Archive for Don Southerton

Black Mass and Upcycling

Black mass and upcycling. Once a lithium battery reaches the end of its useful life or becomes damaged, the battery pack can be collected, dismantled, and shredded.

The shredded material is then processed to produce what we in the industry call black mass, not be confused with an astrophysics term, or a dark movie on Netflix.

This black mass can consist of high amounts of lithium, manganese, cobalt, and nickel metals. EV batteries use these metals in ratios which we label as NMC 622 or 811–60% nickel, 20 % manganese, and 20% cobalt, or 80% nickel, 10% manganese, and 10% cobalt. [1]

These metals when sent to a facility can be reclaimed from the black mass and in direct recycling reused in new battery production.

Black mass and upcycling
(Image courtesy of Argonne National Laboratory.)

I like to use the term upcycle vs recycle for these materials.

As I wrote in my End-of-Life article, “The Lithium-ion Battery Life Cycle: Mandates, Sustainability, Recycling, Recovery,” compared with the West, Asia — specifically China and Korea have been at the forefront in recovery and re-use — reclaiming batteries’ black mass.

I reported in 2021, “… with strong encouragement from the Korean government, many of the nation’s top groups are actively engaged in some form of end-of-life program. For example, Korean steel producer POSCO, looks to import waste battery scraps concentrated in a powdered form from Europe. Likewise, the Hyundai Motor Group, SK Innovation, and LG Chem all have programs to ensure used batteries have second-life applications, or are recycled and metals such as Lithium, Nickel, and Cobalt are recovered. These programs made lots of sense, as Korea is one of the world’s largest producers and innovators of Lithium-ion EV batteries — with accordingly a high demand for these raw materials.”

Fast forward…

This trend has shifted with new incentives for North American battery recovery.

For one, the U.S. government has mandates to shore up batteries among the nation’s key strategic interests. Second, the government looks to make the U.S. more competitive in the battery market.

These programs include the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and other funding under the Biden Administration such as The Energy Act of 2020, and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), which, together with the IRA, offer billions of dollars to the Department of Energy (DoE) funded government programs.

These monies do come with some restrictions.

Specifically, under the Inflation Reduction Act, vehicles that use batteries that contain (i) any “applicable critical minerals” that were extracted, processed, or recycled by an FEOC [ or (ii) any component manufactured or assembled by an FEOC would be ineligible for the $7,500 Section 30D consumer tax credit (Sec. 13401(e)(7)) starting after 2023.

A FEOC is defined as a Foreign Entity of Concern and, with reference, to the IRA, a Chinese company or entity controlled by a Chinese firm.

These prohibitions take effect in 2024 for EV battery components and in 2025 for “applicable critical minerals.”

A Question.

In a recently attended EV battery panel, I raised a question, “Will we, like in the EU, see more regulations for End of Life?” [For example, the new EU regulations will over the next few years, mandate minimum levels of recycled content in batteries, noting end-of-life batteries contain many valuable resources and these critical raw materials must be reused instead of relying on third countries for supplies.]

The panel’s consensus was that unlike the EU and their use of widespread regulations; the thought was for the U.S. to continue to use more of a carrot approach — incentivizing reclaiming battery materials. Something we can see in a range of DOE grants now being offered.

In closing,

One final takeaway the driver for reclaiming black mass is sustainable profitability. The critical metals, NMC, for example in the black mass in this form have a value that may or may not be competitive against new widespread sourcing of the rare materials.

That said, when the reclaimed key materials are further refined and separated from the black mass their value increases 3-fold, and even further new processes increase the value 6 times.

I have also read that these refinements in the reclaiming process can result in improvement in the very EV battery life span, battery density, and range… all of which add considerably to what I see as “Upcycling”.

About the Author.

Mr. Southerton provides strategy, consulting, and training to Korea-based global businesses.

This includes long-time support of many of the major Korean Groups including the Hyundai Motor Group, SK Corp., and LG.

He also has supported Korean market entry for several innovative small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Most recently Southerton has been engaged in the mobility, electrification, and the battery sector.

