C-01 Open Innovation Cybersecurity · AI · Mobility 2025 · Ministry of SMEs and Startups · Lead PM
How 9 deep tech companies got in front of the right corporate teams
The technology was validated, but nobody knew which department or which role at the large corporation they had to meet. The founders had already handed out business cards at several events, and each time it ended with “we will take a look.”
What I did- We broke down the technologies of the 9 companies element by element and first built a pre-matching plan that named the specific department at each demand-side company
- 각 사를 현장 방문해 1:1 컨설팅으로 제안 논리를 다시 썼습니다, 기술 설명이 아니라 상대 부서의 KPI 언어로
- Designed the event as an 8-min tech pitch → 90-min 1:1 networking → 30-min open consultation, so people left with a next meeting rather than a business card
Results- All 9 companies matched 1:1 with large and mid-sized enterprises
- 3 PoCs in discussion with a major telecom group, including 1 confirmed registration as a public-project partner
- One company was connected to a Middle East capital review through a securities firm's overseas advisory line
What we learned hereLarge corporations do not buy “good technology.” They buy something that will hit the responsible department’s targets for this year on its behalf. Matching does not start at the event venue; it starts with finding out the other department’s KPIs.
C-02 Growth Strategy Secondary batteries · immersion cooling · ESS 2023 · Gyeonggi Province · Lead PM
An energy company shut out of large projects for lack of references
They had the technology but no one who had “actually used it,” so they kept stalling at the threshold of large national projects. No references meant no projects, and no projects meant no references — a closed loop.
What I did- We selected 12 of 41 local companies and rewrote the selection criteria “to look at the same things the performance metrics look at”
- We brought in 4 large manufacturing and finance corporations for a 90-minute group consultation, then locked 4 weeks of individual follow-up meetings into the schedule
- Designed the collaboration as a joint project proposal rather than a technical validation
Results- Established a collaboration structure with a prototyping specialist
- Selected for a KRW 9 billion R&D project (linked to an overseas new-city project)
- 같은 프로그램에서 10개사 대상 20 matches, 투자유치 2 · 기술협업 11 · 사업협업 7
What we learned hereWhat a company with no references needs is not an introduction but a project to put its name on with you. Matching that only gets people in the room usually ends right there.
C-04 Policy Advisory Korean Medicine · Bio 2025 · Ministry of Health and Welfare · Lead PM
An industry where no one knew which of the 33 companies was missing what
The support programs ran every year, but there was no data on which company was stuck at which stage. So the same training was being given to everyone, every time.
What I did- A full survey of 33 companies → baseline diagnostics for 16 turned the bottleneck at each stage into data
- Based on the diagnosis, we individually assigned two or more 1:1 consulting sessions to 13 companies
- We invited four investment firms not as judges but as investment reviewers, so the pitches led to actual review
Results- IR pitches by 4 companies · Follow-up review with 4 VCs
- 1 company: Minister of Health and Welfare Award (natural-product pharmaceuticals)
- Stage-by-stage bottleneck data for the whole industry, left as the basis for next year's program design
What we learned hereSupport programs fail to leave results not because the budget is small. It is because the selection criteria and the performance metrics are looking at different things.
C-05 Open Innovation Energy · Manufacturing Innovation · Technology Innovation 2023 · Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy · Lead PM
How we produced 6 PoCs in a market with a 6.8% collaboration rate
By Statistics Korea data, of 13,429 large, small and mid-sized companies in Korea, only 919 — 6.8% — were actually collaborating. The shared view across the industry was that there are plenty of events but nothing left over.
What I did- We reversed the order. Instead of gathering startups, we first analyzed which technologies the mid-sized enterprises wanted and which investment stages they were at
- From that analysis we built a preliminary data matching proposal, sent it to the mid-sized companies first, and then brought the startups in
- Split into 3 sessions in Seoul and 1 in Busan so regional companies could attend without travel costs
Results- IR by 32 companies → 6 PoCs · 3 business matches
- Satisfaction 94% · 300+ cumulative attendees
- The 78-company long-list remains a deal sourcing asset for later programs
What we learned hereMatching succeeds or fails not on the day of the event but on who you analyzed first. And open innovation results play out over 1 to 5 years. One-off events do not produce them.
C-07 Policy advisory Generative AI · public data 2025 · Gyeonggi Province · Lead PM
What 9 teams took away from a competition with 800 entries
Competitions usually end at the awards ceremony. Nothing connected was left for the teams after the prize.
What I did- Reviewed 800 applications nationwide, selected 9 teams, and attached 2–4 mentoring sessions per team from the moment of selection
- We placed IR pitch coaching before the presentation evaluation so the review became the result of the rehearsal
- Assigned practitioners from global big tech and large corporates as dedicated 1:1 mentors
Results- All 9 teams matched 1:1 with practitioners from global big tech and major corporations
- Closed with a public evaluation joined by some 40 residents on the citizen review panel
- Built a structure where the connection with mentors survives the award
What we learned hereThe value of a competition isn't the prize money — it's the people who remain after the review. Without that built into the design, you can review 800 entries and be left with nothing.
C-09 Public Advisory Startup Policy · Open Innovation Seoul Metropolitan Government · Advisor, Startup Subcommittee
제도가 된 제안, 서울형 오픈이노베이션
Until then, Seoul's startup support was largely a structure that looked only at startups. It was thorough about grants and space, but the large and mid-sized companies those startups had to meet in order to earn revenue were not part of the policy at all.
What I did- As an advisor on the Startup Subcommittee, I proposed “Seoul-style Open Innovation” as a program
- I proposed a structure that treats both the demand side and the supply side as the target, not startups alone
- The design called for pre-matching on data → PoC → follow-up, not an event-day handshake
Results- After the proposal, Seoul's open innovation programs widened in scope year after year
- I stayed on the ground as an operator and speaker for Seoul and district programs
- The matching structure written then became the default blueprint for closing PoCs in later MOTIE and MSS projects
What we learned herePolicy changes by redefining who it is for, not by raising the budget. Change one line — from “we support startups” to “we support the room where startups and corporates meet” — and the next year's program looks entirely different.
The expansion followed the proposal; I do not claim it as my achievement alone
