See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266408206

Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative

Design in the IC Supply Chain

Article · January 2009

CITATIONS READS

10 351

2 authors, including:

Jei-Zheng Wu
Soochow University, Taiwan
45 PUBLICATIONS   456 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Effectiveness and Validation Scheme on Multiple Criteria Decision Making Approaches and its Applications to Production and Inventory Planning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jei-Zheng Wu on 29 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 95

Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision

Quality on Collaborative Design
in the IC Supply Chain
Jei-Zheng Wu* Chia-Yu Hsu

Department of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management,

National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan

(Received 10/2008; Revised 12/2008; Accepted 01/2009)

Abstract

Because the design process of Integrated Circuit (IC) product is knowledge-intensive and
time-consuming, the collaboration among IC designers and manufacturers is crucial for reducing time to
market of designing product. To enhance the quality of manufacturing strategic decisions for collaborative
IC design, manufacturing practices must be identified as the core elements of manufacturing strategy.
However, little research has been done regarding the essentials of implementing collaboration among IC
designers. This study aims to clarify terminology of decision quality in manufacturing strategy and define
Critical Success Factors (CSFs) as manufacturing practices for improving decision quality on collaborative
design in the IC supply chain through comprehensive literature review. Moreover, this study proposes a
framework in which the CSFs can be identified for different parties in IC supply chain.
Keywords: decision quality, collaborative IC design, critical success factors, manufacturing strategy, supply chain

time-consuming. IC design requires not only

1. INTRODUCTION
Integrated Circuit (IC) design, which
embodies the main functions of signal processing
for electronic applications, is one of the most key
industries in semiconductor manufacturing.
Particularly, the IC fabless (fabrication-less,
namely stand-alone design house) industry has
contributed 15.5% and 16.4% of total
semiconductor industry growth, with achieving a
stable growth rate in 2004 and 2005, respectively
(Liu, 2006). Notably, IC design requires a longer
lead time than manufacturing, and thus has a great
impact on time-to-market, the cycle time between
product conception and fulfillment (Kim et al.,
1999).
However, IC design is difficult and
fundamental understanding of circuit operation but
also expert knowledge of performance tradeoffs.
Time-consuming experiments and simulations are
required to consider specification constraints while
optimizing multiple criteria such as open-loop
voltage gain, power dissipation, input range, output
swing, offset voltage, common mode rejection
ratio, power supply rejection ratio, unity-gain
bandwidth, phase margin, input-referred noise,
settling time, and slew rate in an operational
amplifier (op-amp) design (Geppert, 1999).
Performance trade-offs require intensive
computation owing to their nonlinear nature and
the complexity increasing exponentially with
advances in technology. Moreover, the design is
getting harder when it moved toward Analog and

*
Correspondence: Department of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, National Tsing Hua University
101, Section 2, Kuang-Fu Road, Hsinchu 30013, Taiwan, R.O.C.
E-mail: d907804@alumni.nthu.edu.tw
96 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain
Mixed-Signal (AMS) and Radio Frequency (RF)
IC design (Leenaerts et al., 2001). Indeed, analog
devices are typically very large to enable them to
handle large currents and guarantee precision
among continuous parameters. Furthermore,
analog circuits resist technology migration
resulting from tight dependence on the wafer
fabrication (fab) process. Design and verification
thus become increasingly complex and
time-consuming. Although numerous studies have
been done regarding cycle time reduction and
productivity in semiconductor manufacturing, few
studies have examined the effectiveness and
efficiency of IC design.
This study investigates Critical Success
Factors (CSFs) for improving decision quality on
collaborative design in the IC supply chain via
comprehensive literature review. Specifically, this
investigation examines relevant methodologies,
developed tools, application frameworks, and
system architectures. The collective outcomes can
help achieve effective and efficient IC designs in
the area of robust design; that is specification
conformance for a plurality of process conditions
and parameters, verification and revision cycles
reduction, elimination the loops of within and
between designs, short yield ramp-up duration for
manufacturing.
2. DECISION MAKING
Decision making is a process of commanding
or performing activities with choices for a
particular purpose. A decision is made by a
decision maker who is an individual or a group of
people in an organization. According to the theory
of bounded rationality (Simon, 1955), a decision
maker is presumably “subjectively” rational since
a decision maker is somehow lack of information
and thus the choice is made based on the decision
maker’s experience. However, unlike an
administrative man (Simon, 1997) who “selects the
first option that meets a given need or selects the
option that seems to address most needs rather than
the ‘optimal’ solution,” a decision maker tends to
structure a decision for capturing a satisficing
alternative subject to the limited resource.
A decision occurs and raises attention
whenever there is a difficult and important choice
to be made (Thompson, 1964; Smith, 1988).
Consequently, a decision is always coincided with
an issue or problem. Once a problem is perceived,
an effective action must be taken to handle it. In
principle, we would utilize different tools for
different situations so as we would apply different
solution strategies for different problems. Decision
problems can be identified by distinguishing
factual and value elements (Simon, 1997). In
particular, the factual premise addresses causations
among variables that are objectively true or false
whereas the value premise depicts decision
maker’s subjective preferences.
The classification of decision problems starts
from March and Simon (1958) in which problems
were defined as two extreme types: programmed
and non-programmed. Thompson and Tuden (1959)
further classified four types of decision problems
according to differences in the certainties or
uncertainties of causation and preferences which
correspond with factual premise and value premise,
respectively. Each dimension constitutes a
continuum between certainty and uncertainty
whereas Thompson-Tuden focuses on the extremes
for ease of discussions. Regarding the uncertainty of
causation, sometimes we are not sure about what the
effect or how much the payoff would be by given
alternatives to be chosen as shown in Figure 1. That
is, uncertainties of causation are analogous to
unpredictability of outcome. Uncertainties in
causation are often resulted from complexity, lack
of information or information being too expensive
to acquire, and system variation. On the other hand,
uncertainties of preferences occur whenever there
are non-commensurable objectives. Specifically,
two objectives are commensurable if both can be
measured in the same units; non-commensurable,
otherwise. For example, preferences over high profit
and low cost are commensurable since both can be
measured in monetary units and attained
simultaneously. In contrast, preferences over high
quality and on-time delivery are clearly
non-commensurable since achievement of one
objective can not compensate failure of another
(Thompson, 1964).
Thompson-Tuden typology suggests a
strategy for each of the problem types as shown in
Figure 2. The well-structured problem is a
programmed one and presumes practicable
information acquisition and computation time in
the strong sense (Thompson, 1967; Simon, 1973).

