Not Endorsed! Your help in needed for an appeal

Hello everyone,

Thanks to you all for your contributions and comments on this forum. It’s been so helpful in gathering my documents. I submitted my application as a global talent on the 19th of December and got my reply on the 11th of Jan - can not be endorsed under Global Talent

Below is my submission (so sorry if it’s a long read).

About me:
I have about 12 years of experience designing electronics hardware. Working in the same product design company for 12 years and now I am the R&D manager, leading the hardware and firmware design team. I joined, my present employer when it started with 3 engineers, and my contributions have grown the company to over 50 engineers nationwide.

I am a registered engineer in Nigeria and also the co-owner and Chief Engineering Officer of a Tech startup based in Canada.

My Recommendation
1. The Chairman of a Tech company in China who has been our (my present employer) technical partner for more than 5 years. His recommendation is on how I lead the hardware design team in my present company; on the projects we have worked on together summing to over $10million; and how I have handled all technical conversations with their company. Also stating how my contribution has saved them from possible financial loss, boosted mutual collaboration, and increased revenue for both companies.

2. A technical consultant in electronics design, based in Europe. Runs his own company and he is also a principal lecturer at one of Europe’s top universities. He is also an active trainer at the High Tech Institute, in the Netherlands. Over 40 years of experience in electronics designs. He is also an author (books on amazon) and he has some patents to his name for his inventions. He trained me 10years ago and I still consult him on my work till date. He practically knows my history. His recommendation emphasizes my technical skills, and how I have grown as an electronics engineer. He also wrote about my contributions to my present employer - how my company sponsored my technical training with him with details of the training, and how that training has helped grow the hardware design of the company. He also wrote on my leadership skills on how I lead the company’s hardware development team.

3. A senior academic staff of a top university in Nigeria. A Dr and a registered engineer with so many grants for innovation won for the university and chairs the innovation committee of the university. My present employer is supporting some inventions with their school, and I am the one to engage with the school to provide hardware design support and personnel training. This recommendation is on the contribution my company is making in the hardware space in Nigeria stating our products and our various innovations, emphasis on how I lead the hardware development and innovation of the company, and on my support to the innovations works at the department. It also emphasizes my rich skillset and on a campaign, I started last year for specific training for the universities and the importance of such training.

They all have a very rich CV which shows their involvement in Tech for many years

Mandatory Evidence
1. Chief Engineering Officer of a Tech Startup in Canada
Evidence is: Company website, pictures of my shares certificate, 2 pictures of zoom meetings with a Top academic member of a research institute we are collaborating with following a 15000CAD grant won on our product, a snapshot of slack conversations, firmware collaboration on Github, picture of our hardware product itself that I designed, and a snapshot of our email exchange since 2020. Also included were links to;

  • Registration on the government website ( which has my name and my position in the company).
  • Google drive link containing all share allocation and IP declaration documents.
  • Google drive link containing the application form of the grant that we won. Winning the grant meant the research institute could collaborate with us.
  • Website of the research institute showing names and pictures of all senior faculty members, who were all clearly part of the zoom meetings and email conversations.
  • Google drive link containing all my work on the product (Schematics, PCB design, and firmware repo)

2. Proof of High Salary.
3. Top technical training and conferences I have attended outside my country.
Evidence is: google links to my certificates showing all my international technical training, pictures with 2 top instructors in the electronics industries won have trained me (including recommendation #2), a snapshot of my registration for the embedded world conference sponsored by my present employer, a picture with the CTO of a startup based in the US ( they have good international recognition) and a picture of myself and the chairman of my present employer at the conference.
4. Document showing my employer’s patent of a product that I designed.
Evidence is: Patent certificate, a snapshot of a works order from recommendation 1 for the patented product, snapshot picture of firmware REPO, PCB designs, and assembled products of the patented product. Also included were links to;

  • Worksorder showing material cost, and national certifications on the patented product.
  • An award recognition for my company - the product of the year. This is as a result of this patented product.

