Stage 1 rejection - Global Talent

Stage 1
1

Hi,
Thanks in advance to this affluent community and knowledge. Sadly, stage-1 my application got rejected on all 10 evidence grounds. Submitted on 28th September and rejection received on 24th October. I am completely open to criticism and believe your educated comment will be very helpful for my next planned steps.

Kindly seeking advise on review appeal process, following is the brief summary of my application and attached is the copy of rejection proforma file.

Recommendation letters

  1. Letter from previous supervisor, CEO & Director and past president of Institute of Chartered Accountants of Bangladesh (ICAB). A Harvard graduate, ex director of the national telecommunication company, and PhD of Information Technologies for public sector reporting in Bangladesh. Chosen particularly because of his involvement at national level IT infrastructure and detailed knowledge of my development works and revenue generated per product developed. Docusign log added.

  2. Letter from supervisor between 2012 and 2015. Current Chief Strategy & Product Officer at the sole national Healthcare Tech company. Founder of startup like Doctorla, placed in the Forbes Technology Council’s list, among eight promising tech start-ups across the world. Chosen particularly because of his knowledge of my contributions in developing Bhutan Integrated Revenue System. Docusign log added.

  3. Letter from director of an external company (Infosapex Limited) later acquired by Innoweb. Particularly chosen because of works done together, mentoring his software development team and his role at multiple senior architect roles with Ericsson, Huawei in UAE, Egypt, and Philippines. Also being founder multiple tech startups. Docusign log added.

–MC1 (revenue growth)–
Technical contribution to Launch the 1st Robotic Process Automation (RPA) brand in Bangladesh for Infosapex Limited (called out in LOR1 and LOR2). Also attached screenshots of audited revenue summary showing growth of circa 300% during my 3 years of Digital leadership at Innoweb Limited, a product-led software development company.

–MC7 (International conference)–
Expert Panellist of RPA at International webinar organised by ICAB for Finance & Audit automation. This was an online conference attended by over 500 people during COVID lockdown as an alternative to annual venue based conference. Attached official letter of invitation and 2 independent news links and another link to news letter by ICAB. All external links calls my name out speaking at this event.

–MC7 (CTO Summit)–
Keynote speaker of RPA at a summit joined by over 200 CTOs, organised by CTO Forum, Bangladesh. Attached letter of invitation email, 1 independent news link and video of my stage talk from Google Drive.

–OC1 (Product development leadership)–
Document demonstrating leadership of software development and project leadership. Screenshot of delivery pipeline integrating multiple tools e.g. Jenkins, Dockers, and Kubernetes. Calling out skills demonstrated and final outcome in terms of work hours saved. Attached support letter signed by global Finance director of client company based in UAE with Docusign log.

–OC1 (Product development as solution architect)–
Introduction to solution, described uniqueness of the centralised state level revenue collection system. Attached proof of funding by World Bank and link to terms of reference. Illustrated data integration models, google drive link to tools and platforms used. Added support letter from project manager of solution development company, detailing my contribution as a solution architect helping develop the solution.

–OC1 (Remuneration)–
Attached copy of employment contracts at two major companies in the UK. Attached screenshots of salary comparison from Glassdoor (with link to verify) for each role. Attached HMRC tax summary for both roles.

–OC3 (Led development of high impact digital product RPA)–Foreground info on RPA and it’s impact during COVID lockdown. Added two videos of product demo with voice-over, added client testimonial video. Endorsed by ex HR head on OC3, Letter from ex HR Head. Added link to single product order and conversion screenshot from xe.com, additional revenue figures mentioned in LOR1.

–OC3 (Led development of high impact digital product e-KYC)–
Introduced 1st of it’s kind e-KYC solution for financial institutions. This was built on Innoweb’s own BPMN software. Added solution screenshots. Endorsed by ex HR head on OC3, Letter from ex HR Head.