Figure 1. A decision-making flow incorporating causation and preference
Figure 2. Thompson-Tuden typology
Most of well-structured problems can be solved via
routine, standard operating procedures, specialists
about particular actions, operations research, and
computer programs (March and Simon, 1958). The
rest of the problems are those non-programmed
and ill-structured (March and Simon, 1958; Simon,
1973). For the semi-structured unpredictable
problem, a decision maker would require expert
judgment to fill the gap between causes and effects
(Pearl, 2000; Hoover, 2001; Woodward, 1997;
Cartwright, 2003, 2004). Investigating complex
causation among huge amount of variables from
raw data comprises three steps: (1) exploring
suspicious causes, (2) screening off spurious
associations, and (3) discovering and structuring
causes. Each step can be facilitated by qualitative
and quantitative aids including Humean tradition,
subjective judgment, causal diagram, temporal
information, conditional probability, structural
equation, and intervention estimation.
When dealing with the semi-structured
tradeoff problem, the best solution would be
Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 97
accommodation of conflict objectives. Practicable
approaches include compromise, competition,
bargaining, co-optation, and coalition (Thompson,
1964). Recent development has gone to specific
tools for particular applications including multiple
objective programming (Weber and Current,
1993), goal programming (Buffa and Jackson,
1983), Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Saaty,
1990), Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)
(Charnes et al., 1978; Banker et al., 1984), and
Simple Multiattribute Rating Technique (SMART)
(Edwards and Barron, 1994). For more details and
specific usage, please refer to Wang (2004). The
suggested strategy for the unstructured problem is
to wait for inspiration. When there is additional
knowledge in causality or preference
accommodation, the unstructured problem will be
able to transform into a semi-structured problem
and then be solved. It always needs wisdom and
patience to find a satisfactory solution for this
problem type. Nevertheless, the well-structured
problem is the desired end of all types of problem
98 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain
(Mao, 2003). When a solution is proposed, the
solved problem is somehow transferred to a
well-structured one. What matters is the
effectiveness of the transformation. Nevertheless,
the quality of decision-making is not well defined
in the research of decision sciences. Thus, this
study aims to clarify and identify terminology of
decision quality in manufacturing strategy.
3. MANUFACTURING
STRATEGY FOR IMPROVING
DECISION QUALITY
Strategy is a series of long-term, pervasively
influential, extensively premeditated, and
practically rehearsed actions aiming at particular
objectives. Since the situation varies from minute
to minute, it is not possible to a priori arrange a
plan of actions in great detail. For this reason, a
strategy adaptively conducts guides rather than a
set of rigid instructions in contrast to tactics or
operations. Consequently, adaptability, abstraction,
and conceptualization reduce complexity so that a
whole picture of how to achieve the final goal can
be drawn premeditatedly.
On the other hand, manufacturing strategy is a
strategy that utilizes manufacturing functions to
achieve strategic objectives based on a sequence of
decisions over time for customer satisfaction
(Skinner, 1969; Hayes and Wheelwright, 1984).
Manufacturing strategy comprises decision-making
problems in terms of manufacturing practices to
achieve manufacturing objectives through linkages
of performance measurement. It is in conformance
with corporate strategy, business strategy, and
marketing strategy (Leong et al., 1990; Dangayach
and Deshmukh, 2001). In order to achieve
sustainable competitive advantage, a manufacturing
Figure 3. Manufacturing strategy process
strategy should be carefully designed and
formulated to constitute the corporate operation
model with strong resources and capabilities. On the
other hand, implementing the corporate operation
model will seek to achieve intended objectives
through complex effects of realized actions. The
process of manufacturing strategy is illustrated in
Figure 3. Briefly speaking, manufacturing objectives
are “what a company can express in front of
customers for sustainable competitive advantage”
whereas manufacturing practices are “what a
company has to do to achieve the former.”
Manufacturing strategic decisions generally
involve multiple manufacturing objectives to
achieve simultaneously that often conflict with
each other when the resource is limited. Similarly,
in decision-making problems, to elicit preferences
among objectives is crucial to make a decision
successful. For higher level of manufacturing
objectives achievement, manufacturing practices
have to be done by virtue of activities in reality as
choices among alternatives in decision making.
Finally, manufacturing performance measurement
ensures that the effects of manufacturing practices
on manufacturing objectives are measurable and
operational so that controlling or intervening
manufacturing practices could meet intended
purposes. In conformity with decision making,
examining causal relationships among variables a
priori in terms of metrics is fundamental to assess
effects and then predict consequences and thus
make a clever choice. To enhance the quality of
manufacturing strategic decisions, Chien and Wu
(2007) defined the spectrum of problem-structuring
in light of structure level and thus proposed a
decision analysis framework as a guide for
modeling various problems with respect to the
spectrum.

