|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
Digital Power Electronics: IC and Power Converter Benchmarking Survey
Darnell Group, Sep 2007, Pages: 54
The initial digital benchmarking survey can be segmented into four distinct sections. The first section, which includes questions 1 and 2 are designed to determine the respondent’s background and primary job function. In order to insure the validity of the survey, it is important to verify that the respondents are qualified to answer the questions. It was also designed to ensure that there was a representative mix of system makers, power converter manufacturers and semiconductor manufacturers. In addition, the last part of the survey (immediately after question 12) asks for respondent information, such as company and location. This information was used to verify that companies or alliances between companies could not skew the results.
The second part of the survey includes questions 3 through 5, these are designed to rank digital power IC companies. Questions 6 though 8 make up the third part of the survey and are designed to rank digital power converter companies. The final part of the survey, questions 9 through 12, is designed to rank the overall position of both digital power converter and digital power IC companies.
The structure of this questionnaire lends itself to a straightforward, quantitative analysis. To determine top-level mind share, each respondent was asked to list their top three companies for each category in order. A company that was listed first received 3 points, second received 2 points and third received 1 point. These points were totalled across surveys to determine leaders.
To determine rank on individual aspects of digital power, the respondents answered two types of questions. The first was a ranking question with features/functions such as Price, Interoperability, Design Tools, Pure Digital Solution and Hybrid Analog/Digital Solution ranked 1 through 5, with 5 being most important. In order for the response to be valid, the participating respondent could not use any number more than once, and could not leave any attribute unranked. Then for each company mentioned, the respondent rated the company on a scale of 0 (poor) through 10 (excellent) based on how the company performs on that feature/function. The rank and rating were then multiplied to determine how that respondent felt about that company. For example, if a respondent said “Company A” was a 10 on Price and rated Price as the most important (5), the company got a score of fifty (10 x 5 = 50) for the Price. On the other hand, if Interoperability was ranked a 3 and the company rated a 6, the company received a score of eighteen (3 x 6 = 18). Companies were then compared based on their average scores across respondents.
Prior to conducting this analysis, all “own responses” were ignored. This means that any time a representative from “Company A” mentioned “Company A” that response was removed from the data set. This was done to stop any company from “stuffing the ballot box.” The same procedure was checked for alliance/standard membership. However, since alliance/standard membership did not have a significant affect on the findings, alliance membership was not adjusted for in the final results.
The second follow-up Digital IC survey consists of 5 questions. Questions 1 and 2 are designed to determine what level of integration, and which features and functions should be included in a digital IC. Question 3 is intended to determine what type of communications protocol(s) and bus(s) should the IC be able to use. Question 4 identifies the target markets for the IC manufacturers. The final question, number 5, is based on the markets checked in question 4. In this question, the respondent ranks the desired features and functions from 1 to 5 in order of importance (5 being most important and 1 being least important). In this question, respondents were allowed to use a number more than once. In order to thoroughly evaluate the responses in this section, a number of comparisons and references will be made to Darnell’s earlier 2007 study “Digital Power Electronics: IC Product Introduction Trends”.
The final survey was a short two question survey designed to determine what percentage of the participating companies focused on standard designs vs. custom designs. Unlike the other surveys, this questionnaire allowed the participant to add their own personal opinions and comments on the percentage breakdown of custom vs. standard design in the area of digital power management.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Emerging Markets in Digital Power Electronics: Component, Converter and System-Level Opportunitites, Second Edition
Digital Power Electronics: IC Product Introduction Trends
Emerging Markets in Digital Power Electronics: Component, Converter and System Level Opportunities, First Edition
Digital Power Electronics: Worldwide Forecasts, Third Edition
DC-DC Converter Market Trends, Worldwide Forecasts and Competitive Environment: A White Paper Derived from "DC-DC Converter Modules And ICs, Ninth Edition"
World Digital Power Management ICs Markets
The International Survey of Institutional Digital Repositories
World DC-DC Converter Markets
Analog TV Converter Profile Report
DC-DC Converter Modules and ICs: Global Market Forecasts and Competitive Environment, Ninth Edition
Consumer Survey on Digital Storage in Consumer Electronics 2008
China Digital TV IC (Chip) Industry Report, 2006
|
|
|
|
