Battery-Analytics GCC Research-Lab Maturation Leader

The mandate

A promising fast-charge degradation model failed when moved from coin-cell research data to production-format cells, exposing undocumented test conditions and optimistic feature selection. The India lab produced frequent prototypes but lacked authority over experimental sufficiency, negative-result retention and product-transfer gates. The digital research head departed after battery-management and cell-science leaders rejected the same release for different reasons.

The interim will begin in Seoul within three weeks and lead for eighteen months across Korean laboratories and the India research centre. Search for a permanent digital battery research leader starts after two models clear cell-scale replication and one enters a product validation programme, expected by month eleven. The successor will chair a failed-hypothesis review and product-transfer gate during seven weeks of overlap.

Handover requires four research themes to have linked experiment and model provenance, retained negative evidence, explicit scientific and product decisions, repeatable cross-lab tests and India principal-investigator depth. Two blinded replications and three product-transfer reviews must run under the installed model. The successor receives experiment registries, assumption logs, IP choices, talent actions and unresolved scale-up risks.

The interim may stop an analytical release, require new cell tests, redirect research capacity, retire an unsupported theme and commit up to KRW 9 billion from the approved digital-research portfolio. Cell chemistry selection, production qualification, vehicle safety release, patent filing and plant-capacity decisions remain with established councils. India research leads may reject insufficient experimental design before modelling begins.

Gigafactory yield, enterprise high-performance-compute procurement, battery warranty policy, physical laboratory operations and chemistries outside the four themes remain outside scope. The seat owns experiment-to-model discipline, analytical research leadership, product-transfer gates, India capability maturation and succession. It cannot claim ownership of cell science simply because its evidence underpins model validity.

Why this seat is open

The failed scale-up demonstrated that prototype volume had outpaced experimental governance, then the accountable research executive exited. Cell scientists and software leaders disagree about where experimental responsibility ends and model responsibility begins. A temporary interdisciplinary leader can establish evidence discipline through live programmes and leave a mature India research bench.

What you will own

• Reconstruct the fast-charge failure across cell format, test conditions, feature choices, uncertainty, replication and intended product use.
• Connect experiment plans, raw measurements, transformations, model versions, assumptions and negative findings through durable provenance.
• Define India research authority over test sufficiency, analytical method, limitation disclosure and product-transfer recommendation.
• Establish gates from hypothesis through cross-lab replication, cell-scale validation, battery-management integration and deliberate closure.
• Build principal investigators and research-product leaders who can challenge both electrochemists and machine-learning specialists.
• Run blinded replication, changed-protocol and failed-hypothesis reviews that reward correction rather than presentation success.
• Transfer research portfolios, evidence registries, product gates, IP questions and succession actions through permanent-leader forums.

Candidate qualifications

• Led battery analytics, electrochemical modelling or comparable physical-science machine learning from research into product validation.
• Recovered a model failure caused by laboratory protocol, scale transition, feature selection or missing negative evidence.
• Matured an India research lab from prototype delivery into accountable experimental and product-transfer decisions.
• Joined cell scientists, data engineers and embedded-product leaders around reproducible evidence and explicit uncertainty.
• Governed publication and patent timing without allowing IP ambition to conceal weak replication or product fit.
• Handed a digital research portfolio to permanent leadership after witnessed hypothesis closure and validation gates.

Non-negotiables

• Can start in Seoul within three weeks and sustain alternating travel between Korean and India research sites.
• Will accept exclusive executive accountability for the four digital research themes and their transfer gates.
• Brings battery or physical-science model scale-up plus India lab maturation; generic AI leadership is insufficient.
• Must disclose battery makers, cell suppliers, testing laboratories, universities, model vendors and investment interests.

1. 49 words maximum. Describe a physical-science model that failed when experimental scale or protocol changed.
2. 49 words maximum. How did you preserve negative battery evidence when teams were rewarded for prototypes?
3. 49 words maximum. State your Seoul availability and the largest research lab maturation you personally led.