Figure 4. Simple causality between revenue and cost
Commonly, a company seeks long-term
profitability by maximizing revenue, the product of
selling volume and unit price, and minimizing total
cost. Indeed, the causal relationship between
revenue and cost can be complicated. For example,
a customer-driven company may try to minimize
total cost so that it can offer wider range of prices
for customers. The simple causal relationship
between revenue and cost can be shown in Figure
4. Consequently, the company may lower prices to
gain more selling volume. Thereby, profit could be
increased with proper price setting.
However, multiple factors such as quality and
delivery may also influence price other than cost.
For example, strategic objectives, including price,
quality, delivery, flexibility, service, company status
and relationship, and technology and collaboration
have been discussed in the literature (Skinner, 1978;
Leong et al., 1990; Hayes and Wheelwright, 1984;
Hill, 1995; Gerwin, 1987; Miller and Roth, 1994;
Miltenburg, 1995; Flynn et al., 1999; Frohlich and
Dixon, 2001). Manufacturing practices are one of
the core elements of manufacturing strategy that
affect the ability of the firm to meet long term
objectives (Skinner, 1969; Hayes and Wheelwright,
1984; Fine and Hax, 1985). These decisions are
often cross functions. Manufacturing performance
measurement ensures that the effects of
manufacturing practices on manufacturing
objectives are measurable and operational so that
controlling or intervening manufacturing practices
could meet intended purposes (Kaplan and Norton,
1992; Kaplan and Norton, 2001). Since the causality
is complex, competitors in the same market may
thus find their niches (Porter, 1985). Figure 5
depicts a more detailed version of causality between
revenue and cost with manufacturing objectives as
the immediate source of revenue and manufacturing
practices as the source of cost. In this way, the
immediate sources of revenue and cost can be
explicitly identified and their influence relationship
Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 99
can be specified as well. For example, investments
in expensive equipment are not objectives but
means to satisfy demand. However, this means must
be able to link with the manufacturing objectives so
that effort will not merely produce cost. For
example, Wu and Chien (2008) developed a
decision framework in which preference over
vendors at strategic level and order allocations at
operational level can be integrated to evaluate
vendor performance, allocate the orders, and
generate the associated material requirement
planning reports for semiconductor assembly.
To sum up, decision quality for manufacturing
systems such as IC design and semiconductor
manufacturing can be defined as follows. First of
all, a “good” decision must be able to a priori
structure causal relationship among decisions in
light of objectives, practices, and performance
measurement based on facts and preferences. A
decision can thus be structured as an
“unstructured”, “semi-structured unpredictable”,
“semi-structured non-commensurable”, or
“well-structured” problem which corresponds to
appropriate solution strategy. Secondly, a decision
can be evaluated according to the objective
hierarchy formulation which ensures top-down
decomposability, bottom-up collectively
exhaustiveness, mutually exclusiveness in the
same level, and criteria collection being complete,
measurable, non-redundant, and minimal (Chien,
2005). Finally, the structure of the decision model
should be as stable as possible so that outcomes of
decision execution can be predictable.
4. THE EVOLUTION OF IC
SUPPLY CHAIN
During the 1980s, Integrated Device
Manufacturers (IDM) for Application Specific ICs
(ASIC) dominated IC manufacturing. After Taiwan
Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
100 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain
Figure 5. Illustrative manufacturing strategy causality
(TSMC) initiated foundry services in 1987, fabless
companies with design know-how were able to sell
products without needing to own expensive
manufacturing facilities, whereas foundry
companies focused on providing specialized fab
services. With the growing complexity of IC
design and semiconductor manufacturing, IC
designers were forced to devise more complicated
systems and circuits on a single chip of silicon
with terminology of System on Chip (SoC) to meet
customer requirements within an acceptable
timeframe. SoC technology integrated various
components, including digital applications such as
logic, memory, CPU, and analog, into a single chip
(Leenaerts et al., 2001). Generally, silicon
Intellectual Property (IP) were traded and
assembled as part of the implementation of SoC.
Specifically, IP appears to be a buyable and
reusable know-how technology that can broadly
take the form of algorithms, software, designs,
models, test benches, or methodologies in a broad
sense. In a narrow sense, IP represents a virtual
component with well-defined functions, method of
use, and tools to support its usage (Gajski et al.,
2000). In the late 1990s, IP providers, who
supplied IP components such as soft kernel, hard
kernel and software technology, began to emerge,
and the IC design industry disintegrated into three
main business areas, namely IP component, IC
product design, and IC design services. Among
these areas, foundry companies could not only
provide manufacturing services but could also
expedite design migration in silicon IP cores (Shih
et al., 2008). Presently, it is impractical for IC
design houses to develop all components and tools
without relying on core technologies provided by
third-party IP providers, including design service
providers, pure IP providers and EDA tool
providers. Consequently, currently IDM, IP,
fabless, system, foundry, assembly and testing
companies are performing respective services and
interacting as shown in Figure 6.
5. CRITICAL SUCCESS
FACTORS FOR
COLLABORATIVE DESIGN IN
THE IC SUPPLY CHAIN
Collaboration in the IC supply chain is various.

