Thanka a lot .
I would like to apply for GLOBAL talent visa ( Exceptional).
I m having PhD in Computer science and engineering along with 17 years IT Experience.
I would like to add these two and send to Tech nation.
Could you please suggest me on this.
I got rejected with the feedback below today, I’m thinking of requesting a review of MC and OC3, I will like to get y’all opinion before requesting review.
For MC:
The reviewer complained about my references being collegues/managers but only one is a manager, the other two are CPO and CTO of companies I worked for. Is this something I should contest ? Also, looking at the Technation guide lines, there’s nothing stating that references must come from people you’ve never worked with, in fact they emphasised using people that know your work.
The reviewer claims the media coverage supporting document does not mention the applicant. But it does mention my name, I’m not sure how they missed that.
For OC3:
The only complain is that there’s no sufficient evidence, I provided screenshots of reports, conversations, emails, github history, would it worth it to provide more context on the provided evidences in the review ?
Lastly, I’m thinking of getting an immigration firm to help put together a solid review, any suggestions on who I should be talking to ?
Assessment panel feedback:
The applicant has applied for the Exceptional Talent visa and selected Optional Criteria 2 and 3.
The applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate exceptional and leading talent within
the digital technology sector in the last 5 years. The applicant is a skilled software engineers but this
does not demonstrate a sought after or extraordinary talent and there is little evidence provided to
demonstrate this is beyond the role recruited to do. The supporting recommendation letters are
provided by colleagues / managers which is not sufficient under the visa guidelines. The references
are also limited in their content about the applicants career, work and impact / outcomes on the sector.
The media coverage supporting document does not mention the applicant. There are no references to
awards the applicant has won, contribution to leadership within the sector or speaking at key events
either nationally or internationally. In summary the applicant has not met the Mandatory Criteria.
OC2 - the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate work beyond their direct
occupation to advance the sector. Including active contribution through GitHub since 2014. The
applicant has met the criteria for OC2.
OC3 - the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate significant contribution to the
field as a founder, senior executive, board member or employee of a product led digital technology
company. Whilst some evidence of work have been provided there is limited evidence within the
supporting material to determine material impact and outcomes as a direct result of the applicants work.
As previously stated the applicant is highly skilled and a highly valued colleague and team member but
this is insufficient to meet the criteria for OC3.
In summary there is insufficient evidence provided at this stage for the Exceptional Talent visa to be
endorsed.
How many edits did you have in total? Could you please share a timeline of the edits?
Two in total
First Edit: Nov 23
Second Edit: Nov 26
You can appeal and point them to where you name was mentioned in the article also put more context to the evidence in MC and OC3, help the review panel understand how your work is impactful and why you are considered a leading talent. One thing is to provide evidence the other is to help someone who has no clue about the significance of your work understand why you stand out in your field.
All the best in your appeal, you can try Fragomen.
Hello all,
I recieved my rejection letter yesterday and below is the feedback i got from my assessor. I was rejected in all the 3 categories. My mandatory criteria was rejected and also my oc2 and 9c3:
Assessment panel feedback:
The applicant has applied for Optional Criteria 2 & 3 (OC2 & OC3).
The applicant fails to meet the requirements of the Mandatory Criteria (MC) because the evidence provided fails to demonstrate extraordinary ability by emerging national or international recognition. The individual is not able to demonstrate a level of emerging expertise which places them at the forefront of
their respective field in the digital technology sector. It is unclear whether the applicant has worked for product led digital technology companies, the companies in their CV are technology service/consulting
companies, this type of work is not eligible for this visa. The applicant’s reference letters are largely from those they have worked with and whilst it is clear the applicant is very competent; it is unclear as to how they are to be considered a leader of exceptional promise. The applicant is unable to demonstrate emerging national or international recognition, more would be expected here to demonstrate that the
applicant is starting to develop a public profile of note in the digital technology sector. Validation from significant external bodies and experts would be required to prove this out.
The applicant fails to meet the requirements of OC2 because the evidence provided fails to
demonstrate that the applicant has been recognised for work outside of their immediate occupation that contributed to the advancement of the sector. The applicant has submitted limited evidence for this criteria in the form of one speaking engagement, this engagement is not in of itself enough evidence for
this criteria as it is unclear how it has advanced the sector. The other evidences for this criteria look to be connected to their work and so not relevant for this criteria.
The applicant fails to meet the requirements of OC3 because the evidence provided fails to
demonstrate the level of impact the applicant has had as it relates to having made a significant
technical, commercial or entrepreneurial contribution to the field as a founder, senior executive or employee of a product-led digital technology company. The applicant’s impact is unclear due to the type of work they have undertaken, working for technology service companies and consulting companies
(ADVHF Technologies, XDZ) and therefore at arm’s length from customers.On the basis of the above the MC, OC2 and OC3 are not awarded, therefore we do not endorse this
application at this time.