–OC3 (Led development of high impact digital product SOL)–
Re-Development of monolithic application, linked with OC1 development. Added two API diagrams with description. Added process flowchart designed by me for cargo registration process, critical for warehouse management system (WMS). Describes process flow for entire WMS. Further endorsed by support letter from ex HR Head.

–OC3 Letter from Employer–
Support letter from Head of HR in previous company. Chronologically detailing my leadership role within a product-led Software development company. referring to multiple OC1 and OC3 documents. With Docusign log.

–What the assessor got wrong–

  • Wrongly labelled product-led digital company as consultancy firm.

  • Completely disregarded clear revenue figures called out in LOR1 of over USD 3.2 million added and over 300% revenue growth.

  • Disregarding an International Conference chaired by the ICT minister as non-major T&D event and my contribution as an expert panellist.

  • Hastily concluded my importance as a Keynote speaker, based on short notice of invitation letter alone. Completely disregarding the possibility of my close ties and informal relationship with the organiser.

  • Completely disregarded my role and contribution as a Solution Architect while in UK, working on a World Bank funded solution development and implementation centralising Bhutan Government’s revenue collection.

  • Questioning integrity of all LORs for my email address being as the originator. Which is clear contrast to the online TN guidelines (Document checklist->Please note the following->section 4). If the guideline did not mention “different IP address to the applicant”, I wouldn’t collect and the send the doc to be signed in the first place.

*Letters of recommendation can be created using a digital signature service (such as DocuSign or similar service), enabling the inclusion of the document log file that clearly indicates the letter’s author and signature originated from a different IP address to the applicant.*

Proforma
Proforma890Ă—1555 155 KB

1 Like
2

hi @Faisal_Chowdhury

I am sorry for the outcome of your submission. i would advise you to resubmit if you still want to get endorsed following all the highlighted points in their feedback.

Their feedback is well explained and following these guidelines will definitely lead to a successful application.

Best of luck!

1 Like
3

Hi Maya,
Thanks for your reply. I avoided appealing thinking it would be a waste of time and effort. I will reapply keeping the given guidance in mind. Thanks again for your response.

–
Best,
Faisal

1 Like
4

Hi Faisal,

Here are my thoughts:

The fundamental reason your application was rejected is this: “Questioning the integrity of all LORs for my email address being the originator.”

The Global Talent endorsement process is peer-reviewed in nature. Tech Nation cannot be experts in all the technicalities of every candidate across multiple fields in digital technologies, nor can they determine whether you are a person of “good character” who will benefit society.

Instead, they rely on high-profile individuals who are familiar with you as a person and possess expertise in your field of achievements.

The order in which they assess the application is as follows:

  1. Your story (personal statement)
  2. Your background (CV)
  3. LORs (strength of the endorsers + evaluation of your story and background).

Only after these three foundational components are assessed do they look at additional supporting evidence that add colour and credibility to your case. This is why it’s recommended to ensure that evidence on top of — PS, CV, and LORs — is coherent and clear.

If you fail to convince them with your story and CV — which, on their own, hold no reason to be believed unless cross-referenced by strong LORs — then no amount of supporting evidence will be sufficient. At this point, they will state outright that the integrity of your case is unconvincing.

I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind their decision.

1 Like
5

Hi, thanks for you response. As you quite aptly explained, that really was the case. I was confused with DocuSign audit trail and it would have been much easier for me to get the LORs on respective letterheads. This was the first strike that I assume, drove the assessor onto questioning my integrity as an applicant, which subsequently made every other evidence less and less credible.

Thanks again for your insightful response.

–
Best regards,
Faisal

6

@Faisal_Chowdhury Thanks for sharing your experience. Do you suggest the referees should upload the recommendation letter & e-sign it on DocuSign and then email the signed letter to the applicant?

7

Hi Ramesh, no worries. I reckon the best option is to what you mentioned, in addition, for measure the letter should be on a letterhead.

1 Like