)
Reference letter from the CEO of large product community where I volunteer and mentor aspiring product managers
Reference letter and commendation letter from the founder of a fashion tech product, I did pro bono work as product advisor to guide the product and business development
Evidence of being a contributor to the large tech sector - for the product community (Pictures and Youtube links of being a speaker at the Product community which had over 200 attendees )
Evidence to show I command a high salary comparing with global payscale.
Optional Criteria 1
Evidence of consistent innovation - describing the problem statement, solution, and impact of the products I have worked on in companies A, B and C in the different industries
Evidence of innovation 2 - Graphic pictures showing the innovation in the different products
Letter of reference from CFO of company B attesting to the innovation in one of the Ed Tech products that was a national project.
Optional Criteria 3 - They already said Yes to this. I am not adding anything new here, already so will be submitting the same documents I submitted before.
Feedback :
The applicant has chosen the exceptional talent pathway via OC1 and OC3.
The applicant has provided an extremely high amount of external links which extended the application to an extreme degree. As such, only a small fraction were taken into consideration. Google Drive links leading to evidence housed outside the submitted application were not considered applicable.
The recommendations speak well of the applicant’s work but they do not demonstrate how the applicant stands out as one of the world’s leading talents in digital technology with current and sustained national or international industry recognition. Additionally, 2 of the 3 letters are docusigned but not paired with a signature verification audit trail to increase their credibility. As noted in the Tech Nation Visa Guidelines, letters alone, which are not backed up with third-party objective evidence to corroborate the claims made, are insufficient to demonstrate how an applicant meets any criteria.
For MC1, the Product Marketing Manager letter is docusigned but not paired with a signature verification audit trail nor is the letter backed up with third-party objective evidence to corroborate the claims made. Neither this evidence nor the Company C screenshots demonstrate how the applicant achieved notable industry recognition on a national or international level in the past 5 years. The Company D Co-founder and Company E letters are not backed up with third-party objective evidence and do not demonstrate this level of recognition either. Compensation alone is insufficient to meet this criteria. Overall the evidence does not demonstrate how the applicant has shown extraordinary ability that places them at the forefront of their field and has gained them notable, current and sustained industry recognition on a national or international level in the past 5 years. MC1 is not met.
For OC1, the Innovation examples (Submitted 4 different Innovations, which I took the forefront in developing and which advanced the sector in Nigeria) do not exhibit notable sector-advancing innovation amongst preexisting global solutions nor do they demonstrate pioneering a new field. Additionally, the Innovation example relies on unverified self- authored text and a letter which is not sufficiently backed up with third-party objective evidence which is insufficient evidence. OC1 is not met.
For OC3, the Company C examples are sufficient to show contribution to a product-led digital technology company. OC3 is met.
Company D and Company E are Probono case so it was work out of my normal day to day activities.
Hi @Ugo The feedback is quite self-explanatory. Without actually seeing the full application its very tough to comment on rejection feedbacks as the quality of content is a big determining factor.
Your evidence package needs stronger third-party validation. Technation committee doesn’t click on external links - so GDrive links are invalid. For the Product Marketing Manager letter, include verifiable metrics like “% revenue increase under your leadership” from audited financial statements.
Additionally, from the feedback it’s clear that even though you signed the letters via Docusign, you didn’t attach the supplementary metadata generated by it. Did you read through the official docs carefully, or get your application checked by someone before submission?
What if the external link has only recent year information. What if the high profile speaking event was held on 2022-2023 where the information of the event is not in website. But still the website is valid one. How do we show the evidence. I have the invitation letter from the event organizer, speaker flyer from the committee, and few stage photos. Still I can give the external link of the event but the info is not there in site. How to still prove them?
No need to add external link to the event. Pictures from the event, programme of event, invitation letter and email should be fine. If the organisers are will they can provide a reference letter.