Help with Rejection Appeal

Stage 1
1

Hi all, I need help with the rejection that I received today.

My application:

LOR 1 - Technical Director from a UK based company highlighting my work
LOR 2 - Sr. Researcher (PhD) with more than 20 international publications
LOR 3 - Sr. Engineering Manager describing my work

MC1 - High salary (Almost 8x the country average) along with Glassdoor comparison
MC2 - High profile event - I conducted an online event series with more than 80k viewership. I provided all the links, live video links, and media recognition in a prominent tech media house.
MC3 - Industry-led initiative - I worked with a leading industry initiative with a large cloud provider and trained more than 10k students outside my main job, many of them got a job because of the program.
MC4 - I developed a high visibility product for a MAANG which is currently live and being used regularly. I provided official letter on a letterhead from the global tech lead, screenshots of the product and links.
MC5 - Official reference letter for above on company letterhead.

OC2.1 - Talks/Conference - I was invited to speak for two years in a row in a Tech Conference in a QS Top #100 university. I have provided screenshots, emails, photos, and website links with schedules, etc.
OC2.2 - Mentorship - I have provided two separate mentorship details with metrics and number of beneficiaries. I have also provided proper website links and official letter on the letterhead of the organization. Under my mentorship, two teams won a national level hackathon in India.
OC2.3 - Official Letter on a Letterhead mentioned above.

OC4.1 - International Peer-reviewed Conference presentation - I did an independent research with my supervisor and presented a paper in a publication which was pubslished as a book. All links, certificates, and photos of me presenting were provided.
OC4.2 - Letter from my research supervisor who highlights my work.

Here is the Rejection Feedback from the Proforma:

The candidate has applied with optional criteria 2 and 4 (work outside occupation and academic contributions). The candidate hasn’t provided sufficient information to be endorsed for exceptional talent.

The candidate has not shown he has been recognised as having the potential to be a leading talent in the digital technology sector in the last five years. The candidate has submitted letters of reference, salary information, speaking events, and projects around product development. These are
complimentary, but they do not indicate someone at the forefront of his field or with significant recognition. Examples such as projects with XXXXX are interesting, but he has not personally led the growth of a product or business (although he has supported them). There are few other indications of leadership, such as winning significant awards or building a public profile nationally and internationally.

The candidate has not demonstrated recognition for work beyond the candidate’s occupation that contributes to the advancement of the field. The candidate has shared examples of mentoring and public speaking. Although this is laudable, the mentoring does not meet the requirements for guidance
in structure and selection. The candidates other speaking with XXXXXXX an the XXXXXXXXXXXX do not show how they are advancing the sector.

The candidate has not demonstrated exceptional ability in the field by academic contributions through research published or endorsed by an expert. The candidate shared a single paper, which is almost 5 years old, and the candidate was not the primary author. Although this is interesting, this alone is not sufficient to show exceptional ability in the field by academic contributions.

–

It feels as if the assessment was rushed and many evidences were overlooked. I followed the guide in detail and have tried to fulfill all the requirements. Here are my comments on their feedback.

  1. They mentioned - “Examples such as projects with XXXXX are interesting, but he has not personally led the growth of a product or business (although he has supported them)”
    My Observation: I led that project, even the official letter has mentioned that I led the product development and that I was the lead engineer. This letter seems to be ignored completely. The public speaking engagement with more than 80k views also seem to be completely ignored.

  2. For OC2 - "The candidate has not demonstrated recognition for work beyond the candidate’s occupation that contributes to the advancement of the field. The candidate has shared examples of mentoring and public speaking. Although this is laudable, the mentoring does not meet the requirements for guidance in structure and selection. The candidates other speaking with XXXXXXX an the XXXXXXXXXXXX do not show how they are advancing the sector. "
    My Observation: My evidences clearly mentioned the structure, duration, and format of the mentoring programs. The official letter also mentions how the program was designed along with my contribution. I also provided links as a proof for the two teams that I mentored winning the hackathon. If this is not advancing the sector, I am not sure what is.

  3. For OC3 - “The candidate has not demonstrated exceptional ability in the field by academic contributions through research published or endorsed by an expert. The candidate shared a single paper, which is almost 5 years old, and the candidate was not the primary author. Although this is interesting, this alone is not sufficient to show exceptional ability in the field by academic contributions.”
    My Observation: The research was done outside my regular job and outside my education but in my field of expertise (Cloud). I did it with a research supervisor (PhD) and the persons name is the first author. However, in the reference letter they mention in detail how I contributed and that the project would not have been successful without my contribution. They seem to have overlooked this piece of evidence. My LOR 1 also mentions my reearch work as he was one of the senior researchers in the same org.

