Quick Intro: Tell Us Who You Are

• What's your role and primary area of responsibility on chip/package/board projects? Options: Director of Packaging Engineering, VP/Head of Physical Design, Package Engineer, PD/Signoff Engineer, System Architect, Other (please specify)
• Which of these best describes your company or organization? Options: Integrated device manufacturer (IDM), Fabless semiconductor company, OSAT/Advanced packaging house, Systems/Platform company, EDA or tooling partner, Other
• Briefly name the project or product family you’re exploring co-design for and its target market (one sentence).
• What is your target prototype or production timeline for this project? Options: <3 months, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, 12–18 months, 18+ months
• Who on your team should be the host contact for coordinating a technical evaluation or pilot?

If You Could Avoid One Thing Forever, Would It Be a Respin?

• How much did your last die/package/board respin cost in schedule and dollars (estimate)? Options: <$100k, $100–500k, $500k–$1M, $1M–$2M, >$2M, Prefer not to say
• How often does a late-package or board issue force a die respin or significant mask change in your projects? Options: Almost every design, Often (multiple/year), Occasionally (some projects), Rarely, Never
• Which failure mode has bitten you most often—SI surprises, PDN instability, thermal hotspots, or mechanical/assembly issues? Options: Signal integrity (timing/reflections), PDN/IR drop or noise, Thermal/thermal runaway, Mechanical/assembly yield, Other
• When a late failure happens, who inside your organization bears the hardest consequences (time, reputation, budget)? Options: Die team, Package team, Board team, Program management, Product line leadership, Other
• Tell us about a specific respin or prototype failure that still frustrates the team—what happened and why did it stick with you?

Where The Workflow Really Breaks Down

• If package decisions are made after die sign-off, how often do you see modeling discontinuities between die, package, and PCB? Options: Always, Frequently, Sometimes, Rarely, Never
• Describe the current sequential flow you follow from die to package to board (tools used, handoffs, checkpoints).
• Which tools and file formats are part of your handoff chain today (pick all that apply)? Options: RTL/GDSII/OASIS, IC layout (e.g., Cadence, Mentor), Package layout (e.g., Ansys/Synopsys/EDA), PCB layout (e.g., Altium, Allegro), EM solver exports (STEP, ODB++), Custom scripts/CSV
• Where do routine handoffs create the most friction—geometry translation, material properties, connector definitions, or timing constraints? Options: Geometry/mesh translation, Material stackups and die/package materials, Connector/pin mapping, Timing and SI constraints, PDN topology and decoupling, Thermal boundary conditions
• How long does it typically take to iterate after a cross-domain issue is found (from discovery to validated fix)? Options: <1 week, 1–2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–3 months, 3+ months

The Modeling Shortcuts You Hope No One Notices

• Which simplified assumptions do you commonly make to keep flows moving—lumped-package parasitics, plane approximations, or reduced EM fidelity? Options: Lumped parasitic models, Homogeneous plane approximations, Low-fidelity EM meshes, Ignored via/coupling effects, Simplified thermal models, None of the above
• How do you validate package and board models against silicon or lab measurements today? Options: Prototype testing, Bench SI/PDN measurements, FEM/EM cross-checks, Vendor validation, We rarely validate
• Where do models diverge most from reality—material data, interconnect parasitics, assembly stresses, or measurement setup? Options: Material data inaccuracies, Interconnect/parasitic estimation, Assembly-induced variation, Boundary/fixture modeling, Solver numerical limits
• Have you tracked instances where tooling handoffs introduced a measurable performance delta? If yes, describe one example and its impact.
• How comfortable is your team with sharing a unified EM model across die, package, and board (IP concerns, tooling fit, trust)? Options: Very comfortable, Somewhat comfortable, Hesitant, Not comfortable

If Co-design Actually Worked Here, What Would Change?

• Imagine a first-pass success on SI/PDN/thermal—what measurable signals would convince you the co-design approach is superior? Options: First-pass SI compliance, Reduced PDN noise/IR drop, Thermal headroom improvement, Fewer respins, Faster signoff cycles
• What target metrics matter most for acceptance—timing margin (ps), insertion loss/dB, IR drop (mV), temperature (°C), or respin probability reduction (%)?
• Which design scenarios should we use to demonstrate value—HBM integration, chiplet/interposer, high-speed SERDES, or power-hungry SoCs? Options: HBM/2.5D interposer, Chiplet modular architecture, High-speed SERDES channels, Power-dense SoC with PDN hotspots, Other
• What constraints must any proposed solution respect—IP quarantine, export controls, EDA licensing, or supply-chain partners? Options: IP/data isolation, Export/regulatory constraints, Third-party tool licensing, OSAT/process compatibility, None of the above
• How much improvement in respin risk or prototype count would justify a sustained change to a co-design workflow for your organization? Options: Eliminate respins entirely, 50–75% reduction, 25–50% reduction, 10–25% reduction, Need to see clear ROI before committing

Who Needs to Join the Table — and Who Will Resist?