Figure 6. The evolution of IC supply chain
To derive complementary technologies for
developing complete design solutions for
customers, most third-party IP providers with
different IP technologies and cores have begun to
collaborate with one another. Su et al. (2005)
addressed four reasons for collaboration among
third-party IP providers. First, IC design houses
require different IP and complementary technology
to reduce design time and get complex circuits
working. Second, fabless design houses require IP
modules and downstream supporting services to
implement IP. Third, IP is verified by other
third-party IP providers or foundry companies to
ensure the higher reusable probabilities and fitness.
Fourth, to devise a complete collaboration strategy,
IC design houses frequently release IP requests to
promise whole solutions for customers. In
addition, the ASIC service process distinguishes
collaboration between foundry and Design Service
Providers (DSP) among four phases: business
negotiation, design, pre-production, and
production; the IP development process begins
with business negotiation and priority setting.
Based on the files provided by foundries, DSP then
establish process-related IP libraries. Moreover,
equipment suppliers co-work with foundry service
providers to design new tools for advanced
Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 101
technologies, and use automated procurement as
the interface for equipment purchasing.
Meanwhile, equipment suppliers use remote
diagnosis and perform trouble shooting if
necessary. Typically, the collaboration mechanism
between foundry and fabless design houses is built
by the main foundry companies, such as TSMC
and United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC)
(Fang, 2004). These collaborations can be further
classified into design collaboration, engineering
collaboration, and logistics collaboration. The
design collaboration mechanisms focus on
supporting customers (namely, fabless or IDM) in
accessing completed and accurate information at
each step of the design process, including design
rule, SPICE model, tape-out, i.e. writing the final
detailed data file on the magnetic tape, and so on
(Macher et al., 2002; Su et al., 2005). The
engineering collaboration mechanisms between
fabless design houses and foundry focus on solving
different yield challenges at different stages of
process technology (Su et al., 2005). Logistical
collaboration between foundries and fabless
designers can be divided into three layers, namely
a manufacturing service layer, business process
layer, and infrastructure layer, to serve different
binding procedures, including naming mapping,
102 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain
business processes binding, resource reservation
binding and manufacturing service management
binding (Su et al., 2004).
For collaborative design in the IC supply
chain, firstly, Computer-Aided Design (CAD) and
Electronic Design Automation (EDA) based on
expert knowledge were essential and then
developed to make intelligent choices among fixed
circuits and common analog blocks that were
stored in the knowledge base where users simply
inputted the performance specifications and the
parameters of the fab process to be used without
fully understanding their operation, and the system
then designed matching analog circuit modules
(Sheu et al., 1988; Carley and Rutenbar, 1988).
Afterward, engineers started to reuse and configure
existing circuits instead of redesigning a full circuit
typology every time. As a consequence,
reconstruction techniques came into being (Fung et
al., 1989). Based on a database of established
knowledge that provides both flexibility in design
and savings in data space, the basic reusable parts
of a circuit can be replaced or reused with
corresponding functions to reflect the circuit
changes, Accordingly, data management systems
were specified by using distributed techniques and
hierarchical data representation for efficiency and
dynamic configuration to store large amounts of
schematic and multiple-fixed-architecture design
records and rules (Cao et al., 1991; Milo and
Nehab, 1991; Cottrell and Grebinski, 2003).
Actually, platform, synthesis, and reuse
methods were originally proposed as a means of
filling the gap between silicon capacity and design
ability (Gajski et al., 2000). In particular, in the
reuse method, the SoC designs or technologies
were assembled using different IP provided by
several IP providers. The reuse method can be used
to form a whole model, known as the IP business
model, in the semiconductor industry. There were
three major players in the model. Firstly, IP
integrators, typically designers in system houses,
provided design services. Secondly, IP tool
developers supported IP development and system
integration for IP providers and IP integrators.
Thirdly, IP businesses, including IP distribution,
service, and trade, affected not only bilateral
contract negotiation but also multiple-party
negotiations among IP providers and consumers. In
relation to IP reusability, Savage et al. (2000)
introduced IP creation, IP conversion, and the
necessary infrastructure. Moreover, Schindler et al.
(1999) devised a web IP reuse infrastructure for
use by IP providers and IP consumers in
exchanging, searching, selecting, depositing, and
sharing design IP.
To facilitate the initialization and
modification of circuit design and layout, several
studies have focused on design optimization. For
example, Jingnan et al. (2001) applied simulated
annealing, together with heuristic based rules, for
constraint generation, to parameterized circuit
descriptions. Moreover, Bűrmen et al. (2003)
proposed a simple mathematical formulation along
with heuristics for ease of computation. To enable
full circuit simulation of each circuit candidate,
Phelps et al. (2000) developed an efficient and
robust numerical search algorithm combining the
population-of-solutions ideas from evolutionary
algorithms with a novel variant of pattern search,
and which supported transparent network
parallelism. Moreover, Geometric Programming
(GP) was applied to IC design optimization
automation for globally optimal tradeoffs among
competing performance measures (Hershenson,
2001). GP utilized the capability of the
interior-point method for optimization, without
human intervention, subject to special types of
constrains or specifications, namely monomial and
polynomial inequalities. The analytical expressions
for the constraints and specifications can be
partially automated by utilizing symbolic circuit
simulators. Owing to the link to an automatic
layout program, it has been suggested that the tool
can generate mask designs directly from op-amp
specifications. However, modeling abstractions,
scalar weight settings, and design rules continue to
be based primarily on human expertise. Restated, a
knowledge-based system capable of adapting to
meta-modeling would be beneficial to facilitate
parameter setting.
The rapidly increasing complexity of IC
design requires a design system architecture or
platform that supports highly efficient and
high-quality sharing of IC design data. An
Application Programming Interface (API) to a
standard Information Model (IM) that provides
access to a shared database is essential to
contemporary IC design systems. These design
data in API should be standardized across the IC

