Please, help review this profile for Exceptional Promise

I’ll keep this brief, so it’s easier to consume.

Personal Statement
Summarising my tech background and specifically talking about the evidences submitted, and answers to the TN questions for personal statement.

Usual stuff showing my track record over my 8 years of experience.

  1. Career history (African fintech unicorn, and ex-FAANG)
  2. Projects and their outcome
  3. Publications – blogs, medium (over 20,000 views combined), etc.

Letters of Recommendation

  1. CEO/Founder of product-led company I worked at for 3 years.
  2. CEO of my previous employer.
  3. Co-Founder and Partner of a VC Hedge Fund based in the US. He recruited me once, to work on a project that connects black people in tech, to potential employers in the US.

Mandatory Criteria - Leadership

  1. Renumeration and contract information from FAANG company.
  2. Payslips of FAANG company from 2020
  3. Payslips of FAANG company from 2021
  4. Performance-based stock award from FAANG company

Optional Criteria 1 – Innovation

  1. Traction of product from the fintech unicorn – showing usage numbers within Africa, as well as revenue of £2.27M over the last month.
  2. Screenshot of solid reviews of the mobile application on the PlayStore with a 4.3 rating.
  3. Letter of promotion during my time at the fintech unicorn.

Optional Criteria 3 – Impact

  1. Screenshots from the Figma board, clearly showing my contributions in the design of the mobile applications at the fintech unicorn company.
  2. Testimonal Letter from Engineering Lead at the unicorn company – stating how much I contributed to the codebase, took out time to go beyond the scope of work to deliver output of the very highest quality.
  3. Stock award from my time at the unicorn company.

Please, let me know where you think my profile stands – between Exception Talent/Promise.

@Francisca_Chiedu, I would like to hear from you on this.

This isn’t sufficient for mandatory criterion IMO. At the very least, you can/should combine 4 of them into
a. 1 giant evidence of your total compensation.
b. 2 artefacts

Why do you need to exhaust 4 separate evidences out of 10 for payslips/stock-award/contract info?
All 4 evidences are doing the same job of showcasing your total-compensation ultimately right?

Thanks for the advice. An alumni was successful using this contact/payslip of a very reputable international company; so I thought why not.

The reason for this, is that it clearly shows evidence of high renumeration. I don’t think number of documents to show that, would be any issue.

Need to strengthen the MC! High compensation isn’t a differentiator these days. 1 out of 4 documents in MC can talk about compensation but not all

Alrighty! What do you feel about the other criteria?
Also, what else I may add to MC?

@Roxy, @Chaitanya_Bapat, @Francisca_Chiedu , what are thoughts on the other criteria submitted

you currently do have sufficient evidence to meet the mandatory criteria the four evidencee you listed are as good as ! evidence.

Okay. Thanks for the feedback.
What do you feel about OC1 and OC3?? @Francisca_Chiedu, @Chaitanya_Bapat, @Roxy

Because of the monetary impact it fits the “impact” more than the innovation in my opinion. I think for innovation focus is to show “how your product is innovative?” “what does it do to advance the field?”

looks good