New products typically mean new components, and one of the hardest to change is that the display itself. From potentially having to build out a new billion-dollar facility, to changing the screen area slightly, problems big and small abound. Today, we’ll focus on the smaller ones… how do we change the form factor slightly of a new display module for a year-over-year product improvement.

As a display module engineer, you will be generally stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one end, your upstream vendors and partners have provided you a defined panel area that encompasses a target active area and that is currently possible based on the manufacturer technology readiness (e.g. don’t expect microOLED resolutions for smartphone screens anytime soon) and cost targets (e.g. products already in production will be cheaper than a new development & associated expense). At the other end, the system integrator will be defining a form factor that is in-line with the product marketing & industrial design targets. This means that you are now stuck bridging the gap between what ‘upstream’ says they can do, and what ‘downstream’ says they need – often disparate realities. What do you do now?

1. Problem Definition

Before jumping straight into urgent design meetings, engineering brainstorms or other full-day time sinks, let’s sit down and define the assumptions about our problem.

• Assumption 1: We have a problem with a mismatch between possible panel form factor and needed product level form factor
• Assumption 2: Upstream vendors cannot modify panel form factor
• Assumption 3: Downstream customer cannot achieve product target without currently specified form factor

All of these assumptions may be true, but they cannot be taken at face value – start by confirming you have an issue to solve.

Assumption 1 – Is there a problem? Generally the answer is yes… but confirm this is the case with detailed MCO reviews, and confirmation of the mechanical state of our module post module process.

Assumption 2 – Can a simple panel change be made to achieve system targets? Generally the first answer is no… whether due to cost, time or complexity, spinning a new mask set or waiting for even a simple experimental configuration to time out will be too time intensive.

Assumption 3 – Can the final system encumber a small design change to accommodate the current panel-enabled form factor? This may be more likely to happen, but will depend significantly on the co-existence with other modules. Expect significant push-back against a system-level design to start and significant justification requests for even the most minor of changes!

When likely all 3 of these assumptions have been validated, it’s time to get to work engineering a solution…

2. Explore a Solution Space

An engineering solution space will generally boil down to a simple tradeoff table between which node in the supply chain a change needs to be made at, and the cost, complexity and time loss at each – an even simpler version of the Heilmeier Catechism famously pioneered by DARPA for boiling down complex engineering problems into a manageable set of plain-answer questions. While each product and organization may differ in the absolute rating that is assigned to each of these factors, generally your job will be to explain why as a team you have to pursue a change at the node you propose changing.

Below is an example of such a tradeoff table – in this scenario, the panel change has been agreed cross-functionally to be the highest risk of all options due to potential issues across cost, complexity and time. However, the engineering team has shown that module changes will be only of medium cost with a small increase in complexity, while the system change will be a high cost but low overall risk to the product due to complexity creep. What now?

3. Align all Stakeholders on Proposed Path

The third and final step is arguably the hardest – getting everyone else on board that your solution is the correct one. I would love to say that presenting your solution is as simple as presenting the product of [cost X complexity X time] as a numerical value that should be minimized, but true engineering solutions rarely work that way… Only you can say at any given point if your problem requires the minimization of cost, and therefore a small degree of engineering complexity can be accepted, or if speed is of the essence and almost any cost overrun is an afterthought… This judgement is what a Display Student Certification is meant to help you understand and apply pragmatically to the countless unique problems that you will deal with on a daily basis.

As for the example above? You’re very likely changing the module process and associated materials… the Display Module Manufacturing Certification will explain why this particular node is one of the more forgiving areas for last minute engineering change orders and why 9 times out of 10, this is where problems are chosen to be solved.