CAD industry so that design systems can
efficiently draw from best-of-class applications
from all sources in the EDA industry. An IM for
design data defines the semantics of, and
relationships between, circuit elements (and the
various views of the data) that are to be
implemented as a programmable package and
made publicly visible in the API (Blanchard et al.,
2002). OpenAccess is an open industry data model
and API for IC design tools along with a
designated database (Blanchard et al., 2002). A
group of mainstream companies within the IC
supply chain sponsored its development, together
with a similar effort aimed to markedly improve
cost and efficiency for IC photomasks. Also, using
a common data model and data access language,
the Universal Data Model (UDM) spanned both
the design and mask-making communities, and had
potential to expand into the fab community
(Cottrell and Grebinski, 2003). This new paradigm
can provide the industry with a direct link for
communicating information across gaps between
design and manufacturing. While minimizing the
impact on applications of its use, this paradigm
supports a graceful migration via translation from
existing stream files, and provides extensibility and
support of future innovations.
Hekmatpour (2005) patented an XML-based
system for collaborative design and verification of
SoC. This invention enabled sharing of design data
from SoC among various design tools and
applications by utilizing a mechanism for data
conversion and analysis. The invention specified
centralized access authorization and security
requirements beyond generic web protocols for a
secured, collaborative and distributed environment.
Specifically, the Internet-based SoC design
framework utilized a SoC extensible markup
language for cross-interaction among design teams
using different tools. For platform-independent
application and service exchange and sharing, an
XML-based object is produced and delivered to
clients and users via design services. As a control
tower, the Virtual Database Management System
(VDBMS) takes data from numerous different
sources and creates a single relational database
interface for all these data sources. Finally, a set of
transformation rules based on XSL is developed to
extract information on demand and publish that
information. The resulting environment is an
Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 103
XML-based information repository that can update
itself to reflect changes in the related data sources.
Additionally, XML-based search tools facilitate the
finding of information by utilizing data structure
and metadata rather than keywords and text. To
achieve active collaboration and participation
among design teams, Hekmatpour’s XML-based
system provides interactive consultation in which a
forum, chat, whiteboard, conferencing mechanism,
and peer-to-peer point of service. The interactive
consultation mechanism also ensures that expertise
and proprietary data remains local and only related
design files are exchanged via the secure XML
containers.
As mentioned previously, design, engineering,
and logistics collaborations respond to low cost
and yield guarantee for fabs during the early stages
of design. In fact, fab design is considered a subset
of design for manufacturing, which also involves
the concepts of design for assembly and design for
test (Shepherd, 1996). In particular, corresponding
assembly and testability features can be not only
applied to reduce part count, manufacturing
complexity, and assembly cost but also enable easy
validation of design robustness.
Therefore, according to above IC design
evolution and collaboration discussed, this study
identifies the following CSFs of collaborative
design in the IC supply chain.
● authorization and security – controlling access
to critical know-how
● CAD and EDA tools – enabling design
automation
● co-design of equipment and tools – focusing
on design and manufacturing with more complex
and specific objectives
● communication technology – contributing to
fast remote and online operations
● database management – handling large
amounts of design and engineering data
● data format, transformation, and interface -
ensuring data interchange between different
platforms or systems
● design for manufacturing – considering
manufacturing-related variation and anticipating
production features
● design optimization technique – accelerating
initialization and modification of design
● information sharing mechanism – contributing
to earlier common consensus and minimizing
104 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain
Figure 7. Proposed framework for promoting collaborative IC design
duplicated work and rework
● interactive consultation mechanism – utilizing
human expertise based on communication
technology to produce more optimized designs
● IP reuse – facilitating IP creation, conversion,
and integration
● knowledge-based system – adapting to and
referring to expert knowledge in relation to
initial design, maintenance, and reproduction
● strategic alliance, community, and coalition –
supporting and providing standards, consistency,
and agreement regarding design system
integration
Therefore, based on the summarized CSFs,
this study proposes a framework for promoting
decision quality while implementing collaborative
design in the IC supply chain as shown in Figure 7.
The proposed framework correlates different
stages of the supply chain with CSFs for
collaborative IC design. The framework suggests
that each CSF should be implemented in at least
one company in a certain stage, across companies
within a stage, or across stages. Subsequently,
supply chain players can easily identify themselves
and check whether a required CSF has been
implemented. For example, IP providers should
ensure IP reusability. However, reuse mechanism
and infrastructure are concerns for fabless and fab
companies. The application is not limited to
disintegrate virtual enterprises. The collaborative
design necessities are similar across independent
units in IDMs. Notably, the proposed framework
ignores several players in the IC supply chain, such
as system vendors, manufacturing equipment
providers, photomask manufacturers, and so on,
since they are either unrelated to collaborative IC
design or considered integral to certain stages
based on the literature review and present industry
status.
6. CRITICAL SUCCESS
FACTORS AS
MANUFACTURING PRACTICES
FOR IMPROVING DECISION
QUALITY
In the semiconductor industry, some
applications have already occurred to support
collaboration among fabless and foundry companies.
These applications can exchange information
regarding the timing and content of product design
and the real time manufacturing process via the
Internet, and can also share technology knowledge
(Yu and Huang, 2001). For example, TSMC provided
the eFoundrySM service, which can assist designer
effectively across design, engineering and logistic
collaboration (http://www.tsmc.com). UMC also
developed the virtual foundry consultant, which can
help customers design and obtain the lot status
(http://www.umc.com). The IC Designer makes
allowance for on-line chip size and cost estimation of
various feature sets. Furthermore, the success of EDA
tools and collaborative IC design relates to the close
relationships among industry participants. For
example, the OpenAccess is co-developed by
 Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 105