Evidence - OC2
1. Mentorship: I have been teaching young kids coding and robotics for free, started this during the lockdown in 2020.
Evidence is: A reference letter from the company that initiated the program, a link to the company website having pictures of me during online sessions, a snapshot of WhatsApp groups teaching the school owners in 2021 and google drive links of my training slides and videos.
2. Gave a talk at a high-profile tech event with pictures and flyers as evidence, also showing flyers of an invitation to speak at a university event - all on hardware design and IoT.
3. CAC registration and documents of the association I registered to network hardware engineer. I am presently the chairman of the association. Other board members; the Chairman of my present company (who is well known in Nigeria for Innovation), and the CTO of a startup based in the US who I also helped with an Open source project (same CTO as stated in MC #3 and OC3 #2)

Evidence - OC3
1 Proof of academic collaboration with a university to support research in electronics innovation.
This is as regards my 3rd recommendation letter emphasizing my contribution. Proof shows a letter sent to my company through me from the school for research assistance. Also included are email conversations and messages between myself and the HOD of the department on various support projects for the school.
2 An open-source project that I contributed to sponsored by Digikey and Hackaday.
Evidence is: A reference letter from the CTO on the company letterhead (as stated above OC2 #3), stating how I help in this project by reviewing and designing the electronics board and also fabrication it for free to support the open-source project. He also emphasized my technical skills, wrote on the association we started to grow tech in Nigeria (OC2 #3), and he also wrote about my work with my employer. Evidence also includes snapshots of our email and WhatsApp conversation about the open-source project support, a link to the open-source project, and a screenshot of the page.
3 An hardware project for my present employer but for an arm of the Nigerian defense. I was involved in the circuit design, firmware, and entire product development. It was an innovation to solve a national pending problem.
Evidence is: Media publication of collaboration with these government agencies in R&D. Invitation letter for my employer to send delegates to visit the government R&D center, and pictures of my flight itinerary to the said location, a screenshot of component purchase from Digikey which shows my name and that of my company, pictures of the final product (PCB, and 3D model), the screenshot of the official repo (not git) showing my firmware commit, an invitation to come for testing, and the flight itinerary, and a picture of the product under test.

Other documents

  1. my personal statement where I hope I gave a good story of my experience and tried to connect all the dot of my pieces of evidence together

  2. my CV contains my experience, skills, projects, and lists of all technical training since 2010. It also shows my COREN registration number.

And so the results came in as follows:
The applicant has fulfilled the necessary eligibility criteria to be considered under the Global Talent route.
Details of which area(s) have been fulfilled are listed below:
No

Meet the Mandatory Criteria (MC)
Show that they have been recognised as a leading talent in the digital technology sector
No

Meet two of the Optional Criteria (OC)
A proven track record for innovation as a founder or senior executive of a product-led digital technology company or as an employee working on a new digital field or concept
No

Proof of recognition for work beyond the applicant’s occupation that contributes to the advancement of the field
Yes

They have made significant technical, commercial or entrepreneurial contributions to the field as a founder, senior executive or employee of a product-led digital technology company
No

They have demonstrated exceptional ability in the field by academic contributions, through research published or endorsed by an expert.
No

Assessment panel feedback:
The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to qualify for all of the criteria selected and therefore we cannot endorse this application.
For the mandatory criterion the applicant has presented shareholding documents and product details, training and conference evidence, proof of high salary and patent details. The shareholding and training and conference details do not show how the applicant has been recognised as a leading talent as there is no external verification of his contribution or skills, or the impact of them. The patent and product details do not adequately show the applicant’s direct contribution or the impact or growth of the product. Lastly, the salary information was well presented but without other evidence supporting this criterion it is not possible to award it.
For OC3, the applicant presented academic collaboration, hackaday support and an hardware project with the military. None of these pieces of evidence show how the applicant has made a significant technical, commercial, or entrepreneurial contribution to the field as a founder, senior executive, board member or employee of a product-led digital technology company. It was not clear how the applicant intended for the evidence being presented meets the criterion and therefore it could not be awarded.
Based on the above, we do not endorse this application.

So I am thinking about what I could have missed or did not do correctly. Was choosing OC3 not appropriate?
How best can I approach my appeal?

Help guys!!

Thank everyone.

