-
I got the decision letter stating this: Screenshots also contain evidence from social media which is not suitable
How else can you substantiate your claims if your ‘only’ evidence exists on social media , such as user traction, startup’s presence / engagement on LinkedIn or even a ‘date of certain activity’ to prove it falls within the permissible 5 year period of showcasing evidences? -
What should the subject line in the email be when submitting an appeal?
-
What exactly does it mean on the tech nation visa guide : ‘Not to use templates for letters of recommendation’, what does this even mean?
-
If you are a potential talent, what does a public profile mean to show leadership? Is this on wikipedia? How can a potential talent be expected to have a public profile if they are still showing emerging leadership?
-
Is it the activity/employment of 5 years ago or the impact that they consider within the last 5 years from the date of the application submission to consider evidences from this activity or employment?
-
How many screenshots should be supplied on a single page in a single document?
-
Can you use a similar example for more than one criteria - salary from glassdoor for more than one employment?
-
What are the different examples of evidence you can give to showcase MC, OC1, OC2, and OC3 under product management/business analysis and where you have an early stage startup?
I think it’ll help if you share the feedback that you got from TN - that way we can help you address the points there.
- It’s too late for an appeal since you can’t provide more evidence - but internal company docs would have helped.
- Doesn’t really matter, probably need to include the application ID
- LoRs need to be unique and not like copies of one another. If they are too similar that may mean the candidate lead the recommenders
- Everyone has a public profile or things they did outside direct work. But seeing point 5 about your work history then you might be reviewed as a talent candidate.
- Evidence needs to be from the last 5 years
- The rule is that vvidence needs to be legible. Other than that there’s no limit.
- Evidence needs to be unique. You can probably use two types of salary evidence but in my mind that’s wasting a spot that can be used for other kinds of evidence
- It’s all mentioned in the guide Tech Nation Visa Guide - Tech Nation. Did you submit evidence for 3 optional criteria? That’s not allowed.
Hi, thanks for your responses, my question 1 is still unanswered, as social media links such as linkedin or facebook to show proof of date within the 5 year permissible period was all I could provide for one particular document I mean.
please see the assessment panel feedback below:
The applicant should not be endorsed for the Exceptional Promise visa. She clearly states in the form
that she has more than 5 years of experience in the tech sector and her CV confirms this. She is not at
an early stage of her tech career and therefor not eligible for the Promise criteria. She has been
assessed for the talent criteria. She has not provided compelling and sufficient evidence to meet the
criteria. She has applied under Optional Criteria 2 and 3 (OC2 and OC3). Even if we take a liberal
interpretation of the guidelines and assess her for the Promise criteria, she would still not meet the
guidelines due to lack of evidence.
There are multiple challenges with the evidence submitted. Most of the evidence is self-authored
documents and reference letters that are not supported by external and third party evidence as required
under the guidelines. There are numerous external links and assessors are not required to access any
of them, as per the guidelines. The applicant has also cut and pasted multiple screenshots onto a single
page and this is also not suitable. Screenshots also contain evidence from social media which is not
suitable. Some of the letters are digitally signed but do not carry a signature trail. Finally, the applicant
has to submit 2 unique pieces of evidence towards each criteria and cannot re-use evidence across
criteria. She has not followed this. It is in the applicant’s interest to submit evidence that is legible and
that meets the guidelines. This is a very poor and weak application.
All three mandatory letters show multiple signs of templating. The last letter isn’t authored by an
acknowledged expert in the tech sector. This letter has also been digitally signed but does not have the
required signature trail. The second letter is from a person who ran a 12-week accelerator that the
applicant participated in. We are not convinced that this person has a detailed knowledge of the
applicant’s work over a period of 12 months or more, as required under the guidelines. We are unable
to see anything exceptional or extraordinary described in these letters.
In any case, despite long-term experience in the field above 5 years the applicant has not received any
sustained recognition by way of reputed tech industry awards at a national or international level. There
are no keynotes at leading global tech events or publications in leading tech journals where she has
shaped the direction of her field. Evidence from 9 Spokes isn’t suitable as it is outside the permissible
last 5 year period from the date of this application. Aldemore isn’t a product-led digital technology
company and working on digital transformation is specifically indicated as an area of activity not suitable
towards this visa. We are unable to see any public profile or recognition of her leadership and
contributions to the tech sector. The salary level is respectable but not indicative of any rare or scarce
skill. Absent any notable recognition we are unable to award the Mandatory Criteria.
Regarding OC2, we respect her work at HireAMum.co.nz but are unable to see how this advanced the
tech field. Petitioning for Wi-Fi in NZ public transport is also respected but not the kind of activity that
meets the criteria. Being elected councilor isn’t tech related or field advancing. We are unable to award
OC2.
Regarding OC3, most of the evidence is self-authored and unverified. We need to see independent third
party evidence to support her claims. Being accepted into and being awarded £7,500 in funding isn’t
any significant contribution to the field. Neither is getting SEIS compliance. The Guiness World Record
activity is clearly not tech related or demonstrative of impact on the tech sector. Lotto NZ is a lottery
provided and not a product-led tech company. Reference letters are not suitable on their own and
cannot be res-used if already used towards another criteria. We are unable to award OC3.
