CEO of Season Group, a vertically integrated Electronics Manufacturing Services (EMS) provider, and SG Wireless, a full-stack IoT provider.
When tariffs began reshaping the electronics landscape post-Liberation Day, I watched technology companies, large and small, grapple with a critical question: How much of their product architecture was locked into a single-country supply chain? As someone who works closely with electronics manufacturers, I’ve seen this answer prove sobering, particularly for companies relying on traditional system-on-a-chip (SoC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA) designs.
This crisis has sparked renewed interest in system-on-module (SoM) architecture. Its value proposition has fundamentally shifted in today’s geopolitically charged environment; what was once a time-saving design choice has become a simple hedge against supply chain uncertainty.
Understanding The SoM Advantage
A SoM is a miniature circuit board integrating the processor, memory, power management and core components into a single, pre-tested (and sometimes certified) module. Unlike designing from a bare SoC or FPGA, a SoM arrives as a validated, working unit.
While embedded systems projects can take six to 12 months for average complexity designs, and custom implementations often extend to 18 months, SoM-based approaches drastically reduce hardware design effort by eliminating complex, high-speed routing challenges like DDR memory layout. The vendor assumes these design risks, allowing engineering teams to focus on the carrier board—the interface between the SoM and the specific application.
In an environment where protectionist pressures play an increasingly prominent role in how goods are sourced and transported, this accelerated timeline creates strategic flexibility that traditional development cycles cannot match.
The Country-Of-Origin Advantage
The most compelling argument for SoMs is their unmatched country-of-origin flexibility. As supply chain resilience becomes critical amid geopolitical uncertainty, the ability to shift manufacturing locations proves decisive.
Changing the country of origin for a SoM requires transferring a PCB assembly process—a capability many contract manufacturers possess. By contrast, replicating the country of origin for an SoC or FPGA means replicating multibillion-dollar semiconductor fabrication facilities. It often takes years as well. This makes SoM assembly far more geographically flexible than chip fabrication.
The Market Segmentation Opportunity
I’ve 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 does require firmware adaptation—the software must be recompiled and validated for the new processor architecture—this remains far less resource-intensive than redesigning hardware from scratch. There are also a lot more AI tools available to help update software nowadays.
This modularity opens entirely new market opportunities. Consider a company whose primary product uses premium-tier components from established semiconductor regions. The component costs may price them out of emerging markets where customers have similar technical requirements but different budget constraints.
By designing a carrier board that accepts multiple SoMs, they can offer a high-specification variant using established-brand components for markets that demand or require them, while simultaneously offering a cost-optimized variant using components from Asian manufacturers for price-sensitive regions.
I’ve watched several manufacturers successfully penetrate multiple market segments with a single carrier board design, varying only the SoM and associated firmware. The hardware development investment was made once, but the commercial reach expanded severalfold. When one market suddenly imposed stringent country-of-origin requirements, companies with SoM-based architectures pivoted within quarters rather than the years required for complete redesigns.
The Trade-Offs To Consider
The per-unit recurring engineering cost of SoMs typically exceeds discrete components. For products shipping millions of units annually, this premium impacts margins significantly. Companies must weigh faster time-to-market and business continuity against long-term production costs.
SoMs are designed for versatility, meaning you may pay for unused capabilities. Graphics acceleration or connectivity options might add cost without value to your specific product. Finding a customer-focused vendor is critical so they can perhaps tune their SoM for your specific needs.
The simplified bill of materials is an advantage, but the module itself represents a vendor dependency, which deserves careful consideration. Selecting a SoM ties your road map to that vendor’s longevity and support. Thorough due diligence on multiyear availability commitments is essential. Additionally, carrier board design still requires expertise in PCB layout and signal integrity.
Making The Strategic Decision
The choice between SoMs, custom SoCs or FPGAs has many factors. For products with moderate volumes, shorter life cycles or requirements to serve geographically diverse markets, SoMs offer compelling advantages. Both high-volume products needing rapid market entry and low-volume products seeking to minimize nonrecurring engineering costs can benefit.
For extremely high-volume products with stable requirements, traditional SoC or FPGA designs may make economic sense. The analysis must account for engineering time, opportunity costs and, now more than ever, supply chain flexibility—not just component costs.
Implementing A SOM Strategy
Start by evaluating your current product portfolio for geopolitical risk and time-to-market requirements. These are your best candidates for SoM-based redesigns.
Carefully vet potential SoM vendors. Look beyond datasheets to understand their manufacturing partnerships, component sourcing strategies and ability to provide alternative modules if supply conditions change. Manufacturing partners can provide critical guidance, often having relationships with multiple SoM vendors and insights into production reliability.
Ensure engineering teams can develop carrier board design expertise. The promise of faster development only materializes if teams understand the requirements of designing around these modules.
The Path Forward
System on module technology isn’t a universal solution, but it’s a valuable tool that hardware companies should seriously evaluate in this environment. In an industry where flexibility increasingly determines survival, the modular architecture of SoMs—particularly their country-of-origin flexibility—aligns with the realities of geopolitical uncertainty.
The SoM approach represents a strategic choice to value resilience alongside efficiency. Companies that thrive won’t be those that optimize for costs alone, but those that build geographic adaptability into their fundamental design choices. This needs to be considered as a cross-functional team and no longer an engineering-only decision.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?