Please rate my application - GTV Exceptional Talent / Software Engineer

Hello Friends,

Hope you are well, Please help rate my applciation for the GTV Exceptional Talent.

A software engineer with 8 years of experience having expertise in (Test Automation, Data & cloud Engineering):

LOR’s:
1 from CTO of a friends company: describing work and relation as per the guideline from tech-nation
2 from Sr. Data Scientist of ex-company: describing work and relation as per the guideline from tech-nation
3 from Lead Quality Assurance Engineer of ex-company: describing work and relation as per the guideline from tech-nation

MC1.1 - Lead the growth of a product-led digital technology company as evidenced by attaching three reference letters from industry leading experts:
1 Frontend Developer whom I know for 7 years and had worked together for two years
2 A Test Architect whom I have worked in previous organization for two years
3 A Principal Software Engineer whom I have worked in previous ogranization
Snapshots of recommendation that I have recieved on Linkedin

MC1.7 - Evidence of speaking at high-profile digital technology sector events: as evidenced by reference letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work, and attendance size

  • Have attached the snapshots of me delivering a talk on technical topic along with that have attached reference letter from the event organizer who happend to be a technical person Chief operating Officer in this case (have tried to highligh the impact of the talk, included audience size) etc

MC1.9 - Published material in professional or major trade publications or major media about the applicant related to the applicant’s work in the digital technology sector. You must include the title, date and evidence that you are the author of such published material and any necessary translation.

  • Have attached snapshots of prominent articles from Medium that were published on major trade publications like Data Engineering Things, have also listed other technical forum articles like dev.to , substack and Towards data-science (pending editor approval)

MC1.8 - You command a high salary or other remuneration for your services, as evidenced by commercial or employment contracts with salary information including any bonus and equity options and history of earnings.

  • Have attached the contract of current company, draw comparisons of my earning with other people from my region who are of my experience (glass-door in this case) , also attached history of earnings, bonus and other benefit details

OC1.1 - Evidence of innovation/product development, proof of product in market and associated traction through revenue.

  • Attached app-store and revenue growth matrix of the application that I have worked in the current and past employments as a product led company

OC1.4 - Evidence of employment contract with salary information including any bonus and equity options and history of earnings.

  • Attached employment contract, history of earnings, bonus and contact details of hr, and bank manager

OC3.1 - Having led in the development of high-impact digital products or services;

  • Attached contract from Upwork showing my self as full time independent contractor who has worked for a product lead company (mentioning the product detail, and client details, reviews) as a snapshot

OC3.3 - 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.

  • Attached an active contract from Upwork showing my self as full time independent contractor who has worked for a product lead company (mentioning the product detail, and client details, reviews) as a snapshot

OC3.5 - Letter from an employer wherever applicable. This is in addition to the required letters of endorsement and should be written by another individual;

  • Two experience letters recieved from the past employers along with contact details, email, signature

OC3.6 - Documentation on product designs or architecture diagram clearly showing your contribution. Please ensure this evidence is no more than three A4 pages long and demonstrates your personal work, not that of the company or team of individuals;

  • Attaching snapshots of technical design diagram documentation that I did as an individual contributor

I am planning to submit the application before the end of this or early start of next week, Any advice, pointers or any important thing that I might be missing and can be added omitted or improved will be much appreciated (@Francisca_Chiedu @Maya @hsafra @pahuja) :pray:

Please Note: I have attached snapshots of letters and images in the evidence files and kept the size of all the documents upto 3 sides of A4 size paper

1 Like

Hi @MuhammadAhmadIdrees

OC3 is about showing impact. On company metrics through your work. Your OC3 evidences don’t seem to showcase this.

You have over-used contracts as an evidence which is a weak strategy.

OC1 pretty much has 1 evidence apart from contract which is weak. OC1 is about demonstrating your contribution to product or digital innovation and its impact,

1 Like

Hi

MC1.9 - Articles in Medium are considered weak

OC1.1 - How do you demonstrate that revenue growth was your contribution or innovation? is there any evidences other than you worked in that company?

OC3.1 & OC3.3 - this might fall under outsourcing?!

This is my personal opinion and other colleagues might have other views on this.

Best of luck!

Hi @pahuja , @Maya thanks for the feedback and observations: for OC1.1: I have written the names of tools, technologies and frameworks and my methodology in implementing them while showcasing the evidences alongside: the innovation in this case is my approach and the optimizations that I did on the applications and the impact is the growth of the apps which is the result of better optimizations and techniques

For OC3: for significant contribution and Impact Mentioned the name of tools, and technologies (name of the product) and the impact in terms of audience reach, also show case code commits history from the development life cycle from the Upwork contract.