On related issues, Southerton has been a contributor to CNBCThe Economist, Automotive News, the BBC, CNN Fortune, Korea Times, Yonhap, tbs eFM, Wall Street Journal, and Forbes.

[1] Most EVs today use either lithium-ion NMC, NCA (Aluminum), or lithium-ferrous LFP chemistry batteries. There are advantages and disadvantages.LFP: lower cost, lower density, higher discharge cycles; and NMC/NCA: higher cost, higher density, lower discharge cycles. Regardless they all contain ametals that are reclaimable.

Korean Business: Challenges and Solutions 50 Workplace Hints, #2 Managing Expectations

I am often asked to assist with Korea-facing business ventures. This can be a North American firm just entering the Korean market or a Western company already with operations in Korea.

Too, I am also asked to support top Korean Groups with their overseas operations.

Most often Korean and Western senior leadership teams did a great job of gaining mutual trust. Both negotiated well. The deal is signed and it’s time to perform.

Sadly, the honeymoon is over. Challenges arise, and what appeared to be clear expectations can now seem murky with poor alignment and weak communications. Why?

There are several reasons. One is that teams that meet, bond, and negotiate are seldom the ones doing the work. The teams on both sides that crafted the deal are better skilled in global business. The teams doing the work are talented, but usually less skilled in local affairs.

Many Westerners have no recent experience working with Koreans, and the Korean teams have limited experience working with North America.

A caveat to this is that many of the Korean teams are bright, but very junior, new to the workplace, and tend to be generalists, while Western teams are comprised of highly specialized industry veterans.

So, what’s the solution?

Frankly, in our experience, the most successful firms show great leadership and vision. They also recognize both sides will need constant ongoing support and training.

Expecting the teams to “get it” seldom works — and if it does it takes time, is costly, and contributes to stress, poor productivity, and even employee turnover. Expecting non-Koreans to understand Korean culture, business models, and workplace expectations is like throwing someone into a pool and assuming they will swim, not sink.

That said, a huge mistake is hiring an industry consulting firm without a full understanding of the specific challenges and cross-cultural issues. In many cases, they fail to get to the root of the problem(s) and expectations are never fully clarified. Issues will surface. Things will get worse.

To conclude,

In dealing with partnerships, I understand the huge stress loads within Korean-based firms. Teams need to perform. Partners will also be expected to perform. Clear, well-communicated expectations and cross-cultural understanding from the beginning are vital, along with a strong business plan and strategy.

Need a solution, I am here on-call with practical workarounds and seasoned experience in overcoming the challenges. Waiting only adds layers and costs.

Text 310–866–3777 

Dsoutherton@bridgingculture.com

Why we need Korean business cultural training

Why we need Korean business cultural training. My “no punches pulled” Q and A. Targeted cross-cultural support and coaching are necessary for local teams to succeed in working with overseas Korean business projects.

By Don Southerton

Q. Why do we need Korean cultural training?

A. This may be the first time working with a Korean team. This opportunity brings with it great opportunity and the need to better understand the new partner’s culture, workplace norms, and expectations.

In most cases, Western teams will interact with Korean HQ and expatriate teams. Some of the teams will hold a line managerial position with day-to-day responsibilities alongside Western managers, while others will hold key management C-level positions, such as CEO, COO, or CFO. In many, if not most, cases, these teams may operate as a “shadow management” with considerable oversight and operational control over local operations.

With the best of intentions, the Korean teams will look to build strong collaboration and teamwork and try to avoid a sense of us and them. However, they do bring Korean work norms that can conflict with Western work-life balance and Western working methods. 

More so, Korean teams may make seemingly one-sided decisions with the company’s best interest in mind but without consulting local teams, causing mistrust.

A solid training and coaching program followed by ongoing support can address differences, such as sharing work styles, hierarchy, and comfort levels, plus providing workarounds.

Q. What are some typical issues that arise, especially without training or coaching?

A. As with all individuals, no two of us are alike –and the same goes for Westerners and Koreans… Each has their unique strengths, skills, experiences, and personalities.

