Revenue Attribution◾️ Dreamdata◾️ Sales leader with a crush on marketing

👩🏻‍💻 Professionally :
- Sales leader with a flavour for Marketing 🤝 
- Sales Pathfinder
- Doubling my LinkedIn followers base each year through content creation here.
I generate all my sales leads inbound from Linkedin Social Selling.
How do I know that Linkedin delivers Revenue?
Follow my Linkedin course on how to measure Linkedin Social Selling to Revenue: 

https://www.linkedin.com/learning/how-to-measure-linkedin-social-selling-to-pipeline/[…]g-and-adjusting-strategies-based-on-performance?


💃 Personally:
- Interested in B2B Influencer marketing.
- Morning 5K runner
- Appointed as an upcoming talent in Denmark u34
https://www.berlingske.dk/karriere/til-kamp-for-kvinder-i-it

Currently testing out the hypothesis: 
If you want to work in the past - join an enterprise.
If you want to work in the future - join a startup.

Fun fact: I was a weekend radio DJ for 2 years in my teen years 🎧

Laura Erdem

We are hiring! 
I am hiring! 

Account Executives in New York!

You will love to sell Dreamdata
- Amazing team
- Market winning product
- Inbounds that are not just qualified, but close within the quarter! 
- Competitive pay

Ping me!

B2B Attribution & Activation◾️ Dreamdata◾️ Sales director with a crush on marketing

🟠 - Marketing
⚪️ - Sales 

Organic Search and Direct are the least favourite sources for Inbounds. Both means "something is working" but we can't put the finger on it due to:
- No proper website tracking
- Deals not joined to Linkedin engagement
- Buyers just not clicking on the sponsored Google link you pay for.

As soon as you see an overview over a full customer journey, it gets so much easier to aggregate the data and understand which channels help educate the prospects and which of those are helping them to convert. 

This specific deal came through Organic - Straight to the pricing page! 
Seems like those LinkedIn targeted ads have worked out after all!

Please, you don’t need more intent signals. 
You need the right ones, the kind that actually lead to revenue.

That’s what we’ve been solving with Dreamdata Signals.

"Show me which Signals became Closed Won opps?"

Since launch, I’ve been watching how teams use it to sharpen their go-to-market. And the difference is wild.

Here’s how I’ve seen B2B teams use it best:
- Build precise audiences around signals and instantly sync them to ad platforms
- Create customized engagement scores to define what “intent” means for your business
- Trigger notifications to sales (on Slack/Teams) when an account shows intent 
Use AI to scan all your Go-To-Market data to uncover hidden intent signals that actually correlate with pipeline and revenue. 

Now you have a loop of success

As a serial inventor, I have a strong record of developing patented and non-patented commercial products in the field of deep tech. With over a decade of experience in high-tech industries, I am a technology-driven manager who co-developed the first commercially successful nano-product in the early 2000s.

In addition to my technical expertise, I have also served as a Board Member and founder in various sectors such as medical devices, environmental technologies, digital platforms, robotics, and production. My focus is on building up tech strategy, roll-out, and funding, and I have a proven track record at the junction of commercialization, including spin-off companies, new ventures, M&A, and turn-around.

I specialize in business development with a background in science and technology. I have experience expanding distribution of engineering products in China, India, Africa, Europe, and North America. My leadership in systematic outbound marketing and business development at Copenhagen Nanosystems generated global media exposure, and I achieved success as an investor in Nordic Web Ventures. I served as an advisory board member for Gate to Create, and as CTO at Leitha Clean Technologies, where I restructured activities to explore a turnaround and an asset sell-off. At reACT.Global (ACT.Global R&D), I managed a team of 12 and oversaw the development of high-tech solutions within microbiology, nano-technology, and chemistry.

As interim CCO at Copenhagen Nanosystems, I successfully expanded distribution, systematized outbound marketing, and achieved global media exposure. Resulting in the highest product sales in the company history. ( 2x sales, 5x distribution, 7x media exposure within first year)

Experienced within innovation and capacity building, based on more than a decade of international partnership building and technology centered transactions.

Christopher Lüscher

Patents are not paperwork. They are export infrastructure!

A new Danish analysis shows that investments in patents, trademarks, and design rights add ~€14bn (DKK 105bn) to Danish exports every single year. That’s not abstract innovation policy that’s concrete competitiveness.

For deep‑tech companies like Curcle supported by Food & Bio Cluster Denmark, Yngvi Bio housed at BioInnovation Institute (BII) or Alea Quantum Technologies part of NATO DIANA then this resonates strongly.

When your value is built on:
fundamental engineering
process innovation
hardware‑software integration
long development cycles

…IP is not optional. It’s what turns R&D into a scalable, defensible business with Patentopia.
Denmark remains in the global top‑10 for patent activity relative to GDP, but international competition  especially from Asia is accelerating fast. 
The companies that will win are the ones that:

build IP strategy early, integrate patents into fundraising and valuation
treat IP as a commercialization tool, not a legal afterthought.

