In an interview with Sanjay Gupta, India Country Head & Chief Development Officer at L&T Semiconductors Technology, followed by TimesTech, the discussion explores India’s transition from a services-led model to a product-driven semiconductor ecosystem. He highlights leadership shifts, talent challenges, and the need for policy continuity, innovation, and ecosystem collaboration to build globally competitive semiconductor capabilities and position India as a future-ready technology powerhouse.
Read the full interview here:
TimesTech: You’ve had a rare journey—from starting your career at Motorola to leading global engineering at NXP, and now building L&T Semiconductor from ground zero. What have been the biggest leadership and technical shifts required when moving from a mature global semiconductor organization to creating India’s first comprehensive product-based semiconductor company?
Sanjay: The journey from a mature global organization like Motorola to building L&T Semiconductors from ground zero represents a fundamental shift in mindset, pace, and scope. At Motorola, I had the privilege of working within an established ecosystem—world-class infrastructure, proven processes, and deep institutional knowledge. We were optimizing and innovating within a system that already worked. At L&T Semiconductors, we’re not just innovating; we’re building the entire foundation.
The biggest technical shift has been moving from incremental optimization to foundational architecture. At Motorola, when we designed the wireless chips for the Razr phone or the networking chips for cell towers, we operated within established design methodologies, proven supply chains, and mature manufacturing partnerships. We could focus purely on the silicon innovation. Here, we’re simultaneously solving the silicon problem, the manufacturing problem, the talent problem, and the ecosystem problem.
From a leadership perspective, the shift is equally profound. At Motorola, leadership meant driving excellence within a structured hierarchy—setting targets, allocating resources, and executing against a playbook. At L&T Semiconductors, leadership means creating the playbook itself. It’s about vision-setting in an environment where the rules are still being written, where government policies are evolving, where the talent pipeline is nascent, and where every decision cascades across the entire Indian semiconductor ecosystem.
The technical challenges are different too. When we built the automotive chip design center at Motorola India, we faced skepticism—”Can India really design zero-defect, life-critical chips?” We proved it could. But that was within Motorola’s global framework. Now, at L&T Semiconductors, we’re not just proving India can design world-class chips; we’re proving India can build a complete product-based semiconductor company that competes globally, manages its own IP, controls its destiny, and creates wealth for India.
The leadership principle that has emerged is what I call “building with intent.” Every hire, every process, every partnership is chosen not just for immediate capability but for its role in creating a self-sustaining, world-class semiconductor ecosystem. It’s more demanding than optimizing within an existing system, but infinitely more rewarding.
TimesTech: You’re known for building high-performing teams from scratch and transforming them through innovation-driven programs. In a talent-constrained semiconductor market like India, what leadership principles and cultural frameworks have worked best for you?
Sanjay: India’s semiconductor talent market is genuinely constrained—we don’t have the decades of institutional knowledge that Silicon Valley or Taiwan possess. But constraint breeds innovation in leadership. Over the years, I’ve learned that talent is not just about credentials; it’s about potential, hunger, and cultural fit.
The first principle is radical transparency about the mission. When I started the networking chip design center at Motorola India, I didn’t recruit by saying, “We need chip designers.” I recruited by saying, “We’re going to prove that India can design world-class networking chips. We’ll do it in three years. We’ll make it first-time right. We’ll be the benchmark for the company globally.” That mission attracted people who wanted to be part of something bigger than a job.
The second principle is aggressive upskilling and mentorship. In a talent-constrained market, you can’t wait for the perfect hire. You hire for potential and attitude, then invest heavily in their growth. When I was the technical lead for the wireless design team, I was 28 years old, and I had people reporting to me who were older and more experienced in some domains. The key was creating a culture where learning was continuous and psychological safety was paramount. People needed to know that asking “I don’t know” was the beginning of mastery, not a sign of weakness.
The third principle is creating visible career pathways. In a startup or a new division, people need to see that excellence leads to opportunity. When we built the automotive chip design center, I made it clear that the best engineers would get to lead sub-teams, then teams, then divisions. We created a meritocratic ladder where technical depth and leadership growth were equally valued. This is critical in India, where many talented engineers feel they have to choose between technical excellence and career advancement.
