Podcast 2025

Guest: Sebastian Adams, founder of Varsity Headwear

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host: Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Host: Sebastian Adams is a man who knows his hats – or caps. Together with his brother, he founded Varsity Headwear, which sells caps to stars such as Oprah Winfrey and Casper Ruud. Based in Oslo, the company is all about style, craftsmanship and quality. Can you build a solid business around exclusive caps? Håkon Haugli and I, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, take our hats off to him and wonder.

Welcome to Innopodden, Sebastian Adams.

Adams: Thank you very much!

Host: It’s always a pleasure to have guests who bring something into the studio, and today we have – well, shall we say three, or perhaps four or five, things on the table in front of us. There are three caps, and then there’s a green … well, a cylindrical container with something inside. And then there’s a rather nice black contraption. Can you tell us a bit more about what you’ve brought with you?

Adams: Yes, so … I can start with the three caps. They’re a small selection of our best-selling styles. And since it’s autumn now, I brought along a couple of autumn … two autumn styles made from merino wool. One of them … well, generally speaking, we go for a classic cap, a classic six-panel shape. And then we use … and they all have a very clean look. It’s a kind of Scandinavian minimalism, focusing on quality materials and stylish, simple, high-quality details. So you won’t see a logo on our caps, apart from a tiny one at the back next to the strap, and then we have …

Host: … I need to pick up one of these and have a look and feel it for myself too …

Adams: … if you’ve seen people with a small white logo next to the strap at the back on the right-hand side, it’s often a Varsity cap. We’ve also developed our own signature strap, so that’s often how people who know the brand recognise the product.

Host: … Inspired by NATO watch straps, I see?

Adams: Yes, inspired by watches, that's right. And of the three, I have two made from wool and one made from a very exclusive cotton. But a key feature of our products is the slightly stiff front panel. This helps them retain their shape nicely, regardless of the shape of your head. It's very popular.

Haugli: Panels, that's a good word. Those are the pieces that make up the actual – sort of head part?

Adams: Yes, that's right. They're the pieces you cut out of the fabric. When you sew them together, they take on a three-dimensional shape.

Haugli: Yes. Who makes these? Where do you make – produce them?

Adams: We manufacture most of them in Vietnam. That’s where our main factory is, and we also have some production in Europe, but most of it takes place in Vietnam. We source materials and components from all over the world. And because we’re so specialised and really geeky about this, we choose ... we can essentially hand-pick the materials based on what we want to achieve with a particular cap. So, many of our materials are made in Europe, because that’s where you can find the most specialised textiles.

Host: You have to feel this one, Håkon, because the one you have is made from a slightly smooth fabric. Feel that!

Haugli: Yes, that one was great fun too. But Sebastian, I have to ask – how on earth did you end up becoming a cap entrepreneur – and a nerd?

Adams: Well, this adventure started with my brother Alexander. We started it almost ... yes, it must be around 12 years ago now. It originally came from our own need. We’d always been interested in entrepreneurship, so we’d often toyed with the idea of perhaps doing something ourselves one day. And then ... this idea came up: OK, wait a minute, we can’t find a cap that meets our needs. And our need was very simple; there was nothing revolutionary about it. We wear caps as an accessory with our everyday clothes, right? But we don’t want to be walking billboards. We just want caps that go with what we wear every day.

Haugli: Yes, because a lot of caps have something … something written on them, don't they?

Adams: And at least at that time, most of them … had some kind of big logo or other branding … a team, for example. It was all very sports-related, right? This product comes from the world of sport, but we wore it as a fashion accessory, so we wanted something of a higher quality that would go better with our everyday clothes. It was as simple as that. We looked everywhere, searching online and around the world, but we couldn’t find what we wanted. And we thought that if we couldn’t find it, there must be at least a small market for it. We hoped and believed we weren’t the only ones looking for something like this, so we thought we had to give it a try. It was the kind of idea we could test out on a small scale.

Haugli: Does the first cap live in a museum somewhere?

Adams: Yes, we still have it at home, so we... once we had a little... I think we were celebrating five years or something, and we brought out some of the first caps and displayed them in a small exhibition. So it’s fun to see, in a way, how far we’ve come. Even though we only make... this is our main product, and we just keep refining it year after year, you can see a big difference when you compare the first one with the one we have now.

Host: But you don't just make – and sell – caps. You also have a range of accessories, including what I rather clumsily described earlier as a big black thing. It looks like some kind of animal, but it's actually a travel case?

Adams: A travel case. Since we specialise in caps, the other things we make are essentially what you need if you really love caps – and a travel case is... very important. If you want to look after your cap and travel with it, it’s important not to squash it in a bag, so we made one very early on. And it’s a very – extremely – popular product for us. It took two years to develop because we’re so detail-oriented and perfectionistic that, even after two years, we couldn’t get external partners to make what we wanted. So I ended up going into my garage and making the mould for the case we have today entirely by myself, using some creative methods and a lot of time. Then I sent the mould to the factory and said, ‘Could you please make it like this?’ And it has served us very well.

Haugli: I wish the listeners could see it. It looks really exclusive, with a zip at the bottom and a kind of platform. You can fold up the lid itself, and it looks like a cap. You can immediately see what it is.

Adams: Yes, it’s shaped a bit like a cap. It has the shape of a cap, and for listeners who are familiar with glasses cases, sports glasses in particular often come with travel cases covered in a kind of nylon fabric. And that’s what we’re looking at now. You can fit three or four caps in there, and perhaps a pair of sunglasses too, if you like.

Haugli: Yes. Exactly.

Host: Exactly, and there is room for three or four ...

Adams: Yes, three or four caps, and then – well, you know, because … you can’t take it for granted that there’ll be room in people’s luggage. So that’s why we’ve … that’s why it took so long to develop the shape, because we don’t want to take up any more space than necessary. So you can bring this product with you, and it gets to travel in your luggage. That’s a real honour, so this is as small as it can be, holding around three to four caps.

Haugli: So … we need to talk a little about the commercial side here. Is there a particular group of people who buy caps, or are they something everyone buys?

Adams: That was part of the reason why we thought this would be such an exciting project to embark on. In theory, the target audience and potential customer base are enormous, right? We sell to women and men of all ages. And when you’re running a business, having a large potential market is always an advantage, as it gives you a better chance of generating enough revenue.

Haugli: Hear, hear.

Adams: So we ... so we sell to absolutely every age group, really.

Host: But your caps cost considerably more than the ones we are used to finding at XXL or similar retailers, which often have well-known brand names on them. Who buys caps for, say, two or three thousand kroner?

Adams: Yes, we do have some products that cost between two and three thousand kroner, but they’re not what we sell most of. Most of our caps cost around 800–900 kroner. So that’s definitely what we sell most of. The caps costing two to three thousand kroner are at the top end of our price range. But if you look at our average product, we are slightly more expensive than many of those you mentioned. What matters to us, and what I think is important in this context, is the value: what do you get for your money? You can probably buy caps for as little as 20 kroner if you try hard enough to find something very cheap. It’s possible.

Host: But you can also get caps for NOK 12,000, if you want?

Adams: That's exactly it, isn't it? So there's a broad range here. And we're affordable when you look at … I mean, we're very affordable when you look at the whole picture. But we sell to ordinary people who care about quality and aesthetics. We make a product that looks good and fits into an everyday wardrobe. We find that we have all kinds of customers, all kinds of people, and we're not so expensive that people can't afford our products if they choose to prioritise them. So we sell to a wide range of people, but I think the common denominator is that they want quality. They want something that looks good and works well, especially over time.

Haugli: Yes, I have to say that I own one of your caps – is that the right word? Caps? – and what I find so interesting about what you’re saying is that it clearly isn’t... I mean, I bought it several years ago, so it has had quite a long life. And what I find interesting is that I’ve owned many caps over the years and wear them because I’m worried about getting sunburnt, among other reasons. But the thing is... I bought it for two reasons. First, there’s no logo on it. That was very important to me. I don’t want to walk around advertising a clothing brand, sports club or anything like that. The one I had before was from Georgetown University in Washington DC, but I’ve never attended Georgetown University. I found it a bit embarrassing to walk around wearing it. So it was very important to me that the cap should be neutral. The other thing was that the fabric itself seemed to be of exceptionally high quality. So, as a consumer, I can confirm everything you’re saying – that’s exactly how I experienced the purchasing process. I thought, ‘This is a quality product,’ and that has proved to be true, because it has held up very, very well. I don’t have a case yet, so I’ll have to consider getting one, but I take the cap with me wherever I go and wear it a lot, especially in summer. And it keeps its shape. You must also have placed great emphasis on designing it that way. Clothes inevitably wear out, but this cap can clearly withstand quite a lot – at least the one I own can. It’s made from a green, linen-like fabric. It probably isn’t actually linen, but that’s what it looks like.

Adams: Yes, it probably is linen. Linen is one of our best-selling caps in the summer, so that’s probably what it is.

Haugli: Is it linen, then? It’s very nice. I’ve said that three times now. But just to make it clear to our listeners, this isn’t something we arranged in advance.

Adams: Exactly – quality and durability are incredibly important, and with that linen cap, for example, we deliberately chose colours that would develop an attractive patina over time. All products wear out, and all fabrics will fade in the sun over time. So we try to work with life as it happens, rather than against it. If you compared the cap you have now with a new one, you would see quite a significant difference in colour. But the trick is that we have tried to choose a colour that still looks good even after it has faded to a lighter shade. It is about trust, isn't it? Between us and our consumers and customers, and those are the kinds of things we care about. We need people to come back – we cannot make a living from selling one cap. We need people to return and be so pleased that they tell their friends. Then we have done a good job. And to achieve that, you have to get into the details. We try to consider … we try to see what happens to our products after they leave the shop too. What kind of life will they have? We try to anticipate what might happen. But durability also depends a great deal on how you look after the product. We try to help and teach our customers how to do that – we have developed three different soaps for caps.

Host: And you have a customer club with tips and that sort of thing?

Adams: Yes, so we try to help our customers get the most out of the product.

Host: Do you find that they are interested in it?

Adams: Yes, yes, yes. We feel very fortunate to have so many engaged customers who come back again and again. In Norway, we have customers who are collectors, you know? Some have as many as 50–60 caps that they have bought over many years. That is at the extreme end, of course. We carried out a survey a little while ago and found that members of our customer club owned more than five products on average. So we must have done something right to get people to buy more than one.

Haugli: You set up the company a few years ago now. Could you tell us a little about the ups and downs and the challenges you have faced? When have you hit obstacles, and how have you moved forward? Tell us a little about the company’s journey.

Adams: Well, we’ve basically done what you’d call bootstrapping in English, right? We started with next to no money. We just used our savings, and my brother and I started the business together, opening our first shop in a side street just off Bogstadveien. We’ve built it up brick by brick from there. We had very limited funds, so we had to be extremely careful with every penny, think hard about how we spent our money and really focus on earning more than we spent. So ours is essentially a bootstrapping or lean startup story. We carried on for ten years before bringing in any external capital from an investor. So we really have built the business brick by brick.

Haugli: Are you both still involved?

Adams: Yes, yes. So we run this together, and we live and breathe it. We’re both incredibly passionate about it, so it’s great fun. But yes, if you’re going to be a specialist in Norway – and we believe that being a specialist gives you a great deal of credibility and trust – the market for a cap specialist in Norway is limited. So from the very beginning, the exciting question was: can we expand beyond Norway, and how do we do it? That’s where we’ve focused a lot of our energy. We took that step about nine years ago by opening a shop in France. We could see that we had a market in Norway. People liked what we made, and they came back to buy more. But it’s one thing to sit in Norway and think there’s a market; it’s another to find out whether it actually exists. We thought, ‘Right, we just have to get out there and try.’ So, of all places, we opened a shop in Saint-Tropez. Most people see it as a very exclusive summer destination, but we chose it because it’s a tiny town that attracts visitors from all over the world. Over the course of two months, people come from all over, so having a shop there would allow us to see whether people wanted to buy our products and where they came from. That could give us an indication of which market we should focus on. And finally, because it’s such a small town, we were able to secure a short-term lease.

Haugli: Yes, exactly.

Adams: And that was the key, because in so many European cities, if you want to be where it’s all happening, you have to sign long leases, and it’s very expensive. We didn’t have any money! We took all our savings and basically committed ourselves to that rent for five months or however long it was, then packed up the car in Norway and drove down. And we built the shop ourselves – Alex and I. We had all the furniture delivered in the evening to the port of Saint-Tropez, then carried everything inside – three tonnes of shop fittings – and put it all together. So our story is largely …

Haugli: Yes, and how did it go? I’m really curious. What did you learn?

Adams: Well, it’s quite humbling when you’ve spent all the money, travelled to another country and built a shop, and that’s all we’ve done.

Haugli: No – ?

Adams: We didn’t… we didn’t have time to think about marketing or anything else. Just starting a company, opening the shop – doing all the practical work – took up so much of our energy and capacity that we didn’t have time to think about it. Part of the idea was that once you were there, there would be so much footfall that you hoped it would be enough in itself to generate sales. But those first few days were quite humbling, standing there in your cap and watching people walk past your shop, you know? And knowing how much it was costing. But fortunately, it wasn’t long before people started coming in, having a look around and asking, ‘What is this?’ And then you get this absolutely fantastic interaction with people, you know? People from all over the world come in and ask, ‘OK, what is this?’ You get to test your pitch over and over again. It has been an advantage for us in so many ways to work in the shops ourselves, because we meet the customers and hear what they say and think, and see how things fit. We’ve been very fortunate to get that feedback. So after a summer there, it had been a huge success. We had sold a lot, made our money back, avoided going bankrupt and returned home with a wealth of customer insights. We had also recorded where all our customers came from, so we had some data to help us decide what to do next. What was originally intended as a market test to understand where in Europe – or indeed the world – we should focus was so successful that we decided to return the following year. We’ve now been there for nine consecutive years.

Haugli: Oh, and you're still there? So if anyone listening to this is in Saint-Tropez, do pop in!

Adams: Yes, and now we've also opened one in Cannes, in the same region, so we now have two shops in the south of France.

Host: So these are your own dedicated shops, but you're also available in a number of other shops and online too?

Adams: Yes, yes, yes, well ... we sell – I mean, we sell through – sort of – lots of great fashion boutiques all over the world, as well as online worldwide. We have our own shops in Norway, in Oslo, and we also have frequent pop-ups at Gardermoen Airport. Then we have shops in Cannes and Saint-Tropez, as well as half a shop in Paris. It’s a shop-in-shop, so it’s inside another shop, where we have a small selection. And we’ve opened – we have shops in Kuwait, Bahrain and Dubai together with a partner there, and we’re constantly exploring where we might open our next shop.

Host: So, where would your dream location for a shop be?

Adams: Our dream location – well, we dream of New York. Because, you know, America is the largest market. The figures we’ve been able to find suggest that around 55 per cent of global hat and cap sales are in the US.

Haugli: 55 per cent!

Adams: Exactly, so it’s a bit like … it would be a little strange not to target that market. We’ve been working towards it for several years now, but it’s a big step, and it’s a long way away. There are many factors that make us feel we need to do it properly and not rush into it. We had a pop-up there last summer, in June. We spent a month in a shop in SoHo, New York, following much the same strategy as in Saint-Tropez: let’s run a pop-up, see how people respond, learn a little, get feedback, and then decide what to do with that information. Based on that pop-up, we felt very positive about opening a shop in New York. But we’re saving up to take that step.

Haugli: The last time we met was actually in New York, when the Crown Prince was there with a large business delegation to mark the 200th anniversary of Norwegian emigration – or organised Norwegian emigration. You had a tiny pop-up shop in the business festival area. It was great to see, and I mention it because when we talk about exports from Norway or internationalisation, much of what we do in Norway isn't visible or tangible. But you represent something we do very little of in Norway: you make consumer products, in other words, B2C. What kind of response did you get from being at the festival?

Adams: Yes, there was a lot going on, so there were lots of people – lots of things to see. But generally, when we showcase our products, people respond positively. They’re curious, and they always have questions – you know – because we’re quite niche, or at least that’s what people think, so they’re fascinated. You always end up having interesting conversations with people about what we’re doing. But what I found quite fun was that – you know – there were so many interesting Norwegian business leaders at this conference, from some of Norway’s largest companies. And I was standing there feeling a bit like, well, like I was pretending to belong. But then … what was fun was that, in my conversations with people, it turned out that they already owned our caps. So time and again, it would be: ‘Where did you say you were from?’ ‘I’m from Varsity.’ ‘Oh, right!’ And then they’d tell me stories about how they used our products and so on. So that was really fun …

Host: It’s fascinating that you’re making a go of it and attracting that kind of attention in the US. Is there anything more quintessentially American than a classic baseball cap?

Adams: Yes, they did invent it, after all.

Host: … But how on earth can a small Norwegian company compete in that market?

Adams: That’s a very good question. I think that, at least, we sell a great deal in the US. Around 40 per cent of our online sales go there, and it is already one of our most important markets. We believe they respect the fact that we take something of theirs so seriously. This is something they really love, and it is very much theirs, isn’t it? They feel it comes from them, but we treat it with a great deal of respect, and that resonates with them. And I also think … the other factor that gives us an opportunity here is that we bring a slightly Scandinavian, Norwegian perspective to the product, don’t we? It combines the quality we value so highly in Norway, the aesthetics and Scandinavian design, with a product they really love. That’s why we believe we can grow there.

Haugli: We at Innovation Norway have had the pleasure of working with you in several different contexts. I know, for example, that you took part in a programme we ran at Bocconi University in Milan – the branding capital of the world. Could you tell us a little about that? Did you have any light-bulb moments there?

Adams: Yes, generally speaking, I have to say that we have benefited from many excellent opportunities through the Norwegian fashion cluster, which is supported by Innovation Norway, and we have learnt a great deal. But the Bocconi course you mentioned really stands out. If many of the other courses we have attended were like a bachelor’s degree, this was more like an MBA. When you attend a university with its own fashion faculty, you realise how seriously they take the subject, so it was incredibly valuable for us. It is always good to step outside the Norwegian bubble, speak to people with different perspectives, learn and see yourself from the outside. If I remember correctly, fashion is the largest industry in Italy, so it is no surprise that they are good at it. We learnt about many different things and had some fascinating discussions about strategy, including what it means to be a specialist rather than a lifestyle brand. We received a great deal of valuable input, and they challenged us on many points. I believe we have attended at least two courses there, and we would happily go again. We have gained a great deal from the experience, and we continue to apply many of the lessons we learnt there to our strategy.

Haugli: It was so funny, because I met one of the professors there, and she is a professor of branding – which in itself is quite unusual. Completely unprompted, she brought you up. She said, ‘I work with a lot of Scandinavian companies’ – and she really has – ‘but they vary in how receptive they are, or how well they can apply the material.’ Then she mentioned Varsity and said that you were putting it to good use. It was lovely that she was so enthusiastic – both for Norway and for you as a company. She also said, ‘I knew nothing about caps, but after meeting you, I know quite a bit about them now.’ So she is clearly not in the target group, but she was very... I thought that would be nice to pass on.

Adams: It is a great honour, thank you – thank you very much.

Haugli: Take that on board. I also think it demonstrates the impact and importance of making those kinds of connections and creating those kinds of learning arenas – an important lesson for us too.

Host: Now that we're talking about branding, we really ought to take a look at the last item you've brought along as well, Sebastian. It's the one I described as a kind of green cylinder. The outside looks really stylish, with your logo and name on it, and inside we find a beanie.

Adams: Yes. A quality Norwegian beanie made from cashmere and merino wool – we actually launched it just last weekend.

Presenter: The fabric is very soft and comfortable.

Adams: Well, well … We’re cap specialists, after all. But expanding into new categories is a hugely important strategic tool for us. We’ve been very cautious about doing that, but we felt the time was right to test the waters a little and explore other types of headwear. So now we’ve launched our first beanie. It was an immediate success online, which is really exciting. It’ll be interesting to see how it’s received in shops, as that often takes a little longer. We still firmly believe in being specialists, but we also think we can sell a wider range of products while retaining our core specialism.

Host: That was one of the things I wanted to ask you about – time flies when you're having fun – and we're nearing the end. But what are your plans going forward? Will you be focusing more on beanies, or are you planning to offer completely different products as well?

Adams: No, we still firmly believe that if you want to expand beyond Norway and build an international brand, you make life much easier for yourself by specialising. You have a much better chance of succeeding if you have a credible, straightforward story about what you do. We’ve seen that time and again. Take the shop I mentioned in France: it’s just a tiny hole in the wall. Aesthetically, it’s not a particularly impressive shop – it really is tiny – so we may have half a second to persuade people to come in. There are no windows, so you can’t see what we do until you reach the door, and people are already walking past. That really shows us how important it is to be clear. If people only have half a second to grasp what the shop is about, the concept has to be immediately obvious. Year after year, this has shown us the real advantage of being very clear about what you do: people understand what’s going on and can decide whether to come in.

Haugli: Exactly. So if I'm in Saint-Tropez and turn to look inside the shop, what do I see?

Adams: Well, what you see is a very – hopefully – a very elegant shop where all you see is the range … very elegant, illuminated shelves, with caps in every imaginable colour. They line the walls, and then in the middle there are a few floor displays where we showcase some caps, but caps are really all you see. So it has worked very well there, because it is so clear what we do. But now I’ve forgotten your question.

Host: Yes, the question was: where do you see yourselves going from here? In other words, what is the next step for the business and its development?

Adams: Well, our goal is to become an international brand – the best-known international brand for quality caps. That is what we are aiming for globally. But we see our category as headwear. So we will gradually expand into other types of headwear too. The thinking is that, as cap specialists, we have learnt a great deal about people’s heads over time, and we can put that knowledge to good use. One example is the beanie we just mentioned, which we have now launched for the first time. We have brought our DNA and expertise as cap specialists into this product. We have launched the new beanie in three sizes, which no one else does. We offer three sizes because one of the main reasons people are so happy with our caps is that they can find one that fits their head. That requires different sizes, so we have brought our DNA into this product too. I think we will gradually add more types of headwear. But caps will remain our guiding star.

Haugli: If anyone listening is curious about the products we have here on the table, what should they do?

Adams: They can visit our website or search …

Haugli: Yes, varsity.com, right?

Adams: varsityheadwear.com, yes. You can take a look there, and we’re on Instagram under the same name. So, if you’d like to see a little of what we do, it’s a small universe, and hopefully … we welcome everyone to take a peek into our little universe.

Haugli: Great, we should definitely share that invitation with all our listeners. After all, everyone needs a cap, but everyone also needs to understand how to build a brand in Norway. You have succeeded in doing that, so what you are doing is likely to be of broad interest. We are certainly very pleased with our partnership and wish you every success. And it was great, really great, to have you with us in the studio today, Sebastian.

Adams: Thank you so much!

Host: Thank you, Sebastian Adams from Varsity Headwear, and thank you, Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann. We'll keep a cool head – or just warm enough – and you'll hear from us again on Innopodden.

Guest: Anna Holm Heide, CEO of NAST

From Innovation Norway: CEO Håkon Haugli and

Presenter Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Host: NAST aims to make technology Norway's largest export sector by 2040. Anna Holm Heide will lead the organisation – and us – towards that goal. She brings experience from Autostore and No Isolation, as well as the Norwegian Student Organisation and ANSA. How will NAST achieve its goals, and who is joining them on the journey? We are joined by Håkon Haugli, and I am Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Welcome to Innopodden!

Holm Heide: Thank you very much!

Host: NAST stands for the Norwegian Alliance for Startups and Tech. In addition to the goal I mentioned at the outset, it aims to make Norway a leading nation for entrepreneurs. To begin, tell us a little about who you are.

Holm Heide: NAST is a relatively new organisation, although it has existed as an initiative for some time. Founders of ambitious scaleups have joined forces to create an organisation that champions key policy issues, aiming to put Norway on the international map for scaleups and competitiveness. NAST's goal is to make Norway a place where you can come, build and stay – even after achieving success as a scaleup founder.

Host: And who are your members?

Holm Heide: Our members include founders of various companies – many founders go on to start several companies once they get going – as well as scaleups, meaning companies that have scaled up and are in the process of establishing themselves in multiple countries. We also have startups that are well on their way to becoming scaleups. In addition, we have supporting members from the investor community and the wider ecosystem. You can also join as a supporter if you simply want to support the causes we work for.

Host: I don't know if it's possible to give a straightforward answer, but what is the single most important issue for you in achieving your goals?

Holm Heide: The most important thing is to get politicians, as well as the general public, to see the companies of tomorrow and new business as some of the most important work we are doing. We need to move away from the idea that entrepreneurs are people who start out in a basement, work away on their own and are mainly driven by a desire to become rich. Entrepreneurs and today’s startups are creating the businesses of tomorrow. If we can achieve that shift in mindset, I believe we will have come a long way. But we also need the right framework conditions to enable companies to grow. We need to attract talent from around the world and make people feel welcome when they come to Norway. And we need an investment community that makes it possible to invest in companies here in Norway, so that we are not dependent on foreign capital.

Host: That almost sounds like something you could have said too, Håkon?

Haugli: Absolutely, and I think it is great that NAST is being established and that … startups and scaleups are organising themselves and actively participating in the political debate, because that is certainly needed. We are now seeing some … I would say some warning lights are flashing amber. For example, when Norway is compared with other countries on entrepreneurship and scaling up, we are not doing particularly well. Or at least not as well as we should be. And as you rightly say, Anna, the same applies to the framework conditions – ensuring that Norway is a good place to start and grow a business is an ongoing task. Our ecosystem is also quite fragile – the term can seem a little abstract, but it essentially consists of centres of expertise, investor communities and, of course, the entrepreneurs themselves. There are not many venture capital investors in Norway, for example, so as the Norwegian economy undergoes this transition, we depend on everyone involved to ensure that these … these pieces come together and the gears mesh.

Host: Yes, you mentioned that the warning lights are flashing for entrepreneurship. A lack of risk capital, cuts to support schemes for startups and setbacks in the green transition. Many would say that NAST and several others are fighting a steep uphill battle?

Holm Heide: Absolutely, and that is precisely why it is so important that we work together. We can also see that this is not unique to Norway – the same thing is happening across Europe. The EU has launched a Competitiveness Compass to help put it on the right track. As part of this, it has launched the EUR 5 billion Scale-up Europe Fund and is now investing significant resources and time in steering Europe – or rather, the EU – towards becoming as competitive as the US and China. We need to do something similar in Norway. We need a competitiveness compass that guides us towards the industries of tomorrow, perhaps away from where our compass is pointing so firmly today. We must recognise that we need to make a number of changes if we are to adapt. Abelias Transformation Barometer, for example, shows that Norway scores poorly on motivation to start new companies. We see that many students leaving university choose much safer careers rather than starting their own companies. Innovation is a missing piece in Norway, and I hope we can move in the same direction as the EU. But that requires politicians to prioritise it. We need to talk about it and decide where we want to go. We need a vision.

Host: Tax became a major issue in this year’s election campaign, and it is important to NAST. You want to abolish or reduce the wealth tax, change the exit tax – including to retain international talent working in Norwegian companies for less than ten years – and change the taxation of share options. We will not explore all these areas in depth, but do you sometimes think tax received more attention during the election campaign than it should have?

Holm Heide: There is no doubt that tax and the wider business environment are hugely important. That said, I think many people felt there was no clear vision or direction. Tax then became something of a fallback issue. The lack of effort to adapt the tax system for scaleups became a common cause for those who wanted to see clear reform, so I definitely think the tax debate became a little too inward-looking. At the same time, it is important to have rules in place that enable companies to grow, and the way the tax system is structured today makes that difficult. A much more ambitious approach to taxing share options, for example, is hugely important. I also think it is vital to review the exit tax, as the Ministry of Finance prefers to call it, so that people are willing to commit fully and feel that the system is backing them.

Host: But if it wasn't going to be about tax, what should it have been about?

Holm Heide: NAST has three key priorities: tax, capital and talent. So if you take tax out of the equation – although it affects all three to a considerable extent – it is also about having a system that is ready to receive international talent, makes people feel welcome and makes it easier to live in Norway. In Oslo, for example, there is a fast-track scheme for skilled workers that has reduced the processing time for everything you need to open a Norwegian bank account from 37 weeks – the length of a pregnancy, exactly 37 weeks in my case, at least – to three days. They have made it happen, and we can see that it works. It makes people feel welcome and wanted. Yet the government says that introducing this nationally would be too complicated, so it simply passes the responsibility on to municipalities that do not have the resources. I therefore believe it is important for us to become a welcome hub for these people if we are to attract the talent we need – because Norway does need it. We lack much of the expertise required to scale up companies internationally. Then there is capital. We need a robust investment community with venture capital that is willing to back startups, because they are rarely a particularly attractive financial bet. That capital therefore needs to be available, and the government could play a much greater role in making that happen.

Haugli: Yes, there is a great deal to agree with here. I think ... when we ask businesses – and startups in particular – what limits their growth, they rank access to expertise as the number one factor. Capital is also important. Then there is a third factor that is absolutely crucial: having customers. That means both securing your first customer and having a credible business case. When we receive applications from entrepreneurs, we pay particular attention to the latter. Does the solution actually solve a problem? Can it scale up? Is there a market for it? This is also an area where we have much to learn in Norway. Many entrepreneurs who come to us talk extensively about the technology they have developed, but far too little about the problem they solve and how customers can benefit from it. I think this is partly cultural in Norway. We are, in a sense, a nation of engineers, and compared with other countries, Norwegian startups invest too little and too late in the commercial side of their business. But what you are saying is very important, Anna: these issues are interconnected. Tax and access to capital are linked, as are the taxation of share options and recruitment. If it takes too long for foreign workers to get established here – 37 weeks, the length of a pregnancy – there are many other opportunities around the world that these talented people could just as easily pursue, or might prefer to pursue because they would not have to wait so long. What Oslo has done is excellent, and anyone listening who is curious can visit the City of Oslo's website – or perhaps Oslo Business Region's website – to read more about it. It shows that major simplifications are possible and that we can make the process of moving to Norway much more streamlined. That is important. A number of stakeholders also have a role to play here, in addition to the entrepreneurs themselves and their organisations. These include universities and the systems that support entrepreneurship both within and alongside education, such as student societies, startup incubators and much more. All of this is extremely important. NTNU, for example, does very well in this area, while other universities do less well. There is clearly a great deal they can learn from one another. Universities have a mandate to promote innovation, but this seems to be interpreted differently across institutions. I would argue that universities make their most important contribution to innovation through education. As you mentioned ... studies show that the longer young people remain in education, the less likely they are to start their own business. That should give us serious pause. It ought to be the other way round, because the more education you have, the better equipped you should be to assess risk and develop ideas that can be put into practice. But the reality is exactly the opposite, so we have a major task ahead of us.

Host: We also support student entrepreneurship through our STUD-ENT scheme, and our team is very clear that the quality of the projects they receive is steadily improving.

Haugli: Yes, and they are every bit as good as the general applications we receive from entrepreneurs. That is interesting, because these are very young people, and the ideas we receive through STUD-ENT are often developed during their studies or among students. This means they have had far less time to mature than, for example, an idea from the average entrepreneur – a 46-year-old man with considerable business experience who may have spent ten years working in, say, a supplier industry, identified a problem and then taken a solution to market. So the dynamic is different, which makes the high quality particularly encouraging. The work done by Young Enterprise Norway, what we do through STUD-ENT, and not least the work of universities and others, is incredibly important. It also helps create a culture, both at universities and in society more broadly, where starting a business is seen as a positive choice.

Holm Heide: Absolutely. I think it is incredibly important to learn about the opportunities available to you while you are at university. Starting early matters too – I helped start No Isolation when I was just 25 and gave no thought to the risks. We were ready to test everything all the time, including prototypes at an early stage. I think the older you get, the more concerned you become with making everything perfect, but you simply have to get out there and test. Starting a business straight out of university has many advantages, but you need to know it is an option. You need to know it is a choice you can make instead of becoming a consultant at a large company. Universities are where it all happens, so we need these initiatives around them. In Finland, for example, almost all activity in the startup and scaleup ecosystem comes from universities, which has also produced quite a few exciting success stories. But it is also deeply integrated into society as a whole. I think we can do much better here. NTNU is doing a lot of good work, but there is also room for improvement elsewhere in Norway.

Haugli: Yes, and much more is needed. The Stockholm School of Economics is a vibrant environment, and many of the digital startups that have grown into major companies originated there. So we need to take a closer look – or perhaps look in the mirror – and ask ourselves: what about Norway? What does the situation look like here? I think we simply have to acknowledge that we have not quite managed to achieve the same thing. It takes a village to make this work, but we – and no doubt many others – are extending a very clear invitation to the universities to consider how we can do this even better. We are very pleased with the small tool we have in STUD-ENT, but it is only a tiny part of the picture.

Host: But many people care about this, and there are quite a few organisations working to support entrepreneurs and startups. These include the Norwegian Entrepreneurs Association, NHO Gründer, FIN – the Association of Innovation Companies in Norway, SMB Norge, Start Norge, Junior Achievement Norway and undoubtedly many others. Where does NAST fit into this landscape?

Holm Heide: Very few of these organisations overlap, and I think that ... If these organisations and their members do a really good job, we will gain more members, because Norway will have more scaleups. As we discussed in relation to education, there is Start Norge and Ungt Entreprenørskap, while FIN is an organisation for ecosystems and technology transfer offices (TTOs) – in other words, early-stage technology transfer and the commercialisation of research. There are also advisory bodies for small companies, which we certainly used extensively when I was at No Isolation. This ecosystem simply shows that many people want us to move in this direction and are working together to make it happen. I see NAST as an important part of this group of organisations because we work at the political level. We want politicians to support this change of pace. We do not provide courses and advisory services in the same way, and I believe that giving startups and scaleups a voice is vital if we are to get politicians to listen.

Host: What do you think, Håkon – do we need all of these?

Haugli: No, that is not really for me to judge. I mean, we live in a free country, and it is great that people organise themselves. That is my general view. I think it is very important for these organisations to work well together, and there are certainly not too many voices speaking up for entrepreneurs in Norway – quite the opposite, I would say. It is an important and substantial task. Established businesses have highly effective advocates, while emerging businesses do not. In that sense, I welcome all these voices. What also matters is the poli... what is the political agenda? I think there is considerable overlap in the issues people care about. Anna, you mentioned the EU. We are approaching a new programme period for Horizon Europe, the research and innovation programme, and the innovation element in particular is highly relevant to entrepreneurs. It includes accelerator programmes, and the EIC has become Europe's largest venture capital investor – although it is essentially an EU programme. Then there is also the Competitiveness Fund, which will prompt a debate in Norway: should Norway take part? It comes at a cost, but at present we contribute less than we receive from Horizon Europe. So, in a sense, it makes good economic sense for society. It is also a very important tool for individual companies that benefit from the accelerator programme and from the loans, grants and investments provided by the EU, which complement the national ecosystem. I would also like to raise a concern that I hope these organisations, including NAST, will address. Comparisons now show that access to private capital, particularly venture capital, is slowing sharply. It is measurable, and we can see it. The European Innovation Scoreboard shows it too. This is the area in which Norway is declining the most. To make matters worse, national R&D schemes – research and innovation funding, including Innovation Norway's funding – are also being cut. This creates a double negative effect. Access to private capital is declining, while the mechanisms designed to mobilise that capital and reduce risk for private investors are also being scaled back. That is not good. Taken together, this means we will see a slowdown in entrepreneurship and, I would say, scaleup activity in Norway. I sometimes see people in the media saying that the private market will sort this out – companies can simply go to the bank. But the problem is that the companies benefiting from both private venture investment and the public support system are not bankable. They would not be able to obtain a standard bank loan. That is precisely why these schemes exist: to bridge what we might call the valley of death at an early stage. The risk is too high for an individual commercially driven actor, whether an investor or a bank, but it is in society's interest for some of these startups to succeed. And this relates to what you were saying, Anna: we have to accept that many of these companies will go bankrupt. That is the reality. But if one in five or one in ten survives, that is a good outcome, and that company – or those companies – will repay so much to society through taxes, employers' National Insurance contributions and other means that the investment will pay off. This perspective receives very little attention in public debate. In the election campaign we have just had, for example, the term 'waste' was used. I have to register that as a serious concern. If everything long-term is considered wasteful, then we have a problem in this country.

Holm Heide: Yes, I think the fact that we are seeing less venture capital and less risk capital should set alarm bells ringing for those who can reverse this trend. We need to invest to turn this around, rather than simply letting it happen. That is precisely what the EU is doing with this fund. Many other countries are doing exactly the same: investing in emerging businesses by bringing in more capital to counter this trend. We are not seeing that at all in Norway, particularly not in the new national budget.

Host: Among the issues your members have voted for – there are ten in total – through what is a good, democratic process, one is to use the government's purchasing power to strengthen innovation and entrepreneurship. You are welcome to say more about that, although it is perhaps not something we at Innovation Norway can do much about. But the other thing that …

Haugli: Actually, we can!

Host: Yes, but then you'll have to tell us more about that too.

Haugli: Yes, well … our experience is that both public-sector buyers and startups need some guidance on public procurement processes. First of all, tenders need to be designed properly, and that requires those responsible for procurement to understand what innovative procurement is. And that is not always easy to grasp intuitively. When I talk about this, I often say that the light bulb did not come about through the gradual development of the candle. So if you order candles, you get candles. In other words, if you order a specific technology, you get that technology – perhaps marginally improved, but it is still the same technology. If instead you order based on a need, such as lighting, you may get something completely different, such as a light bulb. And this is important. In addition, many startups find it very challenging to navigate the public sector, which is large and difficult to access and often imposes requirements relating to credit history or other criteria that startups cannot meet. So there is work to be done here. Historically, we have had several instruments for this, including innovation contracts and innovation partnerships, and they have been very successful. For example, the startup Diffia has helped introduce remote patient monitoring at Østfold Hospital, which is now being rolled out across the entire South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority. This has not only given the company some major customers, but also means that patients no longer have to travel back and forth to the hospital. That is one example of how these kinds of tools can be used. So yes, this is also part of what we do at Innovation Norway. It is of course only a small part of our work, but I believe there is considerable potential here – and I think NAST has really hit the nail on the head – for us to become much better at this. Public procurement amounts to NOK 800 billion a year. That is an enormous amount of money.

Host: An enormous amount of money.

Holm Heide: The amount of money is one thing, but the system is another matter entirely. When disruptive solutions enter the market, they expose the shortcomings and flaws in procurement processes. There is a great deal that does not work particularly well in the way we run tenders today. One of our member companies, Cobrief, works on precisely this issue and has some shocking stories about how the system operates. For a company with limited resources, responding to a tender designed for something entirely different is extremely resource-intensive, even if your service meets the stated requirements. After investing so much time and so many resources, failing to win the contract can be the final blow. We need to untangle these issues to make better use of society's resources. The government must also take its responsibility seriously and look to innovative Norwegian solutions rather than large international companies. We have a very long way to go, and we are ready to take that journey, because this system needs a radical overhaul.

Host: That was interesting! And I got more out of that than I had expected! Very good. But the other point I also wanted to get to is that you have been tasked with putting forward a proposal to streamline and automate the business support system. That certainly makes me very curious. What do you mean by that?

Holm Heide: These are challenges that I know you are fully aware of, but it is about making it easier to apply and navigate the systems that exist today. Many people starting a business have a great deal to think about. They do not have much time or many resources, and they may not have much patience either. Entering a system where they have to write applications and navigate a world that is completely unfamiliar to them can therefore be extremely demanding. What we are calling for through greater efficiency and automation is for these systems to be developed with users and companies in mind. At the same time, I think many entrepreneurs assume, for example, that Innovation Norway is there solely for them. But Innovation Norway has a very broad mandate. It – or rather, you – must work with agriculture and tourism, you have many international offices, and you have a regional focus. There is a lot going on, so it is also wrong to think that the entire system exists for a single entrepreneur. We need to become better at understanding one another and what we should expect from each other. I also think you are well aware of this and have already done a great deal of work on it, so I believe things will improve as the changes you have made begin to take effect.

Haugli: I see this as an invitation from NAST to us. First of all, we feel we are making good progress in using automated solutions, including artificial intelligence. We have established what we call Single point of entry, a tool where you do not submit an application; you simply describe what you want, plan or hope to do, and we help you navigate the business support system. This extends far beyond Innovation Norway's schemes to include other services as well. For example, many people are referred to local authority startup services. But we believe this is work we will never fully complete. On the one hand, if you are to receive public funding, you must be prepared to explain what you will use the money for and account for it in a final report. But we will make the process as simple as possible. We should only ask for information once and not request information we do not use when processing the application, and I believe we can improve in this area. At the same time, it is important that this debate and discussion are based on facts. So my message to you, Anna, and your members is: talk to us about this, not about us. We may be able to make changes that we also want to make, and we want to address specific examples of poor experiences. There have been, and continue to be, discussions about Innovation Norway. I have met many founders who have had poor experiences with us and, of course, many who have had good experiences too. But sometimes I think: you are absolutely right. We have handled this poorly, we have made mistakes, and a system like ours does make mistakes. We also receive specific proposals for change. At other times, however, I feel there are unrealistic expectations of what we can do. It can never be as simple as pressing a button and receiving money from Innovation Norway, such as a loan. We need some documentation, we must carry out a risk assessment, and we must assess the business case, because we also have a responsibility to the taxpayers who fund our work. So above all, to repeat what I said at the outset: this is great. Let us discuss it and what it means in practical terms. What exactly do you want? We may be able to make very specific changes, and in any case, it is important for us to understand what lies behind this ambition.

