Please help review profile: Exceptional Promise (Digital Technology) Thank you so much!

1

Hi everyone,

I’m planning to apply for the Exceptional Promise endorsement later this year, and I would greatly appreciate any feedback as my imposter syndrome is rampant, and I’m unsure if I need to still strengthen my case before I actually apply?

  • I currently work (not full time yet) as the sole UX Designer and Researcher for a UK-based mental health VR start-up that is rapidly growing, has been funded by Innovate UK, has launched in a few NHS locations, and was featured on the BBC. The results/impact of the product on patients is extremely promising. I am currently redesigning their entire mobile app that compliments the VR product which will be used in upcoming trials, participating NHS trusts, and by anyone who uses the product.
  • Before this, I worked as a user researcher for a new UX lab started by a large charity in the UK, was there from the day they opened and helped them grow, while conducting user research for both med tech startups in the UK and charities.
  • I have a long paper I was the lead author for that was accepted at the ASIS&T conference (36% acceptance rate) and published in the proceedings (unfortunately I couldn’t afford to attend and present it myself, the secondary author presented it).
  • I have presented at a London HCID conference on UX practices/conducting UX research for medical technology.
  • I was invited back to my university program to be a guest speaker for a class to discuss the MedTech field in UX
  • I have a Master’s of Science with distinction from a top human-computer interaction program in the UK

My referees are all UK based:

  • One academic (my dissertation supervisor who is a senior human-computer interaction lecturer at a London University, was the secondary author of my paper)
  • The founder/CEO of the VR mental health tech startup who speaks highly of my work
  • The previous digital lead of the large UK charity I worked under (whose idea it was to start the charity’s UX lab)

This is where I stand. I might have a chance to be on a panel at Ladies that UX in the future, but not guaranteed (I was invited, but I have to work out logistics). I don’t have any experience mentoring, not sure if that’s an issue.

Anyway, thanks for reading this far! I’m trying to figure out if I could actually be competitive for the Exceptional Promise route of the Global Talent visa, and if so, if anyone has any advice on the best way to approach it? Or if I need a solicitor?

Thank you very much!

2

Hi @Sabrina

Thanks for sharing your profile. i can see why imposter syndrome is kicking in but let me give you honest feedback because that will help you more than reassurance.

your profile has some genuinely strong elements but also some gaps that could cause problems if you apply now without strengthening a few things first.

the VR mental health startup work is your strongest asset. innovate UK funding, NHS deployment, and BBC coverage are all strong third-party signals. the key question is whether any of that coverage mentions you by name and attributes the product’s impact to your design leadership. if the BBC article or NHS documentation only talks about the company and not you specifically, it becomes company recognition not personal recognition. you need to check that carefully before you build your MC around it.

the ASIS&T paper is interesting but there are two issues. first, a 36% acceptance rate is decent but not exceptionally competitive by academic standards. second, and more importantly, you didn’t present it yourself. tech nation may view that as a weaker signal because the visibility and recognition came to the secondary author who actually stood in front of the room. you should still include it but don’t position it as a major MC piece.

the HCID conference presentation in London is actually more useful than the paper for MC purposes because you were physically present and presenting to peers. the question is audience size, whether it was invitation based or open submission, and whether there is documented evidence of your participation.

the guest speaker invitation back to your university is generally weak for MC. tech nation consistently treats speaking to students as foundational rather than peer recognition. it can go in OC2 at best but won’t move the needle for mandatory criteria.

regarding your referees, the CEO of the startup is an immediate professional contact which tech nation sometimes treats as an internal validator. the academic supervisor who co-authored your paper is good but has a direct working relationship with you. the charity digital lead is probably your most independent referee. ideally you want at least one referee who can speak about your work from a clearly independent position without a direct reporting or collaboration relationship.

your biggest gap right now is external recognition of you as an individual. the companies around you have good recognition signals but you need the evidence to clearly point to your personal contribution and expertise not just the products you worked on.

if the Ladies that UX panel happens and it is a credible sector event with a meaningful audience that would genuinely strengthen OC2. i would try to make that happen before applying.

on mentoring, it is not essential but structured mentorship would help OC2. without it you need your speaking and thought leadership evidence to be stronger.

my honest advice is don’t rush the application. you have a solid foundation but right now you are probably borderline. spending another 6 to 9 months getting one more strong external recognition signal, ideally media coverage naming you personally or a well-documented speaking engagement at a recognised sector event, would meaningfully increase your chances before submitting.