companies and institutions forming OpenAccess on evaluation and clarification of each process and
Coalition sponsored by Silicon Integration Initiative, to proceed with calculation of the overall ratings
Inc. (Si2), an organization comprising leading summarized from individual scores. The decision
companies in the semiconductor, electronic system, analysis process is recursive to identify the
and EDA tool industries (http://www.si2.org). problem nature and construct the conceptual
Through collaboration, the industry can achieve high framework for approaching a decision problem.
SoC integration while reducing the cost, improving According to the UNISON framework, a
the quality, and complexity of integrating future decision-maker, i.e., a party in the IC supply chain,
design systems. Powerful economic and market can structure its own decision problem with
forces are fueling demand for the rapid integration causality and preference where alternatives,
and delivery of single chip solutions in a namely manufacturing practices, are the CSFs
multi-vendor environment. Si2 claims to be uniquely discussed within the proposed framework.
positioned to facilitate collaboration via a strong,
implementation focus driven by member companies.
Indeed, these CSFs are manufacturing 7. CONCLUSIONS
practices for improving decision quality for IC
This study clarified the terminology of
design collaboration which eventually influence
decision quality in manufacturing strategy and
manufacturing objectives. For example, most of
identified the CSFs of collaborative IC design.
the CSFs such as CAD and EDA tools, design
Added to this, we propose a framework for
optimization technique, and IP reuse can be utilized
improving decision quality while implementing
to shorten deliver time and ensure design quality.
collaborative design in the IC supply chain.
In addition, the CSFs have been examined to be
Demand for innovative and collaborative IC design
influential and the outcomes are predictable. The
approaches is growing and moving toward the IP
next question would be how to systematically
integration research. The inefficiency of serial IC
transform into a well-structured decision underlying
design process is being overcome by utilizing
based on the CSFs as manufacturing practices.
modularized and standardized concurrent and
Chien (2005) proposed the UNISON
parallel design process involving real-time
framework comprising six steps for problem
collaboration among different parties in the design
structuring: (1) understand and define the problem,
chain. Although IC design collaboration is
(2) identify the niche for decision quality
evolving and exhibiting benefits, it is necessary to
improvement, (3) structure the objective hierarchy,
identify CSFs for acceleration of the
generate the alternatives, and clarify influence
implementation. The CSFs as manufacturing
relationships among uncertain events, (4) sense
practices can indeed help improve decision quality
and describe expected outcomes, (5) overall
on collaborative design in the IC supply chain.
judgments and value assessments, and (6) tradeoff
Further studies can be done to use questionnaire
among the attributes and make the decision.
technique and interview among the parties in the
UNISON contains three main streams: Objectives,
IC design supply chain for evaluating the domain
alternatives, and uncertainties. From the
experience against the identified CSFs.
perspective of manufacturing strategy, objectives
may correspond to manufacturing objectives and
alternatives are analogous to manufacturing
practices. The performance measurement in
Acknowledgements
manufacturing strategy can be seen as the links This research is sponsored by National
among the streams whereas uncertainties describe Science Council (NSC97-2221-E-007-111-MY3;
the probabilities and beliefs on the causations. In 098-2811-E-007-009) and NTHU Faculty
this way, decision makers would be able to focus Empowerment Project (97N2521E1).
106 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain
References
1. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W. W., 1984,
Some models for estimating technical and scale
efficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management
Science, 30(9), 1078-1092.
2. Blanchard, T., Ferreri, R. and Wilmore, J., 2002, The
openaccess coalition - the drive to an open industry
standard information model, API, and reference
implementation for IC design data, Proceedings of the
2002 IEEE International Symposium on Quality
Electronic Design, 18-21, 69-75.
3. Buffa, F. B. and Jackson, W. M., 1983, A goal
programming model for purchase planning, Journal of
Purchasing Material Management, 19(3), 27-34.
4. Bűrmen, A., Puhan, J. and Tuma, T. 2003, Defining cost