Holm Heide: I should also say that this is not an entirely new issue. I prepared for this podcast by doing a bit of Googling, and I found an article from 4 September 2008 on digi.no entitled ‘The internet will put an end to the form-filling burden’. It featured the newly appointed Minister of Trade and Industry, Sylvia Brustad, who said, ‘I believe we will see more entrepreneurial activity when support schemes become more accessible to everyone.’ Kjetil, the host from Innovation Norway, was already on the case and had put 50 services online. So I think, as you say, we will be working on this for a long time, but I also get the impression that you take it very seriously. And I agree that we should work together, because we share the same goal and Innovation Norway plays a hugely important role. Many entrepreneurs have a very close relationship with Innovation Norway, for better or worse. And yes, we are stronger together. That’s what I think.

Host: We might look at those figures a little differently today – we wouldn't be particularly proud of having 50 services. We're now down to ...

Haugli: ‘No, nor should we put PDF forms online, but ... What you are highlighting is that this is a job I do not think we will ever fully complete. If we could say we had completed it, that would mean we no longer had ambitions to make things easier – and we do. We are clearly committed to making things as simple as possible. And this is not just about us. Among other things, we want to share data across the business support system, so that information provided to the Research Council of Norway can be shared with Innovation Norway, and so on. That will also benefit entrepreneurs by simplifying the process. We have reduced the number of application forms from more than 40 to four. We have also established the Single point of entry solution I mentioned, so that when you start a dialogue with the business support system, you do not need to have familiarised yourself with all the available schemes. You can simply tell us what you want to do, and we will provide the guidance. So a great deal has changed since that article in 1998, but the broader point – that there is still work to be done – obviously remains valid. Another thing I think about when we discuss this is that some people feel we do not understand what they are telling us. That is another dimension, and I believe it is also a competence-related challenge for us. The world is changing rapidly, technology is changing rapidly, and ... so we need to keep developing our internal expertise in new areas. It is legitimate criticism when someone says, “We came to Innovation Norway with a business idea based on a particular technology, and they did not understand what we were saying.” I do not think we will ever eliminate that entirely, but we must continually strive to understand enough. We will never be experts in everything, but we can understand enough to grasp what something is. Then there is another group, I would say, who are dissatisfied with us: those whose applications are rejected. Around half of those who apply for support are turned down, and many of them feel the decision is unfair. Some of them are right, but many are not. As I see it, running a bank is not a popularity contest. We are lending taxpayers’ money. Of course we have to set certain requirements, and some people will be unhappy about that. I do not mean to dismiss their concerns; I am simply saying that this is also part of the picture.’

Holm Heide: I also see NAST's role as challenging you on various issues and raising policy matters that are relevant to both of us. We also want to challenge Innovation Norway to stay informed about developments across Norway – innovative solutions, ecosystems that are doing good work and what is already available – rather than falling into the trap of trying to create everything from scratch. I am not saying that is what you do today, but when it comes to tendering processes, for example, it is important to know what is available and make use of the wider ecosystem too.

Haugli: Mmm – can you give an example? What do you have in mind? What might be an example of this?

Holm Heide: For example, if there is a company that is highly skilled in AI, compiling data and simplifying these processes, you should use the companies that are already out there rather than trying to build that expertise in-house.

Haugli: Yes, I should mention that we used Stack, a Norwegian startup, to develop our new banking system. So we really do try to practise what we preach and use Norwegian centres of expertise, including when we ourselves are procuring services. More generally, I am very keen that we do not compete with the private sector – the vast array of accelerator programmes, incubators and so on. On the contrary, we should work well together and complement each other. Our core role is to help reduce risk through publicly funded expertise and capital. No one else can do that – apart from other public-sector organisations, of course. Beyond that, this way of thinking is entirely in keeping with our approach. As for public-sector procurement, which you specifically mentioned, there are no other tools available for this. Founders have to navigate all these portals themselves – whatever they are called – and I think you are absolutely right that it becomes completely overwhelming. If they do try, they are asked to submit a whole lever-arch file by noon, including something like a three-year credit history, which is an impossible requirement to meet. So we believe there is a need for this. As for the political aspect, we are not a political organisation, but we gain insight into many issues because we work with so many companies every year. So once again, I welcome the invitation to engage in dialogue. We have now established – or re-established – our founder panel, which you are also part of. It is one of the many ways we gather input and gain an understanding of what is happening in the startup community, alongside our daily contact with many Norwegian founders. And we are delighted that you want to be part of it.

Host: Yes, and that dialogue with NAST is important to us. We’re about to wrap up, but I just want to ask you, Anna: you’ll soon be holding an extraordinary general meeting – followed by a party. We won’t ask too much about the party, but what do you expect to happen at the general meeting? What will come out of it?

Holm Heide: At this annual general meeting, we will review our articles of association, elect NAST's first nomination committee and adopt NAST's tax policy platform. And what I expect from this meeting – I am a bit of an organisational nerd, after all – is some lively exchange of views and political debate. Sveinung Rotevatn, a former member of the Norwegian parliament, will chair the meeting to ensure a well-structured debate. Torgeir Micaelsen from the Ministry of Finance will also be there to hear what we have to say, which is very positive. In addition, Alexander Woxen, a veteran of the startup community, will share his experiences. So I expect that many people may have a bit of a political awakening, that we will reach a strong consensus on what our policy should be going forward, and that this policy will then, of course, be incorporated directly into every party manifesto!

Host: It sounds like it will be a lively annual meeting, and probably a lively party too. We won't be able to join you for that, so we've had our own little party here today. Thank you to Anna Holm Heide, Chair of NAST, and thank you, Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, and this is Innopodden. Until next time.

Guest: Ingrid Øvrum Sem, founder and CEO of Shapemaker.

From Innovation Norway: CEO Håkon Haugli and

Presenter Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Programme manager:

You have probably noticed the mobile phone masts and telecoms towers dotted around the places you visit. But have you ever considered that they are positioned according to a plan that takes account of wind and weather, as well as coverage and perhaps appearance? Shapemaker has developed software that makes planning easier by using artificial intelligence, parametric modelling and wind sensors.
We plan to learn more about the company, antennas and masts when Ingrid Øvrum Sem joins Håkon Haugli and me, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, on Innopodden.

Welcome to Innopodden!

Øvrum Sem: Thank you.

Host: It’s exciting to have you here. You studied economics at BI, followed by management at IE Business School – or Instituto de Empresa – in Spain.

Øvrum Sem: That's right.

Host: But Shapemaker looks like a typical engineering project. How did you end up there?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, that's right, good observation – and even now, with 14 employees, I'm actually the only non-engineer in the company, so we're very technology-focused. I'd always wanted to start my own company and create something, so I joined the Antler programme somewhat opportunistically. That's where I met my two co-founders, who had global industry experience and expertise in the process we're automating. They wanted to build software to optimise it and were looking for a third co-founder with a slightly different background. That's how I met them.

Haugli: Cool!

Øvrum Sem: Yes, very! We’ve worked together ever since, and it’s grown from there. That was almost four years ago.

Haugli: How many employees do you have now?

Øvrum Sem: 14.

Haugli: 14 employees, yes. And the service or product – do you sell it worldwide, or what does your market look like?

Øvrum Sem: Good question. When we started, we actually operated in various parts of the world, but we soon realised that we needed to narrow our scope and focus. So, because of building standards – and, of course, our team's capacity – we have focused on Europe as our first market.

Haugli: Yes, and how is it going?

Øvrum Sem: I would say it is going well. We now have customers in five European countries. It has taken time to build the software, but we are now ready to scale up sales across the European market.

Host: Tell us a little more about your solution. Explain what it is and the main benefit of using Shapemaker.

Øvrum Sem: Yes, so when we started ... we came from a background in structural engineering or building technology, so we primarily built the software to automate and optimise that workflow. We initially focused on time and complexity, but we have since found that our customers really value the way we automate all their workflows, giving them full control of their data. In fact, they highlight control of their data as the main value proposition of using our software.

Haugli: How fascinating. Had you considered beforehand that this was something you could offer?

Øvrum Sem: Very much so. No, but I must admit that, as an economist, I may have spotted it quite early on. I realised there was an opportunity to access a wealth of customer data and, of course, to explore the possibility of adding further functionality around our core product at a later stage.

Haugli: Do you own the data yourselves, so you can cross-reference it and perhaps build applications and other solutions on top of it later?

Øvrum Sem: Customers own their own data, but in many cases we have permission to use their data to further develop the product.

Haugli: Yes, exciting.

Øvrum Sem: Yes, we have just launched a research project with Telia Towers, among others. They were our first customer in Norway. We rolled out our solution with them in 2023, and in Finland and Sweden last summer. It is a very exciting research project in partnership with Telia Towers, SINTEF and Alsaker Stål. Among other things, we will develop an algorithm to optimise structural designs, enabling the lightest possible towers to be built without compromising load-bearing capacity or functionality. We will also create – and this is very exciting – a kind of LEGO construction kit for tower infrastructure that can be used across industries, bringing these towers into the circular economy.

Haugli: Yes, because then you take them … can they be dismantled and returned?

Øvrum Sem: Exactly – take them apart and reinforce them as needed …

Haugli: Yes, exactly, so you could … the next generation could go to Elkjøp or somewhere similar, pick up a … get a box containing a tower, build the tower, set it up, use it for a while and then pack it away again?

Host: That would be quite a large box, then!

Haugli: Yes … it’s probably not something you’d go to Elkjøp to buy anyway. But it’s a very interesting idea, and the circular aspect of it is really exciting.

Øvrum Sem: It is, and it’s a modular system that we hope can be used across industries, including for power lines or the electricity grid, for example.

Haugli: Exactly. Yes, could we talk a little about these masts? Who actually uses masts – electricity providers, mobile operators, anyone else?

Øvrum Sem: No, but it is conceivable that the technology we are developing could also be used for other types of infrastructure, particularly towers.

Haugli: Yes, towers, yes ... water towers …

Øvrum Sem: And then there’s oil and gas, wind power and so on, all under development.

Host: You often talk about how what you do reduces complexity. Why is it so complex to install a mobile phone mast?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, I wondered about that too when we started Shapemaker, because I thought that if you had a drawing, you could simply put up these masts all over the world. But they are often 50, 100 or 150 metres tall. The engineer is responsible for ensuring that they can stand safely, of course, as they are installed in places that are highly exposed to wind and weather. There are different requirements for how much weight they need to support. The antennas need to be positioned at different points on the mast. You have to take site-specific data into account, such as the topography, wind and weather conditions at the exact location. You also have to comply with local building standards.

Haugli: Yes, and planning regulations – you can't just put up a mast anywhere you like – on your neighbour's roof, or something like that?

Øvrum Sem: No, it isn't. At the same time, you want to build the lightest possible tower because it has a heavy carbon footprint, being made primarily of steel and concrete. But the companies installing these towers also need to make money from them.

Haugli: And then there’s the question of the distance between the towers. They need to be, well, not too far apart, but not too close together either. That’s the kind of thing the algorithm helps you with. Is that right?

Øvrum Sem: We are not yet looking at radio planning itself, but that is another important and exciting direction we could take. This would involve optimising radio planning based on the available capacity in the mobile mast network. But you are absolutely right – 5G signals have a much shorter range than 4G signals, for example. And the range of 6G signals will be even shorter.

Haugli: Exactly. More masts!

Øvrum Sem: Probably. Hopefully.

Haugli: Oh yes – exactly!

Host: When you look at masts like these, they can seem quite chaotic. It looks as though something has been added here, then something else was added later, and someone said, ‘Oh yes, we need one of those gadgets here too.’ Is that how it works?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, they are very often quite chaotic and look like Christmas trees, especially when you get down to continental Europe. I’m always very pleased to see Christmas trees like that, because it often means there are several operators using the mast, which usually means more structural calculations are needed.

Haugli: Yes – and good use of resources, I would imagine, because sharing one mast is better than having two next to each other.

Øvrum Sem: That's right.

Host: So you see business opportunities when you look at a mast like that?

Øvrum Sem: That's exactly why I enjoy it.

Host: Once you've done the calculations and put up a tower, what happens if it doesn't work – if the coverage isn't what you calculated, or perhaps it turns out not to withstand the elements after all?

Øvrum Sem: Then you have to make changes to the mast, but we do... I mean, our core product is structural calculations. They are at the heart of what we deliver, so we test our software extensively before delivering it. Above all, we know and see that transparency in the calculations is one of the most important aspects of our work. So that is at the core of what we do.

Haugli: We’ve just had a visit from Amy here in Norway – what was it, a hurricane? No, a storm.

Host: Yes. It was severe weather, at least.

Haugli: … so the climate is changing, and perhaps wind conditions in particular are changing too, so you need to build in some safety margins – or how do you approach extreme weather and …?

Øvrum Sem: I would say climate resilience is a strong selling point for us. We also see that operators who have experienced extreme weather are quick to make a purchase. Our software allows you to simulate extreme weather and see how it will affect your portfolio of masts.

Haugli: So instead of installing a mast and seeing how it performs, you simulate strong winds, for example.

Øvrum Sem: In advance, yes.

Host: You mentioned 5G coverage and briefly touched on 6G as well. Most of us do not know much about 6G yet, but does using your technology, such as your software, make it possible to adopt and roll out new technology more quickly?

Øvrum Sem: That’s absolutely right, for both 5G and, in time, 6G. We also see that many of these telecoms operators want to become energy self-sufficient, so they often install wind turbines or solar panels on their masts. This affects the mast’s load-bearing capacity, making it a good use case for Shapemaker.

Host: You mentioned that you aim to reinvent this type of structure and make it more sustainable. Tell us a little more about that – how do you improve sustainability?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, first of all, we can see that we are optimising these calculations in a way that a human engineer cannot do alone. We believe we can reduce the carbon footprint of new masts by at least 30 per cent. It also means they can avoid reinforcing existing masts that are approaching the limits of their load-bearing capacity. And then, as mentioned, there is the research project where we will develop this LEGO building system for tower infrastructure. I would also just like to point out – and I sometimes get some pushback on this, although I honestly cannot understand why – that telecoms are an underlying driver of all the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Haugli: That's true. In fact, one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals is about communication, or at least infrastructure. It addresses precisely this issue, and the digital society clearly presents some dilemmas in general. But … it's here to stay, so Shapemaker and other companies that make it as sustainable and circular as possible play a very important role.

Host: What Shapemaker is doing, Håkon, is digitising and automating a process – or perhaps several processes – that previously involved a great deal of manual and analogue work. Do you think this is the way forward for Norwegian businesses?

Haugli: Absolutely! There are many factors driving this. One is that Norway's high cost levels make automated solutions worthwhile across the board. This applies to everything from how we check in for a flight and file our tax returns to, of course, how planning processes are carried out. So it is important, and Norway is well ahead in this area precisely because we have faced these conditions for a long time. The second factor is what we have just discussed: the climate. It is about using scarce resources as efficiently as possible, which calls for modern technology – AI and other technologies – to ensure that we do not duplicate work. I also think that the rest of the world is undergoing a demographic shift. In large parts of the world, at least, there are fewer people of working age and more people outside the workforce. This will create a significant need for automation in many areas, allowing people to do what they do best and machines to handle the rest. It may sound like a cliché, but it is true. And if I may put on my Innovation Norway hat for a moment, it is fantastic to see a company like Shapemaker succeeding internationally in a high-tech, advanced-technology niche, while also taking on the responsibility that comes with being a player in this field. We applaud you and are delighted both that you are here today, Ingrid, and by the work you are doing.

Øvrum Sem: Well, that's good to hear.

Host: Do you agree with Håkon's assessment?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, I do. Yes.

Haugli: Yes, that's good, because you're the expert on this, not me.

Host: We have recently spoken to several companies that are using artificial intelligence in different areas – which perhaps ties in with what you just said. These range from waste management and waste sorting to, well, different types of infrastructure. Is what we are seeing now the beginning of a new way of doing things – a completely different way of doing things?

Haugli: Yes, but perhaps not quite the beginning …

Host: No.

Haugli: … but there is a great deal happening now. Our office in Eastern Norway, which works with Oslo and the surrounding municipalities, is seeing a significant increase in applications from AI-based startups. And … some of them are completely new, but we have also worked with AI companies for a very long time. It is just … I feel that we are now at the bottom of a hockey-stick curve, and things are rising very quickly. I think there are several drivers behind this. The technology has become much more accessible in a relatively short time, so many companies are integrating generative AI into what they do. And that drives innovation, because innovation happens where new technology meets established industry verticals or companies. So I think we are now seeing the start of something – if not the very beginning, then at least the emergence of AI-driven business development that will have a major impact. We will see many new companies, and public-sector organisations and established businesses in particular will use artificial intelligence in completely different ways than we … We started talking about this a few years ago. I was CEO of Abelia when Watson, IBM's first machine, arrived. It caused quite a stir because it could analyse X-ray images and provide accurate diagnoses. That was true, and it was very impressive, but it did not lead to a breakthrough in the use of artificial intelligence at the time. Now it is. We are seeing that breakthrough now. So it will be very exciting to see where we are in ten years' time.

Host: This is really a question for both of you. Why is it newly established companies, as you mentioned? Why are startups driving this development and coming up with these kinds of solutions? Why not the established companies?

Haugli: I think it is a bit of both, but startups do not have any baggage to consider. They can start completely from scratch and ask: How can we solve this problem using the technology available, without having to think about our employees, collective agreements, established structures, customer relationships and supply chains? An established company must take all of that into account when innovating. But it is important to remember that some strong, leading Norwegian companies are using artificial intelligence very effectively. One example I recently came across is Gjensidige, which has developed an app for assessing vehicle damage. If you take a photo of a dent, the app responds within seconds with a quote. You can then press ‘Yes, I accept’, and the entire insurance claim is settled in seconds. So that is an example of disruptive innovation within an established company. It is not an either-or situation, but startups do have certain advantages. That said, it is incredibly tough. Ingrid, I would like to talk to you about what it is like to start a business in Norway, because there are also quite a few hurdles to overcome.

Host: And we’d like to hear more about that, but first I’d like to hear your thoughts on this, Ingrid. Why is it often startups that develop new services based on artificial intelligence, among other things?

Øvrum Sem: I think it has something to do with being able to see yourself from the outside, and perhaps also with your willingness to take risks. Large companies do have an advantage, as they often have a great deal of data. I find that very exciting to think about. I believe Norwegian companies in particular often have better data than companies abroad, which is a huge advantage as this AI wave gathers pace. We are traditionally very strong in industry and B2B. So I believe we have an opportunity there, but change can be very painful. Taking large companies through this kind of transformation is probably more challenging than building something new from scratch.

Haugli: Yes, data is a crucial point. We have an advantage here because our residents have national identity numbers, which allow us to identify easily which person the data relates to. Some other countries have these too, but many do not. The UK and Germany, for example, do not have national identity numbers, and we sometimes forget that. This makes it easier to cross-reference different registers, including public records and customer data from insurers or banks. These are advantages we need to make the most of as we embrace new technology and more generally.

Host: You mentioned that you now have 14 employees. Tell us a little more about where the company is today – where are you now, and what is your next goal?

Øvrum Sem: Right now, our main goal is sales. That is our primary focus. We also want to make the software more scalable for other markets by incorporating building standards, among other things, so that we can sell in markets outside Europe. And then there is the opportunity to explore new industries.

Host: Right, so when you enter a new market, do you have to teach the system about the building standards and regulations in that market?

Øvrum Sem: That's right, but broadly speaking, European and American building standards are the two prevailing – or dominant – standards worldwide. So far, we have focused on the European standard, and then ... the next step is the American building standard. In markets such as the Middle East, large parts of South-East Asia, Africa and so on, one of these two building standards is generally used.

Host: So common standards are important to you, then?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, it is important to us, everything ... that's absolutely right.

Host: Telenor is one of your shareholders, along with Trond Riiber Knudsen, Firda, Runway FBU – or Fornebu, I’m not quite sure how to say it – Startuplab and Antler.

Haugli: An impressive list!

Øvrum Sem: Yes, we have included the key people in Norway. Haven't we?

Host: What has it meant for you?

Øvrum Sem: It has meant a great deal to us, and I’m very … almost moved when I hear the list, because we’re so grateful for the contribution from each and every one of our investors. Of course, they’ve provided capital, but we’ve also received some valuable advice along the way.

Host: You also work with the public sector. You secured this NOK 12 million project together with the Research Council of Norway, and you have received loans and a grant from us at Innovation Norway. And given who we are, we have to ask: has that made a difference to you?

Øvrum Sem: Yes, you have made a difference to us too ... We are perhaps particularly grateful for the loan we received from you, which gave us a little more runway to reach the next milestone in our project.

Haugli: That's great to hear. Is there anything we could have done differently?

Øvrum Sem: Innovation Norway?

Haugli: Yes – or the business support system as a whole.

Øvrum Sem: 'I think that’s a difficult question. All I can say is that our applications have been processed very quickly. And we’ve received everything we applied for! So perhaps … that has something to do with it?'

Haugli: Yes, that is entirely to your credit, I should say. We reject around half of all the applications we receive. So that says something about the quality of what you are developing – the technology, the idea, the business plan and the team – and certainly also that you have written an application that addresses the right points; that you have applied for funding for something we can actually support. There are some things we cannot support, such as general marketing activities and similar work.

Øvrum Sem: Yes.

Host: Looking ahead and at the bigger picture, what do you think the mobile mast landscape will look like in a few years? How are you influencing its expansion and development?

Øvrum Sem: Well, first of all, I hope we help improve coverage globally. That is the main... reason we are here for our customers, and why our customers exist. So I hope we contribute to that, and I also hope the masts out there carry plenty of equipment, and that we have optimised the number of mobile masts and their strength and weight to match the network capacity required.

Haugli: And what about the company, Shapemaker? What will Shapemaker look like in five years?

Øvrum Sem: In five years, we will be a global provider of structural calculations and infrastructure operations for the green transition.

Haugli: All over the world – globally?

Øvrum Sem: Yes. Why not?

Haugli: Very good, that's what we like to hear.

Øvrum Sem: Yes, I’m often asked about that, and some people say you should focus on the domestic market first. But for us, the domestic market is far too small. We couldn’t exist solely for a domestic market. We couldn’t exist solely for a Nordic market, so we’ve had to think globally from the outset. And to be completely honest, if I were to do anything differently, I might actually have started with US building standards.

Haugli: Yes, that’s interesting. We don’t subscribe to the idea that you should start at home. For some companies, that is clearly the right approach, but there is no one-size-fits-all formula. So the point about US standards is really interesting … and about thinking ahead ... I believe some technology companies would benefit from taking a small step back right at the outset and asking: Where is the largest market for what we are going to do? Then make strategic choices based on that, rather than simply asking what the next step is, as people often do. Fascinating.

Host: And who would be your dream customer, and what would be your dream market?

Øvrum Sem: Our dream market … well, we are completely market-agnostic. It is not that Africa is more exciting to us than the Middle East, and so on. But markets where more infrastructure is due to be rolled out are clearly very interesting to us.

Host: Excellent. Thank you, Ingrid Sofie Øvrum Sem, for joining us on Innopodden. It is quite possible that those who listened to this episode did so via a mobile phone mast. Perhaps it was installed according to Shapemaker's plans …

Haugli: … Yes. We encourage all our listeners to take a good look at their nearest mast, both to see whether it has lots of different Christmas decorations on it and as a reminder that Shapemaker may have helped ensure it stands exactly where it does, using wind measurements and other data. So thank you very much, Ingrid. It was a pleasure having you on Innopodden.

Øvrum Sem: Thank you for having me.

Host: … and thank you, Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, and we’ll be back with another episode of Innopodden.

Guest: Didrik Dimmen, founder and CEO of Auk Eco

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host: Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Host: Herbs are sprouting and thriving on kitchen worktops and windowsills. The scent of home-grown basil, rosemary and thyme is spreading across more than 30 countries. Norway's Auk makes growing at home easy and has itself become a rapidly growing business. Didrik Dimmen co-founded the company and is its CEO. He shares his experiences with Håkon Haugli and me, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, on Innopodden.

Host: Welcome to Innopodden, Didrik Dimmen.

Dimmen: Thank you, thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.

Host: It's great to see you and have you here. Tell us – Håkon and me, that is – I think we have some idea, but still: what exactly is an Auk or an Auk Mini?

Dimmen: Well, in Norwegian, we don't really have a good term for this category. In English, it's an 'indoor smart garden', while in Norwegian, we'd call it a fully automated plant-growing machine, which sounds rather... technical. But yes, it's a fully automated plant-growing device. You simply sow seeds – either your own or ours – or plant cuttings or even plants from the shop, and then you can grow herbs, lettuce and tomatoes fully automatically on your kitchen worktop.

Haugli: What does this machine do?

Dimmen: So, we control it – it’s a completely unique hydroponic design that … is now in its second generation. We control the water, light and nutrients, which are essentially the three main elements, as well as the temperature and oxygen – or CO2 – that the plants need to grow. We regulate all of this – in a way, we package everything the plants need in a very simple solution. We haven’t … we haven’t invented growing things, have we? Humanity has been doing that for thousands of years. We’ve simply made it much easier, much more convenient and adapted it to – how should I put it – today’s lifestyle. We’ve made it simple, compact, attractive and highly functional. We adjust the pH level and pH buffer in the coconut fibre, provide the right types of nutrients and the right kind of light – we’ve developed our own full-spectrum grow light – all to make sure it works really well.

Haugli: How big is it?

Dimmen: I can’t remember the exact dimensions right now, but the Auk Mini is 42 cm long and … is it 28 cm deep? It fits perfectly on a windowsill or in the corner of the kitchen. It fits perfectly on the kitchen worktop against the wall, while still leaving workspace in front. And this brings us to something very important: it’s easy to invent something – to create an invention – which is perhaps what we did with our first product too, but finding product-market fit is difficult. The price point, size, design and how it fits into our homes – that whole package is perhaps the most important part of, how should I put it, innovation, or at least pioneering work. It’s what matters when you’re trying to push things forward, as we’re doing here with Auk.

Host: It has a very sleek and simple design, but there’s quite a lot of advanced technology inside, isn’t there?

Dimmen: Yes. We’re really trying to make it as simple as possible. That’s the art of technology, in a way: using as little technology as possible to make things as simple and robust as possible. Simplicity is the ultimate goal. And we’ve taken a big step in that direction from Auk 1 to Auk Mini – we removed a lot of the electronics, but by using the product’s mechanics and geometry, we managed to achieve almost better growth with much less – in other words, much better growth per square centimetre without necessarily adding more technology. So it’s... In a way, our technology lies both in the technology itself and in the geometry and mechanics. How often we add water, and how often... the water level rises and falls, and the nutrients? There’s a lot to it. So it’s great fun.

Haugli: Yes. Where did the idea come from?

Dimmen: The original idea came from Marius Aabel, who was behind No Isolation and is something of a serial entrepreneur. He's very much the Gyro Gearloose inventor type. I met him through a mutual investor in my previous – my first – start-up. So he... he has a thousand thoughts and ideas.

Haugli: Yes – shout-out to Marius! Cool guy!

Dimmen: And yes, a big shout-out to Marius – cool guy. He just had this idea and tried lots of different things on the market. Nothing worked, and then Auk 1, the first version, was born.

Haugli: Exactly. Do you call it an Auk?

Dimmen: We call it the Auken. An Auk – the Auken. Yes, that's us. I think we're getting close to becoming the generic term for this category in Norway. You don't say 'plant-growing system'. You say Auk. Just as people used to say GoPro for an action camera. I think we're getting there, although I may be a little biased, of course.

Haugli: Yes, and you should be. But I think you're right. There aren't any foreign products like that on the Norwegian market, are there? Or, well, there are…

Dimmen: It’s an incredibly exciting market. Before I joined Auk, I spent a year working with the company as an advisor. That’s when I started researching the space, and there’s an incredible amount of DIY stuff out there. You can buy self-watering pots. You can buy an LED lamp. I remember that during the pandemic, you could pay NOK 1,500 for what was basically a stand – a board with a pole and a light – just an incredibly poor product. It cost NOK 1,500. It’s a complete jumble of different things: something for your balcony, something for your windowsill where you need a light, and so on. There’s an incredible amount of noise. There are also a few similar competitors abroad, such as Click & Grow Herb Garden. Let’s put it this way: if we don’t face stronger competition than that, we’ll consider ourselves lucky. That’s our somewhat less-than-humble view. But there’s so much noise, and we thought: here we come, cutting through all that noise with a standalone, all-in-one system. Really exciting, really simple and it works brilliantly. And we’ve actually just won a... Bob Vila, one of the most respected plant-growing influencers in the US, carried out a huge round-up test covering every type of light and all sorts of other products, and Auk came out on top in the all-in-one system category.

Haugli: Cool. Congratulations!

Dimmen: That was really cool, so in a way, we … we don't see … we see them as alternatives, not competitors, despite all the noise.

Host: Are they … well, you just said they aren't competitors, but even so ... are you competing just as much with self-watering pots and traditional ways of doing things?

Dimmen: Yes, I think so – I mean, the answer was really that there are some international competitors in the market, but they don't have much of a presence. So they're completely... they're outcompeted by far! I mean, here in Norway we're... we're so far ahead of them, which is great. Then there's the domestic market, while things are a little different abroad and so on, but we'll beat them there too. But yes, we're definitely competing with shop-bought herbs, with growing them yourself and with growing them in the garden. Absolutely.

Haugli: Have you solved the problem of those little black flies?

Dimmen: Yes, we have.

Haugli: You have? Tell us a little about it!

Dimmen: Well, this category has had … had a lot of problems, and there are still some we’re working to solve. So … we’re going to make the world’s best products for growing at home, full stop. And initially … plants need a range of things, and they also attract other creatures. In summer, for example, we bring lots of aphids in from the garden, and they thrive in Auken. That’s one of the many things we’re working on. We’ve now introduced a new method where we sterilise the coconut fibre supplied with the product twice. This makes it much better than anything you can buy elsewhere and leaves absolutely no doubt that we aren’t shipping any pests. And if you do get them, we have some treatments you can apply yourself.

Host: Yes, I’ve been looking at various – there are lots of Facebook groups about Auk, international Facebook groups, and this is something they discuss quite a bit, because problems do crop up from time to time.

Dimmen: But the trend is very much downwards.

Host: Is that so?

Dimmen: Yes, yes. This is something we care deeply about.

Haugli: Can I go back to product-market fit? We find that many start-ups struggle with precisely that. They have brilliant technology, but somehow cannot quite put it to use. What did you learn when you were working on this? And how did you approach it?

Dimmen: Yes, I feel this is very much … I feel it’s typically Norwegian. I come from NTNU, and you hear a lot of stories like that there, right? Lots of SINTEF start-ups and spin-outs that only have the technology and just push it into some market or try to find a market. Then they fall into what you might call the engineering trap, which I remember them talking about a lot when I was there. We had Auk 1, and it … Auk 1 was probably … It was where the company started, the entire product. And it was, in a way, based on the initial research by Marius and the team. And perhaps it was a system very much tailored to what they wanted, where … yes, where space wasn’t that important, and … when it comes to design, people have very specific tastes. So we had … we gave birth to … we created the product, launched it on the market and packaged it with the best marketing and branding we could, which is part of achieving product-market fit. And then we received very clear feedback.

Haugli: Yes. What did they say? 'It's too big, that one's ugly.'

Dimmen: Yes, it’s too big and, yes, it’s ugly. Some people think the water tank looks like a coffee machine, and that’s a definite no-go. Another really interesting no-go we heard was: ‘If it isn’t black, I’m not buying it.’ That came from people with black kitchens, for example. So those are the kinds of things we learnt very quickly. Of course, someone could have told us beforehand, and so on. But you don’t always have perfect information when you start out. It was about colour, size and price point, and then you have to … you have to listen to customers. Customers may say one thing but actually mean something else, or there may be a better solution than the one they suggest. So you have to take that information, make your own … make your own assessments, and see what you can produce. When we went from Auk 1 to Auk Mini, we considered both the biggest – the most obvious – pieces of feedback and manufacturability. Design also opened up new possibilities. We looked at kitchen trends, material choices – there was a lot that went into it. So, short product … I mean, this is still a journey we’re on, and one this company will continue for the foreseeable future. We’re going to create world-class products, and that means working things out. Technology is only a small part of it – everything else around it is even more important: the information on the seed packet when you receive it, the onboarding experience afterwards and, of course, how the product works and how much light spills into the room. There are just so many things we’re going to improve.

Haugli: What you're saying is so important, because everyone …

Dimmen: And we talk to customers. In short … I’m a customer myself. I was one in my previous start-up, and you need to know your own customer incredibly well – ideally, you should be your own customer. That makes all this work much easier. But it’s difficult – there are many factors to consider.

Haugli: Yes, it is difficult. This constant back and forth between customer feedback, user experience, product development and engineering is so important. We often see companies becoming fixated on the technology, perhaps because – and this is very Norwegian – 'I love this product and I’m going to keep polishing it until it’s perfect, no matter what the customer says.' That’s part of it. The other thing is that the world around the product changes: trends shift, customer needs evolve, the competitive landscape changes, and so on. So staying on top of all this is, I think, a general principle that applies to virtually every type of start-up, as you’ve just said.

Dimmen: And on that point … we probably have a … as CEO, I’m extremely focused on making sure that everyone in the company – we’re a fairly small company, so it’s not such a big issue – has access to the same information. That means customer feedback reaches every corner of the company, right? The company isn’t that big, so in a way … So far, it hasn’t been a major problem, but our support team plays an absolutely central role, as does feedback from marketing – we do a lot of customer research, product and customer research, support talks to customers … all of this – everyone needs to have that information on the table. It shouldn’t be a case of one department passing it on to another, only for it to disappear – lost in translation. We also try to do a lot of user testing in the office, and everyone who works on the product, from engineering to marketing, should be in the room, listening to and getting a feel for the customers, and trying to put themselves in the customer’s shoes. That’s difficult when you’re working with super-high-tech products, but easier for us, since we make a plant-growing machine and can experience it ourselves. So it’s something that’s embedded in our culture.

Haugli: What do you have in your Auk at home? What are you growing?

Dimmen: I grow basil, and now we're – yes, right now – experimenting with some chilli. So, a bit of everything.

Host: I see that Auk performs very well in tests across the board, except in one area: price. It is much more expensive than its competitors – which may not be direct competitors, but are still in the same market. How do you manage to sell a product that is so much more expensive than the competition?

Dimmen: Oh, that’s such an interesting topic, because people will always complain about the price. I also worked at reMarkable for a couple of years …

Haugli: Exactly – and that's a story worth telling too. But we'll save that for next time.

Dimmen: - An absolutely crazy story! The comments section was full of things like, 'this ridiculous price…' But, well, whatever – they sold for a billion, after all. And I think that in the consumer market, you buy products for their utilitarian value – their functional value – but you buy from us because you want the product, because it is something you want to surround yourself with. There is value in owning something high-quality that you are proud of. We humans like beautiful things, and we also tend to value something more when we pay more for it. At Auk, our approach is very simple: we make products that last. We believe humanity is currently going through an absolutely crazy period in which we produce so much stuff. We are throwing things away and burning through this planet at breakneck speed. We do not believe we need to stop making products. But we do need to make products that last. That is the only way to be environmentally friendly. Of course, you can choose more environmentally friendly materials, but you still have to make things, and you have to make them last. So we make conscious choices: we use higher-quality materials, build our products to be more robust and design them to last. That makes them more expensive, and hopefully our customers appreciate that. It is simply – how should I put it – a fundamental principle for us. We could have made something from thin, flimsy plastic costing 10 kroner, which would probably fall apart eventually, and sold it for much less, but we choose not to. We want to create something beautiful that inspires people to live a greener life and bring a little bit of nature indoors – something that lasts, sitting on your kitchen worktop day after day, year after year, growing fresh, delicious vegetables for you.

Haugli: We have worked with Bocconi University in Milan for several years, taking a number of Norwegian companies there. The university has an entire institute dedicated to branding, which is not exactly a Norwegian strength. I will not say much more about it, except that the professor who leads the programme says there is one mistake brands make: undermining their brand by getting the pricing wrong. That is one of her key messages. For example, if the same product is sold at two different prices in two different markets, consumers will find out. So you have to decide: if you want to be a premium brand, the price must be the same everywhere, or at least broadly similar. Otherwise, you undermine the brand, because consumers will conclude that the product may not be that good after all: either they are paying too much, or it is not really a premium product. She talks a great deal about pricing strategies and pricing as an integral part of building a brand. I find it fascinating that we discuss this so little in Norway … It was not that many years ago that a Norwegian newspaper ran a story debating whether the price of a salmon fillet was immorally high for consumers in Shanghai. I cannot remember the exact price per kilo, but the company selling it was portrayed as unreasonable and unfair. Yet this was a fillet delivered by bicycle to the customer's door in one of the world's largest cities. The price per kilo was probably incredibly high, but the point is that customers were willing to pay it. And it is not … what does morality have to do with it? That is a functioning market, and salmon is the world's finest food. Why should we not charge the world's finest price for it? So this is also about maturity. We are very concerned that Norwegian start-ups lack commercial muscle. They are too weak in sales and brand building, as I mentioned, but also in marketing and everything that goes with it.

Dimmen: But I think we have a really strong foundation for becoming good at it.

Host: And it's much better to have good technology and then improve your sales skills than the other way round.

Dimmen: Yes, absolutely.

Haugli: But that was … I feel like I've been doing a lot of the talking here, Kjetil, but this is …

Dimmen: This is incredibly exciting.

Host: Yes, this is incredibly exciting, and it is fascinating to hear about some of the decisions you have made while building the company …

Haugli: Since I'm on a roll, can I ask another question?

Host: Yes, go ahead!

Haugli: Where can you buy an Auk if you want one?

Dimmen: At the moment, you can only buy it from our website, or from Jernia if you're in Norway. Everywhere else, it's only available through our website. Yes, across 30 or 32 countries.

Haugli: And does it come in a package?

Dimmen: Yes. In a package delivered to your door. Everything you need in one box.

Host: And we could certainly talk much more about Auken itself, but I’d like to ask you, Didrik: Not long ago, you wrote a kind of response in Finansavisen after we had faced some criticism. You have worked with us too – you’ve been our customers for a long time. First, give us a little insight into what our support has meant to you.

Dimmen: Yes, well, we … I am … I mean, the institution, Innovation Norway as an institution, is incredibly important, and I think it should be vastly bigger than it is. I mean, we should … Right now, at this point in human history and in the global community, Norway has an enormous opportunity – we have so much money as a country. We have strong expertise, we have an enormous … we have an enormous opportunity to build an incredibly strong business sector, and in my view, we spend far too little money on it. We have … NOK 2.8 billion was allocated to us through the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries in this year’s budget. So we spend 0.14 per cent of the national budget on direct costs for developing new businesses, as it were, and then we have other schemes as well. It should have been much more, especially when we know that the oil industry is going to disappear and that we are seriously lagging behind in building new industries. Innovation Norway has been good for us right from the start. We received some grants, phase one and phase two, at the very beginning, which gave us a jump-start and made it much easier to get going. Then we received an innovation loan of NOK 2.4 million, which was helpful. We had to provide NOK 200,000 in personal collateral, which … I mean, no one else would have given us that loan at the time. We then secured an overdraft facility from DNB, with us providing a financial guarantee through the growth guarantee scheme. It was increased to – initially it was NOK 4 million, and we guaranteed NOK 3 million, I believe, meaning the bank was only exposed to NOK 1 million. Then it was tripled to NOK 12 million this year. And that … that is very good and very important. So then … DNB can simply approve the overdraft facility within three weeks, and we have just received a loan of NOK 10 million that we applied for three weeks ago.

Haugli: Congratulations!

Dimmen: And yes, it’s very, very good. Of course, we wish there were much more of it and that you took on much more risk, but it has been incredibly important. We’re about to enter a new fundraising round, and having that loan makes us feel much more secure in the process. It means we can wait much longer before starting it, and it’s simply an incredibly important part of our funding mix. We’ve had a lot of battles with the banks to secure an overdraft facility. They want to see all the figures and the company’s track record, and you need to have posted a profit for several years in a row before they’ll lend you any significant amount of money. They have very little understanding of start-ups. It’s a complete disaster. I saw a Progress Party politician say that we should simply abolish Innovation Norway and let the banks decide which start-ups are viable. I can guarantee you that Auk would have faced a much, much harder road to success if that had been the case. The banks don’t have a clue, and the support we’ve received from you has been absolutely crucial. And then, of course, there’s the criticism. As CEO of Innovation Norway, you have an enormous responsibility to manage our organisation efficiently, which is one of the main criticisms at the moment. The application process has become simpler, and it needs to stay that way. As far as I’m concerned, you’re welcome to take on even more risk, but that comes down to your mandate and so on. You’re responsible for managing something incredibly important, and that’s a good thing. My impression is that you take that responsibility extremely seriously, because we are a very important organisation for Norway. So yes, that’s my short, long rant.

Haugli: Thank you for the kind feedback. Above all, it is incredibly rewarding to hear that our support is making a difference and prompting this kind of dialogue with banks and investors, because that is exactly the intention. We are not here to bear the cost of business development, but to help unlock opportunities that would not otherwise materialise. That is at the heart of what we do. And I do feel both humbled by and acutely aware of the responsibility we carry …

Dimmen: Yes, it is a great responsibility.

Haugli: Yes, and we take that seriously. Just to mention … some important aspects of this – one is simplification, and I know and hear, and simply have to admit, that we can be too difficult to work with. It becomes too much … We ask for too much information, and sometimes we even ask for information we already have, don't we? It is a balancing act, because on the one hand … if you receive public funding, you do have to explain what you intend to use the money for.

