Software Engineer (AR VR Developer) - Rejection

Hello Everyone,

Hope you are well

I got rejection mail saying that I met none of their criterias. I am Augmented/Virtual Reality Developer having more than 9 years of experience, worked for many company and developed many innovative solutions for their clients.

I submitted on 14th Oct and got rejection mail today(17th Nov)

Documents I submitted

MC

You led the growth of a product-led digital technology company, product or team inside a digital technology company,as evidenced by reference,letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work, or as evidenced by news clippings, lines of code from public repos or similar evidence.

Reference letter from CEO of past employers describing my work, skills, contribution of company growth

You led the growth of a non-profit organisation or social enterprise with a specific focus on the digital technology sector, as evidenced by reference letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work, or as evidenced by news clippings or similar evidence.

Reference letter from director of non profile organisation for whom I worked and developed many web based simulation helping them proving effective training simulation of medical/surgical procedures. I added links of each simulations and details of how they work

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.

I developed many augmented and virtual reality applications/simulation and published on App Store and Play Store. I added links of them and screenshot of Github account confirming that I was developer of these. Many of them have more than 10K downloads worldwide

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.

Offer latter with salary, increment letter and income tax return for history of earning

OC 1 - Innovation (2 evidences)

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

The products(Apps,AR-VR Simulations) I developed for different clients of my employers when I was working for them. I shared links, screenshots and how innovate they are. I developed many AR VR simulations to help them fulfilling their business needs.

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

- Offer letter, increment letter from past and current employer

OC 3 - Impact(3 evidences)

Employment contract with salary information including any bonus and equity options (although you will have to demonstrate how you have made a significant impact in the sector beyond your day-to-day activities)
- Offer letter, increment letter from past and current employer, work I did in different impactful project(screenshots, links and description)

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

Letter from President of the company saying how I contributed on project (commercially and technically)

GitHub account that contains lines of code clearly showing your continuing contribution.
Company Github account screenshots and commit and impact of product on people


Tech Nation Feedback

The applicant has applied for Exceptional Talent based on Optional Criteria 1 and 3.
The candidate has not shown he is recognised as a leading talent in the digital technology sector in the last five years. The candidate hasn’t shown extraordinary ability by sustained national or international recognition or demonstrated a level of expertise which places him at the forefront of his field in the digital technology sector. He has not been awarded any external prizes or won any awards from the Unity community of developers. He has made a keynote presentation at any leading conference on immersive technologies. He has not been endorsed by any individual who would be considered as a leading talent in digital technology in general or immersive technologies in particular. The applicant has primarily worked for development agencies and has not directly worked for for any product-led digital company as defined by Tech Nation. Finally, the candidate’s remuneration as submitted evidence is not enough to indicate leading talent.

The candidate has not demonstrated either impact or innovation in the sector as per the definition in the guidance. The work outlined is not in a new field or concept and the applicant has not been working for any product-led digital technology company.

The applicant has submitted his GitHub profile as evidence. He has 2 repositories, one with 8 commits and the other with 19. No releases have ever been published and there have been other contributions. An applicant for Exceptional talent would be expected to have made a more significant contribution to
the open source community. The applicant did not lead the growth of a non-profit company. He created several web-based simulations for training as part of a contract for service. No details have been provided to show the impact arising from this contribution.

As per my understanding they have not looked into the evidences properly.

@Francisca_Chiedu and others guys can you please look into this

Hello @Samuel

Sorry to hear about the response that you got. I am sure it must have come a disappointment.

But not to worry, I am sure a resubmission would turn out positive.

As a super comment, I have read that showing proof for OC1 is a hard nut to crack.

A few things that I would like to point out about your submission.

  1. I think that the key problem is clear based on this comment:

The applicant has submitted his GitHub profile as evidence. He has 2 repositories, one with 8 commits and the other with 19. No releases have ever been published and there have been other contributions. An applicant for Exceptional talent would be expected to have made a more significant contribution to the open source community.