• Which stakeholders must sign off for a co-design pilot to proceed (pick all that apply)? Options: Die/PD team lead, Package engineering lead, Board/PCB lead, Test/Validation lead, Procurement, Legal/IP, Executive sponsor
• Which groups are most likely to resist earlier cross-domain collaboration, and why (cultural, tooling, resourcing)?
• What level of time commitment (hours/week) from die, package, and board engineers can you realistically allocate to a short pilot? Options: <4 hours/week, 4–8 hours/week, 8–16 hours/week, 16–40 hours/week, Full-time for a short sprint
• Who holds the final decision authority for committing budget and IP access to an external co-design engagement? Options: Program Manager, VP Engineering, Legal/IP, Procurement, Other (specify)
• Are there internal governance or board reviews that need to see a pilot brief before work starts? If yes, who and what timeline?

Designing a Pilot That You Can’t Ignore

• What single demonstration (metric + scenario) would make you advocate for changing your standard workflow?
• Which datasets and artifacts will we need to run a representative pilot (layout files, material stacks, S-parameters, PDN netlists, thermal sources)? Options: Layout/GDS/OASIS, Material stackup/specs, S-parameter extractions, PDN nets and decap lists, Thermal power maps, Measurement data
• Which tool modules or services should be part of the pilot—EM extraction, SI simulation, PDN analysis, thermal CFD, or integrated co-solver? Options: EM extraction, SI simulation, PDN/IR analysis, Thermal analysis, Integrated co-solver (single model)
• What acceptance criteria would you use to judge the pilot a success (specific numeric thresholds or qualitative outcomes)?
• Who will be responsible for providing data, validating results, and signing acceptance at pilot close? Options: Die engineering owner, Package engineering owner, Board engineering owner, Test/Validation owner, Program manager

Execution Friction: What Keeps You From Saying Yes?

• What single operational risk would make you pause a pilot—data leakage, tool incompatibility, resource drain, or unclear ROI? Options: Data/IP leakage, Toolchain incompatibility, Insufficient engineering resources, Unclear success metrics/ROI, Regulatory/export issues
• Describe the most likely integration challenge between our co-design environment and your existing toolchain.
• What level of onboarding and training would your engineers need to use a new co-design toolchain effectively? Options: Self-service docs only, 1–2 workshops, Hands-on paired sessions, Embedded support during pilot, Full-time onsite support
• If a pilot ran into unexpected issues, what escalation path would you expect (who gets involved and in what order)?
• What fallback would you require if initial co-design outputs didn’t match expected fidelity—rework, extended validation, or rollback to current flow? Options: Extend validation and iterate, Partial rollback to current flow, Pause and reassess scope, Terminate pilot

Money, IP, and Timelines — The Hard Tradeoffs

• If cost were fixed, how much IP/data access would you be willing to provide for a convincing pilot (full models, synthesized views, or black-box interfaces)? Options: Full model access, Redacted/model-views, Black-box interfaces only, No external access
• What commercial model do you prefer for an evaluation—time & materials, milestone-based fixed-fee, or proof-of-value contingent pricing? Options: Time & materials, Fixed-fee milestones, Pay-for-success / contingent, Subscription/trial
• What internal procurement or legal milestones must we clear before work starts (PO, NDA, MSA, data transfer agreement)? Options: NDA, PO/contract, MSA, Data transfer/IP agreement, Other
• What is your expected approval timeline for commercial and legal terms (weeks)? Options: <2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–2 months, 2–3 months, 3+ months
• What ROI or cost-avoidance threshold would justify moving from pilot to an ongoing co-design engagement? Options: Payback <6 months, 6–12 months, 1–2 years, Need strategic reasons beyond ROI

Practical Readiness: Data, Licenses, and People

• Which environments and licenses do we need to provision for the pilot (on-prem compute, cloud, solver licenses, EDA integrations)? Options: On-prem compute, Cloud environment, Solver licenses, EDA connectors/plugins, None required
• Who will own day-to-day coordination inside your team for the pilot (name and role)?
• What data export or sanitization steps are required before sharing files externally? Options: Remove PII/IP, Mask certain nets/components, Aggregate performance metrics only, No sanitization required, Other
• Are there specific security or compliance controls we must meet (e.g., secure file transfer, access audits)? Options: Secure SFTP, VPN/access-controlled environment, Access logging/audit, Encrypted storage, No special requirements
• How soon could your team provide the initial dataset for a pilot once agreements are signed? Options: <1 week, 1–2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–2 months, Longer

When a Pilot Succeeds — How Will You Use It?