Dimmen: Yes, it is taxpayers' money, after all.

Haugli: Yes, exactly! … and report on it, but we want to make it as simple as possible. We have reduced the number of application forms from 40 to four, but we are not there yet. I believe technology, such as artificial intelligence, can help us simplify things on both sides – for startups, so they do not have to retrieve large amounts of information from public registers themselves, for example, and in our own application processing. This work is still evolving. And I just want to say to you and everyone listening that this is something we care deeply about. I believe – and I have to say, I feel – that it is about our legitimacy as a partner. If we cannot move as quickly as possible and remain relevant, both in the application process and, of course, through the 'products' we offer, we will no longer be here in a few years. So we take this very seriously. Right now, there is a great need for our schemes. Demand is high for both our grants and our loan schemes. And access to private risk capital is now slowing down. That makes it even more important to have a relevant toolbox.

Dimmen: And that whole control-versus-precision dilemma is huge ... huge … I'm absolutely certain there are many challenges

Haugli: Yes, but they are solvable, human-made challenges.

Dimmen: And, you know, we mustn't waste taxpayers' money. So these are major problems – or difficult challenges – and it's good that you're tackling them.

Haugli: And we can improve – just in case there was any doubt about what I said – we… well, we can improve, yes.

Dimmen: It is extremely important

Haugli: For us, this is also partly about finding product-market fit, listening to …

Dimmen: … 100 per cent. Yes, for the state, yes. Yes, I mean, I just, I just ... I think perhaps my biggest criticism of – or, well, how should I put it, the government, Norway – is that we think on such a ridiculously small scale, the dimensions are so small. And that is not a criticism of you or your organisation. It is simply that we need to multiply everything by ten. I mean, to reach an international scale – if we are going to become, you know, if we are going to build a truly substantial international business sector – we need to think ten times bigger. And what we have is excellent, the schemes and so on, but – now I am really directing, how should I put it, my criticism at the government, or simply saying that we really need to ... we really need to – NOK 2.8 billion in this year's national budget for things like this. Finland had, what, EUR 600 million, which is NOK 7 billion. So why don't we – why don't we have, say, twice as much as they do? I mean, we have such a great opportunity now; we own three per cent – what was it you said? – three per cent of all listed companies worldwide.

Haugli: Through the Government Pension Fund Global, yes.

Dimmen: The world's largest sovereign wealth fund, or national fund, and it's just like ... we have an insane amount of money! And we now have the opportunity to continue managing it carefully so we don't squander the money, while encouraging green businesses and continuing to set high standards for them. That will remain important going forward. But when they do gain momentum, or when something exciting emerges here, we need to make sure it becomes a huge opportunity. And now, as you say, private capital is hard to come by. We notice that ourselves. And the world is a bit shaky right now. Just think of the opportunity we have as a nation to create the world's best place to build a business. And then there's the exit tax that was recently introduced – not to launch into a full tax debate – but it generates a ridiculously small amount of revenue for the state while doing so much to discourage people from moving to Norway. That's the biggest problem with the tax, as I understand it. It's just like ... what are we doing? We're tinkering with the budget: NOK 2.8 billion now, NOK 2.7 billion last year, or whatever it was. We need to think so much bigger! And if I had my way and increased our budget tenfold, the problem would probably become even greater ...

Haugli: Well, yes, no … it would have been challenging for us, but yes.

Dimmen: We sort of have to … ahhh…. That's my view, of course. I'm an entrepreneur, so I'm right in the thick of it and so on, but …

Haugli: Yes, exactly … I mean, what is unquestionably true is that Norway needs new businesses, and I also share the frustration that people fail to understand – and this applies not only to politicians, but also to the media and others – that everything that is big today started small. We sometimes talk about established businesses as though they have always been there, but even the largest companies have had – at some point – a founder, some early-stage investors and their first customer …

Dimmen: … a lot of risk.

Haugli: A great deal of risk. Just take companies such as Hydro, Yara and Elkem, which originally … came from the same starting point, with Professor Birkeland and Sam Eyde. Sam Eyde was, in a sense, a commercially minded entrepreneur, and I think that … and we must … We are now facing the biggest transformation of the Norwegian economy in a very long time. But when the oil and gas industry can no longer be the engine of growth it is today, we need – more than other countries – a multitude of startups across different industries to ensure that many of them grow into large companies and create value, jobs, export revenues and everything else. So I completely agree with you that this is essential. And not for our sake, but for Norway’s sake, we must be …

Dimmen: Yes, and you don't have any vested interest, as such.

Haugli: No, and we don't have a political role either. I mean, I'm probably on dangerous ground now … but I just have to say, in a way, this is what we're here for – one of our main goals is to have more good entrepreneurs. And there are two dimensions to that: more entrepreneurs and good entrepreneurs, and both are important.

Host: Yes, and a healthy dose of enthusiasm can't hurt anyone!

Haugli: No, it's great fun!

Dimmen: Jeff Bezos said it – now, we shouldn't listen too much to billionaires from the US – but Jeff Bezos said that one of the US's greatest advantages is access to venture capital, right? They're in a completely different league there. So I feel that, as a nation, we should make an active choice through how we vote and through our politicians, and perhaps allocate more than 0.14 per cent of the national budget to building the industries of the future. And we will ... My guess – and this is my, how should I put it, naive projection – is that as soon as oil revenues really start to decline, enormous changes will happen here. Because then the sense of urgency around addressing that or creating new industries will go through the roof, and enormous changes will follow. At least, that's my guess. But of course, it will be exciting to see. We know ... we believe that's where we're heading.

Haugli: I’d just like to go back to something else you said, about investors and the journey you’ve been on to attract investment … could you tell us a little more about that? When you mentioned it earlier, you briefly touched on the fact that you’re now encountering some resistance. What, where – without going into detail or naming names, of course – but

Dimmen: Yes, we're completely transparent.

Haugli: Exciting!

Dimmen: So, we’ve raised money five years in a row now. When I started at Auk, I said we’d do one, at most two, fundraising rounds, and then we’d be... I mean, at first... you know, we raised NOK 10 million the first time, then NOK 20 million. And that’s basically a seed round in the US. It takes money to build large companies, and you can choose to do that by growing slowly and taking a conservative approach. Or you can choose to grow quickly, capture the market and seize the opportunity. We now have a huge international opportunity, and we’ve just invested... put... I mean, we’re so convinced this will become a major opportunity that we’ve just kept putting money into it. Fairly conservatively, though. But we’ve raised money and gradually increased the amounts. We’ve been raising money from the Covid years right up to today. We completed our latest round in March, so we’ve seen how things have developed over the past five years. At first, things were very good, with plenty of money available and a very freewheeling market. There was a lot of money among the wealthiest people and the funds, of course, but also among business angels – people investing between NOK 200,000 and NOK 2 million. There was a lot of spare capital around during the Covid years. Then we suffered a major setback in 2022, when we shipped a product that didn’t work and had to recall it, along with everything that entailed. At that point, raising money was very difficult. After turning things around, we managed to raise money through... we ran a crowdfunding campaign, which was very exciting and suited our product extremely well. We’ve since completed another two rounds, and much of the money in those rounds came from our original investors, both those from the crowdfunding campaign and those who invested before it. We also have some funds, MP Pensjon and Jan Bodd, who joined us in the latest round – people who believe in our journey. In this latest round, we raised money during the final week before Easter. The night before it opened, I was sitting there after we’d spent three months planning the share issue. Raising money is one of the hardest things we do. We already knew the market was poor, but we’d spent three months planning the issue, running an extensive process with existing shareholders and going around speaking to almost everyone in town, so to speak. Then, the night before the issue was due to open – one week before Easter – I watched Dagsrevyen and saw the news about US Liberation Day. That day marked the start of the most turbulent week on the stock market in I don’t know how many years. So basically everyone with money invested in the stock market – which was most of the investors we were speaking to – pulled back... I mean... the conversations stopped. We ended up raising NOK 25 million, NOK 23.5 million of which came from existing shareholders. So we’ve been incredibly fortunate with our shareholders. They’ve believed in our journey and continued to do so as we’ve performed better and better. It’s not as though they’re simply good Samaritans. They’re not... but we’ve been incredibly fortunate. And a huge thank you to all the shareholders who believe in us – all of them Norwegian investors.
So that’s been our journey, more or less.

Haugli: Very interesting. And we are also seeing the slowdown you describe, both …

Dimmen: … we are seeing signs that things are starting to turn around.

Haugli: Yes, that's good. That's interesting. Very good.

Dimmen: But I feel that 2024, at least, was one of the driest years in a very long time

Haugli: That’s my impression too. I think it’s … well, perhaps the thing is – this is a very interesting topic, and it’s still a little early to say – but … my impression is that we’ve now entered a kind of new normal, where ... uncertainty is constant, rather than something we need to wait and see how to deal with. This is how things are now. There is turbulence in trade policy, and that’s the reality, so investors and businesses are adapting to it. That’s interesting, and we’ll see – well, come back in a year or so and we can discuss what things look like then.

Dimmen: Yes, these are exciting times. I also feel … without getting too political, I think we have a huge opportunity here in Norway. We have an incredible amount of private capital, but almost all of it goes into property or relatively safe stock markets. So little goes into … we don't have the culture, interest or tax incentives to invest in start-ups to the same extent as in the UK and many other countries.

Haugli: I just have to share an anecdote. I was meeting with a business association in a small Norwegian town, which shall remain anonymous. A group of people were sitting around the table, and I was there to say a few words about innovation and the kinds of things I usually talk about. Then we went around the table. Everyone in that business association had started a company, and everyone had sold one. So I asked them, ‘What did you invest the proceeds in?’ One by one, they got up, walked over to the window and pointed to the buildings: ‘Yes, I own that one, and he owns that one.’ That is how it is, and it paints such a striking picture. And this is absolutely true. It illustrates exactly what you are describing: when people like them are no longer active business owners, they put their money into property. It is partly tax-driven and feels safe. The returns may be slightly lower over time, but at least they can say, ‘That building is mine.’ I think this is a recurring theme in the debate, but it should be the other way round. Investing in startups should be rewarded.

Dimmen: I completely agree, and we shouldn't sit here and tell wealthy people where to put their money. That's up to them … there's nothing wrong with investing in property. The point is that we need to design the system differently so that they choose to invest in startups, and we have a long way to go. This brings us back to the previous question: how do we build the industries of the future? Innovation Norway needs more funding, and we … simply need more incentives. I particularly believe that the Kapitalfunn scheme should be expanded – by at least ten times, perhaps 20 or 40 times. I'm absolutely certain that if we had effective tax incentives – say, a 30 per cent tax deduction for investing in an early-stage company – it would make a real difference. As things stand, the limit is NOK 5 million per company per year – an insignificant amount – and NOK 1 million per investor. The limits are so low that they're almost laughable. But if we increased them by, say, 40 times, money would pour into the startup ecosystem. With effective tax incentives … at present, you get back 22 per cent of the amount invested, but only up to NOK 1 million per investor. If it were 30 per cent, with a limit of NOK 100 million per company, money would pour into the startup ecosystem overnight. It would only take a small share of current property investments … people might go from having half a per cent of their portfolio in startups to perhaps four per cent, and money would simply pour in! That would be so good for Norway's future!

Haugli: We now have a completely new Parliament and a new Standing Committee on Business and Industry, and I just have to say this: If anyone on that committee is listening to this podcast, call Didrik and ask him for some good ideas. We need someone to make entrepreneurship policy their own … to take ownership of it, care about it and seek advice and guidance. And we understand – everyone understands – that there is no quick fix for many of these issues, but listen to entrepreneurs and put entrepreneurship policy higher on the agenda.

Dimmen: And things like … Innovation Norway – absolutely crucial for Auk. Then there’s the tax … well, the scheme is called the Tax Incentive Scheme for Investments in Start-up Companies – KapitalFUNN. (See https://www.skatteetaten.no/person/skatt/hjelp-til-riktig-skatt/aksjer-og-verdipapirer/om/skatteinsentivordningen/) That was also hugely important to us in the beginning. All the investors asked whether they could invest around NOK 500,000 and then get 22 per cent of it back – roughly NOK 100,000 – through their tax return that same year. It makes things much easier: a NOK 500,000 investment effectively cost them NOK 400,000. They actively made use of that, so it was hugely important. If only we could have done the same for a funding round of the size we’re raising now – NOK 20, 30, 40, 50 or 80 million – it would have been much easier.

Host: It's great fun listening to you, Didrik.

Dimmen: And that … so these are things that have been very pragmatic, and that I’ve noticed in my day-to-day life as an entrepreneur.

Host: … But we’ll have to wrap up this episode of Innopodden quite soon …

Haugli: Yes, it goes by so quickly.

Host: Yes, time flies, but before we wrap up, could you briefly say what the next steps are for …

Dimmen: Even more proposals for tax cuts?

Host: Now I’d like to return to Auk. What are your next steps?

Dimmen: Yes, so we – Auk is now entirely focused on growing internationally. Exports account for 80 per cent of our business. We went from zero in 2022 …

Haugli: 80?

Dimmen: Yes, 80, and our largest markets abroad are the US, Canada and the UK. They are growing the fastest, by around 150 to 200 per cent year on year. In Norway, we have reached the point where almost everyone has heard of us and we are starting to enter popular culture. We are now on the same journey in the US, the UK and Canada, as well as many of the usual suspects in Northern Europe: the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Germany. So we are right in the middle of that journey, and we have only just begun. We have barely scratched the surface. Norway is still growing, but those are the markets... We now sell into a total market of one billion people. Obviously, not all of them are potential customers, but even if you halve that figure a few times, there are still many millions of people in these markets who could become customers. We have received reviews in publications such as Wired, and we are about to be featured in the Financial Times gift guide in the UK, as well as Bob Vila and The Times. These are major publications, and we are investing as much as we can in growing our brand internationally. So we... and as I said, we will continue to make the best product in this category and lead it, just as reMarkable did. There were already some paper tablets around, but they simply did it so much better. Their marketing is outstanding, and the product itself is exceptionally good. Just look at what it has become: a company with revenue of NOK 6 billion. And it all comes from little Oslo, yet they are known across the US.

Haugli: Yes, it’s incredibly impressive. Before reMarkable, people used to say that we couldn’t succeed with consumer electronics in Norway. Then reMarkable came along and swept those objections aside. And you’re actually in a similar segment, even though it’s a completely different product.

Dimmen: And we’re very humbled to have the opportunity to perhaps fill those shoes. And it’s a bit like …

Haugli: But first and foremost, it’s inspiring. It really is.

Dimmen: We’re giving it everything we’ve got to build something along those lines. Of course, our segment is different, but we’re going all in within that category. When you think indoor growing or cultivation, we want you to think of Auk long before you think of growing itself, across all these countries. We have an incredibly exciting opportunity right now. We have the right expertise here in Norway. We’ve been fortunate enough to secure the funding we need from both Innovation Norway and investors. And we’re working hard. Given the competitive landscape and current market trends, we have a unique opportunity. The market is in a fairly poor state, so many of our competitors are struggling, and it isn’t a particularly attractive market to enter. But right now, while we’re in this dip, we’re putting our foot firmly on the accelerator.

Haugli: I feel you’re tapping into some global trends – and I realise we’re coming to the end here, but still – there’s something about self-sufficiency, organic farming …

Dimmen: Knowing where the food comes from …

Haugli: … know what you’re eating – yes, exactly, and I’m also thinking about interior design, bringing the kitchen to life. I’m no expert on these things, but I can imagine there’s much more potential here than just the small-scale solution itself.

Dimmen: Exactly, it’s not – it’s not about the herbs themselves.

Haugli: No, and not the machine itself either. No, it’s about something much bigger: the so-called attributes we talk about in marketing. It’s really interesting. That’ll be the next podcast, Kjetil, because I can see you’re ready to press the button.

Host: Yes, I'm about to press the button now – we'll simply have to wrap things up there. It's been great fun having you as our guest, Didrik Dimmen. And we'll be following Auk's growth – quite literally – in the future.

Dimmen:

It will be very – we are entering an incredibly exciting – and, not least, crucial – phase.

Haugli: What is the website called?

Dimmen: Auk.com.

Host: Thank you, and thank you, Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, and we’ll be back with another episode of Innopodden.

Guest: Petter Mathisen, Business Developer at Miljø Norge.

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Host: Miljø Norge is passionate about the circular economy. So what do they do? They collect used fire extinguishers and prepare them for reuse. They say this saves society 38 kilograms of CO2 emissions per extinguisher. We want to learn more about how they arrived at that figure and what reuse looks like in practice. Petter Mathisen is a business developer at Miljø Norge. In this episode, he joins Håkon Haugli and me, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, in the Innopodden studio.

Welcome to Innopodden!

Mathisenb: Yes, thank you. It’s nice to be here.

Haugli: It's good to have you here.

Host: We – Håkon and I, that is – may be old enough – at least I am – to remember when we could take a fire extinguisher back to the shop and have it refilled. Either because it had been used, or because after a few years the gauge had moved into one of the red zones. But over time, having it refilled became much more expensive than buying a new one. So instead, we bought new fire extinguishers and threw the old ones away. In practice, it was a kind of use-and-discard – or even don't-use-and-discard – approach. What do you do differently?

Mathisen: That’s essentially what we do… You’re absolutely right, fire extinguishers can be serviced manually, and my brother and I started doing that a very, very long time ago. When we were students, we lived in our grandmother’s house. She was over 90, and there were no longer any potatoes in the cellar – the potato cellar – because we filled it with fire extinguishers and set up a workshop where we could refill them. So the plan was to… well, we sold the fire extinguishers in the evenings and refilled them at weekends.

Host: So, you've been doing this since you were quite young?

Mathisen: Yes, we started a company called Norsk brannvern in 2002. That went well, and I’ve been working with fire extinguishers for many years, so I’m quite simply … a bit of a fire extinguisher nerd.
So I know a lot about them. I also know that they can be serviced, of course. We did that for many, many years. But it’s too expensive. It takes 15 minutes, and 15 minutes of labour in Norway costs too much when you can get a fire extinguisher from China for a few hundred kroner. So we ended up doing the same. Perhaps it was a guilty conscience that made us start doing this now? No, not really. But in 2015, we developed a project called the Fire Extinguisher Reuse Project, which sat there … more or less ready to go. Then, in 2021, we started Miljø Norge to automate the process. Instead of spending 15 minutes doing it manually, it takes 50 seconds in a machine – each stage takes 50 seconds. Think of it like an abacus: one comes out every 50 seconds, which is pretty cool.

Host: But tell us a little more about how it works. What... what do you actually do?

Haugli: I’d also like to jump in with a question: So, do you collect lots of fire extinguishers and put them through a process where you essentially do the same thing, but on a much larger scale and in a much more automated way?

Mathisen: Yes, you can't make this financially viable by doing everything manually. It just doesn't work, so we've created the world's first automated production line for reusing fire extinguishers. We receive extinguishers from Norsk Gjenvinning, Ragn-Sells, Stena Recycling and Franzefoss, as well as many other partners. In fact, extinguishers from every industry in Norway should end up with us, and some from Sweden come to us too – we're receiving a huge shipment from Sweden today as well.
We then sell them on again. It was really exciting to call Norsk Gjenvinning. We spoke to them, and they said they wanted to be part of it and that we could get raw materials from them. Then we called the former CEO of Jernia. He simply said, ‘Yes, I've dreamt of this. I want it.’ So we had both free raw materials and a customer before we'd even started, which was great.

Haugli: Yes, brilliant! So you got the entire value chain in place with just a few phone calls.

Mathisen: Yes, that was basically it. It worked out well, but there are always a few challenges.

Haugli: Yes, tell us a little about that – what has been challenging?

Mathisen: Well, it’s a bit like this... There are many challenging aspects. Starting something – whatever it is you’re starting – is difficult. It’s a bit like a fairy tale – people have tried and learnt, and we’re trying to learn too. If you think of the fairy tales about the Ash Lad, as it were, you encounter trolls, which are the challenges, and then you have the good helpers. Norsk Gjenvinning was one of those when they said, ‘We’ll supply you with raw materials,’ and Jernia said, ‘We’ll buy your products.’ But it’s always two steps forward and one step back. There are technical challenges; no one had ever built an automated line like ours before. So, of course, we’ve drawn on a wide range of specialist expertise in Norway. Code in Porsgrunn has helped us with the main project, while we’ve used Norce for the AI within the system, and so on. You touched on this earlier, but how does it actually work? When an appliance comes in – and we receive hundreds of thousands of them –

Host: … And they’re not identical, of course. They’re slightly different, but almost the same.

Mathisen: That's absolutely right. Most people in Norway think that a fire extinguisher is just a fire extinguisher. Some people – if they've bought one – may know that there's a difference between powder, foam and CO2. But that's where most people's knowledge ends. We know that there are more than 100 different types of powder, and we use only 36 – no, 37 – different formulations on our production line. That's 37 different types of powder, each with its own mixing ratio. Then there are thousands of different labels. So even if the label says Norsk brannvern, Firesafe or something else, the extinguisher may still come from the same manufacturer.

Host: The same manufacturer and the same extinguisher?

Mathisen: Yes, it can be the same extinguisher. There are different fire ratings, so an extinguisher might have a number before the A, for example. This applies to ABC dry powder extinguishers – I realise this is getting quite technical, but if your extinguisher is marked 5A, it means that in testing it can put out a fire involving a half-metre-long stack of wood. Ratings range from 5A to 55A. The extinguisher weighs six kilos regardless, but the rating indicates the length of the standardised test fire it can extinguish, measured in decimetres. The stack is approximately 50 cm wide and 50 cm high, with its length varying from half a metre to 5.5 metres. So there is a very significant difference in quality when you test an extinguisher like this.

Host: This is the first time we've had a fire extinguisher nerd on Innopodden!

Haugli: Yes, it’s great fun! I’m so curious about all this! When these thousands of extinguishers arrive at your facility, are they sorted by type, and then does artificial intelligence perhaps decide which type of powder goes into which extinguisher? Is that how it works? Do they sort of pass through the system like that? I’m picturing fire extinguishers whizzing along an assembly line …

Mathisen: It will eventually. We have … actually, the only part we’ve properly automated is the production side – the reuse process itself. But it’s essentially one large line, and as I showed Tove (Andersen, CEO) at Tomra, what we really have is a reverse vending machine, you know. When it comes in, you put it on a conveyor belt, and then 360-degree images are taken of the extinguisher. It’s scanned so the system knows exactly what it is, and then it travels along the conveyor to one of 37 different reuse processes. If it contains foam with PFAS, it goes along the conveyor to the right to be emptied, ensuring that the PFAS is handled safely, and so on. This is hazardous waste, after all. So on the one hand, we operate in a kind of high-tech industry, while on the other, it’s waste management – waste tech, if you like. A kind of modern waste treatment. In the past, the powder went to landfill, and that still happens today. Even in Sweden and Norway, there are still people who don’t send it to us and instead send it to landfill.
One thing that has surprised me since entering the waste industry is just how much ends up in landfill. Frogner Park, for example – have you been there?

Haugli: Yes?

Mathisen: It is quite a large park. Every year, enough waste to cover the area of Frogner Park to a height of 55 metres is sent to landfill in Norway. That is an enormous amount. We simply do not think about it.

Haugli: We had Tove Andersen from Tomra here in the studio, and she spoke about this very issue and how complicated it was because there are so many different standards. And perhaps it is a bit like what you are saying about fire extinguishers – there are so many different types that it becomes an obstacle to mechanising and automating the processes. It creates a number of manual... well, perhaps gaps in the circular chain. Suddenly, you come across a particular extinguisher that you cannot process. Is that something you experience?

Mathisen: Yes, we basically do what Kjetil was talking about. We assign … people to sort those ten pallets, and once we have ten, we can take them over to production. You need quite a large volume to make it worthwhile.

Haugli: Yes, exactly.

Mathisen: There is no benefit to running two machines, because we have to empty the powder silos and refill them so that the powders do not get mixed.

Host: Can you do this with all types of fire extinguishers, such as powder, foam, CO2 and so on?

Mathisen: In principle, you can refill all types. Foam is something we do not really want to put back on the market because it contains PFAS chemicals. It is being phased out, so we do not put it back, as this applies to the entire industry – and there are laws preventing it from being placed on the market, so …

Haugli: And that’s a really exciting perspective! Sorry to interrupt, but what you’re doing isn’t just recycling – you’re actually making the equipment better and more environmentally friendly; you’re upgrading it!

Mathisen: Yes, that’s what we’re trying to do ... We have to keep up with what’s happening.
We talked about standardisation, and we’re currently working with Standards Norway, where we’re revising … helping to revise Norwegian Standard 3910, as it’s called. It covers the maintenance of fire extinguishers.

Haugli: We encourage all our listeners to read it.

Host: Haven't you read it?

Haugli: Oh, yes … great fun!

Mathisen: I also represent Norway on something called TC 70, which is a CEN group made up of international geeks who meet in different places around Europe.

Haugli: It’s so exciting! Standards really do foster innovation. I just have to say that … because having a standard way of doing things creates room for development. So this is a hugely important topic in general – but I won’t spend any more time on it. Could you tell us a little about the company? Before we started recording, you mentioned that you now have quite a few employees. So you’ve come a long way, from those first phone calls to Norsk Gjenvinning and Jernia to where you are today?

Mathisen: Yes. It has been a really exciting journey. We called you as well, after contacting Norsk Gjenvinning, Jernia and a few other partners – including Norsk Brannvern – who were interested in buying all of this, so we essentially had the value chain in place. We then tried to buy a machine that could handle the reuse process, but no such machine existed. We called Germany and the US, trying to find out where in the world we might find one. That was when we contacted Innovation Norway, and you agreed to provide us with NOK 500,000 for a preliminary project to see whether this was even possible. That was really exciting.

Haugli: Yes, that's great to hear!

Mathisen: So we received a grant, which we were very grateful for, and then we had a share issue that brought in professional investors. They have helped move the company forward, and then we received even more technology grants from you. We are very grateful for that. It was a substantial grant to explore what we could achieve with technology and innovation, because nothing like this had been built before. As I mentioned, we have worked with many Norwegian partners on this and built the world's first automated production line for this. So... the line can of course still be optimised, there is no doubt about that. We should also optimise the stage before it. But it is really exciting. As you say, we now have 30 employees, and I believe the latest figure I saw showed that we had paid NOK 7.3 million in employer's National Insurance contributions so far. So we will repay every krone we have received, with interest – we will make sure of that.

Haugli: I think that is such an important perspective. Innovation Norway only provides relatively modest amounts to help companies reach the next stage or develop technology that can lay the foundations for growth. The fact that you are already paying back more than you received in public-sector risk relief is relevant, and I think it is important for listeners to understand that this makes sense from a socio-economic perspective. We do not subsidise the operations of struggling companies; we provide risk relief to create a real springboard for businesses. But enough about Innovation Norway.

Mathisen: No, I think that’s very … that’s absolutely right. It’s a very important point. Neither Geir, who is now the general manager, nor I draw a salary. No, we won’t draw a salary until we’re making money. That’s how it is – there should be a bit of an entrepreneurial spirit, and you don’t get money from Innovation Norway to pay generous salaries. I think it’s really unacceptable when you read in the papers about people who have received large grants and then pay themselves salaries in the millions or things like that. I think it’s … Yes, I know it’s probably difficult to impose limits because you want to attract talented people, but some of those headlines nearly make me fall off my chair. So you can at least be sure that we’ll use the money properly and pay it back. And that’s our goal. As I said to Tove – I spoke to her as well – we’ll catch up with them in 15 years. But I need 15 years before we get there, and by then I think we’ll at least have made a decent return.

Haugli: Yes, that's very good. Another aspect is that you mentioned that many of the people who work for you may not speak Norwegian fluently, and, well ... Could you tell us a little about who works for you?

Mathisen: Yes, all sorts of people work here. I mean, we’re a manufacturing company, and starting a manufacturing business in Norway today is quite exciting.
We’d previously started the service company, as well as a sports venture, and we helped set up a foundation too – a few different things, really. But manufacturing is a bit different – and quite exciting. You need people who get up in the morning and know what they’re doing. So we start at seven. We have a meeting from seven until twelve minutes past, when we review health, safety and the environment, what happened yesterday, what’s happening today and whether there’s anything unusual going on. Then we go through each person’s targets. And you don’t need to speak Norwegian particularly well to clean the equipment, for example, and make it look presentable. We package it and sell it through Felleskjøpet, Byggmakker and other retailers.
It needs to look all right, but I think people have to accept that it won’t be absolutely pristine. It’s the smart choice. It’s a bit like a propane cylinder: not many people with a gas barbecue say, ‘Yes, but I want a brand-new one!’ I worked at Statoil when I was young, and no one ever said, ‘I don’t want that cylinder because it has a scratch on it.’ But that’s probably the stage we’re at now. We need to show people that exchanging it is the new normal. You simply exchange it, just as you did in the old days. That’s perfectly normal. There’s no reason to keep it ... People buy one and hang it on a wall. It stays there for five or ten years, and then it goes to landfill? That’s complete madness! You have to remember that making one of these units in China involves extracting six kilos of iron ore in Africa or Australia and shipping it to China. There, it’s combined with 3.2 kilos of coal to produce four kilos of steel. Then it’s filled with powder, which might come from Thailand – or Morocco, for that matter – shipped all the way to China. It’s filled and sealed, then shipped here, hangs on a wall for five years and ends up in landfill. It’s completely absurd, so exchanging it is obviously a no-brainer. You simply have to exchange it again. To me, it’s quite simply the smart choice. You don’t have to be Greta Thunberg to see that it makes sense.

Haugli: And the only minor downside for you as a consumer is that your fire extinguisher might not look completely brand new.

Mathisen: No, it doesn't look brand new, but then again, not many people keep it on their coffee table.

Haugli: No … because who is it that … exactly, that's ... that's precisely it, it's not really interior décor …

Host: No, but what you're saying now is part of the basis for that calculation – I assume – of 38 kilos of CO2 per extinguisher. Tell us a little more about that!

Mathisen: Yes, it’s an average. I really ought to call Bergfald Environmental Consultants, who provided us with this report. It’s … I think it was 36 pages long, with supporting documentation. It’s about the environmental cost of decommissioning one – the carbon emissions, that is – compared with producing a new one. Like the boat I just told you about …

Host: … Everything that we as consumers don't see.

Mathisen: Yes. So they ... I was just at Sirk Norge’s conference, sharing some figures on what we’ve sold so far. We’ve now sold 200,000 appliances, and I think that has saved the equivalent of around 3,000 return flights to New York in terms of climate impact. But I think the loss of nature is even worse, don’t you? In terms of the tonnage, you could make around 60,000 cookers from the iron we’ve saved. When you think about it, these materials eventually form quite substantial mountains. It amounts to enough powder to cover three football pitches to a depth of more than a metre. No, eight football pitches, sorry. So we’re talking about huge volumes of natural resources that we extract simply to consume, only to throw them into landfill. It’s strange, really. Reusing them is clearly the smart choice.

Host: And when you buy one of the extinguishers you've refurbished and handled, it's called Slåkke, with an ‘å’?

Mathisen: That's right. Slåkke, with an å. It's meant to show that it's a bit Norwegian. And the å also ties in with the circular emblem. That's how it is. We have people who are good at coming up with names, you know, so that's what you get. We also manufacture for a competitor. We have a competitor that normally imports from China, but they've also realised that this is here to stay. So we're in 'coopetition', as it might be called, and we make their reuse products too. They're called GPBM and are the Nordic region's largest importer, based in Sweden. They've entered into an exclusive distribution agreement with us in Sweden, so we manufacture for them under a different brand.

Host: So they sell them under their own name?

Mathisen: Yes.

Haugli: I just heard in a discussion about fire safety that a great many fire extinguishers in Norwegian homes have expired. Because we’re so bad at checking expiry dates. So, if someone listening now thinks, ‘I’m going to take a look at my fire extinguisher at home,’ and discovers that it expired two years ago, and now – inspired by you – they’d like a Slåkke extinguisher, what should they do?

Mathisen: Yes, they can take it in and exchange it. I mentioned Jernia earlier. You can exchange it there and get a Reuse extinguisher. That isn't our brand, so you won't get a Slåkke, although it is manufactured by us, so I should mention that. You can hand in your old extinguisher and get a new one, or you can buy Slåkke at Felleskjøpet or Byggmaker – and many businesses buy from Ahlsell. So there are plenty of places where you can get hold of Slåkke.

Haugli: Are the same retailers required to accept your old fire extinguisher, or do you have to take it to a recycling centre?

Mathisen: It is hazardous waste, so not everyone will accept it. There are some logistical considerations, so you will probably need to take it – at least if you have larger quantities – to Norsk Gjenvinning, Stena or a similar company. But treat it as a raw material. Do not throw it away or leave it outside for three months to rust, because then we cannot reuse it. That is very important to us.

Haugli: Yes, that's an incredibly important point.

Host: But when you take it to a recycling centre and leave it where they collect fire extinguishers – because they have designated areas for them – does it end up with you?

Mathisen: That's right. They come to us. We receive them from 720 waste collection sites across Norway – the vast majority of them. Absolutely.

Haugli: We simply have to say to everyone listening that, for the sake of fire safety at home, the environment and nature, as we have discussed, and Norwegian business development, we encourage you to check the expiry date, take your old device to the recycling centre as soon as possible and make sure you upgrade. We have to say it ... This is pure advertising, of course – we have no vested interest in this, Kjetil, but it is important.

Host: Indeed. We have talked a lot about fire extinguishers, the materials and so on, but we should also hear more about the company. As you mentioned, you currently have 30 employees and a subsidiary in Sweden. What is your next milestone?

Mathisen: Yes, we drew up a list quite early on of things we might want to reuse, but what we have realised is that – OK, the global market for fire extinguishers alone is worth NOK 75 billion. So perhaps we should finish more of what we are already doing in that area. We currently have ten per cent of the market – around 10–15 per cent in Norway, closer to 15 per cent, I think. And we have made a start elsewhere too … Twenty per cent of what we produce now goes to Sweden, so we are up and running there. It takes a long time, and there are a number of barriers you do not consider at the outset. We were in Denmark last week, for example. It takes eleven months to obtain a notification – in other words, a permit to export waste, in this case fire extinguishers – from Denmark to Norway. So it takes time and also costs DKK 75,000. It just … takes a while. Everything takes a little longer than you expect when you run a business. What we really want is to become good – really good – at fire extinguishers first, and then take our fire extinguishers out into the world. But then there is … We also established those subsidiaries because we want to use 100 per cent of the raw materials. A fire extinguisher consists of … We cannot reuse all of them. If they are rusty or dented or anything like that, we cannot use them. Is there moisture in the powder? Then we cannot use that either. So we can only … It is now slightly below – things have improved considerably, and we are working to increase the reuse rate – but around half, or just over half, cannot actually be reused. That is a very large proportion, much larger than we expected. That is why we invested so much in the reuse side and not in the other side. But we should have invested more in that other side too, because of the powder. We have residual powder – one tonne of it every day. And when you reach volumes like that, opportunities start to emerge. Lots of opportunities. Today, it is turned into fertiliser. Yes, so it can be sold as – or rather, it is sold as fertiliser. That is how it works. Not without treatment, though. We send it to a business partner who heats it, puts it through a chemical mixture to remove the oil, silicones and so on, and then they are authorised to sell it as fertiliser. Then there are the plastic tubes – there is a plastic tube inside a fire extinguisher. You can turn that into 3D printer filament if you have sufficient volumes. If you have one of those tubes, you really just have a problem. It is simply rubbish, or whatever you want to call it. But if you have a few tonnes, you can actually make money from it! So that is very interesting. What we are working on now is really finding out how we can use 100 per cent of the raw materials. The rubber hose on the outside – I know that in some countries they grind it up and use it in low-noise asphalt. We cannot do that in Norway because we use studded tyres. It is not particularly popular here, but there are certainly places – and I know they exist – where it can be used profitably. So when you ask what the next product will be: first, we need to make each of those material fractions profitable. That is our goal now. Because it is a bit like … the steel – just the steel in the cylinder – fetches perhaps NOK 1.50 or NOK 2 per kilogram. But this watch strap here costs considerably more, even though that is also made of steel.

Host: Yes, the watch strap. It's made of steel.

Mathisen: Exactly, so you have to think: what can you get for that price per kilo? Can I make fishing lures from that steel, or can I make watch straps? What can I make from it that adds value and uses 100 per cent of the raw material? That’s something we work on quite a lot. So, when you ask about these different companies, the idea is that Miljø Norge is the parent company. Slåkkefabrikken is now a subsidiary that works with fire extinguishers, but if we’re going to work with another product in this area – and we are – then perhaps there should be a separate company focusing on fertiliser, which is a specialist field in its own right. You really need to be an expert in what you do. And I think you also need subsidiaries that are experts in their respective fields. Miljø Norge can then be the industrial player that understands the circular economy and knows how to generate revenue from sound environmental solutions. So that’s the plan. That’s the big plan.

Haugli: It’s incredibly exciting to hear about. We at Innovation Norway are partly owned by the county authorities, which work on regional business development plans. One very important concept for them is what we call industrial symbiosis: what is waste for one business is a resource for another. The idea is to have businesses within the same ecosystem, preferably in the same location, where some – such as you – have residual materials from producing powder, steel, rubber or plastic. These materials can then become resources for others. I think this is also highly relevant to what the business landscape will look like in the future, because the world is facing much greater scarcity across all resources. We have to reuse materials, and we can see that many circular models have gaps. Something is left over, or there is something we cannot use, or we cannot quite work out how to build those models … or you suddenly find yourself with a stockpile of powder that nobody wants. What do you do then? That brings us back to finding and identifying a use for it. In my view, Norwegian counties are taking a proactive approach to this and have understood its importance. This is a very good illustration of the concept, and I would encourage everyone listening to google the term ‘industrial symbiosis’. It may sound like jargon of the highest order, but it does make sense.

Host: This is interesting, Håkon. We have also mentioned Tomra a couple of times. They work with reuse and materials recycling, have large-scale systems for this and are a major global player. Then we have Miljø Norge, which operates in broadly the same industry, but is at a rather different stage in terms of the company's size and development. Is this an area where Norwegian businesses have particular advantages?

Haugli: Perhaps not natural advantages, but Norway is a highly skilled country, and Norwegian companies are quick to adopt new technology – and that gives us an edge. I also think Norwegian consumers are characterised by a couple of things: they care about the climate and the environment, and they are keen to use digital tools and open to doing things in new ways. Reuse is also a growing trend. Just look at young people today: they wear second-hand clothes in a completely different way from my generation. Their attitude towards them is different. So something is happening in Norway that is creating more favourable conditions. But it is not because Norway has particular natural resources to draw on, or because of our location. It is simply down to forward-thinking business founders and entrepreneurs doing the work. Tomra is a very good example. As I mentioned, we had Tove Andersen here, and the story began with two entrepreneurs in a garage thinking, ‘Surely it must be possible to make a reverse vending machine,’ and then doing it. Today, it is a global company with thousands of employees around the world, revolutionising the entire waste management industry globally. So, does Norway have any particular advantages? I would say no. Does Norway have opportunities to succeed internationally in this field? Yes, and we are already doing so. It is also about the interaction you mentioned – you talk to them, and that helps us build a larger community and ecosystem where knowledge, technology and expertise can be shared more easily. That is also hugely important.

Mathisen: Good point, good point. It’s easy to connect with people in Norway, so I can say to Tove, ‘Could you help me out?’ And then she sends over … Haug, that’s his name – he’s in charge of new markets there – and he sits down with us and says, ‘This is how I’d do it. If we were going to help you expand internationally, I’d recommend that you first make some money here in the Nordics and show that it really works. Prove that you can get the technology into distribution centres through online channels, retailers and fire safety providers. And secure an exclusive partner in Sweden.’ We’ve managed to do that. ‘Right, now you’re getting somewhere. Then you raise capital and build five factories at once.’ Through Innovation Norway, we’ve mapped out eight markets – Singapore, several across Europe and so on – so we’re ready. In October, we’re heading back to Germany to speak with them. We also have a Teams meeting with them at one o’clock today, actually, so … it’s exciting!

Haugli: … and it’s so exciting and wonderful to hear that we’ve been a partner in this. It will also be really exciting to follow you through the next phase. Yes – and markets are different, aren’t they? So you’ll encounter other trolls on that journey, and hopefully other helpers too.

Mathisen: And we’re actually … receiving our first load from a new supplier today. We’ve had a great deal of help from Stena in Sweden and Ragn-Sells, but now we’re receiving deliveries from PreZero, Lidl’s waste management company. They’ve sent us three loads, and the deliveries have started arriving regularly. Today, Remondis, the world’s third-largest waste management company, is also delivering its first load from Sweden. So today is actually a bit of a milestone, which is really exciting. And it’s a good time to have this meeting with Germany and say that we now need to explore opportunities in the German market, as there are quite a few more fire extinguishers there.

Haugli: Yes, you could say that.

Host: Fire extinguishers are something everyone should have, but we all hope we will never need to use. Håkon, if you were to challenge Miljø Norge to recycle or reuse something else – something we use and enjoy using – what would it be?