While I agree that having just 2 repos for a 9-year experience may not be superficially adequate, this comment indicates a subjective assessment of what significant contribution is especially as a AR/VR developer where is it more difficult to have real open-source projects and more so, considering that the field itself is younger.

  1. The highlight 1 is also related to this:

Finally, the candidate’s remuneration as submitted evidence is not enough to indicate leading talent.

Going forward, you may want to back check what your remuneration would have been when you received your letter in the past before the exchange rate became a disadvantage. E.g. If your salary was XXX in 2015, exchange rate was probably better. If this doesn’t apply, you may want to use a different OC.

  1. This comment: The applicant has primarily worked for development agencies and has not directly worked for for any product-led digital company as defined by Tech Nation. is very important for the GTV. I think you should really look into this.

  2. As a Tech leader, it would required for you to have contributed significantly to the community outside your “paid” work. I believe that in the short term, this can be fixed. For instance organizing a series of YouTube sessions to talk teach about your specialisation. There are also a few outlets where you may be able to exercise this

Overall, I totally believe that with the same evidences, you may easily get endorsed for exceptional promise rather than exceptional leader.

I think appealing this current decision would be difficult because of the comment about your recommenders.
He has not been endorsed by any individual who would be considered as a leading talent in digital technology in general or immersive technologies in particular.

Not one of the LORs was deemed suitable.

If you think that without adding any more crucial evidence to your appeal, you may appeal the decision highlighting areas within your evidences that address the concerns raised. For instance, pointing the case officer to salary pay grade in your home country. Because exchange to GBP may have been a disservice to you.

All the best.

Disclaimer: I am no expert at this. I have only commented based on my readings on this forum and in the tech nation visa guide.

Thanks @ask4jubad for you feedback. I would like to highlight few things

Well I have more than 30 repos where I pushed all codes of my projects but I cannot make them public. These two repos are my own which I created early this year to help new developer to use this as white lable template. Since I could not share private repos I took screenshots of my contribution and and shared as evidences. I think they considered only these two repos as evidences for significant contribution

Actually I mentioned that as well. When I joined ABC company and after one year I got increment and also compare with salary of that time

I am surprised with this point. From the first year of my career I have worked for companies which are product-lead digital company. I mean their main work is to create software, websites, AR-VR application, mobile application and these are their main revenue source which I believe fulfils the definition of product lead digital company. In face many of them have their own digital products.

I have worked for non profit organisation and helped them creating web-based learning simulations which have been helping them providing effective training, cost effective and many more benefits. I mentioned this we well

Again this is very surprising to me. The recommenders are CEO/Team Leader and Founder of Tech company. They all are running business as software development company. Two of them are specifically working on immersive technologies(AR and VR) where I was main developer for their projects.

Thanks @ask4jubad for the points if you think there should be more points I need to look inot please feel free to reply

Hi @Samuel once again.

It appears as though, the evidences that you provided were not well reviewed.

That’s not for “us” to say. What’s important now is to reemphasize the points that you mentioned.

Regarding
Well I have more than 30 repos where I pushed all codes of my projects but I cannot make them public. These two repos are my own which I created early this year to help new developer to use this as white lable template. Since I could not share private repos I took screenshots of my contribution and and shared as evidences. I think they considered only these two repos as evidences for significant contribution,

I think that because the 2 repos are within this year, it may be that they considered it to have been created only for the purpose of the GTV. You can demonstrate the impact still by showing, for instance, how many forks, or clones have happened on the repo (100 is a good number), the richness of the documentation backing the template that you released or where the template has been converted to a full product by someone else. In addition, you can mention the fact that you have more repos that are private and you can only share analytics and not what they are exactly.

The above is in fact a point to your work outside paid employment must be spotlighted. This is even more crucial when you are applying as a Tech Leader.

