Global talent visa – exceptional promise (digital technology)

Stage 1
1

Global Talent – Exceptional Promise (Digital Technology) | Evidence Review Request

Hi everyone,

I’m preparing my Exceptional Promise (Digital Technology) application and would really appreciate feedback on my planned evidence structure (M1, OC2, OC3). My background is in product-led engineering, and developer community contributions.

Letters of Recommendation (3)

  • COO, Konga – known me 5 years
  • CTO, Youverify – worked together 3 years
  • Co-founder, Codesmith – worked with during Advanced AI Engineering training

M1 – Recognition as a Potential Leader

  • Alerzo – Product-led impact, funding proof, internal references
  • Konga – Engineering achievements, product metrics, internal endorsements
  • High Salary / Offers – BrightHR offer, prior competitive compensation letters

OC2 – Contributions to the Tech Community

Technical Talks:

  • DevFest (Physical) – “From Chatbots to Agents” | Evidence: photos, agenda, audience size done in Dec 2025
  • Pressable Speaker Series (Virtual) – “AI Agents & Autonomous Workflows” | Evidence: video link, engagement metrics done in Nov 2025
  • Codebar Festival (Virtual) – “CSS Debugging” | Evidence: YouTube link, schedule done in March 2025

Mentorship:

  • Codebar Mentorship: Reference from Codebar as a mentor | Evidence of supporting junior developers

OC3 – Contributions to Product-Led Digital Tech Companies

Manchester City – Fan Experience Digital Product Team

  • Worked on the fan-facing website, migrating it from legacy .NET Core to React
  • Developed user onboarding flows for new fans
  • Designed and implemented fan pages and interactive features
  • Contributed to scalable web product improvements for millions of users
    Evidence angle: Product-led digital work, modern web tech, user-focused features, large-scale impact
  • Youverify – Product Engineering
    Identity verification platform, architecture contributions, feature delivery

Questions for Review

  • Does this distribution satisfy Exceptional Promise criteria?
  • Are virtual talks strong evidence for OC2?
  • Does the Manchester City website I worked on count as product-led work and is this company considered product-led under Global Talent definitions?
  • Any gaps, overlaps, or adjustments to improve the evidence?

Thank you so much for your feedback!

2

You 2025 speaking evidence are too recent. Tech nation states that recent evidence are not acceptable.
Most of your OC2 are not acceptable, the ars all recent. OC3, it’s not clear what your impact is.

For the mandatory, aside proof of earnings what exactly are your submitting in 1 and 2

2 Likes
3

Your OC2 evidence timing is the biggest concern right now. All three of your speaking engagements happened in the last few weeks, which the committee will likely flag as rushed evidence. I’ve seen applications get rejected when talks were done just before submission because it doesn’t show a consistent track record. You need activities spanning at least several months to demonstrate genuine community involvement rather than last-minute preparation.

The virtual format of two talks also weakens your case. Tech Nation prefers physical events with substantial attendance, and past applications I’ve reviewed show that purely virtual presentations rarely carry the same weight. Your DevFest physical talk in December is your strongest one, but you’d benefit from having older speaking evidence to show consistency. The Codebar mentorship is good but you’ll need a formal reference letter from Codebar leadership highlighting your impact and duration of involvement.

For your OC3 Manchester City work, you need to be very explicit about why this qualifies as product-led digital technology. The committee might see it as just another corporate website rather than a product-focused company. Your self-documentation should clearly explain that Manchester City’s digital fan platforms are revenue-generating products, not just marketing websites. Include metrics like user numbers, engagement rates, and how the platform drives commercial value.

Your MC evidence looks solid with the three companies, especially if you can demonstrate growth metrics and recognition at each role. Make sure your internal references show you were viewed as a potential leader, not just a capable engineer. The high salary evidence should be supplementary to other recognition, not standalone.

1 Like
4

Thanks so much for your feedback really appreciate.

5

Hi @Feyikemi_Agboola

M1 – Recognition as a Potential Leader

For Alerzo funding will not show that you led the growth of the company. Kindly note that it is not about impact, I should assume you are applying as a Software Engineer, so you want to show lines of code from public repos or similar evidence, reference letters from experts describing your work. The funding will then support as an external validation that what you led to build or grew was valuable, recognized and got funding Then a news clipping talking about the funding or what you raised add to the strength of the external validation - Make sure your name is mentioned somewhere around the funding story. It’s not about the company but about you.

Konga - Engineering achievements, product metrics, internal endorsements is also tending towards leading the growth of a company as a Technical applicant, product metrics, can support but may not be suitable to evidence your claim of leading the growth and this is why, TN primarily expect the below from Technical applicant

Technical applicants must demonstrate proven technical expertise with the latest technologies in building, using, deploying or exploiting a technology stack and building technical infrastructure.

And

Business applicants must demonstrate a proven commercial, investment, or product expertise in building digital products or leading investments in significant digital product businesses.

These are the expectations as to how technical and business applicants are expected to demonstrate how they led the growth or what thew claim they did. Kindly note that one can be
a Founder/Software Engineer - In that case, both can apply. But it’s imperative that ones presentation is consistent with the skill area and narrative.

Also, both Alerzo and Konga tend to be pointing at how you led the growth of a product-led digital technology company, so, its advisable you put both on MC1, to make a stronger piece.

High Salary / Offers is a complementary evidence and not sufficient on its own.

DevFest (Physical) being physical is good but its too recent, if you are applying anytime soon. As a Technical applicant, beyond speaking at conferences contributing to open source will make your narrative stronger. Codebar Mentorship can work if you have had some physical mentoring sessions

Your OC3 is more like a job description than demonstrating that you have made a significant technical contribution to a product led company. Can you show evidence as to how you technically contributed to its success, compilation of code, a reference letter and what have you, can support too

All the best.

1 Like
6

How long is not recent?