Quick question regarding OC1 (recognition as a leading talent through innovation). My current strategy is to highlight innovative product contributions, and I’ve prepared detailed documentation aligned with the recommendations in the guide. However, both of the products I intend to showcase are internal tools built within company. I will have strong endorsements — including a reference from a senior leader (CMO-level) — validating their innovation, impact, and strategic value.
My question is: Can internal products be considered valid evidence under OC1? Have there been any successful applications that used a similar approach?
Would appreciate any insights or past experiences!
Hi @Siddharth_Pawar Internal tools aren’t the best examples as they are limited by their innovation and impact. If you can show a mix of internal and external that would be better.
2 documents for OC3
OC2 isn’t the strongest, so I’m building OC1 as a backup with 2 product-focused documents and a supporting letter, rounding out to 10 pieces of evidence.
But I hear you and it will not add any value there. Thanks a lot
Yeah I wouldn’t focus on OC1. It also requires that you have a patent which is verifiable via Google Patents. Keeping your focus to 2 OCs would make your app better.
If a diff OC doc is uploaded within the two OC placeholders they will not consider it for assessment. If the applicant is dependent on this 3rd OC doc as imp for clearing another OC, it’s going to weaken their chances a lot.