• If the pilot shows measurable respin reduction, how would that outcome be used internally—process change, new tool rollout, or one-off project practice? Options: Process change across org, Tool roll-out for multiple teams, Per-project use, Proof for executive buy-in, Other
• What artifacts or deliverables will you need from us at pilot close to convince stakeholders (technical report, runbook, model package, or demo session)? Options: Technical report with metrics, Runbook for handoff, Packaged unified model, Live demo/workshop, Other
• How would you like results presented—side-by-side SI/PDN/thermal plots, quantified respin risk reduction, or an executive summary with recommended next steps? Options: Detailed technical plots, Quantified risk/ROI, Executive summary, All of the above
• Who will be the signature approver for pilot acceptance and moving to next phase?
• If successful, how quickly would you aim to scale a co-design workflow beyond the pilot project? Options: Immediately across projects, Within 6 months, 6–12 months, Longer / conditional

Let’s Agree the First Concrete Steps

• Are you willing to schedule a 60–90 minute scoping session to walk through a candidate design and confirm pilot scope? Options: Yes—schedule now, Yes—need to check calendars, Maybe—need internal alignment, No, not right now
• Who should attend that scoping session from your side (names and roles)?
• What date range would work for a scoping workshop in the next month? Options: Next week, 1–2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, Later than a month
• What is one clear thing we can commit to that would make you feel comfortable moving forward (e.g., NDA in place, pilot scope document, non-production data only)?
• Is there anything we haven’t asked that would be critical for you to decide on running an evaluation?

Tell Us About the Project That Brought You Here

• To get us started, what single project or product brought you to explore package+board co-design today? Options: New chip/platform launch, Post-first-prototype failure (respin risk), HBM or advanced memory integration, Chiplet / 2.5D interposer design, Next-generation performance target, Other
• What is your job title or decision role for this engagement? Options: Director of Packaging Engineering, VP/Head of Physical Design, Packaging Engineer, PD/Signal Integrity Engineer, Program Manager, Other
• Which teams must be part of the evaluation to make a buying decision (select all that apply)? Options: Die design / PD, Package / substrate engineering, PCB/layout, Signal Integrity / Timing, Power / PDN engineering, Thermal engineering, Test & Validation, Procurement/Commercial, Executive sponsor
• Where is your project today on the calendar relative to tapeout or prototype builds? Options: Concept / requirements, RTL/physical design in progress, Floorplanning / early layout, Tapeout imminent (3–6 months), Prototype built / failure observed, Post-respin planning
• Briefly describe the package technology and complexity we should evaluate (e.g., flip‑chip BGA with 6 substrate layers, fan‑out WLP, 2.5D interposer with <number> dielets).

Why Re-spin Feels So Personal

• How many of your last five projects experienced a die or board respin caused by package/board interactions discovered late in the flow? Options: 0, 1, 2, 3–4, 5
• When a respin happens, which of these impacts matter most to you? Rank the top three in your head and then choose which matter (multi-select). Options: Direct mask/maskset cost, Schedule delay / lost revenue, Engineering overtime and morale, Customer commitments / SLAs, Ecosystem partner disruptions, Regulatory or qualification delays
• Approximate the financial or programmatic cost of your most recent respin (pick the range closest to reality). Options: <$100k, $100k–$500k, $500k–$1M, $1M–$3M, >$3M, Prefer not to say
• Tell us about the moment you realized the late-discovered issue was a package or board problem—what happened and how did it feel for the team?
• How willing is leadership to invest in process or tool changes specifically to avoid future respins? Options: Very willing (budget & sponsor), Somewhat willing (needs proof), Cautious (small pilots only), Not willing right now

