Application How to

I applied to the EU Cyber Diplomacy Fellowship on 12 November and heard back with a rejection on 16 December. I was genuinely excited about this one. The structure made sense to me: a six-month, non-residential fellowship with regular online engagement and two in-person meetings. It felt designed for people like me who work alongside policy, without needing to step away from their jobs or relocate. The focus on cyber diplomacy and coordination across institutions also felt aligned with how I already think about systems and governance. I put real effort into this application. I revised my CV to foreground policy and governance work and wrote a careful motivation letter explaining why this fellowship mattered to me and how my experience connected to it. That said, my background is rooted largely in education and edtech. While I see clear links between education systems, digital governance, and cyber diplomacy, that connection may not have been obvious or convincing within the fellowship's expected profile. My edtech experience likely didn't map neatly onto what they were looking for. The rejection came quickly and without much explanation. What this clarified for me is that many policy fellowships still rely on familiar career paths. Even when they say they value interdisciplinary backgrounds, they often choose candidates who are easy to place into known categories. My work sits close to policy, but not squarely inside traditional pipelines and that seems to matter. What I learned from this process A strong application doesn’t always resolve questions of fit. Edtech and education work can be hard to translate into policy or diplomacy spaces without an obvious bridge. Fast rejections often point to structural mismatch, not lack of capability. I don't regret applying. The process helped me better understand how my background is read in policy contexts and what kinds of translation may be needed going forward. That's useful data to have, even when the answer is NO.