Fellow Designers:

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for making the
IPC Designers Council the success that it is today. Much has
happened this past year; I will use this letter to update you.

The most visible and talked-about program has been designer
certification. There have been recent articles and editorials in
magazines concerning the difficulty of the examination and its
applicability to designers. Some of these comments come from
those who have no experience with the published exam and its
content. Perhaps their confusion stems from the lengthy beta test
that was used to screen questions for the exam. The published
exam, with a little more than 30% of the original beta questions removed,
barely resembles the beta test. (Much appreciation goes out to
the beta testers. These individuals were exposed to a huge
database of questions; some good, some bad, some too easy and
some too difficult).

The certification program was intentionally developed to expand
the limits of the PWB design profession and define what a well-
rounded designer should know. Certification will also give
recognition to the profession's value within the product
development cycle. 

There are some who claim that we are attempting to verify the
creativity of a designer. I will be the first to agree that
testing for creativity is an impossible task. What we can and are
doing is verifying that a designer has the knowledge base to
create a good design and avoid mistakes, just as the driver's
license exam verifies that a driver has knowledge of the rules of
the road and how to avoid accidents (not how to start the car or
how creatively they can get to where they are going). A good PWB
design is defined as one that will produce a cost-effective,
manufacturable product. Designers realize that the sale of
products provides us with the means of income. Designing
something that cannot be manufactured and sold is
counterproductive, if not self-destructive. 

It was a mistake to publish the first exam without having a study
guide available. This, I fear, has contributed to a generally
poor performance of designers on the examination. When the CPA
exam began in the early part of this century, there was also
concern about the relatively small proportion of candidates who
passed (out of 820 candidates for CPA certificates, only 110
passed - a little over 13 percent). The CPA society listened to
and overcame their critics to establish a well-recognized
certificate. The IPC Designers Council will do the same.

Some history on the evolution of the certification program: Since
the beginning, a certification committee of designers was formed
to define the body of knowledge required to transform a schematic
into a reliable PWB design which is easily manufactured,
assembled and tested. This body of knowledge was established
based on the input from a cross-section of designers with
experience ranging from very little to over 30 years. As the
knowledge base unfolded, the program evolved and includes
educational development, resource materials, testing and
certification.
 
For the testing portion, Sylvan Prometric was brought in to help
us develop a test with principles consistent with those used by
educational institutions as well as private organizations with
testing programs. Using the committee's body of knowledge, Sylvan
guided us through the process of developing objectives for each
of the ten subject areas:
     layout requirements
     electrical considerations
     material properties
     component requirements
     assembly technology
     board fabrication
     physical board requirements
     documentation techniques
     testing technology
     reliability issues
These objectives further aided us in the development of
questions, or items, to be used in verifying a designer's grasp
of the knowledge base.

The certification committee is reviewing a study guide for the
first exam. Also, we are currently reviewing the questions on the
first exam and are modifying the entire program based on inputs
from the design community. I must personally thank all those
designers who have spent their weekends and holidays developing a
program for their profession. They have left a legacy from which
all designers will benefit.

Contrary to what you may have heard or read, this project has the
backing of many designers who have and continue to contribute to
the program. The committee has learned a lot from these beginning
efforts. The designer certification program will continue to
evolve and improve under the guidance of the Certification
Officers from our chapters.

In other news of the IPC Designers Council's activities, I am
extremely pleased with the widespread interest in the council.
The IPC E-mail forums have brought information to and from
designers, all over the world. Local chapters have used the forum
to announce chapter meetings or to inquire about interest in
forming a new chapter. The cross matrix of the IPC forums has
enabled designers to discuss, with industry experts and peers,
issues concerning CAD systems, board fabrication, assembly and
test, to name a few. 

New chapters continue to form as you read this letter. Chapters
in Alabama, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Indiana, New York,
and Arizona are either already registered or in the registration
phase. Designers interested in the council but with no local
chapter representation have taken membership in distant chapters
in order to be counted and keep abreast of council activities.

The foremost attraction is the programs being sponsored by the
local chapters. If you have read any of the chapter reports
listed in the "New Horizons" column of PC Design, you saw how
aggressive and active the chapters are. They have held sessions
on ball grid array design, EMI considerations, high speed design,
SMT and fine pitch design, and many other design related
sessions. In addition to sessions, they have arranged for
tours through board fabrication and assembly facilities, as well
as related testing laboratories. At a number of meetings, that I
attended, designers were busy exchanging techniques on CAD
operation and management. In all, the local programming seems to
be the most effective contribution for the continued growth of
the council.

A number of projects besides certification were also undertaken
by the Council. The Council was responsible for designing a
surface mount test board. This board enables a user to evaluate
land patterns, pick and place equipment, soldering and cleaning
processes. This board has been widely used by exhibitors at the
annual Surface Mount International Conference. In addition, many
assemblers and OEMs have used the board for various evaluations.

Another project that has not been given much publicity is our
involvement in activities involving total electronic data
transfer, through the entire product development cycle. The
effort is currently known as DTS '96 (Data Transfer Solutions).
This effort includes not only Council representation but also a
number of CAD and CAM vendors, assemblers, board fabrication
shops, OEMs, and lastly, standards bodies from all over the
world! You will be kept abreast as this program continues to
unwind.

I would like to thank the IPC Board of Directors for their vision
to create the opportunity for the design community to form the
IPC Designers Council. It enables designers from all over the
world to unite for mutual development. 

In conclusion, the IPC Designers Council is strong, its programs
are strong, and most of all, it is being developed "by Designers,
for Designers."

Sincerely,

Gary Ferrari
Chairman - IPC Designers Council