Where Reality Breaks Down: The Sequential Workflow

• If you had to name the one step in your current sequential flow that most consistently hides risk, which step would you point to? Options: Die freeze before package modeling, Package handoff to PCB, Separate SI/PDN/thermal tools with exports, Late-floorplanning vs package pins, Other
• Walk us through your typical sequential handoff—list the core stages you actually run today (short phrases are fine).
• Which EDA or simulation tools are involved at each stage of your current flow (select all that apply)? Options: Cadence (Virtuoso/Allegro/Tempus), Synopsys (IC/PDK/Optical), Siemens Mentor (PADS/Xpedition), Ansys HFSS/CQ/RedHawk, CST/Keysight ADS, In-house or proprietary tools, Other
• Describe the common failure modes you see after the sequential flow (be specific—SI reflections, PDN resonances, thermal hotspots, interposer coupling, etc.).
• How often do you see model discontinuities (e.g., different EM meshes or conductor assumptions) between die/package/PCB tools that materially change results? Options: Almost always, Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never
• Which team currently owns final SI/PDN/thermal sign‑off today? Options: Die/PD team, Package engineering, Board/PCB engineering, Validation/Test, Cross-functional committee, No single owner

Hidden Friction: Data, Tools, and the People in Between

• When a file exchange stalls a project, what usually explains it—format mismatch, licensing, IP restrictions, or simply 'who owns the files'? Options: Format mismatch (ODB++, IPC2581, etc.), Licensing restrictions, IP / NDA concerns, No automated process for handoffs, Lack of clear owners, Other
• Which file formats and transfer methods do your teams currently rely on for die→package→board exchanges? Options: ODB++, IPC‑2581, Gerber X2, STEP/IGES, Proprietary tool exports, Manual drawings / PDFs, Secure share / SFTP
• Have you lost analysis fidelity when exporting/importing models between tools? Tell us about one concrete example.
• How do IP and confidentiality concerns shape what data you can share with external partners or vendors? Options: Shared under NDA, Only abstracted models allowed, No external sharing permitted, Depends on program / partner, Other
• Which of these tooling or people constraints slows down simulation or co-analysis the most for you? Options: Simulation runtimes / compute limits, Licenses availability, No shared EM model, Lack of cross-discipline expertise, Toolchain integration gaps, Organizational silos

What a Win Would Actually Look Like

• Imagine your next prototype passes SI/PDN/thermal on the first try—what would that change in concrete terms for the program?
• Which measurable success signals would convince you a co‑design approach worked? Select all that apply. Options: First‑pass SI compliance, PDN noise margin improvement, Thermal hotspot reduction, Reduced number of respins, Shorter time to sign‑off, Lower overall prototype cost
• For any metric you picked, please state the target or threshold you'd consider a pass (e.g., SI eye margin, PDN noise < X mV, thermal delta < Y°C).
• Which designs or interfaces must be represented in a pilot to make success meaningful (e.g., JESD, DDR/HBM, SerDes channels, power islands)? Options: DDR / HBM, SerDes (multi‑Gbps), High‑speed memory channels, Power delivery networks, Mixed‑signal blocks, Other
• What organizational outcome would count as a win beyond the technical metrics (e.g., cross-team alignment, new governance, toolchain adoption)?

How Risk-Averse Is Your Team Really?

• If co‑design requires changing established handoffs and tools, how willing is your team to change behaviors? Options: Ready and committed, Willing with proof of concept, Skeptical but open, Resistant
• Who in your organization would need to be convinced for a full rollout (select all that apply)? Options: VP/Head of PD, VP/Head of Packaging, Program Manager, Test & Validation Lead, Procurement / Legal, CTO/EVP level
• Do you have engineers available to run a co‑design pilot, and roughly how many FTEs (full‑time equivalents) could be allocated for a 4–8 week pilot? Options: None (need vendor support), 0.5–1 FTE, 1–2 FTE, 2–4 FTE, 4+ FTE
• What level of training or enablement would make your team comfortable using a unified co‑design environment? Options: Hands‑on workshops, Recorded tutorials + docs, Certification program, Embedded engineering support, Other
• Which internal concerns could still block adoption even if the pilot technically succeeds? Options: Budget cycles, Toolchain lock‑in, IP ownership, Process change resistance, Resource bandwidth, Other

Show Me the Evidence: What Makes a Pilot Convincing?

• What single comparison result (e.g., SI eye margin, PDN impedance plot, thermal map) would make you stop and say 'this is better'?
• Do you have a baseline set of SI/PDN/thermal results from your current sequential flow that we can use for head‑to‑head comparisons? Options: Yes, complete datasets, Partial data available, Only anecdotal/qualitative data, No baseline data
• What sample size or scope makes a pilot convincing for you—single representative die/package/board stack, multiple variations, or a full product stack? Options: Single representative case, 2–3 variations, Full set of product variants, Other
• Which deliverable formats will best persuade your stakeholders (select all that apply)? Options: Comparative reports with plots, Raw simulation datasets, Interactive dashboards, Live co‑design demo session, Onsite walk‑through
• What timeline do you need for a pilot to be valuable for your next program milestone? Options: 2–4 weeks, 4–8 weeks, 8–12 weeks, Longer than 12 weeks / exploratory

