EMA - Criteria Weighting 2

Thank you for participating in this short survey, which is the follow-up to the work done at the EMA Steering Group Meeting on 19th April and summarised in the presentation which is attached to this invitation.

We have worked with Carson and Chris to condense the suggestions from the workshop into a manageable number of targeting criteria. The first set of criteria are characteristics of a blue chip that make it attractive to EMA; there are currently seven of these. The second set of criteria comprises inherent characteristics of a blue chip’s business that mean it is likely to have issues addressable with microelectronics solutions, and so by EMA; there are currently five of these.

This is a practical exercise to allow us to prioritise blue chip targets more effectively, with the limited resource available today. The criteria identified now need to be weighted in importance. To allow this to be done easily there is a question for each set of criteria asking you to score each out of 100 according to its relative importance. There are also open text questions where you can provide further comments.

The output will be used to help us construct the targeting model.

If you have any queries about the survey or the process overall please contact Andy Coaton on 01908 365916 or by email at [email protected].

Thank you very much for your time and support. Please start with the survey now by clicking on the Continue button below.

* Please enter your email address below:

ATTRACTIVENESS
These are characteristics of a blue chip that make it attractive to EMA.

Please rate each 'Attractiveness' criterion in terms of its relative importance on a scale of 0-100. Allocate 100 to the most important criterion in the index and then flex each of the others down from 100 depending on how less important they are from the most important (NB If you think all are equally important then rate all of them 100).

	Importance (0-100)
* 1.European presence: Proximity, especially if UK-based, makes a blue chip easier to address in practical terms and offers local strategic decision capability, so more attractive for EMA.

* 2.Size: An ideal blue chip is: (i) large enough on its own to buy enough product to make a microelectronics venture viable; (ii) able to invest sufficient resource, time and cash in a feasibility project; (iii) potentially able to provide capital investment in a new venture (be its own VC).

* 3.Innovative: EMA will be offering innovative solutions and so, almost by definition, only innovative blue chips are likely to be open to EMA.

* 4.Dynamic market: Blue chips in fast changing sectors look for ways to give themselves a competitive edge and so are attractive because they are more open to the benefits EMA can offer.

* 5.Nimble: Blue chips who move fast themselves, for example in introducing new products, are more attractive to EMA because they make decisions quickly which will facilitate rapid engagement, trialling and roll-out.

* 6.Major sector issues: Blue chips in sectors facing major issues (e.g. regulatory changes) are more attractive to EMA because they are being forced to find new ways of doing things.

* 7.Open: Blue chips already used to working with partners at a strategic level are more attractive to EMA because there will be little resistance to joint working.

Do you have any comments about the 'Attractiveness' criteria?

ADDRESSABLE BY MICROELECTRONICS
These are inherent characteristics of a blue chip’s business that mean it is likely to have issues addressable with microelectronics solutions, and so by EMA.

Please rate each 'Addressable with microelectronics' criterion in terms of its relative importance on a scale of 0-100. Allocate 100 to the most important criterion in the index and then flex each of the others down from 100 depending on how less important they are from the most important. (NB If you think all are equally important then rate all of them 100).

	Importance (0-100)
* 1.Physicality: The company deals with people and things rather than ideas and information. Microelectronics solutions are good in situations where physical items are involved because tracking, sensing and controlling are often required.

* 2.Portability/mobility: The lightness and small size of microelectronics solutions give them advantages in situations where products or people are moving around or being carried.

* 3.High volume: Microelectronics solutions are good for businesses dealing with high numbers of people or things because of the importance of: low unit cost, fast throughput, low weight, small size and energy efficiency. Also with large numbers ease of interconnectivity becomes more advantageous.

* 4.Reliability: Microelectronics solutions are good in situations where very high reliability is required because they can be engineered to give very low failure failure rates with redundancy built-in.

* 5.Security: In situations where high security is inherent to the activity, e.g. law enforcement, microelectronics solutions can be engineered to be inherently secure.

Do you have any comments about the 'Addressability by Microelectronics' criteria?

Do you have any other comments or suggestions?