"Original contribution" for Marketing / PR: what counts
Key answer
What works in Marketing / PR
- A new model or methodology tested on marketing data
- Practical effect - growth in metrics, cost reduction, or better customer understanding
- Generalizability - applicable beyond a single case
Traps that cost the criterion
- Description of a campaign without a new approach or proven result
- Substituting the contribution with a set of known tools
- Conclusions without comparison, validation, or measurable metrics
What the officer has to find
It is not enough to show that the work was useful, complex, well paid, in demand in the market, or performed at a well-known organization. It must be shown that the petitioner's specific original contribution was recognized as significant in the professional field by independent sources and that the evidence allows the officer to reach a favorable merits finding within the overall case assessment.
- Significance is supported by independent evidence, such as use of the result by other professionals, implementation, citation, licensing, industry recognition, or documented impact.
- There is a causal link between the petitioner's actions and the claimed result: the materials show exactly what role the petitioner played and why the result would have been materially different without their contribution.
Where it falls apart: The support letters contain general praise without specific facts, metrics, independent verification, or an explanation of the impact on the field.
The full methodology of the "Original contribution" criterion
How it is worded
The method/process/model he developed had not previously been used in a comparable form and led to a qualitatively new level of efficiency.
Avoid: I made a minor contribution to the overall result.
What else Marketing / PR is asked for
- Case studies with metrics: revenue growth, CAC, ROAS, retention, market share
- Letters from executives, clients, and independent experts with specifics
- There are metrics, but the applicant's personal role is not proven
- Publications look like PR or are not about the applicant personally
If the officer already objectedfrom 108 real cases
From community discussions
«When I filed my EB-1A case on my own, I included materials for Leading or Critical Role, but by mistake I merged them with Original Contributions and didn't break them out separately. Only after getting the RFE did I realize this was wrong. Can I add this criterion separately when responding to the RFE?»
Ainur · from public community chats
«We've got an RFE, the contribution was bombed to bits. My husband has an h-index of 19, 1000+ citations. Patents, know-how, preclinical trials, though without implementations. Teaching materials, grants, requests from media for his expertise, conference invitations as keynote, chair. But it's all not enough for the officer.»
Yulia · from public community chats
«Add peer review, one scientific publication, show that my contribution will continue to work in the future, but now for the US. If it works out, get a few more recommendation letters.»
Marianna · from public community chats
Personal opinions of community members from public discussions, not legal advice.
The same criterion in other fields
Reference information and community experience, not legal advice. The AAO figures are lessons from appeals, not approval odds; fees and timelines change - verify on uscis.gov.