I am not sure what you want to appeal as your evidence suggests to me that you didn’t read the tech nation guide. Aside your high earning, your evidence of leadership clearly didn’t show how you have been recognized as a leader. Reference letters are not sufficient. Was the patent in your name?
As for the opensource project, aside whatsapp chats and letter what other evidence did you show to verify the claims in the letter ? Since the project is open source is your contribution in the public domain? Did you put a link to your GitHub account? Did you add Screenshots of your actual contributions to the opensource project?

Based on what you have written, I think you didn’t present by our evidence properly.
Please point me to what key points you want to raise in your appeal, this will also help others give some suggestions on how to approach it. I also think there are other points not raised in your assessment feedback as I am suprised it Is not as detailed as some other rejection proforma shared here.

1 Like

Hi @Francisca_Chiedu,

Many thanks for your reply. Why do I feel I have no chance with an appeal? :blush:

But anyway, that can be decided in the coming days I guess.

Actually, in preparing my pieces of evidence, one area where I struggled with is getting some form of a statement from my present employer of my involvement in hardware designs of all their product, since that is where I have worked all my career. Requesting for such a statement would possibly threaten my engagement with the company as my position in the company would mean on only top management can sign on such a document. My intention was to use, my reference letters, which were from people who know my work very well, 2 of which have active engagement with my company. I manage these engagements and they are on hardware product development.

Aside from the reference letter, I had added a google drive link to all my professional training certificates as listed on my CV (this was stated on my evidence document). These are not general training but are specific on advanced concepts of hardware designs, and they are quite very expensive and I had to be physically at these locations because these training are hands-on. So it could only have to be sponsored by the company. These are training to attend if you are really involved in hardware product development. And you would see that training is needed in the products my company sells. I hoped that this would have counted as well, to say, “If you have attended this training, and your employer produces this, then you were defiantly involved”. No one would be sent for training almost yearly for 10 years if there is no impact of the training on the Job.

On the patent; my name will definitely not be there. But I attached pictures of the hardware product itself, google drives to design documents, the screenshot of our repo at the office ( we don’t use github, but gogs), showing my commits to the project (and other projects I am involved in). An email screenshot where I sent the documents to finalize the patent submission. I also included links to testing certifications and production orders for the product. This production order was also stated in recommendation letter 1. I would have thought how can I have these documents if you are not fully involved in the product development and I had hoped this could prove how much involvement I have in the product.

And about the Share certificate evidence. I am really not sure why that is not taken. Aside from the shares certificates, there was a github collaboration and a slack screenshot, pictures of zoom calls with principals of the research institute we partnered with. These are experts in the field, PHD and Masters’s holders at the least and I added a link to faculties of the institute showing their picture and profile. Details of these meetings can be seen on the Gmail screenshot attached. I hoped that my conversion and collaboration with these experts could prove my leadership in the field.

Or am I missing something? Is there any other way I could have shown my skillset and that I lead the growth of the product? Please advice.

I have read on the forum people who had reference letters, shares certificates, and high salaries passed the MC.

MC states
You led the growth of a product-led digital technology company, product or team inside a digital technology company, as evidenced by reference letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work

@PaulTech, sorry to hear that.

According to the Tech Nation Visa Guide:

  • You led the growth of a product-led digital technology company, product or team inside a digital technology company, as evidenced by reference letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work, or as evidenced by news clippings, lines of code from public repos or similar evidence.

In your MC Ev.1 You have only lines of code from public repos part. No reference letters or news clipping highlight your portion of leading the team and product.

MC Ev.3 you were just visiting?. How can this contribute to the tech sector or show you as a leader? No idea what this can prove.

MC Ev.4 this looks like OC3 (technical contribution) to me.

According to the Tech Nation Visa Guide:

  • Outside of your normal day-to-day job role, you led or were a significant contributor to a substantial open source project, as evidenced from compilation of code commit summaries, repo stars or similar metrics such as download statistics, where possible.

If your contribution is significant and continuous, you may point the accessor to look at your OC3 Ev.2.

OC3 Ev.1 is more like OC2 to me.

According to the Tech Nation Visa Guide:

  • Having led in the development of high-impact digital products or services;
  • Having worked as a key engineer in the core product of a start-up, showing evidence as to how you have contributed to its success.

Your OC3 Ev.3 showed only commits/designs (contribution) and media publications (impact). But how assessor will know which part is done solely by you?