Also below are the documents i supplied to meet this criteria
MC
A commendation letter from my Lead
A commendation letter(cybersecurity ecosystem) from a group of expert’s who are within the digital technology sector and knows about my work
A letter offer from my present employer (cybersecurity security company) as a Cybersecurity Analyst
A document showing an award my previous employer won as the most innovative technology solution by HFM company in the USA in 2022(I also attached a snapshot of an award I won as a result of building a threat analysis dashboard using the AI&ML algorithm from the innovation). Also as an evidence attached was a snapshot of the blog I wrote on a cyber attack I stopped which saved a major client from loosing over $46million in revenue for that month.
OC2
A letter of commendation from a Cybersecurity program manager that know about my contributions in and outside of my job.
Evidence of me mentoring and speaking at a charity cybersecurity career event to individuals in the UK about how to use OSINT to combat cyber threat and how they can build a good and secured security posture. As evidences stated in Tech Nation site, I attached screen shots of the email invite, appreciation email, flyers and a reference letter from the charity (contains the charity registration number) saying their appreciate and the impact I made on their audience during the event.
A letter from a Global IT security manager who happens to be a global client for my previous company, and knows about my impact and contribution in the cybersecurity sector and highlights so much about my potential in becoming a leader in the future in cybersecurity.
OC3
A commendation letter from a Telecom/IT solutions company, talking about my contributions as a Cybersecurity engineer in an SME business in Belfast. This letter highlighted my contributions in the project and how I was able to ensure their attack surface was drastically reduced to prevent them from being a victim of cyber attacks and the goals we achieved on the project as a result of my contributions.
As an evidence, I shared a snapshot of their entire network security architecture of the SME business and highlighted the significance of the diagram. After which I also shared my own person contributions as the cybersecurity engineer in this project and all that I was able to achieve (please note that this is not part of my day to day job just like my OC2 was never part of my job too).
Last I also attached my letter offer for my current job as cyber security analyst with a significant pay.
All my references came from individuals who are Directors or Snr Directors in the companies I have worked with or for.
Each letter had links to their LinkedIn profiles showing their positions and the cybersecurity Technology companies their work in and that they have worked for, and they all explained how they know me, my works, impact’s within and outside of my job. And they also made emphasis on how I have demonstrated my leadership skills and how they see me as a great leader in the future in cybersecurity sector. Each of my references also included their personal emails and phone numbers.
I also attached my resume, detailing all my works, awards I have won as a result of doing an outstanding job in IT and cybersecurity.
My CV also showed my technical roles for every employer I have worked with presently and in the past.
Please note that I have never been employed by a consulting firm as claimed by the assessor.
@Francisca_Chiedu @Maya and others please i need your help on how i can appeal this.
Thank you
The feedback a lot of applicants have been getting lately reflect that the assessors have been failing to read through the applications thoroughly. This is worrisome.
I guess the assessor looked up the companies and the website suggests it is not product led
Thank u @Francisca_Chiedu please how do i defend and explain that the companies are product led, my companies does variety of things which are not limited to Intelligent it which is system monitoring, application management, cybersecurity consulting which is cybersecurity mock audit, managed detection and response, the companies are strictly B2B SAAS. Its not as if my company is strictly consulting
You need to mention the products and explain that the majore source of revenue for the company is derived from the products
Got my nomination for promise though I applied for talent (with all my patents and publications at top conferences I thought that I should qualify, idk what evidences they dismissed) but anyway it’s wonderful news for me, so grateful for the opportunity!
My evidences were: 3 patents, 4 publications on top conferences (by providing 2 gratitude letters from conference directors), gratitude letter from large tech bank in my country for being speaker at their AI conference, gratitude letter from university for teaching lectures, characteristic from my previous job with proof that as part of my work I contributed a lot to open source library that made by that company, letter of employement + rsu confirmation letter from current job.
Anyway as I said I’m happy, not that big deal to receive promise instead of talent!
I spent half year preparing docs and waiting for the decision.
Congratulations…please sharevyour timelines
@Kaivalyauea, I noticed you shy away from sharing your timeline but consistently ask about others’. We’re here to share and help each other.
Congratulations! When did you apply?
I got my 2nd edit on November 26th. I haven’t gotten any edit for 12 days now. For applications which get accepted, I have noticed the 2nd and 3rd edits come between 2 days of each other.
Similar thing , Rejected after 5th Edit, How did you proceed with your appeal? I would require guidance to send review.
I noticed the same thing with the 3rd and 4th (if there is a 4th edit at all). Frankly, I am only expecting a rejection now.
Can you share the reasons for your rejection so we can all look at it and show how best to appeal.
Just got my 2nd edit at 10:53, Dec 8
First edit was 30 Nov 8:15