Practical Next Steps — Who, When, and What

• If we agreed to run a pilot now, what would be the realistic earliest kickoff window for your team? Options: Immediately / within 2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–2 months, After next budget cycle
• What data artifacts can you make available for a pilot without legal approval (select all that apply)? Options: Schematic/layout extracts, Package substrate stackup, PCB layout extracts, Simulation setups and models, Measured prototype data, None
• Who should be the single point of contact (name and role) to coordinate data, scheduling, and acceptance criteria for the pilot?
• What contractual or IP constraints would need to be in place before we can exchange models and run joint simulations? Options: Standard mutual NDA, Data escrow / limited access, IP non‑use clause, No special constraints, Other
• Which of these internal approvals or budget authorities must sign off for a pilot to proceed? Options: Program Manager, VP Engineering, Procurement, Legal/IP, Finance, Other
• What would success sign‑off look like at the end of the pilot and who would be the final approver?

Kickoff: What Outcome Are You Rooting For?

• What's the single most important result you want this pilot to prove (e.g., first-pass SI compliance, measurable respin risk reduction, validated thermal model)?
• When would you like pilot results in hand to make a go/no‑go decision for the next design phase? Options: Within 2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–2 months, Longer than 2 months, Unsure
• Who on your side will be the day‑to‑day point of contact for the pilot and who is the executive sponsor (name and role)?
• How confident are you right now that the team can commit the people and time this pilot will need? Options: Very confident, Somewhat confident, Borderline, Not confident
• Have you run similar co‑design or cross‑domain pilots before? If yes, what worked and what failed? Options: Yes — mainly internal co-design, Yes — with a vendor partner, No, this is a first
• Would you prefer a focused technical proof (narrow scope, fast) or a broader validation (larger scope, slower) for this first pilot? Options: Focused technical proof, Broader validation, Hybrid (focused + extra tests)

If This Pilot Stalls, What Breaks First?

• If we discover a show‑stopper late in the pilot (e.g., missing data, incompatible formats), what immediate business or schedule impact would that cause? Options: Tapeout delay, Respin risk/cost increase, Missed product launch window, No major impact, Other
• Who will feel the pain most acutely if the pilot doesn't deliver—engineering leads, program managers, procurement, or customers? Please name roles.
• Thinking back to past respins or late SI surprises, what early warning signs did you miss that you’d want us to watch for in this pilot?
• How tolerant is leadership for an incremental pilot failure if it de‑risked future designs versus demanding immediate OKs? Options: Very tolerant (long term view), Somewhat tolerant, Low tolerance (needs clear wins), Unknown
• Which commercial consequences are highest priority to avoid (select up to three)? Options: $ cost of respin, Time-to-market delay, Customer contract penalties, Loss of market share, Engineering schedule disruption
• Who in procurement or program management will need a status update if the pilot slips, and how frequently do they expect updates? Options: Weekly, Bi-weekly, Monthly, Ad hoc/on request

Who Actually Holds the Keys to Move This Forward?

• Which single person or role must approve IP/data access for the pilot, and what is their approval process?
• List the teams (select all that will need to be involved or informed) for day‑to‑day work and governance sign‑offs. Options: Die/PD team, Package engineering, Board/PCB team, Thermal group, Power/PDN team, IT/security, Legal/IP, Procurement
• What internal escalations or sign‑offs are required before we can begin (e.g., security review, export control check, license procurement)? Options: Security review, Export control approval, Legal/NDA, Tool license purchase, No additional sign‑offs needed, Other
• Who will be accountable for ongoing license or compute cost approvals during the pilot? Options: Engineering manager, IT/Infrastructure, Procurement, Project sponsor, Other
• How do you prefer ownership and responsibilities to be documented—RACI, simple email approvals, or formal SOW? Options: RACI matrix, Email approvals, Formal SOW, Verbal + meeting notes
• If a single person on your team had to be pulled to lead daily coordination, who is the ideal candidate and why?

Can the Files We Need Actually Leave Your Walls?