Haugli: To be honest, I’m very reluctant to answer that question. I think Miljø Norge is taking a very sensible approach by focusing on what you know. There are major opportunities for growth in that – Germany being a case in point, right? It’s a market many times larger, and it’s already huge. Unfortunately, we come across some companies that try to do too much at once. I don’t have the answer for Miljø Norge, but it sounds very sensible to me to stick to what you know, at least for a while. And I’m afraid my imagination isn’t good enough to come up with what should be next. But looking at the list you already have of other things, I would say that the closer they are in terms of logic and distribution – if you can work with some of the same partners – the easier it will be to succeed, rather than trying something completely different on top of what you already do. That’s not to say you should play it safe. I think you should be extremely ambitious – ambitious about thinking globally and entering new markets, but with something you know. I strongly believe in that. But some companies also succeed by doing the exact opposite, so you’ll have to make your own assessment.

Mathisen: Yes, well, we have a fairly clear strategy for how we want to approach it. So … but you’re absolutely right that it helps if it’s closely related – for example, when we use the powder as fertiliser, it’s easier for us to say to Felleskjøpet, since they already sell our fire extinguishers: ‘Would you like to buy some fertiliser at the same time?’ It’s the same supplier, we have a good relationship and so on. That’s one of the advantages of being a small company. You can change direction quite quickly.

Haugli: Yes, absolutely, that’s great. You need to be able to move quickly while maintaining long-term ambitions and direction. You know what you want, and I think that combination works well. Another point, from a business perspective, is that we see successful companies develop the ability to do what we call pivoting over time. Moving from one thing to another. This really involves two things: changing how you distribute, so you can use different partners and suppliers – like the shipment arriving today, for example. The other is pivoting the product itself and doing something slightly different. Perhaps branding it differently, adding new functionality, improving the quality and so on. These are really the only two ways to create a turning point in your growth curve: by changing either your distribution or your product. There is no other way. Of course, that is pure theory. In practice, every business and every product is different, but experience shows that this is the case.

Mathisen: Yes, things are certainly moving in the right direction. We’ve gone from a long investment phase and being a startup to becoming a scaleup. At last, we’re starting to see figures we can be reasonably pleased with. But we’re never entirely satisfied, are we? When we worked at Norsk brannvern, we delivered a healthy bottom line every year for 20 years. So making major investments and then having to recoup them is quite new to us. But it’s happening now. Goods are pouring in – and going straight back out again. It’s really exciting, and we’re very optimistic about the autumn and the future. Very exciting.

Haugli: You certainly convey great enthusiasm and joy for what you do. And that is clearly very, very important. It has been a real pleasure having you here as our guest and hearing your story. The very best of luck! We’ll keep our fingers crossed, and if there is anything we at Innovation Norway can help with, please get in touch. Good luck! And I’ll certainly be going home to check the expiry dates on my fire extinguishers.

Host: We’ll do that. I think we’ve become a bit obsessed with fire extinguishers too, Håkon. It’s time to bring this episode to a close. Thank you for joining us, Petter Mathisen from Miljø Norge. Thanks also to Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, and we’ll be back with another episode of Innopodden.

Guest: Sidsel Lindsø, founder and CEO of Ecteras Subsurface Experts

From our team: Cristian Valdes Carter, EVP of Strategy and

Programme Manager Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Host: Some people thrive below the surface – often far below it. Ecteras is one of them. The company brings extensive experience and deep expertise in areas including CO2 storage. 'The work we do moves billions,' says founder and CEO Sidsel Lindsø. She takes a deep dive into the business here on Innopodden, together with Cristian Valdes Carter and me, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Welcome to Innopodden, Sidsel Lindsø.

Lindsø: Thank you so much.

Host: It’s great to have you here. We’d like to hear a little about the company. Ecteras is a fairly new name – it used to be called ExploCrowd – and we’d like to hear more about the name too. But first, tell us: how did you get the idea to start the company?

Lindsø: The idea came to me on 9 June 2016. I remember it very clearly. To explain how it came about, I need to tell you a little about what I do and who my colleagues are. I’m a geologist, and geologists live in a slightly different world from most people. That means my world is quite different from yours. In my world, continents drift around and countries collide, creating mountain ranges. There are earthquakes and major faults, and tiny minerals form here and there, becoming resources that we discover. In other words, I live on a different scale, where life began 540 million years ago. I learnt that on my first day at university, while my own timeline had begun with the Egyptians and Neanderthals. So we work across entirely different dimensions, and that is important for understanding what our business is about. We use that experience to understand what is happening underground, and we use our expertise to find CO2 storage sites, minerals and various resources that we use in our everyday lives, as well as oil and gas. In fact, Norway owes its wealth to geologists.

Host: But what happened on 9 June? What year was it – 2016?

Lindsø: In 2016. There was a major downturn in the oil industry, where I was working as a geologist. At the time, even the big names, the exceptionally talented geologists, were being laid off left, right and centre. It is a cyclical industry, so you always know it will recover – then it crashes, all the geologists are laid off, and when it recovers, they are needed again. So we thought there would probably be a need for our expertise in the future. I also had a mentor. I come from a family where starting your own business was never discussed, but my mentor said, 'OK, you ready? You know you’re going to lose your job. Which business are you going to start tomorrow?' That made me think, OK, I can do this … I think I have a chance of succeeding. But I need two things in place – and there are two things I love: I love my field, science, and I love people. I love seeing them grow, and when people work together and achieve something, it is an absolutely wonderful feeling. So there were two aspects. First, I thought: what if we focus on the things the oil companies do not have time for now that they are laying off all their geologists? If we become exceptionally good at this, we can develop ideas and hopefully sell them later. But it was also quite a – how can I put it – bold idea, because how could we believe we could be better than the oil companies? And how could we build enough trust for them to let us into their inner sanctum? But we had anticipated that there would be a future need because we took a long-term view, and many companies in that industry do not have that luxury. So we began mapping the entire Norwegian continental shelf, ensuring that we would be ready when they were. It is an incredibly exciting concept, and perhaps the chances of success were not great, but I had another motivation: if I could succeed, if a woman could build such a highly specialised scientific company in this male-dominated industry, it might inspire other women to do the same. When you make room for one, you make room for more. And hopefully, we could also help open up an industry that is not always particularly receptive to new ideas.

Host: There is a lot there that we will hear more about, but first, Cristian, we need to learn a little more about you too. Håkon Haugli, who usually co-hosts Innopodden with me, could not make it this time, so you are joining us instead. You are relatively new to your role as EVP of Strategy here at Innovation Norway. Before that, you headed our office in India, among other things. Tell us a little more about yourself.

Carter: Thank you very much. Before I went to India and moved from little Bergen to New Delhi, the world's second-largest city, I worked in oil and gas. I headed a company called CCB Subsea, which specialised in subsea maintenance – maintaining underwater equipment – as well as developing new designs and tools for the oil and gas industry. It was a fantastic time, even though we were hit quite hard by Covid. I really enjoyed working in an environment where I was surrounded by engineers. I'm a lawyer myself, so that's a long way from your field, but being around engineers was incredibly rewarding and educational. I also enjoyed visiting the workshops and seeing how you can take a very – shall we say – practical approach to solving problems and finding solutions. Another takeaway from my previous life in oil and gas is the culture, which I think is very special. I mean both vertically, in terms of the relationship between customers and suppliers and how they challenge each other, and also vertically – or horizontally, sorry – across the industry. We have supported this through some very effective tools at Innovation Norway, such as our clusters. So that's my background. Before that, I worked in fisheries and property. And if we go right back to the beginning, my background isn't quite as exotic as yours, Sidsel. But I was born in Chile, where they have some very powerful earthquakes.

Host: Yes, that's certainly exotic enough by Norwegian standards!

Carter: I actually knew a great deal about tectonic plates and things like that even when I was very young.

Host: Ah, so you have one foot in Sidsel's world and the other in the world that I and quite a few others inhabit.

Carter: Yes, you could say that. To sum it up briefly, yes.

Host: Sidsel, Ecteras says, 'we help our clients succeed below the surface,' and that sounds great. But for those of us who aren't familiar with the industry, what exactly do you do?

Lindsø: We are scientists, and we analyse data – subsurface data. Deep underground, we have well data or seismic data. Seismic data consists of sound waves sent down through the ground to create an image of the geological layers and structures. If you imagine an Olympic sports team, that is essentially what we are, only with scientists. Because we have trained and trained and trained. It is like preparing for a regatta, where you compete against others and train to become skilled – good – better – challenging yourself every day. And because we love what we do, work so closely together and have built a strong culture – we can come back to what culture means for innovation, because it matters a great deal; you can design a culture to enhance opportunities for innovation – we have been able to anticipate developments and have solutions ready when they happen. We also do a great deal of research and development, involving projects that are completely impossible to plan. But we have never missed a deadline, because we are quite good at understanding what we are likely to discover and how we can use it. So we always start a project by saying, 'We don’t know what we’re going to find, but we’re going to find something.' And that is often what makes the difference when decisions involving billions of kroner are at stake.

Carter: But may I ask, who are your customers?

Lindsø: So our customers are... it started with the oil companies, because all our sales are relationship-based. They are built on trust and reputation, and now because they need it. So it started with the oil companies. And it is moving increasingly into the European – how shall I put it – political arena, where we support advisers as well as political stakeholders, meaning regulators and legislators. They also need to understand this, and we have a valuable role to play because we are independent; we are not an oil company. This means that Europe can listen to companies like ours, whereas they are reluctant to speak to oil companies. The oil companies are therefore unable to share their expertise in the same way that we can. This gives us a unique role in which we can step in and contribute.

Carter: Evidence-based advice for both politicians and regulators, then?

Lindsø: Yes, but also some of the emitters in the market who are faced with all these new things they need to understand. I mean, how long is the CCS value chain, and what does it consist of? It can feel quite overwhelming, so in the end we find ourselves raising our voices a little and saying: It is also important to understand whether you can present it in a way that the business developer at the other end of the value chain understands.

Host: But you're a fairly small company with relatively few employees. Some of the customers you work with, and perhaps your competitors too, are huge companies with thousands – perhaps hundreds of thousands – of employees.
How is that working out?

Lindsø: Going back, there were 25 of us working as a team, and we were effectively plugged into the companies. This often happens when a large company changes its strategy and says, ‘We’re changing direction; this is what we’re going to do now. But we have so few resources available that we need help – can you fix it?’ Then we step in and deliver. I compared us to a sports team because we deliver much faster than most people in large companies. They have established processes, procedures and structures, whereas we operate completely independently of those and of their strategy, so we can move faster. We had one customer, and this is part of what we do: we make our customers successful. We’re often kingmakers within these organisations. They bring us in, and suddenly they become stars because they achieve something no one thought possible. One of them told me, ‘When I tell other people about the timeline for this project, they just start laughing.’ So we work at a different pace, yet the quality is often higher than they expect. It’s quite unusual, but incredibly rewarding. A few years ago, someone came to us after an unexpected government announcement. A licensing round had suddenly opened for an area where no work had been done before, so six months’ work had to be completed in three weeks. They came to us and said, ‘We’re getting a bit desperate. What can you do?’ We drew up a plan, and they later told us that their partners laughed when they presented it. But we pulled it off and received a round of applause when we delivered. Everyone on our team got involved, helping and supporting one another. You enter this state of flow, but you plan to get there. For scientists who love their field, that’s a powerful motivator, because even looking back on it gives you a real buzz. So we’ve created a company of experts who are highly skilled in their fields, love what they do and make their expertise available to those who need it, when they need it.

Host: Yes, because first and foremost, this is about the people.

Lindsø: Yes, absolutely.

Host: It’s fascinating to hear from you. You work right at the heart of the companies you support, and you touched briefly on what you, or your team, can contribute that they cannot do themselves. But trust is crucial here. How do you earn the companies’ trust to become so deeply involved in the core of their business?

Lindsø: Time. But also consistently showing that you have their back. One of the things people challenged us on at the outset was how we could come in without competing with the existing employees, because they were afraid of losing their jobs. But that is not how it works. Many of the people we have worked with love working with us because it is an experience: they get swept up in this whirlwind and look forward to the meetings, but we also contribute and bring people along with us. And we deliver something they need. At senior management level, they often have very little time. Their resources are already fully booked – remember, we talked about how all the geologists are laid off when times are tough. So they do not have enough resources, and that is where we come in to help. I had an experience like that the first time I met one of these senior executives. He came up to me and asked, 'Can you deliver?' Questions like that make my heart race, but I said, 'My biggest concern is whether your people are ready to embrace new ideas and new ways of doing things.' That was actually his biggest concern too, but we agreed to stay in touch. So, yes. In that sense, we... We lost quite a lot of work last year. The entire team and many others had been fully booked until Christmas, and then some things happened. But we still hear from people who worked with them. They have heard so many good things about us that they want to learn more.

Host: Yes, exactly.

Lindsø: So we're in this strange situation where we can't go out and promote ourselves widely across networks, because then we lose our credibility. But we need to operate in a market where we don't really work through relationships.

Host: Yes, that's an interesting situation.

Carter: You're in a very knowledge-intensive industry, with a very high level of … well, a highly advanced safety culture and so on. So you really need to have watertight solutions, right? Before you can sell them and, you know, and …

Lindsø: If I get it wrong, it costs …

Host: Billions

Lindsø: ten billion.

Carter: Yes. You can either save billions or incur a huge bill, right? Delaying a project can generate significant additional costs, can't it?
But you said something – as far as I remember – about them knowing what they want. Do you also sometimes find that customers don't really know what they need, and that you have to tell them what they actually need?

Lindsø: We have some fantastic examples involving CCS, actually thanks to Innovation Norway. In 2020, when everything fell apart for everyone, we applied for funding and received NOK 400,000 for a study. That enabled us to stay ahead of many of the oil companies in terms of technological development and solutions. They have adopted workflows from us, but it has taken a long time. We had one job where a geologist had taken all his old oil and gas prospects, recycled them and then pitched them as sites where vast amounts could be stored. We looked at each other and said, ‘How do we explain to the customer that it doesn’t work like that, but do it in a constructive way that builds their knowledge and helps them realise it for themselves?’ Because we can never simply go in and say that he is wrong. So we navigate this space. And we managed to deliver in such a way that one of the people who joined the project, whom I spoke to afterwards, said, ‘We came in thinking we knew quite a lot, but you showed us that we still had a great deal to learn.’ So in that sense, because we explored, tested and investigated things ourselves first, we are ahead of the curve, and they have been able to come in and benefit from that. For example, I work with someone who is incredibly smart. He disappears for three weeks, then comes back after tinkering with code and Python and things like that, and says, ‘Right, I now have a solution that lets us use this open-source software in this way.’ That saves us NOK 3 million on a project, and instead of our project taking six months, as it usually does for others, we can complete it in three weeks.

Host: Fantastic.

Lindsø: So it’s a value proposition that appeals to many of our customers.

Carter: That’s great to hear! I also received funding for a project in 2020. Yes, that was during Covid as well, and it was, well … a conversion kit for a Christmas tree. I’ll leave it to the listeners to imagine – to try to visualise what that might be.

Host: You don't mean the kind of Christmas tree we usually have in our living room?

Lindsø: It's a little more expensive.

Carter: A little more expensive – it costs around 30 million, perhaps, yes. It is a set of valves that regulates the flow of oil and gas passing through. But I have … no, it is just ... it is incredible ... when you talk about it, I find myself drifting back to where I came from at CCB Subsea. And clearly, I think CCS, or carbon storage, as an area you are exploring, has very, very strong momentum now. I have been in India for four and a half years, and when I arrived there was very little interest in it, but over those years it has grown considerably. Just a month ago, the Indian Minister of Petroleum visited Northern Lights, together with the chairs of all the national oil companies. So I think you have laid solid groundwork and are, in a way, ready to handle what is coming. But the regulatory framework, for example, may need to progress a little further.

Lindsø: They've actually come quite a long way.

Carter: Are they?

Lindsø: Yes, they are.

Host: Now … both of you are clearly very much in favour of carbon capture and storage. Not everyone is. There are many critical voices when it comes to this particular issue. Tell me a little about how the two of you view it in the longer term.

Carter: Well, I don't think we can avoid carbon capture and storage in a low-emission society. I think most people would agree with that. The question is whether the costs will outweigh the benefits. A few weeks ago, I visited Technology Centre Mongstad, the world's largest and most flexible test centre for carbon capture technologies. They told me that, to achieve the targets we have set, we would need to build a certain number of carbon capture facilities every day. And we are nowhere near that. To me, that suggests there is considerable potential here. It should also generate a great deal of business development, and I believe Norway is at the forefront of developing a full-scale value chain that will drive a great deal of innovation. Take the U in CCUS – carbon utilisation. I believe there is considerable potential there, including in agriculture and in methanol and other fuels.

Host: And for you, Sidsel, this has become one of the most important things you do?

Lindsø: So, as I say this, bear in mind that credibility is what matters most to us. So when we talk publicly about this, perhaps some of the ambitions being communicated are a little too high?

Host: Really?

Lindsø: Because what we fear is that we will fail and look like a failure because things take longer. But a political decision has been made that these hard-to-abate sectors in Europe must eliminate their CO2 emissions, or else they cannot ... And what we are seeing now is one green project after another falling through. But what matters to us is using taxpayers’ money wisely. It is not financially viable at present. It is waste management, but our priority is to protect and safeguard taxpayers’ money as effectively as possible. What Norway has done with the Northern Lights project is therefore an extremely costly collective effort. We have said, ‘We are willing to provide this pot of money to show the world how it should be done.’ In doing so, we are funding that learning, and I think that is a very good way to approach it. We have invested this money, acted as a role model and led the way. But we have also built up expertise that can be exported.

Host: So, in the long term, this actually creates new opportunities.

Lindsø: Norway has so much expertise that is currently undervalued in the rest of the world. And there is a learning curve they need to go through, where Norway can make a significant contribution.

Host: It is interesting to hear you talk a little about the support from us. The NOK 400,000 you received is not really a great deal of money, certainly not in the oil and gas industry. It is a lot of money to you and me, but not in the grand scheme of things.
When we spoke earlier, you told me that you had actually tricked us into giving you funding once.

Lindsø: Yes, and it simply comes down to the fact that I'm a woman.

Carter: Interesting!

Lindsø: And when you're a woman starting a company, it's actually incredibly difficult to secure investment. Fortunately, at the time, I didn't know just how difficult it was. We didn't yet have the figures from Unconventional Ventures showing that only one per cent of venture capital goes to women. Had I known that, I'm not sure I would have been so brave.

Carter: We don't often have guests who admit they've fooled us.

Host: No, it isn't, but I think the statute of limitations has expired in this case, so ...

Lindsø: Yes, but then … remember, this was in 2016, so it was all still very new to quite a few people. On 9 June 2016, we started the company. By then, we had reached the point where we thought, ‘OK, this idea is too good not to try out.’ We quickly reached that threshold where I thought, ‘When I’m old, will I look back and regret that we didn’t test this?’ Then we wanted to test the concept with investors. People still come up to me and say, ‘I remember you standing there that day with such confidence.’ That confidence came from the science, you see. I knew I could make it work. We entered the Angel Challenge competition and were on track to win. Then we received the investment agreement. It set all sorts of alarm bells ringing – it basically said that if you signed it, you would lose your company and all its IP within a year. It was one of those American agreements that had simply been copied and pasted, you know? So we withdrew. The idea was that you could win funding from angel investors, and then we would match it with one million kroner. But the others who were also in the running to win read the investment agreement and withdrew as well. So suddenly, we had a spare million kroner with nowhere to go. And we had an investor, Halvor Øgreid – an absolutely phenomenal investor for us – who said, ‘OK, shall we find an angel investor? We’ll put up NOK 500,000, and then we can unlock that million from you.’ The funny thing is that was all we received: two million kroner, and we haven’t raised any more capital since. But we’ve paid a lot of tax, so we’ve probably been a good investment after all. So you could say we tricked you, but – to put it bluntly, and I’m just saying it as it is – if you’re a woman, you have to be that little bit smarter.

Host: Yes, we'd like to hear a little more about that too, but …

Carter: For once, I feel like it's actually quite nice to be fooled.

Host: Yes, exactly. This is a company that primarily operates in the oil and gas sector, Cristian. What do you think – would they be eligible for support from us today?

Carter: We’re not going to assess an application for funding here, but – but clearly, if the solution has a place in a low-emission society and helps take us a step further in the direction we need to go, then the answer is generally yes. As I mentioned, I also received funding myself. The funding scheme was slightly different back then. But I believe that if you have a good transition plan, this would definitely be a very interesting project to consider.

Lindsø: I think we should have a chat afterwards, because we actually have a scalable portfolio management software platform solution together with some partners, but we can discuss that later … So, you asked me what the future holds, and we can genuinely help reduce risk for emitters and everyone involved in the CCS business value chain. That was interesting to hear!

Carter: Yes, I think it is more a question of what we can rule out, isn't it, when assessing an application like this? But I think carbon storage and carbon capture, and that entire value chain, are areas where Norway has clearly taken the lead. So my immediate thought is that this fits very well with what we want to help scale up and commercialise.

Host: Sissel, you briefly touched on what it is like to be a woman in a very male-dominated industry. We want to see more women entrepreneurs and believe that our society misses out on a great deal when there are too few of them. Tell us a little about your experiences as a woman in the oil and gas industry, which is particularly male-dominated.

Lindsø: What is important to understand is that within my community, my geoscience community, I feel safe and well respected, and the academics there simply behave properly.

Host: And then it doesn't matter whether you're a man or a woman?

Lindsø: Nothing, not in what I’ve been fortunate enough to experience. Not a single sexually charged comment, ever. But when I venture beyond that environment, it’s actually quite different. Even at my ... my age and with my experience. I notice it particularly when I go to Denmark. In fact – and I believe Denmark is 20 years behind Norway – I could never have achieved in Denmark what I’ve achieved in Norway. But I was here. It was incredible: I went to a conference, a CCS conference, and someone addressed me by saying, ‘There’s our princess.’
Then there was another occasion when I went to meet some other people, and someone called me ‘little girl’. And that sort of thing ... it comes down to a fundamental insecurity, doesn’t it? Let’s say 5 per cent feel so insecure that they lash out, but comments like that actually harm my business. It reminds me of a week I had earlier this year, just before International Women’s Day. I thought, well, this is simply ironic. On Monday, I was told that my voice was too high-pitched for a podcast because a woman with a high-pitched voice doesn’t carry the same authority as a man. On Wednesday, I was due to give a technical presentation to 70 people. Someone who was supposed to be a colleague threw me under the bus and took over my role, much to almost everyone’s surprise. Then I went to Oslo and was told in a meeting that men are simply a little more creative than women. And then came the icing on the cake: we were interviewed by Finansavisen TV, and as we were leaving, my male business partner, Tim Dodson, a long-standing executive and geologist at Equinor, was offered a copy of Kapital magazine. Meanwhile, the receptionist offered me interior design magazines.

Host: Is that even possible? These aren't exactly stories that make you feel very proud.

Carter: I thought we'd come further than this.

Lindsø: Yes, but it is important to be aware of it … and it saddens me, because I have now made such a significant impact in my industry. If I still experience this at my age, with the respect I have earned and the way I carry myself, then I feel truly sorry for those who are 20 or 25. They will have to go through far more than anyone should have to. Five per cent have malicious intentions, while the others just let things slide and so on. But gender bias is deeply and systematically embedded in our society, so you have to develop strategies for dealing with it. If you believe it does not exist, you cannot deal with it. If you know it exists and face it head-on, you can develop strategies for handling it. You become an expert at dealing with power plays. When we were starting the company, I always had a man over 60 by my side. He never had to say anything, but as long as we got into the meeting and had the chance to speak, the response was simply, 'OK, she is actually quite clever. Let us continue the conversation.' That was all that was needed. So, if you take a step back … zoom out a little and look at the bigger picture … Women should not be wrapped in cotton wool, but we need to recognise that if they are given a few more opportunities, those opportunities will probably be especially valued.
I should also mention that I was once involved in a lawsuit myself. It concerned a client, and they actually told me during the process that they had held a meeting where they assessed me as a person. Their conclusion at that meeting was that I was too weak to put up a fight. We were talking about several million that they did not want to pay because they had made a strategic assessment that we would not dare to fight them. So it went all the way to court and negotiations. But it turned out well.

Host: Exactly.
We hope we will not have to hear too many stories like that, but it has been fascinating to hear your story today. We also hope we have managed to bring together the world of geological plates – or what are they called – tectonic plates colliding, and the business world we operate in. Thank you for joining us, Sissel Lindsø, founder and CEO of Ecteras, and thank you to Cristian Valdes Carter, Director of Strategic Staff at Innovation Norway. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, and we will be back with another episode of Innopodden.

Gjest: Camilla Dybendal, gründer og managing partner i Frøya Ventures

Fra Innovasjon Norge: Håkon Haugli, administrerende direktør og

Programleder: Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Programleder: Selskaper med kvinner i ledelsen mottar bare en liten brøkdel av investeringene fra Venture-selskapene. Det vil Frøya Ventures gjøre noe med. Camilla Dybendal er en av grunnleggerne og managing partner. Nå er hun partner her i Innopodden med Håkon Haugli og meg, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Velkommen til Innopodden, Camilla Dybendal!

Dybendal: Tusen takk.

Programleder: Vi setter pris på å ha deg her … og jeg tenker att vi må starte med å snakke om penger. Du jobber til daglig i konsulentselskapet Capgemini, og du har lang erfaring fra blant annet Equinor. Men for fire år siden så valgte du å gå inn som medgründer i det som nå er Frøya Ventures, som investerer for å realisere det uutnyttede verdipotensialet fra underinvesterte ideer og markeder. Det handler om penger, men hvordan skal vi egentlig forstå det?

Dybendal: Ja, jeg kan jo prøve å forklare det litt enkelt. Vi er jo da tre stykk som har startet opp Frøya Ventures, da Åshild Hanne Larsen, Ann-Christin Spone og jeg. Og det startet faktisk med et spørsmål fra Kari Holmefjord Vervik som jeg tror dere kjenner godt. Hun er jo da regionsdirektør for Innovasjon Norge i Rogaland. Og under pandemien så deltok hun i en digital paneldebatt om mangfold sammen med oss - som vi var med og arrangerte - og da stilte hun oss et ganske enkelt, men kraftfullt spørsmål: Hvorfor er det ikke flere kvinnelige gründere, og er ikke det noe dere burde se på?

Haugli: Og det traff?

Dybendal: Det traff oss veldig hardt. For det første så var vi ikke så observante på den problemstillingen, så det fikk oss til å grave mye dypere i temaet, og det er oppdaget vi jo at det var jo ikke bare kjønnsulikhet som var et problem, men at det finnes ganske - altså hele markeder og innovasjonsområder som er systematisk underinvestert. Og i tillegg så oppdaget vi noe annet, og det er at Norge har et betydelig problem med tilgang på privat risikokapital.

Haugli: Kan du ikke nevne et eksempel på et sånt område som er underinvestert?

Dybendal: Ja, helse er jo et område. Et annet område er jo teknologi, og det er jo noe alle nå har blitt veldig opptatt av, altså Chat GPT, kunstig intelligens - man ser mulighetsområdene, altså hvordan dette kommer til å påvirke nye selskaper og innovasjonstakten kommer til å øke drastisk. Så vi tror timingen nå er ekstremt bra, i tillegg så - hvis man sammenligner Norge da med de 20 andre OECD-landene, så rangeres Norge på attendeplass. Og det er jo bak alle våre nordiske naboer, og det liker vi jo dårlig. Så faktisk scorer vi 81 prosent lavere enn USA og 64 prosent lavere enn snittet.

Haugli: Og dette er på tilgang på Venture-kapital generelt, ikke sant?

Dybendal: Ja, og det gjør det jo veldig vanskelig for de selskapene som er i startgropa å få til det de jobber med, for man trenger pengene. Og det er jo ikke nok med talent og gode ideer og gode strategier og planer, man trenger risikokapitalen også. Så det er jo noen som heter dødens dal, og det er et litt mørkt sted når man starter opp. Og der er det jo ofte ... da kommer risikokapitalen og er med og investerer i den perioden for å hjelpe selskapene ut av den skumle gropa der da. Så det betyr jo at mange norske gode selskaper ikke får muligheten til å vokse, og det å kunne hente kapital i utlandet er jo kjempeviktig - å kunne hente mer penger til Norge. For hvis Norge skal få til den omstillingen som man ønsker å få til, så må man ha risikokapital på plass.

Haugli: Ja, for du fortalte før vi satte oss ned nå for å lage podkast at dere hadde nettopp gjort et grep for å få mer internasjonal kapital til Norge, kan du ikke fortelle om det?

Dybendal: Jo, vi har jobbet ganske strukturert for å kunne hente kapital utenlands og. Når du starter opp et Venture Capital selskap, sånn som vi har gjort, så betyr det at vi jobber jo for å sette opp et fond hvor vi kan hente penger. Og for å få lov til det, så må du ha autorisasjon fra Finanstilsynet. Så den første krever også en del arbeid, den heter AIF-lisens. Den andre som vi har jobbet med, det er noe som heter EuVECA og det er en European Venture Capital-lisens - så altså, da får du lov til å hente penger fra profesjonelle forvaltere i Europa til fondet i Norge. Og det har vi fått til fordi at vi har fått bidrag fra Innovasjon Norge. Vi var en av de selskapene som fikk nasjonale midler, og det har gjort at vi har hatt muligheten til å gjøre en del grep i forhold til den søknaden som vi har jobbet med. Og nå har vi akkurat fått den innvilget, og det er en kjempeviktig milepæl for Frøya.

Haugli: Så utrolig gøy. Gratulerer.

Programleder: Gratulerer, ja!

Haugli: Hva er liksom neste skritt nå? Hva skjer nå da?

Dybendal: Neste skritt for oss - som er kjempespennende - er at neste uke så starter vår Chief Operating Officer, som vi akkurat har ansatt. Vi går inn i kontorer som vi akkurat har fått på plass. Vi begynner å sette på enda mer kapasitet for å få mer tid til å snakke med investorene til å gå inn i fondet.

Haugli: Hvem er det som du ønsker at skal ringe på ringeklokken på det nye kontoret?

Dybendal: Ja, det er ganske mange. Spesielt profesjonelle investorer i Norge ønsker vi veldig gjerne å ha med oss. Vi ønsker jo å ha med oss offentlige kapital også, og så er det jo sånn at risikokapital ... da er det jo profesjonelle investorer man hovedsakelig har med seg. Det er ikke private investorer som går inn da. Så de har jo ganske god oversikt over hva som må til for å komme i gang. Det som er Frøya Ventures sin ambisjon da, det er å kunne utnytte de i markedene som vi ser er underinvestert. Der er jo for eksempel innenfor teknologi, så har jo vi et team som er ekstremt sterke på ny teknologi - AI, blant annet. Vi er gode på hvordan man kan investere og sette opp selskapet for å få de til å vokse. Og så har man en langsiktig plan sammen med de selskapene over kanskje ti år og når da selskapet har vokst, så ønsker, håper man jo da at man kan gå ut igjen etter ti år. Så det er høyrisiko-investeringer, men man går inn i flere, bruker den kunnskapen man har for å vokse selskapene og sikre at de lykkes, i tillegg til kapital.

Programleder: Hvis dere nå skal hente penger fra utlandet - fra Europa, hvem er drømmeinvestoren og -partneren for dere?

Dybendal: Ja, du har jo Danske vækstfondene, svenske Saminvest, selvfølgelig også Investinor er jo en drømmepartner for oss, og Innovasjon Norge er en drømmepartner for Frøya. Og så har du jo de store forvalterne, du har jo Nysnø, du har DNB, du har ganske mange som er potensielle investorer i venture eller risikokapitalfond, da.

Haugli: Jeg kan jo si at vi vil gjerne snakke med dere om dette da, når vi ikke spiller inn podkast også. Det vi ser akkurat sånn i disse tider da, det er egentlig to ting: Som du allerede har berørt, det ene er - ikke bare gjør … er Norge ganske svake når det gjelder venture-kapital generelt, men pilen går også i feil vei - feil retning. Det er blitt vanskeligere for tidlig vekst, altså tidligfase vekstbedrifter å hente kapital, og det er en del samvirkende årsaker til det, tror vi da. En ting er litt urolig situasjon generelt i verden som bremser risikoappetitten hos noen, og litt høyere rentenivå. Det har også - rentenedgangen har vært utsatt noen ganger, altså man er litt mer avventende. Men det vi også ser som gir håp da, det er en veldig pågang nå av teknologibedrifter som ønsker å benytte seg av våre ordninger, oppstartslån og det som heter markedsavklaringstilskudd. Og det er nytt for oss at vi ser så høy andel oppstartsbedrifter som er basert på for eksempel kunstig intelligens. - Og en veldig bølge for det, særlig i Oslo-området. Så her er det sporer da, til en helt ny … i hvert fall mange nye selskaper, kanskje en helt ny industri, men de trenger da aktører som dere da. Og jeg deler helt og fullt og opplevelsen av at det er underinvestering - det har vært - i Norge da - det ser helt annerledes ut for en Norsk AI-basert bedrift sammenlignet med for eksempel en svensk - og hvert fall en amerikansk - bedrift med samme utgangspunkt.

Dybendal: Ja. Det det er det samme bildet vi ser. Vi tenker at det er en kjempemulighet for Norge. En av utfordringene hvis man tenker Norge som land, det er jo at det å få opp antall ventureselskaper er ganske viktig for å øke tilgang på risikokapital. Så det å se på i større grad hva er det som hindrer ventureselskapene i å lykkes? Nå har jo vi Frøya god erfaring med å sette opp, så vi deler jo gjerne våre erfaringer. Samtidig så er det et urolig marked. På en måte, så kan man jo tenke at det er veldig urolig i USA. Det kan bidra til at flere investeringer kommer til Europa. Det er et positivt momentum. Det andre er at det har vært et dårlig marked over lang tid. Det gjør at man potensielt har veldig gode priser på oppstart bedriftene, så det kanskje god timing til å starte å investere i flere oppstartselskaper. Og det tredje er at nå har veldig mange oppstartbedrifter tilgang på kunstig intelligens når de starter opp. Det gjør at de sparer veldig mye tid i oppstartfasen sin. For eksempel, hvordan skal jeg sette opp et AS? Kan du spørre Chat GPT? Kan du gi meg en liste for hva jeg skal gjøre for å sette opp et AS? Så de sparer ganske mye tid i selve oppstartfasen, og du kan få svart ut en del ting med ny teknologi. Så jeg tror at det kommer til å komme mange flere selskaper. Så det som er veldig viktig er jo at ikke disse selskapene dør ut og mister håpet, så vi må jobbe på spreng for hvordan vi liksom kan investere i de før det er for sent. Fordi i starten så er de veldig avhengige av kapital, og det er jo en av de tingene vi er opptatt av også, å komme i gang raskt. Men vi ser jo det at som et - hvis du skal sette opp et ventureselskap, vi har rigget oss, sånn at vi har tid, at vi ikke går ut, at vi ikke mister momentum til å sette opp selskapet. Så er det hele tiden behov for selvfølgelig å ha kapasitet inn. Du skal løse en del juridiske krav som kommer i oppstartsfasen, så nå er timingen - altså også for Frøya - vi er klare nå til å løpe. Og vi er jo veldig opptatt av å få momentum inn til de små selskapene også. Så det å tenke på hvordan man kan hjelpe de som er veldig tidlig i oppstartsfasen med å komme raskt i gang. Og så tenke at kvinnelige grundere trenger litt andre verktøy i oppstartsfasen og forstå det enda bedre hva som skal til da, for å hjelpe grundere. Og så er jo vi interessert i å investere i alle selskaper, ikke bare kvinner, men vi ser at de selskapene som har mangfoldet i teamene sine, og som har en veldig god forståelse av hvordan problemer de skal løse og hvilken kompetanse de trenger for å løse de problemene, de vil i mye større grad lykkes. Så derfor så er det et krav vi har til de selskapene som vi investerer i i fremtiden, at de er med på et sånt type løp.

Haugli: Så det er jo ganske grelle de - tallene da - når det gjelder kvinners andel av samlet ventureinvesteringer og altså … vi er liksom på nede på et par prosent totalt. Hva er din forklaring på det? Hva tenker du er de bakenforliggende driverne, og ikke minst – og viktigere - hva kan vi gjøre med det, i samspill mellom oss da i virkemiddelapparatet, private investorer og selskapene selv? Og hva kan man kan man kan gjøre - som Norge da? - Fordi man går jo glipp - åpenbart da – av et stort innovasjonspotensial, det tror jeg er et faktum, ikke bare en påstand.

Dybendal: Ja, det var en av de tingene vi så når vi startet Frøya Ventures at det var veldig lite kapital som gikk til kvinnelige grundere. En av de betraktningene vi gjorde oss var at det er jo ikke så ... Altså, det er noen ventureselskaper, men de fleste er menn og veldig mange bruker nettverket sitt, som da også er menn. Det var veldig lite kvinnelige partnere som sitter og tar beslutnings ... beslutningen på hva du skal investere i og mye var jo også kanskje konsentrert rundt energi, så vi tenkte at det ble veldig viktig å få opp et venture capital-selskap som har kvinner med seg også, for det var veldig få kvinnelige partnere i Norge. Derfor så har vi fokusert veldig mye på å få opp mange kvinnelige partnere i Frøya. Vi skal ha med menn også, og så jobber det faktisk ganske mange menn på konsulentsiden i Frøya Ventures da, de er jo ikke så synlige, men vi også har bra mangfold i teamet da, men vi vises sånn ofte utad ganske synlige på partnersiden at det er kvinner.

Programleder: Ja, det er bare kvinner jeg ser på nettsidene deres.

Dybendal: … bare kvinner på partnersiden det … det kommer til å komme menn også, men tanken er jo det at hvis man går inn med investeringer fra et fond, så vil det jo være en av partnerne våre som sitter i styret til det selskapet man går inn i. Og der er det jo mangel på kvinner, og derfor er det veldig viktig å ha kvinnelige partnere. Sånn at du også bidrar inn i styrene. Det vil også ta ned risikoen. Og så er det klart at de kvinnene som vi har hentet inn gjennom vårt nettverk er jo eksepsjonelt dyktige innenfor sitt område, så de er håndplukket og invitert. I tillegg så er det også kvinner som vi ser opp til. De har gode verdier, ikke minst. Vi ønsker jo gjerne å se at de også bidrar til samfunnet på en god måte, og at de har en veldig god forståelse av hvordan man kan drive vekst og støtte selskaper i Norge.

Programleder: Men en del vil jo påstå og hevde ganske hardnakket at de beste prosjektene de får finansiering uansett om det er mannen eller kvinne og lys eller mørk hud på den som står bak, er det ikke sånn?

Dybendal: Ja … Nei, det det er ikke helt sånn, dessverre. Det er klart at i oppstartfasen så er det ganske stor forskjell på hvordan kvinner og menn pitcher et case, og det er jo en av de tingene som vi har sett er et problem. Og så kan man si at kanskje kvinnene må forandre seg, eller kanskje sånn og kanskje sånn. Men det det har veldig mye med nettverk å gjøre også, selvfølgelig. Hvem kjenner du? For i oppstartsfasen, i starten så er det sånn at det er jo veldig mange som har veldig mange gode ideer, men veldig mye handler jo også om teamet. Hvordan du på en måte skal få - hvordan du skal lykkes. Og så er det selvfølgelig andre ting også som gjør at kvinner ikke har vært på banen i forhold til oppstartsmiljø og investeringer. 80 prosent av midlene på Oslo Børs er eid av menn. Det koster penger å sette opp et selskap, det er risiko rundt det. Man trenger, kanskje med flere å støtte seg på. Man har barn, familie. Det er flere ting som dukker opp, og det hadde vi i Frøya Ventures lyst til å teste ut i praksis hvordan vi kunne komme over de barrierene da, og hvordan vi kan lære av det og lære det bort til andre. Så jeg for eksempel er jo en alenemor. Veldig utypisk og kanskje starte opp et venture capital-selskap ved siden av jobben sin, men vi ser jo alle har jo familie nesten og. Det er jo litt med måten man jobber på. Jeg tror det er veldig viktig å ha et team rundt seg, sånn at man kan spille litt som et fotballag. Noen må sitte på benken innimellom. Det er andre ting som skjer i livet, så kan vi spille hverandre gode. Så er det selvfølgelig – jeg vet ikke, hva du tenker, Håkon, du har jo også god erfaring med å se hvilke selskaper som lykkes, hvorfor kvinnene ikke alltid tør å gå inn i oppstartsselskapene?

Haugli: Altså jeg deler din vurdering, i tillegg så tror jeg det er noen strukturelle ting knyttet til arbeidslivet vårt som påvirker det her. Altså, det norske arbeidsmarkedet er veldig kjønnsdelt. Kvinner jobber i veldig stor grad i offentlig sektor og menn i næringslivet. Det vil si at menn jevnt over generelt eksponeres for mere verdiskapning og sannsynligvis også mer teknologi da enn kvinner gjør. Og så er det selvforsterkende spiraler da. Hvis du tenker at gjennomsnittsgründer er en mann på 46 år, så er det ofte slik at han da har hatt et yrkesliv med … vært i situasjoner i selskaper i og ha med seg noen betraktninger om hvilket problem man ønsker å løse. Mens kvinnelige gründere kan selvfølgelig ha akkurat samme erfaring, men har ofte et annet yrkesliv og det … - vi har mindre innovasjon i området hvor kvinner er mange da, type helse. Men behovet er også veldig mye større, så det å stimulere til entreprenørskap generelt da blant unge, barn og unge av åpenbart av begge kjønn og - eller alle kjønn - og i et bredt mangfold. Det er viktig av mange grunner, ikke bare på grunn av oppstartsselskapene, men også fordi vi trenger entreprenørskaps- og innovasjonskultur inn i arbeidslivet og både i offentlig og privat sektor. Så det er et tilleggsmoment.
Men det er jo veldig interessant å spørre om … dere i Frøya Ventures er jo også et oppstartselskap. Og selv om dere har en veldig erfaren gruppe partnere og et formål som handler om å bidra til andres suksess, har dere også noen av de samme prosessene, vil jeg tro. Kan du ikke si litt - det er veldig interessant å tenke hva - hvordan fikk du og dere ideen om å starte ventureselskap? Det er jo ikke veldig ofte og mange sånne etableringer i Norge i løpet av et år?

