Can I kindly get a review of this application below?. Which areas would you suggest I tighten up? Would you equally recommend I aim for Talent or Promise on this one?
LoRs
Founder, Lendsqr
Vice President, GreenHouse Capital
CEO/Co-founder, Assurdly
CV Summary
Lendsqr (overlaps a little into my Banking experience) 2019-2020
Union Bank (only mentioning in my PS, not relying too heavily on it since it’s not product led)2020-2021
Bloomberg 2022-Date
Mandatory Criteria MC Doc1: Lendsqr Key Contributor Evidence to include the following
Founder’s Public Acknowledgment of my direct impact on Tech Media publication 2025
Figma Designs → Screenshots from Some Early Lendsqr Designs 2020
Redacted excerpt from an early Lendsqr strategy document showing infrastructure framework. 2020
Photographs of me representing the Startup at competition Finals. 2020
MC Doc2: Bloomberg Recognitions to include:
EMEA Global Content Manager for FI Products within my department (appointment mail). 2025
Speaker on Webinar for Structured Products Players 2025
MC Doc3: Proof of Significant Salary Increase 2020-2025
OC2 Evidences Ev1 Business Challenge Semi-Finals Assessor 2022 Ev2 Volunteer as a Mentor on Digital Boost (structured volunteering for non-profits and tech enabled businesses) 2025 Ev3 References from startup founders that have provided support/advice on Product Development.
OC3 Evidences Ev1 to include
Bloomberg Specialist Awards (Internal) + Documented Client Impact (with monthly numbers over a 12month period)2024-2025
Bloomberg Internal approval and recognition of advanced technical depth (a programme reserved internally for colleagues operating at the highest levels of technical depth) March 2025
Ev2 Early Credit Scoring Architecture Contribution (with screenshots showing version history, and communication confirmation that I owned the whole architecture) - 2020
Ev3 - Redact UBN strategy doc (tentative, might take it out as it’s on my Banking experience which doesn’t qualify for product led) - 2021
Your application outline has a few valid aspects but largely needs to be strengthened a lot to have a shot at endorsement.
Specifically:
MC:
you can only show evidences from last 5 years so anything before December 2020 will not be valid as of this month. Your 2020 evidences if before Dec 2020 won’t count.
Company representation at events is not valid.
Internal recognition and strategy document is not valid.
appointment mail is not valid.
webinar is not valid unless this was a large tech event hosted as webinar.
significant salary increase is not valid unless it’s higher than industry standard salary for your role in your region.
OC2:
business finals assessor: depends on the scale and prominence of this event in the tech industry. Ensure you mention these along with the invite letter confirming the stature of participants, audience, event size and invite for you to assess.
ensure you provide evidence of program structure and impact of your mentorship alongwith letter from program director confirming the program structure, selection of mentees and your impact on the field.
Startup founder letters depends on your impact on how it advanced the field.
OC3:
internal awards and recognition are not valid.
-Strategy doc is not valid
only contribution evidence is insufficient
There seems to be a lack of understanding of the guidelines and criteria requirements.
In MC you need to show how your work has received industry recognition. In OC2 it’s important to show how your contribution advanced the field. In OC3 you need to show impact of your contributions in quantified core company metrics. Beyond self-claims, there has to be solid backing third party evidence to support your claims.
I would recommend going through the guidelines thoroughly: Notion
Hi Tosin, I think there are a few issues with your document. Start by addressing the timeline issue. Anything before December 2020 is now outside the 5-year window. Your early 2020 Lendsqr materials won’t be valid. Focus on your Bloomberg work and more recent achievements. I’ve seen applications fail because they relied on outdated evidence even when the candidate had stronger recent work available.
For your mandatory criteria, shift away from internal recognition. Internal awards, appointment emails, and strategy documents don’t demonstrate industry-wide recognition. Your webinar needs to be reframed if it was at a significant tech conference. Otherwise, look at external publications, speaking at recognized events, or contributions that received third-party acknowledgment. One successful applicant I worked with combined three strong external publications into one evidence document.
Your OC2 mentorship evidence needs more structure. Get a letter from the Digital Boost program director confirming the selection process and your impact. The business challenge assessor role could work if you can show the event’s prominence and get an invite letter mentioning scale. For OC3, internal Bloomberg awards won’t count. Focus on the credit scoring architecture but you’ll need third-party validation and quantified impact on company metrics beyond just your contribution.
The Union Bank evidence should be removed since it’s not from a product-led company. Your Bloomberg technical depth recognition is great for your narrative but won’t work as standalone evidence. Look for external validation of your contributions. Consider combining your strongest Bloomberg achievements with measurable business impact and third-party documentation like client testimonials or external system architecture reviews.
You have good raw material here. The key is to collect more external validation and quantified impact. I’ve seen similar profiles succeed by focusing on fewer stronger evidences rather than spreading thin across many weak ones. You’ll get there but you’re not there at the moment imo.
I’m addition to your 2020 evidence becoming stale this month, internal company award do not count for mandatory criteria. How does the business challenge evidence advance the sector? If it is an award type evidence, then it should be in MC. Your OC2 mentorship is 2025 so it may be considered close to the timing of your application. Providing advice to startup is not considered structured. You may just use it as a support evidence if you have two other solid ones but it is quite weak.
OC3 looks ok but you need to show that it is your own work not the contribution of others. The evidence should show your name) user name.