DAAV: a startup is mobilizing the Nordics

How do you decide which markets to enter?

We look for airports with enough traffic to generate a meaningful volume of passenger assistance requests. But size is not the only factor. We also look at how open an airport is to innovation. Vienna and Arlanda (near Stockholm) are good examples. They may not be among the largest airports by passenger volume, but they are well known for being open to new ideas and innovations. However, we are not trying to add technology for the sake of it. We want to improve efficiency and reduce operational costs, so we look for airports where that need is clearly there.

Why did trade fair participation become part of that strategy?

As a startup, you try different routes at the same time, and trade fairs are a very efficient way to test interest. For us, joining the SWISS Pavilion organized by Switzerland Global Enterprise (S-GE) at Slush was especially valuable. With a small team, it would have been difficult to organize a strong stand on our own. At Slush, for example, our main target was investors. We did not always have to go after them actively. Many came to the booth, and that created opportunities for follow-up discussions at side events as well. We also received financial support from the Bern Economic Development Agency for our trade fair participation, which was highly relevant for us as a startup.

You also asked  S-GE for direct introductions. What did that add?

That was very valuable. We were introduced to senior management at Swedavia. It happened more or less spontaneously while we were there, and much faster than I expected. In our field, that kind of introduction matters because airports are public infrastructure. When a startup approaches directly, it is one thing. An introduction through an official organization such as S-GE and its local office, the Swiss Business Hub Nordics, located at the Embassy of Switzerland, carries more weight. 

There is also an advantage in coming in very early. In our case, it gave Swedavia an early, practical view of what autonomous navigation could look like in day-to-day operations. We were able to run a pilot and help shape the initial thinking before a formal tender process began.

What are the main barriers when you bring a new solution into a market?

There are three main ones. First, management has to trust that the solution can work and add value. Second, staff need to see it as support rather than a threat. There is often an initial fear that technology could replace jobs, so it is important to show how it can improve working conditions and reduce physical strain. Third, passengers have to feel comfortable using it, although that has usually not been the main challenge. Feedback has been strongly positive.

What stood out to you in Sweden?

The culture of trust and the flat hierarchy. Decisions were handled as a team, and we were in touch with everyone. That made the collaboration very open.

In some airports, even if the wheelchair could operate autonomously, they still wanted us to remain on site during testing. In Sweden, the team was comfortable running it themselves after training. They handled more than 100 passengers in a short period, and around 95% of the feedback rated the experience as extremely pleasant. For us, that was a major milestone. 

Did that experience change the way you think about scaling internationally?

Yes. It showed us what is possible when trust is high and the local team is empowered to work independently. Our goal now is to build that same level of confidence with other airports, so that the technology can be used without needing us physically on site.

It also reinforced the importance of entering markets early. Not necessarily to sell immediately, but to listen. Airports may look similar from the outside, but once you spend time in them, you see major differences in how they operate and what passengers need. If you develop a product in isolation for too long, it becomes much harder to adapt later.

How much do you adapt the product to local conditions?

The core technology stays the same. Our autonomous navigation stack does not change from market to market. What changes is the interface, the language, and some operational settings. Speed and navigation behavior, for example, depend on the airport environment and local habits. Frankfurt is much denser and faster-moving, so the system has to operate more assertively. In Sweden, a calmer navigation style worked better. The bigger cultural adaptation is in how we position and present the solution rather than in the core technology itself.

You have made strong progress. What are your main learnings from this experience?

Looking back, I would take a much more structured approach. If we are already active at one airport in a market, it makes sense to ask S-GE for introductions to other relevant airports in the region and invite them to see the solution in operation.

Another lesson is to start internationalization early, even before the product is fully developed. My recommendation would be to go out early, get as many introductions as possible, and use those conversations to understand what customers in different markets actually need.