Dybendal: Ja altså vi er jo … jeg er tidligere aksjemegler og jobbet på børsen. Og jeg jobbet også for den amerikanske børsen Nasdaq som megler, så jeg er interessert i Finans. Og så de andre damene jeg har med meg, Åshild Hanne Larsen og Ann-Christin Spone, de er også veldig oppegående. Og vi har jo jobbet i ganske mange år med å prøve å gjøre en forskjell både i forhold til å få flere jenter, helt fra barneskolealder til å bli mer interessert i teknologi og STEM-fag (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) til å jobbe med mangfold ut i næringslivet. Og så har vi brukt veldig mye tid på det, og så har vi sett at ja, vi gjør kanskje en forskjell på individuell basis, men vi får ikke til å gjøre en forskjell på systemnivå. Og det var da vi begynte å tenke, hva kan vi gjøre for å få til den systemendringen? Og da ble vi ganske enige om at nei for å få til en endring, så må du egentlig ha penger. Altså, du må ha kapital, for da har du makt til å gjøre endringer i oppstartsbedrifter og i styrer, og for å få kapital hva er den beste måten å rigge seg for å få til mest mulig endring? Og da diskuterte vi litt forskjellige løsninger, men vi landet på at det å ha et fond hvor du kan kjøre risikokapital inn og gå inn i mange selskaper, da vil du gjøre en ganske stor forskjell på systemnivå. Og da visste vi om venturekapital-selskaper og hvordan de jobber, da. Og da bestemte vi oss for det at da går vi for venture.

Haugli: Ja så gøy! Det trengs jo virkelig i Norge da, altså uavhengig av det. Den nisjen dere har valgt dere ut så er det ... Hvis vi ser ti år tilbake da, så er, var venture-scenen i Norge veldig skrinn … var veldig få, altså egentlig hele bredden da, lav investeringsgrad i oppstartsselskaper, og så kalles de som gjør det litt ulike ting. Men venture da, som et fellesbegrep da har hatt en vekst i Norge - og takk og pris for det. Så nå er det flere selskaper. Jeg synes jo det er veldig gøy det dere gjør, og det var veldig stas å ha dere på vår skaleringsdag hvor du holdt et veldig godt foredrag om nettopp om den reisen du nå også har snakket om og. Fascinerende, og jeg vil … opplevde også salen litt sånn, oi! Dette noe annerledes - dere kom med noe som var noe annet. Og jeg vet ikke hvordan du opplever det, men jeg håper at dere får den responsen bredt da, at dette trengs – en, og: dere er godt rustet for å gjøre det. Så det var håpet. Men spørsmålet mitt er egentlig, hva kan vi - kan vi gjøre noe mer sammen? Er det noe vi kan gjøre i Innovasjon Norge for å bidra til måloppnåelse for dere, og ikke minst det som er viktig for Norge da?

Dybendal: Det – tusen takk for at vi fikk lov til å komme på skaleringsdagen. Det var vi veldig glade for, for vi er jo også veldig opptatt av hvordan det offentlige og det private kan jobbe sammen for å få mer vekst innenfor risikokapital i Norge og hvordan man kan hente mer penger til Norge. Og vi ser jo at vi vil jo ikke klare det alene, og det handler jo litt om vårt mål om å gjøre en forskjell på systemnivå. Så vi håper jo at vi kan kanskje diskutere litt andre type oppsett i forhold til samarbeid mellom privat og offentlig sektor. Kanskje man kan se på hvordan man kan få ting til å gå litt raskere, for det går lang tid å sette opp et venutre capital-selskap. Og så tror vi også at i starten så skal det ikke så mye til for å få den snøballen til å rulle, men for et ventureselskap i oppstartsfasen, så er det liksom å komme over den første terskelen der som er litt krevende, for du skal ha ganske mye på plass. Og vi har jo sett at det er flere som har prøvd å sette opp venture som ikke har klart det og gitt seg. Så vi har prøvd og tatt noen læringer av det, og så har vi lært mye når vi har vært på denne reisen da. Så vi tror - det er klart du skal ha ganske store investeringer, men det er fra noen få aktører, så hvis du først klarer å få den ballen til å begynne å rulle, så tror vi at man kan få ganske god verdi på sikt. Og der er det jo flere ting man kan tenke på, og så kan man samarbeide om hvilke selskaper man kan investere i. Hvilke erfaringer har man gjort seg hos Innovasjon Norge, i forhold til hvilke innefarger erfaringer man har gjort seg hos Frøya Ventures. Kan man lage en sånn blueprint for å få i gang fond? Altså hvordan kan vi enda raskere hente enda mer penger? Og så er det klart at ... det er jo … venturefondene er store, men hvis du tenker på nasjonalt nivå så så vil det jo være kjempeviktig å hente ganske mye penger. Så det er viktig at flere lykkes for at det - også for at hele miljøet skal lykkes - så ville det være bra for alle. Og det å ta en diskusjon rundt deg om hvordan man kan jobbe sammen på nye måter tror jeg er kjempespennende.

Haugli: Veldig spennende, dette må vi jo ta en prat om når vi ikke er i podcaststudio. Men det er bare umiddelbart så - noen refleksjoner – og det ene er jo Frøya Ventures og for så vidt andre ventureselskaper, hvordan kan en aktør som Innovasjon Norge bidra til at dere får det armslaget dere trenger som selskap? Der er det noen veldig spennende modeller internasjonalt som som vi kan snakke om, og vi må jo snakke med våre oppdragsgivere om dette er noe vi kan få til. Men det er på en måte tilførsel av kapital da i en periode som gjør at selskapet kan få en raskere vekst som er på en måte bærende element i alle de modellene. Og her er det også E … det skjer masse i EU, altså Det europeiske investeringsfondet, som vi har inngått en ny avtale med nå, de driver jo med risikoavlastning og kan stille noen garantier, kan hende det er en verktøykasse som kan være relevant for dere. Så det er den ene sporet, det andre er de selskapene dere investerer i eller ønsker å investere i: Går det an å forenkle prosessene hos oss da, for å gi mer drahjelp til dem? Fordi dere er et oppegående fagmiljø, så er det mulig for oss å hvile i større grad på de vurderingene dere gjør istedenfor å gjøre separate vurderinger på toppen av det dere gjør, og det kan gå begge veier også. Det at vi kan gjøre vurderinger og så tenke OK, dette er kanskje en kandidat som kan være aktuell for Frøya. Dette har vi utprøvd i småskala, men noen norske ventureselskaper og dette snakker vi veldig gjerne mer om. Hvordan kan vi få til det? Dere kan få en - på en måte - dedikert kontaktperson hos oss. Det går an å være rask og effektiv, la være å spørre selskapene om samme informasjon flere ganger og så videre. Men det krever selvfølgelig tillit og et godt avtaleverk i bunn da. Så det er i hvert fall to spor.
Jeg tenker vi kan utforske mer da, og dette - til de som måtte høre på dette og representere andre ventureselskaper, så er dette selvsagt ikke forbeholdt Frøya, men vi trenger noen pilotselskaper som tør å gå foran og prøve ut nye ting og, og det er veldig viktig for det store oppdraget vårt da, med flere gode gründere og at vi får vekstselskaper i Norge, at vi faktisk har private investorer som tar risiko. Alt vi gjør skal utløse - fra Innovasjon Norge side - skal utløse private investeringer vi gjør ingenting alene og hovedregelen er at en krone fra Innovasjon Norge utløser nesten to kroner av investorer eller bedriftene selv da, og det må være slik.

Dybendal: Og så jeg tror det er et kjempepotensial i det du sier der. Hvordan man kan få eller bruke den offentlige kapitalen og kunnskapen til å på en måte få mer privat kapital - også fra utlandet - til å komme til Norge. Fordi det er veldig vanskelig å drive vekst hvis man ikke har den risikokapitalen. Man har jo sett noen plasser i verden som er veldig gode på det, Silicon Valley, for eksempel. Men jeg tenker også at det er viktig å komme i gang med piloter, sånn at man tar læring og at man tester litt forskjellige ting, for det kan være forskjellig modeller som fungerer bra. Så hadde det vært veldig, veldig gøy om Norge hadde blitt landet i verden som var best på kvinnelige gründere. For det er jo halvparten av alle ideene totalt som da egentlig ikke får finansiering, og det er jo veldig mange potensielt nye jobber og arbeidsplasser som ligger der, og det er veldig synd hvis det går tapt.

Programleder: Ja, det hadde vært fantastisk ... Vi nærmer oss rett og slett slutten på denne episoden -

Haugli: Nei, er det allerede nå?

Programleder: - og da har jeg egentlig lyst til å spørre deg Camilla om du har et råd eller en utfordring til Håkon til slutt for å, ja for å oppnå de målene som du er opptatt av?

Dybendal: Ja, jeg tenker en utfordring ville jo vært å starte en pilot og kanskje flere piloter. Men som et råd generelt, så … jeg vet jo at Innovasjon Norge jobber veldig mye med å fremme generelt verdiskapning og få til flere oppstartsbedrifter. Og det vi synes har vært veldig spennende er jo den siste rapporten som dere ba om, og det å prøve å teste ut i praksis noen av de rådene som kommer fra den rapporten, det tror jeg et råd fra meg.

Haugli: Så bra, tusen takk! Vel mottatt. Jeg opplever at vi både skal finne tid til å sette oss ned og snakke helt konkret om hvordan vi kan samspille i det viktige arbeidet dere gjør, og i det litt større ta egen medisin, og følge de anbefalingene vi har gitt i rapporten. Og så er det sånn at vi tenker, og vi har en internasjonal kontaktflate som også kan være av interesse for dere da - vi jobber jo med ... har jo blant annet en tilstedeværelse i Palo Alto eller London og New York, som er de tre liksom ledende innovasjonshubene i verden. Alle steder snakker vi med investorer, og det kan være mulig å gjøre noe koblinger da direkte mellom norske venture-miljøer som dere, og noen av de vi snakker med for å få økt fart på det. Så det er en lang liste egentlig med ting vi kan jobbe med. Det var utrolig hyggelig å ha det her i studio, og vi heier veldig på den viktige jobben dere gjør og gleder oss til å samarbeide med dere framover.

Dybendal: Tusen takk for at vi fikk komme.

Programleder: Da fikk vi en liten salgspitch fra Håkon til slutt her. Vi får sørge for at vi følger opp den. Takk skal du ha Camilla Dybendal, for at du var med oss. Du er en av gründerne og managing partner i Frøya Venture, og takk til Håkon Haugli. Mitt navn er Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, og dette er Innopodden. Vi høres igjen.

The text version of the episode will be available soon.

The text version will be available soon.

The text version will be available shortly.

Gjest: Jørn Lyseggen, gründer av Meltwater og Shack 15

Fra Innovasjon Norge: Administrerende direktør Håkon Haugli og

Programleder Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Programleder: Jørn Lyseggen fra Trysil startet det som nå er Meltwater i Oslo i 2001. Etter en stund flyttet han selskapet til San Francisco. Meltwater overvåker tradisjonelle og sosiale medier for 27 000 selskaper over hele verden, har 50 kontorer, 2300 ansatte og omsetter for fem milliarder kroner. De tok mål av seg til å bli størst i sin nisje, og det har de blitt. Jørn Lyseggen er nå gjest i vårt medium, hos Håkon Haugli og meg, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Velkommen til Innopodden, Jørn Lyseggen.

Lyseggen: Takk skal du ha.

Programleder: Vi setter pris på å ha deg her. Vi hadde nylig gleden av å ha deg som gjest i vårt innovasjonstale-arrangement også, der du fortalte om dine erfaringer med å bygge et vekstselskap i USA. Men for lyttere som kanskje ikke kjenner Meltwater så godt, ta oss med tilbake til starten, da du etablerte det som først het Magenta og senere ble Meltwater. Hvordan var starten, og hva var det som gjorde at du tok med deg selskapet til USA?

Lyseggen: Ja, nei, det var jo en litt sånn enkel start. Vi var jo to karer og en kaffemaskin til å begynne med, og det er jo litt sånn alle selskaper, de starter i det små, ikke sant? Vi startet i et skur på Tjuvholmen. Det var før Tjuvholmen ble litt fancy, sånn som det er i dag. Det var litt gamle og nedslitte bygninger, men vi var jo veldig heldige. Vi fikk faktisk gratis kontorer av en tidligere kunde av meg. Så det var jo en flott start. Så jobbet vi jo for å etablere oss i Norge. Og jeg tror det er viktig å kunne etablere seg i hjemmemarkedet først, det er jo der man har størst forutsetninger for å lykkes, og hadde man ikke klart det, så var det kanskje ikke noe poeng å prøve å seg ute i den store verden.
Men etterhvert så flyttet vi til USA, eller det vil si jeg flyttet til USA. Selskapet fortsatte i Europa, men … og grunnen til at jeg flyttet til USA, det var jo at vi hadde en global ambisjon. Og skal man bli et globalt selskap, så må man på mange måter lykkes i USA …

Programleder: Og den ambisjonen var med deg fra starten av?

Lyseggen: Ja, det var med meg fra starten. Så tanken var å bli etablert i Norden først, så komme inn i de europeiske markene, UK og Tyskland, og når hadde vi kommet i gang med det, så var tiden inne for å dra til USA. Og den store visjonen var jo da å kunne erobre the mother of all markets, verdens mest kompetitive marked. Det var på en måte den store styrkeprøven.

Programleder: Og hvordan gikk det?

Lyseggen: Vel, til å begynne med så var det jo ganske vanskelig! Det er jo sånn at det er ganske ydmykende å etablere seg i hvert eneste land. Det er jo som å starte et selskap på nytt igjen hver gang. Det er veldig lite kredd du kan få, selv om du har lykkes i andre markeder. Hvert marked er det sånn, ja, ja, det er mulig du lykkes i Tyskland og England, men her er det jo helt andre greier. Og spesielt i USA så var vi jo veldig ydmyke, for Meltwater er jo på en måte en søkemotorteknologi, og det å eksportere søkemotorteknologi til USA virker jo litt som å gå i bekken etter vann, eller i hvert fall ambisiøst, da. Så vi slet jo litt til å begynne med, og ikke minst var det vanskelig å finne de riktige menneskene å ansette. Det var ikke så lett å overbevise de flinkeste i USA til å hoppe på et lite ukjent start-up fra Norge uten store venture backing, for vi var jo bootstrapped. Men så klarte vi til slutt å finne noen av de første riktige menneskene, og når du først finner de første, så klarte de å dra med seg de andre. Og da fikk vi ordentlig dreis på det. Så da ble jo USA den store vekstmotoren i selskapet.

Haugli: Jørn, kan ikke jeg bare hive meg inn her, altså dette skuret, bare for å hoppe tilbake til det, fordi sist vi traff hverandre, så var vi jo på et sted som heter Shack 15 - som du eier i San Francisco, som er for øvrig et helt fantastisk sted, jeg vet ikke om det er et co-working space, det er i alle fall et nydelig sted - som ligger helt nede ved fergestedet, fergekaia i San Francisco. Og det var i forbindelse med at kronprinsen var på besøk i California. Det var stas på alle måter, men dette skuret da, det er jeg opptatt av. Hva er tanken bak det, og hva slags sted er dette egentlig, Shack 15?

Lyseggen: Ja, nei, det var hyggelig. Det var et veldig bra arrangement, så det var veldig gøy at dere holdt det på Shack 15.

Haugli: Takk for at vi fikk lov, det var veldig bra for oss.

Lyseggen: Ja, nei, men det var veldig hyggelig. Spesielt å ha kronprinsen der også, ikke sant? Men Shack 15 er jo da en social club for entreprenører og early stage-investorer i San Francisco. Vi har 2000 medlemmer, så det har blitt et litt sånn landing pad for alle lokalt, og hengested for lokale mennesker, men også folk som kommer til Silicon Valley, så er det en soft landing. Og visjonen bak det var på en måte en lite som en lite nikk tilbake til vår enkle begynnelse. Vi var jo så heldige å få gratis kontorer in the early days, som jeg nevnte. Og det er litt å pay ... så ideen der er å pay it forward og hjelpe den neste generasjonen av startups med å tilby et sted hvor folk kan møte hverandre, folk kan møte hverandre, folk kan møte investorer, kanskje noen av de første kundene, og så videre.

Haugli: Er det norske selskaper der?

Lyseggen: Det er en rekke forskjellige selskaper der. En av selskapene er Tana, som reiser mye kapital. Jeg skal ikke ta noen ære for det de har gjort, men de har i hvert fall vært innom kontoret, og det er veldig mange andre som har vært der, som har funnet sine første investorer, funnet første ansatte, og så videre. Så det er veldig mye som skjer hele tiden.

Haugli: Fantastisk. All innovasjonsteori tilsier at det at folk er sammen, det utløser den type effekter. Og bare det å ha et sted, fysisk sted, har betydning, så dette er jo fantastisk at du gjør. Så, veldig flott.

Lyseggen: Nei, takk for det. Men det opplever vi også at det er et, kanskje spesielt etter covid, så er det et veldig stort behov for folk å møte hverandre. Og jeg kan jo si at når jeg kom til Silicon Valley selv i 2005, så var jeg jo ganske naiv. Jeg landet i San Francisco, og jeg synes det var helt fantastisk spennende, for jeg har jo vært en startup-person i Norden i mange år tidligere. Men når jeg landet i San Francisco, så følte jeg liksom at jeg var nesten på hellig jord, ikke sant? Og så kjørte jeg opp og ned 101, jeg vet ikke om dere kjenner 101, det er liksom den hovedveien der da. Men jeg kunne ikke finne Silicon Valley - for jeg trodde jo Silicon Valley var high-rise buildings, super cool, sexy, moderne greier, men det finnes jo ikke i hele tatt, Silicon Valley er jo en søvnig, søvnig … liksom, hva heter det? Suburb av San Francisco. Og når jeg prøvde å finne Silicon Valley så så tenkte jeg, hvor skal jeg gå? Hvor skal jeg gå for å finne alle disse spennende menneskene?
Og det er også litt tanken bak Shack 15, at det kan bli en litt soft landing, for alle som kommer til Silicon Valley, fra Norge eller andre land i Europa, Asia, til og med Afrika.

Programleder: Hvor ofte er du i Shack 15?

Lyseggen: Jeg sitter i Shack 15 og jobber hver eneste dag. Ja, absolutt.

Haugli: Jeg blir så nysgjerrig på også Silicon Valley, har det forandret seg siden 2007 til nå? Og i så fall hvordan?

Lyseggen: Silicon Valley endrer seg hele tiden, og de går jo … kaster på så nye bølger hele tiden, og det er jo både spennende - og litt overraskende, men alt som er nytt, det kaster folk seg etter, om det er investorer eller entreprenører eller hva det måtte være, men det er en enorm sult og appetitt på det som er nytt. - På det som kan på en måte endre verden. Og det er liksom, Silicon Valley er jo et helt unikt sted i verden, hvor folk har det audacity til å tro at to karer i en garasje …

Haugli: Eller et skur!

Lyseggen: … Eller et skur, kan endre verden. Og det er det ikke mange steder i verden som faktisk tror.

Haugli: Det er jo en helt utrolig høy andel av venturekapitalen i USA som fortsatt går gjennom, kan man si, Silicon Valley. Jeg har lest litt ulike tall, men typisk 60 prosent-ish. Og det er jo helt utrolig, apropos liten forstad til San Francisco. Men det sier jo noe om den kraften som ligger der, og som jo er også veldig inspirerende for oss som driver med tidligfase hjemme. Hva kan vi lære, hva tenker du, hvis det er noe hvis vi skulle ta med oss noe da, fra San Francisco og Silicon Valley til Norge som vi kanskje ikke har da, eller kanskje burde trenge mer av, hva kunne det være?

Lyseggen: Ja, det er et veldig godt spørsmål. Det er jo mange som har tenkt på hvordan man kan replikere Silicon Valley rundt omkring verden. Så det er jo mange teorier om dette her da, og jeg kan ikke si at jeg har liksom fasiten på det, men jeg har gjort meg noen tanker. For det første så tror jeg folk overvurderer litt grann viktigheten av Stanford og Berkeley.

Haugli: Ja, interessant.

Lyseggen: Veldig mange påpeker liksom, eller peker på disse universitetene, men ikke sant, selv Boston har jo kanskje enda mer universiteter. Harvard, MIT og så videre. Men jeg tror det er knyttet til to ting, og de to tingene er veldig nært koblet:
Silicon Valley er kanskje verdens viktigste talentmagnet. De har den luksusen at de klarer å tiltrekke seg verdens aller mest ambisiøse og innovative mennesker. Uansett hvor de er i verden. Det er fra Kina, India, Afrika, Latinamerika, Europa. Uansett hvor de kommer fra, så ønsker alle, i hvert fall innenfor IT-bransjen, å komme til Silicon Valley. Og det er en unfair advantage.
Og i forbindelse med det, så er det også den kultur, og den tror jeg, jeg vet ikke, kanskje var litt … lucky, men San Francisco er jo en sånn der counter-cultural historisk plass. Litt sånn flower power, du har Burning Man, det er litt sånn en counter-culture fundament som ligger i San Francisco. Og det koblet med at de hadde noen initielle, veldig store suksesser innenfor silicon, hvor man da bygde selskaper som utfordret status quo og så videre, har da over tid skapt en sånn enorm konsentrasjon av de viktigste innovasjonsselskapene, i hvert fall innenfor teknologi. Og det er jo en famous saying i Silicon Valley at suksessen til ventureselskaper er suksess. Det betyr at suksessen til ventureselskaper er at du har hatt tidligere suksess. Og Silicon Valley har jo litt grann hatt det. Men det er klart at den enorme tilgangen av nye talent hele tiden er jo en veldig viktig forsterkende faktor for å gjøre den innovasjonskraften i Silicon Valley sustainable. Og hvis du ser på de selskapene som har lykkes fra Silicon Valley, og som er de store selskapene i dag, så er nesten alle innvandrere.
Så jeg tror den viktigste faktoren for at Silicon Valley er så vellykket som det er, er rett og slett at det er en talent magnet, og at de har tilrettelagt for innvandring.

Haugli: Du skrev jo nylig i DN om debatten om entreprenørskap og skalering i Norge, og du ser jo litt utenfra, både med tanke på kronikken og mer generelt. Hva tenker du om Norge? Det er et stort spørsmål.

Lyseggen: Ja, det er et stort spørsmål. Det første jeg kan si er at dess lenger jeg har vært boende utenlands, desto mer stolt blir jeg faktisk av den norske modellen og det norske velferdssamfunnet. USA har jo mange fantastiske ting. Måten de heier frem vinnere på er jo fantastisk, men det er også en ganske dyster nedside i den amerikanske kulturen, hvor de tar veldig lite vare på de som ikke lykkes. Og det ser man jo nå i det amerikanske markedet, hvor det er stadig større forskjeller mellom de som haves og not haves, stadig større polarisering, og den polariseringen begynner jo å komme ut av kontroll, ikke sant? Så mitt perspektiv i Norge er jo at man blir glad og stolt over den norske modellen. Og jeg kan ikke si at jeg er så veldig involvert i alle debattene, men det er klart, selv i San Francisco har man jo hørt om debattene i Norge om skatt og skatteflyktninger og så videre, og det synes jeg er litt trist. Og på mange måter føler jeg liksom at den skattediskusjonen også er en veldig stor distraksjon i forhold til den - kanskje en av de viktigste debattene i Norge. Og det er liksom, hva skal vi gjøre etter oljen, på en måte?
Og det var litt det jeg skrev i kronikken min, og så er det … jeg tror det er veldig viktig å samles om en ordentlig visjon. Og i hvert fall som entreprenør, så kan jeg relatere til det, og i Silicon Valley så er det en saying, uten en visjon, så er en startup bare en svakere og mindre versjon av større selskaper. Og det synes jeg er en ganske telling, ikke sant?

Haugli: For det distruptive eller det utfordrer-elementet ligger jo i det å ha en visjon.

Lyseggen: Styrken er en visjon, ikke sant? Hvis du ikke har en visjon, så er det bare mindre og svakere. Og hvis ikke Norge klarer å skape en visjon, så er det bare mindre og svakere. Vi er et lite land.

Programleder: Men er det mulig for et land som Norge å ha en felles visjon?

Lyseggen: Ja, altså å skape en visjon er jo ikke enkelt. Det … alle som prøver å lage en visjon for et selskap, jeg vet jo det. Men det er jo ikke nødvendigvis slik at det er en eksakt vitenskap. Jeg tror det er viktig å velge noen områder som vi har naturlige forutsetninger for å lykkes, og som langsiktig har stort potensiale. Og ingen sitter på en krystallkule den ene veien, men på en måte er det viktig bare å velge – og velge bort. Så sier man, disse områdene skal vi fokusere på, og disse skal vi fokusere langsiktig på. Og i så måte så tror jeg liksom, hvis vi skal få det til, så tror jeg vi trenger en ordentlig ledelse. Det viktigste ansvaret for visjonen er den politiske ledelsen, som jeg ser det. Vi trenger en sterk politisk ledelse som jobber systematisk over tid med noe som Norge kan bli langsiktig. Og det som jeg kanskje synes er spennende, det er jo at det er andre som har lykkes. Kanskje virkelig litt rart. Skal vi i lille Norge - hva skal vi gjøre? Hvordan skal vi klare å hevde oss internasjonalt? Hvordan skal vi klare å lykkes? Vi er jo et lite land, ikke sant?

Programleder: Men du nevnte Dubai og Singapore som eksempel?

Lyseggen: Ja, ikke sant? Det er jo eksempel på noen som faktisk har lykkes, og Singapore for eksempel. De ble jo pelmet ut av Malaysia, og var litt lost og måtte … de var tvunget til å lage en visjon. Og Singapore, inneklemt mellom store aktører som Kina, Japan, India, de har klart, fordi de har en langsiktig strategisk visjon, å bygge seg opp som en nummer en talent magnet, og to regionalt kraftsenter for kapital og innovasjon. Så Singapore er jo på mange måter en go-to-place for alle som ønsker inn i Asia, og hele den den regionen. Og det er fantastisk. Og Singapore, de var to millioner mennesker, når de satte denne visjonen. I dag er de cirka seks millioner.

Haugli: Ja, omtrent som Norge, tror jeg.

Lyseggen: Ja, omtrent. På størrelse med Norge. Og så har du andre eksempler. Dubai, det var en ukjent by på 180 000 mennesker, når de fant olje. Og så var det noen som tenkte langsiktig og besluttet at vi må diversifisere, for den oljen kommer ikke til å vare. Nå har vi vært så heldige at vi har funnet olje, la oss bruke de inntektene til å bygge opp noe som vi kan leve på in the long run. Den første skyskrapen i Dubai, den ble satt opp i 1978. Og nå er Dubai en by på fire millioner mennesker, og er blitt et regionalt kraftsenter for finans og innovasjon, og også en talent magnet globalt. Så det synes jeg er veldig spennende, og det er liksom, hvertfall som entreprenør, så synes jeg det er kjempegøy å se at det er noen som på en måte ikke har de naturlige forutsetningene til å bli veldig, vellykket, men som på grunn av visjon og langsiktig arbeid lykkes til tross for at det er en underdog. Det er på en måte hele den gründervisjonen i seg selv, ikke sant?
Og ser man på Norge da, så har man … jeg tror Norge faktisk har veldig gode forutsetninger for å ta en tilsvarende posisjon i Europa og bli en talent magnet og kraftsenter i Europa for innovasjon og teknologi. Og grunnen til at jeg tror det er liksom jeg tror vi har, for det første så har vi liksom mange bedre forutsetninger enn det Singapore og Dubai egentlig hadde når de startet. Norge er jo et veldig velfungerende samfunn. Alle som bor i USA i dag kan i hvert fall bekrefte det. Men ting fungerer her, ikke sant? Vi har verdens beste helsevesen og utdannelse. Det er kanskje lett å klage over de tingene man har i Norge, men objektivt sett så har vi noen av verdens beste helsevesen og utdannelse, og mye mer enn folk kan drømme om i mesteparten av verden. Vi er verdens mest familievennlige land, og alle som får barn vet jo hvor vanskelig det er å jonglere både det å reise en familie og lykkes karrieremessig. Og så har vi også luksusen av en helt fantastisk natur. Etter covid, så dro jeg til Lofoten for første gang og jeg må si at Lofoten er kanskje en av de vakreste plassene i hele verden. Og så er det ikke sånn at man må dra til Lofoten heller, er man i Oslo så har man Nordmarka, naturen er tilgjengelig for alle, og spesielt i de nye generasjonene som vokser opp … det å ha tilgang til natur og få lov til å ta del i den, det er noe som de nye generasjonene setter veldig pris på. Så med det som utgangspunkt, så har vi på mange måter naturlige forutsetninger for å bli en talentmagnet. Men det vi da selvfølgelig må legge til rette, er hvorfor skal folk komme til Norge? Så jeg tror vi trenger en veldig sterk strategi for innvandring, eller immigration.

Programleder: Ja, for det er jo en av de store utfordringene at vi har faktisk ikke tilgjengelig de menneskene vi trenger?

Lyseggen: Ikke sant? Vi er for få mennesker, vi er et lite land. Men vi har forutsetninger for å tiltrekke oss mennesker. Og som jeg skrev i kronikken min, hvis Dubai klarer å tiltrekke seg folk til en ugjestmild ørken, så burde jo vi klare det her i Norge. Men jeg tror vi trenger en ordentlig innvandringsstrategi, og da selvfølgelig av kvalifiserte mennesker, og den første innvandringen som trengs, tror jeg, er å få alle nordmenn i Sveits tilbake.

Haugli: Ja, hvordan skal man gjøre det?

Lyseggen: Nei, jeg vet ikke hva man skal gjøre, og jeg kan ikke noe om norsk skattepolitikk, men det jeg vil si er at uansett hvem som vinner valget til høsten, så må det være en av de høyeste prioritetene å få nordmennene i Sveits bak til Norge. Fordi vi er jo få mennesker, og vi trenger alle. Og de mennesker som er i Sveits, uansett hva man tenker, så er jo de ressurssterke mennesker. Så det er jo stor tap for Norge at de ikke er i Norge. Det andre er jo selvfølgelig å tilrettelegge for oppholdstillatelse og arbeidstillatelse for kvalifisert kompetanse. Sånn at det er veldig enkelt og ukomplisert å komme til Norge og få jobb og så videre.
Jeg kan ikke nok om det, men det er mange som har ekspertise på det, så hvis vi tilrettelegger for det - digitale nomader og alt det som skjer, det er mange som jobber strategisk med det, det burde vi også gjøre i Norge. Og i tillegg så føler jeg også at det er veldig viktig med infrastruktur. Singapore og Dubai har vært veldig strategiske med å bygge flyplasser og flyselskaper. De har noen av verdens beste flyselskaper. Og jeg så i avisen her om dagen at Norge har faktisk blitt en eier i Norwegian. Det synes jeg er veldig bra. Jeg tror vi må investere ordentlig i Norwegian. Vi må ha direkte flights til alle viktige marker i verden. Og når Norwegian var på sitt beste, så hadde de jo til og med direkte flights til Oakland i San Francisco. Og da hørte jeg plutselig, at det var mange som dro til Norge på ferie, og fordi det var spennende, og fordi det var liksom veldig bra fly, og fornuftige priser. Og det å liksom komme til Norge i dag, er litt sånn tungt faktisk. Jeg merker det selv - fra San Francisco jeg må liksom innom London eller København eller Amsterdam og det gjør det liksom ekstra trådt, og disse tingene - hører kanskje litt banalt ut - men jeg tror det er veldig viktig. Så det ene er immigration, jeg tror også det er veldig viktig å bygge broer til de store markedene. Og det er mange måter å gjøre det på. Men jeg tror, fordi Norge har en unik fordel gjennom sitt oljefond, så tror jeg … vi investerer jo veldig mye i dag i utlandet, og det er jo veldig bra, og jeg kan ikke nok om det, men det er jo forståelig at man ikke må investere for mye i Norge, da. Men jeg tror hvis man investerer veldig strategisk i internasjonale ventureselskaper, så har man faktisk bygget opp broer til de store markedene. Hvis man investerer i de beste ventureselskapene i de viktigste markedene, så får jo plutselig norske selskaper en naturlig varm velkomst i de markedene. De ventureselskapene lykkes fordi de har godt kontaktnettverk, de har god kompetanse, og kan hjelpe til å reise videre funding i de markedene. Så hvis vi strategisk investerer i slike fond, som i utgangspunktet skal gi oss to-tre ganger pengene uansett, så det bør jo være en bra investering, så vil det jo være ekstremt verdifullt for norske selskaper. Gründere, start-ups og scale-ups.
Og litt apropos i forhold til det: alle de store ventureselskapene i USA og Silicon Valley, de drar jevnlig til Dubai, til Saudi-Arabia og Singapore for å hente penger. Så hvis Norge var strategisk i forhold til hvordan de plasserte oljepengene sine, så ville de komme også til Norge. Og tilsvarende så tror jeg det er viktig også at vi bygger sterke partnerskap

med universiteter i utlandet. Så vi snakket litt om visjonen, at vi må velge noen områder som er veldig bra for oss. La oss velge, uansett om vi velger, robotics, cybersecurity, ocean tech eller medtech, la oss velge de universitetene i verden som er de fremste innenfor de områdene. Og så jobber vi strategisk med å bygge opp våre egne forskningsmiljøer, men da i sterk allianse med de internasjonale forskningsmiljøene. Og så organiserer vi de beste konferansene i verden innenfor disse spesifikke sektorene. De holder da selvfølgelig i Norge. Da kan alle fly hit til Norge med direkte flighter. Da blir det på en måte sånn at de konferansene må alle være på. Hvis vi har laget de beste konferansene, så må folk være der. På den måten får vi tilgang til de beste folkene innenfor de ulike sektorene som vi fokuserer på. Da kan vi ha konferanser på forskning. Og da kan vi ha konferanser på forskning, vi kan ha konferanser på liksom, på selve … bransjekonferanser, så liksom de som er kommersielle aktører kommer, og så kan vi ha liksom, ja, bare vi er flinke nok til å tenke liksom på hvilke sektorer vi faktisk ønsker å spesialisere oss.

Haugli: Jeg synes vi aner konturen av en visjon for Norge, i det du sier. Det er utrolig inspirerende! Og litt sånn grei påminnelse det her med Dubai og Singapore, for å hoppe tilbake dit. Ikke sant, det er jo vi … mange av diskusjonene i Norge går jo på hva vi har naturgitte fortrinn til å lykkes med, og det er jo åpenbart en fordel, og ikke sant, gir oss noen styrker. Men det er jo en rekke områder hvor vi ikke har naturgitte fortrinn, og som vi også kan lykkes på, som du nevner da. Robotics for eksempel - det er jo klart, det hjelper jo kanskje å ha litt dyp i Nordsjøen da, hvor man kan sende noe robotikk ned og høste noen erfaringer som ikke er tilgjengelige for alle andre. Men selve teknologien er ikke vi noe bedre rustet til å ta. Og likevel, lykkes norske bedrifter innenfor nisjer. Mikrobrikker er jo et eksempel på det, hvor Norge har sterke kunnskapsmiljøer, og så blir det en betydelig industri. Så det å ikke se seg blind, tenker jeg, på at det skal bare være områder hvor naturen har lagt til rette for at vi skal lykkes, men at vi har motet også til å si det er noen områder hvor hva skal vi si, kulturen eller menneskene har frembrakt noe kunnskapsmessig som vi kan bygge på, det tenker jeg er et veldig viktig budskap da.

Lyseggen: Jeg synes det er helt riktig at … En ting er naturen, men Norge er jo et veldig automatisert samfunn. Vi er jo veldig flinke på teknologi og på kompetanse. Når jeg forteller folk at i Norge så leverer folk skatten sin og bekrefter på SMS, så tror de ikke på meg omtrent. Jeg tror det er på en måte det er en venn-diagrammet mellom hva vi her naturlige foresetninger til og hva tror vi er store fremtidige opportuniteter som vi har like gode forutsetninger som alle andre til å lykkes. Og jeg tror det vi ser på robotics, det er jo et eksempel. Det er sektoren innenfor AI som vi kan bestemme oss for å spesialisere oss på. For eksempel cyber security, som kanskje kommer til å bli en av de viktigste områdene for AI. Hvorfor ikke?

Haugli: Ja, og noe vi ikke har snakket så mye om er jo tillit, som det norske samfunnet er gjennomsyret av. Og ikke bare har vi tillit til hverandre, men når vi måler hva Norge er kjent for ute i verden, så er det også dette med at man har tillit til norske produkter og norske tjenester. Jeg tenker på at det gir muligheter for cybersikkerhet, men typisk sånn datalagring for eksempel, altså det at dataen er trygt lagret i Norge, der har vi en fordel. Dette er jo kun konkurransefortrinn, så - jeg vil ikke fornærme noen - men det er kanskje litt lite bevissthet rundt disse konkurransefortrinnene, det kulturelle kontra det med havet for eksempel, som jeg tror vi har et godt og helt nødvendig bevisst forhold til.

Lyseggen: Jeg synes det var faktisk et veldig godt poeng. I disse dager så er man litt skeptisk til kinesiske selskaper, kanskje. Man er også skeptisk til amerikanske selskaper. De som er opptatt av personverden liker jo ikke at amerikanerne kan liksom - myndighetene kan plukke data fra Facebook og så videre. Det kan de i dag.

Haugli: Ja, de vet jo alt om oss.

Lyseggen: De vet alt, ikke sant? Så det synes jeg er et kjempegodt poeng. Og der har jo Europa på mange måter vært i toneangivende, ikke sant? Når jeg kom til USA i 2005, så når jeg snakket om privacy, så bare lo folk av meg. Og da var det sånn, forget privacy, it's all about transparency. Men så skjedde jo Cambridge Analytica, og da snudde jo tonen, og da ble folk litt bevisst med at privacy er faktisk veldig viktig. Og Apple har jo vært veldig bevisste på å fokusere på privacy som er et konkurransefortrinn i forhold til andre så det poenget du snakker om tillit, det er kjempebra det er faktisk noe som Norge har forutsetning for å bygge på.

Programleder: Det er en del utfordringer for både deg og andre som representerer det offentlige Norge her da, Håkon?

Haugli: Men først og fremst inspirasjon synes jeg. Altså både det at Jørn har lykkes med å skape denne fantastiske bedriften da, med utgangspunkt i Norge da, i et skur på Tjuvholmen som vi har lært, og har tatt det med seg hele den pay it forward-kulturen, og jeg synes også det du tegner et riss av da, som Norge kan lykkes med, det er veldig inspirerende. Og først og fremst bensin da, til hva vi kan gjøre sammen i Norge. Innovasjon Norge gjør jo ingenting alene, vi gjør jo alt i samarbeid med andre deler av det økosystemet, så jeg håper mange lytter og finner tilsvarende inspirasjon som jeg har funnet av det Jørn sier. Og veldig gøy både at du var med på Innovasjonstalen, og at du valgte å være med her i dag.

Lyseggen: Ja, takk. Det var veldig hyggelig det. Takk for at dere hadde meg.

Programleder: Takk skal du ha for at du var med oss, Jørn Lyseggen, grunnlegger og hovedpersonen bak Meltwater. Og takk til Håkon Haugli. Mitt navn er Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, og dette var Innopodden. Vi høres igjen.

This summary was produced using artificial intelligence. Innovation Norway staff have quality-assured the content.

Guest: Janne Aas-Jakobsen, founder and CEO of Consigli

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

The host introduces the topic: Women entrepreneurs in Norway face more barriers than others, and in this episode we meet one of them. Janne Aas-Jakobsen is the founder of Consigli, a company that uses AI to make construction projects more efficient.

The company's status and goals

Programme manager: Give us an overview of where the company stands.

Aas-Jakobsen: Two things are important: securing global market share before our competitors do, and keeping pace with technological developments.

Haugli: And how are those two things going?

Aas-Jakobsen: It’s going well. We have really good people, and that’s what it takes.

Aas-Jakobsen explains that Consigli has 42 employees and many ‘agents’ working for multiple customers. She believes that employee numbers will not be a good measure of success in the future. The AI agents identify construction projects worldwide, contact decision-makers via LinkedIn and email, and take notes and summarise meetings.

Market development and internationalisation

Consigli started in Norway but recognised the need to expand internationally, particularly into England, a global hub for property investment. Aas-Jakobsen describes the tax challenges and the need to have a physical presence in new markets.

Technology and product

Consigli has developed a ‘self-designing engineer’, an AI agent that designs all the technical systems in a building in 2–3 days, compared with 6–24 months previously. The solution provides the developer with all the documentation needed to obtain binding quotes from contractors. Previously, the alternative was to hire a range of advisors and invest significant time and resources.

Efficiency and sustainability

Consigli guarantees at least a 20 per cent reduction in material use in projects and has tangible examples from major residential developments in England. Its AI solution learns from previous mistakes and optimises the placement of technical installations, delivering both financial and environmental benefits.

