MEMS – overcoming the barriers to success

Citation

Yon, G.T. (2002), "MEMS – overcoming the barriers to success", Sensor Review, Vol. 22 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/sr.2002.08722aaa.002

MEMS – overcoming the barriers to success

MEMS – overcoming the barriers to success

Keywords: MEMS, Commercial

The consuming public, historically, has been attracted to fund commercialization of emerging technology. Over the past two decades this attraction has evolved into a voracious appetite for the new. Until the latest investor disavowal of the "dot com" phenomena, each announcement of the newest technology has created an aura of expectation for rapid advances and exploding financial rewards for the "astute" (or lucky) early investor. While not attracting as much public attention as the "dot com" situation, a similar scenario has been playing out in the small world of "micro" and "nano" evolving enterprises. Eager investors were bombarded with visionary claims of potential markets reaching annual levels of multiple billions of dollars. Prior to the recent disenchantment of the investment community with so-called "high-technology", there have been examples of micro/nano enterprises being acquired for massive sums of money. The rationale for such activity is called into question in these situations where the acquired enterprises'current revenue would be insufficient to service the interest charges for the acquisition debt (much less repay the investment in a reasonable time frame). Some may argue that such an aggressive posture is fundamental to catalyzing an explosive market for the technology. An opposing viewpoint, however, postulates that such an approach creates a major risk of retarding or eliminating the realization of the intrinsic value of the technology. Which, if either of these two views, is closer to the mark? Of more long term importance, are there more fundamental matters to be addressed other than funding?

The reader may ask, why raise such a commercial question in a journal dedicated to research rather than in journals of commerce? The rationale for raising this issue in this environment is based on a belief that the commercial barriers to widespread dissemination must be considered at a very early stage in setting research objectives. This is particularly true in the case of MEMS which currently requires use of a wide range of technical disciplines such as materials science, process physics, electronics, mechanics and a deep applications knowledge to identify final device use requirements.

There is little, if any doubt, existing among researchers, visionaries, entrepreneurs and the investment community that microsystem devices and the next generation offspring, nanotechnology, will fundamentally change the way current business is carried on. The problem is most of the businesses won't know that micro- and nano- technology devices are making these advances possible because they will simply replace existing devices already in use. This "displacement by replacement" mindset has far reaching implications that govern the overall realization of the value of the MEMS technology. Not only will this approach possibly limit creative thinking in finding new to the world applications for this technology, there will also be little opportunity to improve the operating profit margin currently experienced by standard components to allow sufficient profit necessary to fuel continuing growth of MEMS. The end result in this case is a "zero sum game", i.e. for every MEMS design win, there will be a corresponding reduction in use of conventional devices. This has been the bane of the sensor industry for decades, i.e. while playing a critical role in the general scheme of things, the sensor contributes a small amount to the overall cost of the capital equipment in which it is embedded. Additionally, the availability of a superior sensor will not, in of itself, create an incremental growth in the demand for the capital equipment containing the sensor. This environment has created a situation where a large number of current MEMS applications are neither high volume nor recognizable by the end user as providing the key technical contribution to the success of the overall application. An interesting corollary can be found in the case of the microprocessor as applied to personal computers. For a number of years, the general public had little awareness of the importance of the microprocessor to the very existence of the personal computer. While the names of the computer manufacturer had high brand recognition, there was virtually no recognition given to a company called Intel. With the launch of a marketing campaign to create brand recognition for the device supplier, i.e. the requirement for manufacturers to place a "Intel Inside" label on each product shipped, this situation was rectified. It can be argued that, while more difficult in the case of MEMS, a similar approach can be used to begin to elevate user awareness. At least two examples come to mind, ink jet printer nozzles and air bag deployment sensors. A simple marketing ploy such as this will not provide the needed stimulus for widespread commercialization of MEMS but it will provide one step forward in creating awareness in the mind of the general public.

Is there a more fundamental approach that can be taken to maximize the potential for this technology? Rather than focusing on use of MEMS to replace existing sensors through improved performance, should a dramatically different view of the role of sensors be taken? Is there a sufficiently large market (both in unit volumes and prices) to allow a self-sustaining enterprise? If so, when will the opportunity be realized?

The first step has been taken with the significant amount of effort expended to optimize and standardize a number of the processes required to produce MEMS devices. This task is key to reducing esoteric production processes to a routine level and eliminating one barrier to commercialization, availability of design and production sources.

A second step has also been taken. Recognizing the trite but true saying, "investors do not fund research", many governments have filled that gap through significant funding. In the United States, various agencies in the federal government have created a pool of over $400 million to fund initiatives in Nanotechnology. This is but one of many similar activities initiated in European and Far East countries. Considering that the total market size for MEMS devices in 2000 has been estimated at $3 billion, there can be little argument that real development initiatives suffer from underfunding.

What is missing? Various forecasts have shown broad variations in market growth estimates. Estimates for worldwide sales of MEMS vary from $10 billion to nearly $50 billion in the year 2005. One key requirement that drives such uncertainty is the approach to the generation of new concepts and solutions. In too many instances, a number of projects resemble the classical technical problem of having a solution searching for a need to satisfy. The rationale for the routine use of interdisciplinary advanced development teams is straightforward-sensors rarely sell themselves, the extended capabilities of MEMS significantly increases the need for integration of the sensor into the system. Success must be achieved in formalizing the use of true interdisciplinary teams of experienced professionals from the MEMS field as well as the conventional disciplines (including seasoned marketing professionals) to identify application targets. The degree of success will determine how far the industry can move from the low market level of $10 billion in 2005 to the optimistic projection of a $50 billion market in 2005.

Gene T. Yonis based at EPS Consultants, 4245 Woodward Way, Cumming, Georgia 30041, USA. Tel: 770-814-4215; Fax: 770-814-4217; E-mail: autobusy@aol.com