If we want more Danish deep‑tech to scale globally, IP needs to be part of the operating system from lab to market.

Looking forward to seeing how the upcoming national IP strategy in 2026 will strengthen this path, especially for deep‑tech startups and scale‑ups. Conduit Venture Labs DTU Skyfactory

🔗 Source: TechSavvy Media
https://lnkd.in/emvqpPpu

#DeepTech #IPStrategy #Patents #Commercialization #Export #Innovation #DanishTech #Curcle Group4Grant

Christopher James Lüscher, Ph.D

Identifying, Developing, and Financing IP-Based Businesses

Open article: Patenter løfter dansk eksport med trecifret milliardbeløb: “Det er konkret konkurrencekraft” by techsavvy.media

Patenter løfter dansk eksport med trecifret milliardbeløb: “Det er konkret konkurrencekraft”

Nordic Innovation has always been strong at deep‑tech.
And it’s not accidental.

Across the Nordics, success in deep‑tech is built on: 
→ engineering depth over speed
→ long‑term capital patience
→ tight coupling between research, industry, and deployment
This is why Nordic teams consistently perform well in: 
⚙️ hardware‑heavy systems
🌱 energy & climate infrastructure
🏭 industrial technology
🔬 materials, photonics, and advanced manufacturing
Deep‑tech here isn’t optimized for hype. It’s optimized for delivery.
But technical excellence alone doesn’t guarantee funding success not in programs where risk and execution are evaluated just as hard as novelty.
Which brings us to the real challenge Nordic deep‑tech still faces.

#NordicInnovation #DeepTech #Hardware #IndustrialTech

Europe doesn’t have a lack of deep‑tech ideas. It has a build gap

After years working across EU deep‑tech, grants, and commercialization, including close collaboration with research and innovation environments at DTU - Technical University of Denmark, one pattern is consistent:
Exceptional science Fragmented execution Late (or missing) industrial validation.

The market talks about innovation. Founders live with manufacturing, regulation, capital friction, and timelines.

Bridging that gap is not about better pitch decks. It’s about structured venture building, early industrial reality checks, and financing models that respect how deep‑tech actually develops in Europe.

This is where venture studios and grant‑native commercialization become critical.
What do you see as the biggest execution gap in European deep‑tech?

#DeepTech #EuropeanInnovation #VentureBuilding #Commercialization #StartupEcosystem #EUInnovation

After working with countless grant supported projects, one thing is clear:
Grants aren’t won on technology alone!

They’re won on consortium structure.
Calls may look technical.
Evaluations are systemic.

What breaks most proposals:
Partners chosen for availability, not strategy
“Big names” without real evaluative weight
Roles that don’t match past winning patterns
No level of technical brilliance fixes that.

The real challenge isn’t the paperwork:
Who actually wins in this topic?
Which partners truly matter?
Who should lead and who shouldn’t be there?
The good news?

This no longer has to be guesswork.
New innovation intelligence tools now make it possible to:
->See who has won before and how
->Understand proven consortium patterns
->Design structure first, then build the proposal

That shift  from intuition to intelligence  is core to how we think about Group4Grant.

Great technology still matters.
But informed structure is what turns it into funded impact.

Most deep‑tech proposals don’t fail on the technology.
They fail on structure.
Hardware innovation comes with unavoidable realities: 
→ longer timelines
→ higher capital intensity
→ strict interdependence between design, manufacturing, and validation

Evaluators know this.
That’s why they look beyond the idea and ask: 
→ Has this type of consortium delivered before?
→ Are the execution roles credible on paper and in history?
→ Does the structure reduce risk or amplify it?

Too often, consortium formation still relies on:
 → personal networks
→ informal recommendations
→ late‑stage partner additions
Not because teams are careless  but because evidence hasn’t historically been available early enough.


This is where execution‑focused platforms like Conduit Venture Labs matter.
By sitting at the intersection of deep‑tech venture building, industrialization, and scale‑up, Conduit doesn’t just support technology development it reinforces structure: 
→ aligning hardware startups with manufacturing‑realistic pathways
→ de‑risking the transition from prototype to deployment
→ strengthening execution credibility where evaluators look first
In deep‑tech, the difference between a promising idea and a fundable project is rarely novelty. It’s whether the structure proves the technology can survive reality.

And in hardware, those early structural decisions are the ones you can’t undo.

taplio

The Battle

Laura Erdem

Christopher Lüscher

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreLaura Erdem's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreChristopher Lüscher's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Laura Erdem

Christopher Lüscher

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Laura Erdem's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreChristopher Lüscher's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreLaura Erdem's LinkedIn Performance