• How comfortable are you sharing native layout and model files (e.g., OpenAccess, GDSII, OASIS) with an external partner under your IP rules? Options: Comfortable with NDA, Comfortable with sanitized files only, Only allow on‑site review, Not comfortable at all, Unsure
• Which data types and formats will be required for the pilot (select all that apply)? Options: OpenAccess, GDSII/OASIS, LEF/DEF, IBIS/IBIS‑AMI, S‑parameters (Touchstone), STEP/IGES (mechanical), Thermal meshes, Other
• What typical package/board file sizes should we expect (per model or dataset)? Options: <100MB, 100–500MB, 500MB–2GB, 2–10GB, >10GB, Unknown
• How do you currently transfer large EDA files securely between teams or to partners? Options: SFTP/FTPS, VPN + SCP, Secure cloud share (Azure/AWS/GCP), Physical media (encrypted HDD), Proprietary transfer portal, Other
• Would you accept sanitized or partially redacted models for initial evaluation, with native data held in a controlled environment for deeper runs? Options: Yes — sanitized first, No — need native from day one, Maybe — depends on metrics required
• Are there export control or regional restrictions that would prevent cloud processing or cross‑border data transfer? Options: Yes — cloud restricted, Yes — cross‑border restricted, No restrictions, Unsure — need to check

Is Your Tooling and Compute Ready to Keep Pace?

• Could you run the co‑design toolchain in your environment (on‑prem or approved cloud) with available licenses, or will you need us to provision trial licenses? Options: We can run internally, We need vendor trial licenses, Hybrid (some tools internal, some provided), Unsure
• Which EDA or mechanical tool vendors and versions are in your stack (select all that apply)? Options: Cadence (Virtuoso/Allegro), Synopsys (IC/PCB tools), Mentor/Siemens, ANSYS HFSS/Maxwell/Thermal, CST, In‑house/custom
• Do you have access to appropriate EM/thermal solvers (licenses and runtime), and if not, what is the typical procurement lead time? Options: Licenses available now, Licenses available after procurement (weeks), No licenses and long lead time (months), Unsure
• What compute resources are available for heavy solver jobs (select all that apply)? Options: Local cluster, Enterprise HPC, Approved cloud (company account), No heavy compute available
• Are there maintenance windows, batch job policies, or priority queues that could delay pilot runs? If so, describe typical job lead time.
• How willing is your IT/security team to create a short‑lived, isolated environment for pilot runs if required? Options: Very willing, Somewhat willing, Reluctant, Won't allow

What Would Make Us Call the Pilot a Success—Without Doubt?

• Which quantitative metrics will you use to judge success (select up to three)? Options: First‑pass SI compliance (eye margin), PDN impedance targets met, Thermal hotspot reduction (°C), Estimated respin probability reduction, Routing density improvement, Other
• What baseline will we compare against—your current sequential flow results, a golden model, or previous prototype measurements? Options: Sequential flow simulation, Golden model, Measured prototype, Combination, Unsure
• Who must sign off on the acceptance criteria (names/roles), and do they require formal documentation or a short demo walkthrough? Options: Packaging lead, PD lead, Thermal owner, Program manager, Executive sponsor
• Are there hard thresholds (e.g., max allowed insertion loss, PDN impedance) that would automatically fail a design in your program? Options: Yes — clearly defined thresholds, Some thresholds defined, No formal thresholds, Unsure
• If results are promising but not perfect, what remediation path is acceptable (e.g., additional runs, scope expansion, handoff to your engineering teams)? Options: Additional vendor runs, Handoff + training to your teams, Scoped follow‑on project, Reject and stop pilot
• How will you quantify the business value from pilot outcomes (dollars saved, months saved, risk reduction score, other)? Options: $ saved (estimated), Time to market saved, Reduced respin probability, Qualitative decision confidence, Other

Who Will Do the Day‑to‑Day Work—and How Much Will It Cost Them?

• If the pilot requires 1–3 engineers at 20% capacity for 4 weeks, can you commit those resources? Options: Yes — confirmed, Maybe — need to check, No — not available, Unsure
• Which skillsets will you provide versus expect from us (select all that apply)? Options: Package layout expertise, Board/PCB layout, PD/PDN modeling, Thermal modeling, EM model validation, Data sanitization/ownership
• Would you prefer we train your engineers during the pilot, or run the pilot as a managed service with a knowledge transfer at the end? Options: Train during pilot, Managed service + handoff, Hybrid
• How do you want progress communicated—daily standup, weekly technical review, or milestone reports? Options: Daily standup, Twice weekly check‑ins, Weekly technical review, Milestone reports only, Ad hoc
• What internal costs or shadow work do you anticipate we should budget for (e.g., procurement of temporary licenses, security reviews, legal time)?
• If a critical engineer becomes unavailable mid‑pilot, who can step in and how long to ramp?

Guardrails: How Do We Keep IP, Schedule, and Trust Safe?