functions for robust IC design and optimization,
Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in
Europe Conference and Exhibition, 196-201.
5. Cao, W., Lien, Y. E., Qiu, Y. and Shao, L., 1991, A
distributed engineering database management system
for IC design, Proceedings of the Design, Automation
and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition, 33-37.
6. Carley, L. R. and Rutenbar, R. A., 1988, How to
automate analog IC designs, IEEE Spectrum, 25(8),
26-30.
7. Cartwright, N., 2003, Two theorems on invariance and
causality, Philosophy of Science, 70(1), 203-224.
8. Cartwright, N., 2004, Causation: one word, many
things, Philosophy of Science, 71(5), 805-819.
9. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E., 1978,
Measuring the efficiency of decision making units,
European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6),
429-444.
10. Chien, C. F., 2005, Decision Analysis: A UNISON
Framework for Total Decision Quality Enhancement,
Yeh Yeh Book Gallery, Taipei.
11. Chien, C. F. and Wu, J. Z., 2007, Structuring
manufacturing strategy, Proceeding of the 3rd IEEE
International Conference on Automation Science and
Engineering, IEEE CASE 2007, 265-269.
12. Cottrell, D. R. and Grebinski, T. J., 2003,
Interoperability beyond design: sharing knowledge
between design and manufacturing, Proceedings of the
2003 IEEE International Symposium on Quality
Electronic Design, 214-219.
13. Dangayach, G. S. and Deshmukh, S. G., 2001,
Manufacturing strategy: literature review and some
issues, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 21(7), 884-932.
14. Edwards, W. and Barron, F. H., 1994, SMARTS and
SMARTER: improved simple methods for
multiattribute utility measurement, Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(3),
306-325.
15. Fang, L. Y., 2004, Accelerating firm’s innovation
through inter-organization: in sectoral innovation
system perspective, Proceedings of the DRUID
Academy Winter 2004 PhD Conference.
16. Fine, C. H. and Hax, A. C., 1985, Manufacturing
strategy: a methodology and an illustration, Interfaces,
15(6), 28-46.
17. Flynn, B. B., Schroeder, R. G. and Flynn, E. J., 1999,
World class manufacturing: an investigation of Hayes
and Wheelwright’s Foundation, Journal of Operations
Management, 17, 249-269.
18. Frohlich, M. T. and Dixon, J. R., 2001, A taxonomy of
manufacturing strategy revisited, Journal of Operations
Management, 19(5), 541-558.
19. Fung, A. H., Lee, B. W. and Sheu, B. J., 1989,
Self-reconstructing technique for expert system-based
analog IC designs, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and
Systems, 36(2), 318-321.
20. Gajski, D. D., Wu, A. C. H., Chaiyakul, V., Mori, S.,
Nukiyama, T. and Bricaud, P., 2000, Essential issues for
IP reuse, Proceedings of the 2000 Asia and South
Pacific Design Automation Conference, 37-42.
21. Geppert, L., 1999, Design tools for analog and digital
ICs, IEEE Spectrum, 36(4), 41-48.
22. Gerwin, D., 1987, An agenda for research on the
flexibility of manufacturing processes, International
Journal of Operations and Production Management,
7(1), 38-49.
23. Hayes, R. H. and Wheelwright, S. C., 1984, Restoring
our Competitive Edge-Competing Through
Manufacturing, John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York.
24. Hekmatpour, A., 2005, XML-based system and method
for collaborative web-based design and verification of
system-on-a-chip, U.S. Patent 6968346B2, November
22.
25. Hershenson, M. delM., Boyd, S. P. and Lee, T. H.,
2001, Optimal design of a CMOS op-amp via
geometric programming, IEEE Transactions on
Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and
Systems, 20(1), 1-21.
26. Hill, T., 1995, Manufacturing Strategy: Text and Cases,
Macmillan, Houndmills.
27. Hoover, K. D., 2001, Causality in Macroeconomics,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
28. Jingnan, X., Serras, J., Oliveira, M., Belo, R., Bugalho,
M., Vital, J., Horta, N. and Franca, J., 2001, IC design
automation from circuit level optimization to
retargetable layout, Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE
International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and
Systems, 1, 95-98.
29. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P., 1992, The balanced
scorecard – measures that drive performance, Harvard
Business Review, 70(January-February), 71-79.
30. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P., 2001, The
Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced
Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business
Environment, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
31. Kim, D. K., Kwon, K. W., Choi, J. C. and Lee, C. D.,
1999, Reusable intellectual property cores in PC data