Would an appeal be useful here or should I apply freshly?
Anything in specific I should do while appealing?

Please help me on how to present a strong appeal considering these points.

1 Like
2

@Francisca_Chiedu @hsafra @pahuja your inputs would be greatly appreciated.

1 Like
3

sorry to hear that, i wish if i can help you. may i ask when you submitted your application ?

1 Like
4

I submitted it on 28th November night.

Here are the Edits:
29 Nov 2024 09:41 (GMT)
2 Dec 2024 18:26 (GMT)
3 Dec 2024 13:46 (GMT)
15 Dec 2024 22:47 (GMT)
19 Dec 2024 08:46 (GMT)
19 Dec 2024 12:46 (GMT)

I received the email today but the proforma is dated 19th.

1 Like
5

Hi @geekmay sorry about the outcome! You can appeal and should - a. It’s free of cost b. If not anything you will get more relevant feedback and Ofcourse there’s a chance the outcome changes.

Your feedback doesn’t clearly mentions if they cleared the LORs and any criteria at all? Usually they mention for each criteria if it was successful or not.

In your appeal you can redirect the assessors attention specifically to parts of your application and add narrative of how it actually meets the criteria and maybe the assessor understood it differently.

1 Like
6

Thanks for the response @pahuja, that is what surprised me as well - they gave a very generic response. I have seen other rejection proforma and they mention MC, OC# clearly. I will try appealing.

1 Like
7

Yes you should! It doesn’t look right esp if you had it all in your evidences.

1 Like
8

@Francisca_Chiedu please does the 28 days for review, will weekend be counted in the days or it is not counted?

1 Like
9

i heard they are on holiday starting today until January, they also rushed my application

1 Like
10

I mean after getting a rejection, you’re to respond after 28 day window. I want to clarify if the counting of days include weekends

1 Like
11

Its 28 Calendar days, so technically its all the days including weekends

1 Like
12

You mentioned the first point in the rejection letter, which states that “he has not personally led the development of products or businesses.” Based on your observation, an appeal on this point is unlikely to succeed. Here are my thoughts:

I. First, Define: What Does It Mean to Lead the Development of Products or Businesses?

1. Clearly Define “Leadership” and “Development of Products/Businesses”

“Leadership”
Refers to guiding a team or individuals by formulating strategies and driving execution with clear goals. It typically includes decision-making, resource allocation, and team coordination.
In a business context, “personally leading” emphasizes direct involvement in critical aspects, such as direction setting, core strategy formulation, and driving key outcomes.

“Development of Products or Businesses”

  • Product Development: Covers the entire process from concept design, research and development, and testing to market launch, ultimately reflected in market performance, user feedback, or revenue growth.
  • Business Development: Involves market expansion, user growth, revenue increases, and possibly business model innovation or partnership building.

2. To Succeed in the Appeal, Provide Solid Evidence Demonstrating Leadership in Product or Business Development. Possible angles include:

  • Strategic Decision-Making: Have you personally set key objectives and roadmaps for the company’s product or business development?
  • Execution and Management: Have you directly managed or supervised teams to implement strategies into actionable plans?
  • Demonstrable Results: Did your leadership in product or business development lead to significant outcomes, such as user growth, revenue increases, or market share expansion?

3. Provide Supporting Evidence to Prove Personal Leadership

  • Documents and Reports: Such as strategic planning documents, product roadmaps, or annual business objectives.
  • Data Support: Use data to prove the results of your leadership, such as user growth rates or business revenue increases.
  • Third-Party Recognition: Include evaluations from investors, media reports, or customer feedback that highlight your leadership role.
1 Like
13

The endorsement feedback is generic. So you have let them know how you meet the requirement based in the GTV immigration rule and tech Nation guide. Point out how the evidence shows you are recognised leader and provide more context about the evidence supporting your MC. For OC also show how your evidence advanced the sector and contributed to research. Also provide metrics and try to quantify your achievements. This will help the assessor appreciate your contribution and potential contributions to the UK.

3 Likes
14

Could you post what you did for appeal?