• What legal or contractual protections do you require before any IP or dataset moves outside your environment (select all that apply)? Options: NDA, Data processing addendum, IP usage limits, Escrow/escrow-like controls, No external sharing allowed
• Are you open to a joint sandbox approach where native models stay on your servers and we run remote, authenticated sessions against them? Options: Yes — preferred, Maybe — depends on setup, No — prefer transferred data
• What logging, audit, or access controls does your security team expect for vendor engineers accessing data? Options: Full audit logs, Role‑based access, Time-limited access, MFA and device controls, Other
• Do you require any insurance, liability limits, or indemnities tied to pilot work that we should include in an SOW? Options: Yes — specific limits, Standard vendor agreement acceptable, Unsure — need legal input
• If a data incident occurred during the pilot, what immediate steps would you expect from the vendor? Options: Immediate notification + remediation plan, Containment + forensics, Pause work and audit, Other
• Are there any IP owners (third parties) whose permission we must secure before using certain models or data? Options: Yes — third party approvals needed, No, Unsure

Final Go/No‑Go: What's the Remaining Hurdle?

• What's the single biggest remaining reason—technical, legal, or political—that would make you delay starting the pilot?
• What would you need to hear or see (artifact or assurance) in the next 7 days to move from hesitant to committed? Options: Signed NDA, Trial license availability, Detailed runbook/plan, Exec sponsor approval, Other
• Who signs the official go/no‑go and when can they sign (specify name/role and tentative date)?
• If we deliver preliminary results that show promise but require additional scope, do you prefer a fast follow‑on agreement or a pause for internal alignment? Options: Fast follow‑on, Pause for alignment, Decide case-by-case
• What is the earliest realistic pilot start date given current approvals and availability? Options: Within 1 week, 1–2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, More than 4 weeks, Unsure
• Anything else we haven’t asked that would change whether this pilot succeeds (hidden constraints, political timing, upcoming reviews)?

Quick Intro — Who's Driving This Project?

• What's your name, title, and the team you'll represent in this evaluation?
• Which best describes your organization? Options: Fabless semiconductor company, OSAT / advanced packaging vendor, Systems/Module OEM, Tier-1 electronics company, EDA/tooling supplier, Other
• Who are the key stakeholders we should expect to involve (roles, not names)? Options: Director/VP Packaging, VP Physical Design, Package Engineer, PD/RTL Lead, Signal Integrity Engineer, Power Delivery Engineer, Thermal Engineer, Program Manager, Other
• What's your desired timeline for seeing a pilot result (e.g., proof of improved SI/PDN/thermal vs baseline)? Options: Immediate (2–4 weeks), Short (1–3 months), Quarterly (3–6 months), Longer (6+ months), Undecided
• What's the single most important outcome you want from this co-design evaluation? Options: Reduce respin risk, Validate HBM/chiplet integration, Improve SI/PDN margins, Reduce time-to-first-prototype, Establish cross-team workflow, Other
• Who will be the final decision-maker(s) for moving from pilot to full adoption?

When 'Late Package Decisions' Cost You Millions — Tell Us About That

• Think about the last time a package-related issue forced a die respin or major delay — what happened and what was the root cause as you saw it?
• How often do package/board discoveries occur after die sign-off in your recent projects? Options: Almost every project, Often (many projects), Occasionally (some projects), Rarely, Never
• How much direct schedule or cost impact did that most recent respin or late fix create (choose closest) Options: <$100k, $100k–$500k, $500k–$2M, >$2M, Intangible/unknown
• When those surprises emerge, who typically bears the brunt—design, package, test, program management, or all of the above? Options: Design team, Package team, System/board team, Program management, Cross-functional impact
• How did that experience change the way your teams communicate or schedule future projects?

Are You Comfortable With 'Sequential'—Or Are You Quietly Compromising?

• Walk me through your current die→package→board workflow—where does the flow break down most often?
• Which tools or file formats do your die, package, and PCB teams currently exchange? Options: GDSII/OASIS, ODB++/IPC-2581, EDIF/LEF, Custom CSV/Excel handoffs, Proprietary EDA exports, Other
• How automated are your cross-domain data handoffs today? Options: Fully automated, Mostly automated with manual checks, Manual but repeatable, Ad-hoc/manual error-prone, No formal handoff
• When models are translated between tools, what kinds of discontinuities do you see (e.g., missing parasitics, mismatched stack-ups, ignored coupling)?
• How long does it typically take to get a full SI/PDN/thermal model set ready for validation after package design is frozen? Options: <1 week, 1–2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–2 months, >2 months
• On a scale of 1–10, how confident are you that current handoffs preserve critical EM detail required for first-pass success? Options: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

When the Prototype Lands, What Keeps You Up at Night?

