Requesting Advice on Recommendation Letters and Supporting Evidence for Tech Nation Global Talent Visa Application

Stage 1
1

Dear Tech Nation Community,

I am Ravi, a tech enthusiast with 11 years of senior software development experience. Throughout my career, I have played a key role in delivering numerous end-to-end digital products to market. I am currently applying for the Global Talent Visa under the ‘Exceptional Talent’ route and would greatly appreciate your high-level advice on recommendation letters and structuring my supporting evidence

Recommendation Letters (LORs):

LOR 1: Head of Technology, Company A
Current company (October 2022 – Present)

LOR 2: DeliveryHead, Company B
Tenure: ( 2021 – September 2022)

LOR 3: Director, Company C
Tenure: February 2020 – November 2020 (short tenure)

LOR 4: Director of IT, Company D
Tenure: 2017 – February 2020

Clarification Required: From the above, would LORs 1, 2, and 4 be appropriate for submission, considering the length and duration of my relationship with the referees? Do they meet Tech Nation’s expectations for recommendation letters?

Mandatory Criterion – Evidence of Technical Leadership: Current Company A

Primary Evidence: Project Manager letter (Delivery Technical Head)

Supporting Evidence:

  • Records highlighting the success of the project, including revenues generated and user engagement metrics.

  • Analytical reports with performance outcomes.

  • Architectural diagrams and GitHub commit history explaining technical contributions.

  • Screenshots showing application flow and notable features.

Optional Criteria:

OC1 – Innovation:

Scenario: Collaborated with a startup to convert their idea into a real-world problem-solving application.

Evidence:

  • Reference letter from the company’s founder.

  • User acquisition metrics (e.g., 4,000+ sign-ups) and initial revenue numbers.

  • GitHub commit history showing contributions.

  • End-user feedback collected through the application.

  • Application screenshots and videos

OC2 – Significant Technical Contribution:

Scenario: Assisted a mid-sized company in developing and launching a market-ready product by providing end-to-end architectural and implementation suggestions, enhancing scalability and flexibility.

Evidence:

  • Letter of recommendation from the company CTO.

  • Sales data attributable to product success.

  • Signed the agreement letter with the partnership.

OC3 – Occupation-Beyond Contribution:

Scenario: Delivered a two-month training program for Company X, a company founded by a close friend, to help their business growth. The work was voluntary and unpaid. The training resulted in three trainees being hired and who have been employed on a project for the past six months.

Evidence:

  • Training materials and presentation slides.

  • Appreciation letter from the company director.

  • Email thank-you messages from the trainees.

Further Clarification Sought:

  • OC1 Evidence Company is a startup company. We started developing the application, converting our idea and major goals, etc., over the past 12 months. When the MVP was ready, the founder registered the company in the UK, which was 6 months ago. The application was deployed 4 months ago and is working well. does this meet OC1 criteria?
  • Does the voluntary training program described under OC3 qualify as a valid contribution beyond my occupation?

I appreciate your time and insights on strengthening my application.

@pahuja and @Francisca_Chiedu could you please review my case and provide your advice? I would be truly grateful.

Best regards,
Ravi Teja

2

Hi @Ravi_Teja_Jonnalagad, you have nicely put the case together. I want to follow this thread as I have a similar case. Appreciate your sharing. Good luck.

1 Like
3

You evidence do not demonstrate how you are recognised a leader, innovation evidence doesn’t meet the criteria. Work outside also doesn’t show how you advanced the sector. You need to read the tech nation guide. Yes, the LORs letter is not suitable, also ensure the others are considered experts in the field.

1 Like
4

Hi @Ravi_Teja_Jonnalagad

LORs need to be from people who are themselves experts in digital technology. Just from the titles it’s not possible to comment if they meet the recommender criteria.

It’s unclear how many evidence documents are you showing under each criteria and from the above looks like you haven’t read the official guide at all. You need minimum 2 evidences per criteria and need to select only 2 OCs not three.

From the above, MC is not sufficient to meet the criteria - it looks like only an internal project which doesn’t suffice to demonstrate you are a leader in the industry.

What’s your role in the innovation and its impact in OC1? Only 1 evidence is incomplete.

You can confused OC2 and OC3 above: also like mentioned you can only choose two OCs.

The two months training program at a company is not valid evidence for OC2.

Please review the official guidelines and re-organize per the requirements.

1 Like
5

Hi @pahuja @Francisca_Chiedu yes I just started the process by my own. I just got the official guidelines document. I will go through it and amend my details.
Much appreciated for your detailed review.

2 Likes
6

For your recommendation letters, LORs 1, 2, and 4 would be appropriate as they cover relationships of 12+ months, which meets Tech Nation’s requirements. Avoid using LOR 3 since the tenure was less than 12 months. Remember that these letters should come from established experts in digital technology who can provide unique examples of your achievements and impact.

Regarding your OC1 evidence, the startup company with only 6 months of registration and 4 months of deployment may be considered relatively new for demonstrating sustained innovation and impact. Tech Nation typically looks for evidence showing significant contributions over a longer period. If possible, strengthen this section with concrete metrics showing exceptional growth, user adoption rates, or innovative technical solutions that differentiate your application from others in the market.

For your OC3 voluntary training program, this could qualify as a valid contribution beyond your occupation, but you need to demonstrate significant impact. The appreciation letter and thank-you emails are good, but I recommend adding quantifiable outcomes like improvement in team productivity, project delivery timelines, or business growth directly attributable to your training. Recent guidance indicates that letters of reference alone aren’t sufficient - you need additional evidence showing measurable impact. Consider adding testimonials from the hired trainees describing specific skills they gained and how they’ve applied them in their current roles.