Expecting local teams to “get it” without support and training seldom works. Even if a better understanding of the work culture eventually occurs over time, this “learn as you go” approach is costly, contributing to stress, poor productivity, and even employee turnover. Sadly, the most common mistake I see is waiting to see if tensions rise, and workers quit before acting. 

 Q. Can you cite an example of misunderstandings resulting in mistrust, loss of time, resources, and profits?

A. A challenge I was recently asked to address was the intervention by the expatriate partners in decisions that are best handled by local Western teams.

Probing the issue, I learned that based on extensive experience in the market and industry, the local Western management felt these decisions were often short-sighted, reactive, and not aligned with their well-thought-out strategy. Some saw it as a “cut twice, measure once” approach and “ready, fire, aim.” 

Of even more significant concern were one-sided decisions not resulting from the collaboration. In any case, local management felt their input and expertise were being marginalized. As pressure to meet HQ expectations, avoid any negative news, as well as missing Sales or Production “Targets” they saw increased intervention by the expatriate teams.

In this case, I worked with the Western teams to provide some proven workarounds, particularly tempering the Korean teams’ pressing for immediate results.

Specifically, I shared ten steps.

1. To soften jumping to implement a stop-gap plan with hopes of producing immediate results, look to minimize the anxiety for both the local Korean team and the headquarters team. Please be sure to show confidence that the challenge can be overcome.

2. Acknowledge your team’s high engagement and assure the Korean teams that action will be taken promptly.

3. As a next step upon receiving a directive from Korea, have an informal discussion with local Korean teams to brief them on action steps that enable the team to work through what needs to be explored more deeply.

4. Follow up with email correspondence confirming the verbal discussion.

5. Allow a day or two for the Korean team to review your action plan. In many cases, the Korean teams are not familiar with local practices and the vocabulary used to describe Western technical nuances.

The local expat teams may also want to report back to Korea on progress. HQ leadership is ultimately responsible, so the better informed they are, the more trust they will have in local teams — Korean and Western — that the project will progress.

6. Remember that you may receive only some feedback promptly because of time differences.

7. Conducting informal daily updates to the Korean teams and sharing the steps undertaken with the local Koreans can also be helpful.

8. Even better is reporting positive accomplishments in your review process.

9. It is essential to address the potential trade-offs and risks as action steps leading to solutions and assuring the team that these steps will not impede the project and may, in fact, avoid costly setbacks.

10. Finally, having said all this, maintaining trust through strong relationships between Korean and Western local organizations is essential.

Q. What have Koreans told you about Americans? Work habits, commitment, etc.

A. If you ask Korean expats how they perceive Americans and Westerners in general, responses would be very positive and respectful, especially toward Western work ethics and work habits. Koreans see great value in American and Western teams providing them with new insights, perspectives, and best practices.

A. What might be covered in Korean business culture training?

I see the training as twofold — 1) providing teams with an understanding of the Korean partner’s affiliate company history, heritage ( challenges overcome), trends, and expectations! , and 2) sharing the Korean workplace and its norms, practices, and workarounds. One nuance I share is that Korean overseas operations can differ from those in Korea, something I am most familiar with. 

Above all, a best practice is to celebrate similarities and shared values when possible, along with instilling an awareness of and respect for cultural differences.

Addressing the team’s questions and concerns is also vital with issues, such as work-life balance, safety and quality processes and procedures, and Korean partners’ overall expectations.

Q. Anything else?

A. To conclude, the need for cross-cultural training programs for local employees and management is a high priority.

The assumption that local and expatriate teams can bridge cultural gaps through practical on–the–job experience might work with those few highly intuitive individuals with the exceptional ability to assimilate cultures.

What stands out in numerous studies, however, is the need for ongoing multicultural training, that can successfully impact people, especially those who need to quickly adapt to new or changing business culture and values, while fostering sensitivity and teamwork among all company members.

Finally, I have found a tiered service model — training, mentoring, and ongoing strategic support- to be the most effective approach for an organization. For leadership, they most often benefit from one-on-one coaching, too.

Don Southerton

Rise of Kia: Part 2 Brisa

The Hyundai Motor Group has posted some wonderful images of a 1970s Kia Brisa. Last week in Part 1 of my “Rise of Kia” I shared the launch of the Brisa. Part 2 provides some more details on its success.