The fourth principle—and this is crucial for India specifically—is cultural frameworks that honor both individual excellence and collective responsibility. Indian engineers are incredibly talented, but they often come from educational systems that emphasize individual achievement. In every team I built in the past, I have built frameworks where individual brilliance is celebrated, but it’s channeled toward team outcomes. We use design reviews, technical forums, and mentorship circles where senior engineers are expected to elevate the entire team’s capability.
The fifth principle is creating a “learning organization” culture. Semiconductors move fast. What you learned five years ago might be obsolete. So we’ve built continuous learning into our DNA—technical certifications, conference attendance, knowledge sharing sessions for deep learning, and partnerships with premium institutes including IITs where our engineers can stay connected to cutting-edge research. This signals to the team that we’re not just executing; we’re evolving.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, is creating ownership mentality. We built the teams where we deliberately try to create self-contained activities with full ownership. The goal is to create more autonomous teams where engineers own entire product partitions or technology domains. This transforms the psychological contract from “I’m executing someone else’s idea with no purpose” to “I’m building something which has a clear purpose.” That shift in ownership is worth more than any compensation package or external attraction.
The result? We’ve built teams that are not just technically competent but deeply committed to the mission. Attrition in our core teams is significantly lower than industry average, and more importantly, the quality of work—the attention to detail, the proactive problem-solving, the innovation—is world-class.
TimesTech: Having worked closely with MeitY, IESA, IITs, and startup incubators, how do you assess India’s current readiness in the semiconductor value chain—design, talent, manufacturing, and ecosystem collaboration? Where does India still need to move faster?
Sanjay: India’s semiconductor readiness is at an inflection point. We’re not where we need to be, but we’re closer than we’ve ever been, and the trajectory is accelerating. Let me break this down across the value chain:
Design Capability: 7/10 and Rising
India has proven design capability. We’ve designed wireless chips, networking chips, automotive chips, and consumer electronics chips. The talent exists. The problem is scale and concentration. Most of India’s design talent is in services—outsourced design for global companies. What we lack is product-based design companies that own the IP, manage the entire lifecycle, and capture the value. L&T Semiconductors is explicitly trying to change this equation.
The premium institutes in India are producing excellent engineers, but the curriculum is still catching up to industry needs. We need to focus on Systems & Architecture, system-on-chip (SoC) design, advanced process nodes, AI/ML chip design and power semiconductors. The good news? The top institutes including IIT Delhi, IIT Bombay, IIT Gandhinagar, IISc Bangalore and IIT Madras are now actively partnering with industry to bridge this gap. I’ve seen the quality of student projects improve dramatically in the last three years.
Manufacturing: 4/10 and Accelerating
This is where India has the biggest gap. Until recently, we had zero fabs. Now we have one TATA fab in making (partnership with PSMC) and multiple OSATs (Outsourced Semiconductor Assembly and Test) coming across Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, and Noida. This is progress, but it’s not enough.
The challenge isn’t just building fabs; it’s building them at competitive cost and quality. A fab requires not just capital but an entire ecosystem—reliable electricity, ultra-pure water, hundreds of specialty chemicals and gases, skilled technicians, and seamless logistics. We’re still building this ecosystem. The government is supporting well, but we need faster infrastructure development and more aggressive cost competitiveness.
My assessment: India will have 3-4 operational fabs by 2029-2030. By 2035, we could have 6-8. But we need to move faster on the OSAT side—packaging and testing are where we can create immediate value and jobs.
Talent Pipeline: 5/10 and Needs Urgent Attention
This is the constraint that keeps me up at night. We don’t have trained manpower for fab operations, advanced process technology, or product-based semiconductor companies. Our engineering colleges produce good designers, but we lack experienced system architects, process engineers, device physicists, trained specifically for semiconductor product design and manufacturing.