We are unable to endorse the applicant as she does not meet any criteria.
The TN feedback seems quite clear and self-explanatory. In the appeal, you cannot provide any new information but only redirect the assessor to specific parts in your application if you demonstrated what they have refuted. Seeing the feedback, it looks like that won’t help in most case as they have not accepted a lot of evidence provided and recommenders. It’s best to incorporate the feedback in a new application if you decide to apply again.
In addition to what @hsafra has answered:
On #1: it depends what you were trying to demonstrate from this document where you posted multiple social media screenshots. Which criteria and what exactly were you trying to demonstrate and what kind of social media evidence did you provide to prove it? If these were LinkedIn or Facebook callouts and posts appreciating you, that’s considered weak evidence and in most cases not even accepted. What was the engagement levels on these social media evidences? Did you paste screenshots like a collage or was there any context given in each screenshot as to how it demonstrates the criteria success and your contribution in this?
Without knowing the above details, it’s hard to comment.
Please go through the official TN guidelines to see examples of evidences under each criteria and what each criteria stands for/if your evidences under that criteria demonstrate the criteria meaning.
@Ankita_Sharma Hi, I’m sorry to hear about the outcome. Based on the feedback provided by the assessor, it seems you may need to submit a new application. When did you apply, and when did you receive this feedback?
Honestly, I dont see that you need help on this and your application and feedback is quite clear and the appeal is a little bit challenging in this case.
However, maybe if you share the list of evidences, we will have better understanding of your situation.
Anyhow, depending on TN feedback, I would definitely recommend starting new application (if you like) and paying attention to every single comment they shared (as in fact they guided you to a successful application)
Points like : number of years experience, external validation, avoiding social media evidences, avoiding using an evidence for two criteria, adding only tech related evidences & tech related professionals, avoiding reference letter on its own as are insufficient, etc.
-
Can the recommendation letters be from someone who has known me and my work for more than 5 years?
-
What does product-led digital company mean? If you work in a retail company or in a specialist bank that creates product offerings for mortgage but if you work in a technology squad working in digital products or their digital program, isn’t that product-led digital company? I need more clarification on this…
-
Are you allowed to give website links of the company you worked for where you made significant commercial impact?
-
What are the different examples of innovation you can give if you were an employee working in a company that has a patent?
-
Is OC3 only for giving examples of evidence where you have made an impact as an ‘employee’ in a product led digital company? Why does MC have an example in their tech nation guide about ‘commanding a high salary’ ? can you give examples in MC even if you were an employee?
- Ideally they should know you in the last 5 years or had previous knowledge and continued contact
- that’s spelled out in the guide
Single definition of “Digital technology sector” and “product-led”:
The “digital technology sector” or “product-led digital technology companies” are defined as businesses that provide a proprietary digital technical service/product/platform/hardware as their primary revenue source. The creation of software, processing/storage of data, or the creation/application of technical computing hardware is often a central aspect of their business model.
[This excludes general consultancies, outsourcing and technology-related consultancy groups focused on process/service delivery or solutions/systems architecture. Such firms do not meet the guidelines, particularly those primarily serving large corporate or multinational corporate (MNC) customers.
Work at specific agencies may be considered if the agencies are extremely focused on product innovation in a specific industry and are well-recognized for their contributions to that industry.]
- It’s better to have screenshots of the sections you want to present, Assessors aren’t required to follow links
- A few examples are mentioned in the guide. If your workplace has a patent you’ll need to be able to show how you contributed to it - it’s not enough just to work at a place that holds a patent
- From the guide
- they have made significant technical, commercial or entrepreneurial contributions to the field as a founder, senior executive, board member or employee of a product-led digital technology company
You need to work for the company at some capacity.
MC has high salary since very high salary sometimes indicates high achievements that were deemed to be worth a high compensation.
The guide has a few examples for MC as an employee
Hi, Can a recommendation letter be written by someone who themselves were a Global Talent visa recipient and a tech nation ambassador?
Why not? As long as they fit the standard in the guide
Three letters of recommendation from three different well-established individuals acknowledged as experts in the digital technology field, with detailed knowledge of your work over a period of 12 months or more, supporting your Global Talent application, which include all of the following:
Each person who writes a letter for you must:
- Be a senior member of their organisation
- Know your work
Each letter must:
- Be about your Global Talent application - you cannot use a letter that was written for another reason
- Explain how the author knows the applicant; and
- Knows the applicant’s achievements in the relevant field; and
- How the author considers the applicant shows exceptional talent or promise; and
- the contribution the applicant would make to the UK digital economy.
I have prepared new documents for my new application…how do i share them all here for a tech nation ambassador to review them here and give feedback?
I have prepared new documents for my new application…how do i share them all here for a tech nation ambassador to review them here and give feedback?
Is this the new application? Share them in the format used in other posts of people seeking reviews
What is that format?
How can i show "my contribution’ to architectural diagrams or product designs when i don’t have access to systems in previous employment?