CEO of Season groupa vertically integrated Electronics Manufacturing Services (EMS) provider, and SG Wireless, a full-stack IoT provider.
As post-Liberation Day tariffs began to reshape the electronics landscape, I watched tech companies large and small grapple with a crucial question: How much of their product architecture was tied to a supply chain in a single country? As someone who works closely with electronics manufacturers, I've found this answer to be sobering, especially for companies that rely on traditional system-on-a-chip (SoC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA) designs.
This crisis has sparked new interest in system-on-module (SoM) architectures. Its value proposition has fundamentally changed in today's geopolitically charged environment; What was once a time-saving design decision has become a simple hedge against supply chain uncertainty.
Understanding the SoM advantage
An SoM is a miniature circuit board that integrates processor, memory, power management, and core components into a single, pre-tested (and sometimes certified) module. Unlike designing based on a mere SoC or FPGA, an SoM arrives as a validated, working unit.
While embedded system projects can take six to 12 months for designs of average complexity and custom implementations often take up to 18 months, SoM-based approaches dramatically reduce hardware design effort by eliminating complex high-speed routing challenges such as DDR memory layout. The vendor assumes these design risks so that development teams can focus on the carrier board – the interface between the SoM and the specific application.
In an environment where protectionist pressures are playing an increasingly important role in the procurement and transportation of goods, this accelerated schedule creates strategic flexibility that traditional development cycles cannot match.
The country of origin advantage
The most compelling argument in favor of SoMs is their unrivaled flexibility in terms of country of origin. As supply chain resilience becomes increasingly important in the face of geopolitical uncertainty, the ability to relocate production locations is proving critical.
Changing the country of origin for an SoM requires transferring a PCB assembly process – a capability that many contract manufacturers have. In contrast, replicating the country of origin for an SoC or FPGA means replicating billion-dollar semiconductor manufacturing facilities. It often takes years. This makes SoM assembly far more geographically flexible than chip manufacturing.
The opportunity of market segmentation
I have observed companies successfully develop region-specific SKUs by swapping modules with different country of origin profiles while maintaining the same carrier board design. While switching SoMs requires firmware customization – the software must be recompiled and validated for the new processor architecture – this is far less resource intensive than redesigning the hardware from scratch. There are also many more AI tools available these days to help update software.
This modularity opens up completely new market opportunities. Imagine a company whose main product uses world-class components from established semiconductor regions. Component costs can make them stand out in emerging markets where customers have similar technical requirements but different budget constraints.
By developing a carrier board that accepts multiple SoMs, they can offer a high-spec variant with components from established brands for markets that demand or need them, while at the same time offering a cost-optimized variant with components from Asian manufacturers for price-sensitive regions.
I have seen several manufacturers successfully penetrate multiple market segments with a single carrier board design, varying only the SoM and associated firmware. The investment in hardware development was made once, but the commercial reach increased many times. When a market suddenly imposed strict country-of-origin requirements, companies with SoM-based architectures switched within quarters, rather than the years required for complete redesigns.
The trade-offs to consider
The recurring development costs per unit of SoMs typically exceed the costs of discrete components. For products that ship millions of units annually, this markup has a significant impact on margins. Companies must balance faster time to market and business continuity against long-term production costs.
SoMs are designed for versatility, which means you may be paying for unused features. Graphics acceleration or connectivity options may add cost to your specific product without adding any value. It is crucial to find a customer-focused provider so they can potentially customize their SoM to meet your specific needs.
The simplified BOM is an advantage, but the module itself represents a vendor dependency that should be carefully considered. Choosing an SoM ties your roadmap to that provider's longevity and support. Thorough due diligence on multi-year availability commitments is essential. Additionally, carrier board design still requires expertise in PCB layout and signal integrity.
Make the strategic decision
The choice between SoMs, custom SoCs or FPGAs depends on many factors. SoMs offer convincing advantages for products with moderate volumes, shorter life cycles or the requirement to serve geographically different markets. Both high-volume products that require rapid market entry and low-volume products that aim to minimize one-time development costs can benefit.
For extremely high volume products with stable requirements, traditional SoC or FPGA designs may make economic sense. The analysis must take into account development time, opportunity costs and, more than ever, supply chain flexibility – and not just component costs.
Implementation of a SOM strategy
Start by assessing your current product portfolio for geopolitical risks and time-to-market requirements. These are your best candidates for SoM-based redesigns.
Review potential SoM vendors carefully. Look beyond the data sheets to understand their manufacturing partnerships, component sourcing strategies, and ability to provide alternative modules if supply conditions change. Manufacturing partners can provide important guidance and often have relationships with multiple SoM vendors and insights into production reliability.
Ensure engineering teams can develop expertise in carrier board design. The promise of faster development will only come true if teams understand the requirements that arise when designing around these modules.
The way forward
System-on-Module technology is not a one-size-fits-all solution, but it is a valuable tool that hardware companies should seriously consider in this environment. In an industry where flexibility is increasingly critical to survival, the modular architecture of SoMs – particularly their flexibility in country of origin – fits the realities of geopolitical uncertainty.
The SoM approach represents a strategic decision to value resilience alongside efficiency. Companies that succeed will not be those that simply optimize costs, but rather those that incorporate geographic adaptability into their fundamental design decisions. This needs to be viewed as a cross-functional team and no longer just a technical decision.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for top CIOs, CTOs and technology managers. Am I qualified?