In the fall of 1974, the first Kia Brisa S-1000 four-door sedans rolled off the Sohari production line. ( A year earlier they had begun production of the Brisa pickup).

Overall the Brisa sedan was a success with 75,987 sold between 1974 and 1981.

In conjunction with the manufacturing of the Brisa sedan and Brisa pickup, Kia Motors also produced the vehicles’ 1-liter gas engines.

While the competition sourced engines from their foreign partners, this marked the first Korean company to manufacture its engines. In the first year of production, 65 percent of the parts in the Brisa, including the engine, drive shaft, and clutch, were manufactured in Korea. This local sourcing was strongly encouraged by the Korean Government and the ratio of locally produced parts increased steadily over the years.

Kia Motors would grow into Korea’s second-largest carmaker and would experience both international success and its demise under the 1997 financial crash —the latter leading to a “second chance” under parent company Hyundai Motor.

Source: Hyundai and Kia Motors The Early Years and Product Development  Author Don Southerton

The T600 and the Rise of Kia Motors

October 18, 2023 Don Southerton

Over the years I have been fortunate to meet with and interview many of the early Korean and Western Hyundai and Kia teams and leadership. Today’s successes were built upon their struggles and can-do perseverance.

Last week the Hyundai Motor Group posted some amazing photos of the Kia T600 circa 1969. I shared some more details such as in early 1962 Kia’s Shiheung production line launched the first in the line-up–the K-360. Production would continue until 1973 with over 25,000 of the sturdy vehicles sold.

I’d add the T600 would signal Kia’s rise … ( Kia= Rising out of Asia).

From my 2012 Hyundai and Kia Motors The Early Years and Product Development

Kia Motors [Now Kia] Kia Worldwide is one of the world’s fastest-moving global automotive brands. It has earned a reputation as an industry leader in design styling along with a full line of fuel-efficient vehicles that have earned critical acclaim and dramatically increased consumer awareness. Interestingly, the carmaker had early roots as a Korean bicycle and motorcycle manufacturer.

In the early 1960s, the Kia Motors Company moved beyond first bicycle components, then bicycles, and motorcycles to produce a highly practical K360 three-wheel utility truck. Across much of Asia, similar vehicles met a demand for reliable low-cost commercial transportation that could transport goods and products often in tight urban areas.

Based on the Mazda Mazdago design, the K360 also signaled Kia Motors’ long technology alliance with the Japanese automaker with a number of cars and trucks eventually licensed from Mazda.

During this era of budding Korean economic development, strong technology ties with foreign partners were common. For example, other Korean firms entered into partnership arrangements with international carmakers, including Nissan (Datsun), Toyota, Fiat, GM, and Ford. Korean industrial groups desiring to enter the car sector forged these alliances to gain advanced automotive technology and know-how. In addition, the government implemented strong trade protectionism in an effort to build a self-sufficient import substitution economy.

In particular, the Korean Automotive Industry Promotion Law required cars to be manufactured locally versus imported from foreign markets.

When pressured by the government to produce Korea-assembled cars, Kia Motors leveraged its strength as an engineering-based company and chose not to assemble compact cars imported as knockdowns (CKD). Instead, Kia set up a full-scale production plant with considerable local sourcing of parts.

Sohari

In 1973, Kia’s Sohari plant opened with the initial production of a pickup version of the Brisa. Drawing on the ongoing relationship with Mazda, the Brisawas based on the second-generation Mazda 1000, which was marketed as the Familia in Japan.

The T600 and the Rise of Kia Motors
Brisa

In conjunction with manufacturing the Brisa pickup, Kia Motors also began production of 1-liter gas engines. While the competition sourced engines from their foreign partners, this marked the first Korean company to manufacture its own engines. In the first year of production, 65 percent of the parts in the Brisa, including the engine, drive shaft, and clutch, were manufactured in Korea. This local sourcing was strongly encouraged by the Korean Government and the ratio of locally produced parts increased steadily over the years.

