Hi, my sympathies about the Brexit thing, I can see why you'd be looking around. I think Peter summed this up nicely. To elaborate a bit on the 10 criteria:
-It's not binary. The more high-quality evidence you provide, in more categories, the "bigger" you look, and the better your chances of success.
-It's not 100% guaranteed if you meet the minimum 3, because the adjudication is very subjective. Your aim is to create an overall impression of achievement, recognition, prominence, and impact on your field - and to do that within their 8 narrow, arbitrary evidence categories.
-While more categories generally are better, it will hurt the case to throw in low-quality evidence (i.e., employee-of-the-month awards, hyperlocal news stories) just to add another category. Basically bad evidence makes you look small, which is the opposite of what you want.
-You can start right away, compiling evidence of the cool work you're doing, plus its impact on your field and how it makes peoples' lives better. Get some media coverage. Enter some contests. Judge some contests. Write some articles.
-It's not binary. The more high-quality evidence you provide, in more categories, the "bigger" you look, and the better your chances of success.
-It's not 100% guaranteed if you meet the minimum 3, because the adjudication is very subjective. Your aim is to create an overall impression of achievement, recognition, prominence, and impact on your field - and to do that within their 8 narrow, arbitrary evidence categories.
-While more categories generally are better, it will hurt the case to throw in low-quality evidence (i.e., employee-of-the-month awards, hyperlocal news stories) just to add another category. Basically bad evidence makes you look small, which is the opposite of what you want.
-You can start right away, compiling evidence of the cool work you're doing, plus its impact on your field and how it makes peoples' lives better. Get some media coverage. Enter some contests. Judge some contests. Write some articles.
HTH clarify a bit.