What’s needed urgently:
- Specialized semiconductor engineering programs at IITs and top engineering colleges—not just electronics, but semiconductor-specific tracks specially including joint research topics like quantum, power semiconductors and AI compute chips
- Industry-academia partnerships where domestic companies like L&T Semiconductors and, TATA Electronics co-design curriculum and provide internships
- Vocational training programs for fab technicians and operators—we need thousands of skilled blue-collar workers
- Retention programs to prevent brain drain—many of our best engineers still migrate to the US or Taiwan
Ecosystem Collaboration: 6/10 and Improving
I’ve worked closely with MeitY, IESA, IITs, and startup incubators. The collaboration is genuine and improving, but it’s still fragmented. Here’s what’s working:
- Government support is real and responsive. MeitY is not a closed-ear government department. They listen, they adapt, they move fast on policy changes.
- IESA is doing excellent work in bringing industry together and advocating for policy changes.
- IIT partnerships are deepening—we’re seeing more joint research, more student internships, more technology transfer.
- Startup ecosystem is vibrant—there are 50+ semiconductor startups in India now, many focused on AI chips, analog chips, and specialized applications.
What needs to improve:
- Coordination between design, manufacturing, and packaging—we need a unified roadmap, not siloed efforts
- Long-term policy continuation —special focus on product design enablement by giving appropriate grants to create fabless ecosystem. The startups and companies need 10-year visibility, not 5-year cycles
- Access to capital—semiconductor companies are capital-intensive (EDA tools, wafer manufacturing, silicon validation tools); we need more venture capital and government funding mechanisms
- IP protection and standards—we need stronger IP frameworks and industry standards to enable collaboration
Infrastructure Challenges: The Honest Assessment
Let me be direct: India still has infrastructure challenges that the West solved 30 years ago. Uninterrupted electricity is not guaranteed in all regions. Water quality and availability are concerns. Logistics and transportation, while improving, are not yet seamless. For a fab, you need hundreds of specialty chemicals and gases—we’re still building the supply chain for these.
But here’s what gives me confidence: India has always overcome challenges through its talented workforce and adaptive governance. The government is hearing the concerns and moving fast. States are competing to attract semiconductor investments, which is driving infrastructure improvements. Private companies are investing in backup power, water treatment, and logistics solutions.
My Overall Assessment
India is 3-5 years away from having a credible, competitive semiconductor design ecosystem. We’re 5-7 years away from having meaningful manufacturing capacity. We’re 7-10 years away from having a complete, self-sustaining value chain. But the trajectory is clear, and the momentum is real.
The biggest risk is not technical or infrastructural—it’s policy discontinuity and talent drain. If we maintain government support, if we create compelling career opportunities for our engineers, and if we build world-class companies that can compete globally, India will become a semiconductor superpower within a decade.
TimesTech: L&T Semiconductor is positioning itself as a product-based semiconductor company rather than a services-led model. Why is this shift critical for India’s long-term semiconductor ambitions, and what gaps does it aim to fill in the global supply chain?
Sanjay: This is perhaps the most important strategic question for India’s semiconductor future. Let me explain why the shift from services to products is non-negotiable.
The Services Trap
India’s semiconductor industry has been built primarily on design services—companies like TCS, Infosys, and Wipro do outsourced chip design for global companies. This is valuable work, and it’s created jobs and expertise. But it has a fundamental limitation: we capture 10-15% of the value chain, and we have no control over our destiny.
When a global company outsources design to India, they own the IP, they own the product architecture and product roadmap, they own the customer relationship, and they own the profit margin. India gets the engineering fee. This is the classic outsourcing model—it’s stable, but it’s not wealth-creating for India. It’s also vulnerable: if labor costs rise or if automation reduces design work, these jobs disappear.
More critically, services-led models don’t build product thinking, customer obsession, or market leadership. When you’re executing someone else’s vision, you optimize for cost and schedule, not for innovation and market impact. You don’t learn how to build products that customers love. You don’t learn how to manage supply chains, navigate regulations, or build brands.
The Product Opportunity
Product-based semiconductor companies—like Qualcomm, Broadcom, Nvidia, or even regional players like MediaTek—capture 60-80% of the value chain. They own the IP, they own the customer relationships, they own the roadmap, and they own the profit margins. More importantly, they drive innovation, set industry standards, and create massive wealth.