Industry challenges and culture

Aas-Jakobsen points out that the consultancy industry has incentives to sell hours and licences, rather than necessarily improve efficiency. She believes that Norwegian culture is sceptical of commercialisation and that engineers are often risk-averse, while markets such as England and Singapore are more ready to adopt new technology.

Success is about getting the market to adopt the solution, not just developing technology. Aas-Jakobsen highlights the importance of hiring the right people, having the courage to let people go, and achieving a great deal with limited resources. She warns against being seduced by venture capital and recommends building a robust, customer-driven business.

Conclusion and future outlook

Haugli and Aas-Jakobsen discuss Norway's ability to adopt artificial intelligence and the need to think globally from the outset. Aas-Jakobsen concludes by saying that Consigli has employees from around the world, but that the Norwegian system makes it difficult to attract and retain international talent.

Guest: Marit Wetterhus, founder and CEO of Capassa

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host: Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Host: Capassa aims to become the leading financial management platform for small and medium-sized businesses, making financial management more accessible and easier for owners to understand. Marit Wetterhus is the founder, CEO and guest on Innopodden. Håkon Haugli and I, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, also try to make sense of it all.

Welcome to Innopodden, Marit Wetterhus.

Wettrehus: Thank you very much.

Host: We appreciate you being here. You lead Capassa, which describes itself as a company dedicated to helping small and medium-sized businesses succeed in an increasingly digital and competitive business environment. What do they need your help with?

Wettrehus: SMEs are the heart of the economy, both in Norway and across most of the Western world. To illustrate what we do, I’d like to share a story a customer told me recently. He runs a fast-growing company with major customers, strong revenues and a well-functioning team. Everything is going well, and on paper it all looks excellent. Then he gets a phone call. Someone points out that there are some cash flow issues, so he starts digging into his figures. And he realises, ‘Shit, this isn’t good.’ He has outstanding invoices, rising costs and VAT due within the next two weeks. It’s a real crisis. He sits down and thinks, ‘How could this happen?’ He then realises that he only reviews his figures perhaps once a month, or even every other month. The accounts are often one or two months behind, so he doesn’t have access to up-to-date, accurate financial insights.
He became a Capassa customer and was onboarded in under two minutes, connecting his company in the same amount of time. He immediately gained full insight. We provide dedicated dashboards containing all the relevant information, including a specific cash flow dashboard. This gave him a complete overview of his cash burn – or burn rate, as we say in Norwegian – working capital, operating cash flow and free cash flow, all updated daily. With a complete overview, he could adjust course immediately. Once he was set up, he naturally asked the AI agent – the digital CFO – ‘How can I improve this company’s cash flow?’ He received very specific advice: send invoices promptly, secure faster payments and, of course, defer any costs that can be deferred.

Haugli: Just to jump in here: Do you actually have an AI CFO built into the system?

Wettrehus: Yes. We do.

Haugli: How exciting! That's great. Can you – can you talk to it?

Wettrehus: You can talk to it just like you would with other agents, but our agent is clearly very focused on finances. And it is very focused on – it likes accounting, and it likes, it likes to have … it has a very good overview of developments in the field in Norway. For us, it is important that our customers have a firm grasp of their finances. They need a clear view of the past. They need a clear view of where they are today, but they also need to be able to look ahead. With forecasts and budgets, which are of course important too. That is really why we built Capassa: to help SMEs avoid these difficult situations, because they can actually be avoided. And I have to say, I have experienced this myself ... this is my fourth company. I have spent some time …

Haugli: Drum roll … we like the sound of that.

Wettrehus: I have served on many boards, of both listed and unlisted companies, and I have invested in a number of companies over the years. What I have essentially done throughout is build the tools I needed myself. So I can honestly say that every unlisted company needs Capassa.

Haugli: Yes, that's great. So, why is the company called Capassa?

Wettrehus: Oh … the name was decided by text message. The name means … well, we have a good friend of the company who has lots of good ideas, and the thinking was … investing, as in capex investments. ‘¿Qué pasa?’ – ‘What’s happening?’ in Spanish. What’s happening with your investments? So that became Capasa. I received a text with Capasa spelt with one s and immediately checked whether the dot-com domain was available. It wasn’t. I texted back saying that wasn’t a name we could use because it wasn’t … well, I didn’t really like the name either. Then I got a reply asking, ‘What about two s’s?’ So I checked the domain, and it was available. I bought it immediately. I should add that afterwards, I did a quick Google search to find out whether it meant anything negative. It doesn’t. It’s actually just the name of a tree or shrub in South America, and we’re perfectly happy with that.

Haugli: Yes – wow, what a great story! And it also makes me think of capacity – you get that association too. It’s about building capacity, in a way.

Wettrehus: Yes, absolutely. At least, we're trying.

Host: Speaking of capacity, you now have 16 employees. Where does the company stand? Are you in a growth phase, or how are things going?

Wettrehus: Yes, we are … well, what we’re seeing at the moment is that … we’ve spent a lot of time on development. We’ve been finding our feet along the way, and we’ve had to cut our coat according to our cloth, but more and more people are discovering us. Until now, we’ve been something of the world’s best-kept secret, but we’re now out in the market and, as I said, more and more people are discovering us. Our goal is simply to keep growing.

Haugli: In Norway? Internationally?

Wettrehus: We’ve been thinking that we should be able to handle Norway ourselves, and we’ve already started planning our expansion beyond Norway. Norway is a very small country. It’s very well organised, and it’s highly advanced in terms of technology and digitalisation. But it really is very small, with very few companies compared with other markets.

Host: But you specifically target small and medium-sized businesses. What challenges and needs do they have that differ from those of large companies when it comes to managing their finances?

Wettrehus: Large companies can afford to bring in expensive, high-end consultants, and they can also afford sophisticated systems that can do all sorts of things. Small and medium-sized businesses cannot. Yet they have the same need as large companies for insight into their day-to-day operations and finances. It is much harder for them, however, because they cannot afford these sophisticated systems. That is one of the reasons we started Capassa: it is important to ‘level the playing field’. If they are to have the opportunity to grow, they need the same insights, but providing those insights requires a completely different approach to building the system. You need a fully automated platform. I think that is one reason why it is easier for us at Capassa, as a relatively new startup: we are not burdened by the legacy technology that many large banks and financial institutions struggle with.

Haugli: That is an interesting perspective … the story you are telling. We see many companies every year at Innovation Norway, including some that do not succeed. Often, it is frustratingly mundane issues that trip them up. Cash flow is certainly one of them – for example, a VAT bill suddenly arrives that they have not planned for. It makes you wonder, ‘Why on earth were they unable to see this coming three or four months ago and plan for it?’ Yet it can push companies into a difficult situation and, in the worst case, bankruptcy. You help address that very problem, so there is a clear growth dimension to what you do: you lay the foundations for others to succeed. I am really pleased to hear that. Very good.

Wettrehus: Yes, and that is an important point. To build on what you said about small and medium-sized enterprises, our goal is to revolutionise the finance function for SMEs. Everyone working in and around unlisted companies needs access to information so they can support these businesses and help them grow. That is our goal: to help businesses grow. If you always have access to accurate, transparent and up-to-date financial information, enabling you to make sound decisions, running a company becomes much easier. And when it comes to liquidity … it is not only SMEs that go bankrupt because they run out of cash. We cannot necessarily eliminate a company's liquidity challenges. But we can provide forecasts for the future. We help companies prepare forecast budgets so they always know where they stand. If you know that you will run out of money in six months, you can take action today. This makes it much easier to be proactive and make sound decisions for the company. It is also far easier to approach a financial institution and say, ‘We will need funding in six months,’ than to turn up and say, ‘We’ve run out of money,’ when the company is already in crisis.

Host: Who are your main competitors? We are familiar with accounting systems – although that may not be the right term for all of them – such as SAP and Unit 4, or Agresso, Xledger and Power Office. Are these your competitors, or do they supply data to your system?

Wettrehus: Very good question. First, I’d like to consider the purpose of an accounting system. In Norway, having one is a legal requirement. Every company must have an accounting system. Its purpose is really quite simple: to ensure that the company reports accurate figures so that the government receives the taxes and duties it is owed. That is what the accountant cares about, what the auditor cares about, and where the focus lies. At Capassa, we focus on financial management, so that the people working in and around the company understand what is actually happening. We retrieve data from the accounting system, but not only from there. We also retrieve data from the Brønnøysund Registers and many other sources. We bring together data from many different places and present it in a way that customers can actually understand. Instead of receiving a mass of figures, you get graphs and explanations that make it much easier to understand the company’s day-to-day situation. Very few companies want to give just anyone access to their accounting system, and this is about sharing data. That is where we are very different, because we want everyone who helps the company to have access to information. Our system has role-based access control, which means you can invite people in. You can invite your board members, investors and accountant into the system, so everyone works from the same data. We then present the data differently to investors. They want information presented in their own way, so we tailor it for them without the company’s management having to lift a finger. If you are looking to raise external capital, you can imagine how useful that is. We now have several customers who use us primarily as a due diligence tool because they see it as an excellent way to access a large amount of data quickly. At Capassa, the more companies you have in our system, the more useful it becomes. We like to say that we help our customers with financing ... we give them financial superpowers. But when it comes to competitors, our biggest competitors are Excel and manual work.

Host: Yes, exactly.

Haugli: Yes, exactly. I’m also thinking about PowerPoint here – the dialogue with investors, which is often based on … probably an underlying Excel spreadsheet, which is then presented in PowerPoint. Interesting, really exciting to hear.

Wettrehus: What they often do … what many of our customers do now is export the charts from Capassa and present them in a PowerPoint. You can do that too, but the easiest option is simply to give them access, so you do not have to think about it. We have fully automated reporting, and if you think about it … financial reporting is something most companies have to do. Many of our customers are very pleased that we have fully automated it, because it means they do not have to think about it.

Host: And as part of this, they also receive something called a Capassa score. What is that?

Wettrehus: Yes, it’s … I assume you know what a credit score is, right? A credit score is a rating that companies give to other companies. These credit-scoring companies use audited figures. And at the moment, those audited figures are from 2023. I don’t know about you, but for most small and medium-sized companies, quite a lot may have happened since 2023. So what we do at Capassa is … we use the figures that were synced overnight. This means the figures, and therefore the Capassa score, are always up to date. Essentially, it’s a number from zero to ten. It gives you an indication of how you’re doing and benchmarks your performance against your competitors. So it’s essentially a modern financial assessment in near real time.

Haugli: Yes, that’s a very important point, because there’s actually a lag of around 18 months. You’re working with audited figures from 2023 and are only now auditing the 2024 accounts, while you have figures for 2025 – from last night, as it were.

Wettrehus: No, I have the figures from last night, and on top of that, we also know … we also know how good the company is at sending out invoices on time and paying its bills. So we have much more information about how well the company runs its operations. And it isn't easy for most others to access that kind of information.

Host: You mentioned your digital CFO and said that the solution or software improves over time as more companies use it. Tell us a little more about how you use artificial intelligence.

Wettrehus: Artificial intelligence is – to use a good Norwegian expression – a game changer, and we’ve fully integrated it into our system. This means you can ask the digital CFO questions directly and get immediate answers, whether they’re about finances, the app or something else. The application is designed for people who haven’t necessarily attended the Norwegian School of Economics or BI Norwegian Business School, but even those who have don’t always remember exactly how to calculate working capital. You can ask the digital CFO or AI agent about all these things directly. We also make extensive use of machine learning and algorithms, and we have …

Haugli: Does the agent or CFO have a name?

Wettrehus: Well, it’s the digital CFO – Capassa, your digital CFO. Yes, we’ve had it ever since we started the company. We use a lot of machine learning and algorithms. Our dashboards are updated daily with a range of information, and we also have automated reporting. One of my favourite features is budgeting: at the touch of a button, machine-learning algorithms create a budget or suggest one for you, based on all the company’s historical figures. So, you press a button and get next year’s budget, then press another button and get next year’s cash flow budget – and I haven’t seen anyone else offer that yet. Anyone who has ever created a cash flow budget in Excel knows it’s an absolutely dreadful experience.

Haugli: Yes, absolutely.

Wettrehus: It really is a rubbish job.

But the future is automated. It is intelligent and accessible. And that is exactly what we are working on at Capassa.

Host: You founded the company with two others in 2018, apparently after the idea came up at a Christmas party. We don't need to go into what kind of Christmas party it was. Magnus Kirkerud and Aage Thorsen are clearly men, while you are a woman, making you something of a rarer breed among entrepreneurs. Let's talk a little about that too. What are the biggest challenges you have faced as an entrepreneur?

Wettrehus: I don't see myself as a female founder. I see myself as a founder, and I think being … being a founder is, at times, incredibly demanding, and it involves an enormous amount of work. Unless you've been there and tried it yourself, I don't think you can appreciate just how much work it really takes. And that's regardless of gender. But there is one area where I see that we face challenges: funding and access to venture capital. It's a challenge, and we need to address it. If you look at the figures, Unconventional Ventures' data for 2023 showed that all-female founding teams received 1.7 per cent of venture capital, which was actually up from 0.7 per cent the previous year. As for mixed-gender teams, like Capassa with my co-founders, you might think that diversity – having both men and women – would be a good thing. But mixed-gender teams received just 6.4 per cent of venture capital in 2023, up from only 3 per cent in 2022. This means that all-male founding teams secured 91.9 per cent of the funding in 2023, and as much as 96.3 per cent in 2022. That's a problem, and we need to address it. We also need to do something about the low proportion of women in venture capital. A great deal has been done – I know there has been a major effort to bring more women into venture capital. But if you look at the female partners in venture capital firms – the people making the investment decisions – there are still far too few women. We need to change that.

Host: And what should we do about that?

Wettrehus: Let me put it this way: I go to work every single day to solve problems. I don't necessarily have the answer, but I believe there are many things we can do. It's important to start early. I was once told that universities needed to make it easier for women to become entrepreneurs. I think we need to start much earlier. I believe it starts as soon as children are born, before they begin nursery, and continues from there. It's important for them to learn that it's perfectly fine to take up space, share ideas, be bold and have the courage of their convictions. We need more female entrepreneurs. But we clearly also need to address funding. You probably have much more to contribute on the funding side than I do, but we could certainly make it a little fairer.
That was a long answer.

Haugli: That is a very good answer. But you have highlighted something important here: there is no quick fix. I completely agree with you that there are some fundamental issues at play. Norway actually has one of the most gender-segregated labour markets in the Western world. Women in Norway are very well represented in the public sector, but far less so in business. For men, the opposite is true. This means that more men than women encounter problems that could be solved through entrepreneurship. That is an important driver. We also know how valuable it is to know someone else who has started a business – in this case, women who have done so. Girls naturally look to women, so role models and networks matter. Becoming an entrepreneur can seem like a very remote prospect if you do not know anyone who has done it before, and it may feel even riskier than it actually is. These are some of the things we know. When it comes to venture capital, the figures are alarmingly low. This is particularly striking for us in a country where we are used to having at least a reasonable degree of gender equality in many areas, because this is one area where equality is clearly lacking. From our perspective, this is not simply a question of fairness. It is deeply unfair, just to put that on record, but the real issue is that we are missing out on enormous innovation potential. We can assume that many businesses are never established or, if they are, do not gain access to venture capital. That is a problem for Norway because we need all the innovation we can get. This is particularly important now: as we face major societal challenges, we need many more entrepreneurs. And, to be clear, this is not about having fewer male entrepreneurs. We simply need more entrepreneurs overall and to draw on the full potential of the entire population. We at Innovation Norway are taking several steps in this area, including helping to reduce risk. We provide loans and grants, always in combination with private investors and other financial institutions. Every business has a bank; we do not support businesses that do not have one. That is one part of it. I also strongly believe in working on long-term measures that broaden people's horizons. Initiatives such as teaching young people about entrepreneurship at school are important. It is important to encounter a range of role models, because the labour market offers far more opportunities than those that may be immediately obvious to you. So, like you, I do not believe there is a quick fix, but it is important that we have this discussion – and that we shake things up a little. Some organisations are doing this very well. One example is Frøya Ventures, a group of highly skilled and experienced women who have founded a venture capital firm with a particular focus on women starting businesses. We need organisations like this because they help move the entire venture capital community in the right direction. So positive things are happening, but I also believe this is a very long-term undertaking.

Wettrehus: Yes, and of course, if you want to scale up a tech company internationally, you need capital – a lot of capital. And if you cannot access that capital, it is difficult to scale up anything at all.

Haugli: We also meet women through our work who say that being a woman can be an advantage, particularly internationally, because you stand out so much. But in a way, that only gets you onto the dance floor, right? You have to make use of that dance floor and be … and manage to convince people. And that is when bias comes into play, causing women and men to be perceived differently. Tests have been carried out where women and men deliver exactly the same pitch, and investors find the man delivering it more interesting than the woman. That is precisely what I find so alarming.

Wettrehus: Yes, but that is because the investor sitting there is a man himself, so it is much easier for him to relate. That said, I started my career in telecoms in the 1990s and became CEO of a Telenor-owned company early on. I then moved into automation and IT infrastructure, so let’s put it this way: there has never been any shortage of men. No, there are plenty of them. So that has not been a problem, but I have been something of a tomboy from the start. I have to say that I am very proud of who I am and not afraid to be myself on my own terms. I have probably always stood out, but then the question is whether that has been a disadvantage. For me, I do not think it has. Of course, some people try to undermine you with power plays, and you learn a few things along the way. Humour can often go a long way towards putting people in their place when they try it. But I was invited by the European Banking Federation to join the opening panel at one of its major conferences in Brussels. I was seated alongside the head of Euronext, which had just acquired Oslo Børs, and of course I turned up in a bright pink suit while everyone else was wearing dark suits. So it is also important to go all in and dare to be yourself. After all, we do not necessarily need even more men in black.

Haugli: Exactly. It is diversity that creates value, not everyone being the same. If you had tried to play the same role as the others on that panel, it would not have added any value. You added value precisely because you represented something different, and the same applies to entrepreneurship. That is why it is important for people of all backgrounds and identities to be part of the entrepreneurial world – because we need them. I would say we need them more than ever. Just look at where we are today. The world faces some truly major challenges, and we know that researching solutions is not enough. Of course, solutions must be developed through research. Knowledge is important, but it must be put into practice, and solutions must be scaled up quickly. We need solutions to tackle the climate challenge, an ageing population and the security situation we now face – and we need to scale them up. To do that, we need entrepreneurs who have both the ability and the ambition to grow.

Host: And that brings us neatly to what I wanted to ask you at the end, Marit: what are your three best pieces of advice for – well, let's say women – but really for anyone who wants to start their own business but is hesitant to take the plunge?

Wettrehus: Yes, it’s going to be very difficult to stick to three. I’m going to go beyond those three. As an entrepreneur, there are … I would say there are three things that are extremely important, and then I’ll add a couple more. Timing is everything. You can have the world’s best solution, the world’s best team, the world’s best everything, but if the timing isn’t right, you don’t stand a chance. And you also need luck. It’s very important to be lucky.

Host: It's a little difficult to plan for luck, isn't it?

Wettrehus: Let’s put it this way … What was it a former Microsoft executive said to me? ‘Marit, those who work hardest are often a little luckier than everyone else.’ And that brings us to the final point: the English word ‘grit’. I haven’t found a good Norwegian equivalent, but it’s about perseverance, not giving up and simply keeping at it. Because I can promise you that, as a founder, there are days when you wonder what on earth you’re doing. Everything feels painful and difficult, and everyone says no. But you have to focus on that one small positive thing and find a way to turn the team around so you can move forward. You might pivot, and then you just have to keep going. That’s incredibly important. I also believe the team matters. When building a team, it’s important to bring in people who are far more capable than you are – that’s something I’m very good at – as well as people who are different from you and think differently. Be careful not to bring in too many yes-people, because a slightly heated discussion can often lead to much better decisions. I also believe that, as a founder, you need to dare to fail. We still have a long way to go in Norway, with the Law of Jante and everything else. If you dare to put your head above the parapet and things don’t go well, it feels as though everyone is out to get you. You have to dare to fail, and of course you must learn from it. But if you never make mistakes, you simply aren’t doing enough. I often say that you either win or you learn. You have to be willing to do that. Then there’s building a network. I completely agree with you that it’s important. I started a women-in-tech network with Anne Birkeland at the British Embassy. Many fantastic women are involved. But last, and certainly not least, you also need to live along the way. My family will probably laugh themselves silly when they hear me say this, but building a company takes time. You should also have a life outside work and enjoy the journey, because life is the journey towards the destination. And you need to have fun along the way. Capassa’s motto is that you should go to work, have fun and learn something new every single day. The day you stop doing that, you need to find something else to do.

Haugli: What great advice! Excellent. I felt it could also be applied to other areas. It was very good advice for entrepreneurs, but also … I think … sound life advice for the rest of us too. Thank you very much.

Host: Thank you. I must admit I lost count after we passed three. There was a lot of good advice there. We’ll take it with us, and we think this episode will also earn a pretty respectable Capassa score.
Thank you, Marit Wetterhus, founder and CEO of Capassa, and Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann. We’ll be back with another episode of Innopodden.

Guest: Simon Anholt, founder and CEO of Nation Brand Index

From Innovation Norway: CEO Håkon Haugli and

Host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Host: Simon Anholt travels the world telling people what their country is worth – or at least what its Nation Brand Index score is. Now he has assessed Norway, and the moment of truth has arrived. Håkon Haugli and I, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, are ready to hear the verdict.

Welcome to Innopodden, Simon Anholt.

Anholt: Thank you very much.

Host: It's a pleasure to have you here. We recently launched a report on perceptions of Norway, drawing extensively on your Nation Brands Index and other international sources. Tell us a little about the background to the Nation Brands Index. Why did you start this work in the first place?

Anholt: It's a good question. I released the first edition back in 2005, so 20 years ago. That's a strange thought in itself. I mean, I don't think I'm even 20 yet, how could I have done that? But but I did, and I did it basically because I wanted data on what people thought about other countries. It was already my job advising governments around the world on perceptions and national image, so the subject has always been fascinating to me. And I realised that there was no data, and I would often express personal opinions about what the Americans thought about the French, or the French thought about the Germans. And I began to feel slightly anxious about these assertions I was making. How do I actually know? And so I started doing informal questionnaires just amongst people I knew, and I began to realise that actually the reality was probably very different most of the time, from the belief. So I teamed up with a company in Seattle, called Global Market Insight, who were a panel provider. I didn't know what a panel provider was, but it seemed that they had six million friends around the world whom they could send questionnaires to, when they wanted to research stuff. And like good Americans, they immediately jumped on this idea and said let's do it now. And we started doing it. And we're still doing it today … not, not with GMI. Now I do it on my own, with external panel providers.

Haugli: There are still six million people?

Anholt: No, we never had six million people responding to this. We had a total of six million available to us. I think the number available to us now is probably far greater than that. But the number we actually use each time is 40,000 a year. However, since this is 2025, we have a lot of sophisticated maths that enables us to expand that panel enormously to cover many, many more countries. We can talk about that later – it’s quite interesting how we use statistical science to compensate for the number of people we have.

Host: For us, the most interesting part, of course, is: what are the key findings about Norway?

Anholt: Well, people like Norway, surprise, surprise, and perhaps even more importantly, they seem to want to like Norway. This means that whenever something potentially negative is suggested to them, they dismiss it. We don't do much prompting because this is what we call a quantitative survey, not a qualitative study. So we don't ask people open-ended questions, and these aren't focus groups. But when we do conduct focus groups or interviews and ask people, for example, 'What about the fact that Norway is a major oil and gas producer? How does that fit with its green image?', they simply reject the question. They say, 'No, no, no, it's... Norway is green, right?' Almost in a threatening way. They want to like it. They want to like the Nordic countries. And I think that, increasingly, in this turbulent period, people need to feel that there are countries with positive values – towards the environment, towards each other, towards migrants and towards society in general – and Norway generally fits that description. That's probably why it has such a very, very positive image; it's the kind of country that people want to have around.

Host: And what makes Norway different from other countries?

Anholt: It's quite similar to other countries in the Nordic region, so that the Nordic image is a kind of composite. It's not identical to Sweden, of course. Sweden is much more consumer facing, it's much more brandy if you like. It's not the same as Finland. Finland is a bit weirder and people – the Finns know I say this, by the way, I have permission -

Host: That's very reassuring.

Anholt: When I was advising the Finnish Government several years ago, I said that the thing about Finland is that they are mad, bad and dangerous to know. And they accepted that with good grace. So, all the Nordic countries have their own slightly different images, but they come together to create something that is ... it’s a region that people feel good about before they drift off to sleep at night.

Host: How about these perceptions? Do they change much over time?

Anholt: No, not really. It's actually quite a boring subject from that point of view. Human beings are very strongly attached to their prejudices about other countries, and I think that's simply a matter of survival. There are a lot of countries out there – more than 200. And frankly, if we reassessed our view of every country each time it behaved in a slightly anomalous or unpredictable way, we'd have no time left to eat or sleep. We'd be constantly reassessing our views. So what we do is turn them into prejudices, or … And that's why I originally used the term 'brand'. Because what is a brand? A brand is a prejudice; it's a simple, childish reduction of something rather complex and rather important. And that's exactly what we do to countries: we turn them into brands and then lock them away in cold storage at the back of our minds. And we don't review that prejudice unless we're absolutely forced to. So if a country starts behaving out of character according to our own perception of its character, it needs to carry on doing so for quite a long time before we go through the laborious process of questioning our perceptions. Some are different from others – America only has to behave anomalously for a fairly short time before we start asking ourselves what's going on. In reality, America has been behaving as it does today for at least ten years. But I don't want to get started on America now. Otherwise, we really will be here all day.

Host: Well, when you spoke at the Export Conference, you mentioned how America is ruining its image by being the ‘baddest’ it can be?

Anholt: Yeah, I suspect that it is ruining its image. I mean, I know that it has been ruining its image since about 2015. It's been slipping in the Nation Brands Index ranking ever since Bush II. So in one sense, this phenomenon is not new, but it seems to have shifted into a much higher gear with Trump. And the point about America First is that you, Trump, could not have come up with a better way of damaging the goodwill and trust felt towards America around the world. It's as if he'd read my book and deliberately broken every single rule that I set out. These aren't my opinions; they're based on research. These are the things you need to do if you want people to love your country, buy your products, hire your people, respect your opinions, et cetera, et cetera. All the things that countries need. You need to be a principled player in international affairs; you need to be the kind of country that people can trust; you need to harmonise the needs of your domestic population with those of as many other human beings around the world as you can possibly think of; you need to harmonise your treatment of your own territory with the needs of the entire planet. These are the things that the Nordic countries do instinctively, like to do, want to do and are known for doing. And this is what America used to do for 300 years, and now suddenly it's come out into the open and said, 'No, we don't give a damn about any of that,' and it's going to make them very, very, very unpopular. Very, very quickly.

Host: Well, let's get back to Norway. How do you think Norwegian companies can leverage the value of Norway's brand?

Anholt: Well, the most … the most striking thing that we find from the survey on that point is when - one of the standard questions in in the NBI questionnaire is: Imagine you've just bought a product and you discover it comes from country X - in this case Norway - does that make you think that you spent about the right amount of money on it, or should you have spent less, or should you have spent more? And pretty much everybody in the survey says I should have spent more. In other words, they perceive that “made in Norway” is an added value; however much they paid, it was cheap. And they should have spent more. So we're saying to people in effect … and then there's another question actually, which is even more precise. It says, “would you like to buy a product from this country?” And everybody says, oh, yes, yes, yes. And there are none. So that's really interesting; we don't often see this - people declare themselves to be crazy about products made in Norway, even though that cannot be based on any experience because, well, unless they're telemark skiers, they might have bought the binding that we were told about in the conference – but most of the time they will not be familiar with any Norwegian products. So this is plainly an invitation to Norwegian exporters or potential exporters. The world wants made in Norway. So you just have to make it available to them and you should have a downhill run.

Host: That's a, that's a challenge for you there, Håkon.

Haugli: Yes, it's a fantastic starting point. And I think the … Simon, you also warned us against becoming complacent and arrogant, so let's come back to that in a moment. But I think the big challenge for Norway and Norwegian companies is to make the most of that position, as mentioned. We should probably develop, you know, 15 to 20 consumer products, because this research shows that people would be interested in buying them. At the moment, we don't have those products – you're absolutely right. We have ski bindings and perhaps a few other things that are primarily intended for the domestic market, but I think very few are well-known brands abroad. Our best-known brand, Stressless – the chair – ranks around number 78 on the global brand index. So this is an opportunity. Commissioned by the Ministry of Trade and Industry, we have developed something called 'Made in Norway', a Norwegian country-of-origin brand that companies can display on their products. It will hopefully remind customers around the world that the product is made in Norway and that they should probably be paying more for it than they currently do, because it is high quality. We also require a sustainable production process, along with other values embedded in the brand.

Anholt: And you vet, you vet the products for quality to use the brand?

Haugli: - We assess the companies' practices rather than every individual product, but we do assess their production. There are two criteria for using the brand: production must be sustainable, and the majority of it must take place in Norway.

Anholt: Can I make a suggestion?

Haugli: Absolutely, that would be fantastic.

Anholt: That you go a little bit further than that. Because I think there are probably plenty of countries out there who require that their exports be sustainable; that's the minimum viable product these days. It would be rather good if Norway went a bit further and said it has to be globally friendly in more ways than just that. In other words, you have to be able to demonstrate in some way that it doesn't harm anyone in any other country, and that it's world-friendly. That could almost become a Norwegian policy: everything we do is assessed to ensure that, at the very least, it does no harm.

Haugli: Yes, I think that's a fantastic suggestion. I mean, the whole concept of circularity comes into play as well, right? You need to ensure that. Every consumer product needs to have an afterlife. So … this isn't currently part of our criteria, but 'world-friendly' ... I love that term, by the way. I think that's definitely something to explore, and as we're still in the first generation of this, there's time and scope to consider how we can refine it.

Host: We're all familiar with 'Swiss made', especially as a logo on watches. Are there any other good examples of countries that have done this successfully?

Anholt: It seems to be a fashion in Latin America. Lots of Latin American countries use country of origin marks. There's Hecho en Mexico, Chile uses something similar. I think that's just because for some reason locally in Latin America, the perception is that this is how you do Nation branding. It's export oriented and it's about a quality mark. The problem is that it can easily become a bit of a chicken and egg-situation because if the country of origin isn't already admired, then actually putting that sticker on a product could devalue the product. And so you have to be … one of the reasons I said that having a country of origin mark for Norway is a safe thing to do, because Norway is perceived as being premium. So that that will add value, made in Norway, that adds something to it. But made in Mexico, not necessarily. It depends on the product. So a lot of those Latin American countries have found that that hasn't really worked. And in many cases, I don't think they realise that the reason why it hasn't worked is because it doesn't appear in the consumer's mind around the world - made in Mexico, made in Colombia, made in Chile doesn't necessarily add value. So you have to be in the right position to be able to do it. Switzerland is an excellent example of where it does work, because Switzerland par excellance is the country-of-origin mark that adds value and gives you permission to charge a significant premium for your product. And it's no accident that Présence Swiss, which is the organisation that looks after this for the Swiss Government, they have quite a legalistic view of this. It's about licencing people on for a fee to be allowed to use this mark and it's very, very strictly policed. And that's the right thing for Switzerland to do, no question about it.
Other countries mostly don't bother, they just they just hope for the best and some of them are fine, like Italy is fine. You don't need - you don't need “Fabricato in Italia,” you just need to say Italy, and people kind of want it. They just need to hear that it's an Italian maker’s name and they want it. I was actually saying at the conference, I seem to remember, that it's a great asset for a country to have a language that people can recognise, even if they can't speak it. So Italian is a killer, because anybody in the world, without knowing even how to say Ciao - if they hear a maker’s name that ends in -ucci or -ello or -ato or -etto, it's Italian, right? Japanese is the same. Chinese is the same. English is the same, but everybody calls everything in English names. So that doesn't really mean very much.
But the Scandinavian languages are recognisable up to a point. If you're careful with the name and you're careful with the word …

Haugli: We have a lot to talk … to thank The Muppet Show for! The Swedish chef ...

Anholt: Absolutely. Where would we be without the Swedish shirt?

Haugli: … paved the way for language recognition. It's a really interesting point. So if … let's assume you are at the bottom of the Nation Brand list, you would be advised not to display your country of origin or brand.

Anholt: Right, right. Because you would … it would take value away from the product. And this is always one of the anomalies when you're trying to create a country-of-origin mark, because by definition, at the outset, the companies, producers and brands you want to use the mark are the ones that don't want to. And those that come to you and say, 'Please, can we put the label on?' are the ones that will add the least value to Norway. In my own country, the UK, we have a private-sector organisation that does something quite similar, and the big hurdle they had to overcome was getting their first major brand to sign up. I think they eventually reached the point where they got Jaguar to put 'Made in England' on a sort of sticker. I don't believe they do that any more, but that was the turning point, because they could then get other major British brands to join. Until then, only small, insignificant brands wanted to sign up. And, of course, that would devalue the mark.

Haugli: And this is a really interesting point. Because Jaguar … Jaguar as a brand is much better known than 'Made in England' as a brand. So they would gain nothing from adding that. You might even dilute the Jaguar brand, because people might think, 'So Jaguars are also produced elsewhere. That’s why this particular car has to say Made in England.' So there are all kinds of dilemmas.

Anholt: Yes. The psychology is quite complex, and I remember having many conversations with the Finnish Government years ago about how valuable it would be if people knew that Nokia was Finnish. And I remember speaking to Jorma Ollila about this on behalf of the Finnish Prime Minister's Office branding committee, which I was a member of, and I said, ‘Why doesn't Nokia proudly say “Made in Finland”?’ And the official answer was: ‘Well, of course we're a Finnish company and very proud of it, but we're really a global company, and we have more employees outside Finland than in Finland, and... blah blah blah. Blah blah.’ And of course, they're absolutely right. But I know the real reason was that they felt they were bigger than Finland. And probably not without reason. In its heyday, Nokia was more famous than Finland.

Haugli: Yeah, Finland should put “Making Nokia” there.

Anholt: 'Making Nokia – Nokia inside', like Intel. So where I think they got it wrong was that, in a very Finnish way, they were a little too modest about it. I think Nokia felt that 'Made in Finland' would devalue the product because people would say, 'Finland – where the hell is that?' I actually think the opposite would have happened. People would have been genuinely interested and said, 'Oh, what's this quirky little country it comes from?' If people know one thing about Finland, they know it's in the north. Well, they think it's in Scandinavia, right? So they know it's in 'Scandinavia', so to speak. That means they wouldn't have thought less of the product because it came from Finland. They would have found it interesting, and it would have strengthened Finland's brand more than it did. But Nokia is no longer a consumer brand.
They're trying to do it again now with Oura, the ring I'm wearing at this very moment. Thank you, Finland. I'll expect my commission in the post.
But the unfortunate thing is that, for commercial consumer brands like these to make a real difference to a country's image, you need lots of them – not just one or two. Otherwise, it's hardly worth the effort. That's why I've been saying to us at Innovation Norway and others over the past few days that you really need some good, old-fashioned industrial policy here. You need to set up a brand factory. You need to create incentives, motivation, opportunities, training, education and cross-fertilisation – all kinds of things – and send talent scouts around the country to find promising entrepreneurs with strong products, ideas, design instincts and communication skills. They may already be doing well domestically; you just need to encourage them to consider exporting and use government resources to help them do it. Set up a seed fund and give them money so they can start researching other markets and exploring the opportunities there.
Borrow Hydro's CEO and ask them to spend half an hour with an entrepreneur to talk about building an international brand, and so on. Over time, it will work. This is a long-term undertaking, but in five to ten years you may begin to build a portfolio of consumer brands around the world. That would be incredibly valuable for Norway. You'd be catching up with Sweden.

Haugli: Yes, we love that competition!

Host: You know, this sounds really exciting. Can we do it?

Haugli: I think we could do it. And it's such an intriguing concept. I mean, we know that Norway needs to move away from what is currently our most profitable industry: oil and gas. It's a matter of when rather than if. So what are we going to replace it with? Obviously, it will be a wide range of products and services. As part of that, I don't think we can rely solely on our business-to-business platform. We also need to look at consumer products and services. We have the occasional outlier in Norway – some companies do succeed, but certainly not many. And they need to come from different industries. So the common denominator would not be their industry or product, but the fact that they are consumer brands. Building that academy, school or platform – whatever you want to call it – would certainly be a challenge. Perhaps at some point there will be the political will to build it, and we would certainly welcome that. There are lessons to be learned … I mean, just to … we have something called reMarkable, which is a tablet that … you can write on with a pen. It's a bit like a notepad, but –

Host: - It feels like paper.

Haugli: Yes. This has been hugely successful. It is actually one of our unicorns, with a brand that has been built very quickly and an outstanding, unique product. They succeeded in a niche market and became a global brand within, I would say, five years – now someone will correct me for saying five years; it was probably two or six, but that does not matter – so, reMarkable. And that is a remarkable story. We need more …

Anholt: And why has it got an English name?

Haugli: I think, to reach a global market.

Anholt: Yeah, but that's a common misunderstanding.

Haugli: What would you call them if you …?

Anholt: I'd call it something unpronounceable Norwegian.

Host: With an ‘Ø’ in it!

Anholt: Absolutely.

Haugli: When I was an exchange student in Australia ...

Anholt: I’d call it, I call it Frognerseteren.

Haugli: Frognerseteren, very good. I hope they're listening and that they call it ... That's a really easy term, isn't it?

Anholt: Because people … forgive me for interrupting. But people so often get this wrong. They say make it suitable for global markets, give it an English name. But that is a cop out. It makes you anonymous. And then people say, oh, don't give it a complicated name because they won't be able to say it. That's the whole point! It's fascinating if people can't say it. And you force them to spend time thinking about it and laughing as they mispronounce it, and learning how to misspell it. And you know you got to give people a bit of something to chew on.

Haugli: Yes, fantastic. Well, I hope they're listening. I was an exchange student in Australia when I was 16 or 17, and the local shop stocked a shampoo brand called Norska, which obviously means Norwegian. It had nothing to do with Norway, but it was such a clear reminder of what Norway was associated with globally at the time: cleanliness and blonde hair, yes. And then … you know, everything's lovely, with that fresh-air scent … So I think this is also a reminder for us … why isn't that a Norwegian brand?

Host: Well, when I was a student in the US, I had a fridge called Norge, spelt just like we spell Norway in Norwegian.

Haugli: Yes, N-o-r-g-e.

Anholt: This is a phenomenon that I wrote about years and years and years ago. I call them cuckoo brands.

Haugli: Yes, exactly - kicking out the ...

Anholt: That's right. They lay their eggs in other countries' nests. And … one of the examples I gave was that the number one brand of chewing gum in Italy is called Brooklyn. There's a more or less accurate drawing of the Brooklyn Bridge on the packet, and it's made by the Perfetti company. It has never left Italy in its long history, but chewing gum obviously has to be American. And it's worked very well for them, you know. You have to fight back.

Host: So that's one of the things you've mentioned. If we want to increase the value of Norway as a brand – and, I suppose, of Norwegian companies too – we need to be more Norwegian.

Anholt: Absolutely. I mean you, you know, be yourself. Everybody else is taken.

Haugli: That's good. So, Frognerseteren rather than something remarkable; something more Norwegian. Very interesting. And I think it's also counter-intuitive for us because, given the size of our country and our limited success in building brands, we're very cautious about how we approach it and perhaps make mistakes. I mean, both companies and we as a nation make mistakes.

Anholt: I think you have Groucho Marx syndrome. You remember the American comedian Groucho Marx? He used to say I would never join a club that would have somebody like me for a member.

Haugli: Really well phrased by the way. Yes.

Anholt: He was a smart guy. He was, he was smarter than his brother Karl. But I do think that's a syndrome that countries like Norway need to be aware of – this tendency to diminish yourselves. And there's a natural habit of modesty. I mentioned at the conference that almost every Norwegian I meet finds a reason to say within the first five minutes that we're a small country.

Like I didn't know. I don't think that Norway is a small country. In my mind as a Brit and a near neighbour, I don't perceive Norway as being a small country. I perceive it as being an admirable country. Its size doesn't interest me. Anyway, it is quite big. It just doesn't have any very many Norwegians in it.

Haugli: The second longest coastline in the world.

Anholt: There you go.

Haugli: And the 7th largest commercial fleet … and a large energy sector.

Anholt: I wasn't thinking of shipping fleets, to be honest, but …

Haugli: No, I know, but I … these are just some facts that can give us the kind of self-confidence that you're looking for.

Anholt: Yeah ... the only thing that can give you self-confidence is success. And I think there’s something about these kinds of exercises, whether it’s country-of-origin branding for products or public diplomacy on a global scale, alongside all the other things you have to do – including exporting Norwegian cuisine. Taken together, all of this does have an impact on the population.
And I’ve seen this in other countries, particularly South Korea, which has perhaps been the greatest miracle of all. It has gone from being largely unknown outside Asia to having many tens of millions of devoted fans around the world. And look at the impact that has had on the Korean people themselves. They haven’t become arrogant – the Koreans are far too delightful for that. But their confidence? Hmm, they look a foot taller than they used to.

Haugli: And this brings us to soft power. South Korea is widely known for its popular culture. At the Export Conference, you described Norway as, I believe, a ‘soft power superpower’. Could you elaborate on that? What does it mean, and why do we deserve that description, given that we are a small country and very modest?