In the fall of 1974, the first Kia Brisa S-1000 four-door sedans rolled off the Sohari production line. Overall the Brisa was a success with 75,987 sold between 1974 and 1981. In 1975 the Brisa pick-up also became the first Kia to be exported when a number were shipped to Qatar in the Middle East.

The T600 and the Rise of Kia Motors
Brisa Sedan, Sohai Plant

Oil Shock

Notably, what spurred the Brisa’s early success was actually its small 1000cc engine displacement. Starting in 1973, an international oil shortage forced gasoline prices to skyrocket creating a supply shortage in Korea.

Veteran Hyundai and Kia Motors executive Mark Juhn who began his career with Shinjin Motors noted that the oil shock had a devastating impact on Kia’s rival— a newly formed and much larger General Motors Korea, a joint-venture company between GM and Shinjin Motors.

Mr. Juhn shared that with high gas prices Korean consumers favored the Kia Brisa and its smaller more economical engine over GM Korea’s first production model, the Chevrolet 1700 with a larger 1700cc engine.

Mr. Juhn also pointed out, “I could say the oil shock brought good luck to Kia but GM Korea struggled.”

[For those of you long associated with Hyundai, Mr. Juhn would later in his career head up Hyundai Motor America and was the driving force convincing HMC leadership to approve and support the game-changing 10-Year, 100,000 Mile Guarantee program].

The T600 and the Rise of Kia Motors
Mark Juhn with Don Southerton, Seoul, South Korea

Steady Growth

By 1976 Kia also strengthened its position in the commercial vehicle sector by purchasing Asia Motors based in Kwangju, South Korea. Asia Motors manufactured heavy trucks, buses, and a line of military vehicles. In addition, to meet the growing demand in Korea for cars, Kia even started CKD assembly of the Fiat 132 sedan, along with the Peugeot 604, a larger model sedan.

Government Intervention

Despite Kia’s successes, government intervention imposed new mandates over much of the growing Korean economy. Direct competition was regulated across many sectors of industry. In 1981, Kia Motors was told to stop producing cars and concentrate instead on light commercial vehicles. In turn, more light truck and van models were added, including the 1-ton Bongo, the Ceres pick-up and some larger truck models.

Ford Alliance

By the mid-1980s the Korean Government decided to change policy and relax its restrictions on the car and truck companies. Kia was allowed to return to car production. Working with Mazda’s Ford alliance, Kia Motors began to produce the Festiva (known as the Pride in Korea). Export to the U.S. began in 1988. The venture was extremely successful with 300,000 Festivas being shipped overseas between 1988 and 1993.

Stay tuned!

More to come on my documented early years of  Kia Motors Kia America, and Kia Worldwide and Hyundai Motor America and  Hyundai Motor Group

Earth Day- Earth Week- Earth Month 2023

Earth Day- Earth Week- Earth Month 2023
By Don Southerton

Reflecting on Earth Day, my ties to Green and Sustainability have reached back in time more than a few years. In fact, it parallels my work with Korea. In the mid-2000s, I was an advisor to developing and building the Incheon, South Korea Songdo International Business District. Under the leadership of Green visionary Stan Gale, the city is the global model for urban sustainability.

Earth Day- Earth Week- Earth Month 2023

Envisioned as a Green, high-technology city of the future — at the time, it was one of the world and Korea’s most significant foreign real estate development projects.

Built on reclaimed land and with partners like Kohn Pederson Fox, Cisco, and United Technology, the forward-leaning project also showcased some of the first LEED-certified buildings in South Korea and Asia.

In conjunction with the Songdo IBD project and my work for Hyundai, around 2007 the Songdo team and I had the opportunity for a VIP visit to Hyundai Motor’s R&D. We even got to fuel their 1st Gen Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEV), and then test drive the vehicles. At this time, Songdo’s leadership was very interested in FCEV buses for the International Business District powered by hydrogen.