protection ASIC design, Proceedings of the First IEEE
Asia Pacific Conference on ASICs, 278-281.
32. Leenaerts, D., Gielen, G. and Rutenbar, R. A., 2001,
CAD solutions and outstanding challenges for
mixed-signal and RF IC design, IEEE/ACM
International Conference on Computer Aided Design,
270-277.
33. Leong, G. K., Snyder, D. L. and Ward, P. T., 1990,
Research in the process and content of manufacturing
strategy, Omega, 18(2), 109-122.
34. Liu, P. Z., 2006, 2006 IC Design Industry Analysis,
Industry and Economic Databank in Taiwan Institute of
Economic Research.
35. Macher, J. T., Mowery, D. C. and Simcoe, T. S., 2002,
E-business and the semiconductor industry value chain:
implication for vertical specialization and integrated
semiconductor manufactures, East-West Center,
Economic Series, 47, 1-38.
36. Mao, C. K., 2003, Decision, Common Wealth
Magazine Inc., Taipei.
37. March, J. G. and Simon, H. A., 1958, Organizations,
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
38. Miller, J. G. and Roth, A., 1994, A taxonomy of
manufacturing strategies, Management Science, 40(3),
285-304.
39. Milo, A. and Nehab, S., 1991, Data framework for
VLSI design, Proceedings of IEEE/ACM International
Conference on Computer Aided Design, 140-143.
40. Miltenburg, J., 1995, Manufacturing Strategy: How to
Formulate and Implement a Winning Plan, Productivity
Press, Portland.
41. Pearl, J., 2000, Causality: Models, Reasoning and
Inference, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
42. Phelps, R., Krasnicki, M., Rutenbar, R. A., Carley, L.
R. and Hellums, J. R., 2000, Anaconda:
simulation-based synthesis of analog circuits via
stochastic pattern search, IEEE Transactions on
Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and
Systems, 19(6), 703-717.
43. Porter, M. E., 1985, Competitive Advantage: Creating
and Sustaining Superior Performance, The Free Press,
New York.
44. Saaty, T. L., 1990, How to make a decision: the analytic
hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational
Research, 48(1), 9-26.
45. Savage, W., Chilton, J. and Camposano, R., 2000, IP
reuse in the system on a chip era, Proceedings of the
13th International Symposium on System Synthesis,
2-7.
46. Schindler, P., Weidenbacher, K. and Zimmermann, T.,
1999, IP repository, a web based IP reuse Infrastructure,
Proceedings of the 1999 Custom Integrated Circuits
Conference, 415-418.
47. Shepherd, P. R., 1996, Integrated Circuit: Design,
Fabrication and Test, McGraw Hill, New York.
48. Sheu, B. J., Fung, A. H. and Lai, Y. N., 1988, A
Journal of Quality Vol. 16, No. 2 (2009) 107
knowledge-based approach to analog IC design, IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 35(2), 256-258.
49. Shih, W., Shih, C. and Chien, C. F., 2008, Horizontal
specialization and modularity in the semiconductor
industry, Harvard Business School Case Study,
9-609-001.
50. Simon, H. A., 1955, A behavioral model of rational
choice, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99-118.
51. Simon, H. A., 1973, The structure of ill-structured
problems, Artificial Intelligence, 4(3), 181-201.
52. Simon, H. A., 1997, Administrative Behavior: A Study
of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative
Organizations, 4th edition, The Free Press, New York.
53. Skinner, W., 1969, Manufacturing - missing link in
corporate strategy, Harvard Business Review,
May-June, 136-145.
54. Skinner, W. 1978, Manufacturing in the Corporate
Strategy, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
55. Smith, G. F., 1988, Towards a heuristic theory of
problem structuring, Management Science, 34(12),
1489-1506.
56. Su, Y. H., Guo, R. S. and Chang, S. C., 2004, Inter-firm
collaboration mechanism in process development and
product design between foundry and fabless design
house, Proceedings of 2004 Semiconductor
Manufacturing Technology Workshop, 47-50.
57. Su, Y. H., Guo, R. S. and Hsiao, C. H., 2005, Pattern of
vertical engineering collaboration between foundry and
design service provider, Proceedings of IEEE
International Symposium on Semiconductor
Manufacturing, 361-364.
58. Thompson, J. D. and Tuden, A., 1959, Strategies,
structures, and processes of organizational decision,
Comparative Studies in Administration, The University
of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.
59. Thompson, J. D., 1964, Decision-Making, the Firm,
and the Market, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
60. Thompson, J. D., 1967, Organizations in Action :
Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
61. Wang, H. F., 2004, Multicriteria Decision Analysis –
From Certainty to Uncertainty, Ting Lung Book
Company, Taipei.
62. Weber, C. A. and Current, J. R., 1993, A multiobjective
approach to vendor selection, European Journal of
Operational Research, 68(2), 173-184.
63. Woodward, J., 1997, Explanation, invariance and
intervention, Philosophy of Science, 64(4), S26-S41.
64. Wu, J. Z. and Chien, C. F., 2008, Modeling strategic
semiconductor assembly outsourcing decisions based
on empirical settings, OR Spectrum, 30(3), 401-430.
65. Yu, C. Y. and Huang, H. P., 2001, Development of the
order fulfillment process in the foundry fab by applying
distributed multi-agents on a generic message-passing
platform, IEEE/ASME Transaction on Mechatronics,
6(4), 387-398.
 108 Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain

提升積體電路供應鏈協同設計決策品質之
關鍵成功因素

吳吉政* 許嘉裕

國立清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系

(97/10 收件；97/12 修改；98/01 接受)

摘 要

由於積體電路產品的設計過程不僅需要高度知識密集並且相當耗時，積體電路設計者與製造商
間必須協同合作以縮短產品推出至市場的時間。為了提昇製造策略在協同積體電路設計之決策品
質，必須先制訂製造實務以作為製造策略之核心。然而，過去在整合積體電路設計的決策制訂研究
相當缺乏。本研究目的為界定製造策略之決策品質，並藉由深入及廣泛的回顧文獻，定義關鍵成功
因素作為製造實務，以提高積體電路設計供應鏈協同設計之決策品質。本研究並提出一架構供積體
電路供應鏈不同階段下，界定其協同設計之關鍵成功因素。
關鍵詞：決策品質、協同積體電路設計、關鍵成功因素、製造策略、供應鏈

*
聯絡作者：國立清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系，新竹市光復路二段 101 號。
E-mail: d907804@alumni.nthu.edu.tw

View publication stats