For the first semester of 2026, the IOC has taken part in an International Development Program with first year MBA students, from the University of California Berkeley, Haas School of Business. The class brings together different project from companies all around the world, for one semester.
Their project was to contribute to the 100% playbook, identifying products coming from fish that have a demand in certain regional markets and creating a tool that could be used by other clusters to evaluate market demand for different fish-made products.
Clarissa He used to be an intelligence officer in the Navy for 6 years. She chose this degree for the breath of opportunities she could get from it, and to get more exposure into the industry. Which brought her to the International development program, where she learned about project management skills and stakeholder management.
Rahmat Clinton was an engineer building manufacturing lines for innovative food products. Through that experience, she realized that even the best engineering cannot launch products without the right financial support. She is pursuing an MBA to explore how finance can unlock innovation.
Agrim Gupta was in management consulting for 5 years, helping client decarbonize and commercialise technology. His motivation for this degree was to upscale in those sector and work in a new geography.
What was your main learning point?
Agrim: In terms of learning, it has been both personal and professional. From a personal aspect, the blue economy was a new industry for all of us, from that aspect, it was very nice to learn about something completely new. From a professional aspect, working in a new geography with new people, I got a lot of insight into the cold consulting skillset, how to collaborate and effectively lead projects on your own.
Rahmat: My biggest learning was the importance of validating assumptions early, especially when working on ambiguous problems. During one of our first stakeholder meetings on-site, we learned that several of our key assumptions were incorrect. While it required significant rework, the experience ultimately strengthened our project and reinforced the value of testing ideas quickly before investing heavily in a particular direction.
What was the most challenging part?
The most difficult part was navigating uncertainty through having incomplete data and no way of getting the actual information that we needed, even if we were asking people that were working in fisheries and in processing in the region. Either companies’ data would be proprietary and not representative of all of Oregon or Scotland, we had to find other ways to triangulate the information that was needed. We were tackling a complex problem with limited information, and our understanding evolved significantly as we met with stakeholders.
What was the most enjoyable aspect?
Nitin: For me, the most enjoyable aspect has been the team. It’s very easy, when you have that random element, to be paired with people who are unwilling to compromise, unwilling to accept that there is a new way to try out things or a different perspective. But what this team has relentlessly showed is that they are willing to step back from their position if they think there is a valid counter-argument to be made. Watching a very efficient team trust each other enough to give that leeway was a very enjoyable experience. On a personal note, it is Iceland. There are not enough tours that we have done during the weekend, I wish that I could replace some of the time that we spent in the office.
Rahmat: I totally agree, the most enjoyable aspect was being able to immerse myself in Iceland while working on a project connected to one of the country’s most important industries. Learning about Iceland’s history, culture, and fishing sector through site visits, conversations with locals, and meetings with industry leaders provided context that would have been impossible to gain remotely. I was particularly fascinated by how central the fishing industry has been to Iceland’s economic development.
You are here in Iceland as the last step in your project, what is your impression of Iceland? Of the cluster?
Clarissa: The Cluster is very collaborative, it feels like a very positive work environment. We have all been in workspaces where everyone is there but there is no real connection. Here, I think it’s very obvious, you can tell that the people are connected to each other as well as the work that they’re doing.
I didn’t realize how Icelandic the Iceland Ocean cluster is, the fisheries and the blue economy are so integral to the country, the country’s economy, its culture, and its history. It was really cool that the project that we have, while based in Iceland, is also very much part of Icelandic culture.
Rahmat: I came away deeply impressed by both Iceland and the Iceland Ocean Cluster. Iceland’s natural beauty exceeded my expectations, but what stood out even more was the warmth and openness of the people I met. The Iceland Ocean Cluster was equally impressive because of its ability to bring together stakeholders across the fishing industry to create more value from shared resources. Seeing how the cluster fosters collaboration and innovation gave me a new perspective on the role networks can play in strengthening an industry.
If you had more time, what would you do?
Agrim: A lot of it has been strategizing the plan, what things should happen and what would be the next step, but we would have loved to also go a step ahead and actually start implementing these plans, and taking it a step further. It could also be rewarding to actually see the value of the work they did, a lot of the implementation was also informal strategy. But then again, you can never have enough time.
Rahmat: If I had more time, I would spend additional time meeting with stakeholders across the seafood value chain and learning more about how different organizations interact within Iceland’s ocean economy. The project introduced me to the power of industry networks, and I would have loved to explore more examples of collaboration and innovation taking place throughout the ecosystem.
If you could do one thing differently, what would it be?
Nitin: We would have benefited from the conversation we had with Cécile from Matís. She talked to us about the importance of understanding the composition of the various fish side streams that you can collect. From that one simple conversation – we dug as much as we could in an hour – that one conversation reframed so much of the recommendation that we were giving. Had that conversation happened a couple of months ago, we could have revisited some products that we chose at the end of the day. It’s not just about what side streams are available, but what type of side streams are available, and maybe that means that we have to revisit the product ideas, taking that into consideration. Definitely, after getting the sense of the landings for the species, if we had focused on composition first rather than jumping the gun to product, that would have helped the analysis further.
For future students what advice would you give them?
Agrim: It’s important and embedded into IOC’s culture, its collaboration. A lot of people might think a project on this topic outside their field, that secondary research online, will be the best way to upscale. I think it’s important, but on top of that, what’s even more important is to talk to a lot of people like leverage, IOC, and cluster companies, and their sister clusters also. I feel like a lot of these perspectives across different kinds of stakeholders, where there is someone who’s managing the cluster, some of the cluster companies, and people from the regulation standpoint, all of these perspectives bring in the right directly really useful insight. Just be out there and talk to a lot of people, that helped us a lot.
Clarissa: I would actually second that, because when we started the project in January, especially because Alexandra and Clara were able to provide us with a lot of research that people had done for the Great Lakes, a little bit for the Pacific Islands as well, and everything that the IOC has done. Initially, my impression was, “we have all of this stuff we can read and synthesize, why do we need to talk to these random people?” Once we started figuring out who these “random people” were, I realized that these are actually very important people to talk to because they have seen the processing aspect, they have seen what it’s like to be a fisherman or to be the one researching the different species. By going through that process, I realized how valuable that information was and it’s not something that you can just read of the page, despite having hundreds of pages of research.
Nitin: As much as we want to provide insights to a completely new location, the people who work there and who live that life know their ecosystem so much better, so sometimes the value added that we can provide is either zooming out on their problem and giving them a bigger perspective or sharing perspectives from one location to another. Again, the conversational part definitely helps understanding. Initially, I was so focused on reading the report and thinking, “There is no way I’m going to know every species of fish that lands or every small player in the industry, that Scotland or Oregon supports”. Let’s just go with what we know which is how to do we synthesise all of this information in terms of very essential framework that these teams can use.
Rahmat: Take full advantage of being on the ground. Some of the most valuable insights came from conversations with stakeholders, locals, and industry leaders that challenged our assumptions and expanded our understanding.