Songdo’s innovations were again the subject of my 2013 article for the Korean government’s Ministry of Culture, Sports & Tourism, highlighting the city’s Green accomplishments.
Link: https://www.scribd.com/document/157552923/KOREA-2013-VOL-9-No-08#

I also hosted a 2013 BBC World Service visit to Songdo IBD, showing off its Green smart city capabilities, capped off by an interview with Cisco’s former Chief Global Strategist Wim Elfrink, an early adopter who popularized the term IoT — the Internet of Things. A day later, we visited Hyundai Motor’s Eco Lab and test-drove their 3rd Gen HCEV, a first-of-its-kind production SUV, which was soon launched in Korea and then California.

In the years that followed, as companies I supported moved to mobility and EVs, I, too, shifted my research and work to these new sectors. Electrification has been and continues to be a major part of my work, leading to an ongoing immersion in the sector supporting Korean startup Grinergy and Green lithium battery technology.

This year we’re seeing a heightened level of engagement fueled by the U.S. Biden administration’s funding more eco-friendly and secure sourcing of related Green technologies at the top of the list. See https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/american-made-limits-sourcing-eliminating-dependence-new-southerton/?trackingId=DMW8HonHQV2b1SGG%2B43GmQ%3D%3D

In particular, the focus on Green, Sustainability, and Resilience is this year’s Earth Day, or as one presenter at a recent webinar shared—it’s more of an Earth Week and Earth Month.

Personally, this includes participating in workshops and presentations at the Federal, State, and local levels, including groups like Yale Blue Green (YBG), who are engaged in environmental and sustainability topics and issues, and the Colorado Electric Vehicle Coalition.

This coming week is no different with plans to attend a Live Earth Day event at NREL—the National Renewable Energy Lab headquarters in Golden, Colorado.

Takeaways
As a Colorado DOT electrification expert shared, the questions their office received just a year ago centered on “if” EVs and related mobility were a good idea—to now a heightened acceptance and questions on expanding infrastructure and issues like micro-mobility, battery recycling, and end-of-life—to expanding availability from urban centers to rural and less economically served areas.

More so, as noted above and in my previous article American-Made, Limits on Sourcing, Eliminating a Dependence on China there is a need for better sourcing and sustainability of the raw materials and components used in Green tech.

Finally, as we reflect on Earth Day, in both in my work and pursuits, I find a greater embrace of new Green technologies, fueled by government and private funding and with a growing public interest in sustainability.

Questions? Comments? Have a project in mind or need support?
Urgent requests Text at 310-866-3777 All other Dsoutherton@bridgingculture.com

Grinergy to Exhibit at 2022 UMEX 

Grinergy to Exhibit at 2022 UMEX 

The Abu Dhadi event to showcase drones, robotics, components, and unmanned systems.

Seoul, South Korea. February 16, 2022

Grinergy, a South Korean headquartered lithium-ion rechargeable battery and battery management systems company today announced that they will exhibit at 2022 Unmanned Systems Exhibition (UMEX) and Simulation Training (SimTEX).

The conference set to kick off on February 20th  in Abu Dahbi is dedicated to showcasing drones, robotics, components, and unmanned systems– key applications for Grinergy battery technology. 

Grinergy offers multiple solutions to revolutionize the shortcomings of the conventional lithium battery industry. Grinergy’s proprietary technology offers remarkable safety with improved charging capability. 

For more information on Grinergy at UNMEX or their battery technology applications, please contact Don Southerton at dsoutherton@grinergy.co.kr or +1-310-866-3777.

Grinergy USA

Year-end Promotions, Restructuring, and New Assignments: Korea’s Corporate Culture 2021

Year-end Promotions, Restructuring, and New Assignments:

Year-end organization-wide promotions, restructuring, and new assignments for teams are traditionally a part of Korean corporate culture. Top to bottom within Korean companies they occur sometime between early December and early January, with the changes to senior leadership announced first, and team level changes as a norm made known the week just before or between Christmas and New Year’s Day.

After the Holidays, teams then report back to work. Some assume new roles frequently in departments where they have little experience—requiring employees to acquire new skills—sink or swim.

In the days that follow those shuffled brief their replacements, as staff remaining in their jobs update new management teams on the status of projects and issues.

Meanwhile, others will be en route to assignments in overseas operations; a challenge for those working outside Korea for the first time.