India needs product-based semiconductor companies for several reasons:
- Wealth creation: A successful product company creates 10x more value than a services company of the same size
- Job creation: Product companies create not just engineering jobs but sales, marketing, supply chain, and management jobs
- Innovation leadership: Product companies drive innovation; services companies execute innovation
- Strategic autonomy: India needs to own its semiconductor destiny, not be dependent on global companies’ outsourcing decisions
- Ecosystem development: Product companies attract talent, capital, and partnerships that strengthen the entire ecosystem
The Gaps L&T Semiconductors is Filling
L&T Semiconductors is explicitly positioned as a product-based company. We’re not doing outsourced design; we’re building our own products, owning our IP, and going to market directly. This is harder, riskier, and more capital-intensive than services. But it’s the only path to building India’s semiconductor leadership.
The gaps we’re filling:
- Analog and mixed-signal chips: These are less glamorous than digital chips, but they’re the backbone of every electronic device. India has very few companies designing world-class analog chips.
- Automotive and industrial chips: These require zero-defect, life-critical reliability. We’ve proven we can design these; now we’re building products.
- Specialized application chips: AI accelerators, edge computing chips, IoT chips—these are where India can compete globally without needing the most advanced process nodes.
- Complete product ownership: From concept to customer support, we’re managing the entire lifecycle. This builds capabilities that services companies never develop.
The Global Supply Chain Opportunity
The world is realizing that concentrating semiconductor manufacturing in Taiwan and South Korea is a strategic risk. The US, Europe, and India are all investing in building domestic semiconductor capacity. This creates an opportunity for Indian product companies to serve global markets from India.
But here’s the catch: global customers won’t buy from Indian companies just because they’re Indian. They’ll buy because the products are world-class, the reliability is proven, and the supply chain is secure. This is why L&T Semiconductors is positioning itself as a global company that happens to be headquartered in India, not an Indian company trying to go global.
The gaps we’re filling in the global supply chain:
- Diversification of supply: Customers want alternatives to Taiwan and South Korea
- Specialized applications: There’s huge demand for chips that don’t require the most advanced nodes—automotive, industrial, IoT, analog
- Trusted partnerships: India is seen as a trusted, democratic partner by the US, Europe, and Japan—this is a strategic advantage
- Cost competitiveness: Indian companies can deliver world-class products at competitive costs
Why This Shift is Critical for India
If India remains services-led, we’ll always be dependent on global companies’ outsourcing decisions. We’ll capture 10-15% of the value. We’ll create jobs, but not wealth. We’ll have engineers, but not entrepreneurs. We’ll be a vendor, not a leader.
If India builds product-based companies, we’ll own our destiny. We’ll capture 60-80% of the value. We’ll create massive wealth and jobs. We’ll build entrepreneurs and leaders. We’ll be a partner to the world, not a vendor.
L&T Semiconductors is betting on the latter. It’s harder, riskier, and more demanding. But it’s the only path to making India a semiconductor superpower.
TimesTech: With multiple U.S. patents and deep technical roots, along with an MBA from ISB, how do you balance deep-tech innovation with commercial scalability and market relevance—especially in capital-intensive sectors like semiconductors?
Sanjay: This is a question I think about constantly. I have deep technical roots—I’ve designed chips, I understand process technology, I know the physics. I also have an MBA from ISB and experience scaling organizations at Motorola. The tension between deep-tech innovation and commercial scalability is real, and it’s where many technical founders fail.
The Tension is Real
Deep-tech innovation wants to optimize for performance, reliability, and elegance. It asks: “What’s the best possible solution?” Commercial scalability wants to optimize for cost, time-to-market, and customer fit. It asks: “What’s the best solution we can deliver profitably and on time?”
These are not always the same answer. A technically perfect chip that takes 5 years to design and costs $500M to bring to market might be commercially unviable. A chip that’s 80% as good technically but can be designed in 2 years and costs $50M might be a commercial home run.
The key is knowing when to optimize for which dimension.
The Framework I Use
First, understand the market deeply. Before we start designing a chip, we spend months understanding the customer’s problem, the competitive landscape, the price sensitivity, and the time-to-market window. This is not a technical exercise; it’s a market exercise. I’ve learned from ISB that market understanding is as important as technical understanding.