Summary: Most likely, you didn’t provide enough context to your pieces of evidence, and the assessor didn’t understand what are they looking at.

Best wishes,
Savva.

1 Like

Thanks @Savvkin

It appears my last post and yours came in at about the same. Did you get to read it?

It looks like structuring my evidences correctly could have been the issue.

Thanks.

You lose nothing appealing. It’s free, go for it. I think you your evidence didn’t meet the requirements of what Tech Nation typically use to assess applicants. Evidence of whatsapp chat, zoom calls is not sufficient to meet the mandatory criteria. The training certificates also is not required for the leadership criteria, it would have be suitable when evidence of continuous learning was a criteria.
For the patent, it was a company patent and not solely your work. It’s best if it was credited to you, a support letter from the company crediting your contribution to the patent could have sufficed.
Anybody can have access to the document so showing pictures and email screenshot is clearly not sufficient.

For the mandatory criterion, did you have evidence of speaking at conferences? Was there an article or publication that talked about you being a leader in your field? These are examples of evidence that external and in line with Tech Nation requirements.
The people who got endorsed with high salary and references letters often presented it well and probably had information in the public domain that could be verified.
If I do a Google search on your name, will I find information suggesting that you are a leader in your field?

2 Likes

@Francisca_Chiedu, well noted. Thank you so much.

1 Like

I still think you can still appeal with your current line of thought and let a second assessor validate the position of the initial assessor or overturn it. You get endorsed or additional feedback to prepare your future applications. Just so you know, there are people in this forum who applied twice or thrice before they eventually got endorsed.

Yes, @Francisca_Chiedu, I would give it a trial. I am also open to re-applying

With an appeal, can you request a piece of evidence be considered in another OC? For example, my MC #3 be considered for OC3.

For my OC3 however, which was intended to show contribution. Is it well placed? or should I have opted for Innovation - OC1? Just thinking…

Though I spoke at 2 tech events and did show that in OC2. One was a google tech event, and another in a university, but that was used in OC2 which I got a YES for.

Anyways, my intention was to use my contributions with my present employer to prove that I am a leading global talent, backed by the media recognition of my employer, the number of years I have been with them, my present position with the company which my salary evidence reflects, my recommendation & reference letters, training attended, projects I have done, my salary, my CV, personal statements and my shares certificate. But obviously, that did not convince the assessor.

Any advice on appealing this?

Thanks

Mr. Paul Just like Mrs. Fransisca pointed out, you lose nothing appealing. This time, just do what Fransisca suggested and point your revision on recognition at your work on a national or global scale, crediting your recognition with that, and I suppose you’ll be successful.

The same happened to me, and I was rejected at first, but on my review, I aced it and got the endrosement. Apply for a Review: Probably a new accessor would see things your way and endorse you.

I wish you the very best, Mr. Paul.

Whatever the case, maybe you should always reach out to the forum. There are wonderful people here that are always available to help you.

2 Likes

For sure, you have to try to appeal. But do not rush. Prepare accordingly. Take a break for several days, open and read Guide carefully again and review your application, highlighting strongest parts that you think support MC and OC3.

You may point the assessor to any part of any document you posted with the initial application (including links you have in those documents, but not guaranteed expert going to click it).

Guide says you have to select exactly two OCs. I think you can switch criteria during the review process, but are you sure you have three strong examples of innovations in your submitted application?

How many listeners did you have at those events? How big were those events? Probably it can be reused to support MC.

The number of years, position, salary, shares, training alone doesn’t present you as a tech sector leader. Rather a highly-skilled worker (Confirms you are one of the Technical applicants section)

1 Like

Thanks, @Princelys for your reply.

I hope I can pull through just like you. Since you were successful with your appeal, can you explain clearly what you mean by your statement;

point your revision on recognition at your work on a national or global scale, crediting your recognition with that

knowing that there is no evidence from my employer recognizing my effort with their products, but I have all my recommendation emphasizing my position in the company (an R&D manager), the depth of work with my employer, and how my contributions have helped the company grow; clearly stating that I lead the hardware development team of the company of all their electronics products.

Just share your thoughts please.

Thanks once again.

@Savvkin

Thanks. thanks for your thoughts.

Would carefully prepare my appeal.