This can also be a challenge for local overseas operations. In particular, it is common for those newly assigned to be unfamiliar or have very limited experience with the many nuances in the localized foreign business, as well as the new role and responsibilities. Not to mention, working outside Korea is in itself a learning curve that can take months and even years.

And I strongly recommend leadership—Western and Korean– have countermeasures in place to mitigate any transitional gaps. They do occur. In fact, over the years I have worked extensively to facilitate smooth transitions.

So, what to look for…
The top Chaebol will and have begun to announce key promotions, which can provide some insight into future trends. The Chaebol usually also comment on whether this year’s promotion number is more or less than in the past and the reasons “why.”

On restructuring, top Chaebol have already announced plans. These can range from granting more independence to business units to consolidating control.

In their restructuring, SK Group elevated a number of executives to vice-chairman level and granting independent decision-making authority to their key affiliates that span from semi-conductor chips, batteries to wireless network, energy, and biotech.

In contrast, Samsung Electronics noted as a shake-up they will merge 3 of their business units.

Samsung also announced several changes in its corporate policies. With the new year, they will employ a new personnel management system. Under the new system, Samsung will abolish a set of requirements before an employee gets promoted to a certain level, such as a minimum term of service that lasts roughly eight to 10 years. Instead, top-performing employees will be eligible for their work performance and expertise be taken into account as key factors for promotion over time in grade.

The Hyundai Motor Group, too, has announced its executive reshuffle. To align with the new Chairman E.S. Chung’s future vision, we see a plan to bring younger faces on the C-suite with a focus on future mobility and on technology sectors such as infotainment, ICT, and autonomous driving. This then means many of the current leadership are stepping aside to the advisory posts.

New Years’ Message
This said, as in the past, with the new year, we can expect leadership will share their 2022 plans in an annual New Years’ company announcement, too. I monitor closely and as they are in Korean will share when appropriate and upon request.

As a final note, for western global teams, I suggest congratulating those who are promoted but also be sensitive to Korean team members who were passed over… or possibly moved to what may be seen as a less strategic assignment.

BTW Time in grade is just a criteria for promotion, or in some cases if a junior is promoted over a senior it is deemed as their time to retire.

Questions? Please feel free to reach out. dsoutherton@bridgingculture.com

Grinergy Top Pick in ‘K-Startup Center (KSC) Demo Day’

Grinergy Demo Day

Translated by Don Southerton

See the original text:

http://www.sisunnews.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=153895

The 2021 ‘K-Startup Center Demo Day’ was organized and hosted by South Korea’s Ministry of SMEs and Startups, and the Startup Promotion Agency.

‘KSC’ is a startup support program for promising Korean domestic ventures and startups looking to expand overseas. 

This event held on Friday December 10th at Banyan Tree Club & Spa Seoul Crystal Ballroom  showcased 7 innovative companies. Participating in the KSC program were Aon, Sentbe, Testworks , Grinergy, GEMotion, HiLocal and Dot. Each company presented an IR pitch through the online platform and were then screening  by VCs. 

The 1st place winner was ‘Grinergy’, which shared their  lithium secondary battery solutions that are capable of low-temperature and rapid charging. 

Sentbee, which introduced their “Digital C2C/B2B overseas remittance payment service’, was selected as the 2nd place. ‘TestWorks’, which introduced ‘Artificial Intelligence Algorithm and Data Solution Service for Learning’, was selected in 3rd place.

“Startups participating in today’s event are promising companies that have been recognized by accelerators from 7 countries around the world,” said Kim Yong-moon, president of the Korea Startup Promotion Agency. “In the future, the Korea Startup Promotion Agency will spare no effort to support K-start-ups to take a leap forward and advance into the global market.”

###

Grinergy Selected 1st Place in 2021 K-Startup Center Demo Day

Congratulations Grinergy on being selected 1st Place in the 2021 K-Startup Center Demo Day.

South Korea Grinergy

What a great honor.

축하합니다

Grinergy is a lithium-ion battery technology company with multiple solutions to revolutionize the shortcomings of the conventional lithium battery industry.