Second, define the “good enough” threshold. For every chip, we define what “world-class” means in that specific market. For automotive chips, it means zero-defect, life-critical reliability. For consumer IoT chips, it might mean 95% reliability with lower cost. For AI accelerators, it might mean peak performance with acceptable power consumption. We don’t optimize for absolute perfection; we optimize for market-relevant excellence.
Third, build in modularity and iteration. Instead of trying to design the perfect chip in one shot, we design in phases. Version 1.0 might be 80% of the vision but can ship in 18 months. Version 2.0 adds more features and optimization. This is how Qualcomm, Broadcom, and other successful companies operate. It’s also how we manage risk—we get customer feedback early and iterate.
Fourth, invest in the right tools and processes. Deep-tech innovation requires world-class design tools, simulation capabilities, and process partnerships. We invest heavily in these. But we also invest in project management, supply chain, and go-to-market processes. The best chip in the world is worthless if you can’t manufacture it, supply it, or sell it.
Fifth, build a culture that values both innovation and execution. This is perhaps the hardest part. Engineers naturally want to optimize for technical perfection. Business leaders naturally want to optimize for speed and cost. We’ve built a culture where both are valued, and the tension between them is productive, not destructive. We have design reviews where technical excellence is celebrated, and we have business reviews where commercial viability is celebrated. The best engineers at L&T Semiconductors are those who can navigate both dimensions.
Specific Examples
Example 1: Process Node Selection
When we’re designing a new chip, we could use the most advanced process node (5nm, 3nm) for maximum performance. But advanced nodes are expensive, have long lead times, and require massive volume to be profitable. For many applications, a 28nm or 14nm node is technically sufficient and commercially much more attractive. We’ve learned to ask: “What’s the minimum process node that meets the market requirement?” not “What’s the most advanced node we can use?”
Example 2: Feature Set Prioritization
When designing a new automotive chip, we could include every possible feature and optimization. But that extends the design cycle and increases risk. Instead, we prioritize ruthlessly. Version 1.0 includes the features that 80% of customers need. Version 2.0 adds the features that the remaining 20% need. This gets us to market faster, reduces risk, and allows us to incorporate customer feedback.
Example 3: Supply Chain Optimization
A technically perfect chip is worthless if you can’t source the components or manufacture it reliably. We’ve learned to involve supply chain and manufacturing partners early in the design process. Sometimes this means making design choices that are 5% less optimal technically but 50% more manufacturable and cost-effective. This is not a compromise; it’s wisdom.
The Role of the MBA
My ISB MBA was transformative in helping me understand this balance. It taught me that business strategy, market dynamics, and financial sustainability are as important as technical excellence. It taught me frameworks for thinking about competitive advantage, customer value, and scalability. It taught me that the best technical solution is worthless if it doesn’t create customer value and business sustainability.
But here’s what’s important: the MBA didn’t make me less technical. It made me a better technical leader because I could connect technical decisions to business outcomes. I could explain to engineers why we’re choosing a less advanced process node (because it’s more cost-effective and gets us to market faster). I could explain to business leaders why we’re investing in a particular technical capability (because it’s a source of competitive advantage).
The Capital-Intensity Challenge
Semiconductors are capital-intensive. A fab costs $5-10 billion. A new product line requires $100-500M in NRE (non-recurring engineering) costs. This creates pressure to optimize for commercial viability—you can’t afford to spend $500M on a technically perfect chip that doesn’t sell.
But this pressure is actually healthy. It forces discipline. It forces us to understand the market deeply. It forces us to make hard choices about what to build and what not to build. The companies that fail are those that either:
- Optimize purely for technical perfection and ignore commercial viability (they run out of money)
- Optimize purely for speed and cost and ignore technical excellence (they build products that don’t work or don’t differentiate)
The companies that succeed are those that balance both dimensions and make conscious trade-offs.
My Advice to Technical Founders
If you’re a deep-tech founder building a semiconductor company, here’s what I’d say:
- Understand the market as deeply as you understand the technology. Spend time with customers. Understand their pain points, their budget constraints, their time-to-market pressures.