Anholt: It's not a … it's not a technical term, 'soft power superpower'. That's just me being populist. But what I mean is a country that punches above its weight in terms of its image. So if you were to measure Norway, not by its GDP – because its economy is unexpectedly large, although most people don't know that; they just think it's another Scandinavian country – but if you were to rank Norway according to the classic, traditional criteria of hard power and major-power status, it certainly wouldn't be number 11 in the world, right? But in terms of image … Have I got that right? Is it number 11 in the Nation Brands Index?

Haugli: 14, I think. (Editor’s note: Norway ranks as number 12 in the 2024 report.)

Anholt: OK, well, somewhere around there. Certainly in the top quarter, at least. So it punches above its weight. Its image may be even better than the reality, but it certainly has a strong presence in people's minds. And it's admired almost as much as if it were a major power.

Haugli: Which is such an astonishing finding.

Anholt: To you, perhaps. To me that seems normal.

Host: You mentioned two things in your lecture that I found really interesting. One was the perception of a country's morale, and the other was humanity's mood. Can you actually measure that – and what is it?

Anholt: What I was talking about was morality. It's not a great word for this, but what I sort of mean by that is the perception that the country is a responsible player in the international community. So that's the number one driver, statistically speaking, of a positive, powerful national image. Why does that matter? Because if you have a powerful and positive national image, you make more money. There are other reasons why that's good as well, but it's often the first one that people care about. Governments, especially. So the better your image, the more foreign investment you get, the greater the premium your products can command in foreign markets, the more talent you attract and the more migrants of every kind you attract. From humble refugees right through to digital nomads and high-level tourists, and I think all of those are good things. So the number one driver of all of that is perception. It's basically about people feeling glad that you exist, and when I'm explaining this to people around the world, I often use Norway as an example. I swear I do. And people say, 'Well, give us an example.' I say, 'OK, let's take Norway.' Most people know next to nothing about Norway, except that, firstly, it's in Europe, and that's good. They don't know about the European Union; that's just a technicality. But they know it's in Europe and they know it's Scandinavian, which is even better because that's a subset of … a premium subset of a premium region. And they've also heard of something called the Oslo Peace Accords. And they think that Oslo is probably somewhere in Norway, right? And they've also heard of the Nobel Peace Prize. And somewhere in the back of their minds, there's a connection with Oslo, and they're a bit confused because they think, 'Well, is it Sweden, or is it …?' But anyway, they're all the same country, right? And this combination, this … this is how country images are formed. It's so accidental and so superficial. But we're talking about enormous numbers of people who don't spend very much time thinking about other countries, and that funny little constellation of faintly twinkling celestial bodies is what makes Norway a superpower. And that's why, when people ask me, 'What can we do to improve, expand or enhance our brand?', I'm always tempted to say, 'Why would you even bother?' Because it's already so good. Just work out how to use it. Now is the time to start leveraging it, for your own benefit, of course, but, in the spirit of the good country, for the benefit of others too, because international collaboration and cooperation are what have made the Nordic region so admired today. So you have to keep doing that.
And so, as I said at the conference, if you really, really want to enhance your brand value even further, just be more Norwegian. Work out what that actually means and do more of it. Do it more visibly, more imaginatively, more creatively, more regularly and more strategically. And you can't fail to … What the whole Nordic region needs – and Norway no less than any of the others – is simply to be better known. The signal from brand Norway starts to fade quite rapidly as you move away from Oslo. And of course, you're well known in the Nordic region. Of course, of course. And of course, you're well known in Western and Northern Europe. Of course, of course. But as soon as you get down to the Mediterranean or the middle of the Atlantic, the signal starts to fade very quickly. And there are outliers in East Asia who seem to know all about Norway – heaven knows why – and love it. But Central Asia? What are you talking about? Africa? What are you talking about? Most of the Americas? What are you talking about? So if there's one really important task for Norway in the coming decades, it's to teach the world what Norway is, what the Nordic region is, how you fit together and what your values are. Because those values are becoming more valuable as politics becomes nastier – and it's becoming very nasty, very quickly. There's a pandemic of narrow-minded nativism sweeping across Europe and the globe. And in that context, you, Norway, and your fellow Nordic countries are the torchbearers of progressive liberal democratic values, whether you like it or not. And the interesting question is whether, at that point, the Nordic region becomes more of a sword than a shield. I don't know, but the fact is that you find yourselves on one side of a rapidly deepening divide in the world. These are your values, and you're going to have to defend them. And nobody is better placed than you.

Haugli: Food for thought. I was ...

Anholt: Scary shit, as we say in English!

Haugli: Absolutely. You're absolutely right. I wanted to move on to something lighter. And someone … Norway has some of the world's most famous athletes, such as Haalland, who plays for Manchester City.

Anholt: Does it? And what's Manchester ... Is that a football team?

Haugli: Right, exactly. Very interesting … and Ødegaard, who is the captain at Arsenal – that’s also a football team, by the way. We also did very well at the Summer Olympics and, of course, astonishingly well at the Winter Olympics. I mean, we are a sporting nation. I was just wondering whether this plays a role at all, or whether this … and the reason I’m asking is that we see a lot of companies using athletes in their marketing and promotion. So does it … does it matter?

Anholt: Sure it does not, not to me.

Haugli: Yes, you're obviously not very interested in football.

Anholt: I'm very ignorant about sport. I dislike movement of all sorts. I think people should stand very still and then no accidents would happen ...

Haugli: This is true, though, I mean it is very dangerous to do sports so…

Anholt: It matters to the people who like sport, which is the rest of humanity apart from me. I think that the trouble is that, for example, having a famous footballer from your country is universal. Every country has a famous footballer. It's like every country has a famous beer brand, and so forth. So that in itself is nothing particularly special. And please don't kid yourselves that it is.
I mean, Cameroon has got famous footballers. And has that made Cameroon world-famous? Not really. Having said all of that, I don't see any reason why, at the more practical, tangible, detailed level, a company shouldn't. It's a bit of a no-brainer, you know. If you can ... if you can use a famous figure to endorse … it's very old-fashioned marketing. It's quite quaint, but it still works. So why ever not?
I think, at the higher level, is sport somehow going to be part of the way that Norway becomes better understood, better known and even more highly valued around the world? I doubt it, because the sports you're really big in aren't mainstream sports. But who knows? Fashions do change. Look at how aggressively the United States has been promoting what we in Britain call American football and what they call football. That's becoming … it is catching on in lots of other countries, and basketball is too.

Haugli: At some point the term World Series might actually become true.

Anholt: That’s right. We'll see. So I mean if you if you did desperately want this, then you know there are sufficient examples in recent history to show that you can take an entire sector and you can push it globally. It costs a lot of money. It takes a lot of time, but it can be worth it. And the way that … I come back to Korea again, the way that South Korea managed to push Korean cuisine to join that short, privileged list of world cuisines, it's been a remarkable achievement. I have no idea how much it cost them to do that. It was me that recommended they do it by the way, and plus encouraging and stimulating popular media ...

Haugli: Yes, and K-pop music, which is a global phenomenon.

Anholt: Absolutely. So, so Gangnam Style, which is a direct result of that strategy. These things can be done. And you need a large sovereign wealth fund to do it. Hmmm.

Haugli: Well, I think we'll have a tough job ahead of us persuading our sovereign wealth fund to develop consumer strategies … and N-pop.

Host: Pop, but obviously there are still many things we can work on, and there are ways we can raise the profile of Norway and the region even further. Companies that want to learn more about this, including the 'Made in Norway' label, can visit businessnorway.com.
I'm afraid that's all we have time for today. Thank you so much for joining us, Simon Anholt.

Anholt: You're most welcome

Host: It was a pleasure to have you here. Thank you, Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann. We’ll see and hear from you again on Innopodden.

Guest: Anjali Bhatnagar, founder and CEO of Tørn

From Innovation Norway: CEO Håkon Haugli and

Host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Update: Tørn has gone bankrupt. The company filed for bankruptcy shortly after we published this episode. However, we believe it may still be of great interest and value to our listeners.

Host: They are founders of innovative companies, driven by a desire to create something new and solve challenges for their customers. They bring fresh perspectives and different ideas. But they face more barriers than others. They are female founders.
Few women start businesses in Norway. In a series of Innopodden episodes, we meet some of them.

At Tørn, you can buy a fireplace no one else wants, a compressor at half price, a staircase for the loft, a few metres of plastic sheeting or a sauna door – if you absolutely must have one – without breaking the bank. Tørn is not a new competitor to Maxbo and Byggmakker, but works alongside them. It sells the stock gathering dust in the furthest corner or at the back of builders’ merchants’ warehouses. Anjali Bhatnagar is the founder of Tørn. Armed with a PhD in physics and leadership experience from companies such as Telenor, Geodata, Creuna and Halogen, she struck out on her own. Now she takes a turn as a guest with Håkon Haugli and me, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann.

Welcome to Innopodden!

Bhatnagar: Thank you.

Host: We really appreciate you joining us. At Tørn, you estimate that five to eight per cent of the stock held by builders' merchants goes unsold. The industry has an annual turnover of tens of billions of kroner, so that adds up to a significant amount. But your background was in completely different industries. What sparked your interest in surplus goods from the building materials industry?

Bhatnagar: It actually happened quite by chance. And the way it happened is quite funny. I had never worked in retail, although I had worked in many different industries. Then, in September 2019, I read an article in Aftenposten about the issue of surplus stock. I was very surprised by the scale of it, which I could quickly estimate in my head. The article also highlighted how much of this stock ends up in storage and is eventually thrown away. I care deeply about the environment, but I am also very commercially minded. So when I read the article, my hypothesis was that whenever a shop has stock it has been unable to sell, there is a buyer out there, but the shop has no way of reaching them. The idea, then, was that bringing all the surplus stock together in one place and marketing it to relevant customer groups would increase the likelihood of it being sold and put back into use, rather than stored away and eventually discarded.

Haugli: Do you buy the goods, then?

Bhatnagar: No …

Haugli: … no, you're an intermediary... You're a platform connecting the two.

Bhatnagar: We are a technology company specialising in ... so that was the basic idea. And again – you know, you don't have to ... I had no ambition to become an expert in the builders' merchant trade or building materials, but my background is simply this: OK, how can we solve problems by using technology and focusing on users? What are the problems, and how do users experience them? So Tørn is a technology company specialising in precisely the technology needed to make that whole process much easier. We also specialise in digital marketing, because attracting bargain hunters from across the country to the platform is an art in itself, and it helps those products find a new owner.

Host: If I ran a hardware shop or builders' merchant – which I don't, of course, but … if I did – and had a growing stockpile of goods that I needed to clear, what would I have to do to sell them on Tørn?

Bhatnagar: Yes, that is exactly the issue, isn't it? You have tried to sell those products, reduced the price and put them in the clearance section, but ultimately that has not worked. So what do you do with them? Today, you might turn to Finn, but then you would have to create each listing manually: 'I have a compressor, I need to take photos of it and describe it as accurately as possible.' It is far too time-consuming. But if you contact us, you will get a Tørn account. Then all you need to do is go into your warehouse and use your phone to scan the barcodes on the products that have been left sitting there. We have technology that uses those codes to retrieve all the product information, images and technical specifications. All of this is essential for people buying building materials. These are not dubious Finn listings where you do not know where the products came from. The listings go live on Tørn and become available to the buyers who visit Tørn regularly. They can also see that the products are not from some random importer or private individual. They come from Kjetil's well-known shop, and that is clearly stated. So buyers know they are dealing with a reputable retailer or supplier they can trust, that the products are high quality, and that they are new and unused, with a full warranty and right of withdrawal – all at a fraction of the original price.

Haugli: Are they professional buyers?

Bhatnagar: It’s a mix, but 90 per cent are consumers – people like you and me taking on a home improvement project. The other 10 to 12 per cent are small trade businesses, such as building contractors, who can also pick up real bargains. And there’s no uncertainty: all the product documentation is included, which is a benefit, right? Another difference from Finn is that we’ve focused heavily on the needs of the people running the shops. They don’t have time to spend ages selling these products. That’s why the products get thrown away – it’s easier just to put them into storage, as the shops want to focus on running their business and their core activity: selling products at full price.

Haugli: Exactly, and it can almost have a negative effect if you're so desperate to get rid of those windows that you put them right in the middle of the shop.

Bhatnagar: It looks cluttered, doesn't it? Yes, and it doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it? Suddenly, it's... Yes, so again, Tørn's whole value proposition is that, as you said at the outset, we're on the same team. We're not competitors; we simply solve a problem for them once they've done everything they can to sell the products.

Haugli: I also really like how you can scan the code and the whole process is fully automated. It just goes straight in. Because you make a very good point: it is quite important that – if we take the window as an example – it is not even a centimetre too large, as that would effectively make it unusable. And it is all fully automated, rather than someone having to measure and weigh it and upload photos manually…

Bhatnagar: And take loads of photos – bad photos, right? Another thing I haven't mentioned is that we've developed the technology even further to make it even easier. We've realised that the key is for it to happen almost automatically. So, with some of our retail chain partners, we've reached agreements with their central management teams to receive ready-made lists. These are added to the Tørn platform through integrations with the chains' own systems, so the products are transferred to Tørn automatically. When a store logs in to Tørn, it can see lists of all the products that have become surplus stock.

Haugli: Yes, perhaps a certain amount of time has passed since it arrived in the shop, or something like that?

Bhatnagar: We have our own processes for that. When they say, 'OK, we've given up on this product because it hasn't had any sales in the past 18 months,' it is marked as ready. The shop then … looks at the list and clicks publish, publish, publish. They don't need to do anything else.

Haugli: Do you find that customers are motivated by the opportunity to sell it, or is it also about making a little money? Less than they would from selling it in the usual way, perhaps, or is sustainability the motivation? Do they see it as a smart contribution to the circular economy, or is it simply practical and easy – or is it a combination of these things?

Bhatnagar: It’s a bit of both, and it depends somewhat on whether you’re talking to a store manager or an executive at a retail chain. To be completely honest, the alternative today means having working capital tied up in those products. The longer they wait, the more the products lose value, while the costs continue to mount – storage isn’t free. Nor is disposing of the products. It’s quite expensive now. So, by selling on Tørn as soon as you decide, ‘I don’t want to spend any more time on this,’ you release some of that working capital. And liquidity is incredibly important when the industry is going through difficult times. You also avoid additional costs and … I don’t think sustainability is the main driver at store level, but it does free up warehouse space, allowing new products to come in. At head-office level, there’s also a sense that, yes, we’re doing something worthwhile and sustainable. So the motivations vary depending on who we’re working with.

Haugli: But let’s say I’m… a keen DIY renovator, and I go onto Tørn and see that Kjetil’s hardware store has four windows that are perfect for my renovation project. What do I do then?

Bhatnagar: You shop just as you would … you know, if you go to tørn.no, it looks like an online shop. That’s one part of our solution, right? You shop on Tørn just as you would at any other online shop. In fact, shopping on Tørn is even smoother than shopping at a conventional builders’ merchant, because that’s what we specialise in. So you select the products, and when you see the four windows from Kjetil’s shop, you add them to your basket. Then, when you go to checkout, we can see that Kjetil’s shop is in Hønefoss, for example, while you’re in Oslo. So we ask whether you want to collect them yourself or have them delivered to you.

Haugli: Yes, I can choose that.

Bhatnagar: And because we have full control over the product data, we know the size of the windows, how they are packaged and how much they weigh. They need to go on a pallet, so you also see the shipping cost at checkout. Shipping is often expensive, of course, because these are large items. But you can choose whether to have them delivered or collect them yourself, and then you pay.

Haugli: Yes, and then … I choose to collect them myself. I get a receipt from the system, then I go to Kjetil's shop in Hønefoss and say hello, and there they are, ready for me. So then I can collect them?

Host: Then they'll be ready!

Bhatnagar: Yes, because once you've finished paying with Klarna, Vipps or whatever, the order is complete, and a notification goes to Kjetil, who manages the Tørn solution – the most important part of the Tørn solution today. It's how we work with the shops. And then you see, 'Oh, an order has come in, and the four windows that have been gathering dust have now been sold' – to someone called Håkon, who's coming from Oslo to collect them.

Host: Finally!

Bhatnagar: OK, then I'll get it ready. It's on a pallet in a corner. You've also printed out a packing slip from the Tørn solution and attached it to the goods to show that they're due to be collected. You have a deadline for collecting them, and then you go to the shop and say, 'I'm here to collect the Tørn goods.' You show them on your phone that you've paid, and then you collect them. Done.

Haugli: Yes, exactly. Yes – with a full warranty and everything, because these are new products. It’s a really clever idea!

Bhatnagar: You can make really significant savings. Sometimes, depending on how urgently shops need to free up space, they will practically give things away. You can get 70 per cent off, right? On our side, this is also built into our platform's algorithms, because we know that price is an extremely important factor for shoppers. That is why we are trying to establish a separate category called surplus goods. It makes sense because you save a lot of money. You are buying new products, and it is the right thing to do. That is also why we are working hard to ensure that everything listed on Tørn is guaranteed to be surplus stock and available at the lowest price, rather than allowing ordinary products to slip in. We simply want the concept to be very clear.

Haugli: Yes, we ... we do quite a lot of work on the circular economy at Innovation Norway, covering everything from waste management to how you can ... use design, which you know well, to build the product's life cycle into it, in a way, and much more. We're in contact with many companies, and someone once told me that the generation after ours will think about waste the way we think about smoking indoors. I mean, there are such enormous amounts of waste, not least commercial waste, and we don't really have good systems for dealing with it. Because what do we do with it? Well, we burn it, bury it or, at best, chop it into tiny pieces. Do you agree? Do you also see it that way – that you're actually helping to solve a significant waste problem?

Bhatnagar: There is this waste hierarchy – if you're familiar with it – and we're right at the top, working to ensure that fewer things enter that hierarchy, right? Because before you start thinking about reuse, repurposing those products or simply selling them second-hand and so on, the most important thing you can do is ensure that the five to eight per cent never enter the hierarchy in the first place.

Host: Exactly, so that they are used as intended.

Bhatnagar: Yes. So that’s where we see our role. What I see working well with the Tørn concept is that we’re a kind of platform that facilitates sales between sellers across the country and users. We’re also ready to put the necessary framework in place when the market for reused building materials becomes relevant, although I see a number of challenges there. And we’re very... as a start-up, we have to stay very focused, right? But we’re also set up for when that market begins to mature. Once someone takes responsibility for reused materials and ensures that those products are properly documented, they’ll still need a sales platform as well, or...

Haugli: Yes, so you see that as the next phase?

Bhatnagar: It's a … phase 3. So, well, basically, there are a few challenges, but that's what start-up life is like. You can have a vision and a roadmap, but you have to take it one day at a time.

Haugli: Yes, tell us a little about that. What is it like to be an entrepreneur?

Bhatnagar: It's extremely tough and … not for everyone, really. But you also learn an incredible amount. As I've said … and I've written several articles about this too, you need to be a certain type of person for it to suit you. It's not for – and I can honestly say this, hand on heart – it's not for everyone. It's a high-risk pursuit – you have to enjoy the rollercoaster!

Host: But give us a little insight into where Tørn stands today. How big is the company now? How many products change hands through your solutions? How many employees do you have? And so on.

Bhatnagar: I think … we've experienced tremendous growth. I think we went live with a minimum viable solution three months after I read an article in Aftenposten. And then growth really took off … during the pandemic, from 2020 to 2023. We doubled the number of agreements with our partner locations and the businesses selling those goods, and our turnover just kept growing. Looking at the figures, over the four years we've been operating, we've generated more than NOK 150 million in sales and completed over 110,000 transactions – around 112,000, according to the figures I checked early this morning.
So we've proved that it works as it is. We're solving a problem for retailers, but it has been a real rollercoaster, and in 2024 we were hit by what I call a 'perfect storm'. Marketplaces are a classic chicken-and-egg situation. They're very easy to understand, but extremely difficult to make work because you have to work on both sides simultaneously, all the time. They're two completely different target groups: retailers and shoppers, right? They require entirely different approaches. And it's fairly capital-intensive at the outset. That's true of every marketplace. If you look at Airbnb, for example, it took them many, many years to build critical mass. So it requires capital, and everyone knows how tough the capital market became from 2023 onwards. At the same time, we had to shift our focus away from growth, which had been our mandate from the outset: 'You need to grow now; it works.' The question then became: 'OK, how quickly can you become profitable?' That was one challenge, while the entire building materials sector also began to decline towards the end of 2023. So in 2024, there was a severe shortage of capital, and the building materials sector entered a mode where – even though we'd proved that Tørn works and users praised how easy it was, and so on – the people who were supposed to use the Tørn solution in the shops suddenly found themselves short-staffed. The retail chains also had their backs against the wall and needed to cut costs, so they thought, 'OK, I can do that myself.' Surplus stock was no longer the priority, right? The focus was on the top line and how to maintain it. No one cared much about sustainability or what would happen … Warehouses were full, but they could become even fuller. And when you're trying to cut costs, you try to do as much as possible yourself. Those are just two of the factors that hit us; there were many others. But our challenge – or my challenge – was simply to keep control of the money coming in and going out, so we had to reduce our headcount. It was incredibly sad, because we'd built up such strong momentum. We had to go through the whole process of reducing headcount and cutting costs, while also taking a very critical look at the issues we'd ignored during our first four years – issues we'd essentially thrown some money and people at and said we'd solve later, once we'd secured growth. We had to examine exactly where we were losing our margins and where friction was arising and costing us money. So 2024 was an exceptionally challenging and instructive year for us.

Haugli: Do you think you're out of the woods now?

Bhatnagar: A tunnel, in the sense that I’m looking at what we need to prioritise now. From experience, we know that … we’re a learning organisation. We’ve always adapted quickly, and now we don’t know how we could have –? What we do know is that the market is declining at the moment, but it will pick up again in 2025. And when the focus shifts away from top-line growth again, there will be consolidation – you saw that in Finansavisen too. It’s going to happen. No one in the industry wants to spend time dealing with surplus goods, and that issue is more pressing than ever. It’s just that … it isn’t reaching Tørn to the extent it should, so I do feel that the market will turn as well. We’re using the time ahead of us to really … focus entirely on ensuring that the model we’ve built becomes even more sustainable.

Haugli: … Both financially and from an environmental perspective. It also makes good business sense for these building materials chains to free up the capital and time tied up in products they cannot sell. So it is actually a very good fit, even in a declining market, to work with partners like you who solve this problem. But then again, anyone running a business has many things on their agenda, so …

Bhatnagar: I know … you know, everyone has their challenges, and my hypothesis – which we have now proven – is that it is far too costly for each of these businesses to sell their surplus goods on their own. It requires a great deal of marketing, because the target audience is completely different from your usual one.

Haugli: And there’s not much money in it, so the margin is, well … no.

Bhatnagar: And there is little money in it, so you have nothing to gain from spending a lot of money selling something where you have already lost your margins. But it makes sense for an organisation like ours, because we are open to everyone and solve the problem on everyone's behalf.

Haugli: Exactly. Yes, and on the other side of the equation, customers who are renovating or running a small joinery workshop, or whatever it may be, can find lots of things with you – without having to travel …

Bhatnagar: Yes. Not just … like, you have to read 40 brochures, or you just check ...

Haugli: … yes, at least driving from one builders’ merchant to another to find four windows here or two windows there, that sort of thing. Yes, no, this makes a lot of sense. It’s really exciting to hear you talk about it, and I’m very pleased that you carried out that consolidation in 2024. What you’re describing is something we’ve seen over the past year, with a slowdown on the capital side – or the investor side, you could say – but also among pilot customers, if we can call them that. You’re past the pilot phase now, but for many start-ups, their most important task is securing their first customers. And in a market where things are trending downwards – or perhaps not even downwards, but where there is a great deal of uncertainty – that in itself is more challenging than it used to be. So 2024 has been a challenging year for start-ups.

Bhatnagar: Absolutely, and I also feel that it’s … again, it’s about … what it takes to be an entrepreneur. You have to – you simply have to hold on to your vision, but you also have to be very open and ready to pivot.

Host: But you went into this with extensive business experience. Were you prepared to face these kinds of challenges?

Bhatnagar: No one can be prepared for that. I thought that, having worked with so many different companies, as well as being a consultant and working for others, I was quite well equipped. But the particularly challenging aspect of being an entrepreneur is the constant lack of capital and time. Because, again, you are always short on time, which means you cannot cling to fixed ideas about how things should be done. You need to have a very, very firm grasp of the problem you are solving and its scale, while remaining open-minded. I have some hypotheses – we work very much on a hypothesis-driven basis. We think something will work, so we test it as quickly as possible. If it does not, you simply move on to the next question: what is the best way to solve the problem and get as far as possible with as little money as possible? It is not like working for a large company. Even in corporate ventures, no one loses sleep over whether there will be enough money to pay your small team next month, because the money always comes from somewhere else. You simply have a task to complete. I actually find this useful, because it forces you to adopt a very commercial mindset and recognise that the money will not come by itself. You really have to deliver results every single day. So that was something I was not prepared for, because financial worries were not something I had experienced much before when working for larger companies.

Host: You belong to the fairly exclusive group of female entrepreneurs. New figures show that only 20 per cent of the companies that received funding from us last year were led by women or had a majority of women in their management teams. What are the main challenges you have faced as a female entrepreneur?

Bhatnagar: None.

Host: No?

Bhatnagar: Not as a female founder. I’ve faced the same challenges as any other founder, really, so that hasn’t actually been an issue. I also feel that because I’m a woman with a strong technology background, working with a technology company that I’ve built, and because I have dark skin, it has worked to my advantage: people remember me more easily than many others. So I don’t feel that I’ve encountered anything I would describe as … Nor do I think that … I’ve had hundreds of rejections from investors, but there has always been a reason. Either I approached the wrong investor – not wrong as such, but one who doesn’t work with the type of sector we operate in – or we were at the wrong stage for them. And, importantly, I always reflect on … what could I … I always ask for feedback afterwards. Then I consider whether perhaps I could have done a better job, or whether I didn’t have the figures they were looking for. Perhaps the business case wasn’t compelling enough. So that has always been my experience of the hundreds of rejections I’ve received. It has never had anything to do with me being a woman.

Host: That's very good to hear.

Haugli: Yes, that's very good. And relatable, too. The thing is … people experience things differently – we're all different. We experience things differently, but through our contact with women-founded companies, we also hear that many experience what you describe – neutral feedback, but sometimes being different can also be an advantage. If four companies are pitching and one is led by someone who looks and acts differently, that can be a plus. So it's important to bear that in mind as well. Looking at the bigger picture, one challenge for us in Norway – and one we share with many other countries – is that too few women study technology, and too few women start businesses … or work in the private sector more broadly. Women in Norway are much more likely to work in the public sector, and both of these factors make them less likely to start their own business. We must assume, I think, that talent is distributed equally. Women and men aren't inherently different when it comes to … taking risks, either. I sometimes hear people claim otherwise, but I think that's nonsense. Norwegian women travel into space and cross the South Pole, so that argument simply doesn't hold up. Personal characteristics vary far more between individuals within the same gender category than they do between women and men as groups. But there are structural reasons why we have too few women entrepreneurs. This matters not simply because they are women, but because we need many more talented entrepreneurs across a wide range of fields. That's why it's important to have this discussion and ensure that the measures we take are based on the right premises. And that's why what you're saying is so refreshing.

Bhatnagar: And, you know, I completely agree with everything you said, but I would add one more thing. The world is changing so much, and we face such major challenges. You also need to pay close attention to the kinds of problems that are particularly important to solve right now. I would also say that, yes, having a technology background gives you a better starting point for coming up with ideas. But that is also just a snapshot of where we are right now. So, if you want to work on a new idea in fashion, interior design or something related to the home, for example, that is obviously not where investors are currently focusing. I therefore think you need to keep an eye on where things stand: Where are the greatest challenges, and where are the greatest investment opportunities? Then ask yourself, 'Do I have an idea that fits the current landscape?' If not, you need to be prepared to fight that much harder.

Haugli: Yes, I think you have to fight regardless, but perhaps a little harder in that case. What you’re saying is very interesting, and I completely agree with you. I think there are some areas where we’ll see more innovation in the future, such as our health services, because the need is so great. We simply can’t solve every challenge in healthcare by throwing more people and money at it. We need innovation in this area. We haven’t yet reached the point where we see the thriving culture of innovation we might hope for, but we are seeing a great deal of good innovation in healthcare. And to bring it back to the topic, there are many women in this field. Being a woman neither qualifies nor disqualifies you, of course. But it’s very important that innovation also happens in areas with a high proportion of women, particularly in the public sector. And you certainly don’t need to be a technologist or work for a technology company to become an entrepreneur – quite the opposite. Many other kinds of experience can be valuable. I recently heard about a nurse who invented a much better sheet because it absorbed moisture and improved the patient experience. She was in the process of commercialising the product. That’s just one tiny example among many thousands of innovations that aren’t driven by the digital technology we so often talk about.
We need more of this.

Host: You've already touched on this, but if you were to offer one piece of advice to women who are considering starting their own business, …

Haugli: … or men …
Host: … what would it be? – Yes, but particularly for women in this context.

Bhatnagar: I think you have to recognise that it will be tough, but at the same time, you should be motivated by how much you will learn. In my own experience, those four years felt more like 15, and it is great fun if you are the kind of person who enjoys solving problems. My advice would be: if you are not going to take risks like this in Norway, where would you do it? There are so many good support schemes available, so you just have to go for it. At the same time, be very open and curious. Another piece of advice is that, whatever your background, you should always keep track of the money coming in and going out, and maintain that balance. It may sound very simple, but it really is about staying on top of your finances. The sooner you can find a way to generate income, the better. It simply makes life a little easier.

Haugli: That's good advice.

Host: Very good advice. Thank you, Anjali Bhatnagar, founder of Tørn. Kjetil's hardware and building supplies shop is now closed, and with that, I'll say goodbye …

Haugli: The windows have been bought.

Host: … thank you. Today's customer was Håkon Haugli.

Bhatnagar: Thank you, it was a pleasure to be here today.

Host: We'll be back with another episode of Innopodden.

This summary was produced using artificial intelligence. Our employees have quality-assured the content.

Guest: Ronald Griffin, CEO of Seen

From Innovation Norway: CEO Håkon Haugli and

Presenter Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann introduces Ronald Griffin, the man behind Norwegian technology company Seen, known for creating adverts that speak directly to the recipient, often using their name and personalised content.

The host explains that Ronald Griffin was named on Forbes’ list of the most talented people under 30 and speaks at major conferences. Griffin has achieved his success without any formal education, having left school at the age of 14. He explains that curiosity and a passion for creating products and solutions have been his driving force, and that he began working on solving a range of challenges from an early age. This led him to establish Seen with three other entrepreneurs in 2017.

The technology behind personalised video

The host and Håkon Haugli ask how the technology works and how it can, for example, make Barack Obama speak directly to a recipient. Griffin explains that it combines data from sources such as customer databases with video templates, making the message personal and relevant to the recipient. This could mean that a customer hears about their own products, or that a voter receives information about relevant political issues.

Griffin explains that video is the most demanding format to generate, and that they use both AI and traditional technologies to create unique, credible videos. The aim is to make recipients feel seen and that the message speaks directly to them, while enabling the brand to use data in a new way and increase conversions. He emphasises the importance of authenticity and trust, and says they avoid going too far with deepfakes and synthetic voices.

When asked about his favourite projects, Griffin highlights the collaboration with Chelsea Football Club, where they used Eden Hazard to launch a new kit. The video was personalised with the recipient's name on the shirt and combined recorded footage with synthetic voices. Griffin also mentions collaborations with other major brands, such as Nespresso.

Commercialisation and internationalisation

Griffin talks about Seen's commercial journey and how the company has grown from its Norwegian roots, supported by a strong team in Oslo and Stockholm. They have gradually expanded their international focus, using their own products to reach new customers, including by sending personalised videos to companies such as Amazon. He describes the journey as challenging, particularly for a Scandinavian company, but they have succeeded in attracting major international customers such as the Boston Red Sox and Chicago Blackhawks.

Recruitment and team

Griffin shares a recruitment story in which one of the co-founders was recruited through an online zombie game. He emphasises that it is all about people, and that you need to think differently to find specialist expertise, particularly in commercial roles and development.

Investors and capital

Griffin says they recognised the need for expertise and capital early on and approached the market to attract investors. They eventually caught the attention of Petter Stordalen and his communications agency, which has been a long-term strategic investor. He emphasises that video and generative AI are particularly capital-intensive, and that investors’ long-term commitment has been crucial to the company’s success.

Challenges during the pandemic

When the pandemic hit, Seen experienced a dramatic downturn. Everything ground to a halt, and the company had only enough capital left for another six weeks. Griffin describes how the team decided to keep fighting, and how teamwork and the efforts of employees, suppliers and customers helped them through the crisis. He reflects on the importance of treating capital with respect and maintaining control during the growth phase.

Views on bankruptcy and startup culture

Griffin believes it is important to talk more about success stories, but also to support those who try and fail. He believes Norway is a great country in which to start and build a business, and that it is important to champion those who dare to push boundaries.

The host and Håkon Haugli also discuss the media attention surrounding bankruptcies, and the need for better systems and measures to reduce risk for entrepreneurs. They emphasise the importance of learning from mistakes and setbacks, and how a strong ecosystem with more successful companies will encourage reinvestment and value creation in Norway.

Griffin says that Seen has an international environment, and that many people see the value of living and working in Norway despite the weather and the long, dark winters. He believes Norway has unique perspectives and structures that provide a competitive advantage, but that more risk capital and expertise are needed to help companies go even further.

The road ahead for Seen

Finally, the host asks about Seen's plans for the future. Griffin says they have successfully built the platform and technology, and that the next step is to structure and scale up the commercial side internationally. The goal is to attract more high-quality customers and succeed globally, with support from investors and Innovation Norway.

This summary was produced using artificial intelligence. Innovation Norway staff have quality-assured the content.

Guest: Kjetil Krogstad, dance influencer

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

The conversation opens with host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann introducing Kjetil Krogstad as a guest on Innopodden. Krogstad has left his day job and now makes a living from dancing, giving presentations and hosting events. He has become an internet sensation with 1.4 million followers on social media after he began posting dance videos on TikTok and Instagram. His breakthrough came when he dressed up as Jonas Gahr Støre for Halloween, and the video went viral.

The transition from a nine-to-five job to becoming an influencer

The host asks what it felt like to leave his job as a nursery manager to pursue a career in social media. Krogstad says it was a long process marked by uncertainty, but that he ultimately took the leap because opportunities on social media grew so much in 2024. He encourages others to live more in the moment and take chances, adding that he had to follow his own advice when he left his job.

Social media and brand building

The host and Haugli ask Krogstad about his most-viewed video. He describes a video in which he emerges from behind a tree holding snow and a cup of coffee – a video that has been viewed more than 20 million times. The coffee cup has become part of his trademark, and people often ask him about it when they meet him.

Krogstad and Haugli discuss how distinctly Norwegian his content is, with its focus on Norway’s natural landscapes, culture and clothing. Krogstad says he has become something of an ambassador for Norway and has worked with Visit Norway to showcase the country to the world.

Message and influence

The host notes that Krogstad is an influencer and asks how he views his role and influence. Krogstad says that he is simply being himself, and that his message is about being more true to yourself and having fun in everyday life. He receives a lot of feedback from people who say that his videos have made them smile during difficult times. He reflects on how being an influencer is about more than just make-up and fashion, and that he was a finalist in the 'Role Model of the Year' category at the Vixen Awards.

Choice of topics and social engagement

The presenter asks about the choice of topics in the videos, such as Pride and Sámi National Day. Krogstad explains that he uses the platform to spread messages, and that addressing topics such as Pride can be challenging because of the reactions they provoke. Nevertheless, he has chosen to do so and feels that negative reactions have become less frequent over time.

Comments and engagement

Krogstad says he used to read every comment he received, but that this is now impossible due to the volume and number of platforms.

Haugli reflects on how Krogstad spreads joy and shares an inclusive message. Krogstad confirms that he wants to be someone people can 'escape to' for a break from everyday life, and that his main message is to be yourself.

Business model and finances

The host asks how Krogstad makes money. He explains that his income comes from presentations and partnerships with businesses and tourism destinations, and that he is selective about the partnerships he enters into. He wants to stand behind what he promotes and also aspires to write a book and explore new ideas.

The host and Haugli discuss how Krogstad represents a new type of economy and value creation, and how his personal commitment and relationship with his audience are key to his success.

The host raises the question of how to balance the personal and the private, and asks Krogstad for his thoughts. He says he believes this will change over time, and that the key to success is to keep evolving and refreshing the content.

International expansion

Krogstad says he has been in contact with Chinese management and received support from Innovation Norway. He has now found new business partners and plans to showcase Norway on Chinese apps.

Towards the end of the conversation, Haugli asks who inspires Krogstad. He replies that he is inspired by people who are completely themselves, and that individuality and authenticity are what motivate him.

Guests: Ingvild Erøy Prestårhus and Hege Fiskå, both from Kakadu.

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host: Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Host: They are founders of innovative companies, driven by a desire to create something new and solve challenges for their customers. They bring fresh perspectives and different ideas. But they face more barriers than others. They are female founders. Few women start businesses in Norway. In a series of Innopodden episodes, we meet some of them.

Many people struggle to complete essential tasks using digital services. That is where Kakadu comes in.
Kakadu helps people develop digital skills and complete the tasks they need to do online. It also helps public and private organisations make their services easier to use. We have invited founders Ingvild Erøy Prestårhus and Hege Fiskå to join us on Innopodden.

Welcome, Ingvild and Hege! You are Kakadu's Chief Commercial Officer and CEO, respectively. Let's start by getting to know the company a little better. Who are Kakadu's key target audiences?

Fiskå: Yes, I can start with that. We actually have two target groups. The first is people who face barriers to digital participation. The second is companies that provide digital services and spend a great deal of time and resources helping these people.
So those are the target groups we work with to solve problems.

Host: But who are they, then – are they young or old? Where do they come from?

Fiskå: You mean the people? Yes, you mentioned older people. Many assume that we only help older people, but we are actively working to communicate that this is not the case. Digital exclusion affects every age group, and we can see it emerging as early as primary school. So yes, the majority are over 60, but it is important to us not to stigmatise anyone, but rather to include everyone. That is why we have called the company and the service Kakadu.

Host: And just how big is the problem you are helping to solve?

Prestårhus: Yes, there are different ways, you could say … to quantify it – Skills Norway says there are 600,000 people, while the Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills says it is one in five. So I can only sum it up by saying that quite a lot of people are on the wrong side of the so-called digital divide. And importantly, while no one knows for certain what the future holds, research suggests that this problem will grow in the years ahead, not diminish.

Haugli: Can we go back … I’m just jumping in here, but … can we go back to the name, Kakadu? You touched on it briefly. Could you tell us a little more?

Prestårhus: Yes, absolutely. A lot of people ask us about that, and Hege and I had quite a few names on our list. I think there were around 200.

Fiskå: Yes, at least.

Prestårhus: We gave quite a bit of thought to ‘kan du/can do’. We liked it, but of course it was already taken on navnesøk.no. And then Hege visited a bird park.

Fiskå: Yes, as Ingvild says, we had an incredible number of names. We knew it couldn't be anything like digi-this or digi-that. It's not a senior thing. Then I was reading about these cockatoos at a bird park, and I realised they're really smart! What they do is ... they send one ahead to work out how to solve the task, while the others stand behind and watch. Once the one in front has figured it out, they simply do the same. So there was something about repetition and learning that made it obvious – it had to be Kakadu.

Prestårhus: And the name was available when we searched for it. So we were pretty quick to buy it.

Haugli: Yes, but it also has a bit of a Western Norway flair to it – ‘what can you do?’ I mean, it’s only missing an ‘n’. ‘What can you do?’, I thought. A very well-chosen name, in my opinion.

Prestårhus: Yes, and it is quite easy to brand, and has received a lot of positive feedback.

Haugli: Yes. It also brings to mind a cockatoo. It’s a magnificent bird.

Prestårhus: Yes, definitely. I’ve heard they’re a bit noisy, but we don’t give a shit.

Haugli: Perhaps you need to make a bit of noise to get things done? So that's a good thing.

Prestårhus: Ruffle some feathers!

Host: You also help organisations make themselves understood – municipalities, public-sector organisations and private companies that can use your solutions. Tell us a little more about how this works.

Fiskå: We see ourselves as an impact tech company working to create positive social change through the solutions we provide. A large part of this involves empowering people to manage their own digital lives. We offer services such as step-by-step guides that businesses can integrate into their own digital solutions, including websites and apps. We have an AI-powered language assistant that provides plain-language support to editors creating guides, making it easier to produce and write a good guide. We have also just launched our flagship product: an interactive guide that sits at the top of the website and supports you throughout the entire journey when you need help. This is how we build the skills and confidence of people who need support, while streamlining customer service and reducing repetitive enquiries, which also place a considerable burden on customer service centres. That is it in a nutshell.

Host: But if I follow a guide created using your solution on a company’s or public-sector organisation’s website, will I know that, or is it fully integrated?

Fiskå: Not necessarily. It’s about being there when and where users need help. Our new solution will largely be what’s known as white label. In other words, it becomes part of the solution – part of the website you’re visiting. Our aim is to help you when you need it, rather than focus on whether the Kakadu logo is displayed. What’s also quite exciting is that everything created by our paying customers – businesses, in other words – is also published on kakadu.no. We’ve positioned it as a go-to place for self-help, making all that knowledge and expertise available to everyone. Organisations, volunteers, libraries, public service centres, you and me, and friends and family can visit Kakadu.no to find guidance from businesses, as well as a wealth of general competence-building material that we at Kakadu create.