@Maya for MC1.9: the famous publications actually reside on the medium platforms, as I mentioned in this case (Data Engineering things) (Towards data Science)

OC3.1 & OC3.3: Yes I agree the contract itself is through the outsourcing company which in this case is Upwork: But the work that I got through this contract itself was a product led digital company (and the two contracts are totally different from each other) … reason why I am using it as for this evidence is because to have different variations (If I use my present day employer contract for this purpose it will be a lot of repetition because I have already use it in OC1.1 showcasing the apps that I have worked)

Let me know if you guys think if the above explanation or classification of documents is fine, improved or what can be done to enhance the chances for acceptance.

Hello friends, haven’t heard back? @pahuja @Maya

After documents refinement, the structure of the application looks like the following:

LOR’s:
1 from CTO of a friends company: describing work and relation as per the guideline from tech-nation
2 from Sr. Data Scientist of ex-company: describing work and relation as per the guideline from tech-nation
3 from Lead Quality Assurance Engineer of ex-company: describing work and relation as per the guideline from tech-nation

MC1.1 - Lead the growth of a product-led digital technology company as evidenced by attaching three reference letters from industry leading experts:

  • 1 Frontend Developer whom I know for 7 years and had worked together for two years

  • 2 A Test Architect whom I have worked in previous organization for two years

  • 3 A Principal Software Engineer whom I have worked in previous organization

  • Snapshots of recommendation that I have received on LinkedIn

MC 1.7: Evidence of speaking at high-profile digital technology sector events: as evidenced by reference letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work, and attendance size

  • Have attached the snapshots of me delivering a talk on technical topic

  • Along with that have attached reference letter from the event organizer who happened to be a technical person Chief operating Officer in this case

  • have tried to highlight the impact of the talk, included audience size

MC1.9 - Published material in professional or major trade publications or major media about the applicant related to the applicant’s work in the digital technology sector. You must include the title, date and evidence that you are the author of such published material and any necessary translation.

  • Have attached 3 old Medium articles (including those as it has major viewership history)
  • 3 major trade publications (Data Engineering Things), Towards data-science (pending editor approval) , have also listed other technical forum articles like dev.to
  • Have also mentioned of the sub stack newsletter

MC1.8 - You command a high salary or other remuneration for your services, as evidenced by commercial or employment contracts with salary information including any bonus and equity options and history of earnings.

  • Have attached the contract of current company
  • Draw comparisons of my earning with other people from my region who are of my experience (glass-door in this case)
  • Also attached history of earnings, bonus and other benefit details
  • Contact details of relevant persons for further confirmation

OC1.1 - Innovation - Evidence of innovation/product development, proof of product in market and associated traction through revenue.

  • Attached Snapshots of the App-store and revenue growth matrix of the application that I have worked in the current and past employments as a product led company
  • Have explained how the innovative optimization techniques used in the development process of the application has led to achieve App store and financial success
  • Provided relevant links for the metrics from the App store in this case (Google and Apple)
  • Provided contact details of relevant persons for further confirmation

OC1.4 - Innovation - Evidence of employment contract with salary information including any bonus and equity options and history of earnings.

  • Attached snapshots of employment contract from past employer(X),
  • Attached snapshots of History of earnings from past employer(X)
  • Attached snapshots of Salary slips and bonus from past employer(X)
  • Contact details of HR and bank manager for further confirmation

OC3.1 - Impact - Having led in the development of high-impact digital products or services;

  • Attached Snapshots of Technical Architecture Diagrams along with Documentation as an individual contributor showing the impact of the decisions and strategies adopted through those Documentation and Diagrams.

OC 3.2 Impact - Starting or contributing to open source projects in a way that has been acknowledged by peers as advancing the field;

  • Attached details of the open source repo including # of stars, forks, and about section
  • Attached snapshot of the PR’s and code commit history
  • Attached snapshot of the Past employer project details on GitHub, along with continued contributions
  • Github links for further confirmation

OC 3.3 Impact - 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.

  • Attached snapshots of two experience letters from the past employers detailing work done and success history for products

Firstly Kindly rate the above new modified set (@pahuja , @Maya , @alex_james , @alexnk , @hsafra , @Francisca_Chiedu ):

  • Now I only have 9 evidences in total and not exceeding 3 page size limit

Is it fine to go with 9 evidences (only) ?:

  • Or should I include a cover letter detailing the each document further?
  • I thought of splitting OC 3.2 but have kept that as a single document since these are similar evidences in nature

Please help advice, much thanks again

1 Like

MC 1.9 Medium articles are not considered valid as per guidelines.