- Build a team that includes business and commercial expertise. You don’t need to be a business expert, but you need people around you who are.
- Make conscious trade-offs between technical perfection and commercial viability. Don’t compromise on reliability or quality, but do optimize for market-relevant excellence.
- Invest in the right tools, processes, and partnerships. Deep-tech innovation requires world-class infrastructure.
- Build a culture that values both innovation and execution. The best companies are those where engineers understand business and business leaders understand technology.
TimesTech: Looking ahead 5–10 years, what kind of skills, academic-industry partnerships, and policy continuity will be most critical to ensure India doesn’t just participate in, but leads parts of the global semiconductor landscape?
Sanjay: Looking ahead 5-10 years, India has a genuine opportunity to not just participate in, but lead parts of the global semiconductor landscape. But this requires deliberate action on three fronts: skills, academic-industry partnerships, and policy continuity.
Skills: The Critical Bottleneck
India’s biggest constraint is not capital or infrastructure—it’s talent. We need three types of skills:
1. Advanced Design Skills
We need engineers who can design world-class chips at advanced process nodes. This requires deep knowledge of:
- System-on-chip (SoC) design and architecture
- Advanced process technology and design rules
- Power, performance, and area (PPA) optimization
- Verification and testing methodologies
- AI/ML chip design (increasingly important)
2. Manufacturing and Process Skills
As India builds fabs and OSETs, we need engineers and technicians who understand:
- Process technology and device physics
- Fab operations and quality control
- Equipment maintenance and optimization
- Chemical and materials engineering
- Yield optimization and failure analysis
This is where we have the biggest gap. We need:
- Specialized degree programs in semiconductor process engineering at IITs and engineering colleges
- Vocational training programs for fab technicians and operators—we need thousands of skilled blue-collar workers
- Partnerships with global fab operators—TSMC, Samsung, Intel should help train Indian engineers and technicians
- Retention programs—we need to prevent brain drain of our best process engineers to Taiwan or South Korea
3. Entrepreneurial and Business Skills
We need engineers who can not just design chips but build companies. This requires:
- Product thinking and customer obsession
- Business strategy and financial management
- Supply chain and operations management
- Sales and marketing
- Leadership and team building
This is where programs like ISB’s MBA are valuable, but we also need:
- Entrepreneurship programs specifically for semiconductor founders—not generic startup programs
- Mentorship from successful semiconductor entrepreneurs—we need people who’ve built companies to guide the next generation
- Access to capital and networks—venture capital, government funding, and industry partnerships
Academic-Industry Partnerships: The Multiplier Effect
The best way to build skills at scale is through deep academic-industry partnerships. This is not just about companies hiring engineering graduates; it’s about co-creating the future of semiconductor education and research.
What needs to happen:
1. Joint Research Centers
Companies like L&T Semiconductors should establish joint research centers with premium institutes and IITs. These centers should have:
- Industry funding and equipment
- Joint publications and IP sharing agreements
- Internship and hiring pipelines
2. Curriculum Co-Design
Premium institutes should work with industry to design curriculum that are relevant to current and future market needs. This means:
- Industry experts teaching courses or co-teaching with faculty
- Real chip design projects as part of coursework
- Access to industry tools and design kits
- Regular curriculum updates as technology evolves
3. Faculty Development
The faculty need to stay current with industry trends. This requires:
- Sabbaticals in industry
- Access to latest tools and technologies
- Collaboration with industry researchers
- Funding for research that’s relevant to industry
4. Student Internships and Hiring
Companies should hire engineering students for internships and full-time roles, but more importantly, should invest in their development. This means:
- Meaningful internship projects, not just grunt work
- Mentorship from senior engineers
- Clear career pathways for engineering graduates
- Retention programs to prevent brain drain
5. Startup Support
IITs should support semiconductor startups through:
- Incubation programs and funding
- Access to design tools and fabrication services
- Mentorship from faculty and industry experts
- Connections to venture capital and corporate partners
I’ve seen this work at various IIT Delhi and IIT Bombay. The startups that have the strongest industry connections are the ones that are most likely to succeed.