Prestårhus: We actually have 250 guides there today.

Haugli: That's so cool. Just out of curiosity, what are your backgrounds? How did you get to where you are today?

Prestårhus: Well, even the most basic research shows that many entrepreneurs want to solve a problem they have experienced themselves. For me, one factor is that I have been my family's pro bono IT expert for many, many years. I have seen my parents' frustration as they repeatedly find themselves in digital situations they cannot navigate, as well as my own frustration at having to teach them those skills. My background is in marketing and communications, so I understand the value of a strong message and how to communicate it effectively. And there is a gap in the market that Hege and I want to fill.

Fiskå: My background and experience are quite similar to Ingvild’s. First and foremost, I know what it’s like to be the person the whole family turns to for a bit of help with the iPad before you leave after Sunday dinner. That Apple ID – I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve tried to help in those situations, only to end up just … sorting it out myself instead of letting Dad do it.
In terms of expertise, my background is in media and communications, media graphics and graphic design. I’ve worked extensively with digital content production, studied marketing, and then went back to school to study digital innovation, among other things. It’s that blend of the slightly nerdy and the creative, combined with good communication, that drives me to create something entirely new.

Haugli: It’s great that you both highlight being your family’s pro bono digital advisors, as you put it. I can really relate to that. With both my parents, I saw how even things like working out what to do when the TV signal goes down could be difficult. Or using a cash machine – or online banking, rather. How do you use that? And now, with anti-money laundering rules, you’re suddenly told that you have to complete all these anti-money laundering checks … fill in lots of forms. It can be very overwhelming, even for capable people, especially when you consider those who may be ten years behind in terms of what they’re used to. It’s an incredibly good idea. So I’m not a paying customer, but I’d say I’m a very enthusiastic supporter. Perhaps that’s a segment – perhaps you could, I could … I’d be able to contribute something like …

Host: I think many of us can relate to being the family’s IT support. But to use these guides, you do need a certain level of digital know-how. You need to be able to visit your website or find them elsewhere. Is that something of a dilemma for you?

Prestårhus: Well, what can I say? We were asked whether it is a paradox to teach digital skills through digital platforms.

Host: Yes, exactly.

Prestårhus: The short answer is no. A growing proportion of the population wants to develop digital skills through digital platforms, and we as a society need to move in that direction and make it possible. So yes, to use our service, you need a basic level of digital skills. That is clear, but this is also where the largest group in society is: you already know a little, but you have the potential to learn more. That is our starting point. Based on this, we provide a sustainable, future-oriented solution that does not rely on one-to-one guidance. Some people will undoubtedly continue to need one-to-one support for the foreseeable future, but the largest group consists of those who can and want to learn digital skills through digital platforms. Those are the people we help.

Host: How do you test your solutions, and how do you find out whether they work or not?

Fiskå: Yes, we’ve spent an incredible amount of time on user testing. We actually began our entire journey with an extensive research project, supported by funding from the Norwegian Directorate of Health, to find out how big the problem was, what was being done at the time, what worked and what didn’t. That’s when we realised we needed something different from traditional training. So we moved away from PowerPoint presentations and that kind of learning format, because the learning doesn’t stick. You don’t remember it when you’re actually in the situation. That was the idea behind it: we needed to create something that didn’t exist. Throughout the process, we’ve user-tested every type of prototype and worked very closely with the people facing the greatest challenges. We started with older people, because if we could create a solution that even those who might find it most difficult could use, then everyone else could use it too. So user testing has been an incredibly important part of everything we’ve done. We’ve built the solution gradually, tested features before releasing them and, overall, made it a major priority.

Host: Do you get a lot of feedback from users?

Prestårhus: Yes, we do, and it’s very motivating and rewarding. People get in touch and ask whether we can come and talk to them and show them more. They applaud what we’ve done and make suggestions – for example, ‘You’ve made a guide for BankID; could you do this for the XYZ service too?’ And yes, feedback comes in through various channels. We’re also actively out in the field, as we like to say, talking to people through different organisations. That’s probably one of our top five sources of motivation and drive to keep doing what we do.

Fiskå: We also run proof-of-concept tests with the company to demonstrate – and quantify – the impact, and to make sure it works for them too. We want to help a vulnerable group, but it also needs to benefit the company using it. So testing, prototype testing and user... that has been the foundation of everything we have done.

Prestårhus: Yes, and of course we have built those kinds of metrics into the guides themselves. We also have a Kakadu score – in other words, a satisfaction score – of around 90 per cent, which in itself provides strong validation of what we do.

Host: And that sounds very good.
You belong to a fairly exclusive group: female founders. Only 16 per cent of innovative startups like Kakadu have female founders. I’d really like to ask you: What are the biggest challenges you have faced as female founders?

Fiskå: That’s a big question. Personally, I don’t go around thinking of myself as a female founder. I’m a founder, full stop. That said, we know that a female founding team faces different expectations from a male founding team. So… yes, we know that we often have to prove more and deliver more. We have to get further and reach bigger milestones before we receive – in a way – the same level of trust or access to the same kind of investment as a male team. But when you know that in advance, you accept that these are simply the rules of the game. So you step up a gear. You know you’ll have to work a little harder to get the same opportunity as everyone else. It isn’t fair, I can tell you that. But apart from that, I don’t go around thinking that being a female founder presents enormous challenges. Unless you have anything to add, Ingvild?

Prestårhus: No, I mean, we're good at always turning things into opportunities, so being a female founder opens up a lot of opportunities. But to return to your question – have we experienced anything …?

Host: Have you faced any particular challenges specifically because you are female entrepreneurs?

Prestårhus: Yes, well, the challenge when you’re asked to give a specific example … it’s always difficult to convey a feeling without, as it were, playing the victim – in inverted commas. But one phrase we encountered, and which we’ve spent quite a lot of time trying to move beyond, was that when we started the company, we were identified as ‘the two girls with that project’. We heard that in various contexts and thought, well …

Fiskå: Add ‘little lady’ and you’ve got the full package.

Prestårhus: Yes, so that is something we have noticed. And yes, we have made a conscious effort to work around it and say that we are building a company that helps society, while also emphasising the more commercial values to show that this is about business. And we have also reflected on the fact that there is probably a difference between what we encounter as female founders and what other founders encounter, yes.

Host: And that reflects a certain attitude towards female entrepreneurs. Has it actually made things more difficult for you in any way, or has it simply made you work even harder?

Fiskå: For my part – going back to the fact that I don't think about being a female founder – I just get on with what I'm doing and focus on delivering value, developing the business and doing what the company and I have set out to do.

Host: No, but perhaps that means the fact that you're women hasn't really mattered that much, and that you haven't encountered any particular attitudes because of it?

Prestårhus: No, I would say so. It has a lot to do with how you are addressed and, as Hege also points out, you have to prove yourself. You often have to go the extra mile, be aware of this before entering the room, and try to claim the space everyone deserves. And push back when you hear language ranging from ‘little lady’ to ‘the project – those girls’, or, as we have heard in various situations, ‘Oh, you’re so charming.’ Things like that simply ... have no place in these kinds of settings. So we just have to acknowledge that this is not how we work, rise above it and walk away with our heads held high.

Fiskå: You just have to let it roll off your back. It’s really about what we choose to spend our time and energy on.

Prestårhus: Yes, but just to be clear, it does happen. We have experienced those situations, but we would rather make it clear that this is not something we identify with. We want to do better, and that is possible too.

Host: Now I’m going to ask you a question, Håkon, that may be influenced by the same kinds of prejudices – I don’t know. Research shows that women often start slightly different types of businesses from men, frequently driven by a strong social commitment. And that’s typical of what you did. What do you think – is Kakadu a typical example of a business founded by women?

Haugli: Well, it isn't typical as such, but there are some differences between the kinds of businesses women and men start. And I think that goes all the way back to a labour market where women and men choose different educational paths and occupations, which in turn affects their exposure to the kinds of problems they want to solve. For example, we see more female founders in health and education than in other sectors. And in highly engineering-focused businesses, women are very much in the minority, so we don't see as many of those kinds of startups – or at least not as many with female founders. And then I get a bit... I don't know... It feels a bit cringe, to borrow that word, to talk about women in this way, because every founder is simply themselves, working to achieve what they have set out to do. And many people are also reluctant to be put into a particular group, as if to say... well, our entrepreneurship is our entrepreneurship. Full stop. Not because we're women, or men for that matter, or young or old, or whatever. But I really recognise what you're describing. We might call it a kind of hidden discrimination, although that may be too strong a term. It's a bit like when a man approaches a restaurant table where five women are sitting and says, ‘Are you girls here all by yourselves?’ They're obviously not by themselves. And it's a bit like that here too. What you're describing is a little like, ‘Oh, are you girls doing this all by yourselves?’

Fiskå: Yes, yes, where are the grown-ups?

Haugli: Yes, where are the adults? This is where it comes into play – and we conducted a proper study on this a few years ago – it affects how investors view women entrepreneurs. Things may have changed since then, and I sincerely hope they have. But it is precisely the mechanism you describe that means women have, historically at least, found it harder than men to secure investment, even when their projects are equally good. The study also highlighted a couple of other very important points that I believe show where we can do more. One was the importance of role models – seeing someone who has done it before. That matters greatly. It applies to everyone, of course, but it is even more important for those who are under-represented. So it matters more for women than for men, because men have a wider range of role models to draw inspiration from. The other point is the importance of networks: having people around you to learn from. That could mean having someone on your board who has previously started a business. This is not solely a gender issue, of course, but it is important to have someone you can turn to for advice. It is lonelier when you are part of a small minority than when you are one of many. So role models and networks are also areas where we at Innovation Norway can do more to raise visibility and create opportunities.

Prestårhus: Yes, 100 per cent.

Fiskå: I completely agree that – OK, as you know, women often start companies that focus on somewhat softer values, but … women are just as good at business development as men. There is no difference. And the statistics also suggest that female founding teams often perform better over time than male teams. So there is something to consider here – why not invest just as much in softer values and businesses that address societal challenges? We have since heard that many people did not see the technology behind what we do. So we ask, ‘Yes, but have you tried to understand it?’ No, we do not create courses. Even several years later, people still say, ‘But you only create courses for older people.’ And we say, ‘But that is not what this is about at all.’ We are developing a SaaS solution, and having to somehow hammer that into people’s heads makes you wonder: why? Is it simply because you put impact first? Or what is it that creates that immediate barrier? So that may well be a challenge: people have not understood just how technology-heavy our company actually is.

Haugli: If I may raise a particular issue that I care about. It’s something – we’ve discussed this topic many times – and people say, ‘Yes, but women are so risk-averse.’ That really provokes me, because if we look at other areas of society, women are clearly not risk-averse. Just think about what Norwegian women do. Everything from going on long mountain hikes to skiing across Greenland, travelling to the South Pole or the Himalayas. Then there’s the fact that simply giving birth is risky. So this is really a myth that is being kept alive. It particularly affects female entrepreneurs and is used to explain why we don’t have more women starting businesses. We simply have to put an end to it, because it’s wrong – demonstrably wrong, in my view. When women start businesses, they take exactly the same risks, have just as much appetite for risk, and succeed or fail at the same rate as men who start businesses. In fact, women do slightly better, as you said. That may be because the threshold for starting a business is a little higher for women, so their starting point is slightly stronger. But the documented difference isn’t very large. There is some difference, though.

Host: You briefly touched on your relationship with investors and how it can sometimes be more difficult for women – and women-led companies – to secure the investment they need. What have your meetings with investors been like?

Fiskå: Yes, we’re now in our second funding round and have met with many investors. For the most part, the meetings have been good. I find most of them very professional. They ask the right questions and focus on the commercial… commercial value and our ability to scale up – all those kinds of things. But the statistics are quite disheartening when you look at how much – or how little – venture capital goes to women. It’s important to draw attention to this because experience and evidence show that there’s no difference in how well we perform. So… yes, I’d say the meetings have generally been good. We’ve secured investments, so we’ve been successful in that respect, and we’re now in the final stages of our second round.

Haugli: How exciting. We’ll have to keep our fingers crossed for you. I imagine it’s rather nerve-racking.

Fiskå: Yes, but it’s also incredibly rewarding because there’s such a steep … what do you call it, learning curve, and every time you meet an investor, you get feedback and think, ‘OK, hmm, I need to take that on board. I need to add that to the plan. We need to plan for that.’
So it becomes this back-and-forth, ping-pong process until you’ve really addressed every objection and can say, ‘OK, we’ve got this under control.’ Then you just have to close the round, which … always takes a little longer than you think. One tip we have for finding the right investors is this: when you go through an investment round, you’ll be thoroughly scrutinised, and they’ll dig through all your documents and everything else. But do the same in return. Really take a deep dive into the investors: find out who they are, what their mandates are and whether they’re interested in your business case. Don’t waste your time, because there will be a lot of meetings. And if you’re a female founder, look for investors that include diversity and female founders in their investment criteria. That way, you’ll be much more targeted, and your chances of securing investment may be far greater. So don’t take a scattergun approach. Narrow your focus, choose carefully, and look beyond the Nordics and little Norway too.

Haugli: That is very good advice. I think many founders find that, at the stage you are in now, they are almost putting themselves under the microscope. They are hardly proactive at all. They simply showcase all the fantastic things they are doing and hope someone will take an interest. There are a couple of problems with that. One is that they do not carry out the kind of due diligence you are advocating. And they really should. This is a relationship that is meant to last for a long time, and you would not enter into any other long-term relationship on such a shaky basis, simply hoping that someone likes you.
 That is one issue. The other is that capital strategy is often where companies go wrong. They bring in the wrong owners, who make different demands, and the more of the company they own, the more they can steer its strategy away from the original vision. So it is important to do that groundwork and enter the investor dialogue with a clear position: this is what we want to pursue. Of course, you should be open to investors' views, but you should not abandon your strategy because you are so desperate for funding. Because that does happen.

Fiskå: Yes. Think carefully about smart capital. If you find investors who understand where you are and where you are going, and who can genuinely join you on that journey – because it becomes a bit like a marriage you cannot get out of. And that can put you in a difficult position. If you take – shall we say – quick cash, they may steer you in a completely different direction because they want something different from what you want as a founder.

Host: So, is this something you have been conscious of right from the start?

Fiskå: Yes, absolutely. We had our first funding round a year and a half ago, and it is important to have investors who share our values and understand what we are trying to achieve and how they can support us, rather than focusing on what they can get in return and how quickly. There is a big difference between the two. So we have carefully chosen investors we feel confident having with us for the long term.

Haugli: Best of luck with your current funding round.

Fiskå: Thank you, thank you.

Haugli: Knock on wood.

Fiskå: Bangs the table – yes, yes, it’s happening!

Host: On your website, kakadu.no, users can choose from – as far as I can see – eleven languages. This means they can use Norwegian services in Norwegian, of course, but also in Spanish, Ukrainian, Lithuanian and several other languages. Do you also have plans to expand your offering to cover more complex digital tasks and services in other countries?

Prestårhus: Yes, absolutely. We’re starting here at home in Norway by bringing major trailblazers on board, as I call them, so we can really quantify the business and societal value we offer. We’ll then expand into the Nordic region and Scandinavia, before moving into Europe and perhaps even the rest of the world. There is significant international demand for our service. Norway is at the forefront of digitalisation, and we know that the rest of the world will follow. So we see considerable potential and demand for our service.

Haugli: Just so I understand how it works: If, for example, I am a Ukrainian refugee who has come to Norway and I want to use banking services, but I do not understand how BankID works, would you create a solution that guides me through it, or through Nav, or something else?

Prestårhus: Yes, in that case, BankID is our customer. BankID creates the guide using our service. This allows them to create a guide very quickly that incorporates every layer of inclusive design, and our technology makes it possible to translate it into any language – which is itself a highly inclusive measure.

Haugli: Inclusive design – that includes things like universal design, font size, lighting and so on.

Prestårhus: That's right, that's included too.

Fiskå: Yes, those are the basics … the fundamental things that everyone has to deliver. What we also want to do with our service is go the extra mile – we have involved clinical psychologists. We have explored different types of design, including how to keep people motivated in a somewhat stressful situation. In other words, how do we prevent users from simply thinking, ‘No, I can’t do this’, shutting their laptop and moving on? We actually looked at the same communication principles used by emergency medical dispatch centres: how to handle a highly stressful situation and guide someone through it. This can include anything from small words of encouragement while you follow the guidance to many other features and additional layers, not least communication. We had already started developing our language bot before AI and ChatGPT arrived. When it became a trend, we naturally embraced it. We also collaborated with NTB Arkitekst to incorporate plain-language and inclusive-language principles. It flags certain preferred and discouraged words, and you can upload your own language profiles, which is particularly useful for public-sector organisations that are legally required to use plain language. So we offer many additional layers that others do not. This is also because we operate in a niche and are a specialised provider in this particular field – and we want to be the best at it.

Prestårhus: I can add a statistic that not everyone may be aware of: 20 per cent of the population say that technical language, or ‘techno-babble’ as we call it, prevents them from participating digitally. So we are directly addressing a root cause and helping more people write in a digitally inclusive way. This means more people can understand.

Host: You are based at Innoasis, a startup and business community in Stavanger. I understand that you also work from home quite a bit. But what does working alongside other startups at Innoasis mean to you, and what impact has it had?

Fiskå: Yes, it has been incredibly important. Networks are worth their weight in gold, so from day one we chose to join forces with clusters and work from coworking spaces. When we started, it was just Ingvild and me. It was the middle of the pandemic, and we mostly worked from home, each of us isolated on our own. But as soon as the opportunity arose, we moved into Innoasis. It feels as though you have something like 1,000 colleagues, just in different departments and specialist fields. That is incredibly valuable, and you make friends too. The companies here are at the same stage. They have often been where you are now, or they are heading in the same direction.
At Innoasis, the companies are not usually at the very earliest stage. They have gained some traction, are often in a growth phase and may have expanded their team a little. Feeling that you have people in the same situation to lean on is incredibly important.

Host: You gave us some good advice earlier, Hege. Ingvild, do you have any advice for women who are thinking about starting a business?

Haugli: … or anyone else?

Host: ‘Or others, but right now we’re talking specifically about female entrepreneurs.’

Prestårhus: Yes, so the first thing is that there is no perfect time to start something yourself. I find that quite liberating. So don’t wait around thinking, ‘OK, perhaps the perfect opportunity will come along next year?’ No, you have to create it yourself. That’s the first thing. And if I may offer one more piece of advice, it’s not to think that being an entrepreneur means fitting into a particular box. You can create your own, and that’s a very important part of the diversity we need among entrepreneurs. So be part of that diversity, and remember that you can define for yourself what an entrepreneur looks like.

Haugli: Excellent advice!

Host: And we’ll take that with us. Thank you for joining us, Ingvild Erøy Prestårhus and Hege Fiskaa, the founders of Kakadu. And thank you to Håkon Haugli. My name is Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, and we’ll be back with another episode of Innopodden.

Guest: Hedda Felin, CEO of Hurtigruten Norway

From Innovation Norway: Håkon Haugli, CEO, and

Host Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann

Host: She leads a fleet of ten ships and is the custodian of more than 130 years of maritime history. Hedda Felin is CEO of one of Norway’s most important brands – Hurtigruten. The company is developing zero-emission ships and believes the Norwegian coast can become the world’s most sustainable travel destination. We welcome Hedda Felin aboard Innopodden, with Håkon Haugli as skipper and me, Kjetil Svorkmo Bergmann, at the helm.

Welcome to Innopodden – it’s great to have you here. You’ve worked in several countries – across Scandinavia, as well as in France, the UK, China and Guinea – and you joined Hurtigruten in March 2021 after many years at Statoil and Equinor.
Lonely Planet described Hurtigruten as the world’s most beautiful sea voyage as far back as 2005, and that description has often been used for your voyages ever since. Is it accurate?

Felin: Yes, that’s definitely a resounding yes! I already knew that, of course, but this job has really taught me to see Norway from an outside perspective and made me fall in love with the country all over again. There really is no better way to experience Norway, and when you compare it with destinations around the world, Norway truly is one of the most beautiful.

Host: Hurtigruten currently has a fleet of ten ships and 2,000 employees, most of whom work at sea. The maiden voyage of its first ship, DS Vesterålen, took place in July 1893, after the company we now know as Hurtigruten won a tender to establish a fast route between Bergen and Kirkenes. Today, the group also includes Hurtigruten Expeditions and Hurtigruten Svalbard. Could you give us a quick overview of the different parts of the group?

Felin: Today, the Hurtigruten Group comprises Hurtigruten, with its ten ships in Norway, and Hurtigruten Svalbard. What we previously knew as Hurtigruten Expeditions has now been shortened to HX, relocated to London and established as a global expedition cruise company, so it has effectively been separated from the group. Hurtigruten as we know it therefore consists of ten ships operating along the Norwegian coast: the seven ships sailing the original coastal route from Bergen to Kirkenes, as well as two Signature ships offering more tourism-focused voyages to Svalbard, between the Norwegian coast and Svalbard, from Hamburg to the North Cape and from Oslo to the North Cape. Together, these make up the ten ships we operate along the coast. We also have our operations in Svalbard, and that is what constitutes the Hurtigruten Group today.

Host: Håkon, have you travelled with Hurtigruten?

Haugli: You bet I have! Travelling with Hurtigruten is one of my favourite things to do in Norway, and not just on long journeys. I’ve done that too – once, I travelled from Bergen to Honningsvåg and back. But Hurtigruten is also an option for shorter distances, such as travelling from Trondheim to Bodø. I completely agree with Hedda’s description … Norway is simply incredible, and I think many Norwegians would benefit greatly from travelling more within Norway in general, and particularly with Hurtigruten. There’s something almost meditative about sitting there and watching the coastline pass by. It’s both relaxing and beautiful, and it makes you feel proud. There are also wonderful things happening on board. We can talk more about that, but when it comes to the food, for example, there have been some remarkable developments. So I wholeheartedly recommend that all our listeners travel with Hurtigruten.

Host: It’s still on my list of things I’d like to do …

Felin: You're welcome back any time!

Host: … but every now and then, you bring up the very story I touched on earlier, tracing Norway’s maritime history from oil extraction in the North Sea to the construction of floating offshore wind turbines – which is what we are doing now. What role do you think Hurtigruten has played in this story?

Haugli: Well, Hurtigruten. It means many things, but I also see it as the glue that holds the coast together. It has kept local communities alive by bringing goods, post and passengers to communities throughout Norway. And in a way, our coastal traffic has also laid the foundations for much of the wider maritime industry. Norway is one of the world’s largest maritime nations, and it all started on a small scale. Hurtigruten is part of that story, though of course not the only part. Today, we are at the forefront of using and developing low- and zero-emission vessels. Hurtigruten has also played an important role in that journey, so I believe it is all closely connected. When it comes to Norway as a maritime nation, it is clear to me that Hurtigruten has a place in that story. Many others do too, of course – that is important to say – but Hurtigruten is our topic today. And I also thought it was quite clever … Kjetil, when you started with the nineteenth century, right? How people thought at the time. They essentially said: ‘We depend on this transport service.’ So they put the route out to tender, and the company that is now Hurtigruten submitted a bid and won the contract. Similar tendering processes have taken place regularly ever since, reflecting the public sector’s interest in keeping this route running. Just imagine if that had not happened. What would have become of all those ports of call, and how would the transport needs have been met? There would clearly have been far more road traffic, and some of those local communities would probably no longer exist.

Felin: Yes, the fundamental question is how to reach the most remote small ports, particularly in the far north of Norway, especially between Tromsø and Kirkenes. And we still see that today. Last winter, for example, the weather was particularly severe. Hurtigruta was the only service that got through. The roads were closed, the trains, buses and ferries were not running, but Hurtigruta kept going – as long as it was safe, of course. If the captain says, ‘We’re not calling at the port because it isn’t safe,’ they always have my full support. But the fact that Hurtigruta was the only service ensuring these local communities received essential goods, as happened last winter, was a timely reminder of how important the route remains today.

Host: Yes, it’s fascinating, because those of us who see Hurtigruten as a wonderful tourist journey don’t think about that at all.

Felin: But what … what is unique about it is that the tourists on board get to experience something completely different from a purely tourist cruise, because they get to see the real Norway. They see these communities – not the largest ports, but the small ones that only Hurtigruta calls at. It is a small ship by cruise standards, so it can call at relatively small ports, where people are waiting for Hurtigruta to arrive – perhaps waiting for someone to come home or for important goods to be delivered. So, in a way, they get to experience the real Norway. And they find that incredibly exotic.

Haugli: I also think tourism is changing, and that many of the tourists who choose Norway are looking for precisely these kinds of authentic, even somewhat extreme, experiences. We tend to think that bad weather is a drawback, but of course, it can get so bad that ships are unable to call at port. But a bit of wind, rough conditions and winter weather are, I think, exactly what tourists – including those from our neighbouring countries – are looking for. This is particularly true of those travelling from further afield, as it is completely unfamiliar to them. And when crossing the Arctic Circle, it is a ritual on board Hurtigruta to baptise passengers with a bucket of cold water.

Felin: – and ice cubes.

Haugli: ‘– and ice cubes. It’s quite a chilly experience, really. But it’s well worth experiencing – just think how exotic it is. And the Arctic Circle – the very concept, that sense of where you are in the world: now we’re this far north. It’s something only we in Norway can offer, something only Hurtigruten can offer.’

Host: We’ve talked a lot about Norway here, and that’s hugely important. The Hurtigruten brand is also very much built on its Norwegian identity. And that’s precisely why you chose to be among the first companies to adopt the new country-of-origin label – the Made in Norway label. Why is that important to you?

Felin: Yes, it was a perfect fit for us to work with you to establish the Made in Norway brand. I want Hurtigruta to become even more Norwegian. Some people say there is nothing more Norwegian than Hurtigruta – not even brown cheese. We have this heritage that we safeguard and want to continue safeguarding, but we are also a global company with guests from all over the world. As we mentioned earlier, we have operated expedition cruises as part of our ambition to become a more international company. But Hurtigruta will become even more Norwegian, because we recognise that our Norwegian identity is our greatest asset. And we have nothing to be ashamed of. In fact, it is what makes us so attractive. It is our thoroughly Norwegian identity, and Made in Norway has become a mark of quality. We are very proud to be the first tourism company to receive this mark, and the response has been fantastic! Here in Norway, everyone takes pride in Made in Norway and the Norwegian flag. But our international offices – in Australia, the US, China, Paris, Berlin, Hamburg and London – love this mark of quality too. It has quite simply been a huge success for us.

Haugli: I would also like to take this opportunity to thank you. This label was developed in collaboration with 22 pilot companies, and you were one of them. This is not something we at Innovation Norway have done alone. We have done it through you and all the other companies involved. Together, we worked out how to approach it, which criteria to apply and how the label should be used. So we are extremely proud and delighted that you have chosen to use it. It is wonderful to hear that it is working, and we are very excited about what comes next. More and more companies are now adopting the label, and we are printing and presenting new certificates all the time. It is very exciting.

Felin: Great fun.

Host: I can see the label on your website, but how else do you use it, including internationally?

Felin: Well, yes, it’s in … all the materials we have. We have a lot of marketing materials and campaigns, and I think Australia is a good example. It’s on the other side of the world, but they have a campaign called Norwegianness that focuses entirely on all things Norwegian. They use Norwegian sayings, exclusively Norwegian images and Norwegian … they showcase Norwegian ingredients, and Australians love it. So, if you’re looking to book a Hurtigruten voyage, you’ll see various campaigns. The latest one, for example, is called: Do you want to be a happy salmon? ‘Do you want to be happy salmon?’ Nicely translated! And it has … it has worked really well. It combines everything Norwegian: the Norwegian images, everything Norwegian you’ll experience, the Norwegian expressions, and then the Made in Norway label. We launched Made in Norway in Australia, and it simply took off. It really highlights how modest we are. Is being Norwegian really that good? Yes, it’s absolutely fantastic, and … is authentic Norwegian really that good? I mean, we have Norwegian people and Norwegian history. We’ve also done a great deal to promote Norwegian food, which I’m sure we’ll come back to – and it’s genuinely world-class!

Haugli: It’s really interesting. We’ve looked at international comparisons to see which so-called nation brands are the most valuable. Norway is actually ranked second in the world, behind Switzerland. Take a watch, for example: whether it says Made in Switzerland can make a difference of several percentage points to the price. People are more willing to pay for a product that is Made in Switzerland. But Norway ranks second, and we’re far too unaware of this, and far too modest and cautious about promoting what is Norwegian. There’s nothing dishonest or wrong about saying that a product or service was developed in Norway and using its Norwegian origins as a selling point. Norway is associated only with positive qualities. We need to harness the commercial potential in that. It isn’t imperialism, nor is it intended as a slight against anyone. I simply think we all have a part to play here.

Felin: We do.

Haugli: To be even clearer and stand even firmer.

Felin: We do, and we simply have to... Yes, we are too modest about our own achievements. We can see that – and that is what they say, for example, in Australia: ‘They’re so modest, they’re too modest!’ But when we compare ourselves with others and look at the feedback we receive, we can see that we truly have a great deal to be proud of.

Haugli: OK – happy salmon – we just have to go back to that … it’s an expression that makes me wonder: do people understand it ...? Where does it actually come from? A happy salmon – it’s quite peculiar. You have quite a few expressions like that ...

Felin: We have quite a few like that … every campaign has its own … ‘ha det’ ..., ‘være midt i smørøyet’ …, but I also find it quite amusing.

Haugli: … in the middle of the …

Felin: … the butter in the porridge … or …

Haugli: Great fun. Yes.

Host: Speaking of all things Norwegian, you also put a lot of thought into the food on board. Tell us a little about that.

Felin: Yes, we find it incredibly exciting, because this is part of our sustainability story: we want locally sourced food, with as few emissions from transporting it as possible. So we are talking about local food. In fact, it is hyperlocal. It comes from virtually every port, so it really is a win-win-win for us! It tells our sustainability story, while the quality of the food is outstanding. We are also seeing more and more foodies travelling with Hurtigruten because the food has become so highly regarded. Norway wins world championships for its cheeses, and we serve them on board. Even the French take their hats off to us and have to admit that the cheeses really are excellent. And it is not just the seafood we are known for, but cured meats, cheeses, reindeer – everything, really. So you have sustainability and quality. It also means that we have hundreds of local partners along the coast who work with Hurtigruten throughout the year. This makes it possible to run businesses in small communities across Norway. That is the win-win-win, and the results are outstanding. We also have so many talented people working in the kitchens on board our ships and developing our menus and concepts. They recognise how rare it is to have the opportunity to work almost exclusively with local ingredients. Our aim is to get as close to 90 per cent as possible, and we are already above 80 per cent. There are some things you simply cannot source in Norway, but wherever possible, we use local food and traditional recipes. And drinks too – it is not just about the food. We have started serving a wide range of Norwegian ciders, locally brewed beer from Lofoten and more, so our guests can truly taste their way through Norway. On the west coast, you might be served scallops, and as you travel further north, reindeer from Kirkenes. The food reflects the season and local specialities, and guests hear a little about the local supplier as they eat. It has been a great success. This is another area where we can truly be proud, because the food is world-class too.

Haugli: Fantastic! Let’s say we boarded in Hammerfest – what might we be served for dinner?

Felin: Well, I think it would probably have been snow crab as a starter. I had the chance to try the new menu when I was there a couple of weeks ago. Fantastic snow crab. Then I had a small taste of rakfisk – a fairly mild one. That brings in the tradition and history of eating it as December approaches. And then there was reindeer for the main course – which is simply unbeatable.

Haugli: There is something special about the stories behind the food, like the ones you are sharing now, isn't there? The Christmas meal, the fish and the reindeer. We have a Sámi population who make their living from this. Just think how much that enriches the experience, as well as the incredibly important role you play in developing local communities, making it possible to produce food across the country and actually generate sales. That local connection works both ways. You can buy locally, while producers can also sell locally – right on the quayside. That matters a great deal, because transport is a major cost for many suppliers. At Innovation Norway, we work with agriculture across the country – and not just agriculture, but reindeer husbandry and other forms of food production too. We see that one of the competitive disadvantages we face in Norway is the distance to market. So I think this is a win-win for everyone. What you are doing is really exciting.

Felin: Yes, it is. And then there’s the fact that we’re not seasonal, and that’s... we touched on how Norway has developed, but winter tourism has also been very important here, hasn’t it? We have tourists all year round. The ships aren’t empty in winter, as they were in the old days when there were only local passengers, and the tourists arrived in May, June and July. Now, there are just as many tourists throughout the year. And that means suppliers can continue selling their produce to us, and we can serve it all year round.

Haugli: This is a major change too. The first time I travelled on Hurtigruten, sometime in the 1990s, I think, it was a bit like you might imagine a ferry to be. I mean … the food was good, but it was very traditional: hamburgers, meatballs … And I have nothing against hamburgers or meatballs, but it’s completely different today. You’ve made some very wise choices over many years, which have clearly had a major impact on both your suppliers and yourselves. And I imagine your customers value this enormously. Because … foodies – it’s great that they come …

Felin: Yes, it’s great that they come, and it’s… I find the French market particularly interesting – I may be a little biased, as I lived there for many years myself, and I know how much they care about the quality of food – but when they now say, ‘No, we’re choosing Hurtigruten,’ it’s first and foremost because of the food. And that is a mark of quality.

Host: Fantastic. You also mentioned that you are working on some, shall we say, innovative projects related to this, including reducing food waste and ensuring that any food waste can be put to use?

Felin: Yes, I have some great examples. At Hurtigruten, we want all these sustainability initiatives to be as tangible as possible. We often find they can become a little vague, so we try to turn them into specific projects. One that has attracted a great deal of attention, particularly internationally, is our food waste project. Our first goal is to reduce food waste as much as possible. We use everything – the whole fish, for example, making stock from it, and the whole animal. We also consider how we portion food onto plates in appropriate serving sizes, and so on. Our guests care deeply about this. But we will never eliminate food waste entirely, so there will always be some. That made me think: what can we do with it that is innovative? Ideally, something circular – that is where we want to be. How can we reach the point where we are doing something genuinely circular? We are working on this with one of our partners, Myklevik Farm, just outside Lofoten. They supply us with large crates of organic vegetables of fantastic quality. Together, we have installed a grinder. We deliver our food waste to the quay and grind up the scraps, which Myklevik Farm then uses to fertilise its vegetables. We receive a new batch of vegetables grown using healthy, nutrient-rich fertiliser made from the food waste on board. It is a really exciting project, and exactly the kind of initiative we want to discuss with Innovation Norway, because this is innovation, isn't it? These are very tangible projects, and the response has been excellent. The Americans, in particular, were amazed: ‘Is that really true? You actually get back vegetables fertilised with your own food waste?’ It is a genuinely circular project.

Haugli: Yes, that’s fantastic to hear! I just want to say that these are exactly the kinds of projects we’d like to discuss with you, to explore how we can work together and help reduce the risk. And that applies to both sides – your business partners and you. It’s genuinely very exciting.

Felin: We can talk more about that – and I should also say thank you. We had local contributors from the communities, local savings banks and others who supported us and helped make it happen.

Haugli: Very good. There’s another project we’re working on together, which is about fuel. The context is that maritime transport is still largely diesel-powered, and Hurtigruten aims to help reduce emissions. Could you tell us a little about it? It’s really exciting. We’ve seen some sketches showing the ship with some large sails, and …

Felin: Yes, it’s a very inspiring project. We’re seeing a great deal of interest in our Sea Zero project, both internally and externally. First and foremost, we want to reduce emissions from our existing ships as much as possible. That’s where we need to start. Rather than focusing solely on the future, we’ve taken all our ships into dry dock to make them as energy-efficient as possible. They’re made from very strong steel and are incredibly robust, so from a sustainability perspective, it’s important not to scrap them too soon. Half the fleet is now hybrid, and we’ve introduced new propellers, smart paint and other energy-efficiency measures on board. But then there’s the question of what the next generation of Hurtigruten ships should look like. That’s where we started. During the pandemic, we held innovation days because we were getting a little tired of dealing with all the pandemic requirements and needed to focus on innovation and the future as well. What should the next generation look like, and how close to zero emissions can we get? What is actually possible? So we joined forces with Sintef and said that we wanted to remain completely technology-neutral. Could we design an entirely new ship with that in mind? And, of course, the Green Platform initiative and Innovation Norway are central to the project. We developed the concept design, brought partners on board, and the project is now moving ahead at full speed. The hull has now been designed. We’ll test it in a tank in Trondheim in late winter or early spring to see how it performs. First and foremost, this is about reducing energy use and emissions – cutting emissions as much as possible. The aim is to reduce them by around 50 per cent. I think this is so important because we’re constantly discussing which energy source to use. What can replace diesel? We don’t want heavy fuel oil to be used along the Norwegian coast. We stopped using it a long time ago, although it’s still used in the cruise industry. So today, we need to use the most efficient options available. But how can we minimise emissions through the way we design and operate the ship? We’re using a great deal of smart technology – heat recovery, hull optimisation and, of course, some more traditional technologies, if you can call them that, such as sails. We’ve designed the ship with large sails, almost 30 metres tall, fitted with solar panels.

Host: Yes, but these aren't sails in the way we usually think of sails?

Felin: No, it isn't. They're tall, and this … these are – these are already used on large cargo ships, so we know they work. You can lower them because the Hurtigruten ships need to call at small ports and pass under bridges. The ships have solar panels, so in summer …

Presenter: Yes, even on the sails?

Felin: … yes, on the sails. In summer, you can actually generate energy from them, and we have plenty of wind. They can turn to follow the wind direction, and we can see that this can account for up to 10 per cent of … reduce energy consumption by 10 per cent simply by using sails. This is our Sea Zero project, which brings together all the technologies available today that have been tested and are mature enough to be used by 2030.

Haugli: It’s fantastic that you’re doing this. I think you’re also paving the way for a completely different kind of shipping in the future. It will benefit you, but it will also benefit Norway and the world. We need solutions like this. And I should mention that we at Innovation Norway, together with the Research Council of Norway and Siva, have a scheme called the Green Platform. We’re not alone in running it, but it brings together several public funding agencies to support more ambitious initiatives, and this is one example. A truly inspiring example. I’m really looking forward to boarding the vessel with its sails and solar panels. And there are so many factors involved – and what you mentioned is very important, and something we also see – saving energy is about much more than the propulsion system itself. For example, you can save a great deal of energy by cleaning the ship’s hull. The type of paint and, of course, the design also make all the difference. Taking this holistic approach is truly doing the world a service, so it’s very exciting.

Felin: We have 14 Norwegian partners on board who share our passion for developing green shipping in Norway. It is very exciting, and the project will be open and serve as inspiration for others. Of course, it requires both infrastructure and political will. Many things need to fall into place, but we believe it is vital to show what is possible and demonstrate that we are helping to drive this development if we are to achieve the targets we have set as a nation. To meet not only our 2050 targets, but also those for 2040, we need to get started in the early 2030s and play an active role in this development.

Host: And what do you imagine travelling on a ship like that will be like, compared with travelling on one of the ships we know today?

Felin: No, in many ways it will be similar, but it will be quieter, won't it? We notice that even now, when we switch our hybrid ships to battery power and turn everything else off as we sail emission-free into a fjord, making our guests aware that we are now operating without emissions. We have biofuel and battery packs that can be switched on – not for very long at a time – but we can use them when entering a port in a vulnerable fjord. So if the entire journey could be like that, then that is of course where we want to be. And I feel strongly that we should not only focus on Norway's World Heritage fjords, which we have talked about a great deal. Unfortunately, the deadline for them has now been pushed back somewhat, but the entire coastline should be treated in the same way. We have a long, vulnerable coastline that we need to protect, so our aim must be to sail with the lowest possible emissions along the entire Norwegian coast. That is the ultimate goal.

Haugli: I also think that – and, by the way, I completely agree with everything you’re saying – just imagine the porpoises and other wildlife you can get even closer to when it’s quiet, and how unique it is to be on such a large vessel yet so close to nature. It creates wonderful experiences, which in turn make travellers more aware of just how important it is to protect nature. So there are some very exciting ripple effects. I believe Hurtigruta already achieves this today, but we can make it even more apparent.

Felin: Even clearer, yes. When we see how … important it is, and the importance of education on board, so that those who travel with us ... we want them to return home with a greater awareness of the sea, the coast, wildlife, nature and sustainability. We want them to understand that using local suppliers creates positive ripple effects, reduces emissions to zero and delivers good quality. And, as you say, when we sail from Honningsvåg to Svalbard – one of the most awe-inspiring nature experiences I have ever had – and a pod of whales appears behind the ship, the captain switches everything off and we lie still, hearing nothing but the sound of all the whales around the ship…

Haugli: Yes, just imagine!

Felin: It gives you goosebumps, especially when you see people from all over the world experiencing it and witness their reactions. It also allows you to see your own country from an outside perspective. It is quite powerful.

Haugli: Many of the things we take for granted, such as bad weather, are part of what attracts visitors to Norway. And I mean, it’s just so ... it’s a truly powerful and moving experience. To be able to offer something like that and have the opportunity to experience it, so we … this is an invitation to all our listeners to travel with Hurtigruten, take pride in Norway and appreciate just how wonderful it is. It’s incredibly inspiring to hear about the important sustainability work you’re doing.

Host: And with that, we leave our listeners with a few images in their minds, hopefully. Thank you for joining us, Hedda Felin, CEO of Hurtigruten, and thank you, Håkon Haugli. We are putting our feet safely back on dry land, and we will be back with another episode of Innopodden.