• What failure modes worry you most when integrating package and board with a new die (pick all that apply)? Options: SI timing failures, Crosstalk/reflections, PDN impedance spikes, Thermal hotspots, Manufacturability/assembly failures, Unexpected EMI issues, Other
• Describe a concrete example where the sequential flow produced a ‘surprise’ at prototype — what indicators were missed earlier?
• How do those surprises typically affect stakeholder confidence, future budgets, or program timelines?
• Which of these outcomes would most relieve that anxiety for you? Options: Reduced respin probability, Earlier detection of SI/PDN issues, Quantified thermal margins, Faster sign-off on package, Clear acceptance criteria
• How would you measure ‘reduced respin risk’ in your programs (metrics or KPIs)? Options: Probability of respin, Time-to-first-good-board, Number of ECOs post-silicon, Cost-per-respin, SI/PDN margin improvement in dB/ohms, Other

Imagine a Design Where Package and Board Were Partners, Not Afterthoughts

• If you could wave a wand and solve one co-design problem today, what would change first—time, cost, performance, or team alignment? Options: Time-to-market, Cost (lower respin/iteration cost), Performance (SI/PDN/thermal gains), Cross-team collaboration, Other
• Describe the target design or scenario you want us to use for the pilot (e.g., flip-chip with HBM, 2.5D interposer, chiplet cluster).
• Which success signals would convince you the pilot worked (pick up to three)? Options: First-pass SI compliance, PDN impedance within target, Thermal headroom confirmed, Reduced simulation-to-hardware delta, Fewer ECOs in silicon, Shorter debug cycle
• How should we measure success quantitatively for this pilot (preferred metrics)?
• Who needs to sign off on those success signals inside your org?

What’s Standing Between Good Intent and Getting This Done?

• What internal barriers have blocked co-design initiatives in the past—tool mistrust, IP concerns, org silos, or skill gaps? Options: Toolchain incompatibility, IP/data access policies, Organizational silos, Lack of co-design experience, Budget constraints, Other
• How comfortable are your legal/IP teams with sharing layout, package, and board data with an external co-design partner? Options: Comfortable with NDAs, Require strict on-premise controls, Reluctant/needs heavy review, Not allowed
• If the biggest obstacle were people and process, what would success look like for the teams involved?
• How much internal change management bandwidth can you realistically allocate to run a pilot (owners, weekly syncs, reviews)? Options: Dedicated program team, Part-time champions across teams, Minimal availability, Undecided
• What reservations would cause you to pause before committing to a pilot, and how could we address them?

Data, Access, and Practicalities — Can We Run This Together?

• What datasets are available and at what readiness—layout/GDS, package stack-ups, IBIS/SPICE models, PDN nets, thermal boundary conditions? Options: All available and ready, Most available with cleanup, Partial and needs extraction, Sensitive/proprietary — limited access
• Are there specific formats or tooling constraints we must adhere to for automated ingestion? Options: Must use specific EDA vendor formats, Open formats acceptable, Prefer SFTP/secure transfer, On-premise-only processing required, Other
• What security or IP controls would you require for the pilot (NDA, on-site work, containerized environments, data anonymization)? Options: Standard NDA, On-premise execution, Isolated cloud tenancy, Data anonymization/pseudonymization, Other
• Who will be the data owner and single point of contact for file handoffs?
• What does success look like operationally at handoff—formats, timelines, and acceptance criteria for each dataset?

Commitment & Next Steps — If This Could Reduce Respin Risk, What's Your Move?

• If the pilot proves we can materially reduce respin risk, what decision would you want to be able to make immediately afterward? Options: Extend to broader program, Adopt toolchain company-wide, Run additional pilots, License tech for internal use, Other
• What commercial or legal terms will you need to see to move from evaluation to procurement (PO, trial license, service SOW)? Options: PO after successful pilot, Trial license then PO, SOW with milestones, Not sure/need procurement input
• What internal approvals are required and how long do they typically take? Options: Engineering-only approval, Engineering + Procurement, Legal + Procurement + Execs, Undecided/varies
• Realistically, how much calendar time and executive attention can you commit to run and review the pilot? Options: 2–4 weeks of focused work, 1–3 months part-time, 3–6 months with infrequent touchpoints, Unsure
• What would be a reasonable first meeting cadence and decision-gate schedule to keep momentum? Options: Weekly syncs + milestone reviews, Bi-weekly updates, Monthly steering + weekly working sessions, Ad-hoc as needed