I would like to ask; the Letters of Reference that you submitted for MC, are they in addition to the statutory LORs or same as the LORs? And just to be clear, beware that being CEO of a Tech business doesn’t qualify one as leading talent in digital technology. Rather, the recognitions and contributions that such people have made in the digital space. For instance, a CEO of a Tech company that has raised about $2m should be a beginning, spoken at a large tech conference, engaged with the public tech space in a non-work environment and grown organizational capacity on a large scale.

I still do think that you have a fair chance of an appeal. But, your position statement has to superbly strong since there are now impressions about you not talking in a conference amid others which are expected of an Exceptional Tech Leader.

Note that if you decide to appeal the decision, here are the things to consider:

Recommendations: Source: Tech Nation Visa Guide

  • Review enables you to identify any mistakes in processing your application, it should not be used to only argue against the endorsement decision.
  • When submitting a Review, keep your arguments as concise and clear as possible, this helps the Review assessor to consider your case.
  • Focus the contents of your Review on any mistakes in processing your application that you have identified.
  • Submitting complex or excessive amounts of information is unlikely to strengthen your Review or assist the process.
  • New evidence cannot be submitted under Review and attempting to do so may hinder the Review process.
  • As you cannot change your original application, carefully consider whether the mistake you have identified will change the outcome without new evidence.

If you decide not to request a Review, you can still consider whether to make a new Global Talent application for endorsement. If you do make a new application, carefully consider how you might improve your application based on the previous endorsement decision and the feedback that is provided. Alternatively, you can apply for a different visa route if you meet the relevant criteria. Both of these options will require you to pay a new application fee.

Yes I can show impact of these repo. However I think this repos are more relevant to OC2 (outside immediate occupation) and I selected OC1 and OC3.

Yes- Reference letters for MC are addition to LOR and from different people from same orgranisation. Team leader gave LOR and CEO gave reference letter for MC

Yes I can show impact of these repo. However I think this repos are more relevant to OC2 (outside immediate occupation) and I selected OC1 and OC3.

Exactly, the OC2 would have been easier to demonstrate with the repos.

Yes- Reference letters for MC are addition to LOR and from different people from same orgranisation. Team leader gave LOR and CEO gave reference letter for MC

Don’t you think, it would have been better to switch things up? I.e., LOR from CEO and then, reference for MC from Team Lead, since they know your work directly.

Sorry to hear about this.
I read through your application and the comments from the reviewers. I am inclined towards the reviewers but let me share my thoughts which can help you appeal.

OC1 - Innovation. It’s a category where one must showcase the innovation they have done within the digital sector. Innovation is something absolutely new or a new way to solve the problem.
How do you think showing salary and offer letter proves you innovated?
Do understand the competition not about the best employee but an exceptional talent. I know someone who got a feedback stating this person has done amazing work at their current company but isn’t an exceptional talent.

Please rework on OC1 and go for an appeal. Except the first evidence in OC1 I can’t think anything else proves you innovated.

OC3: offer letter, compensation letter etc don’t show your impact. Impact is moving something from 1 to 100 and getting someone extremely reputable to vouch that.

Regarding recommendation letters: One must aim to get C suite to talk about them.

Thanks Roxy for your feedback

For this I have developed several immersive projects in virtual and augmented reality which have transformed the way of working/training or providing service. For example I have developed VR simulation(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkfxDHulC0c) for server/network configuration which is now used to train staff in a immersive way. Similarly some AR apps I developed are used to detect water problem(https://www.aiza.ai/aria). In OC1 evidence I mentioned 6 different products with screenshots, links and descriptions

Here for the impact of work I also mentioned the projects details and how they have been used by different people and organisation. For example the simulation i developed are now helping them providing effective training, cut down training cost, replicating hazardous situation in vr to make realistic scenarios etc.

Can you please tell more about this? I did not understand this

@Francisca_Chiedu can you please have a look as well and share your valuable feedback

You evidence are mainly reference letters. For the mandatory criteria, there is no additional evidence showing you have been recognised to be at the forefront of your field. Tech nation guide stated that reference letters are not sufficient, it appears so of your recommenders are not considered qualified to endorse you.