Policy Continuity: The Foundation
All of this—skills development, academic partnerships, company building—requires a stable policy environment. Here’s what’s needed:
1. Long-Term Visibility
Semiconductor companies need 10-year visibility, not 5-year cycles. This means:
- Stable government support for fab development, OSAT development, and design companies
- Predictable tax and regulatory policies—companies need to know the rules won’t change every election cycle
- Long-term funding commitments—not just announcements, but actual disbursement of funds
The good news? The current government has shown genuine commitment to semiconductors. MeitY is responsive and moving fast. But we need this commitment to transcend political cycles.
2. Competitive Fab Economics
For Indian fabs to be competitive, they need:
- Subsidies on capex and opex to offset the cost of building in India vs. Taiwan or South Korea
- Competitive wafer pricing so Indian companies aren’t at a disadvantage
- Tax incentives for semiconductor companies and their suppliers
- Infrastructure support—government should invest in electricity, water, and logistics infrastructure around fab clusters
This is not protectionism; it’s leveling the playing field. Taiwan and South Korea subsidized their semiconductor industries heavily. India needs to do the same.
3. Talent Retention and Attraction
To prevent brain drain and attract global talent, India needs:
- Competitive compensation—Indian companies should be able to pay salaries competitive with Silicon Valley
- Visa policies that make it easy for global talent to work in India
- Quality of life improvements—better infrastructure, healthcare, education for families of engineers
- Recognition and prestige—building semiconductors in India should be seen as prestigious, not as a fallback
4. IP Protection and Standards
For product-based companies to thrive, India needs:
- Strong IP protection—patents, trade secrets, and design rights should be protected
- Industry standards—to enable interoperability and reduce fragmentation
- Regulatory clarity—especially for export controls and security-sensitive chips
5. Ecosystem Coordination
Finally, India needs better coordination across the semiconductor ecosystem. This means:
- A unified semiconductor roadmap—not just design, manufacturing, and packaging silos, but an integrated vision
- Regular industry-government dialogue—to identify bottlenecks and solve them quickly
- Collaboration frameworks—to enable companies to work together on pre-competitive challenges like standards, training, and infrastructure
The 5-10 Year Vision
If we execute on skills, partnerships, and policy, here’s what India can achieve in 5-10 years:
By 2029-2030:
- 3-4 operational fabs with competitive cost and quality
- 10-15 product-based semiconductor companies with global presence
- Thousands of engineers trained in advanced chip design and manufacturing
- Strong academic-industry partnerships producing world-class research and talent
- India capturing 3-5% of global semiconductor production
By 2034-2035:
- 6-8 operational fabs, multiple OSATs, and a complete value chain
- 30-50 product-based semiconductor companies, some with global leadership positions
- Tens of thousands of engineers and technicians trained and employed
- India as a trusted partner for global semiconductor supply chains
- India capturing 8-10% of global semiconductor production
- Massive wealth and job creation across the ecosystem
This is not a fantasy. This is achievable if we execute on skills, partnerships, and policy. The talent is here. The government support is here. The market opportunity is here. What’s needed is sustained commitment and smart execution.
Rome was not built in one day. But with the right strategy, the right partnerships, and the right policies, India can become a semiconductor superpower within a decade. I’m betting my career on it.
Closing Thoughts
These six questions touch on the core challenges and opportunities facing India’s semiconductor industry. My answers are grounded in 30+ years of experience—from designing chips at Motorola to building design centers in India to now leading L&T Semiconductors in India.
The journey from a service-led industry to a product-based, globally competitive semiconductor ecosystem is not easy. It requires technical excellence, business acumen, leadership capability, and policy support. But it’s achievable. India has the talent, the government support, and the market opportunity. What’s needed is sustained commitment and smart execution.
I’m optimistic about India’s semiconductor future. Not because the challenges are small—they’re not. But because I’ve seen what Indian engineers can do when given the right opportunity, the right support, and the right mission. We’ve proven we can design world-class chips. Now we’re proving we can build world-class companies. And soon, we’ll prove we can lead the global semiconductor industry.