MC1.1 is overuse of letters. Letters are accepted but insufficient to prove criteria as per guidelines. Moreover 3 letters talking about the same project won’t even have much difference in their content.

MC 1.7 ensure the organizer covers the audience size and the stature of she event in digital tech in the letter. If you have an invite letter, your name mentioned on their website, any other public proofs please add.

OC1.1 TN won’t contact someone to validate. You need to provide a reference letter if you want it to be a strong validation. Include why is this innovative in first place. Like in last feedback, your OC1 has only one narrative, salary documents are add-ons and do not prove innovation. You need atleast 2 relevant evidences per criteria.

OC3 ensure there’s external proof to validate your impact on quantified company metrics.

Good luck!

1 Like

Here are my comments:

Ignore the salary information. This is not considered INNOVATIVE for OC1. Focus to explain your innovation, which is something new to the market or new to the world. A letter to support it at some point may help.

For all of your OC3, you should present your business impact on your work. Reduce the explanation of how much you worked or the list of projects you have done. These are just list of activities which are not the key of OC3. More than 60% of your evidence space should be reports and explaination of your report to say how it impacted the business.

I hope this helps @MuhammadAhmadIdrees

1 Like

Thanks @pahuja & @alexnk for your feedback: Can you help answer the following:

Now I only have 9 evidences in total which are not exceeding 3 page size limit

Is it fine to go with 9 evidences (only) ?:

  • Or should I include a cover letter detailing the each document further?
  • I thought of splitting OC 3.2 but have kept that as a single document since these are similar evidences in nature

I paid the fees on Dec 9 2024, Is it fine if I submit the application after or before (in this case today) holidays?

1 Like

You can do 6-10 pieces of evidences: 9 is a good number - you can add a cover letter but it’s not really an evidence to prove the criteria.

You need to submit within 3 weeks of paying fees.

3 Likes

If you have space, I would recommend to add a letter, but make sure that the letter helps to support and proof the authencity of your self-authored document.

2 Likes

@Maya , please I would like some clarity, does this mean that companies who are into product development is a NO? For instance I worked tech organization with ERP products asides other products, Does this mean it would fall under ERP Consultancy?

Hi @MuhammadAhmadIdrees

You can add narrative, description of what the document is about and what it meets in the guide and why do you think its suitable. This introduction doesn’t need to be presented as a letter.

Medium articles are not accepted, please read the guide.

Your innovation evidences need to be refined. salary evidence is not considered a strong one. so does that mean you are depending on only one evidence for this? maybe you can split the content you are providing and add a letter for confirming your innovation as external validation.

Have you listed the salary in both mandatory and innovation! if that is the case, then i would advise to omit this in one of them. it is stated in the guide that you cant use the same evidence twice!
For the impact, i agree with @alexnk you have to focus on statics numbers, impact and not your day to day /regular work duties.

You have to submit your application by this week then, if you did the payment on the 9th regardless the holidays.

Best of luck!

Hi @Nikkei

if the company main activity is mainly developing products for others, then i understand from the tech nation guide thats a no since they will be classed as outsourced or consultancy firms. You can refer to the guide for further details.

maybe others in the forum have different view on this.

Right, thanks @Maya

I am almost done with the application part: There is one evidence which is confusing and other friends have pointed:

I attached 3 letters of recommendation and 1 snapshot of LinkedIn recommendation considering it as a similar evidence:

Now after further examining and reviewing: I have noticed:

The attached reference letters are from my colleagues and seasoned industry professionals who are now working in other well reputed organizations, Do you think will it pass or make it?

  • Because for MC 1.1 I don’t have any other proof like, news clipping, lines of code from public repo

Also I am attaching Medium articles just to build a context from where the writing Journey started I know this not considered as sufficient evidence (Do you think it will have a good impression or should I remove it)

Do you have any advice on the above…?

1 Like

Hi Maya,

Thank you for your insights

Regards,

Hi @MuhammadAhmadIdrees

Personally i would avoid adding medium as its explicitly mentioned in the guide, however, if you are adding it as a secondary evidence! not a primary one?! it is just wont be sufficient! then it should be fine.

Apologies, I cant really advise on your previous colleagues, I will leave this to other members in the forum to advise on!

I still think you need to read the tech nation guide. You evidence are not compelling. Aside letter from organiser, do you have pictures of you appeal at a conference? Is this a sector leading event? Publication from medium are not acceptable evidence.

Fir innovation, aside from revenue, do you have evidence you product development? Any patent ? What evidence do you have to show it’s a new Field? Not sure Upwork contract will work as outsourcing doesn’t count.

1 Like