[Promise Rejection] - Help me with my Review

Stage 1
1

Hello TN Community,

My TN application got rejected and I am in dire need of your help with my “Review” submission which follows the rejection. Here is a summary of my application:

  1. I applied of March 1st
  2. Received the Rejection on April 12

Evidences Submitted:

Mandatory:

  1. Details of Startup 1 that I founded and still run as a CEO + Recurring revenue of approx 50,000 GBP monthly as of December 2022
  2. Startup 1 Joining a prestigious accelerator among hundreds of applicants
  3. Details of Startup 2 that I founded, managed as CEO and failed but had innovation
  4. Startup 2 winning a regional award as the most innovative pitch
  5. Publication about my Entrepreneurial journey in The Entrepreneur magazine
  6. Product management I conducted in my previous role while employed during my earlier years

OC2:
7) Speaking at a physical conference which had more than 5,400 attendees
8) Speaking at a online conference which - figure of attendees not available but it was published in The Entrepreneur magazine

OC3:
9) Details of my founding of Startup 1 (Licenses, Capital Raised (+1M GBP), Role, etc.)
10) In-depth outline of Startup 1’s technology (Screenshots of our platform and how the important features work).

TN Feedback

Mandatory: the evidence the candidate has provided regarding Startup 1 and Startup 2 and the results and press regarding these businesses meet the requirements for Mandatory Criteria.

OC3: Startup 1 hasn’t generated a substantial sum in revenue since trading began over three years ago in 2019, the candidate’s efforts in raising private investment have been successful and effectively demonstrate the significant commercial and entrepreneurial contributions he has made to the field as a founder. The candidate meets the requirements for OC3

OC2:
The panel discussions that the candidate participated in in terms of reach the talks had in terms of attendance or evidence of press coverage the panels received don’t effectively demonstrate how they contributed to the advancement of the Field. The Paid work the candidate, participated in has been disregarded, as this criterion asks for examples beyond the candidate’s occupation. We cannot award OC2.

As such, due to not awarding OC2, I was rejected.

I am now considering submitting a review with the following arguments:

Argument 1:

  1. The conferences I spoke at had +100 attendees, were on the main stage, and were not paid for

Argument 2: I am wondering here if I can shuffle my evidences around in order to qualify for OC1 instead of OC2 which was rejected. My approach to do this would be to note out the following errors:

Error made by submitting the following evidences as Mandatory Criteria and not Optional Criteria:

Proof of product in market and associated traction through revenue: EVIDENCE 1- Startup 1 Revenue. Should have been submitted as evidence for OC1 and not Mandatory.

In addition, with regards to revenue, we made the error of not including the updated figures: New figure is 86,100 GBP recurring monthly which exceeds that of the founders salary (as opposed to the outdated figure of 50,000GBP reported)

Evidence of innovation/product development: EVIDENCE 10– Startup 1 Tech. Should have been submitted as evidence for OC1 and not OC3.

What do you guys think? Can I reclassify evidence as part of the submission review? And how do my chances look like?

2

You can’t reclassify evidence in a review. Focus on pointing out how you meet the criteria for OC2. Since you are a promise applicant, you require one evidence to meet the criteria. Speaking event should suffice.

1 Like
3

This is very strange, he meet s the mandatory criteria then why reject on the basis on Optional Criteria? I thought optional criteria is optional.

4

Hello Fransica,

Thank you for your reply. Can you elaborate on what you mean by One Evidence?

1 Like
5

As at the time you applied, exceptional promise applicants require at least on piece of evidence to meet the optional criteria.

6

Hey Pankaj, they are optional in the sense that you optionally choose 2 out of 4. But u still need to meet the requirements for those 2-that is not optional

7

Ah yes got it. Thank you

8

Ahh i see, thanks for clearing that.

9

Can you paste the exact screenshot of the feedback

1 Like
10

Hey @JenniferArungal please see below. Pretty much what I copy pasted. Why?

image
image1063×781 262 KB

11

OC2 wasn’t granted merely due to being a paid position, as that inherently constitutes a routine activity. In case you provided multiple pieces of evidence under that criterion, consider appealing the decision and highlighting a particular instance where, for instance, you volunteered. Emphasize an action or aspect for which you didn’t receive any financial gain.

1 Like